I m guessing that no one would have picked 5 qualifiers on this team. Looks like they are peaking at the right time.
Ryan Christiansen is the biggest surprise. I have always been a big fan of Jimenez and Taylor and was confident if Taylor got his groove back, he'd start smashing fools. Too bad he made some mistakes in the semis.
I agree. Badgers had a nice tournament and I am very excited about the young men who are getting their first trip to the big dance. I think this will build confidence and success next year.
Good job also from me. I thought we would get 2 to nationals!!!!!! JJ stepped up and so did RC. congrates to them!!!!!
just a thought about next year.
Actually with Medbury coming back and having zeke and rt back we could have 3 guys in the running for a title. That alone would make Wisconsin a top 10 team in the nation!
"A nice showing is 8th place?" - I am glad we have Jordan, Taylor and Medbery one more year.
Team Scores
1. Penn State 150.5
2. Iowa 127.0
3. Ohio State 126.0
4. Nebraska 117.0
5. Rutgers 106.5
6. Michigan 89.5
7. Illinois 88.0
8. Wisconsin 67.5
9. Minnesota 51.5
10. Purdue 34.0
11. Indiana 30.5
12. Northwestern 11.5
13. Michigan State 10.5
14. Maryland 7.5
I'm happy for the 5 qualifiers but another year of finishing in the bottom of the big 10
Quote from: billymurphy on March 06, 2016, 09:54:51 PM
"A nice showing is 8th place?"
Team Scores
1. Penn State 150.5
2. Iowa 127.0
3. Ohio State 126.0
4. Nebraska 117.0
5. Rutgers 106.5
6. Michigan 89.5
7. Illinois 88.0
8. Wisconsin 67.5
9. Minnesota 51.5
10. Purdue 34.0
11. Indiana 30.5
12. Northwestern 11.5
13. Michigan State 10.5
14. Maryland 7.5
Yes.
Hope this helps.
Quote from: Brett Favre on March 06, 2016, 10:23:22 PM
I'm happy for the 5 qualifiers but another year of finishing in the bottom of the big 10
The top 4-5 teams are far ahead of the Badgers. */e- To be fair, Rutgers wrestled out of their minds at B10s. If Wisco catches Ill. or UM next year, it would be outstanding.
I think everyone predicted four or five qualifiers. The over/under on the other thread was 4.
IJ, RT, RR were locks after you saw the number of AQ spots and most thought JJ and AC had a good chance. They had a descent tournament and wrestled to their seed at almost every weight but 149. They got a boost at 157 and 285. The gap between WI and IL is technically only one wrestler. If you take 197 and get first that would give WI about 20 pts depending on bonus. You can look at that and say they have a mile to go or its only one guy and they are not far off.
The positive is next year we will have 3 guys who should be high AA as well as not have any holes in the lineup.
125 - JJ
133 - Taylor
141 - Stickley/Martin
149 - Crone
157 - Ruschell/Scharenbrock
165 - Jordan
174 - Robertson
184 - Christensen
197 - Ritter
HWT - Medberry
On paper, we will have a top 10 team next year and one of the best teams we have had in awhile. Our weakest weights will likely be at 157 or 141. Not bad considering Stickley/Martin had good redshirt years and Ruschell will be a Senior. Hopefully Robertson can get healthy or work through whatever issue he is having this year, as something must not be right to lose all your offense.
I always find the Largest Seed-Place Difference Statistic in TrackWrestling to be a great way to measure a teams performance at a tournament. Wisconsin had the second largest seed place difference, which means as a team we over-performed what we were expected to do. So I agree with Ghetto that the Badgers are peaking at the right time.
1. Rutgers 12
2. Wisconsin 10
3. Michigan 7
4. Illinois 4
5. Nebraska 2
6. Indiana 1
6. Purdue 1
8. Penn State 0
9. Michigan State -2
9. Minnesota -2
11. Iowa -3
11. Ohio State -3
13. Maryland -5
13. Northwestern -5
Below is my optimistic breakdown of how I thought we wrestled over the weekend:
125 - Johnny is continuing to improve, and is wrestling the way we all knew he could. He's much more aggressive on his feet with his ties and attacks, riding tough and moving much better on bottom. I don't think he is too far away from beating guys in the 8-12 ranked range.
133 - RT is back - you could tell he is feeling much stronger and has a great amount of strength/energy in the first day of the tournament. I think this plays well for him for the first day of NCAA's to get to the quarters. For some reason I though he looked a little slower (respectively) on the 2nd day - hopefully that won't be the case for the quarterfinals in the morning of day 2 at NCAA's. He's just so much stronger than the field, that he can really overpower positions. He's 2 extremely short mental lapses away from beating Clark - and even if he only had 1 of those mental lapses, would win that match more times than not. Excited to see him compete at NCAA's, as I think he's feeling better and capable of beating anyone and everyone, including Nashon.
141 - G2 had a pretty tough draw. I like the way he competes, he just needs a leg attack to really make him dangerous on top and on the feet. I think a snatch single would be good for a guy like Gabe, who is lankier and less explosive than the more compact guys at 141 - thinking of Kyle Ruschell's snatch single (stepping on the lead foot), as Kyle was in the same type of situation as Gabe.
149 - Solid season - I'm sure Andrew is not pleased on the finish, but there are many positives to build on. After losing that first match, he really made it tough on himself to earn an AQ spot. All the tools to get to that next level - and that's exciting. He's the type of guy who's going to make huge gains after the results of this tournament, as he has a great drive.
157 - TJ looked solid - wrestled very confident and offensive. He has the ability to put up so many points and looks pretty strong out there. I'm optimistic on his progress into next year - as he has many skills on his feet and on top to be able to wrestle himself into a national qualifier and win matches at NCAA's.
165 - Zeke is so strong and focused - his intelligence / wrestling IQ is off the charts. Clearly it also helps having the skillset and confidence Zeke has. Excited to see him have an opportunity to wrestle Dieringer and get become an NCAA champion.
174 - Tough weight - from the matches I watched, Ricky lacked that spark and offensive approach he had last year. I think he has the ability to get to his leg attacks and get takedowns, especially with his ability to scramble in those positions, but he's allowing guys to get to his legs first, and he's not as good scrambling from a defensive position than he is when he's on the legs. Hopefully he gets a decent draw at NCAA's and get can on a roll and get that confidence to get to his offense - if he does I think he will be getting his hand raised more often than not at NCAA's.
184 - Ryan is wrestling with a lot of confidence and is really building from each match. He's very stubborn in his positions and can score points from top versus just riding. That's huge with the 4-point nearfall - see match versus Courts. Excited to see what he can do at NCAA's - really hope he gets a solid draw and get himself into a position to AA as a freshman.
197 - Brutal draw - wrestled very hard and still battled those AA's. He wrestled hard in every position and that's something to make you hold your head high. Thought he progressed and improved over the season - which is tough to do when going through tougher competition from November through March.
285 - Solid wins by Brock. I think he is capable of winning matches at NCAA's, just hope he can get an opportunity. I know Stoll is pretty beat up, but he will probably get a WC. Only 1 other guy who earned an AQ didn't earn a spot at the conference tournament - that makes 2 WC's better that guy and Stoll, and I believe there are 4 other WC's available then. One of the criteria they look at is being 1 placement outside of the AQ placement in your conference tournament, which Brock has done in the toughest conference for wrestling.
Quote from: Lunatic Fringe on March 07, 2016, 08:26:11 AM
I always find the Largest Seed-Place Difference Statistic in TrackWrestling to be a great way to measure a teams performance at a tournament. Wisconsin had the second largest seed place difference, which means as a team we over-performed what we were expected to do. So I agree with Ghetto that the Badgers are peaking at the right time.
1. Rutgers 12
2. Wisconsin 10
3. Michigan 7
4. Illinois 4
5. Nebraska 2
6. Indiana 1
6. Purdue 1
8. Penn State 0
9. Michigan State -2
9. Minnesota -2
11. Iowa -3
11. Ohio State -3
13. Maryland -5
13. Northwestern -5
Just curious what seed place you are using for guys not seeded?
125 -1
133 +3
141 0
149 -7
157 +6
165 0
174 -1
184 +1
197 0
285 +7
I have it +8 if you give an unseeded guy a 14 spot. I did it fast so might be off. And did not count any place below 8th since it does not score points. I think you can look at the results two ways.
1. Each guy for the most part did really well and they should be congratulated. Each basically met expectations.
2. As a team it was not a great performance they came in 8th and pretty far from 7th. It is just were the talent level of the team is currently sitting. The guys came to wrestle and wrestled to their abilities and most exceeded them, but you also have to look at why seeds are so low to start. Lack of talent or development who knows? It is like taking a team project to go 0-16 in football win 6 games and finish middle of the pack and say hey we weren't last it was a great performance.
It is conundrum because the guys did wrestle well for their abilities but expectations were so low to start. It is almost a Pyhrric victory. Each guy did great but the team performance was not great.
Quote from: stp on March 07, 2016, 01:52:36 AM
Quote from: billymurphy on March 06, 2016, 09:54:51 PM
"A nice showing is 8th place?"
Team Scores
1. Penn State 150.5
2. Iowa 127.0
3. Ohio State 126.0
4. Nebraska 117.0
5. Rutgers 106.5
6. Michigan 89.5
7. Illinois 88.0
8. Wisconsin 67.5
9. Minnesota 51.5
10. Purdue 34.0
11. Indiana 30.5
12. Northwestern 11.5
13. Michigan State 10.5
14. Maryland 7.5
Yes.
Hope this helps.
Quote from: Brett Favre on March 06, 2016, 10:23:22 PM
I'm happy for the 5 qualifiers but another year of finishing in the bottom of the big 10
The top 4-5 teams are far ahead of the Badgers. */e- To be fair, Rutgers wrestled out of their minds at B10s. If Wisco catches Ill. or UM next year, it would be outstanding.
Way to set the bar there stp. Outstanding to move up 20 points? Hmm...outstanding would be a 40 or 50 point move. Top five. Top three. Outstanding isn't moving ahead of Illinois or Michigan in my opinion. Modest request really.
Quote from: jeast on March 07, 2016, 09:32:04 AM
Way to set the bar there stp. Outstanding to move up 20 points? Hmm...outstanding would be a 40 or 50 point move. Top five. Top three. Outstanding isn't moving ahead of Illinois or Michigan in my opinion. Modest request really.
Well...baby steps. You go ahead and have your unrealistic expectations. Wisco is also close to the Cornhuskers. imo- PSU, tOSU and IOWA are on a different level at the moment.
I pulled that directly from TrackWrestling. In their Statistical Results you can view it. I simply copy and pasted.
I agree. They did not have an outstanding performance, but I do think that they exceeded their expectations heading into the big ten tournament.
But can someone clarify for me, why does Horwath not have an automatic bid. I posted the link below, but according to the NCAA website HWT had 7 automatic qualifier spots and Horwath took 7th place???
http://www.ncaa.com/news/wrestling/article/2016-02-25/di-wrestling-qualifier-allocations-coaches-rankings-and-rpi
Peck from MD did not wrestle. The B10 had to give up that bid.
Quote from: Lunatic Fringe on March 07, 2016, 09:45:16 AM
I pulled that directly from TrackWrestling. In their Statistical Results you can view it. I simply copy and pasted.
I agree. They did not have an outstanding performance, but I do think that they exceeded their expectations heading into the big ten tournament.
But can someone clarify for me, why does Horwath not have an automatic bid. I posted the link below, but according to the NCAA website HWT had 7 automatic qualifier spots and Horwath took 7th place???
http://www.ncaa.com/news/wrestling/article/2016-02-25/di-wrestling-qualifier-allocations-coaches-rankings-and-rpi
The big 10 lost an AQ spot at HWT because one the AQ's did not compete. I believe it was the MD HWT but do not quote me on that.
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:30:13 AM
I got back late last night from Iowa City. Here are my observations
UW only had two guys in the top 60 of the B1G. I wouldn't call this a success.
There are 77 schools with D1 wrestling. Over 40% of D1 wrestlers will make it to nationals. Maybe the bar for success needs to be raised.
I hate to say it but watching UW this weekend was like watching a JV team wrestle at a Varsity tournament. Of course Zeke is an exception.
Iowa City is a great place to party.
Will also be interesting to see how many 3x or 4x state champs, fargo, jr nats, [insert title here] champions (in HS) do not qualify.
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:30:13 AM
I got back late last night from Iowa City. Here are my observations
UW only had two guys in the top 60 of the B1G. I wouldn't call this a success.
There are 77 schools with D1 wrestling. Over 40% of D1 wrestlers will make it to nationals. Maybe the bar for success needs to be raised.
I hate to say it but watching UW this weekend was like watching a JV team wrestle at a Varsity tournament. Of course Zeke is an exception.
Iowa City is a great place to party.
The B1G tournament is a mini national tournament - arguably one of the toughest tournaments in the country. We had 8 guys place, or 8 of the top 80 (10%), hardly a JV effort. Yes, many placements were below the top 6, but you have to take into consideration seeding/draws and the fact that at many of the weights there's a big gap between the top guys and the rest of the field. That's not indicative of bad wrestlers, it's indicative of elite guys at the very top of their weight class who are able to dominate most everyone they compete against.
Quote from: stp on March 07, 2016, 09:39:08 AM
Quote from: jeast on March 07, 2016, 09:32:04 AM
Way to set the bar there stp. Outstanding to move up 20 points? Hmm...outstanding would be a 40 or 50 point move. Top five. Top three. Outstanding isn't moving ahead of Illinois or Michigan in my opinion. Modest request really.
Well...baby steps. You go ahead and have your unrealistic expectations. Wisco is also close to the Cornhuskers. imo- PSU, tOSU and IOWA are on a different level at the moment.
Baby steps? You must think we are building a new program here. We are not. If the year were 1996 and not 2016 I would agree with you wholeheartedly. Davis has filled his usefulness in my opinion.
You would have to put Rutgers in that "different level" category as well then. Rutgers...outstanding weekend.
I disagree with your choice of word. Outstanding can be defined as unrealistic certainly. I don't think it would be unrealistic though. It would be outstanding if Wisconsin could become a top 3-5 wrestling program in the B10. Moving up to the bottom of the first tier of teams wouldn't be outstanding to me, but more mediocre in its accomplishment. Thus the annoyance with your verbiage. Sorry if I offended you. Sincerely. Just disappointed I didn't have more to cheer for in Iowa City over the weekend.
Quote from: Ghetto on March 06, 2016, 07:14:13 PM
I m guessing that no one would have picked 5 qualifiers on this team. Looks like they are peaking at the right time.
Ryan Christiansen is the biggest surprise. I have always been a big fan of Jimenez and Taylor and was confident if Taylor got his groove back, he'd start smashing fools. Too bad he made some mistakes in the semis.
I predicted 8th and 6 quals and I'm said to be the most negative guy on here. Thing is we only had 2 in the top 6.
I honestly though there was a lot to cheer for at Iowa City. Most people were predicting 2 or 3 qualifiers and we got 5. We also have possible wcs so maybe more. This year's team has 2 major holes which will be filled next year. The reason teams like Rutgers and Nebraska did better is the didn't have guys who scored 0 team points. Next year will be a big shift imo.
Quote from: hammen on March 07, 2016, 10:44:06 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:30:13 AM
I got back late last night from Iowa City. Here are my observations
UW only had two guys in the top 60 of the B1G. I wouldn't call this a success.
There are 77 schools with D1 wrestling. Over 40% of D1 wrestlers will make it to nationals. Maybe the bar for success needs to be raised.
I hate to say it but watching UW this weekend was like watching a JV team wrestle at a Varsity tournament. Of course Zeke is an exception.
Iowa City is a great place to party.
The B1G tournament is a mini national tournament - arguably one of the toughest tournaments in the country. We had 8 guys place, or 8 of the top 80 (10%), hardly a JV effort. Yes, many placements were below the top 6, but you have to take into consideration seeding/draws and the fact that at many of the weights there's a big gap between the top guys and the rest of the field. That's not indicative of bad wrestlers, it's indicative of elite guys at the very top of their weight class who are able to dominate most everyone they compete against.
8 also finished in the bottom 80 (10%). Just depends on how you spin it.
Quote from: hammen on March 07, 2016, 10:44:06 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:30:13 AM
I got back late last night from Iowa City. Here are my observations
UW only had two guys in the top 60 of the B1G. I wouldn't call this a success.
There are 77 schools with D1 wrestling. Over 40% of D1 wrestlers will make it to nationals. Maybe the bar for success needs to be raised.
I hate to say it but watching UW this weekend was like watching a JV team wrestle at a Varsity tournament. Of course Zeke is an exception.
Iowa City is a great place to party.
The B1G tournament is a mini national tournament - arguably one of the toughest tournaments in the country. We had 8 guys place, or 8 of the top 80 (10%), hardly a JV effort. Yes, many placements were below the top 6, but you have to take into consideration seeding/draws and the fact that at many of the weights there's a big gap between the top guys and the rest of the field. That's not indicative of bad wrestlers, it's indicative of elite guys at the very top of their weight class who are able to dominate most everyone they compete against.
you can go 1-3 and get 8th... 2 of them did... but only 7 placed, not 8... oh and our bottom 5 guys went 3-12...
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 01:08:48 PM
Quote from: hammen on March 07, 2016, 10:44:06 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:30:13 AM
I got back late last night from Iowa City. Here are my observations
UW only had two guys in the top 60 of the B1G. I wouldn't call this a success.
There are 77 schools with D1 wrestling. Over 40% of D1 wrestlers will make it to nationals. Maybe the bar for success needs to be raised.
I hate to say it but watching UW this weekend was like watching a JV team wrestle at a Varsity tournament. Of course Zeke is an exception.
Iowa City is a great place to party.
The B1G tournament is a mini national tournament - arguably one of the toughest tournaments in the country. We had 8 guys place, or 8 of the top 80 (10%), hardly a JV effort. Yes, many placements were below the top 6, but you have to take into consideration seeding/draws and the fact that at many of the weights there's a big gap between the top guys and the rest of the field. That's not indicative of bad wrestlers, it's indicative of elite guys at the very top of their weight class who are able to dominate most everyone they compete against.
you can go 1-3 and get 8th... 2 of them did... but only 7 placed, not 8... oh and our bottom 5 guys went 3-12...
You're acting like it's easy and standard to get wins at the B1G tournament. Other guys could've easily won more matches with a better random draw. We've had many future and returning AA's just during my 5 years who did not even win a match at the B1G tournament, and this was when it was only 11 and 12 teams. Happens a lot. Placing 8 guys is a good step in the right direction.
Quote from: hammen on March 07, 2016, 01:14:41 PM
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 01:08:48 PM
Quote from: hammen on March 07, 2016, 10:44:06 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:30:13 AM
I got back late last night from Iowa City. Here are my observations
UW only had two guys in the top 60 of the B1G. I wouldn't call this a success.
There are 77 schools with D1 wrestling. Over 40% of D1 wrestlers will make it to nationals. Maybe the bar for success needs to be raised.
I hate to say it but watching UW this weekend was like watching a JV team wrestle at a Varsity tournament. Of course Zeke is an exception.
Iowa City is a great place to party.
The B1G tournament is a mini national tournament - arguably one of the toughest tournaments in the country. We had 8 guys place, or 8 of the top 80 (10%), hardly a JV effort. Yes, many placements were below the top 6, but you have to take into consideration seeding/draws and the fact that at many of the weights there's a big gap between the top guys and the rest of the field. That's not indicative of bad wrestlers, it's indicative of elite guys at the very top of their weight class who are able to dominate most everyone they compete against.
you can go 1-3 and get 8th... 2 of them did... but only 7 placed, not 8... oh and our bottom 5 guys went 3-12...
You're acting like it's easy and standard to get wins at the B1G tournament. Other guys could've easily won more matches with a better random draw. We've had many future and returning AA's just during my 5 years who did not even win a match at the B1G tournament, and this was when it was only 11 and 12 teams. Happens a lot. Placing 8 guys is a good step in the right direction.
I don't think he is saying it is easy to place just a big difference in placing 8 compared to 3-6. Just like you can get a bad draw and not place AC, you can get a favorable draw and finish 8th by winning one match RR. To finish 3-6 you are going to beat someone formidable, you can sneak into 8th beating a guy with a losing record.
No one "snuck" into 8th place by beating a guy with a losing record. Also just as an FYI, a few guys who entered the tournament with losing records: Conor Youtsey, Brian Murphy, Brody Grothus.
Not going to get much easier next year. The Big Ten is young. Of the top 8 (80 wrestlers), 21 graduate (13 are in just 3 weight classes). at 133 and 165 we already were ahead of all those that graduate so tough to gain any points there. Medbery will help greatly and 197 will be losing 5 guys so maybe some opportunity for Ritter
125- only 2nd place graduates (1)
133- 4th, 5th, 7th, and 8th graduate (4)
141- 7th place graduates (1)
149- 5th place graduates (1)
157- 4th place graduates (1)
165- 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th graduate (4)
174- nobody graduates (0)
184- 6th and 8th place graduate (2)
197- 1st, 2nd, 5th, 7th, and 8th graduate (5)
285- 4th and 7th graduate (2)
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 01:08:48 PM
Quote from: hammen on March 07, 2016, 10:44:06 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:30:13 AM
I got back late last night from Iowa City. Here are my observations
UW only had two guys in the top 60 of the B1G. I wouldn't call this a success.
There are 77 schools with D1 wrestling. Over 40% of D1 wrestlers will make it to nationals. Maybe the bar for success needs to be raised.
I hate to say it but watching UW this weekend was like watching a JV team wrestle at a Varsity tournament. Of course Zeke is an exception.
Iowa City is a great place to party.
The B1G tournament is a mini national tournament - arguably one of the toughest tournaments in the country. We had 8 guys place, or 8 of the top 80 (10%), hardly a JV effort. Yes, many placements were below the top 6, but you have to take into consideration seeding/draws and the fact that at many of the weights there's a big gap between the top guys and the rest of the field. That's not indicative of bad wrestlers, it's indicative of elite guys at the very top of their weight class who are able to dominate most everyone they compete against.
you can go 1-3 and get 8th... 2 of them did... but only 7 placed, not 8... oh and our bottom 5 guys went 3-12...
3 - 12. Didn't realize that. Ouch.
Grothus went 0-2, Murphy only had 11 matches half his losses were not in B10, more than half of Youtsey's losses were not B10. Not sure what your point was since these guys are getting beat out of the B10?
Stein Purdue 197 finishes 8th never beat a guy with a winning record. He himself has a losing record. It is possible to sneak into 8th place.
Quote from: Micah on March 07, 2016, 01:40:05 PM
Grothus went 0-2, Murphy only had 11 matches half his losses were not in B10, more than half of Youtsey's losses were not B10. Not sure what your point was since these guys are getting beat out of the B10?
Stein Purdue 197 finishes 8th never beat a guy with a winning record. He himself has a losing record. It is possible to sneak into 8th place.
Right, they still have losing records - and none of our guys snuck into 8th place.
Our top 5 guys went 17-7
They don't have losing records because they are in the B10. Most of their losses are from outside the B10.
Quote from: hammen on March 07, 2016, 01:27:46 PM
No one "snuck" into 8th place by beating a guy with a losing record. Also just as an FYI, a few guys who entered the tournament with losing records: Conor Youtsey, Brian Murphy, Brody Grothus.
who had such a bad draw they couldn't do better?
"...you can sneak into 8th by beating a guy with a losing record." No point in arguing anymore - it's a fact they had losing records at the start of the tournament. It still is irrelevant because all of our guys who placed defeated at least one guy with a winning record.
Quote from: Micah on March 07, 2016, 01:49:10 PM
They don't have losing records because they are in the B10. Most of their losses are from outside the B10.
winning a match in the B1G is a good season... this is why we can't get better, because people like Hammen already believe we are doing just fine.
Not saying it's a good season - it's just pathetic that you cannot acknowledge a guy having a good tournament (placing ahead of seed) and can't get over the fact that they didn't place high enough. We all want them to place higher, and they want to place higher, but undermining one's tournament result because they didn't place even higher than their seed is not showing respect to how difficult it can be to achieve a high placement at this tournament.
Qualifying 5 for nationals is not bad. I didn't expect to get Christiansen through. I really didn't think he had a chance. I did think that Horwath did, and it's too bad it didn't happen for him. Dude filled in admirably after being in the shadows.
Quote from: Ghetto on March 07, 2016, 02:16:42 PM
Qualifying 5 for nationals is not bad. I didn't expect to get Christiansen through. I really didn't think he had a chance. I did think that Horwath did, and it's too bad it didn't happen for him. Dude filled in admirably after being in the shadows.
BH may have a shot. Only 2 of the AQ's at HWT did not make it and there are 6 WC spots.
I hope he does.
Quote from: mkm13 on March 07, 2016, 06:34:33 AM
The positive is next year we will have 3 guys who should be high AA as well as not have any holes in the lineup.
125 - JJ
133 - Taylor
141 - Stickley/Martin
149 - Crone
157 - Ruschell/Scharenbrock
165 - Jordan
174 - Robertson
184 - Christensen
197 - Ritter
HWT - Medberry
On paper, we will have a top 10 team next year and one of the best teams we have had in awhile. Our weakest weights will likely be at 157 or 141. Not bad considering Stickley/Martin had good redshirt years and Ruschell will be a Senior. Hopefully Robertson can get healthy or work through whatever issue he is having this year, as something must not be right to lose all your offense.
That's 8 qualifiers IMO and 4 AAs.
It's unfortunate that Kyle Snyder didn't get an AQ spot for the B1G - otherwise Brock would be in. I like his chances of getting a WC though.
Quote from: hammen on March 07, 2016, 01:59:51 PM
Not saying it's a good season - it's just pathetic that you cannot acknowledge a guy having a good tournament (placing ahead of seed) and can't get over the fact that they didn't place high enough. We all want them to place higher, and they want to place higher, but undermining one's tournament result because they didn't place even higher than their seed is not showing respect to how difficult it can be to achieve a high placement at this tournament.
we had a couple above seeds... 1 spot I think... and a couple below. I'm not the type to give a pat on the back for going 1-3. I also believe 3 guys could have done better. As if RT was ever really a 6 seed... but he did wrestle very well. We had a couple guys drop matches they should have won, a couple guys who did not perform well and a couple that where slightly better than expected... overall is was an "OK" result. I don't think it is a brutal tournament to place 7th or 8th in, I think it is a brutal tournament to place in the top 5... having to win 4 matches is much harder than 1 or 2.
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 01:53:45 PM
Quote from: Micah on March 07, 2016, 01:49:10 PM
They don't have losing records because they are in the B10. Most of their losses are from outside the B10.
winning a match in the B1G is a good season... this is why we can't get better, because people like Hammen already believe we are doing just fine.
I think you just look at it differently. Not saying who is correct and who is wrong. It is all about wins for you. Nothing else. That is the same way I feel about Packer football. College sports is just different. It is not all about wins and loses for me to enjoy a season. That is why the professionals get paid the big bucks.
Quote from: Ghetto on March 07, 2016, 02:16:42 PM
Qualifying 5 for nationals is not bad. I didn't expect to get Christiansen through. I really didn't think he had a chance. I did think that Horwath did, and it's too bad it didn't happen for him. Dude filled in admirably after being in the shadows.
I honestly think Christianen has been wrestling at a high level the last 6 weeks and the draw was good to him. Good to see him through be interesting to see what happens next year after RR having so much trouble at 174
So with that post above, who wrestled above and below expectations? Here's mine...
125- Above. There are times when he struggles.
133- Above. Dude hasn't been right all year. Maybe he is now.
141- At expectation.
149- Below. Because I thought he was rolling.
157- Above
165- At. I expected him to win.
174- At. RR is struggling with something. Ever see him demolish the kid in freestyle at JR nationals? Where did that offense go?
184- Above. Didn't think he'd qualify.
197- At.
285- Above.
Can Robertson stay at 174? Is he shrunk down enough to make that happen long term? Or does he go up and create a logjam at 184?
Quote from: Musky Hunter on March 07, 2016, 02:26:01 PM
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 01:53:45 PM
Quote from: Micah on March 07, 2016, 01:49:10 PM
They don't have losing records because they are in the B10. Most of their losses are from outside the B10.
winning a match in the B1G is a good season... this is why we can't get better, because people like Hammen already believe we are doing just fine.
I think you just look at it differently. Not saying who is correct and who is wrong. It is all about wins for you. Nothing else. That is the same way I feel about Packer football. College sports is just different. It is not all about wins and loses for me to enjoy a season. That is why the professionals get paid the big bucks.
I still enjoy it plenty, it is not all about wins, I am just sick of people saying we are doing good when we are only doing what was expected... nothing happened this past weekend that I didn't expect... expect 149 and 174... I expect 133 to be that good as he seems to have the rust off leading up to this, I expect the result at 125, 165, 184 and HWT they wrestled about to their seeds... I just don't act like the team went above and beyond. I predicted 8th, they finished 8th... I predicted 6 would get in, 5 did, 6 might. If I had really low expectations then I guess they did well but I didn't... based on seeds they wrestled about as expected. They did fine, not great and not poorly but just fine. I am happy we got 5 I was really pulling for 6. I think we have 2 real good shots at finalists in 2 weeks.
Quote from: Ghetto on March 07, 2016, 02:24:04 PM
Quote from: mkm13 on March 07, 2016, 06:34:33 AM
The positive is next year we will have 3 guys who should be high AA as well as not have any holes in the lineup.
125 - JJ
133 - Taylor
141 - Stickley/Martin
149 - Crone
157 - Ruschell/Scharenbrock
165 - Jordan
174 - Robertson
184 - Christensen
197 - Ritter
HWT - Medberry
On paper, we will have a top 10 team next year and one of the best teams we have had in awhile. Our weakest weights will likely be at 157 or 141. Not bad considering Stickley/Martin had good redshirt years and Ruschell will be a Senior. Hopefully Robertson can get healthy or work through whatever issue he is having this year, as something must not be right to lose all your offense.
That's 8 qualifiers IMO and 4 AAs.
Who are you picking for your 8 qualifiers and four AAs? Obviously IJ, RT, CM. I don't know much about Ritter, Stickley or Martin.
Quote from: Ghetto on March 07, 2016, 02:30:58 PM
Can Robertson stay at 174? Is he shrunk down enough to make that happen long term? Or does he go up and create a logjam at 184?
Robertson took 8th at 174 and nobody ahead of him graduates. That is going to either motivate him greatly or discourage him big time if he truly had a very tough time with cutting weight and not the success he probably expected. I guess I am assuming he cannot beat Christensen?
Quote from: Micah on March 07, 2016, 02:48:38 PM
Quote from: Ghetto on March 07, 2016, 02:24:04 PM
Quote from: mkm13 on March 07, 2016, 06:34:33 AM
The positive is next year we will have 3 guys who should be high AA as well as not have any holes in the lineup.
125 - JJ
133 - Taylor
141 - Stickley/Martin
149 - Crone
157 - Ruschell/Scharenbrock
165 - Jordan
174 - Robertson
184 - Christensen
197 - Ritter
HWT - Medberry
On paper, we will have a top 10 team next year and one of the best teams we have had in awhile. Our weakest weights will likely be at 157 or 141. Not bad considering Stickley/Martin had good redshirt years and Ruschell will be a Senior. Hopefully Robertson can get healthy or work through whatever issue he is having this year, as something must not be right to lose all your offense.
That's 8 qualifiers IMO and 4 AAs.
any change Lubeck can bulk up to 157? He may or may not be better than TJ but can't hurt to try as I don't see him getting past Crone.
Who are you picking for your 8 qualifiers and four AAs? Obviously IJ, RT, CM. I don't know much about Ritter, Stickley or Martin.
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 03:08:22 PM
any chance Lubeck can bulk up to 157? He may or may not be better than TJ but can't hurt to try as I don't see him getting past Crone.
I was thinking the same thing when I saw Lubeck wrestle at 65. Worth a shot. Hopefully TJ can find the passion/energy he needs to have a great senior year at 157. I think he has probably the most short term upside there if he is healthy and his heart is in it. Looked a little burned out at times this year.
I think the future at 157 after that is likely Sharenbrock, if he recovers okay, or 1 of the Wick boys. Lawson and Covaciu may be in the mix down the road as well but I have no idea what their projected college weight would be.
Quote from: vsmf2010 on March 07, 2016, 03:22:45 PM
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 03:08:22 PM
any chance Lubeck can bulk up to 157? He may or may not be better than TJ but can't hurt to try as I don't see him getting past Crone.
I was thinking the same thing when I saw Lubeck wrestle at 65. Worth a shot. Hopefully TJ can find the passion/energy he needs to have a great senior year at 157. I think he has probably the most short term upside there if he is healthy and his heart is in it. Looked a little burned out at times this year.
I think the future at 157 after that is likely Sharenbrock, if he recovers okay, or 1 of the Wick boys. Lawson and Covaciu may be in the mix down the road as well but I have no idea what their projected college weight would be.
I think TJ started the season great and then skid and couldn't recover. A full season like the start would be a good year. As far as recover... did he have surgery?
I think if the coaches feel one of the Wick boys can get to nationals and score points at 157 they should go for it and skip the redshirt. Take advantage of IJ, RT, and CM senior year. Things are lining up for a possible top ten run with those three. Take advantage while they can cause it is going to be a big loss losing those three.
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 03:30:01 PM
Quote from: vsmf2010 on March 07, 2016, 03:22:45 PM
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on March 07, 2016, 03:08:22 PM
any chance Lubeck can bulk up to 157? He may or may not be better than TJ but can't hurt to try as I don't see him getting past Crone.
I was thinking the same thing when I saw Lubeck wrestle at 65. Worth a shot. Hopefully TJ can find the passion/energy he needs to have a great senior year at 157. I think he has probably the most short term upside there if he is healthy and his heart is in it. Looked a little burned out at times this year.
I think the future at 157 after that is likely Sharenbrock, if he recovers okay, or 1 of the Wick boys. Lawson and Covaciu may be in the mix down the road as well but I have no idea what their projected college weight would be.
I think TJ started the season great and then skid and couldn't recover. A full season like the start would be a good year. As far as recover... did he have surgery?
He was injured and I believe they were deciding on surgery. Saw him in a sling so I assume they opted for surgery.
Quote from: Micah on March 07, 2016, 03:32:18 PM
I think if the coaches feel one of the Wick boys can get to nationals and score points at 157 they should go for it and skip the redshirt. Take advantage of IJ, RT, and CM senior year. Things are lining up for a possible top ten run with those three. Take advantage while they can cause it is going to be a big loss losing those three.
That is always the tough question. General thinking is the 5th year will be better than the 1st year and a lot of great wrestlers have hit the ground running after a red shirt year like AD, Tomasello, Imar, Nolf, Nickal, the 3 Jordans, etc. But you also have situations where they pull the red shirt off because the kid is ready or the team needs them like Snyder, Myles Martin, Kaid Brock, and Jo Jo Smith. My thought is if you are not sure it is a significant upgrade you redshirt them. If it is no doubt like the 4 I just mentioned you let them wrestle. Snyder was a little bit of a different situation because he spent his senior year of HS at the OTC which is almost like redshirting.
I really don't understand the rationale of judging performance based on seed. So it's good if a wrestler has an average or terrible year is seeded 10th and gets 9th? Penn State and Iowa will never win the "out wrestled their seed" competition because they have such little room to improve. Seems to me that the whole "beating your seed" rationale is part of the moral victory game reserved for average/poor teams.
Didn't Ritter compete at 184 lbs this season?
And finishing outside the top half(8th place) of the Big Ten is
not a successful season. We have two studs (Taylor and Jordan)
who carried the team.
-and there were some exceptionally bad Big Ten teams this season,
such as Northwestern and Maryland, and getting a win against
a wrestler from one of those teams was not exactly a huge accomplishment.
I think next year we qualify at
125
133
149
165 to 285
AAs at 125, 133, 165 and 285.
125 needs to improve a lot to be an AA. Only five ranked guys are seniors and two of them are from PSU and OkSt. They usually just reload. Youtsey is ranked 20th and beat him 5-1. He has not beat any of the ranked guys. Not saying it is impossible because he has ability he just has to make a big leap.
To put it in perspective Lambert is 10th probably not going to AA and he beat Youtsey easily and pinned JJ.
Wondering if we will see JJ redshirt some time in the next 2 years. Figured it might be next year depending on the development of Cullen and if he can still make 25 but with the 3 seniors probably not the right year to do it.
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: Barou on March 07, 2016, 03:52:34 PM
I really don't understand the rationale of judging performance based on seed. So it's good if a wrestler has an average or terrible year is seeded 10th and gets 9th? Penn State and Iowa will never win the "out wrestled their seed" competition because they have such little room to improve. Seems to me that the whole "beating your seed" rationale is part of the moral victory game reserved for average/poor teams.
I think you really hit the nail on the head. Perpetually average and poor teams have to come up with new and different ways to measure success when real success seems so far off, or even unattainable.
Ben Askren just did a blog on how wrestling to seed will win you a national championship.
Quote from: Ghetto on March 08, 2016, 07:22:21 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: Barou on March 07, 2016, 03:52:34 PM
I really don't understand the rationale of judging performance based on seed. So it's good if a wrestler has an average or terrible year is seeded 10th and gets 9th? Penn State and Iowa will never win the "out wrestled their seed" competition because they have such little room to improve. Seems to me that the whole "beating your seed" rationale is part of the moral victory game reserved for average/poor teams.
I think you really hit the nail on the head. Perpetually average and poor teams have to come up with new and different ways to measure success when real success seems so far off, or even unattainable.
Ben Askren just did a blog on how wrestling to seed will win you a national championship.
I assume he is referring to the top 3 or 4 teams wrestling to their seeds? If Wisconsin wrestles to their seeds, they will finish maybe top 14? Jordan being seeded #1 is at least 20 points. Taylor is looking at an 8 or 9 seed so maybe 6 or 7 points? The other three won't be seeded or maybe a 15 or 16 seed.
Side note - Jordan scored 24.5 points in the Big Ten tournament. The highest scorer in the tourney.
Quote from: Barou on March 08, 2016, 08:21:25 AM
Quote from: Ghetto on March 08, 2016, 07:22:21 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: Barou on March 07, 2016, 03:52:34 PM
I really don't understand the rationale of judging performance based on seed. So it's good if a wrestler has an average or terrible year is seeded 10th and gets 9th? Penn State and Iowa will never win the "out wrestled their seed" competition because they have such little room to improve. Seems to me that the whole "beating your seed" rationale is part of the moral victory game reserved for average/poor teams.
I think you really hit the nail on the head. Perpetually average and poor teams have to come up with new and different ways to measure success when real success seems so far off, or even unattainable.
Ben Askren just did a blog on how wrestling to seed will win you a national championship.
I assume he is referring to the top 3 or 4 teams wrestling to their seeds? If Wisconsin wrestles to their seeds, they will finish maybe top 14? Jordan being seeded #1 is at least 20 points. Taylor is looking at an 8 or 9 seed so maybe 6 or 7 points? The other three won't be seeded or maybe a 15 or 16 seed.
Side note - Jordan scored 24.5 points in the Big Ten tournament. The highest scorer in the tourney.
Yes, the wrestling to seed and winning only matters for the teams at the top. If PSU wrestles to their seeds they will win easily. If WI wrestles to it's seeds it will finish around 15. It is a great personal achievement to wrestle to or above a seed, but it doesn't mean it was a big achievement in the big picture. It's like that one guy on your team that can't buy a win, he finally beats someone, great personal achievement yes and you are happy for him. Big picture, the one win doesn't mean much. Unless you are that team at the top and it gets you a title.
Quote from: jeast on March 07, 2016, 10:55:41 AM
Quote from: stp on March 07, 2016, 09:39:08 AM
Quote from: jeast on March 07, 2016, 09:32:04 AM
Way to set the bar there stp. Outstanding to move up 20 points? Hmm...outstanding would be a 40 or 50 point move. Top five. Top three. Outstanding isn't moving ahead of Illinois or Michigan in my opinion. Modest request really.
Well...baby steps. You go ahead and have your unrealistic expectations. Wisco is also close to the Cornhuskers. imo- PSU, tOSU and IOWA are on a different level at the moment.
Baby steps? You must think we are building a new program here. We are not. If the year were 1996 and not 2016 I would agree with you wholeheartedly. Davis has filled his usefulness in my opinion.
You would have to put Rutgers in that "different level" category as well then. Rutgers...outstanding weekend.
I disagree with your choice of word. Outstanding can be defined as unrealistic certainly. I don't think it would be unrealistic though. It would be outstanding if Wisconsin could become a top 3-5 wrestling program in the B10. Moving up to the bottom of the first tier of teams wouldn't be outstanding to me, but more mediocre in its accomplishment. Thus the annoyance with your verbiage. Sorry if I offended you. Sincerely. Just disappointed I didn't have more to cheer for in Iowa City over the weekend.
Couldn't make it down. Which of the Jordans were the Hawkeye fans behind in the final?
Couldn't make it down. Which of the Jordans were the Hawkeye fans behind in the final?
[/quote]
They were cheering for Zeke. OSU was threatening to take second place from them at the time.
Quote from: Micah on March 08, 2016, 08:34:08 AM
Big picture, the one win doesn't mean much. Unless you are that team at the top and it gets you a title.
Why do you limit your "big picture" to wins and losses on the mat. Quite honestly, that is the "small picture" when one puts the collegiate athletic experience into perspective.
The point here is, success depends wholly on how one wants to "frame" the scenario. So, your "big picture" has no more validity than someone who wants to frame a journeyman's win over another guy of modest ability as a giant victory. It is all about perspective.
Quote from: npope on March 08, 2016, 02:14:49 PM
Quote from: Micah on March 08, 2016, 08:34:08 AM
Big picture, the one win doesn't mean much. Unless you are that team at the top and it gets you a title.
Why do you limit your "big picture" to wins and losses on the mat. Quite honestly, that is the "small picture" when one puts the collegiate athletic experience into perspective.
The point here is, success depends wholly on how one wants to "frame" the scenario. So, your "big picture" has no more validity than someone who wants to frame a journeyman's win over another guy of modest ability as a giant victory. It is all about perspective.
You quoted me out of context. My statement was in direct relation to wrestling above seeds wins championships. Was not talking about life lessons or off mat experiences. You are better than that npope! The whole conversation was even quoted 😐
Quote from: npope on March 08, 2016, 02:14:49 PM
Quote from: Micah on March 08, 2016, 08:34:08 AM
Big picture, the one win doesn't mean much. Unless you are that team at the top and it gets you a title.
Why do you limit your "big picture" to wins and losses on the mat. Quite honestly, that is the "small picture" when one puts the collegiate athletic experience into perspective.
The point here is, success depends wholly on how one wants to "frame" the scenario. So, your "big picture" has no more validity than someone who wants to frame a journeyman's win over another guy of modest ability as a giant victory. It is all about perspective.
I will play devils advocate to this though 😀 why are you trying to measure something that is intangible? Are you saying a team can't win and provide an excellent collegiate experience? Are you really trying to tell me the guys at WI get a better collegiate experience than guys at PSU? I think it is silly to try and measure something that is not measurable. How many PSU wrestlers would leave for the WI experience? Not very many.
How many wrestlers with bad experiences would it take before a program is deemed not successful? And what rubric would you use for this measurement? Every team is going to have disgruntled wrestlers leave a program even PSU.
We use wins and losses because they are measurable when talking about a sport. You can't measure ones experience and compare it to another's at a different school.
Quote from: coconut joe on March 08, 2016, 04:52:54 PM
Quote from: Barou on March 08, 2016, 08:21:25 AM
Quote from: Ghetto on March 08, 2016, 07:22:21 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: Barou on March 07, 2016, 03:52:34 PM
I really don't understand the rationale of judging performance based on seed. So it's good if a wrestler has an average or terrible year is seeded 10th and gets 9th? Penn State and Iowa will never win the "out wrestled their seed" competition because they have such little room to improve. Seems to me that the whole "beating your seed" rationale is part of the moral victory game reserved for average/poor teams.
I think you really hit the nail on the head. Perpetually average and poor teams have to come up with new and different ways to measure success when real success seems so far off, or even unattainable.
Ben Askren just did a blog on how wrestling to seed will win you a national championship.
I assume he is referring to the top 3 or 4 teams wrestling to their seeds? If Wisconsin wrestles to their seeds, they will finish maybe top 14? Jordan being seeded #1 is at least 20 points. Taylor is looking at an 8 or 9 seed so maybe 6 or 7 points? The other three won't be seeded or maybe a 15 or 16 seed.
Side note - Jordan scored 24.5 points in the Big Ten tournament. The highest scorer in the tourney.
Have seeds been released? Do you really think Jordan is going to be #1 seed?
Brackets released tomorrow at 6pm est at ncaa.com. I cannot imagine how AD would not be seeded #1 regardless of what the #'s say. He has not lost a match since the last inauguration.
The Wisconsin guys on the team did better than zero wins(1-6 to be exact).
It is true that Crone went 0-2
and Peissig lost by tech fall 22-5 and 14-3(giving up 4 minutes and 37 seconds of riding time against Michigan)
but Gabe Grahek went 1-2 for the day. He beat the Illinois kid that had a 6-13 record
by the score of 2-0.
The Wisconsin guys have got to pick it up! But I do not see it happening anytime soon.
I personally think the Badgers missed out on (my list) the top 4 recruits in Wisconsin this year.
1.Breske
2.Marko
3. Bianchi
4.Stokke (going football so nobody will get him for wrestling)
Quote from: coconut joe on March 08, 2016, 04:52:54 PM
Quote from: Barou on March 08, 2016, 08:21:25 AM
Quote from: Ghetto on March 08, 2016, 07:22:21 AM
Quote from: thedecider on March 07, 2016, 10:27:08 PM
Quote from: Barou on March 07, 2016, 03:52:34 PM
I really don't understand the rationale of judging performance based on seed. So it's good if a wrestler has an average or terrible year is seeded 10th and gets 9th? Penn State and Iowa will never win the "out wrestled their seed" competition because they have such little room to improve. Seems to me that the whole "beating your seed" rationale is part of the moral victory game reserved for average/poor teams.
I think you really hit the nail on the head. Perpetually average and poor teams have to come up with new and different ways to measure success when real success seems so far off, or even unattainable.
Ben Askren just did a blog on how wrestling to seed will win you a national championship.
I assume he is referring to the top 3 or 4 teams wrestling to their seeds? If Wisconsin wrestles to their seeds, they will finish maybe top 14? Jordan being seeded #1 is at least 20 points. Taylor is looking at an 8 or 9 seed so maybe 6 or 7 points? The other three won't be seeded or maybe a 15 or 16 seed.
Side note - Jordan scored 24.5 points in the Big Ten tournament. The highest scorer in the tourney.
Have seeds been released? Do you really think Jordan is going to be #1 seed?
No I made a mistake. I would think Jordan is a lock for the #2 seed.
Quote from: Micah on March 08, 2016, 02:52:05 PM
Quote from: npope on March 08, 2016, 02:14:49 PM
Quote from: Micah on March 08, 2016, 08:34:08 AM
Big picture, the one win doesn't mean much. Unless you are that team at the top and it gets you a title.
Why do you limit your "big picture" to wins and losses on the mat. Quite honestly, that is the "small picture" when one puts the collegiate athletic experience into perspective.
The point here is, success depends wholly on how one wants to "frame" the scenario. So, your "big picture" has no more validity than someone who wants to frame a journeyman's win over another guy of modest ability as a giant victory. It is all about perspective.
You quoted me out of context. My statement was in direct relation to wrestling above seeds wins championships. Was not talking about life lessons or off mat experiences. You are better than that npope! The whole conversation was even quoted 😐
I don't think you have been quoted out of context. Rather, I just suggested that the "frame" could be bigger - or smaller; it depends on one's perspective. You suggest that the whole enchilada is the NCAA meet - that's where it all counts. That wins over lesser wrestlers by lesser wrestlers don't really count - they don't matter. I'm saying that's not necessarily true. Personally, I think all of the matches a person might wrestle might contribute meaningfully to his future if he deems them to be of such importance and that they shape his life. The shaping of one's life doesn't only occur on the grandest of stages. It depends on one's perspective.
Quote from: billymurphy on March 08, 2016, 06:30:04 PM
The Wisconsin guys on the team did better than zero wins(1-6 to be exact).
It is true that Crone went 0-2
and Peissig lost by tech fall 22-5 and 14-3(giving up 4 minutes and 37 seconds of riding time against Michigan)
but Gabe Grahek went 1-2 for the day. He beat the Illinois kid that had a 6-13 record
by the score of 2-0.
The Wisconsin guys have got to pick it up! But I do not see it happening anytime soon.
I personally think the Badgers missed out on (my list) the top 4 recruits in Wisconsin this year.
1.Breske
2.Marko
3. Bianchi
4.Stokke (going football so nobody will get him for wrestling)
I agree that we need more out of in state talent, BUT I completely disagree on that fact that you don't see it happening anytime soon. We have some Wisconsin boys who are ready to make some noise in the next year or two in Lantz, Cole Martin, and Reinhardt. They have all had success at opens already and will help solidify some holes that we have.
Quote from: npope on March 08, 2016, 08:43:15 PM
Quote from: Micah on March 08, 2016, 02:52:05 PM
Quote from: npope on March 08, 2016, 02:14:49 PM
Quote from: Micah on March 08, 2016, 08:34:08 AM
Big picture, the one win doesn't mean much. Unless you are that team at the top and it gets you a title.
Why do you limit your "big picture" to wins and losses on the mat. Quite honestly, that is the "small picture" when one puts the collegiate athletic experience into perspective.
The point here is, success depends wholly on how one wants to "frame" the scenario. So, your "big picture" has no more validity than someone who wants to frame a journeyman's win over another guy of modest ability as a giant victory. It is all about perspective.
You quoted me out of context. My statement was in direct relation to wrestling above seeds wins championships. Was not talking about life lessons or off mat experiences. You are better than that npope! The whole conversation was even quoted 😐
I don't think you have been quoted out of context. Rather, I just suggested that the "frame" could be bigger - or smaller; it depends on one's perspective. You suggest that the whole enchilada is the NCAA meet - that's where it all counts. That wins over lesser wrestlers by lesser wrestlers don't really count - they don't matter. I'm saying that's not necessarily true. Personally, I think all of the matches a person might wrestle might contribute meaningfully to his future if he deems them to be of such importance and that they shape his life. The shaping of one's life doesn't only occur on the grandest of stages. It depends on one's perspective.
I never said anything about the NCAA tournament in my quote. I was referring to any tournament and any title. If you read again what I wrote and quoted. This is the point, if a guy that never wins, does not get seeded, wins a match and places, he wrestles above his seed and your team places 8th out of 14 teams in the "big picture" of team of overall team score it means nothing. Now if that guy wins you the title it is important, I was just painting the picture that wrestling to a seed doesn't necessarily mean much in a team race.
In my explanation I even included that I would be happy for the guy. You took the response out of context and applied the big picture as an overall college life experience. Not something I was planning to delve into or debate because it is subjective.
The Badgers missed on Breske, tried and didn't get him. I don't believe that all comes down to Barry but thats my opinion. Marko and Bianchi are not misses, I hope they both have great careers but there is a difference between D1 wrestlers and BIG Ten wrestlers.
Quote from: GoodGod on March 08, 2016, 10:05:11 PM
The Badgers missed on Breske, tried and didn't get him. I don't believe that all comes down to Barry but thats my opinion. Marko and Bianchi are not misses, I hope they both have great careers but there is a difference between D1 wrestlers and BIG Ten wrestlers.
Beau could have gone anywhere he wanted and he made the best decision for him. I really like him and his family and would have loved to see him in a different red singlet so I am certainly disappointed. I wish him well and will watch his progress at Nebraska and beyond if he continues to wrestle after college which I think is likely.
The Wick brothers probably could have wrestled just about anywhere they wanted and they chose WI. You win some and you lose some. Nature of the beast.
The great prospects that leave the state always sting a little more but very few programs in any sport are able to get everyone they want. PSU in wrestling, KY and Duke in mens Bball, and Alabama and OSU in football are a few that come to mind.
Projected 2016-2017 starting lineup.-(projected 9th place NCAA finish)
125 Jimenez
133 Taylor
141 Martin
149 Crone
157 Ruschell
165 Jordan
174 Robertson
184 Ritter
197 Peissig
Hwt Medbery
Quote from: billymurphy on March 09, 2016, 11:49:53 AM
Projected 2016-2017 starting lineup.-(projected 9th place NCAA finish)
125 Jimenez
133 Taylor
141 Martin
149 Crone
157 Ruschell
165 Jordan
174 Robertson
184 Ritter
197 Peissig
Hwt Medbery
No Christensen?
Yea our qualifier won't have a spot?
Quote from: Micah on March 09, 2016, 12:01:07 PM
Quote from: billymurphy on March 09, 2016, 11:49:53 AM
Projected 2016-2017 starting lineup.-(projected 9th place NCAA finish)
125 Jimenez
133 Taylor
141 Martin
149 Crone
157 Ruschell
165 Jordan
174 Robertson
184 Ritter
197 Peissig
Hwt Medbery
No Christensen?
I think there is a good chance Ritter goes up to 97
Ritter is a potential stud at 184 (17-2 redshirt year).
Christensen was 7th place Big Ten.
Ritter was last years top Badger recruit and is
ready to take over at 184. The other question
is whether Robertson decides to stay down at
174 lbs, where he was a walking dead man.
I do agree that it is likely Barry will allow somebody
to challenge Peissig at 197 lbs next year.
Last year we were not allowed the privilege of seeing
the Ritter vs. Peissig wrestle-off.
Also Reinhardt only lost to Robertson I believe 4-2 in the wrestle offs. Maybe he will bump up to 197.
Quote from: wrastle63 on March 09, 2016, 08:00:16 PM
Also Reinhardt only lost to Robertson I believe 4-2 in the wrestle offs. Maybe he will bump up to 197.
Or go 174
I am going to take a stab and it is only a stab with some twists.
25-Lantz....JJ will reshirt and then in 2018-2019 they will decide who wrestles 25 or 33
33-Taylor
41-Martin
49-Crone
57-some one we dont know about ;)
65-Jordan
74-RC
84-well RR or Reinhardt
97-Ritter
HWT-Medbury
Top 6 at the nationals!
Once again just some thoughts and wild stabs :D
Top 6 at nationals ???I see only 3 realistic all americans on that list,jmo not even sure how high Medbury will place being probably only the 4th best hwy in the Big10,Mich,Ohio St and iowa all ahead of him.Until UW starts getting Div1 talent in the room they will struggle to even climb into upper 1/2 of the big10. :(
Quote from: boowrestle on March 10, 2016, 10:06:40 AM
Top 6 at nationals ???I see only 3 realistic all americans on that list,jmo not even sure how high Medbury will place being probably only the 4th best hwy in the Big10,Mich,Ohio St and iowa all ahead of him.Until UW starts getting Div1 talent in the room they will struggle to even climb into upper 1/2 of the big10. :(
You saying Stoll beats CM?
Quote from: boowrestle on March 10, 2016, 10:06:40 AM
Top 6 at nationals ???I see only 3 realistic all americans on that list,jmo not even sure how high Medbury will place being probably only the 4th best hwy in the Big10,Mich,Ohio St and iowa all ahead of him.Until UW starts getting Div1 talent in the room they will struggle to even climb into upper 1/2 of the big10. :(
I agree. They might be top 10 but won't be top 6. I do, however, think after this year we will see the last year of Snyder at OSU. Complete speculation but I think he might have pulled his redshirt to finish this year before he goes international full-time.
Quote from: wrastle63 on March 08, 2016, 08:50:17 PM
I agree that we need more out of in state talent, BUT I completely disagree on that fact that you don't see it happening anytime soon. We have some Wisconsin boys who are ready to make some noise in the next year or two in Lantz, Cole Martin, and Reinhardt. They have all had success at opens already and will help solidify some holes that we have.
I think all 3 of those will be pushed pretty hard to even make the lineup next year, let alone make some noice. I would say the best chance is Martin, but I would give Stickley a slight edge over him at this point.
Quote from: billymurphy on March 09, 2016, 07:33:45 PM
I do agree that it is likely Barry will allow somebody
to challenge Peissig at 197 lbs next year.
Not sure why this is even a question, Peissig is not a big 10 level wrestler. Assuming Ritter can grow into a good sized 197 and Robertson can figure out how to wrestler 174, our ideal lineup is:
125 Jimenez
133 Taylor
141 Stickley/Martin
149 Crone
157 Ruschell
165 Jordan
174 Robertson
184 Christensen
197 Ritter
Hwt Medbery
Maybe Christensen will try 174 next year and move Robertson back to 184? Hopefully Robertson/Christensen/Ritter can figure out their weights to fill 174/184/197 and compete at a high level. It appears at this point, the best weight for all 3 of them might be 184.
Quote from: mkm13 on March 10, 2016, 10:40:09 AM
Quote from: billymurphy on March 09, 2016, 07:33:45 PM
I do agree that it is likely Barry will allow somebody
to challenge Peissig at 197 lbs next year.
Not sure why this is even a question, Peissig is not a big 10 level wrestler. Assuming Ritter can grow into a good sized 197 and Robertson can figure out how to wrestler 174, our ideal lineup is:
125 Jimenez
133 Taylor
141 Stickley/Martin
149 Crone
157 Ruschell
165 Jordan
174 Robertson
184 Christensen
197 Ritter
Hwt Medbery
Maybe Christensen will try 174 next year and move Robertson back to 184? Hopefully Robertson/Christensen/Ritter can figure out their weights to fill 174/184/197 and compete at a high level. It appears at this point, the best weight for all 3 of them might be 184.
I agree, figuring out those three weights with those three guys will be key. I don't expect those weights to AA but for duals and picking up a few wins at nationals they are important, at the top it is the team that has a fringe guy win matches and maybe sneak into an AA spot that makes the difference.
BOO CM will NOT lose to Stoll. Also I think CM will beat Coon.
Quote from: Micah on March 10, 2016, 11:13:03 AM
Quote from: mkm13 on March 10, 2016, 10:40:09 AM
Quote from: billymurphy on March 09, 2016, 07:33:45 PM
I do agree that it is likely Barry will allow somebody
to challenge Peissig at 197 lbs next year.
Not sure why this is even a question, Peissig is not a big 10 level wrestler. Assuming Ritter can grow into a good sized 197 and Robertson can figure out how to wrestler 174, our ideal lineup is:
125 Jimenez
133 Taylor
141 Stickley/Martin
149 Crone
157 Ruschell
165 Jordan
174 Robertson
184 Christensen
197 Ritter
Hwt Medbery
Maybe Christensen will try 174 next year and move Robertson back to 184? Hopefully Robertson/Christensen/Ritter can figure out their weights to fill 174/184/197 and compete at a high level. It appears at this point, the best weight for all 3 of them might be 184.
I agree, figuring out those three weights with those three guys will be key. I don't expect those weights to AA but for duals and picking up a few wins at nationals they are important, at the top it is the team that has a fringe guy win matches and maybe sneak into an AA spot that makes the difference.
Right on. To be a consistent top 10 contender you ideally have a shot at a qualifier at every weight, a few high seed AA guys and a few more low seed/unseeded guys who can make a run at a top 12/8 with a good tournament and the right draw.
I think next years lineup on paper has a shot to look like that.
This year I would say we went into the season with a shot at qualifier at 8 weights, expected 2 high seeds, and the thought that Ricky could be a top 12/8 guy. Ended up with 5 qualis, 1 high seed, and a great shot at 2 AA's. Hopping the other 3 can wrestle really well, win some matches, and see how far they can take it.
Quote from: wrastle63 on March 10, 2016, 11:39:58 AM
BOO CM will NOT lose to Stoll. Also I think CM will beat Coon.
I agree. Prior to Snyder's return, I thought CM would be the favorite next year. Most freestyle guys who take a ORS come back even better on their feet and that is most of the story at HWT. Mat wrestling is just not as big of a deal there because all the top guys usually get out and CM is just fine on the mat.
Snyder is the wild card. Not sure if he will be back and not sure of that match up with CM. Might have a better idea after next weekend.
I said possibily the 4th best in Big10 and I might be mistaken but pretty sure Medbury is 1-3 against Coon,just frustrates me sometimes to see how some people talk about how much talent is coming up in the Badgers room.Sure a lot of talented kids but not Big10/Div1 talent ???
Does lubeck have a yr. left? Would like to see him take a crack at fifty seven .
Quote from: boowrestle on March 10, 2016, 12:16:29 PM
I said possibily the 4th best in Big10 and I might be mistaken but pretty sure Medbury is 1-3 against Coon,just frustrates me sometimes to see how some people talk about how much talent is coming up in the Badgers room.Sure a lot of talented kids but not Big10/Div1 talent ???
That may be true but I do not see how that applies to CM. He is certainly a proven commodity. I could only find 2 matches between CM and Coon. Both last year and they split.
Last year he had wins over Bobby Telford, Adam Coon, Collin Jensen, Ty Walz, Mike McMullan, Billy Smith, Brooks Black, Michael Kroells, Austin Marsden, and Denzel Dejournette.
Quote from: Jimmy on March 10, 2016, 12:37:35 PM
Does lubeck have a yr. left? Would like to see him take a crack at fifty seven .
Yes he will be a RS Sr next year. Would certainly think he will be in the mix somewhere. Cannot imagine him going down to 41 again so that leaves 57 or 49.
If Ritter is as good as advertised I think we will see him at 184. That means RR has to decide if he can make 174 again for an entire season or does he bulk up to try and wrestle 197 which could be very tough for him
Christensen may be a guy that then has to bump up to 197.
I think there are going to be some serious discussions and battles with those three to decide who wrestles where next year. They will need to decide on a plan by late summer. All three would probably be best at 184.
Reinhardt is another possibility at 197. Not sure how he competes with the three guys above.
Reinhardt and Ritter have done very similar at the opens.
I am guessing a wide open wrestle off for 184 and others have to move up or down. Obviously though if someone wants to go for 197 then they are going to want to really bulk up and not worry about making 184 in the fall so some decisions need to be made.
Still think Peissig could make a jump after experiencing this year and may be tough to beat if those other guys remain small.
Ritter, Reinhardt and Christensen all wrestled at 184 lbs this past season.
Robertson should have been competing at 184 this past season- went from Hulk(184) to Bruce Banner(174)
*Robertson was beating Peissig in the room without much problem prior to dropping to 174.
-Taylor, Jordan and Medbery appear to be vastly better than the 4th best wrestler on the team.
Quote from: wrastle63 on March 10, 2016, 03:51:39 PM
Reinhardt and Ritter have done very similar at the opens.
Ritter beat Reinhardt 7-2
Ritter was 18-2
Reinhardt was 15-8