Interesting article on J Robinson's opinion on how to make D-1 College Wrestling stronger.
http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/01/college_wrestling_is_strong_bu.html
I like his idea of the National Champion being determined by a dual format. He is right, that college fans root for teams, not individuals.
I like how he talks about the team concept. I truly think that is what is missing in wrestling at all levels. Many wrestlers like to just be part of a team and that does not exist many places. He is right that most fans follow teams and not individuals
When I wrestled you had middle school (7th, 8th, 9th) duals with weight classes
Then we had JV duals
Then of course varsity duals.
Every wrestler had two ways to win either individually or as a team. Even with a loss you could help out your team by not getting pinned. In a team dual everyone is the same as they each get one match whether you are a state champ or a below .500 wrestler.
I truly believe that if we would have a single middle school season across the state with duals and middle school tournaments only and then have a middle school state tournament different from WWF tourney that it would grow numbers in high school to JV duals, etc. I hope the coaches association with the challenge series continue to work down to organize all the way down to the middle schools.
Strong programs are admitted but you need quality individuals or develope them to have a good team.
He makes good sense but I also wonder if some really good wrestlers that might be developed in D1 are in D2-3 because they are not interested in the grind and politics of D1?
Team means something in the D2-3 if the team is dominating and successfull the crowds show up, the problem comes from resources and commitment to the sport. Because those programs without finically support and full time program directors suffer and get only parents of wrestler following them.
I had friend say to me the other day that one thing he love to see is folks like Dana White with the UFC dump some support and money into the sport of wrestling and do more to promote it. Made sense seeing most of his successful top flight guys are wrestlers. He should give back.
Heck Ben Askren does a great job of promotion and White has made Millions from wrestlers he should give back. Maybe he should follow Bens lead 😄😄😄😄😄😄.
I am of the opinion it has to happen at all levels and tournaments and meets need to be more of an event and more commitment from high profile folks would help.
I love watching the Badgers not really focused on individuals till the matches but the draw is the idea of the Badgers the Team.
I also think that the concurrent seasons take away from one or the other so College season runs the same time as high school if they had a period of time where the fans of High a School could go to college matches that would help. I would love to see College start in Janurary run through April so that folks finishing with the High a school schedual could go and watch college wrestling. Of course visa versa too College wrestlers helping High a School wrestlers in the early season or even reffing.
He makes great sense in this article. Especially the team aspect part. Average fans can get behind a team but it's hard to follow individuals in sports. Always a topic on here how not enough people show up to Badgers duals. Never seem to have that problem with basketball or football. If the duals actually meant something more average Badger fans would probably show up. It's easier to advertise and make money on teams than individuals for TV stations. Yet like the article says there are factions who do not want to hear this argument. Many times around team state on here we see the same topic brought up how unimportant the team series is. Team is the way to go for growth.
I agree with J on this! It is hard to have the same type of support here in this state when the attitude is that March is only when it matters.
I think a Team Champion based on a dual format would be good for college wrestling.....but not at the expense of the individual championships.
That's the wrestler in me......
Quote from: whatever on January 27, 2015, 12:15:07 PM
I think a Team Champion based on a dual format would be good for college wrestling.....but not at the expense of the individual championships.
That's the wrestler in me......
I would agree with this, shouldn't lose the whole identity of wrestling as an individual sport, but grow the team part of it.
Quote from: shouldvewrestled on January 27, 2015, 12:18:21 PM
Quote from: whatever on January 27, 2015, 12:15:07 PM
I think a Team Champion based on a dual format would be good for college wrestling.....but not at the expense of the individual championships.
That's the wrestler in me......
I would agree with this, shouldn't lose the whole identity of wrestling as an individual sport, but grow the team part of it.
Agreed
I guess my question would be "What do you mean when you say not at the expense of the individual championships"? The individual championship would lose some excitement and glamour by not crowning a team champion at the end.
Quote from: Chief on January 27, 2015, 01:35:43 PM
I guess my question would be "What do you mean when you say not at the expense of the individual championships"? The individual championship would lose some excitement and glamour by not crowning a team champion at the end.
90% of the spectators don't even have a horse in the team race at individuals. Heck even look this year, say RT, Jordan, and Medberry wrestle out of their minds and win titles (extreme longshot) that would put WI close to the top teamwise. You can't tell me having 3 studs makes a team. MN, Iowa, PSU, Michigan, Ohio State all better "teams."
Besides that excitement would be placed on a new event right after or before the individual tournament thus not actually losing an excitement just gaining more for another wrestling event. Another event can't hurt the sport.
Any time I talk to seniors in HS about what they'll miss about their HS team, they always say "I loved the duals." Nothing on this earth is as emotionally draining, pumped-up exciting, muy loco as a good dual. I feel the same about college.
Do people like the team championship (dual format) prior to the individual championship, or individual prior to team?
Maybe high school is one way, while college is the opposite.
Quote from: Gutwrench on January 27, 2015, 03:31:24 PM
Do people like the team championship (dual format) prior to the individual championship, or individual prior to team?
Maybe high school is one way, while college is the opposite.
Could be the same weekend if the WWCA would except it here in Wisconsin. ;)
I am a MN fan and I enjoy the Championships more than the National Duals which MN has won some. I never want to see the National Championships (true champion) take a back seat to the duals.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 27, 2015, 04:04:17 PM
I never want to see the National Championships (true champion) take a back seat to the duals.
I don't think anybody is suggesting that the tournament that crowns individual champions should be less prestigious.
I totally agree with Jrob that the dual meets are much better entertainment for spectators than tournaments. There's far more drama in a team competition, every match matters a lot, and it is far easier to focus on one match at a time.
Giant tournaments really are awful, frankly. We love them as wrestling fanatics because they are all-you-can-eat-buffets of wrestling. But a huge arena with matches going on 6 or 8 mats is a mess for casual fans. The fans are far from the action. It's constant distraction. You miss highlights. It's almost easier to appreciate a tournament watching online, if the software is working well.
I will predict this; If we ever change to the dual format and it determines the National Champion, attendance will decrease. Meaning there are more fans attending the present, individually scored championships than there will be for a dual format championship.
We have a very well received and very well attended tournament. We seem to be bent on making it weaker.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 12:50:04 AM
If we ever change to the dual format and it determines the National Champion, attendance will decrease. Meaning there are more fans attending the present, individually scored championships than there will be for a dual format championship.
It doesn't matter if the duals tournament is less well attended than the individual tournament. Aren't two highly meaningful events better than one?
The individual championship tournament will remain as exciting as ever.
How much drama does the team total add to the existing national tournament? I'd argue very little. People are focused on the individual matchups.
When Penn State ran-away with the team totals in recent years, the lack of a close team race didn't detract from the excitement of the tournament a bit.
We have two now. Changing the focus of how the NC is determined will result in less attendance, less interest overall.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 06:29:52 AM
We have two now. Changing the focus of how the NC is determined will result in less attendance, less interest overall.
Problem is most people don't even know the one happens and the only people who understand the other are wrestling fanatics. We can keep the status quo and watch the sport dwindle into contraction from D1, Robinson's main point.
I disagree. I don't know if it still holds true but I no for a long time the NCAA Wrestling Championships were/are? the third or fourth biggest event for revenue/attendance (maybe someone wants to do the leg work to see if this is still the case).
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 08:06:27 AM
I disagree. I don't know if it still holds true but I no for a long time the NCAA Wrestling Championships were/are? the third or fourth biggest event for revenue/attendance (maybe someone wants to do the leg work to see if this is still the case).
I disagree that the individual event would suffer if they held a national championship dual series. The individual event is already attended by diehard wrestling fans, not just the average guy off the street. These die hard fans will still go to the individual event no matter what. It's why like you said its the 3rd or 4th revenue event for college sports. The team series didn't seem to bring down individual states attendance in WI and doubtfully other states who do this. We may have to agree to disagree but the state of wrestling as a whole and other non-revenue sports are in jeopardy at the highest levels I feel if football and basketball keep getting bigger. They are getting bigger too and will only cost more to fund and like Robinson said it's easier to cut sports than raise funds. I'm just saying lets try to find a way to raise those funds for them and make wrestling more popular and bring in more money through duals and the best way to do that is make them actually meaningful.
A national dual tournament in all levels would generate interest and revenue which are both needed. Every team qualifies!
Right now would be a perfect time and it would lead into the individual tournament. Hosting regional championships like basketball. How great would it be if Wisconsin hosted it somewhere here and it had every D3, D2, and D1 team there from our region fighting to advance.
Lets be honest even the Big Ten duals mean very little as a team because nobody cares about the team title from duals so it is just a series of individual matches. Would it mean more and generate more excitement if it was used as qualifying for the NCAA tourney, etc.
Shouldve... "I disagree that the individual event would suffer if they held a national championship dual series. The individual event is already attended by diehard wrestling fans, not just the average guy off the street"
We have had the National duals for quite some time (with regional qualifiers). The attendance has been poor so I don't understand why you think. To be honest, less die hard fans go to the duals, and the average guy off the street is not attending either.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 09:11:45 AM
Shouldve... "I disagree that the individual event would suffer if they held a national championship dual series. The individual event is already attended by diehard wrestling fans, not just the average guy off the street"
We have had the National duals for quite some time (with regional qualifiers). The attendance has been poor so I don't understand why you think. To be honest, less die hard fans go to the duals, and the average guy off the street is not attending either.
Do the national duals actually mean anything other than just another tournament? And what are we doing to get the average badger fan off the street to come to the duals (they don't mean anything) hard to back something that really is just an exhibition.
Duals don't mean anything according to you. Even though they don't mean anything attendance is pretty good at MN, IA, PSU, and others.
Fans have to show up if they value their sport, period.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 12:16:33 PM
Duals don't mean anything according to you. Even though they don't mean anything attendance is pretty good at MN, IA, PSU, and others.
Fans have to show up if they value their sport, period.
Well if they don't mean anything and attendance is pretty good, then wouldn't attendence just be better if it did mean something. Wrestling is one of those unique sports where as fans we have the opportunity to have individual champs and team champs and should be taken advantage of separately. Maybe scheduling is the problem. The NCAAs finals now is spread over three days and many of these fans plan vacations for this event. Still I don't think if there were a team tournament, scheduling could be worked out as not to draw away from the individual tournament.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 12:16:33 PM
Duals don't mean anything according to you. Even though they don't mean anything attendance is pretty good at MN, IA, PSU, and others.
Fans have to show up if they value their sport, period.
Would say it's not just me. You named the 3 powerhouse teams in college wrestling. I think many of the fans who do value the sport do show up. Wrestling just doesn't get the fan who is just a fan of the badgers, not the sport itself. You can say what you want but what does winning a dual actually get you? Experience for the individual tournament at the end of the year? If that's it I don't see it growing is all I'm saying.
If we don't try new ideas, how many years down the road do they kick the sport out of the Olympics again? Maybe it needs a team aspect for the Olympics to actually get the sport covered by the mainstream coverage? From my experience people, not just fans of the sport, can back the dual system. Heck I help run the computers for one of our states bigger christmas tournaments. A father of a wrestler came up to me wondering how the team that was in first place was there. He's been around wrestling for longer than I have been alive and he doesn't understand the team scoring system of an individual tournament. Do many others then? Hard to get excited for a team competition when you don't even understand how it's run.
Quote from: Street Glide on January 28, 2015, 01:38:34 PM
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 12:16:33 PM
Duals don't mean anything according to you. Even though they don't mean anything attendance is pretty good at MN, IA, PSU, and others.
Fans have to show up if they value their sport, period.
Well if they don't mean anything and attendance is pretty good, then wouldn't attendence just be better if it did mean something. Wrestling is one of those unique sports where as fans we have the opportunity to have individual champs and team champs and should be taken advantage of separately. Maybe scheduling is the problem. The NCAAs finals now is spread over three days and many of these fans plan vacations for this event. Still I don't think if there were a team tournament, scheduling could be worked out as not to draw away from the individual tournament.
Scheduling might be the hardest part would agree there Glide. Maybe get the individual part done in 2 days and have the (Elite Eight) of the team part be the last day. First day if you want the team part first. Just throwing out mumble jumble ideas quickly. Smarter people than me could figure out something I'm sure.
The other hard part is that when it comes to teams, fans love the unpredictability and love the upset. There is no parity. Before the tourney starts everyone know who the final 4 will be and there is very little chance of upsetting those teams.
Should've.... " Maybe it needs a team aspect for the Olympics to actually get the sport covered by the mainstream coverage? "
Doubtful, The biggest Olympic sports for fans are gymnastics, swimming, ice skating, and track (you could add skiing and speed skating here too). Though they have a team component, it is rarely mentioned.
The fans watch the individuals of these sports, not the teams.
"When Penn State ran-away with the team totals in recent years, the lack of a close team race didn't detract from the excitement of the tournament a bit."
It did for me!
Take the super bowl, unless the Packers are in it I have zero interest in watching it. Yes, I know I am the minority but I think there are more people like me than you think.
Why can't the NCAA sanction both?? Doesn't Pennsylvania crown both a High School team champ at the individual and a team dual champ?? 2 different types of team championships. To me the real team champ comes from a dual format where you compete head to head against the other teams.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 04:03:14 PM
Should've.... " Maybe it needs a team aspect for the Olympics to actually get the sport covered by the mainstream coverage? "
Doubtful, The biggest Olympic sports for fans are gymnastics, swimming, ice skating, and track (you could add skiing and speed skating here too). Though they have a team component, it is rarely mentioned.
The fans watch the individuals of these sports, not the teams.
Gymnastics the biggest part people watch is the team aspect not who later wins the individual gold on each apparatus. The others are individual sports who lucky for them people watch. Wrestling not so much. Let's just keep doing things the same way, numbers are increasing, forfeits are reducing and we are a hotbed of sports coverage.
It seems as though some people don't have enough confidence in the appeal of our sport to believe it can support an individual & team Having a dual tournament to crown the team championship would not imo take away from the individual tournament at all. The vast majority of fans at the individual tournament know going in that the team they support does not have a chance to win it all. Last year you had Penn St & Iowa as the only teams with a real shot at winning, & those teams did not make up the majority of the fan base. The current championship format is already primarily about the individual, & that is Robinson's point.
It would be a lot easier to sell the fan base as a whole on supporting our sport if they had a team to support in a format that made sense.
"Gymnastics the biggest part people watch is the team aspect not who later wins the individual gold on each apparatus. The others are individual sports who lucky for them people watch"
I completely disagree. Olga Korbut, Marylou Retton, Nadia Comenici..... nearly everyone knows what they did, not what teams won.
The interest in this is overwhelmingly on the individual aspect.
I would be fine with it if the NCAA would sanction a dual champ as well. I am telling you if that were the case, the attendance would still be better at the individual tournament.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 05:07:11 PM
"Gymnastics the biggest part people watch is the team aspect not who later wins the individual gold on each apparatus. The others are individual sports who lucky for them people watch"
I completely disagree. Olga Korbut, Marylou Retton, Nadia Comenici..... nearly everyone knows what they did, not what teams won.
The interest in this is overwhelmingly on the individual aspect.
I would be fine with it if the NCAA would sanction a dual champ as well. I am telling you if that were the case, the attendance would still be better at the individual tournament.
People may remember the individual names for records in history but in the moment they cheer harder for a team. I would also be fine with a dual champ and would be totally fine with the attendance being a little better for the individual part. If they could make the penultimate duals the same weekend it would be great so easier on fans.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 05:07:11 PM
I would be fine with it if the NCAA would sanction a dual champ as well. I am telling you if that were the case, the attendance would still be better at the individual tournament.
OK, fine. It's not a zero sum game! The interest in the dual tournament can be pumped-up without ruining the individual tournament highlight at very end.
As long as one or more of the power teams opts-out of the dual tournament, it will be a poorly attended non-event. Allow the dual tournament to determine the team national championship, then we have two exciting tournaments to close the year.
Look, the drama of the individual tournament are the individual weight brackets - who is gonna advance, is wrestler X gonna beat wrestler Y. There is no chance that the individual tournament will be less than thrilling.
You are digging your heels in, resisting any significant change. What would be wrong with trying an elevated duals tournament? If the results are less satisfying, it is trivial to return to old system.
Quote from: 1Iota on January 28, 2015, 05:03:12 PMThe vast majority of fans at the individual tournament know going in that the team they support does not have a chance to win it all. Last year you had Penn St & Iowa as the only teams with a real shot at winning,
Well said!
The team race at the individual tournament is an afterthought except for 2 or 3 teams. I mean, I like to see the Badgers place well, but I could care less which of the elite teams amasses the most points in that complex scoring system.
A team beats another by wrestling them. The "champion" of the tournament is very artificial. Let it go to the dual tourney.
Well, Iowa finished 4th and Minnesota was 4.5 outbof first, OK State placed third.. Iowa was over 30 points behind.. Really 3 teams had a chance and Iowa wasn't one of them.. Probably the same 4 teams at the top of a dual format event, and probably the same outcome last year, but that wouldn't be the case every year..
I would like to have two tournaments but to me the real champion is in the individual tournament. It IS a team avent.
My biggest issue with duals is the poorest wrestler on the team can pin someone and your best wrestler can pin someone. The may in no way be equal in quality (in fact, most duals are won by your poorest wrestlers in reality). There is little reward for being superior. The bonus points a superior wrestler can amass in a tournament rewards them more for being superior.
I would love to see a team champion too but still want the individual tourney to be scored and count as a championship.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 06:34:56 PM
I would like to have two tournaments but to me the real champion is in the individual tournament. It IS a team avent.
My biggest issue with duals is the poorest wrestler on the team can pin someone and your best wrestler can pin someone. The may in no way be equal in quality (in fact, most duals are won by your poorest wrestlers in reality). There is little reward for being superior. The bonus points a superior wrestler can amass in a tournament rewards them more for being superior.
You do make some good points. You ignore that there are bonus points in duels too. And duels measure completeness.
Neither the tournament nor dual is a perfect measure of the best team.
The intermat rankings are similar:
Duals
1 Minnesota
2 Iowa
3 Missouri
4 Cornell
5 Ohio State
6 Penn State
Tourney
1 Iowa
2 Ohio State
3 Minnesota
4 Missouri
5 Illinois
6 Cornell
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 06:34:56 PMI would love to see a team champion too but still want the individual tourney to be scored and count as a championship.
That is pretty much the status quo.
If there are two team championships, the dual meets will remain largely irreleant. The individual tournament has all the juice.
I'd like to try a change, see what happens.
"If there are two team championships, the dual meets will remain largely irrelevant. The individual tournament has all the juice."
You prove my point above.
"You ignore that there are bonus points in duels too."
No, I don't. My point is that a superior wrestler deservedly has a greater effect on the outcome in the individual tournament as in the dual format.
In a dual Kyle Dake is more likely to be equal in effect on the outcome with a less capable wrestler than in the individual format.
Also, in an individual tournament, you get fans cheering for many teams. They want wrestlers to knock someone off to help their team.
I would have way less interest in a team dual final with PSU and Okie State than an individual tournement where MN can rally and place 5th, 6th, or 10th.
When my team is out of a dual tournament I really have little interest in watching it.
The individual format keeps more fans interested longer. There is interest even if your team finishes 20th for instance.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 07:59:43 PM
"If there are two team championships, the dual meets will remain largely irrelevant. The individual tournament has all the juice."
You prove my point above.
The individual tournament needs no team championship to keep it exciting.
You are intent on keeping the status quo, with the dual tournament irrelevant.
Having both an exciting dual and individual tournament is a boost for the sport of college wrestling.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 08:03:47 PM
No, I don't. My point is that a superior wrestler deservedly has a greater effect on the outcome in the individual tournament as in the dual format.
In a dual Kyle Dake is more likely to be equal in effect on the outcome with a less capable wrestler than in the individual format.
Yes, of course. We can go round and round about this. The dual is better at measuring the team depth. The tournament allows teams with weak links to succeed. Pinners have plenty of influence on dual meets, its not simply balance.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 08:03:47 PMAlso, in an individual tournament, you get fans cheering for many teams. They want wrestlers to knock someone off to help their team.
Ya, OK, more joy for the fans of 2 or 3 teams out of 60.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 08:03:47 PMI would have way less interest in a team dual final with PSU and Okie State than an individual tournement where MN can rally and place 5th, 6th, or 10th.
When my team is out of a dual tournament I really have little interest in watching it.
The individual format keeps more fans interested longer. There is interest even if your team finishes 20th for instance.
Competitive dual meets are a blast to watch. There seem to be so few of them. A competitive duel meet between elite teams is just the best drama - for everybody.
Everybody is not going to agree. I say take the dual tournament off life support and make it exciting. Two great tournaments is so much better than one. I acknowledge that there is a small loss at the individual tournament by moving the championship to the duals, but it is an experiment well worth trying.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I am telling you, going to the dual for the championship will result in less attendance.
We have already seen this having had the duals for some time.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 28, 2015, 10:35:55 PM
Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I am telling you, going to the dual for the championship will result in less attendance.
We have already seen this having had the duals for some time.
??? You claim there is less attendance already?
Yes, what draws more, the National duals or the National Tournament?
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 11:47:50 AM
Yes, what draws more, the National duals or the National Tournament?
Which one is promoted? Which one has national meaning? It's not an equal comparison like you say. Place national champs title with the duals attendance will increase. Won't take anything away from the individual championships. Each weight will still have their national champ. Can even give out a trophy for team score if they want, still say it's not a true "team" championship as your whole team doesn't even wrestle at it.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 11:47:50 AM
Yes, what draws more, the National duals or the National Tournament?
If the dual tournament was a legit national title, attendance would go up.. I would like to see a National Duals Champ, and a National Tourney Champ..
" still say it's not a true "team" championship as your whole team doesn't even wrestle at it."
Yes, they do. They are eliminated earlier in qualifying.
I would be happy to have both as long as we have two champions, one for each tournament.
Even if the NCAA wants to have an officially sanctioned duals championship the individual tournament will still be better attended.
I'll make that bet with anyone that wants to wager.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 01:18:09 PM
" still say it's not a true "team" championship as your whole team doesn't even wrestle at it."
Yes, they do. They are eliminated earlier in qualifying.
I would be happy to have both as long as we have two champions, one for each tournament.
Even if the NCAA wants to have an officially sanctioned duals championship the individual tournament will still be better attended.
I'll make that bet with anyone that wants to wager.
I wouldn't make that bet and agree the individual tournament would probably be better attended as more teams have at least 1 wrestler to follow. Still say the powers at be could find a way to make the final duals same weekend as the individual tournament and make the biggest weekend in college wrestling even better.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 01:18:09 PM
Even if the NCAA wants to have an officially sanctioned duals championship the individual tournament will still be better attended.
Maybe. You keep repeating this irrelevant point.
What matters is that the individual tournament will continue to be compelling. Attendance will not drop one bit if the Dual Tournament determines the team championship.
And the gain is that the Dual Tournament will be attended by 100% of the ranked teams, well have a second great tournament to follow, and the sport of wrestling will be enhanced.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 01:18:09 PM
" still say it's not a true "team" championship as your whole team doesn't even wrestle at it."
Yes, they do. They are eliminated earlier in qualifying.
I would be happy to have both as long as we have two champions, one for each tournament.
Even if the NCAA wants to have an officially sanctioned duals championship the individual tournament will still be better attended.
I'll make that bet with anyone that wants to wager.
the B1G with 12 teams last year had 74 auto qualifiers.... Pac 12 with 6 teams had 17, how do you believe that is fair? B1G gets 4 times the spots with only twice the teams... not a fair measure for team vs team. I say 3 to 4 B1G teams might get their entire team in this year. It is not fair at all, it is not an equal playing field. No one cares about the National Duals because it is a tournament with only some of the best teams and it does not crown a national champion. Outside of the usual top 4 teams, who really cares about the team championship at nationals? Team duals in WI and individual still both pull good crowds.
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on January 29, 2015, 02:04:48 PM
No one cares about the National Duals because it is a tournament with only some of the best teams and it does not crown a national champion.
Right.
I get tired of hearing all year long that the only thing that matters is the 3 days in March. The coaches often rest wrestlers in the dual meets for strategic reasons. The duals are like exhibitions.
By making dual tournaments crown the national champ, teams will start shaping their lineups to win dual meets. That will be a subtle, positive change. Everybody loves the march tournament, but having one event be the only competition that counts is not healthy for the sport.
If you have two national champions, then you really have none. I guess I could accept two national championships if you waterboard me, but it really would be a more exciting experiment to elevate the national dual tournament to a premier event. Take a risk, see if the change doesn't add interest to the wrestling year. NCAA easily return to old system if the individual tournament suffers. I really doubt that would be the case, the tournament that determines individual NCAA champs will always be the big dance.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 01:18:09 PM
" still say it's not a true "team" championship as your whole team doesn't even wrestle at it."
Yes, they do. They are eliminated earlier in qualifying.
I would be happy to have both as long as we have two champions, one for each tournament.
Even if the NCAA wants to have an officially sanctioned duals championship the individual tournament will still be better attended.
I'll make that bet with anyone that wants to wager.
Didn't you say attendance at the individual tournament would go down because of a dual national championship??
QuoteOutside of the usual top 4 teams, who really cares about the team championship at nationals?
...it seems the posters always arguing for a coaching change at UW seem to be concerned with team championships/placings......
Quote from: whatever on January 29, 2015, 04:26:37 PM
QuoteOutside of the usual top 4 teams, who really cares about the team championship at nationals?
...it seems the posters always arguing for a coaching change at UW seem to be concerned with team championships/placings......
yes you hope to be one of those teams, but when you never in the mix you lose interest in who takes the first 3 spots. I never cared if my team was 20th or 15th or 10th... I would care if they where 1st, 2nd or 3rd but if not in the running I don't care who wins since my horse is no longer in the race. Teams consistently outside the top 4 places focus on their individuals not on if their team goes from 15th pace to 13th place. Point is what percentage of the fans in the building care about the team race? Generally just the 2 or 3 teams fighting it out.
Quote from: Huckfinn on January 29, 2015, 02:49:50 PM
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on January 29, 2015, 02:04:48 PM
No one cares about the National Duals because it is a tournament with only some of the best teams and it does not crown a national champion.
Right.
I get tired of hearing all year long that the only thing that matters is the 3 days in March. The coaches often rest wrestlers in the dual meets for strategic reasons. The duals are like exhibitions.
By making dual tournaments crown the national champ, teams will start shaping their lineups to win dual meets. That will be a subtle, positive change. Everybody loves the march tournament, but having one event be the only competition that counts is not healthy for the sport.
If you have two national champions, then you really have none. I guess I could accept two national championships if you waterboard me, but it really would be a more exciting experiment to elevate the national dual tournament to a premier event. Take a risk, see if the change doesn't add interest to the wrestling year. NCAA easily return to old system if the individual tournament suffers. I really doubt that would be the case, the tournament that determines individual NCAA champs will always be the big dance.
I think this is an excellent point & it also makes it much less likely that people outside of the cultish wrestling community will care.
MNBadger doesn't want the dual format because then the championship won't be decided only by the top studs on a team. But isn't that just another way of emphasizing the individual? Having a championship team in any sport means having the fewest holes, or weak links. If you're worried about you studs pin only counting as much as the opponents pin against a weak wrestler, fill that void. A dual is generally going to be won by the most complete team, or the team that is strong at every weight. A team championship should not be decided by 40% of the starting line up.
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on January 29, 2015, 04:43:16 PM
yes you hope to be one of those teams, but when you never in the mix you lose interest in who takes the first 3 spots. I never cared if my team was 20th or 15th or 10th... I would care if they where 1st, 2nd or 3rd but if not in the running I don't care who wins since my horse is no longer in the race. Teams consistently outside the top 4 places focus on their individuals not on if their team goes from 15th pace to 13th place. Point is what percentage of the fans in the building care about the team race? Generally just the 2 or 3 teams fighting it out.
Part of what I am hearing there Jag is that nothing matters except winning. Now, I agree that that is indeed the mentality of much of the fan base, but I think that is part of the problem. Being the "winner" has been elevated to such elite status in our culture that it undermines the values that we claim to prize, e.g., determination, tenacity, etc. Words are cheap. Instead, as a culture, we repeatedly reinforce that the only thing that matters is winning.
I think that is the bigger problem here. We tend to be fans of winners, not losers. We tend to care less about those who have tried and failed. We are a society of hypocrites; giving lip service to values and instead, really only valuing outcomes.
BTW, I think a dual championship series
and individual championship series would be just fine...for true fans...and maybe fair weather fans, as well.
QuoteA team championship should not be decided by 40% of the starting line up.
I beg to differ. (Believe me, I don't care to be on the same side of the fence as MNBadger....)
If you look at football, you could make the argument that the team with the fewest weak spots will win the most titles....but others might argue (especially in the NFL) that the championships will be won by those 40% i.e. quarterbacks, receivers, maybe a wrecking-ball-of-a- linebacker, etc....
Michael Jordan won 6 NBA titles because he could carry the donkeys on his team all by himself.....
Quote from: npope on January 29, 2015, 05:00:34 PM
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on January 29, 2015, 04:43:16 PM
yes you hope to be one of those teams, but when you never in the mix you lose interest in who takes the first 3 spots. I never cared if my team was 20th or 15th or 10th... I would care if they where 1st, 2nd or 3rd but if not in the running I don't care who wins since my horse is no longer in the race. Teams consistently outside the top 4 places focus on their individuals not on if their team goes from 15th pace to 13th place. Point is what percentage of the fans in the building care about the team race? Generally just the 2 or 3 teams fighting it out.
Part of what I am hearing there Jag is that nothing matters except winning. Now, I agree that that is indeed the mentality of much of the fan base, but I think that is part of the problem. Being the "winner" has been elevated to such elite status in our culture that it undermines the values that we claim to prize, e.g., determination, tenacity, etc. Words are cheap. Instead, as a culture, we repeatedly reinforce that the only thing that matters is winning.
I think that is the bigger problem here. We tend to be fans of winners, not losers. We tend to care less about those who have tried and failed. We are a society of hypocrites; giving lip service to values and instead, really only valuing outcomes.
BTW, I think a dual championship series and individual championship would be just fine.
....isn't that what is also known as
"the American Way", Nat?
Quote from: whatever on January 29, 2015, 05:07:24 PM
Quote from: npope on January 29, 2015, 05:00:34 PM
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on January 29, 2015, 04:43:16 PM
yes you hope to be one of those teams, but when you never in the mix you lose interest in who takes the first 3 spots. I never cared if my team was 20th or 15th or 10th... I would care if they where 1st, 2nd or 3rd but if not in the running I don't care who wins since my horse is no longer in the race. Teams consistently outside the top 4 places focus on their individuals not on if their team goes from 15th pace to 13th place. Point is what percentage of the fans in the building care about the team race? Generally just the 2 or 3 teams fighting it out.
Part of what I am hearing there Jag is that nothing matters except winning. Now, I agree that that is indeed the mentality of much of the fan base, but I think that is part of the problem. Being the "winner" has been elevated to such elite status in our culture that it undermines the values that we claim to prize, e.g., determination, tenacity, etc. Words are cheap. Instead, as a culture, we repeatedly reinforce that the only thing that matters is winning.
I think that is the bigger problem here. We tend to be fans of winners, not losers. We tend to care less about those who have tried and failed. We are a society of hypocrites; giving lip service to values and instead, really only valuing outcomes.
BTW, I think a dual championship series and individual championship would be just fine.
....isn't that what is also known as "the American Way", Nat?
I was born in Japan. What do you want from me?
But seriously, you are right. So let's stop giving lip service to the virtues previously mentioned, e.g., persistence, determination, etc. Let's just admit that nothing matters except winning. I'd feel a lot less smarmy if we could just admit it.
Dman..."Didn't you say attendance at the individual tournament would go down because of a dual national championship??"
No, I never said that. I would be happy with two tournaments and having a national dual team champ and a national team champ. In fact, I would prefer it.
I said and still say attendance at the duals will never compare to that of the individual tournament.
Jag.. I disagree I always cared what place we took in a tournament. Depending on your squad, 20th might be a pretty darned good showing. Additionally, if we finished 12th last year and this year we are 9th, I see that as progress and of value.
1iota.... Tournaments are decided by all the team members. Do you remember the Gophers having 10 AA's?
If fewer members qualify, so be it. At least then it isn't the weakest members deciding the outcome which is really what happens in a dual.
I realize I won't change your mind and you won't change mine. I would be thrilled with having two champions (dual and team).
The dual fans don't want both because they know the majority of people want the team championship, not the dual championship.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 05:20:45 PMAt least then it isn't the weakest members deciding the outcome which is really what happens in a dual.
Baloney. The good teams typically don't have any fish anywhere in their lineups. Bonus points decide close duals, and the winner is usually the team with the studs.
Your theory occasionally holds water with matches between lower half teams, but who cares.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 05:20:45 PMThe dual fans don't want both because they know the majority of people want the team championship, not the dual championship.
The dual championship is a team championship.
You are resisting any change, you want to keep the duals as an insignificant warmup for the real championship. Why not take a tiny risk and see if a change enhances the season?
The coaches do not agree on what to do, and evidently it turns out the fans don't either.
"You are resisting any change, you want to keep the duals as an insignificant warmup for the real championship. Why not take a tiny risk and see if a change enhances the season?"
Change just for the sake of change makes no sense.
IF the dual format is better/more popular, it will prove itself by attendance.
I stated before, I would like love to have both and have a dual champion and a team champion. Let's make this change and see what happens!
"Baloney. The good teams typically don't have any fish anywhere in their lineups."
I never said fish. I said the weakest members. Typically when you have two highly ranked opponents it results in a decision. The dual is often decided on the weakest members trying to salvage a decision and not give up bonus points. This does not mean they are fish as you say.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 10:39:02 PM
"You are resisting any change, you want to keep the duals as an insignificant warmup for the real championship. Why not take a tiny risk and see if a change enhances the season?"
Change just for the sake of change makes no sense.
It is not change for sake of change. It is an attempt to add more interest to the sport.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 10:39:02 PM
IF the dual format is better/more popular, it will prove itself by attendance.
You keep throwing out this straw man.
Nobody, but nobody, has suggested that the dual tournament will ever be more popular than the individual tournament.
Just because the individual tournament is more exciting does not mean it must be used to determine the team national championship.
On the contrary, the fact that the individual tournament is so compelling suggests it can afford to share some of the juice with the duals tournament. The sum of two juicy events may be greater.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 10:39:02 PMI stated before, I would like love to have both and have a dual champion and a team champion. Let's make this change and see what happens!
That is not a change, that is exactly the status quo. You are set in your ways and unwilling to experiment with a new approach.
We already have a dual championship. We already use the individual tournament to determine a national team champion.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 10:43:29 PMThe dual is often decided on the weakest members trying to salvage a decision and not give up bonus points.
And the stronger wrestlers are being tested to see if they can get those bonus points. Thus duels test the strength of the good wrestlers.
You are making a silly argument. As I said before, there is a bit of truth to your theory in duals between weak teams, where you'll get matchups between weak wrestlers that count for a lot but really don't mean much.
A team tourney tests and rewards the most acomplished wrestlers more than a dual tourney.
It seems the dual proponents are pushing something on the majority of us who don't want it.
The dual proponents scream about how exciting duals are (and I agree) but if duals are so darned exciting, why won't anyone show up to th Badger matches?
I don't know about WI but the individual tournemnt in MN has much, much more attendance than the dual portion (and this is a dual crazy state). Your argument about sharing the "juice" is fine I guess. This is fine if you want to force something down the throats of the fans who have repeatedly shown they are opposed.
As far as the idea of "trying it out", you know once changed it will be a long, long time before the NCAA would agree to go back if it turns out to be unsatisfactory.
The trial balloon (National Duals) already has shown the future of this scenario.
Quote from: npope on January 29, 2015, 05:00:34 PM
Quote from: jaguarwrestler on January 29, 2015, 04:43:16 PM
yes you hope to be one of those teams, but when you never in the mix you lose interest in who takes the first 3 spots. I never cared if my team was 20th or 15th or 10th... I would care if they where 1st, 2nd or 3rd but if not in the running I don't care who wins since my horse is no longer in the race. Teams consistently outside the top 4 places focus on their individuals not on if their team goes from 15th pace to 13th place. Point is what percentage of the fans in the building care about the team race? Generally just the 2 or 3 teams fighting it out.
Part of what I am hearing there Jag is that nothing matters except winning. Now, I agree that that is indeed the mentality of much of the fan base, but I think that is part of the problem. Being the "winner" has been elevated to such elite status in our culture that it undermines the values that we claim to prize, e.g., determination, tenacity, etc. Words are cheap. Instead, as a culture, we repeatedly reinforce that the only thing that matters is winning.
I think that is the bigger problem here. We tend to be fans of winners, not losers. We tend to care less about those who have tried and failed. We are a society of hypocrites; giving lip service to values and instead, really only valuing outcomes.
BTW, I think a dual championship series and individual championship series would be just fine...for true fans...and maybe fair weather fans, as well.
Let me equate me feeling to the Super Bowl, millions will watch, heck maybe hundreds of millions... but how many actually care about the outcome of the game? How many are just football fans, or want to get together with friends and eat junk food or just like the commercials. Point is unless you have a horse in the race you just tend to not put much weight in the winner. Let's go a bit further... when I said I don't care if we finish 15h or 10th.... it is like if the Packers don't make the playoffs I wont care if they finished 2nd in the conference or 3rd... both places are about the same result at the end of the day. Not to say I wouldn't be completely behind the individuals and cheering for them whether going on the championship side or the consolation side. I would still respect a 2-2 finish even if they didn't place. Yet, if we where in 15th and needed a pin to finish in 13th I wouldn't exactly be on the edge of my seat... because to me one place is about equal to the next. I wouldn't exactly equate this to win at all costs and winning is everything. I mean I wouldn't sellout like Florida State and Miami and bring in criminals to try and win a title, kids that are only great athletes but have no real shot at graduating or likely will be skating on thin ice their entire career.
If we are talking about my feeling on Barry, well I am sure he builds good men, but that doesn't mean Cael and J and John Smith don't... I believe you can have both success and a good mentor it doesn't have to be one or the other. I don't expect my kids coach to make him a great man, that was my job for the 18 years they lived with me before going to school, that was the influences around him growing up with family, friends, teachers, coaches and community influences. If I need his college coach to make him a man then I am in trouble. I am also not asking to be a national contender every year, but a top 3-4 finish every 5 years would be nice... I think we have had 1 or 2 in the last 20 years.
Barry Davis had 20 years coming into this year his B1G dual record was 53-94 with 2 top 3 finishes and 4 winning B1G seasons.... the 20 years prior to Davis was 125-37 in the B1G with 12 top 3 finishes and 17 winning seasons.... one is the exact opposite of the other... he must just be a great man?? We where once a very good B1G team, one of the top, now we get a glimpse of that once every 4 or 5 years.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 29, 2015, 10:39:02 PM
"You are resisting any change, you want to keep the duals as an insignificant warmup for the real championship. Why not take a tiny risk and see if a change enhances the season?"
Change just for the sake of change makes no sense.
IF the dual format is better/more popular, it will prove itself by attendance.
I stated before, I would like love to have both and have a dual champion and a team champion. Let's make this change and see what happens!
I don't believe the individual attendance would drop if they had a dual tournament, I doubt people attend only to see a team crowned champ. I don't believe a team tournament would draw the same crowd but I think it would still pull well.
Quote from: whatever on January 29, 2015, 05:04:45 PM
QuoteA team championship should not be decided by 40% of the starting line up.
I beg to differ. (Believe me, I don't care to be on the same side of the fence as MNBadger....)
If you look at football, you could make the argument that the team with the fewest weak spots will win the most titles....but others might argue (especially in the NFL) that the championships will be won by those 40% i.e. quarterbacks, receivers, maybe a wrecking-ball-of-a- linebacker, etc....
Michael Jordan won 6 NBA titles because he could carry the donkeys on his team all by himself.....
& I disagree with this. Basketball might be the exception, but as a football & baseball you can't win with only 40% of your roster. The SD chargers for years had the best offense in football & won nothing. You absolutely need your stud players at key positions, but if that is all you have you will get exposed. If you march into battle with the best QB, WR, RB in the game, but your defense & OL are weak, you will not only lose, you will get slaughtered.
Tonight I am going to the Mn/IA dual. I am excited but winning or losing the dual to me takes a back seat to the individual match ups.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 30, 2015, 10:40:11 AM
Tonight I am going to the Mn/IA dual. I am excited but winning or losing the dual to me takes a back seat to the individual match ups.
& that is exactly J Robinson's point. You are a die hard wrestling fan that is interested in all the match ups. Robinson is talking about how to capture the casual fan that is more likely to support the team than an individual. The casual fan does not understand the significance of Kelly vs Ness. They support Goher or Hawkeye athletics. I am a perfect example of this. I am not a big volleyball fan & certainly don't understand the details of the sport, but with the success of the current Women's team, this past fall I attended my first UW match. I doubt I would have attended if the game meant nothing & was more of an exhibition.
" I doubt I would have attended if the game meant nothing & was more of an exhibition."
Who said wrestling duals mean nothing? Being the Big Ten dual Champ means something.
I would bet most fans of the teams are interested in the outcome versus the matchups. I don't care about the outcome, but I would still attend if it was in my backyard. You place the top 16 teams based on rankings and NCAA finish in a bracket at the Kohl for a national team championship and I feel confident you will sell 8,000+ tickets per session.
I would bet not.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 30, 2015, 12:58:44 PM
I would bet not.
so you think more people care about the match at 133 or 197 over who wins the match and the B1G?
I think the team entity means quite a bit. I am working on a project at the U of M now. There was actually an article on the local WCCO website today with J Rob talking about the importance of this meet with some good quotes in it. He stresses how important a B1G title is to them and how important this showdown between the top two teams is. I have talked to a few people who are not really college wrestling fans that are going to this tonight just to see this atmosphere. (Wish I could go).
Quote from: MNbadger on January 30, 2015, 11:28:46 AM
" I doubt I would have attended if the game meant nothing & was more of an exhibition."
Who said wrestling duals mean nothing? Being the Big Ten dual Champ means something.
Why does it mean something? A team is crowned at the conference tournament.
Given the choice I would rather be the Big 10 Tournament Champion but the dual championship certainly means something.
My son and I were 2 of the 13,610 fans in attendance at MN/IA last night.. That was an electric environme t you get any other place than in a team environment. Yes, those who understand wrestling appreciated the significance of individual matchups much like someone who understands football appreciates the matchup between the tight end and the safety of linebacker, and the defensive tackle and guard, but what made the Williams Arena crazy was that it was Gophers/Hawkeyes. I would bet that a dual format championship would attract more casual wrestling fans because of the team format and they can root for their school. I would not replace the current championship, I would have two as they are two totally different measures of a wrestling teams ability.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 30, 2015, 09:21:51 PM
Given the choice I would rather be the Big 10 Tournament Champion but the dual championship certainly means something.
The dual championship means nothing. They don't even wrestle everyone so how could it me anything to anyone. Truth is they are on the schedule as tune up matches for March for every school except Iowa, Minnesota, and Penn St. Gee I wonder why they are always good. Brands, Sanderson, and Robinson what to be great on January 30th, not just in March.
I just hate that Davis discounts everything except for March!
Something to think about. Wrestling is the true team sport. Your best player (Wrestler) can only score 6 pts. In basketball one guy can carry the whole team.
Gee I wonder why they are always good. Brands, Sanderson, and Robinson what(*want) to be great on January 30th, not just in March.
I just hate that Davis discounts everything except for March!
Fact: Coach Brands has an abnormal desire to win.
Fact: Coach Brands is a better coach than Coach Davis.
Fact: Brands is a better coach than a vast majority of college coaches.
Fact: You are not going to get even one single person to argue these points.
Conclusion: Wisconsin has three superior wrestlers on the team and
a few other guys that are right on the edge of being very good.
Big Ten Tournament: 1.Iowa 2.Ohio State 3.Minnesota 4. Penn State
5. Illinois and fighting it out for 6-8. Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska.
9. Northwestern. 10-14. Purdue, Indiana, Michigan State, Rutgers, Maryland.
I think that Minnesota will win the Big Ten Tournament. They are better as a tournament team than a dual team this year. In years past they would win with points on the backside of the bracket. That is not the case this year. They could have 4 to 6 number one or two seeds going in.
Quote from: MNbadger on January 30, 2015, 09:21:51 PM
Given the choice I would rather be the Big 10 Tournament Champion but the dual championship certainly means something.
Why?
Quote from: billymurphy on January 31, 2015, 11:29:47 PM
Gee I wonder why they are always good. Brands, Sanderson, and Robinson what(*want) to be great on January 30th, not just in March.
I just hate that Davis discounts everything except for March!
Fact: Coach Brands has an abnormal desire to win.
Fact: Coach Brands is a better coach than Coach Davis.
Fact: Brands is a better coach than a vast majority of college coaches.
Fact: You are not going to get even one single person to argue these points.
Conclusion: Wisconsin has three superior wrestlers on the team and
a few other guys that are right on the edge of being very good.
Big Ten Tournament: 1.Iowa 2.Ohio State 3.Minnesota 4. Penn State
5. Illinois and fighting it out for 6-8. Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska.
9. Northwestern. 10-14. Purdue, Indiana, Michigan State, Rutgers, Maryland.
Who, in your opinion, is the next Brands, JRob, Sanderson we should go after?
Quote from: bigG on February 02, 2015, 04:05:48 PM
Quote from: billymurphy on January 31, 2015, 11:29:47 PM
Gee I wonder why they are always good. Brands, Sanderson, and Robinson what(*want) to be great on January 30th, not just in March.
I just hate that Davis discounts everything except for March!
Fact: Coach Brands has an abnormal desire to win.
Fact: Coach Brands is a better coach than Coach Davis.
Fact: Brands is a better coach than a vast majority of college coaches.
Fact: You are not going to get even one single person to argue these points.
Conclusion: Wisconsin has three superior wrestlers on the team and
a few other guys that are right on the edge of being very good.
Big Ten Tournament: 1.Iowa 2.Ohio State 3.Minnesota 4. Penn State
5. Illinois and fighting it out for 6-8. Wisconsin, Michigan, Nebraska.
9. Northwestern. 10-14. Purdue, Indiana, Michigan State, Rutgers, Maryland.
Who, in your opinion, is the next Brands, JRob, Sanderson we should go after?
Ben
or
Don
:)