dragit

Yeah I addressed all that and nothing in this post contradicts my points, at all. Your quoted sentence was about the way they engage in public discourse, speech only, not equating speech that I don't like (which is more than just one post about the Dake/Starocci match) with bad conduct (alleged rape), which is exactly what you said I said--a giant distortion of my post. And I also said that my original post explicitly allowed for the idea that my negative gut reaction to her personality might be a result of my own curmudgeonliness and inability to engage effectively with the younger generation's standards of discourse. And I further said, in both my posts, that it's possible that that style that I don't like may end up being the key trait that makes her a hero depending on how this turns out. So, yes, there were some "harsh words," but they were tempered with self-reflection, with allowance for the potential greatness in the subject of those harsh words--and no matter how you cut it, nowhere near as harsh as claiming that someone equates speech with rape.

You took one sentence of a very long post and made a baseless claim that I was equating the two of their alleged conduct. What I was saying in that one sentence in a very long post is that they both have very aggressive public personalities that many find abrasive, argumentative, and pugilistic, and if you combine those ingredients, you get combustibility which complicates something that even without those ingredients is a very serious subject. With respect to that very serious subject, however, I was quite clear that the published allegation is that Starocci "seems to have been a renowned jerk and possibly a criminal," and I was also clear that a possible outcome of all this is that she will be a hero for having been the leading and courageous catalyst for reform. And in fact I linked the two ideas--that I don't care for what I've seen of her personality and that she could end up a hero: "but it's people like that who are often the only ones who can blow the top off an organization that has gotten out of control." And I also allowed for the distinct possibility that my personal views about what I know about her might be attributable to my narrow-minded curmudgeonism in a parenthetical "recognizing that I simply do not understand a lot of what makes that generation tick." So nothing TF is wrong with me in terms of "equating . . . speaking and . . . rape" which I plainly did not and would not ever do.

I'm guessing that the university is waiting for an inquiry or inquiries, by the university, the police, and/or more news organizations, to be completed before it says anything or allows any of its employees to say anything. If the inquiries finish and disciplinary action is taken or a story written, then I'd expect statements in response. If they finish and nothing comes of it, not sure whether they'd respond. It's a tough situation. The likeability gap you mention between Starocci and Bartlett factors into it, but I think the thing that makes it really difficult is that it seems like the big drivers of this are Ms. Bartlett and Starocci, both of whom are at best are undignified and at worst toxic people. Mix that together and include sex issues in the equation and it's going to get very ugly. This topic thread is about Cael, and he's caught somewhere in the middle of all this. It's possible he acted by the book on everything he knew about but is hamstrung by university policy right now in terms of commenting. It's also possible that given his lack of enthusiasm for publicity he's happy to let one student paper story blow over without engaging. And it's also possible his program has become dysfunctional. Syd seems to be noxious and not someone I'd care to spend a minute with, let alone be associated with in any way (while recognizing that I simply do not understand a lot of what makes that generation tick), but it's people like that who are often the only ones who can blow the top off an organization that has gotten out of control. We really can't know based on the public record if that describes Penn State and Cael. His 4x champ has been popped twice for PEDs (please don't tell me that this NLWC athlete is not relevant to a discussion about the PSU coach, that's wrong for a lot of reasons) and his 5x champ seems to have been a renowned jerk and possibly a criminal. Not good looks but there's not enough info to know if those are the tips of two massive icebergs that implicate program-wide issues, or just a couple of floating hazards without much below them.

C'mon you're the smartest guy on the boare and you don't know the answer to, Why does a dog lick itself?

Best case scenario seems to be an absolute and total disdain for his responsibilities under and within the rules and the oversight system.

Is this who/what you're thinking of? http://wrestlingforgable.blogspot.com/?m=1

I grant you that he's a hard one to figure out but I think that's an overstatement. He signed approximately a billion autographs or selfies last year, which did him no tangible benefit. He just has his own approach to the sport which wouldn't line up with how the vast majority of us would choose to do things. I think he should focus on Wrestling because it's the thing he's by far the best at, and, I suspect, the only thing he's great at. And I also think he can make more money here than anywhere else. He's leaving hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on the table that I think he'd earn winning world championships. But he plainly has a different drummer and to my disappointment makes different choices. For me - disappointment, yes, feeling used, not at this point.

You're getting at relativity, which is fine. But if we're going to make relative arguments, my view is that although compared to the field, Spencer is a good scrambler, it's probably his weakest skill. He is an absolute beast at muscling guys around and putting them off balance and then taking them down on his feet, and he is a killing machine on top. Those are dominant skills that he is the best at by far. In scrambles, however, his opponents have had far more luck in getting into winning positions and tagging him with his very rare losses.

Me too. I thought the show would be a good place to get a sense of what was going on but it was brutal. First it took about two minutes to get to the show on the website playback. I mean, this is a technology company, why are there always technical issues?? Then they had zero substance on Bassett. I think someone said they thought it was a compliance issue. No specifics, nothing. Willie's podcast was much, much better. And to be clear, I am not a Flo hater, and I generally enjoy the FRL broadcasts for entertainment value. But they need to do some thinking about what it means to be a leader in covering a sport if they want to be looked at that way.

Clearly not, for a lot of reasons, the first one being that I think Ok State will win a title in the next five years.

I was lucky enough to be just a few rows up from the mat for his semi in 2016 at the Garden. Between his wrestling and his smile he just lit up the arena. I'll never forget it. Best wishes to him in his future endeavors.

Combine this news with the Illini strong results at B1G and to a little lesser extent NCAAs. Like Penn State before 2010, and tOSU to an extent around the same time, Illinois and Rutgers have been sleeping giants who could be monsters if they could keep their guys home. Rutgers doesn’t seem to have it in them but Poeta may be doing something in Champaign that could make that happen.

Not sure if you should be canonized or seek help.

Their father is Jewish

No way they took a serious look and doubtful they even talked to him (other than maybe returning his phone call and having the most perfunctory conversation).