For Drew

bigoil · March 25, 2015, 01:40:06 PM

While much is on individual wrestlers, we know the entire season is geared towards March.

They didn't seem to match the level of their opponent after the first round.
I question the decision making on choosing both up vs down
Wrestling to get to overtime with decisions made.

It is now time to look at changes. We have a great University and will attract numerous hungry aspiring coaches.

hammen · March 25, 2015, 02:03:00 PM

Quote from: bigoil on March 25, 2015, 01:40:06 PM
While much is on individual wrestlers, we know the entire season is geared towards March.

They didn't seem to match the level of their opponent after the first round.
I question the decision making on choosing both up vs down
Wrestling to get to overtime with decisions made.

It is now time to look at changes. We have a great University and will attract numerous hungry aspiring coaches.

When?

DocWrestling · March 25, 2015, 02:39:07 PM

Multiple wrestlers gave up their escape point to choose neutral because they did not trust that they could get out from bottom. Not sure losing that point offsets the fact of maybe saving giving a riding point to the other wrestler.

You cannot win championships and even close matches that way. That should have been a coaching point all year. I would have made them choose down and had made them get out if they wanted victory. I think they only earned one victory in those multiple cases anyway.

Quite honestly getting out from bottom is about effort through movement and did not always see it.

How many times has a wrestler won the match but the loser was awarded a riding point at end.

bigoil · March 25, 2015, 02:56:31 PM

Quote from: hammen on March 25, 2015, 02:03:00 PM
Quote from: bigoil on March 25, 2015, 01:40:06 PM
While much is on individual wrestlers, we know the entire season is geared towards March.

They didn't seem to match the level of their opponent after the first round.
I question the decision making on choosing both up vs down
Wrestling to get to overtime with decisions made.

It is now time to look at changes. We have a great University and will attract numerous hungry aspiring coaches.

When?

Sorry Drew, I don't recall specifics, I believe one was McCall and the other was maybe RT or IJ. I get if it was JT as he has struggled in that down position.

hammen · March 25, 2015, 03:02:41 PM

Quote from: DocWrestling on March 25, 2015, 02:39:07 PM
Multiple wrestlers gave up their escape point to choose neutral because they did not trust that they could get out from bottom. Not sure losing that point offsets the fact of maybe saving giving a riding point to the other wrestler.

You cannot win championships and even close matches that way. That should have been a coaching point all year. I would have made them choose down and had made them get out if they wanted victory. I think they only earned one victory in those multiple cases anyway.

Quite honestly getting out from bottom is about effort through movement and did not always see it.

How many times has a wrestler won the match but the loser was awarded a riding point at end.

Who said it wasn't? And you would have your wrestler choose down regardless of the situation and how they were wrestling on bottom that match? That's a poor coaching decision. Wrestlers choose neutral all the time to not go on bottom against good riders, to save riding time or just because they are more confident in their ability to score from neutral that match versus on bottom. It's giving yourself the best chance to win. Nothing is wrong with that. You see this all the time throughout the season in college, and at B1Gs and NCAAs, and lots of guys win when choosing neutral versus the standard "I choose down". It's just being smart. In particular matches where we chose neutral instead of bottom or top, those were absolutely the correct calls given the circumstances of the match. No question. RT was rolling around trying to get out and gave up backpoints. He has rolled on a lot of guys throughout the season and gotten away, but Gulibon figured it out. RT just got a couple of takedowns in the 2nd, why would he risk being ridden and wasting time trying to get away when he got ridden for more than a minute and gave up points in the first? Zeke was a similar situation, where Walsh was able to get a takedown and rode Zeke for over a minute in the first, Zeke scored a takedown in the 2nd I believe, correct choice to not go underneath on of the best riders in the country when you are down in the 3rd, giving him the opportunity to ride out the period when you know you will be able to get to his legs and give yourself an opportunity to win the match.

DocWrestling · March 25, 2015, 03:31:53 PM

In my opinion of those matches, I agree that it was likely the right decision in the match to not select down. It gave those wrestlers the best chance in that match at that moment.

My point is that it was an apparent weakness of more than one wrestler and that was frustrating. My point is that to get further up on the podium I think you need to be able to get out from bottom against anyone. In most cases the wrestlers had already been ridden in earlier periods which made the choice for neutral was even more obvious but I was also disappointed with the effort on bottom. There was lack of movement off the whistle, there was laying in the belly, there was letting a guy get in the legs repeatedly, and no clear plan to create separation. I just did not see the desire and effort from the bottom and honestly it looked like wrestlers were content to save energy. I realize this is oversimplified and likely not right at all and the opponent certainly had something to do with it but that is what it looked like. Maybe it is my pet peeve that you can be on bottom and the ref blows the whistle and you don't even move.

I even spent more time watching more matches to see what guys were doing on bottom and it was different.

bigoil · March 25, 2015, 10:15:10 PM

There was one match, I believe McCall was leading 2-1 and had :46 riding time. He chose neutral. There was no intent to score imo. It was the hope to get got the third and obtain :14 seconds of additional ride time. For a 3-2 win. The opponent escaped in less than :10 and the match went to OT.

He chooses down and escapes, he is winning the match 3-1, 3-2 after a 3rd period presumed escape.

hammen · March 26, 2015, 07:14:46 AM

Quote from: bigoil on March 25, 2015, 10:15:10 PM
There was one match, I believe McCall was leading 2-1 and had :46 riding time. He chose neutral. There was no intent to score imo. It was the hope to get got the third and obtain :14 seconds of additional ride time. For a 3-2 win. The opponent escaped in less than :10 and the match went to OT.

He chooses down and escapes, he is winning the match 3-1, 3-2 after a 3rd period presumed escape.

I think I remember this - first round against Oregon St. Timmy got ridden in the tie breakers to lose 3-2. That might be why he didn't choose down. I can't remember how the kid rode, but that might have been the plan all along. Timmy had that bad wheel going into the ncaas, and maybe they scouted the guy and thought it was best to go feet to score and win the match. He still had almost 4 minutes to score on his feet and win the match with a takedown, versus potentially getting ridden the whole 2nd which would just exhaust him to much for the 3rd. Lots of factors that don't make it a simple call. I do understand what you are saying though - and a guy as explosive as Timmy should be able to get away from nearly everyone, but we all know that isn't always what happens.

bigoil · March 26, 2015, 08:36:18 AM

Quote from: hammen on March 26, 2015, 07:14:46 AM
Quote from: bigoil on March 25, 2015, 10:15:10 PM
There was one match, I believe McCall was leading 2-1 and had :46 riding time. He chose neutral. There was no intent to score imo. It was the hope to get got the third and obtain :14 seconds of additional ride time. For a 3-2 win. The opponent escaped in less than :10 and the match went to OT.

He chooses down and escapes, he is winning the match 3-1, 3-2 after a 3rd period presumed escape.

I think I remember this - first round against Oregon St. Timmy got ridden in the tie breakers to lose 3-2. That might be why he didn't choose down. I can't remember how the kid rode, but that might have been the plan all along. Timmy had that bad wheel going into the ncaas, and maybe they scouted the guy and thought it was best to go feet to score and win the match. He still had almost 4 minutes to score on his feet and win the match with a takedown, versus potentially getting ridden the whole 2nd which would just exhaust him to much for the 3rd. Lots of factors that don't make it a simple call. I do understand what you are saying though - and a guy as explosive as Timmy should be able to get away from nearly everyone, but we all know that isn't always what happens.

You are correct, and that doesn't all fall on the coaches, I would say they may have had the plan you described but it looked like TM was content to go to the 3rd and see how it played out and then neither wrestler was taking too many chances in the 3rd.

imnofish · March 26, 2015, 11:42:05 AM

There are no hard and fast rules about "choice" decisions, because every wrestler and every match have their own variables that need to be considered. Even with a plan in place, the progression of the match can take surprising turns that favor changing tactics during competition. Good coaches have a plan, but also are flexible enough to make adjustments in real time.

DocWrestling · March 26, 2015, 11:58:37 AM

Quote from: imnofish on March 25, 2015, 01:15:43 PM
With hard work and maturity, our kids should be better next year, and at least one "surprise" will emerge.

Kind of my biggest concern with the Badgers. Other Big Ten teams seem to have more "surprises" or their "surprises" finish ahead of our "surprises".

Hoping one of the in-state wrestlers will be a big "surprise" next year!

billymurphy · March 26, 2015, 01:28:38 PM

The Badgers have all three AA's back and RR. This is as bright of outlook to next season as it gets.
I stand by my prediction that the Badgers finish higher than Minnesota in the Big Tens and nationals.
Naturally, nobody expects the Badgers to beat Iowa, Ohio State or Penn State.

And a distant eighth place in the Big Ten Tournament and 17th place at nationals was disappointing for sure.
Too many holes in the lineup is a very fair criticism.

dad 2 5 · March 26, 2015, 05:49:44 PM

17th is not where I had hoped the Badgers would finish. I do like the looks for the AA coming back and maybe RR and JJ can compete for AA or top 12. There continues to be holes and which we need recruiting to fill in. We need to see the Badgers get 10 solid guys and then fill in behind them. Every match must count from October until the NCAA podium. It is about getting in position, seeding, winning mentality. Hope the off-season is productive and we move forward.

jaguarwrestler · March 26, 2015, 06:23:55 PM

Quote from: billymurphy on March 26, 2015, 01:28:38 PM

The Badgers have all three AA's back and RR. This is as bright of outlook to next season as it gets.
I stand by my prediction that the Badgers finish higher than Minnesota in the Big Tens and nationals.
Naturally, nobody expects the Badgers to beat Iowa, Ohio State or Penn State.

And a distant eighth place in the Big Ten Tournament and 17th place at nationals was disappointing for sure.
Too many holes in the lineup is a very fair criticism.

I don't claim to know MN team for next year, but they tend to reload well. Badgers loose 2 seniors, JT and I would think JJ and still have questions at 149 and 157... so if you want to bank our best 4 will do better than their team you could be right if their cupboards are pretty bare.