Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 99 of 107

Thread: Sanderson does not like National Duals

  1. #91
    Ancient Arachnid Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    5,424

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Quote Originally Posted by rstrong View Post
    What? How could you possibly offer this as an argument?

    The best teams in the country are NOT competing! PSU wasn't at Nat Duals last year. Iowa was a notorious no-show the year before. I think the answer is clearly YES - it needs to be THE National Championship in order to attract the the teams to compete. Wrestling, as a sport, doesn't have a true team championship when top caliber teams dismiss the tournament as irrelevant. And as a product for the fans we want to attract, it's a hard sell when the teams themselves don't believe in the duals or team championships.

    You don't need ALL of the top teams to compete in order for this to be a significant event. In fact, the dual meet format can be a double edged sword. How big a fan draw was Anthony Robles at the NCAA's? In a dual meet format, he'd probably wrestle once and then be gone.


    Quote Originally Posted by rstrong View Post
    Our sport shouldn't be about bait-and-switch. Joe Sixpack and Johnny Baseball are going to be upset about why the matchups between guys like DT and Dake at the All-Star Classic don't actually happen. It's about accountability.

    I would agree that the intricacies of why certain wrestlers are held back to protect their seeding, or other ducking techniques, is only interesting to hardcore fans. And, further, that it shouldn't be. The fans we want to expand to should expect a better product. Joe Sixpack and Johnny Baseball shouldn't have to understand intricacies, they should expect to see top-quality (not 2nd tier with JV guys) wrestling each and every week throughout the season.

    We should promise, and deliver, a quality product throughout the season. That is the cornerstone of what will make wrestling viable for the next 20+ years.
    Matchups like DT and Dake can easily be ducked in a dual meet tournament format (bait-and-switch), but are unavoidable at the NCAA's. I agree that it is a good thing to upgrade the quality of the season, but that's a different issue from which tournament crowns the National Champion team, which is the only change that I am debating.
    Atrophy: what you get when you win atournament.

  2. #92

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    I grew up with the current system, and I loved it. I still do love it, and I am sure that many that grew up with the system still love it. I get it. But we are stagnant right now. I say bring on change.

    But without a process, we will be stuck with the status quo. YOu can say what you want about the NWCA, but what other group is out there working to save our sport? Who else is doing something. Because it is important that we do something. IF transparency is an issue, I think that can be worked out. I feel we have a good start even if the first go through wasn't quite right. If the right people come together, I am sure something can be worked out that is better than the status quo.

  3. #93

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Quote Originally Posted by Spider View Post
    You don't need ALL of the top teams to compete in order for this to be a significant event. In fact, the dual meet format can be a double edged sword. How big a fan draw was Anthony Robles at the NCAA's? In a dual meet format, he'd probably wrestle once and then be gone.
    I guess that might make sense -- if you were assuming somehow that Robles wouldn't be wrestling in the individual tournament. Sorry Spider, but that really doesn't make any sense at all. Robles participation in the individuals would be exactly the same.

    And - yes - you really do need ALL of the top teams to participate to make the team tournament the national championship. Otherwise it really isn't a national team championship at all.

    BUT - I see where this is going. Around and around in circles. You don't want to change the current NCAA tournament. Moving the team championship to a Nat Duals format is not acceptable to you. Makes no difference what logical reasoning I offer, you're set in your emotional opinion. (Which isn't necessarily a bad thing - it just is what it is.)

    Let's just agree to disagree.
    Last edited by rstrong; 09-26-2012 at 08:50 PM.

  4. #94
    Ancient Arachnid Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    5,424

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Quote Originally Posted by rstrong View Post
    I guess that might make sense -- if you were assuming somehow that Robles wouldn't be wrestling in the individual tournament. Sorry Spider, but that really doesn't make any sense at all. Robles participation in the individuals would be exactly the same.

    And - yes - you really do need ALL of the top teams to participate to make the team tournament the national championship. Otherwise it really isn't a national team championship at all.

    BUT - I see where this is going. Around and around in circles. You don't want to change the current NCAA tournament. Moving the team championship to a Nat Duals format is not acceptable to you. Makes no difference what logical reasoning I offer, you're set in your emotional opinion. (Which isn't necessarily a bad thing - it just is what it is.)

    Let's just agree to disagree.
    I don't think you understood my points at all because your arguments don't address them. Maybe I just wasn't clear enough, but you are right. We are going around in circles. I agree that we disagree.
    Atrophy: what you get when you win atournament.

  5. #95

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Hopefully the people that are working for change are doing better than we are doing in this thread. Bottom line, if you were a CEO, and you were provided the trend line for wrestling (less than 80 programs and going south), and the decision was to go with the status quo, the stakeholders would revolt, a CEO would be fired, and a new CEO with a new direction would be born. But in Wrestling, our stakeholders don't see the all mighty dollar, only the system of wrestling we grew up with and loved. Are we embracing what we love or are we embracing the trendline that is going into the basement? When you read this thread, it is clear who is embracing what.

    Don't get me wrong. A. I love the current system and B. I love the idea that wresting will still be here 20 years from now. But, I like B more than A. Think about it. What are you embracing? Are you part of the problem or part of the solution. I have no problem with constructively looking at this thing, but if the purpose is to defeat the current proposal without drafting an alternative to look at, defeating this is not helping anything. We need a REAL solution to a REAL problem. If the current proposal isn't it, then we need to come up with something else that has the purpose of changing this trend line.

    And we are not thinking of this like a business at all. Any body that has a business that faced this trend line would be actively looking for new solutions. Why more stakeholders aren't crying for change is beyond me. I just don't get it. I love it the way it is, but I am not willing to hold on to it as it slowly slips into its grave.

  6. #96
    Ancient Arachnid Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    5,424

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Cwilson, I agree with you and I agree largely with Rstrong as well. I am not against change at all. My ONLY objection is that I do not believe that making the National Duals the determinant of the National Champion team will increase interest in wrestling. It is major change which, I believe, will have very minor benefits if any. I could be wrong - it happened once before, a long time ago .
    Atrophy: what you get when you win atournament.

  7. #97

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Quote Originally Posted by Spider View Post
    Cwilson, I agree with you and I agree largely with Rstrong as well. I am not against change at all. My ONLY objection is that I do not believe that making the National Duals the determinant of the National Champion team will increase interest in wrestling. It is major change which, I believe, will have very minor benefits if any. I could be wrong - it happened once before, a long time ago .
    So if I treat this like a business, and I know my trend line is very, very bad. I ask for proposals to review. We have our meeting. One proposal is shared. We have talked about it. We have discussed strengths and weaknesses. The problem I have, is I don't see two. But I know I have to do something, because if I leave like it is, I don't have a job. For sure, the current trendline suggests that sticking with the status quo is not a good idea at all.

    So if the option is adopt the new proposal or stick with the status quo which is clearly not working, what does a responsible CEO choose? Clearly he or she would choose something over nothing. I continue to hear the argument, "show me proof that this proposal will fix it". I have a counter question. Show me proof that wrestling will remain strong if we stay with the status quo. Nobody can show me that proof, because all of the data suggests otherwise.

    Two things strike me. 1) it is clear that something needs to be done, and 2) I don't see a lot of forward thinking our there. My guess is, if we are the CEO, and we are responsible to our stakeholders, we would be expected to do something. The only thing out there is to adopt the current proposal or tweek the current proposal to best fit the needs of all of the coaches, because there doens't seem to be any other options. Staying with what we have without actively looking for other solutions is irresponsible. I have yet to hear those against the proposal to offer a counter proposal, which is completely unproductive and part of the problem, not part of the solution.

    I don't remember where I saw it, but I thought I saw some discussion about having the two events and both of them somehow contributing to the overall title. I am not sure how that would work. Wrestlers by there nature handle adversity well. And they don't handle it by sitting by the tracks while the train goes by. We are a group of people that understand that action is required to get the changes we need to get what we want, and we are good at applying this to our training. Why can't we take that attitude and use it to protect our sport?
    Last edited by cwilson; 09-29-2012 at 12:59 PM.

  8. #98

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Is it possible to something with dual meets to make the regular season more meaningful to a fan base without changing the national title picture. It seems to me without an NCAA sanction, it doesn't work, and if we can't get the NCAA to adopt two champions, we are back to the drawing tables, which is probably how the idea to shift the national championship picture happended. The plan is evolving to fit the needs of wresting and the NCAA simultaneously, which will most likely require compromise.

  9. #99
    Ancient Arachnid Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    5,424

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Your point is that any change is better than no change. I don't agree. Some changes may actually make things worse. I offered some suggestions earlier and then repeated them. My objection stands.
    Atrophy: what you get when you win atournament.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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