billyhoyle

11 offense, 11 defense, 11 special teams (it’s actually more than 11 because you have punt, kick, punt return, kick blocking, kick return, but let’s just say 11). So 33 starters in football *3 = 99. 10 starters in wrestling * 3= 30. Then factor in that there are significantly more substitutions and injuries in football, and that football is a revenue sport, it makes sense that they would have a that number be the cap. With that said, it does screw over non revenue sports.

Who is that?

Who is that? And what is the Sputnik international? Seems no different than sourcing themat forums message board.

You’re more likely to have 0, 4 time champs than 3 or even 2. Spencer Lee, Mark Hall, Kyle Snyder, Dustin Schlatter, David Taylor, J’Den Cox…. Being a 4X champ rarely happens, and it’s not usually the guys you’d think it would be.

Nobody needs more than 30 people in a room. What’s the point of that? Just start a club wrestling team for the 31-50th best wrestlers in the school.

I don’t get why you believe something tweeted out by an anonymous twitter account. It would be like quoting something posted on this forum as true.

This is true for a lot of smaller schools. But getting a degree from Iowa, Illinois, Oklahoma, etc, is still a great investment. And schools like that aren’t in need of more enrollment.

I’m curious which schools that have D1 wrestling teams currently have trouble filling enrollment at the school itself. There was an argument that decreasing the roster size could cost universities money because of decreased enrollment, but very few D1 programs fit this description (to my knowledge). This was the case at scam universities like Grand Canyon, and I know it is as some smaller NAIA schools that really don’t offer much academically, but I think most D1 schools are more established.

The house always wins.

From the video we heard the shot and he grabbed his ear almost immediately. We also didn't see any debris/glass flying in the air, and the entire thing was on video. So I think it's pretty clear that he was shot......But it is also classic Trump to not want to release the medical record.

Which D1 wrestling program fits into this category?

It's interesting seeing JD Vance call for Biden to resign while I believe Trump hasn't done this yet. Trump, as flawed as he is as a leader, has incredible political instincts. I think he recognizes that calling for Biden to resign is a de facto endorsement of Kamala for being President.

Schools that have trouble filling enrollment aren't great places to go to school. I don't think many D1 wrestling programs fit into this category where they can't get enough students in the university.

Saying their high school career was "not extraordinary in any way" shows your own lack of knowledge. They were recruited by the greatest college wrestling coach of all time at his peak of dominance who could almost have his pick of any recruit in the country. Both Tom and Terry were undefeated as seniors in Iowa. Tom set a record for the most takedowns in a season and most points in a season in his senior year of HS (https://www.iowawrestlinghalloffame.com/inductee/terry-brands-2). They were absolutely dominant in the toughest (or close to toughest) wrestling state at the time, and the style that they wrestled made it clear to people who knew wrestling (Gable) that they would be great. You don't judge a recruit by the 4 year record (theirs was outstanding as well btw), but by how dominant they were when they were being recruited.

What's the line on Mijain Lopez? It's a sure thing he never loses!

Palmer was a top recruit, but not at the level that you remember. Schlatter was a much more hyped recruit from Ohio. So was Stieber and of course Taylor. A couple guys from his own year were ranked higher than Palmer. Palmer did wrestle a bear in high school though and had an absolutely insane documentary made about his senior year (insane as in, this guy did not have a balanced childhood). Back to the OP: I love this legendary quote from Royce Alger about recruiting the Brands: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2188889568046543 The funny thing about this match is it became apparent that Marsteller was overhyped after all the attention this match got, and then seeing Wiercoch got teched early in his freshman season (the next year). Obviously Marsteller was still great, but many had him as the #1 overall recruit ahead of Snyder heading into their senior seasons despite Snyder's Junior world gold.

It makes no sense that he would win world's the year before the Olympics and then all of a sudden lose motivation when the second Olympic gold would place him as one of the greatest American wrestlers ever. I just think Brooks surpassed him.

I'm not saying the changes you are suggesting are wrong. All I am saying is that I don't consider the failure by the secret service to be equal to incompetence. This guy got off 8 shots because he had a semi-automatic assault rifle-that is extremely challenging to stop even though they did eliminate the threat in seconds. At some point, there will be another failure by the Secret Service. Thankfully, we went forty years between the last major one and this one (they have stopped many potential threats between these two events). When that next failure happens, there will be some other point of failure that seems obvious in retrospect that was overlooked. It's just the nature of challenge of the job. It's impossible to account for and prevent every scenario given that these candidates are holding so many rallies and the secret service has finite resources. You mention drones and helicopters as a defense-well preventing a drone attack is challenging as well. Look at the murder of the Japanese prime minister as an example of how challenging stopping an assassination is. As technology gets better to stop these attacks, the technology available for them also improves. It's very easy to shit on law enforcement these days. I think we can acknowledge that they failed while also recognizing how difficult their job is, and how failure does not equal incompetence. The focus should be analogous to that after 9/11, where the goal was to stop future events-not insult the FBI for their failure to stop the attack.

In retrospect it of course should have been covered and they of course failed to fully secure the candidate. But they didn’t fail in protecting his life-you can call it luck, but the assassin had to take a rushed shot and was taken out quickly once the snipers identified him as a threat. The secret service both failed to fully protect Trump, but also saved his life. The thing with points of failure is that it’s impossible to eliminate them all in this type of outdoor setting, and most of the time we can only be reactive instead of proactive. Reinforcing cockpit doors on airplanes is a perfect example. It would have prevented 9/11, but who knew to do that? Yes, the roof should have been secure. But that wasn’t the only point of failure. Anyone in that crowd potentially had the ability to sneak in a weapon through the checkpoint with proper concealment. Look at what happened in Japan as an example. We live in a country where it’s extremely easy for these wackos to get guns (political assassins are often not politically motivated but fit the same profile as Crooks). So the challenge of protecting somebody this high profile is very real. The next time something like this happens, there will be another obvious point of failure that caused it. I think some of the key takeaways from this are: 1. Better communication is needed between local police and secret service. 2. Candidates should avoid having these open outdoor rallies-venues should be more secure. 3. Secret service should have a better system of removing the candidate from the stage if there is anything suspicious at all.

Because of the secret service, the sniper was eliminated seconds after he fired. They also rushed the stage and protected Trump. It is almost impossible to guarantee security, especially in a wide open space. Many would be assassins are arrested or stopped well before that point.

Is that budget really a lot though? They had more agents protecting Trump than a typical candidate because of the Iran threat. If Trump holds 100 rallies and they are in wide open areas with multiple sniper teams and pre planning, protecting him alone is insanely expensive. The current president requires even more resources. They also have to protect the ex presidents, families of presidents, and now RFK. There’s a big logistics question about how many outdoor rallies these candidates should have and how much of that security should be covered by the campaign.

So we are saying Sidakov is better than JB because he beat JB well past his prime and Dake, who got teched by a Bellarussian at the Olympics? Tsargush was dominant until he ran into JB. JB in his prime takes out Sidakov in his prime.

Are we sure he didn't just have a cauliflower ear that popped when he hit the deck? He is in the wrestling hall of fame after all.

This is why Europeans think we're nuts. We have people posting as toilets who are riflery experts (I don't understand what you said, but it sounds like you know your shit). So many random people are armed. Anybody who snaps can have access to a weapon and try to do some crazy shit like we saw yesterday. I'm more amazed that we have gone 40 years between Reagan and this than the failure of the Secret Service in this case to prevent it. That has to be one of the most difficult jobs in the world. I wonder if the only solution here is that moving forward there shouldn't be presidential rallies outside in open areas-and that they should really only take place in indoor venues with fixed points of entry.

The thing you posted here is a screenshot of 4chan. 4Chan is a message board where anyone can post anything anonymously. So it wasn’t a report that you posted, it was just somebody trolling you.