I'm not saying Taylor can't get out, but he got out in the first match when Dake tried something silly on his return. When he kept it more conservative and sound in the overtime (and returned him to the side and not straight over), he held him down.

I dont see Dake getting away with the ride he did for 30 seconds for 2 minutes.

Originally Posted by vaisforlovers

I dont see Dake getting away with the ride he did for 30 seconds for 2 minutes.

I'm shocked (SHOCKED!) you feel this way.

Im shocked your going against what already happened. Dt got away in a 2 miute period. This just in, its easier to ride a guy for 30 seconds than 2 minutes.

Originally Posted by ban basketball

"What an IDIOT for taking down,"

Why was Molinaro's choice even more practical that what I just said? Because the only other match that those two wrestled before Molinaro DID escape from Dake in the down position, quite easily, at that.

I remember a little bit of manufactured controversy after that match when Bader caught Jeremy Spates asking Dake what he thought when Molinaro chose down and Dake responded "what an idiot." So it would seem that he agreed.

As others have pointed out too, the match at the Scuffle was 1-0. No escape for Molinaro.

Originally Posted by vaisforlovers

Im shocked your going against what already happened. Dt got away in a 2 miute period. This just in, its easier to ride a guy for 30 seconds than 2 minutes.

Well, you know what they say, if something has happened once, it will happen every time the same situation pops up.

Originally Posted by ban basketball

At the NCAA's? He needed a lot more than a takedown there. SHP, as well as myself, pose this for the NCAA tournament.

Being that he couldn't take him down when he went neutral before, and being that going down was a "losing strategy," should he have tried up?

I'm amazed at your ability to be so consistently wrong.

You're that one really annoying guy at school who takes a ridiculous stance on a topic without knowing any of the facts. Then when the facts very clearly prove you wrong, rather then admitting that you are wrong, or that you didn't know the facts, you stubbornly continue to insist you are right in the hope that everyone will get fed up with arguing with you.

Originally Posted by LoSt

I'm amazed at your ability to be so consistently wrong.

You're that one really annoying guy at school who takes a ridiculous stance on a topic without knowing any of the facts. Then when the facts very clearly prove you wrong, rather then admitting that you are wrong, or that you didn't know the facts, you stubbornly continue to insist you are right in the hope that everyone will get fed up with arguing with you.

In short sir, you are my wife.