Tell that to J'Den Cox.no because he was already a full sized 213 who made a hellacious cut to 197. he didn't have to grow into that weight at all. he wrestled higher as a high school freshman. and he was a big 215 too.
totally irrelevant response lol
given lee has barely wrestled any freestyle how does that work?
it's ok. the GOAT at any weight sits on a chair in our corner every match.
And the coolest part for me at least is that I wrestled him in high school
19-18.
I'm pretty sure in the Jason's 60 matches that ended by fall, he had enough points for a tech in over half of them also. Super fun guy to watch.
Using facts to shut down an Iowa opinion? You are just being mean to our guest.
I believe Nolf was never counting any lights while looking up at the ceiling. Same for Zain.
And assuming he wins his fourth for the sake of discussion, neither of them stood on top of the podium 4 times. you can't have it both ways.
you won't find anybody who is not a psu fan that thinks jason nolf is better than kyle snyder. being a homer is fine. i also think DT was far superior to Nolf despite having worse results. it's not an anti-psu thing. it's just reality.
Lee will likely end his career with a higher bonus percentage. you all can cherry pick results all you want, but when you lean on a results-based criteria, you're going to lose on the ultimate most important one: titles. and then the convo's over.
I agree, not the GOAT. To be the GOAT (IMO) he would need to be a 4x (still doable), but needs to have more career matches (stay healthy) and less losses. Showing up matters. He cannot fix the last two items at this point. But, IMHO, he is clearly in the top 10 conversation. Not top 10 sells Lee a little short
If titles are the be all end all then why isn’t anyone putting Pat Smith and Logan ahead of guys like Nolf, Nickal, and DT? It’s because losses and dominance do matter. Also, if we are just going by the wrestlers absolute peak then I think DT, Zain, and Spencer are near the top with Nolf and Nickal just a tiny step behind. And with Spencer his absolute peak was probably his freshman year but even then he had 2 losses and didn’t win big 10’s. Actually looking at it more he had 1 extremely dominant tournament which was of course the national tournament but when during his peak he still took multiple losses I’m not sure how he is even in the conversation. Him winning 4 titles (probably) is the only leg he will have to stand on. He loses to these other guys in pretty much every other category. He was dominant his junior year but the overall competition was horrible. That is why I feel like his freshman year was the best. It was actually a good weight
Pat Smith is ahead of those guys under that results metric and most all time greats lists have him ahead of them. I think that's wrong, but it's the way you guys seem to want to do business.
Par terre is arguably spencer's best position in freestyle. he's turned just about everybody he's wrestled. on the senior level that includes NATO, Sanders, and Vito. He has a great gut and is fantastic at transitioning to laces off his leg attacks. That's how he teched his way through his age group world tournaments.
Yes. Admittedly, I am pretty much discounting his junior freestyle career at this point. I also admit Spencer is the most powerful (& strong) 125 I have seen, but will maintain, seniors is a different animal.
okay, but his par terre game already transferred to the senior level. he's turned 100% of his senior level opponents, 3 of which made US Senior National teams at some point in their career.
Or one of them asking, "what were you saying about that raccoon thread?"
But David Taylor has the same amount of losses, but to better wrestlers, a much higher bonus rate, and outscored Dake in career NCAA tournament scoring. If you put Nolf over a 4x Spencer, don't you have to put DT over Dake?
Why is citing more career wins or less career losses any more or less "cherry picking" than citing more NCAA titles?
