Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2345678 ... LastLast
Results 37 to 45 of 107

Thread: Sanderson does not like National Duals

  1. #37

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    From Kevin Robert's twitter (@Kroberts118)
    "Things real wrestling fans don't say:"wish I went home before finals in 94,team race over.Didn't want to see unseeded freshman Branch win."

    "Another: 'wish I hadn't gone to Corvallis in 80 to see Howard Harris pin way through finals,including 4x Olympic Medalist Bruce Baumgartner".'

    "Things wrestling fans don't say: I wish I would've skipped finals when Anthony Robles won NCAA,since team title was pretty well wrapped up."






    "Things wrestling fans don't say: I wish I wasn't there to see Pat Smith's 4th title, since there was no real team race."
    Quote Originally Posted by Flop The Nuts View Post
    [D]on't let lack of knowledge impact your ability to post as if you are knowledgeable.

  2. #38

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    Amen Snackem.
    To avoid criticism say nothing, do nothing, be nothing.

  3. #39

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    To be fair, many of us that don't want to change the team title, DO like the national dual meet tournament and DO like the individual aspect to the current NCAA tournament. No matter what is decided we will continue to enjoy the individual NCAA tournament. That said, we ALSO think that to no longer have the team championship as part of the individual tournament will take off a significant amount of the luster from the tournament.

  4. #40
    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 UGLY View Post
    I like the idea of a national dual championship. It only makes sense that the national team champion would be the best TEAM and not the team who has a few really good wrestlers that score a lot of points at a tournament. Its the same in high school, I like a dual state championship as well. It cant hurt the sport and then we could really see who the best TEAM. I love the NCAA tournament but I think this proposal only helps college wrestling.
    Reasonable, but bad idea in my opinion. The dual meet proposal redefines the meaning of National Champion Team. It has always been defined as the team that scores the most team points in the NCAA Tournament format. As I said earlier in the other thread and you alluded to in the above cited post, a good tournament team and a good dual meet team are not always the same. But the National Champions are, BY DEFINITION, the best tournament team. If we change that definition, then the NCAA tournament team score becomes meaningless, and as I believe the NWCA said, the idea of two national championships is off the table. If the NCAA Tournament doesn't determine THE National Champion Team, then (as I and others have said already) college wrestling's premiere event of the season loses much of its significance.
    Atrophy: what you get when you win atournament.

  5. #41

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    This may be my biggest problem with what is being posted on these boards. If the NCAA says that they don't recognize the NCAA tournament's highest scoring team as the "team championship", then it becomes MEANINGLESS? The highest scorer in the NCAA tournament is STILL the BEST tournament team. Sure, a title and trophy go to the Nat Duals champion. But this way WE GET BOTH. The highest scoring NCAA tournament team is still the BEST tournament team -- it is anything but meaningless.

    We get to find out who the best dual team is, the best individuals, and the best tournament team. In the process we get a chance to grow wrestling. Given - best tournament team doesn't get a shiny trophy... I hope that isn't what this all boils down to. That would be a tremendous shame.
    Last edited by rstrong; 09-16-2012 at 01:03 AM.

  6. #42
    Ancient Arachnid Spider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    5,424

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    But wouldn't that give us two National Champions? Who would be THE National Champion Team, or is it not important to have just one National Champion? Seems to me it would create more problems than it would solve.
    Atrophy: what you get when you win atournament.

  7. #43

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    I read these posts often but rarely post. But I feel that this issue is very important to the survival of wresting as I feel wrestling has to evolve to stay around in the distant future. So here it goes. I really do see all the sides. But I also recognize the need for change.

    I like most of you on this forum am a wrestling diehard. I will watch the individual tournament no matter what the stakes. Individual titles are up for grabs, and that is why I watch it. I am wathcing the individuals, and the team thing just kind of happens along with it.. I live in a place that is not very wresting friendly. We have few diehard fans. It is very difficult to get a parent to sit at a tournament all day to watch their own kid let alone watch somebody they don't know. I can, however, get them to come watch a dual. I can get them to watch a College Dual on TV as well. And I can get our high school kids (casual fans) to come for a two hour dual.

    If I have a tournament, I advertise when the finals are going to start because I know the casual fan won't come for the whole thing. So, having a dual team championship may cater to an audience that is unwilling to watch what we have now. And IMO, that would be good for wrestling. I like the idea of moving towards a dual championship for the sake of the survival of the sport. I am 44 years old. I am the perfect age to talk about the slow death of wresting, and I was a member of a Division I program that cut their program in 1987-88. I have seen it happen over the last 20 years.

    If the wrestling community gets behind this proposal, there is little risk of moving forward with it, because the diehards will always be there, and that is who supports the current structure. It can't go worse than it is going right now from a popularity point. To expand the popularity of wresting, we need to expand outside of the diehard fan. Getting an event on ESPN that viewers can tune into for a couple of hours and see something from beginning to end that has high stakes is a great idea. But without support from the wrestling community, it won't work. 51% consensus from college coaches is not good enough in my opinion. IN the 35 years I have been involved in wresting, I see wresting shoot itself in the foot all of the time. Let's not let the fear of change get in the way of progress. Let's not vote this up or down based on what kind of team we have right now. That is the one thing I hate about democracy. Too often people vote on what is good for them currently vs what is good for the whole. (of course I love democracy, just not that part of it)

    If we can get this through, I will support it. IF it doesn't go through, I will continue to support it. But I like the initiative because it has a real shot of evolving wrestling. And if it doesn't work, we lose little. WE still have a team trophy, and I bet the top programs can evolve to compete for it. There will still be a winner for the individual torunament. It just won't have the recognition from the NCAA. It will still have recognition from the diehards.

    I love wrestling enough to let it evolve. Remember the only thing that is constant in life is that things continue to change. Evolving is key to survival in any aspect of life or business. The question is, do we love wresting enough to let it evolve? To do nothing is to let the slow death continue IMO.

    Wrestlers are competitive by nature. If the rules change in crowning a team champion, the rules are still the same for everybody. I bet the top programs could make adjustments to still be competitive, but of course it will be controversial, because everybody likes the status quo. It is the nature of human beings. It is also the main reason for the lack of progress in many organizations.

    So, with the support from the wrestling community, I see this as an opportunity to improve what we already have without giving up anything but a golden trophy. It is amazing what people will do or not do for a piece of metal. If it has promise to help wrestling you do it. A trophy doesn't get in the way of progress for a visionary organization.

    Realistically, despite the format, the same four or five teams will be going for the title in both venues.

  8. #44

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    also, you have to figure that TV viewers will be the target audience for the Dual Championships as the diehards are still involved in their own competitions. THe individual tournament will always have better attendance because the lower levels are finished with their post seasons. So I do see the timing with the dual championships as a problem if you want to fill the stands. Filling the stands doesn't appear to be the objective in the current proposal. If you are looking to fill the seats, the location will have to be in a wrestling hub as you won't see nationwide travel to the event.

  9. #45

    Default Re: Sanderson does not like National Duals

    I read these posts often but rarely post. But I feel that this issue is very important to the survival of wresting as I feel wrestling has to evolve to stay around in the distant future. So here it goes. I really do see all the sides. But I also recognize the need for change.

    I like most of you on this forum am a wrestling diehard. I will watch the individual tournament no matter what the stakes. Individual titles are up for grabs, and that is why I watch it. I am wathcing the individuals, and the team thing just kind of happens along with it.. I live in a place that is not very wresting friendly. We have few diehard fans. It is very difficult to get a parent to sit at a tournament all day to watch their own kid let alone watch somebody they don't know. I can, however, get them to come watch a dual. I can get them to watch a College Dual on TV as well. And I can get our high school kids (casual fans) to come for a two hour dual.

    If I have a tournament, I advertise when the finals are going to start because I know the casual fan won't come for the whole thing. So, having a dual team championship may cater to an audience that is unwilling to watch what we have now. And IMO, that would be good for wrestling. I like the idea of moving towards a dual championship for the sake of the survival of the sport. I am 44 years old. I am the perfect age to talk about the slow death of wresting, and I was a member of a Division I program that cut their program in 1987-88. I have seen it happen over the last 20 years.

    If the wrestling community gets behind this proposal, there is little risk of moving forward with it, because the diehards will always be there, and that is who supports the current structure. It can't go worse than it is going right now from a popularity point. To expand the popularity of wresting, we need to expand outside of the diehard fan. Getting an event on ESPN that viewers can tune into for a couple of hours and see something from beginning to end that has high stakes is a great idea. But without support from the wrestling community, it won't work. 51% consensus from college coaches is not good enough in my opinion. IN the 35 years I have been involved in wresting, I see wresting shoot itself in the foot all of the time. Let's not let the fear of change get in the way of progress. Let's not vote this up or down based on what kind of team we have right now. That is the one thing I hate about democracy. Too often people vote on what is good for them currently vs what is good for the whole. (of course I love democracy, just not that part of it)

    If we can get this through, I will support it. IF it doesn't go through, I will continue to support it. But I like the initiative because it has a real shot of evolving wrestling. And if it doesn't work, we lose little. WE still have a team trophy, and I bet the top programs can evolve to compete for it. There will still be a winner for the individual torunament. It just won't have the recognition from the NCAA. It will still have recognition from the diehards.

    I love wrestling enough to let it evolve. Remember the only thing that is constant in life is that things continue to change. Evolving is key to survival in any aspect of life or business. The question is, do we love wresting enough to let it evolve? To do nothing is to let the slow death continue IMO.

    Wrestlers are competitive by nature. If the rules change in crowning a team champion, the rules are still the same for everybody. I bet the top programs could make adjustments to still be competitive, but of course it will be controversial, because everybody likes the status quo. It is the nature of human beings. It is also the main reason for the lack of progress in many organizations.

    So, with the support from the wrestling community, I see this as an opportunity to improve what we already have without giving up anything but a golden trophy. It is amazing what people will do or not do for a piece of metal. If it has promise to help wrestling you do it. A trophy doesn't get in the way of progress for a visionary organization.

    Realistically, despite the format, the same four or five teams will be going for the title in both venues.

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
  •