321A Unfair Regionals?
#21349
02/19/04 11:48 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 74
Old Boy
OP
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 74 |
Does anyone agree 321A Norton regional is way tougher than other regionals?
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21350
02/20/04 12:01 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 37
RHS152
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 37 |
true norton is harder but how about u cry about it
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21351
02/20/04 12:47 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,190
jmadden
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,190 |
I will mark one vote for excuse making.
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21352
02/20/04 12:53 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 157
tuffEnuff2
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 157 |
theres going to be a whole lot of shakin goin on, but in the end, the cream will rise to the top..
..God gave you a body that can take almost anything, it's your mind you have to convince -vince lombardi
God gave you a body that can take almost anything, its your mind you have to convince -vince lombardi
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21353
02/20/04 03:46 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 91
Big Daddy
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 91 |
Can be absolutely no doubt NT. regional is the toughest -at least in 321A. Unfortunatly and unfairly (in my opinion) it is that way every year. I have seen people post saying that nothing can be done about it because next year might be different. This is wrong, wrong, WRONG! The toughest regional has always been and will continue to be the one in NW Kansas. Some will want to disagree but look at past state winners, placers and team placings and see what regional they came out of. I am not basing my post on emotion but on FACT!
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21354
02/20/04 03:54 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,190
jmadden
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,190 |
Wah! I don't see a single kid seeded #5 that impresses me.
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21355
02/20/04 03:55 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,190
jmadden
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,190 |
Unlike the Abilene regional where there are some pretty awesome #5 and #6 seeds.
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21356
02/20/04 05:32 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 21
BLUTARSKY
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 21 |
Fanatic,
Realizing that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and that you may be blind in your good eye, please consider the following #5 seeds at the NT Regional:
119--Richards of Oberlin 130--Gienger of St. Francis 145--Breon of Phillipsburg 152--Long of Hill City 160--Thiele of Norton 171--Samson of Atwood and #6 Underhill of Hill City 215--Pulec of Stockton
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21357
02/20/04 05:59 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 91
Big Daddy
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 91 |
All those are quality kids and if you follow wrestling out in the west you would know that these guys have had some very close matches with people seeded above them, in some cases the no. 1 seed. Fanatic you say that none of the number 5 seeds impresses you and thats too bad. Either you must think the 5 seeds at Abilene are world beaters or for some reason you are looking at this with a biased eye. This topic was discussed before and an overwhelming majority of the respondents thought the NT. regional was the toughest. Enough said.
|
|
|
Re: 321A Unfair Regionals?
#21358
02/20/04 08:58 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,255
Aaron Sweazy
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,255 |
I thought the idea of regional pairings were to put people in the geographically closest regional. Someone explain how Goodland and Colby end up at the same regional as Jeff West, SFT, and Royal Valley, sounds loopy to me.
Yours in wrestling,
The Swayz swayz.wrestling@gmail.com recruiting help, promoting the sport& more!
|
|
|
|
0 registered members (),
235
guests, and 2
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics35,989
Posts250,449
Members12,302
|
Most Online709 Nov 21st, 2011
|
|
|