Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 9 of 34

Thread: Dake #4

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default Dake #4

    looks like we get to see a Caldwell Dake match in the semis

  2. #2

    Default Re: Dake #4

    Quite frankly that is more shocking than Robles at #1, or at least on par with it. Surprised Molinaro got the #2 seed, but he'll have to avenge a loss to Mason to make the semis.

  3. #3
    Super Moderator Zapp Brannigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, NY
    Posts
    8,269

    Default Re: Dake #4

    Quote Originally Posted by Gantry View Post
    Quite frankly that is more shocking than Robles at #1, or at least on par with it. Surprised Molinaro got the #2 seed, but he'll have to avenge a loss to Mason to make the semis.
    Is it really avenging? I mean, Molinaro beat Mason the week before, so wasn't Mason's win the avenging? Or is Molinaro now avenging his previous avenge?

    EDIT: As to Dake, it's a pretty crappy seed, but it follows with the college football adage "it's better to lose early than late."
    Last edited by Zapp Brannigan; 03-10-2011 at 02:16 PM.
    Jacob Schlottke---Gone too soon, and the world is a little less bright because of it. RIP, brother.

    One, two, Evans is coming for you...

  4. #4

    Default Re: Dake #4

    Dake, like several members of Cornell, got a raw deal here imo. With Molinaro and Dake both having 2 losses and Dake beating Molinaro head to head, I just don't get it. Normally, winning the Big 10 tournament is a big deal but 149 at Big 10s just wasn't a strong weight. Dake's seed, Grey at 8, Kerber at 9 and Meagher getting Hall in the first round all disappointing.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Dake #4

    I have to agree, it did look like Cornell got some pretty rough seeds, should make the team race that much more interesting.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Dake #4

    I might just be a Cornell homer, but am I the only one who literally finds this makes no sense?

    I mean, they both have two losses. Dake beat Molinaro head to head this year. Dake majored Mason, who Molinaro lost to. Dake is a returning national champ.

    The only case you could even consider for Molinaro being seeded above Dake is that he won the Big 10's, but most should agree the Big 10's at 149 were pretty depleted. I suppose another argument that you could make is that Molinaro was an AA at 149 last year, whereas Dake was a weight below...however, that doesn't cut it, not for me at least.
    Am I cool now?

  7. #7
    Olympic Champ kr1963's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida, United States
    Posts
    7,028

    Default Re: Dake #4

    Quote Originally Posted by IloveSATS View Post
    I might just be a Cornell homer, but am I the only one who literally finds this makes no sense?

    I mean, they both have two losses. Dake beat Molinaro head to head this year. Dake majored Mason, who Molinaro lost to. Dake is a returning national champ.

    The only case you could even consider for Molinaro being seeded above Dake is that he won the Big 10's, but most should agree the Big 10's at 149 were pretty depleted. I suppose another argument that you could make is that Molinaro was an AA at 149 last year, whereas Dake was a weight below...however, that doesn't cut it, not for me at least.
    Dake also lost to Vinson (seeded 9th) whom Frank beat last year. Frank also beat Mason (seeded 7th) as well. Frank's losses were by 1 pt each to Mason (3-2) & Dake (1-0). Both of Dake's losses were by 2 pts.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Dake #4

    Quote Originally Posted by kr1963 View Post
    Dake also lost to Vinson (seeded 9th) whom Frank beat last year. Frank also beat Mason (seeded 7th) as well. Frank's losses were by 1 pt each to Mason (3-2) & Dake (1-0). Both of Dake's losses were by 2 pts.
    All true, but I still think the head to head trumps all. I find that those are small, insignificant details when you compare that, in their one meeting this year, Dake defeated Molinaro. People can call "stalling" and "playing the edge" all they like, but the fact is that in the record books it's going down as 1-0 Dake.

    As for Molinaro and his mat skills, he obviously has work to do on bottom. He lost his match to Dake because he chose neutral, not believing he would be able to get away. Both Caldwell and Dake are tough riders (perhaps some of the best this year) and I have a feeling both will be able to give Molinaro fits on the mat. Molinaro has proven that he can ride and nab that RT point, but he has yet been unsuccessful with turning anyone. He didn't capture the major vs. Ballweg just because he used up a lot of time on top that could have been spent scoring takedowns. I can't say much for Caldwell, as honestly I haven't seen a lot of film of him, but Dake is very good at both riding and turning people with crab/claw on top, which could be key come the tournament.
    Am I cool now?

  9. #9

    Default Re: Dake #4

    Quote Originally Posted by IloveSATS View Post
    I might just be a Cornell homer, but am I the only one who literally finds this makes no sense?

    I mean, they both have two losses. Dake beat Molinaro head to head this year. Dake majored Mason, who Molinaro lost to. Dake is a returning national champ.

    The only case you could even consider for Molinaro being seeded above Dake is that he won the Big 10's, but most should agree the Big 10's at 149 were pretty depleted. I suppose another argument that you could make is that Molinaro was an AA at 149 last year, whereas Dake was a weight below...however, that doesn't cut it, not for me at least.
    I'm a Penn State homer, but I have to agree with you. One thing that does sometimes enter in is when the losses take place. Molinaro's last loss was to Dake the end of December. He hasn't lost since. But that said, in light of Dake being a defending national champ, same record and winning their head-on-head--I think Dake should have been seeded ahead of him. But--we don't know how good of a shape Caldwell is in. The draw could be a blessing in disguise for Dake if Caldwell is significantly below 100%.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •