|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Michael Rodriguez added to this discussion on January 22, 2018
|
Brady...I would rank tOSU wrestlers similarly, and I’ll give you Pletcher, but think about it...why put Snyder down? Ever? He’s a takedown machine. He wears big guys down with pressure and neutral attacks. Speaking of big guys, so you remember last year? I could almost hear the collective gasp of the Buckeye faithful when Snyder tweaked his rib because one of these behemoths was on top of him. And for what, a point?
Moore, who you have third, chose neutral last night in a right bout with an All American level opponent. If you’re not going down then, you’re should never go down. Martin, both Jordans, McKenna? All of them have bottom wrestling as the weakest part of their game. I just don’t see argument when the risk/reward is measured out. I think a lot of wrestlers and coaches have this “you have to choose down†mentality. I’m not sure it’s best suited for this team.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on January 22, 2018
|
Former Buckeye 2x AA Eric Smith had a rule. Never take down if you're winning on your feet. Bucks are clearly more comfortable in neutral with a couple exceptions (Bo and Campbell like top).
Agree that Nate's best strategy against Lee would be to focus on TD's and avoid bottom if not necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Brady Hiatt added to this discussion on January 22, 2018
|
|
Quote from Michael Rodriguez's post:
|
|
"Brady...I would rank tOSU wrestlers similarly, and I’ll give you Pletcher, but think about it...why put Snyder down? "
|
I didnt say I would, just that I have confidence he coold escape. I also said I’d buy 8/10 easier.
Much depends, obviously, on match situations.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Brady Hiatt added to this discussion on January 22, 2018
|
|
Quote from Matt Mace's post:
|
|
"
|
Quote from Brady Hiatt's post:
|
|
"
|
Quote from Michael Rodriguez's post:
|
|
"Honest question, who should choose down? Maybe Pletcher?"
|
My Level of Confidence
Snyder
Pletcher (except vs Gross)
Moore
BoJo
MyMar
NaTo
Campbell
McKenna
Hayes
MJ"
|
No way i put Snyder under many of the HVYs. There is no point in that. Not worth the effort for 1pt. I agree with Pletch and Moore and mostly MyMar, but Bo's struggles underneath his cousin are well documented.
Obviously, the decision is situational, but in general this team struggles underneath and should probably choose neutral."
|
Didnt BoJo get away from both Hall and Valencia?
For Snyder, I didn’t say i would, but I listed him #1 in my confidence in getting away because he CAN from anybody.
|
Last edited by Brady Hiatt on January 23, 2018; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Jack Muni added to this discussion on January 22, 2018
|
Nate is usually great in the down position. That is what is so incredible about Lee's ride out. That being said, now we know! Come up with a better game plan next time. If it means not going down, so be it. In hind sight, he had a better chance of scoring on his feet that trying to get that one point and allow Lee to accumulate a riding point. Live & learn.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
John Ice added to this discussion on January 23, 2018
|
|
Quote from Michael Rodriguez's post:
|
|
"The whole team should use that plan...Everyone."
|
Couldn’t agree more!
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Joe Kinzel added to this discussion on January 23, 2018
|
I think people are putting too much emphasis on Nate's loss to Lee. Yes, it was disappointing but what does it tell us?
Nate is not capable of escaping from Lee? Lee is the better 125#? Or....maybe it doesn't tell us anything. Maybe NaTo was sick. Maybe he had an off day and just didn't wrestle his best.
As much as I would have liked to see him win I'm not convinced the next time they wrestle we will see the same result. If nothing else, If Nate doesn't choose down he may win by 5 points.
I guess what I'm saying is I've been around the sport long enough to know that one match doesn't define a season or isn't always a true indicator of how match-ups will be decided in the future.
Too optimistic?
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on January 23, 2018
|
|
Quote from Jack Muni's post:
|
|
"Nate is usually great in the down position. That is what is so incredible about Lee's ride out. That being said, now we know! Come up with a better game plan next time. If it means not going down, so be it. In hind sight, he had a better chance of scoring on his feet that trying to get that one point and allow Lee to accumulate a riding point. Live & learn."
|
On the mark.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Rex Holman added to this discussion on January 23, 2018
|
Lee's ride. Micro assessment.
I think we bring attention to it for a couple different reasons.
It was perfect. Not a mistake made. If you want a case study of a second period ride, that was it. Just perfect. The kind of ride that a brings a coach a particular sense of satisfaction. It was domination from a position. What we strive for as coaches and athletes.
Has he spent a majority of his focus on that position while at Iowa?
Why was it perfect? He smothered it. He had an answer for every position engaged and made it look easy. He was stronger at positions than someone who has never been handled like that. It was an outlier performance.
That domination carried into the third and affected everything going forward in that match.
One event does not a reflective sample make. Really looking forward to seeing if he can dominate everyone else from that position. One thing is for sure, Lee is a title threat.
Iowa ride is a near wrist hand through the crotch and lay on top making it look like you are active when in reality you are just waiting to pounce on one of the few things the guy can do as he works up.
McKenna has been working with Stieber as he was getting nasty on top with some torque. A little more confidence and McKenna starts turning a lot of people.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Steve Durose added to this discussion on January 23, 2018
|
The questionable strategy in Nate's match was the optional start when Lee took down to start the 3rd. Not only was the escape point conceded, but the riding time point as well. If Nate rides him out it's 0-0 going to SV. If Nate rides him for a minute it's 1-0 Lee, Lee's tank is depleted, and a takedown wins it. The only possible downside would be giving up a reversal in the first minute, which I'd like to think would be unlikely given Nate's experience level.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on January 23, 2018
|
|
Quote from Steve Durose's post:
|
|
"The questionable strategy in Nate's match was the optional start when Lee took down to start the 3rd. Not only was the escape point conceded, but the riding time point as well. If Nate rides him out it's 0-0 going to SV. If Nate rides him for a minute it's 1-0 Lee, Lee's tank is depleted, and a takedown wins it. The only possible downside would be giving up a reversal in the first minute, which I'd like to think would be unlikely given Nate's experience level."
|
Interesting analysis. I felt the decision to get two TD's in two minutes was better strategy because I doubted Nate would ride for a minute. But it's possible he could have.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Jeff Reid added to this discussion on January 23, 2018
|
I have to say this once again, why doesn't tOSU drill the standup? Just awful from the bottom position. NATO however, I believe, was just overly cautious from the bottom position, being aware of Lee's top game. I think he tried avoiding the turn as opposed to escaping. I think he wins the next matchup.
On a positive note, I was encouraged by Micah (other than getting ridden)and Keyshawn. They kept it close and I think it was a confidence booster for both of them, even though they lost.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Mark Niemann added to this discussion on January 23, 2018
|
I think it’s presumptuous to think Ohio State doesn’t practice bottom skills. I have to believe they do their best to perfect the three aspects of the sport (top, bottom, neutral). It might not show up on the mat as much as we’d like, but to think they don’t practice seems erroneous.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Jeff Reid added to this discussion on January 24, 2018
|
Neimann, just to be clear, i did not say they didnt practice from bottom position. I said it doesnt appear they practice the standup. My HS coach, John Storey only had us practice one move from bottom and that was the standup. Nothing else. In his eyes, the SU was the highest percentage move from bottom. So get up and out, get your one and go for two from feet.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Three Questions
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on January 24, 2018
|
Jeff: With all due respect, the tactics used now are different from those that worked in high school under John Storey. If you explode up without hand control, these D1 wrestlers will lift and return you hard. Also, the claw ride is much different to counter than an arm chop or ankle breakdown. If it were as simple as a hard standup, the Bucks--and everyone else--would do it.
That being said--PSU wrestlers seem to get out with little issue. There is no denying that certain teams are much better on bottom than Ohio State. The Bucks make their living off takedowns.
College Folkstyle rules--which give way too much of a reward for parallel riding and the escape--can work against this strategy on occasion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
