If on espn, the national duals finals will be a widely watched event. THe diehards will tune in (but probably won't travel because high school and youth is still going full steam).

IMO - the casual fan that does not follow wrestling will be more interested in a team event than an individual event. There is no crystal ball, so it is impossible to predict the reaction of a change like this.

But with the current plan, we have a track record to use to predict the future. And extrapolating the current trend line suggests that keeping things the same is a very bad idea

I think doing nothing is much riskier than doing something. We need to embrace for change, but I agree we need a plan with better consensus. But everybody should be working cooperatively for a new solution.

I have a grandson that is two years old. I am hopeful that wrestling will be here for him. And I am realistic enough in my thinking to come to the conclusion it is not going to look the same for him as it did for me. But the most important thing is that the opportunity is still there.

Originally Posted by Herkey#1

I'm not sure that coverage by ESPN is guaranteed. They are not going to show an event with half empty seats.

National duals is already scheduled such that it does not interfere with March madness. Although I agree that it would be better suited to be an end of the year tournament.





I like the idea of having two championships. However I have not seen any facts or research that supports the opinion that the proposal would grow wrestling. It's all just speculation and I think people don't want to make major changes based on speculation.






Mr. President...I didnt know you were a wrestling fan!

Good one, Herkey--and timely!

Originally Posted by FloggingSully

To build interest at the local fan level you need to get local fans (and students) to go to meets. Isn't it easier to market a dual to local fans if the dual means something? like having a shot at going to the national tournament? Wouldn't this proposal make duals between teams in the 'weaker' conferences (SoCon, CAA, MAC, etc) more marketable to local fans?

Yes, I can see that and to be honest, I had not factored in that the 'weaker' conference champions would be at the National Duals. I was thinking of the old format where they were generally nearly all top 20 teams. In that format most teams never had a chance to qualify.

Originally Posted by Herkey#1

I'm not sure that coverage by ESPN is guaranteed. They are not going to show an event with half empty seats.

National duals is already scheduled such that it does not interfere with March madness. Although I agree that it would be better suited to be an end of the year tournament.





I like the idea of having two championships. However I have not seen any facts or research that supports the opinion that the proposal would grow wrestling. It's all just speculation and I think people don't want to make major changes based on speculation.






Mr. President...I didnt know you were a wrestling fan!

Anything that will be done will be based on speculation. THere is no crystal ball on what will happen if a dual format goes in. But there is a track history of what is going on now, and it would seem to me that the wrestling community would be trying to do something to change that trend. To do nothing is keeps our current situation in place and maybe the track record that goes with it. So I am hopeful that something can be done. But if the national duals is not the way to promote change in our sport, what is? I am for anything that has a chance to get our sport in front of more eyes.

Originally Posted by Spider

Rstrong, I understand your point, but I think I addressed it earlier:

I would reply, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

If you don't think it's broke - then we have nothing further to discuss. IMO, it's pretty clear, it's in serious condition and the prognosis is not good. We need to get together and agree on action to fix it.

Granted - it isn't easy to build consensus. But it's very easy to be dismissive and stick to status quo. I just don't believe that can be an option.

Being an author is difficult. Being a critic is easy. I'd happily hear what the critics are able to author themselves - unless it's "let's wait and see." That's authoring nothing.

Originally Posted by TomWright25

They could be right or wrong in their opinion and we can debate the relative merits of each position. But it's not fair to infer negative motivations because they have a different philosophy of what's good for wrestling.

I'm not implying any particular coach has anything but the best of motives. What I am saying is that if we adopt this change, that those that have the most to lose are those that are in the position to most be affected. In other words, yes, PSU (maybe Iowa) will likely earn the most NCAA tournament points and that makes it just that much harder for them to willingly give up something that is so close to their grasp. I'm not suggesting that it's easy - I'm suggesting that it's the right thing to do for the sport. Unless there is an alternative on the table we can choose, or you agree with Spider and - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Originally Posted by Herkey#1

I'm not sure that coverage by ESPN is guaranteed. They are not going to show an event with half empty seats.

Waiting for "guarantees" is an interesting strategy. It is akin to the status quo approach.

Originally Posted by Herkey#1

I like the idea of having two championships. However I have not seen any facts or research that supports the opinion that the proposal would grow wrestling. It's all just speculation and I think people don't want to make major changes based on speculation.

Having two meaningful championships is great. Unfortunately, only the NCAA's has achieved actual 'championship' status. The Nat Duals have been only partially subscribed to. By putting the 'big' trophy at the Nat Duals, and the other trophy in NCAA's aren't we likely getting (2) meaningful tournaments. Sure, I don't have a crystal ball. I'm confident schools won't blow off the Nat Duals nearly as quickly. But again - should we wait for more research for some kind of "guarantee"?

Originally Posted by Herkey#1

Mr. President...I didnt know you were a wrestling fan!

I had recently read about Romney's visit to Florida for that $50k/plate dinner and it stuck in my head. Thought it might be fun to dangle it in the post. Nice catch.