What a dual and what a finish. When I got done scoring the bouts, I couldn't believe the takedown stats. Unfortunately, the new stalling rules were front an center with 24 stoppages on the boundary line. Will we see the situation remedied?

Takedowns:

NCSU: 5
Mizzou: 13

This is quite a stunning statistic. NC State won the dual meet with only five takedowns on the day. The bouts were split five to five, and each of the Wolfpack winners won the takedown battle, except Kevin Jack. Jack won a 4-2 decision with an escape, reversal, and riding point. Although he didn’t score a takedown, he didn’t surrender one either.

This was a very evenly matched dual in the neutral position. Lavion Mayes and Blaize Butler accounted for half of all the takedowns in the dual meet with nine. Those were the two dominant wrestlers in the neutral position, outside of them wrestlers struggled to gain an advantage on their feet.

Committed Attacks:

NCSU: 29
Mizzou: 41

A lot of the wrestling in this dual meet was done on the mat. This is the second Missouri dual broken down for “By The Numbers,” and they had a slow pace match against Oklahoma State as well. Don’t mistake slow paced for boring. The slow pace is explaining the attack rate in the neutral position.

It is really difficult to identify committed attacks on the mat, so the stat is only looked at in the neutral position. There were only two attacks in the neutral position in the 184lb bout. Peter Renda controlled the match from the top position and was very aggressive working for turns. It wasn’t a boring match, so don’t let this stat mislead you.

Reversals:

NCSU: 1
Mizzou: 1

Matt Manley and Kevin Jack traded reversals in the 141lb bout for the only reversals of the dual. Both teams have guys that can control a match from the top position so this shouldn’t be surprising. However I was surprised there weren’t more reversals. Stay with me here, and hear me out.

The reversals that have been scored in the matches I have been breaking down have had very little to do with what the bottom man is doing. It has been more about a miscue by the top wrestler (not the case in the 141lb bout). I expected reversals to happen with guys getting over-aggressive from the offensive position. The Renda match is a great example. Several times he had to fight hard to stay in the advantage position when he got aggressive on top. He was able to regain control, but expect good top teams to give up some reversals.

Nearfall:

NCSU: 4 sets of 2, 3 sets of 4
Mizzou: 2 sets of 2

This is where NC State won the dual meet. They earned bonus at 184 and 285lbs. These victories were keyed by several nearfall situations. The bonus point difference ultimately earned the win for the Wolfpack.

The four-point nearfall has proven to be a significant rule change. Expect wrestlers to adjust to this rule in the future and really emphasize their top game. When you see how the top specialists are being rewarded, you have to start adding turns to your game.

Unfortunately, there was some controversy around the set of nearfall for Tommy Gantt at 157lbs. We will never know the true impact of the call, but Barnes is probably on his feet with a chance to tie or win the match if the sequence is called properly. Gantt’s back bow is legal when not run between 45 and 90 degrees from the bottom man’s shoulders. The problem coach Smith had with the situation was: he drove the foot at exactly the angle that keeps it from being a legal hold. Smith challenged the hold and somehow the call stood. I could not hear the ruling whether the call was confirmed or the call stood, due to the lack of video evidence. Our angle is from the opposite side of the mat, so keep that in mind as you what the situation unfold here.


This is where the rule and book jumps into a messy gray area. Maybe we can get a clarification. Chuck Barbee: are you reading? When the back bow is run toward the head you almost always see it stopped for a potentially dangerous call. It is not explicitly identified as a potentially dangerous hold like a few others in the rule book. The illustration says that it is a legal hold provided it is not driven at the 45 to 90 degree angle. The piece that is missing is the proper call when it is driven at the innapropriate angle. Is it a potentially dangerous hold or does it become an illegal hold?

Stalling:

NCSU: 12
Mizzou: 8

Stalling played a significant role in the match. Calls at 165lbs had a significant impact on an, otherwise, closely contested bout. This situation is exactly why I hate the black and white rule of the drop down and side headlock count.

Max Rohskopf is aggressive looking for turns with the side headlock. Under the old rules, officials could watch the action and call it appropriately. Unfortunately, they weren’t capable of making good decisions and wrestlers like Max had their toys taken away because the officials wouldn’t penalize the “hangers” using the hold inappropriately. The officials were being gamed and it is unfortunate that some guys lose a go to nearfall combination.

Other matches saw stall calls flying, but the outcomes weren’t drastically affected. Renda probably still majors Miklus and Mayes does the same to Donahue. It didn’t affect the outcome, but the whole country should have went into panic this weekend with the aggressive wrestler being hit on two occasions. Just happened to be two former NCAA champions being hit for stalling as they attacked. Leaving many scratching their heads. Yes, I had to drag the Dieringer match into the NC State and Missouri breakdown because it was that confusing. This rule needs to be tweeked, but that won’t happen before the off-season. Mark it down right now: we will see one of these calls determine a big match at the NCAA tournament. Above you saw the official determine the aggressive wrestler was pushing the action out of bounds by two different officials. They just can’t call the rule consistent enough for the wrestlers and coaches to get a handle on it. You shouldn’t have respected coaches laughing in the corner because a judgment call is handled so poorly, and they can’t do anything about it. They were so many boundary calls, 24 in the NC State/ Missouri dual, I couldn’t include them all to show the inconsistency. I did want to show a pair that is tough to swallow for the competitors. When escapes happen on the boundary it is hard to get penalized for going out of bounds and not get upset. Watch Donahue escape out of bounds and try to circle in. Mayes gets the stall call by simply cutting him off and stalking toward him. The call is mind blowing. Alex Dieringer is working in the top position when Wilson attacks his legs when being cut free from the stand up. He gets attacked out of bounds as he gives up the escape on the boundary line. The official piles on with a stall call against Dieringer. This the least egregious call of the group, but could you imagine the outcry if a similar situation determined a big match in March? While some of these calls I flat out disagree with due to the judgment, see Alex Dieringer neutral GIF, the officials have been put in an impossible situation to call this rule consistently. I don’t think I, or anyone else has the perfect remedy, but it is clear this rule needs changed.