Rule: Amount of video challenges at the NCAA tournament

[Numbers]

Do you think there should be a rule change for the amount of video challenges available per team depending on how many matches a college team wrestles at the NCAA tournament?

A team with 3 qualifiers (0 AA) and a team with 10 qualifiers (8 AA's) are very different.

If each team gets 3 challenges to start a tournament, should a team be able to be granted additional challenges after the team completes 30, 40, 50, 60 NCAA matches?

Ohio State had 56 matches this year!  Penn State had 48!

The current system of capping the challenges gives an almost unfair advantage to wrestlers on teams with fewer qualifiers.

[imnofish]

If the objective is fairness to the wrestlers, then the limit should be a specific number of challenges per wrestler, per individual match.  If the objective is to get the tournament completed in a manageable amount of time, then they probably have already established the perfect rule. 

[bigG]

I'm fine with it as it is. We don't need any more changes to the rules. Every time we change the rules, we lose prospective fans. I fear that when I'm in my 70's (God willing) there will be six of us left sitting around watching the last two wrestlers and trying to explain the cylinder rule to might-be fans of the future.

[leg turk]

I didn't like how the same ref that made the initial call, was the one that reviewed it on the monitor.  Of course he will never overturn his own call.

[CLC FAN]

Thank goodness they did in the Wick vs Massa match.

[Numbers]

I'm fine with it as it is. We don't need any more changes to the rules. Every time we change the rules, we lose prospective fans. I fear that when I'm in my 70's (God willing) there will be six of us left sitting around watching the last two wrestlers and trying to explain the cylinder rule to might-be fans of the future.

The media and fans do not track number of coaches challenges remaining (yet).  And even if they did, the data would come from TrackWrestling or Flo for the telecast.

For duals, I am fine with everyone gets the same number of challenge rules.  Each team gets 10 matches.

For tournaments, it gets to the grey area.  Everyone can enter 10 wrestlers, but some may wrestle 2 times and some 5-6 times.  Heck, I am even okay that Spencer Lee took a loss at Midlands without any possible challenge (Unattached wrestlers could not challenge.)

At NCAAs, the coaches that bring 1 or 10 are treated the same.  If your team wrestles 2 times or 56 times, same amount of challenges?  Not sure if allocating coaches challenges by number of matches completed is possible, but I think it should be considered.

For most teams, if you are up by 7 points in a match in the third period, you likely will not challenge.  Why should Ohio State or Penn State feel they should not challenge a takedown for the extra team point in round 1 (because they still have 50 matches left)?

[imwi]

Do you like what they did this year in the Big Ten by getting rid of the assistant ref and essentially making him the review guy?

[Jimmy]

Ncaa tourney. 1-3 qualifiers get 1 challenge, 4-6 get 2,and 7-10 get three.

[Jimmy]

They didn't use towel tappers this yr. instead the refs had a vibrating wristband. With everybody watching the action and a towel tapper not walking out there coaches didn't realize time was out and this led to a lot of challenges at ends of periods. Also coaches we're allowed to challenge stalling calls which is laughable when they're the ones asking for more stalling calls

[bigoil]

I didn't like how the same ref that made the initial call, was the one that reviewed it on the monitor.  Of course he will never overturn his own call.

This.

The NFL has figured this out. Hopefully, the NCAA does too.

I agree, seems pointless at this point unless it is a clear miss, which frankly doesn't happen much.

[bigG]

I'm fine with it as it is. We don't need any more changes to the rules. Every time we change the rules, we lose prospective fans. I fear that when I'm in my 70's (God willing) there will be six of us left sitting around watching the last two wrestlers and trying to explain the cylinder rule to might-be fans of the future.

The media and fans do not track number of coaches challenges remaining (yet).  And even if they did, the data would come from TrackWrestling or Flo for the telecast.

For duals, I am fine with everyone gets the same number of challenge rules.  Each team gets 10 matches.

For tournaments, it gets to the grey area.  Everyone can enter 10 wrestlers, but some may wrestle 2 times and some 5-6 times.  Heck, I am even okay that Spencer Lee took a loss at Midlands without any possible challenge (Unattached wrestlers could not challenge.)

At NCAAs, the coaches that bring 1 or 10 are treated the same.  If your team wrestles 2 times or 56 times, same amount of challenges?  Not sure if allocating coaches challenges by number of matches completed is possible, but I think it should be considered.

For most teams, if you are up by 7 points in a match in the third period, you likely will not challenge.  Why should Ohio State or Penn State feel they should not challenge a takedown for the extra team point in round 1 (because they still have 50 matches left)?

Keep it the same. No sport shoots itself in the foot like wrestling. I'd think Sumo is more popular world-wide, simply because you can tell who's scoring and why they are scoring.

[Jimmy]

Is there scoring in sumo? I thought it was win or lose.

[imnofish]

I'm fine with it as it is. We don't need any more changes to the rules. Every time we change the rules, we lose prospective fans. I fear that when I'm in my 70's (God willing) there will be six of us left sitting around watching the last two wrestlers and trying to explain the cylinder rule to might-be fans of the future.

The media and fans do not track number of coaches challenges remaining (yet).  And even if they did, the data would come from TrackWrestling or Flo for the telecast.

For duals, I am fine with everyone gets the same number of challenge rules.  Each team gets 10 matches.

For tournaments, it gets to the grey area.  Everyone can enter 10 wrestlers, but some may wrestle 2 times and some 5-6 times.  Heck, I am even okay that Spencer Lee took a loss at Midlands without any possible challenge (Unattached wrestlers could not challenge.)

At NCAAs, the coaches that bring 1 or 10 are treated the same.  If your team wrestles 2 times or 56 times, same amount of challenges?  Not sure if allocating coaches challenges by number of matches completed is possible, but I think it should be considered.

For most teams, if you are up by 7 points in a match in the third period, you likely will not challenge.  Why should Ohio State or Penn State feel they should not challenge a takedown for the extra team point in round 1 (because they still have 50 matches left)?

Keep it the same. No sport shoots itself in the foot like wrestling. I'd think Sumo is more popular world-wide, simply because you can tell who's scoring and why they are scoring.

Yep.  Gotta' keep it simple enough that people can understand it, or at least be convinced that they do.  That's the beauty of basketball.  If a fan can count to 3 they can presume to be experts.  Just to give their fans a challenge, a 6 point shot should be added.  I wonder how many of them would then have to take off their shoes to watch a basketball game?  

[littleguy301]

Is there scoring in sumo? I thought it was win or lose.

well there are certain dress code you have to do but dont know about points, never seen any scored in a match.

good sport, pretty cut and dry if you ask me!

[bigG]

Is there scoring in sumo? I thought it was win or lose.

W and L are the points. There ya go. You can tell who won.

I bet many semi fans (if there are any left) of folk/free/greco couldn't tell you who was winning if they couldn't see a scoreboard. Nah, let's add some other silly twists and turns. Leave it.