Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 19 to 21 of 21
Discuss Iowa returning to National Duals, PSU not attending at the College Wrestling within the Wrestling Talk Forums; - Midwest (host TBD), Iowa , Iowa State, Oregon State, Virginia Tech, Wisconsin and Northern ...
  1. #19
    Redshirt ron.prozanski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Milan, Indiana

    Default Re: Iowa returning to National Duals, PSU not attending

    -Midwest (host TBD), Iowa, Iowa State, Oregon State, Virginia Tech, Wisconsin and Northern Iowa.
    -Cornell(confirmed), Central Michigan, Oklahoma, Purdue, Illinois, and American.
    -Rutgers (confirmed), Minnesota, Kent State, Michigan, Missouri, and Cal Poly.
    -Oklahoma State (confirmed), Boise State, Ohio State, Nebraska, Wyoming, and Tennessee-Chattanooga.

    ?The ultimate goal of this event is to create a premier national dual meet championship that will become a platform for growing spectator and media interest in wrestling both at the institutional and national levels. The initial rollout in the 2011-12 season is designed to assess how the dual meet championships fit into the existing wrestling calendar and also to determine the revenue generating potential for the purposes establishing a revenue-share with participating teams in future years?.

    I was trying to make since on how they was pairing up the teams for each region and it dawned on me.They are separating the teams that had a nice big fan base that would draw/travel to the regional event. Look at the breakdown;
    Each of these teams that I underlined has a fan base that is extremely loyal and they travel with the team to big events.
    I Also noticed that in the verbiage, they are trying to determine a revenue-share with participating teams. Does that mean it will be setup something like the BCS Rankings? Rank the teams on a curve. Teams with a big fan base that fill seats, get a better or favorable rating in their rating system. Do the teams split ticket sales from that region or the whole event? If based on region, I would want to be paired up with Iowa almost every year if possible to maximize the dollars going to my school.
    Last edited by ron.prozanski; 07-13-2011 at 01:06 PM.

  2. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Locust Grove, VA

    Default Re: Iowa returning to National Duals, PSU not attending

    Quote Originally Posted by SetonHallPirate View Post
    cpeake-That's because Iowa appearing was the difference between the event making and losing money, as they brought, under the old format, the lion's share of fans. That wasn't the case with Penn State, either last year or this year. That's where all of the outrage with Iowa came from, at least from the person I look at in the mirror every morning.
    Dear Mirror, what you say is true, but the "less than muted criticism" that I read on this site last year was mostly aimed at Iowa's "ducking" the competition. Which admittedly they did, but it worked out for the best. This year they have a chance to build confidence in the absence of Penn St. (a team that beat them in the tournaments last year). I think it's a brilliant strategy.

  3. #21
    NCAA Champ BlueBloodLion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    The same planet as you

    Default Re: Iowa returning to National Duals, PSU not attending

    Doing true geographic regions proved difficult to do in basketball when trying to maintain a competitive balance, so they moved away from it (for the women now as well). Looking at the announced group, this is roughly how I would expect them to fall into place:

    West - Cal Poly, Oregon St., Boise State, Wyoming, Minnesota, Nebraska
    Central Plains - Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa, Iowa State, Northern Iowa, Missouri
    Great Lakes - Wisconsin, Michigan, Central Michigan, Illinois, Purdue, Kent State
    Mid Atlantic- Ohio State, Cornell, Rutgers, American, Virginia Tech, UT Chat

    I have put in bold the teams who seem to be the most likely top-8 schools based on the last 5 years or so (sorry American and VT, maybe I'm being nice picking Boise). The balance doesn't seem too bad, obviously heavy in the Great Plains and light in the Great Lakes.

    The interesting question would be who would go? It seems to me that attendance would be MUCH higher is you chose one location and brought the top 16 teams. Each conference champ, then round out with at-large bids. Since the conference season is over, you really don't need the regional - you already had it!

    Or, go with 8 mini-regions (seems redundant to me, but this would at least reduce travel) with 4 teams each. The winners get to move on.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

user tags

Nobody landed on this page from a search engine, yet!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts