Crotalus

No, it's legit. I'll give Flo some credit for posting this up free so quickly.

Internet troll: someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion. Source: Urban Dictionary

It was Mauller instead of Surtin.

Yeah, the free Covid year was dumb the way they applied it. If they felt it was necessary it should have applied to anyone who was competing in 2020, as their NCAA tournament was canceled. They way they applied it punished any seniors in their fourth year of competition in 2020, and gave a fifth year, and thus a chance to compete at five NCAA tournaments, to anyone that did not compete in 2020 (redshirts, Oly redshirts, and 2021 freshman) but did compete the next year.

No worries. Appreciate the play-by-play.

Looks like you mixed up the names and had me worried. Jacques won 2-0 Glad we're not seeing a duck here with the dual locked up for Mizzou.

Hopefully he's back on track. He's a guy who should be on the podium this year.

Hopefully Hart will wrestle better than he has the last couple of weeks.

No you've got me trying to follow two threads. Haha.

R12 his freshman year, too. And was 2-2 in 2021. I'd love to be more hopeful but I'll just plan on being surprised if he does better than that. Nice. That was definitely Mizzou’s best chance for bonus and they took advantage. The second half of this dual looks to be pretty evenly matched.

Big Elam is a round of 12 guy at best. Just hasn't been able to improve much from year to year.

Thank you very much. Mizzou’s twitter is letting me down.

Hawks loses 4-2 in what was one of the best bonus possibilities for ISU. Elam vs Bastitda is likely the second best match of the night.

Anybody covering play-by-play for those of us without flo? Mocco wins 7-5 over unranked opponent. Not exactly inspiring.

Hadn't heard of him. Incredible story indeed. Here's a non-flow piece about him:

Huge Mizzou fan and super excited for this matchup. As far as I know, both guys are healthy and I (maybe naively) don't think either coach will duck here. If O'Toole doesn't take the mat, I'll be one of the first ones here to bash coach Smith, but I don't see that happening.

Part of the problem is they didn't show a good clip of the hold. Most people, including Greg Olsen, are thinking it was the left hand on JuJu's back. But it was the right hand pulling the jersey that you can barely see right at the beginning of the relay they kept showing. Bradberry got beat on that inside out move and grabbed the jersey to show JuJu down. The jersey pulling away from the body made an easy, if unpopular, call. How much are you supposed to let a DB get away with on the most important play of the game?

I fully agree with you, here.

Crazy to think what the world must have looked like when that happened a few thousand years ago. Hahaha. Anyways, I'm going to have to check that place out. Sounds right up my alley.

No, you're not willing to accept the conclusions because it conflicts with your view of humans riding T-rexs just a few thousand years ago. Coincidentally, I spent the morning searching for fossilized shark teeth from Miocene age deposits (~23-5 mya). Got a really nice Carcharodon hastalis (the genus is in debate) and a beast of a Hemipristis serra that was unfortunately missing most of the tip.

Yeah, he was NCAA wrestling's Bob Gibson.

Why wait? Let's jump right in. I think it's completely bonkers and belongs in the realm of philosophy, not science. While it is "theoretically" possible, there is no evidence to back it up (though it would have been programed that way, of course).

Likewise, my friend. Likewise.

Wow, this thread blew up while I was trying to actually get some work done. But Mike handled any I would have responded to directly. It is really hard to have an intelligent conversation about this when some folks can't distinguish between a scientific theory and a "theory". Science thrives on being challenged and questioned, but you need data in order to do so. The ideas that have been challenged the most and stood the test of time are the ones we have the most confidence in. The age of the planet/universe and evolution are some of the most heavily scrutinized concepts and are by far still our best explanations. Dunning-Kruger is one of those buzz words you are so fond of, but it is more accurate than your comment above.

I'm make it simple for you, pseudoscience is when you have your answer before you ask any questions. Ex: the earth is 6,000 years old. The only schtick is your deflection.