MSU158
Everything posted by MSU158
Braxton Amos
MSU158 replied to Creek chub's topic in College Wrestling
Slooooooowwwwww time of the year. Troll's can at least be good for generating conversation.
285? Can Braxton even make 197? You realize that Cassar is the 1st Finalist for PSU under Sanderson? Still, tOSU does a side by side VERY well for 197-285 against ANYONE. tOSU------------197--------------285-------------------------PSU-------------------197---------------------285 2019 Moore 2nd----Singletary (2-2)--------------------------------Nickal 1st----------------Cassar 1st 2018 Moore 4th------Snyder 1st--------------------------------------Rasheed 7th------------Nevills 7th 2017 Moore 3rd------Snyder 1st--------------------------------------McCutcheon R12----Nevills 5th 2016 Martin DNQ---Snyder 1st---------------------------------------McIntosh 2nd---------Nevills DNP 2015 Snyder 2nd----Tavanello (0-2)--------------------------------McIntosh 3rd----------Lawson 6th 2014 Heflin 2nd------Tavanello R12--------------------------------McIntosh 7th----------Gingrich (1-2) 2013 Campo (0-2)---Karageorge DNQ----------------------------Wright 1st--------------Lawson (1-2) 2012 Campo R12----Capone (1-2)----------------------------------McIntosh (1-2)-------Wade R12 2011 Capone (1-2)--Stolarsky DNQ-------------------------------Ruggear DNQ----------Wade R12 2010 Magrum(2-2)--Morrison (0-2)--------------------------------Steadman DNQ-------Wade (2-2) These don't even account for Pucillo or Bergman right before that timeframe. So, in the past 10 years, tOSU has 2,2,2,3,4,R12,(2-2),(1-2),(0-2) and DNQ at 197. PSU, in that same 10, has 1,1,2,3,7,7,R12,(1-2),DNQ and DNQ. At 285, tOSU has 1,1,1,R12,(2-2),(1-2),(0-2),(0-2), DNQ and DNQ. At 285, PSU has 1,5,6,7, R12,R12,(2-2),(1-2),(1-2) and DNP. Even adding 184(which PSU has basically OWNED), tOSU does well, with emphasis on the past 5 years 2010---------------Pucillo(1 handed) R12-----------------------------------Erwin (2-2) 2011--------------Magrum(1-2)--------------------------------------------------Wright 1st 2012--------------Magrum inj-----------------------------------------------------Wright 2nd 2013--------------Magrum(1-2)--------------------------------------------------Ruth 1st 2014--------------Courts R12-----------------------------------------------------Ruth 1st 2015--------------Courts 5th------------------------------------------------------McCutcheon R12 2016--------------Courts(0-2)----------------------------------------------------McCutcheon(0-2) 2017--------------Martin 5th------------------------------------------------------Nickal 1st 2018--------------Martin 2nd-----------------------------------------------------Nickal 1st 2019--------------Martin 3rd-----------------------------------------------------Rasheed(2-2)
Yeah, let's not forget 2 Junior World teams winning a bronze in 1 and then a U23 World Silver. But, yeah.........
Askren.......OUCH!
MSU158 posted a topic in College Wrestling
Fastest KO in UFC history. I was afraid he was too long in the tooth by the time he got into the UFC. Think this confirmed that while also making the snake Dana White rather happy. Time to hang em up and get back into wrestling full time. Hopefully he sees that.
MSU158 replied to MSU158's topic in College Wrestling
The thing you are CLEARLY misstating is that he has EVER needed striking skills or that lack of them is why he has taken headshots in the last 2 fights. What he NEEDS is proper stand up defense and transitioning to grappling. One thing Ben has always had is a gas tank. Yet in both matches he rushed forward WIDE OPEN. Bad strategy got him in trouble in both fights. NOT bad striking skills. Now, I do think he is a bit too aged at this point and his UFC fights are numbered. But, he is still that good on the ground that he CAN beat anyone in that division. The key is whether or not he can apply the proper game plan and defend against early barrages. That and whether or not he really, wholeheartedly needs to continue fighting. If the loss doesn't energize him along the lines of Gable after Owings, I would say retire and focus on making other great wrestlers........
Ok. To me, regulating sports HAS TO look at the intent of the sport itself. What IS the intent of the sport? Is it to highlight athletic skills by trying to injure an opponent or is that injury solely an unintented result. If the former, you have serious questions to answer when trying to get people to accept it. How can you regulate something that NEEDS to have this to be itself? MMA and even boxing, to a lesser extent, have to deal with this. Meanwhile, Football injuries are usually(I know there are bounties and things of that nature) a byproduct of the physical nature of the sport itself. As such, the powers that be have continued to try to make rule changes to try to minimize the unintended injuries. So, to be CLEAR, I believe the intended design of the sport itself creates its own issues with regulation or even the ability to regulate it. I am not saying I have an issue with MMA or boxing. If both parties know the risks and accept them, I am fine with them doing it. But, we are, at least when it is visual, a "PC" society. Having guys make a living beating each other up, is hard for many to get behind. If the INTENT is not to injure, but it happens as a by-product, it IS much more acceptable.
To be clear, all I was trying to do was relate intent across the board of life in general. To me, atleast, I always try to look at the intent of every person, thing, situation, policy, game, etc. I then judge these things based on that. For a further life example: 1.) A man walking down the street saw a burning house and jumped in to save a child and DID. Hero, right? 1.)A man accidentally started a fire and then jumped back into a burning house to save a child and DID save that child. Still every bit a hero, right? 2.)A man jumped into a burning house to save a child and DID save that child. However, he started the fire INTENTIONALLY. Not so much a hero, but at least he draws a line. 3.)A man jumped into a burning house to save the money in his safe, but happened to come out with a child in the process. At least he isn't truly selfish. 4.)A man jumped out of a burning house and ignored the child. Not good. 5.)A man started the fire and let the child burn. Very not good. 6.)A man started the fire TO burn the child. Do I need to clarify? Hopefully, we can move on from this and let you guys argue about boxing gloves!!!!
Who Wins the best two of three?
MSU158 replied to Keisha_Phillips's topic in International Wrestling
"all the time"???? me thinks you may not know exactly what that phrase means..................
Askren Knocked Out!
MSU158 replied to ConnorsDad's topic in College Wrestling
It definitely was hijacked and has morphed into a ridiculous argument that I am admittedly right in the middle of!
Again, no intent is necessary for the CHARGE itself, the PENALTY or lack there of still falls squarely into interpretation of intent. Why do you think they actually have an option to plead guilty with an explanation? Come on guys, don't be willfully obtuse just to argue. Intent is a very strong word that NO ONE would, should or could ignore when dealing with ANY transgression. I clearly stated that it doesn't excuse negligence or recklessness, so you should still be found culpable in those situations. BUT, the D E G R E E of culpability swings heavily on the INTENT in all situations. Degree was the key word and point of my argument from the beginning. There are charges specifically for no intent, but that same transgression becomes considerably more severe with equally more severe consequences if varying degrees of intent are found.
When does Iowa State overtake the Squawkeyes?
MSU158 replied to WillieBoy's topic in College Wrestling
I don't disagree with anything you said here. The issue is with the empty cupboard comment. That is simply unfair when comparing ANY coach to Carl. There are plenty of great coaches that cant start with a cupboard like Cael did no matter how they tried and couldn't fill it like he can. Recruiting is a key aspect of coaching and Carl dominates it. But, transport him to Edinboro right now and even he would be hard pressed to fill that same cupboard halfway to what he has now.
These 2 legal definitions should end this ridiculous debate: Definition of Criminal Intent: Criminal intent is a necessary component of a "conventional" crime and involves a conscious decision on the part of one party to injure or deprive another. Intention (criminal law) In criminal law, intent is one of three general classes of mens rea necessary to constitute a conventional, as opposed to strict liability, crime. A more formal, generally synonymous legal term is scienter: intent or knowledge of wrongdoing. Even strict liability crimes are tiered specifically due to intent. Selling to a minor may be criminal, but the degree of punishment still would be determined based on proving intent.
So, your rationale to inaccurately argue is due to my only using one criminal example to describe degrees of a crime based on intent? So, robbing someone at gunpoint vs. accidentally not paying for a pack of gum because the grocer didn't ring it up are not differentiated by intent? Rape by kidnapping someone, torturing them and doing it fully against their will vs. a 16 year old having sex with a fully willing 15 year old is not differentiated by intent? How about 2 15 year olds? Methinks you are just being "intentionally" obtuse in this case........... Edited to add: Hell, even speeding is open to interpretation based on intent. Tell a cop or even a judge you were drag racing you will be lucky you don't get thrown in jail on top of the ticket. Tell them you were trying your hardest to speed safely while driving your pregnant wife to the hospital because her water broke and you will likely just pay a fine or maybe even get off. Pretty sure "intent" applies across the board to ANYONE that interprets and/or enforces Law.........
Why do I have to distinguish and who says I am not, anyway? If the design and intent of a thing is to hurt someone, all 3 are in play and effect people's opinions across that same board. Muddled and inaccurate? There are accidental death and self defense. Both of which you have NO criminal responsibility. INTENT has EVERYTHING to do with those outcomes. How about this: 1st Degree: Premeditation and then carrying it out makes the intent 100% clear. Hell, the word "intentional" is even used in the definition. 2nd Degree: 2nd degree is also "intentional" but the lack of planning and forethought implies a lesser "intent" as the planning of the act infers a deeper "intent" to KILL. 3rd Degree: This is when the "intent" is to hurt but NOT kill. Negligence and recklessness can come into play here. Felony Murder: This can range extensively as it is usally a by-product of another crime such as arson, armed robbery, rape and even some DUI's. Voluntary Manslaughter/Murder: Heat of passion type where "intent" cannot be rationalized due to a emotionally or mentally disturbed state so that they cannot reasonably control their emotions. Involuntary Manslaughter/Murder: "unintentional" killing resulting from "criminal" negligence/recklessness. The KEY here for culpability is the act of crime that CAUSED the death. Still the death being "unintended" decides this charge. Accidental death/self defense/justifiable homicide: This is 100% defined by I N T E N T- 1.)lawful acts of violence were excusable as homicide by misadventure. 2.)Accidental killings that do not result from the defendant's criminal NEGLIGENCE and do not occur during the commission of a crime are not criminal offenses. 3.)"homicide is excusable … [w]hen committed by accident and misfortune, or in doing any other lawful act by lawful means, with usual and ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent." CA PENAL § 195. Other states simply omit this class of homicide from their statutes defining prosecutable offenses.
I said degrees did I not? I never said lack of intent frees you from negligence or responsibility. But, it sure changes/decides the degree of punishment. Also, when deciding on banning something that is not inherently bad, intent should absolutely be considered.
1.) Boxing is close, but the use of gloves and keeping it to SOLELY punching makes a big difference to me and I assume, most others. That isn't to say the intent is not to hurt, but not close to the degree that MMA usually involves. These things make boxing more of a "sport" than a straight up fight. MMA basically IS straight up fighting and that makes it hard for most to accept, emotions or not. 2.) I don't think emotions really have anything to do with it. MMA is as close to a legal, organized street fight as you can get. Of course many are going to rail against it. Intent should ALWAYS matter. If the INTENT is to truly hurt EVERY opponent as much as possible as quickly as possible, there absolutely is a strong argument for banning it. If the intent is a sport that shows athletic greatness without truly trying to hurt your opponent, why wouldn't you try to continue it while making it safer? There are aspects to DUI's BECAUSE of the lack of intent. Intent is one of, if not the most important aspects of law. That is why there are so many degrees of murder. Still, comparing drunk driving to football is ludicrous. It is illegal because of the inherent danger it causes EVERYONE on the road. In sports like Football these guys know the risks and the organizations are truly working hard to minimize them. Simply not a comparison at ANY level.........
This aspect cannot be ignored. To be clear, he IS the best overall current head coach by a significant margin. Hell, he is making an argument to challenge even Gable. Still, his fame, much like Gable's put him at the forefront of recruiting right from the start. To be fair, coaches like Dresser, Brands, Smith, Ryan and even guys like Pat Pop, Brian Smith or Tim Flynn would do exceptionally well if they were able to recruit like Sanderson. That isn't to say that they would do as well as Sanderson(I don't thinky anyone can match what Sanderson has created overall at PSU), but a significant part of that gap is inarguably recruiting.
I am not against MMA at all, but I DO get many of the points made by its detractors. Let's be real. The objective of MMA is to either beat your opponent unconscious or into submission. As such, it is hard for the "enlightened" ones to wrap their head around such a "barbaric" activity. The others you list are very dangerous and 1 is EXCEPTIONALLY stupid(smoking), but the INTENT isn't to decisively hurt your opponent or even yourself. As a result, banning anything other than smoking, just doesn't make sense. However, continuing to try to improve safety should and will continue.
MSU158 replied to jammen's topic in College Wrestling
To be fair, until J Rob, Minnesota was barely relevant on the national landscape. Still, it is interesting to see how cherry picked timeframes can render different results. When all is said and done, PSU has OWNED the last decade and it isn't even close. No matter how you frame an anti-PSU argument, 10 years of dominance can't be ignored or swept under the rug by ANY set of data. Hell the 2nd closest average placement team over that 10 year span is Iowa and they only finished 1st or 2nd 1 time each. Hell, the ONLY other team to finish top 10 every year is Cornell! Last 10: _____________1st________2nd___________3rd________________4th__________________Top 5___________________________Top10 PSU................8..................0......................0..............................0....................................8.....................................................10-8 wins a 6th and 9th Iowa...............1..................1.......................3.............................4....................................10...................................................10-All top 5's Cornell...........0..................2.......................0.............................1.....................................5....................................................10-5 top 5's and 7,7,7,7,8 OkState.........0..................2.......................3.............................1.....................................6......................................................9-6 top 5's and 6,6,7 and 13 tOSU..............1..................3.......................1.............................0.....................................5......................................................9-5 top 5's and 6,6,8 and 29 Minn..............0..................2.......................1.............................0.....................................3......................................................8-3 top 5's and 7,7,7,8,13 and 17
Again, I am not saying that MMA fighters are not highly susceptible to CTE. I just pointed out STRONG numbers that show the amount of collisions creating brain trauma that NFL linemen take dwarfs what an MMA fighter would see in the same time span. Now, boxing, I admit could challenge this, but even boxers only fight 1-2 times per year and usually spar with heavy gloves and headgear. While in a fight, the odds are better they take more powerful shots, more often, but that amount over the course of a year most likely falls WAY short of the average NFL player.........
Not really true. Yes, these guys get hit in the face, but how often does that occur at full speed without headgear? The top guys fight maybe 2x's a year and aren't taking full punches in practice. Meanwhile, NFL lineman, on average, sustain 60 car crashes, PER GAME(not even accounting for practices), with the equivalency of hitting a wall at 30 mph. The very large amount of repeated blunt force trauma to the head dwarfs the exposure to an average MMA competitor. It just comes down to physics. NFL athletes are just so big, strong and fast that nearly EVERY collision is going to rattle the brain. Take 1000's of those collisions over a career and it WILL create irreversible brain damage. The above isn't to say that MMA isn't brutal and won't cause significant damage as well. I am just pointing out that a career in football from peewee through the NFL is going to dwarf anything else other than being a volunteer crash dumby for a car company!
What team could rise the most and what team could fall the most in NCAA's due to the Olympic Redshirt year?
MSU158 replied to MadMardigain's topic in College Wrestling
I admittedly don't keep track of everyone's affiliation, but they ALL were just as delusional as anyone calling for 150 from Iowa.......
Shame on hardcore fans for being overly optimistic. How many times Have I heard PSU fans call for them to break the team scoring record? I get that it has been quite some time since Iowa has been solidly into the 100's so 150 is beyond a stretch. But, when you have 7 returning AA's, 2 R12's and a top recruit at the last weight, would you not expect fans to be optimistic? If I had to guess I expect 110-120, with closer to 120 needed to beat PSU. For 150, Iowa would need to stay healthy and have no one falter.
Also, for a guy with that much MMA experience, look at how he lunged wide open into that knee. Hell, he looked like an overweight heavyweight does when he goes for a double leg without bending his knees. Seriously, watch right when the knee connects to see Askren's positioning. I simply can't believe a super winded UFC fighter would get caught in that stance, let alone Askren 3 seconds into a fight. If he can get it to the ground he can beat anyone, but his age is definitely a factor for him getting the fight to the ground.
Not at all. Meant coaching. If he devoted hisself full-time to that, be it kids club level or even collegiate, all wrestling would benefit greatly.