|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on January 7, 2009
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Mike Taylor added to this discussion on January 7, 2009
|
I didn't think he said anything bad. Sure, he punked Gardner a bit by implying he would back down from a late challenge. However, was he not correct?
Part of the problem I see with this Buckeye team right now is they are not living up to the talking they did in the off season. Jaggers especially. In one of his interviews he made it a point to punk out the Iowa squad a couple of times. That is fine, but you have to make sure you back up your words. Now sitting at 6-6, he just looks foolish. I am very interested to see how tough this Buckeye team is. They are facing some adversity by not living up to their own expectations yet (poor team showing at Las Vegas and recently a poor showing against Kent St). In their defense, this squad is having to learn how to deal w/ national success. Something that hasn't existed w/ a Buckeye team in a long time. Hopefully this adversity brings them closer together vice driving them apart through frustration. Time will tell.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Scott Shaw added to this discussion on January 7, 2009
|
I just watched the video and the "all world" comment didn't even originate with Andrassy. I don't think that he meant anything by it and if people don't like a coach saying that he thought that one of his athletes was going to be able to push the action in the third period of a match, then they need to reevaluate what they think a good coach is. Andrassy was confident that his kid had out worked his opponent, that is nothing that any quality coach doesn't feel about the opponent, even if it is not true.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on January 7, 2009
|
I respect Andrassy for the great job he's done at Kent. I also think a few of his comments could have been rephrased. As a coach, however, you're better served in the long run by discussing your own wrestlers more than the other teams--unless it's to pay a compliment. I certainly hope someone brings these comments to Gardner's attention. I'd hope he'd be pissed--and motivated. Still, Andrassy's candor is refreshing.
Also, judging by comments made by Tom Ryan and Tom Rowlands, the Buckeye staff is not panicked over their recent struggles. That's good to see. The staff seems to have a lot of confidence in their guys. I get the impression that Coach Ryan does a good job of building them up. Given the challenges of college wrestling, I think that's critical to long term success. The staff seems to believe they'll get on track and finish strong.
One interesting comment from Coach Ryan--he felt J.Jaggers put himself in bad position regardless of whether or not the pin call was correct. I appreciate that he didn't alibi for what happened. Personally, I didn't like the call. But I'm glad the staff offered no excuses.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Mike Taylor added to this discussion on January 8, 2009
|
|
Quote from Hank Kornblut's post:
|
|
"
One interesting comment from Coach Ryan--he felt J.Jaggers put himself in bad position regardless of whether or not the pin call was correct. I appreciate that he didn't alibi for what happened. Personally, I didn't like the call. But I'm glad the staff offered no excuses."
|
I agree Hank. My twin brother and I were just recently having a conversation about teaching young wrestlers sound fundamentals...which does not include placing yourself on your back. We are both volunteer coaches (he in South Carolina and me in Iowa) and feel the best moves are the basics. The rule I was ALWAYS taught when competing was the outcome of a match is far too important to be left in the hands of a referee. No disrespect to refs. They have a tough job, but if you want the calls to go your way, don't make any of them close and leave them up to the ref's interpretation. Jags left himself at the mercy of the ref's perspective. More often than not, you'll get away with the move he tried. Not all the time, however, as Jags discovered.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on January 8, 2009
|
Mike: There's a lot of truth to what you say. But all wrestlers need to find a style that works for them
Here are my thoughts on funk:
1) Funk is fundamentally sound wrestling. The name "funk" implies an absence of technique but that's not true. The counter Jaggers tried (I would love to know if it has a name) is one I've seen executed correctly many times. Keaton Anderson was amazing at it. Credit Lashaway for anticipating what Jaggers would do. Perhaps J. forced it.
2) The problem with Funk comes from wrestlers over relying on it. When a wrestler eschews good leg attacks in order to counter at every opportunity, he's going to lose eventually when it really matters. Ben Askren liked to use "funk" but would gladly shoot as well. Tony Jameson's senior season he got sloppy with his "funk" and got burned several times.
3) The best wrestlers might have funk in their arsenal but usually it's their leg attacks that pay the bills. Jaggers heated up his single leg attack towards the end of last season and scored a lot with it. This forced his opponents to shoot--which increased his chances of scoring with counters as well. When Jags gets back to scoring offensive takedowns, he'll start winning again.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Rex Holman added to this discussion on January 8, 2009
|
Concerning Andrassy's comment;
1) Zeb set him up with a lead in question about Cody being all world in high school. As we all know high school is not college wrestling and that past success is a possible indicator of future success but not an absolute which is what I am fairly certain Andrassy was trying to express.
2) Language is an expression of knowledge and experience. Sometimes our words express what we mean to say and sometimes they do not. To say that Cody does not want to win the match if you take him to the third period could be viewed as a personal attack and is really not a fair assessment. The right thing to say in making a fair assessment of the wrestler is that he will make mistakes or his position will falter later in the match and that is the strategy we used to beat him. One is subjective while the other is objective.
If a coach is going to say something like Andrassy did, then it will serve his opponent as motivation to beat his wrestler. I don't think you want to do that as a head coach. If someone were to say that about me or one of my kids, that next match is going to be particularly brutal and some things may transpire that would not have otherwise.
From personal experience, I wrestled at ASU and left to continue my career at OSU. I wrestled in the semifinals at the '92 NCAA tournament. A story passed onto me from Coach Hellickson was that he had a conversation with Melvin Douglas, an assistant coach at ASU, after the match which I lost. Melvin said something to the effect hat I would not place as I was a head case. Well, modern bracketing dictates that if you make the semifinals, you are automatically in the top six. Hellickson laughed and walked away. The moral to the story is that people are going to talk trash about you to validate their own ideas. Surround yourself with people that believe in you and are willing to go the extra mile for you. Let the bs fall on deaf ears and work progressively towards your goals.
I have nothing against Melvin. I realize that part of my life was important in shaping the person that I am today. I tell the story because it was an important part of my experience and it may help others.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on January 8, 2009
|
To say that Cody does not want to win the match if you take him to the third period could be viewed as a personal attack and is really not a fair assessment. The right thing to say in making a fair assessment of the wrestler is that he will make mistakes or his position will falter later in the match and that is the strategy we used to beat him. One is subjective while the other is objective.
Very astute.
The moral to the story is that people are going to talk trash about you to validate their own ideas.
even more astute.
Surround yourself with people that believe in you and are willing to go the extra mile for you. Let the bs fall on deaf ears and work progressively towards your goals.
Great advice.
Rex: Write your wrestling story. I'll be the first to buy it.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Controversial Comment
Dom Mancini added to this discussion on January 9, 2009
|
The move that Jaggers was trying is called a "single leg pass" as defined by Ben Askren - it's a good move but Jaggers completely missed the leg - you are supposed to wrap your arm around the leg and roll on the outside of the leg - he missed the leg and landed flat on his back completely out of position (in between his legs) which is why he got into trouble - he was in good position when he started the move getting his foot parallel with Lashaway's. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
