The News

News Sources

History/Records

Commitments

Videos

Links

Discussion

Forum Home

Forum Search

Register

Log in

Log in to check your private messages

Profile

Check the latest updates on Twitter at: @OWNetwork

► Add to the Discussion

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

below is email i sent today to Tom Ryan and Mike Moyer, Exec. Director NWCA. Does idea have any merit? Advantages seem obvious but what are the obstacles?

Tom, i know you are president of the Coaches Assn, thus i ask you and Mike -----

i see the NWCA national duals are cancelled-- to generate more interest and put added excitement into college wrestling how about considering returning to old times when the Division II and Division III champs were entered into the NCAA tourn with the big schools---- some of greatest champs were not Div I, Ricky Sanders, Carlton Haselrig, Wade Schalles came from Div II injecting new blood into the event. In 1978 Ken Mallory of Division III Montclair St won NCAA at 134 lb. Would sure be huge topic of conversation among fans, would add fans too. .....just pondering. ...BobP



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Justin Hayes added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

Yes!



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Mark Niemann added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

Do D-I, D-II, and D-III all play by the same academic & athletic rules? If so, I say go for it. If not, that's a bit unfair to all involved.



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

Quote from Mark Niemann's post:

"Do D-I, D-II, and D-III all play by the same academic & athletic rules? If so, I say go for it. If not, that's a bit unfair to all involved."




its a point ive heard before, however among Div I today there are wide differences in various schools academic standards. Could be an obstacle but can u give me an example to discuss?

most ideas have flaws-- national duals despite big efforts by NWCA to promote just collapsed. But is idea presented here workable?



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Alex Creech added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

No if it means less spots for D1 kids. How were the D2,D3 champs seeded back then?



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

Quote from Alex Creech's post:

"No if it means less spots for D1 kids. How were the D2,D3 champs seeded back then?"




disgree re numbers, after all today NCAA tourn has 33 per wt-- whats justification for that? ...why not 32 with no rattail, why the rattail? Numbers r workable, we got 33 today go to 35, why not? No obstacle.

seeding i don't know how it was done but again imo that falls into the "workable" category.

if college wrestling could benefit from bigger fan base and more excitement i am all for exploring this idea. It worked once.



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Alex Creech added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

Seeding and if you reduce at large #'s for d1 could have more than a slight impact on the d1 team race. it might be workable, but there would definitely be some obstacles to overcome. it's a neat idea, just wouldn't want it to impact the team race.



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

Quote from Alex Creech's post:

"Seeding and if you reduce at large #'s for d1 could have more than a slight impact on the d1 team race. it might be workable, ... it's a neat idea, just wouldn't want it to impact the team race."




Alex, not talking about "reducing at large numbers for Div 1" --- 33 per wt now at NCAA. Add 20 champs from Div II and III we get 35 per wt, very manageable.

Seeding always a crapshoot, i have some experience in it, Reno T of C & Ironman. Its about survival of the fitest, just wrestle --and as the former great Cleveland St Joseph coach John Storey would say, "THE CREAM WILL COME TO THE TOP".



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

I recall reading something about the rules changing so that D2 and D3 were no longer able to compete in a D1 championship. I think it's an NCAA rule. Not positive.

Tervel Dlagnev was a D2 champion.

Jim Weir, from my alma mater, Cleve. Heights High School, was a 3x D3 NCAA champ from John Carroll. He was a 2x D1 AA as well. This was the early 1970's. Weir never placed at state in high school (his brother, Bill, was a state champ).
Weir is widely regarded as the greatest wrestler in JCU history.

Back to the question--I like the idea.



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
tony jameson added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

Awesome idea, only negative (if even that) thing I saw mentioned was the team score race. Seeing as how the d2 and d3 champs would have no implication for their own team points that would be the only obstacle I see

Feeding off your idea, what if to keep the dual champion activity alive in a way, why don't they implement a champs dual, d1 champs dual d2 champ who dual the d3 ect since the main idea seems to be where would they fare at the next level. Just some thoughts would be cool to see what they could do



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on July 8, 2017

Quote from tony jameson's post:

" Awesome idea, only negative (if even that) thing I saw mentioned was the team score race. Seeing as how the d2 and d3 champs would have no implication for their own team points that would be the only obstacle I see

Feeding off your idea, what if to keep the dual champion activity alive in a way, why don't they implement a champs dual, d1 champs dual d2 champ who dual the d3 ect. "




hi Tony, i like "Awesome" -- as an aside check out Div I team points when Wade Schalles won and you won't find any because Clarion was D2 then.

Everything effects team race now, seeding, refs, bad calls, replay reviews so i don't see that adding 2 more guys to each wt as a big obstacle. Bottom line: U gotta beat the guy u face, no matter his division ---and if your Div I guy beats/pins Div 2 or 3 he will get his points for his team.

There was controversy and hard feelings and fact is some teams didnt want to participate in Div I National Duals. It evolved into a tortured event so i cant see Div I vs Div 2/Div 3 duals interesting any top Div I team. Good idea only on paper apparently.



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Britt Malinsky added to this discussion on July 9, 2017

Quote from Bob Preusse's post:

"

Quote from tony jameson's post:

" Awesome idea, only negative (if even that) thing I saw mentioned was the team score race. Seeing as how the d2 and d3 champs would have no implication for their own team points that would be the only obstacle I see

Feeding off your idea, what if to keep the dual champion activity alive in a way, why don't they implement a champs dual, d1 champs dual d2 champ who dual the d3 ect. "




hi Tony, i like "Awesome" -- as an aside check out Div I team points when Wade Schalles won and you won't find any because Clarion was D2 then.

Everything effects team race now, seeding, refs, bad calls, replay reviews so i don't see that adding 2 more guys to each wt as a big obstacle. Bottom line: U gotta beat the guy u face, no matter his division ---and if your Div I guy beats/pins Div 2 or 3 he will get his points for his team.

There was controversy and hard feelings and fact is some teams didnt want to participate in Div I National Duals. It evolved into a tortured event so i cant see Div I vs Div 2/Div 3 duals interesting any top Div I team. Good idea only on paper apparently."


There was a time, not long ago (I believe Division II was around 40 teams at the time) where I wouldn't have been too opposed to seeing the D-2 tournament scrapped, and seen us have just Divisions I and III. (hockey has that setup, so it's not exactly precedent-setting for the NCAA) With Division II having been at 60 teams last season, I've been dissuaded from that idea, naturally.



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Deven Dittrich added to this discussion on July 13, 2017

From this fan’s perspective, there seem to be two issues with programs participating in the National Duals: (1) a reluctance to tie the results to the NCAA tournament's scoring; and (2) the timing of the Duals having the potential to negatively impact the results of the NCAA tournament due to injury and/or fatigue.

If the NWCA wants to incentivize participating in the National Duals by tying their results to the NCAA tournament, perhaps one possibility would be that the winning team automatically qualifies all ten of it's wrestlers for the NCAA tournament. Or, if you really want to incentivize it, the winning team qualifies 12 (a starter at each weight, plus two backups), 2nd place team qualifies 11 (starter at each weight, plus one backup), and 3rd place team qualifies 10 (starter at each weight). In recent years, the top teams in the country typically have at least a couple of weights in which they have backups capable of making some noise at the NCAA tournament. Allowing these top programs the opportunity to have additional point scorers- or, even if the back-up’s points don’t count toward the team score and they only have the opportunity to wrestle for themselves or knock out scoring wrestlers from other contending teams- would certainly aid teams in recruiting, adding depth, and motivating back-ups who may have a chance to wrestle at NCAA’s if their team participates and wins the National Duals. Penn State, Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Iowa, Cornell… all of these teams have had hotly contested weights in recent years with two- sometimes three- wrestlers battling for the starting spot right up until the time of the conference tournament. Which one of these teams wouldn’t have loved to have had the opportunity to send multiple wrestlers at the same weight in situations where no one separates themselves?

Another possible change that could be made to the National Duals is to have them be non-NCAA events and allow teams to include their redshirts. This would allow for a true test of the best "Team" and allow some of the prized redshirts to get valuable experience without penalty of losing a year of eligibility. This would also allow teams to minimize the potential risk of wrestling slightly injured or fatigued wrestlers by inserting similarly-skilled redshirting wrestlers who have, basically, already wrapped up their season and are finally competing at a “college” level rather than the “high school” level they were at near the beginning of the season. Instead of trying to tie into the NCAA, use the NWCA format to embrace the fact that it's not the NCAA and that organization's rules don't need to be followed (similar to the experimental rule changes exercised in the All Star Dual)

Any thoughts...?



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Jeff Streu added to this discussion on July 13, 2017

Quote from Deven Dittrich's post:

"From this fan’s perspective, there seem to be two issues with programs participating in the National Duals: (1) a reluctance to tie the results to the NCAA tournament's scoring; and (2) the timing of the Duals having the potential to negatively impact the results of the NCAA tournament due to injury and/or fatigue.

If the NWCA wants to incentivize participating in the National Duals by tying their results to the NCAA tournament, perhaps one possibility would be that the winning team automatically qualifies all ten of it's wrestlers for the NCAA tournament. Or, if you really want to incentivize it, the winning team qualifies 12 (a starter at each weight, plus two backups), 2nd place team qualifies 11 (starter at each weight, plus one backup), and 3rd place team qualifies 10 (starter at each weight). In recent years, the top teams in the country typically have at least a couple of weights in which they have backups capable of making some noise at the NCAA tournament. Allowing these top programs the opportunity to have additional point scorers- or, even if the back-up’s points don’t count toward the team score and they only have the opportunity to wrestle for themselves or knock out scoring wrestlers from other contending teams- would certainly aid teams in recruiting, adding depth, and motivating back-ups who may have a chance to wrestle at NCAA’s if their team participates and wins the National Duals. Penn State, Ohio State, Oklahoma State, Iowa, Cornell… all of these teams have had hotly contested weights in recent years with two- sometimes three- wrestlers battling for the starting spot right up until the time of the conference tournament. Which one of these teams wouldn’t have loved to have had the opportunity to send multiple wrestlers at the same weight in situations where no one separates themselves?

Another possible change that could be made to the National Duals is to have them be non-NCAA events and allow teams to include their redshirts. This would allow for a true test of the best "Team" and allow some of the prized redshirts to get valuable experience without penalty of losing a year of eligibility. This would also allow teams to minimize the potential risk of wrestling slightly injured or fatigued wrestlers by inserting similarly-skilled redshirting wrestlers who have, basically, already wrapped up their season and are finally competing at a “college” level rather than the “high school” level they were at near the beginning of the season. Instead of trying to tie into the NCAA, use the NWCA format to embrace the fact that it's not the NCAA and that organization's rules don't need to be followed (similar to the experimental rule changes exercised in the All Star Dual)

Any thoughts...?"



I'm curious to hear people's thoughts on tying the National Duals results to the NCAA tournament team scores. The NCWA (club) has done that in recent years. Our team at UAkron opted not to go to National Duals due to budget and schedule, but I'm regretting not going because we easily would have been 2nd (or possibly 1st) in NCWA D2, instead of our 4th place finish.

I think tying the results together has merit, because having a good dual lineup and a good tournament team is a measure of a truly good team.

I think that incentivizing it by allowing all 10 wrestlers of the winning team to advance to nationals (any members of that team not automatically qualifying at their conference would earn at-large bids) is a very good idea!

I'm leaning towards no on allowing 11 or 12 wrestlers to advance. The NCWA and NAIA allow 2 entries per weight in the post-season, but the second wrestler does not score team points. If the NCAA were ever to allow multiple entries (doubtful), then the second wrestler definitely shouldn't score team points.



Add to the discussion and quote this      

Discussion Topic: Does this idea have merit?
Corey Haddad added to this discussion on July 19, 2017

Quote from Bob Preusse's post:

"below is email i sent today to Tom Ryan and Mike Moyer, Exec. Director NWCA. Does idea have any merit? Advantages seem obvious but what are the obstacles?

Tom, i know you are president of the Coaches Assn, thus i ask you and Mike -----

i see the NWCA national duals are cancelled-- to generate more interest and put added excitement into college wrestling how about considering returning to old times when the Division II and Division III champs were entered into the NCAA tourn with the big schools---- some of greatest champs were not Div I, Ricky Sanders, Carlton Haselrig, Wade Schalles came from Div II injecting new blood into the event. In 1978 Ken Mallory of Division III Montclair St won NCAA at 134 lb. Would sure be huge topic of conversation among fans, would add fans too. .....just pondering. ...BobP"




Old times? Add fans?

Being a ESPN3 Matside Announcer for the last 8 NCAA D1 Tournaments, I receive data from ESPN after the tournament and it shows wrestling is growing in popularity. From the competition floor, I saw packed house for all six sessions. The Championship Finals was a spectacle for the fans in attendance and after watching on DVR when I returned home, it was a terrific presentation by ESPN.

Apparently you missed the boat regarding the numbers from the 2017 D1 Wrestling Championships.

ESPN’s three-day, six-session presentation of the NCAA Wrestling Championships (March 16-18) reached 8.6 million people on television, a 6% increase over 2016.

The NCAA Wrestling Championships Finals delivered an average total live audience (TV + streaming - meaning both WatchESPN simulcast of television coverage + ESPN3 individual feeds) of 753,000 viewers, up 12% from last year’s Championship Finals. The 2017 Championship Finals audience was the largest for the sport’s final night in the last four years and was the fourth most-watched on record.

Three-Day, Six-Session Championships Experience Year-Over-Year Growth
ESPN’s entire presentation of the NCAA Wrestling Championship — six sessions across the three days — averaged a total live audience of 314,000 viewers, up 24% from last year. Similar to the Championship Finals, the 314,000 viewers, on average for each session, ESPN’s best in the last four years.


Every Mat, Every Match Audience Grows: ESPN3’s every mat, every match coverage continues to grow in popularity, as ESPN’s streaming audience increased in each of the individual six sessions for both average minute audience and total minutes watched compared to last year’s event. This was best demonstrated by Saturday night’s Championship Finals, which experienced a 21% increase in streaming average minute audience year-over-year. Additionally, fans streamed more than 3,700,000 minutes of action during the Championship Finals, also an increase of 21% over last year.

Local Markets:
Columbus was the top-rated market for Saturday night’s action, drawing a 1.6 local rating. Pittsburgh (1.4), Philadelphia (1.0), Oklahoma City (1.0), and St. Louis (0.9) were the top 5 local markets.



Add to the discussion and quote this      

► Add to the Discussion