Outstanding Wrestler

[CoachDelgado]

I have been in the room discussing candidates for OW at the state tourney. Pinning all the way through holds more weight than mostly pins and some techs. They are both great wrestlers with outstanding credentials. The simple fact is that Gibson, regardless of how many people supposedly ran from his weight class, had the best tournemant of anyone. He had 5 pins and no else did. Career achievements are not factored into the equation.

[best_of_the_west]

Well if OW is based solely on most pins, and it doesn't have anything to do with difficulty of the weight class, why do they even vote? They should just measure the amount of time for most pins. I think a tech shows more dominance anyway.

[kdxdude]

OW should be figured by the least amount of mat time in the tournament.

 

 

What do others think?

[CoachDelgado]

Well botw,

You could have two wrestlers with an equal number of pins in the tournament. Then what is done? The refs vote on just one of them. On occasion difficulty of weight class is thrown out there. My opinion about this year's DI candidates that might of been discussed in the pre-finals official's meeting would likely have been Bundy (difficulty of weight class), James and Gibson. The refs are free to choose who they want and for whatever reasons they want. The pre-finals meeting is just about suggestions and whittling down 14 weight class to 3 or 4 potential candidates.

[best_of_the_west]

I just don't think that least mat time makes the best wrestler. It doesn't take into account the difficulty of a weight class. That's just how I feel.

[pokey]

I bet $10 that no one who is arguing this has ever felt they deserved OW and didn't get it. Because if you had, you would know that when you look back on it you would not worry about an OW when you were a State Champ....that is the real prize!!! It won't affect where these guys go to college or what their credit rating will be or if men will make it to Mars. At most it will be a great conversation, in ten years, between two GREAT kids who earned the right to argue it. Bottom line is that it is subjective. You are entitled to your opinion but remember that it may be irrelevant. Just a thought (or 2).

[best_of_the_west]

Believe me, I know that my opinion is irrelevant, but I have this thing where I have to express it.

[WrestleSBA]

And you know that you do a good job of doing that too BotW .

[slingshot]

Pokey, you make good points and even add a little humor. Ever think about stand-up comedy or at least a debate team?

[wiscwrest]

I hate to see all this bickering about who should have gotten the OW at state as Quinn and Kyle deserved it but they can pick only one. It is purely subjective in how they pick the award and in no way discredits any wrestler. They both are fantastic will continue to be through their college careers. Lets not take anything away from Quinn as he was dominant.I do agree with the Matt Keller comment especially after he won his fourth title should have gotten OW. I WAS THE FATHER OF A STATE CHAMPION FROM ANOTHER STATE AND SAW MY SON BE THE MOST DOMINANY WRESTLER AT THAT STATE'S TOURNAMENT IN MANY YEARS AND HE DID NOT RECEIVE OW AS IT WAS GIVEN TO A THREE TIME CHAMP AND I APPLAUDED AND SAID AT THE END OF THE DAY IT WAS A GOOD DECISION AND CERTAINLY SHOULD NOT BE QUESTIONED. Quinn and Kyle good luck in your college careers. HOW YOU MATURE AND MAKE IMPACT ON PEOPLES LIVES AS I AM SURE YOU WILL DO IS HOW YOU WILL BEST BE REMEMBERED.

[texas23]

i agree that quinn should have got OW one year and kyle should have got it one year. they give matt keller the OW when is a freshman, and he never gets it again. he dominated the next three years, but they give it to gibson twice when kyle dominated for 2 years just as he did. there is no need to argue over it. i just stated that i think kyle should have gotten OW this year since gibson got it last year. they both have been equally dominate except for kyle having tougher weight classes.

tex-thanks for posting my posts from earlier in the year. sorry im a fan of kyle and i like to vioce my opinion on him. i guess i was suppose to ask you permission first since i had been writting about him all year. i didnt know that coacht had a rule for how many times you could write about something or someone.

Hey Rabbit,

 

I was only answering your question as to the broken record comment that some other posted stated. I typically like to back up my posts with some kind of example or comments that lead to me taking the time to write.

 

You know you do not need to check with me first before you post, but thanks for thinking that way. I am sure you meant it.

 

Kyle gets his due from you plenty. He is an outstanding wrestler. Quite frankly though, his finals match was dominant in the fact that he was able to score take down after take down. He seemed not interested in trying to pin his opponent in my view. He did have one opportunity that came up near the end of the second period where the opposing wrestler got into a back on the mat position. I would have like to see Kyle go out and wrestle the guy as opposed to taking him down until it was a tech fall. Maybe that was a factor in the voting, he did not try to pin his opponent, he settled for a "catch and release" strategy to win. Good for him, his talent showed. No less of a talent either, but he did not work to pin his opponent in my opinion.

[takedown42]

I thought the ultimate goal in wrestling was to Pin your opponent. To pin someone is what most wrestlers strive for and most certainly what the fans like to see. To demonstrate ones ability to not only take someone down but to be able to pin them also. I am not questioning James style of wrestling because that is what he chooses to do. I just think Gibson demonstrated a more dominant style by winning on his feet, the bottom and especially on top. A complete wrestler.