|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: NCAA Wrestling Tournament
Tim Courtad added to this discussion on April 1, 2010
|
The NCAA basketball tourney is thinking about expanding the teams to 96. What do you think if wrestling expanded to 64? I think this will add more participants and more revenue for the tourney. All they would have to do is add one more round that could be thursday morning. There is a lot of talent that does not get to go to the tourney. This increase in numbers would help some smaller schools or new programs with recruiting as well as help the bigger schools by getting all 10 members of their team to Nationals for extra team points. Another 260 competitiors, their families, friends, coaches, and fans could add another 10,000 spectators to the arena. College needs to do whatever it can do to make some noise. Market it as the ultimate competition. It would be like all competitiors having a pigtail match. I don't think this would be to demanding for college athletes to wrestle 6 matches over a three day period to win a national championship.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: NCAA Wrestling Tournament
Gary Sommers added to this discussion on April 1, 2010
|
|
Quote from Tim Courtad's post:
|
|
"The NCAA basketball tourney is thinking about expanding the teams to 96. What do you think if wrestling expanded to 64? I think this will add more participants and more revenue for the tourney. All they would have to do is add one more round that could be thursday morning. There is a lot of talent that does not get to go to the tourney. This increase in numbers would help some smaller schools or new programs with recruiting as well as help the bigger schools by getting all 10 members of their team to Nationals for extra team points. Another 260 competitiors, their families, friends, coaches, and fans could add another 10,000 spectators to the arena. College needs to do whatever it can do to make some noise. Market it as the ultimate competition. It would be like all competitiors having a pigtail match. I don't think this would be to demanding for college athletes to wrestle 6 matches over a three day period to win a national championship."
|
No doubt it would increase revenue, which after all is what the NCAA is all about. Well, increased revenue and ridiculous rules.
It will just water things down in both cases. Before this politically correct, touchy feely generation we are now in qualifying for things such as these was meant to be a challenge, an honor, and a reward, not an entitlement.
The only thing the NCAA needs to do is get a D-1 playoff system in football. If D-3 school like Case, MIT, Johns Hopkins, etc. can theoretically miss class time for four weeks of playoffs so can schools like Ohio State, LSU, and Texas. Seriously, which players have the more demanding course load?
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: NCAA Wrestling Tournament
Tim Courtad added to this discussion on April 1, 2010
|
I agree it is allowing more competitiors, but I don't feel that it will be watered down. Any kid that can start at a division 1 level college has ability and has proven themselves either from high school or at the college level as a quality wrestler. I don't think any wrestlers in college dream to be a national qualifiers. All American is the ultimate goal for all college wrestlers. I feel strongly that high school should try to be more competitive with either one division of 64 kids or two divisions of 32 kids, limiting the amount of state place winners. The more participants is not an issue for me as watered down. Your still going to have the Palmer/ Metcalf match in the finals. There might be an upset though, where a "cinderella" performance happens and a know name kid places 6th in the country. That's why March madness is so exciting in basketball and how the wrestling tourney can be as exciting for wrestling fans.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: NCAA Wrestling Tournament
Gary Sommers added to this discussion on April 1, 2010
|
|
Quote from Tim Courtad's post:
|
|
"I agree it is allowing more competitiors, but I don't feel that it will be watered down. Any kid that can start at a division 1 level college has ability and has proven themselves either from high school or at the college level as a quality wrestler. I don't think any wrestlers in college dream to be a national qualifiers. All American is the ultimate goal for all college wrestlers. I feel strongly that high school should try to be more competitive with either one division of 64 kids or two divisions of 32 kids, limiting the amount of state place winners. The more participants is not an issue for me as watered down. Your still going to have the Palmer/ Metcalf match in the finals. There might be an upset though, where a "cinderella" performance happens and a know name kid places 6th in the country. That's why March madness is so exciting in basketball and how the wrestling tourney can be as exciting for wrestling fans."
|
Tim, by definition is has to water it down. The more competitors, the weaker the field. That is just logical to me.
All NBA and NFL players have proven much more than a collegiate wrestler, yet I don't think either of us believes that all teams should make the playoffs.
And yes March Madness is exciting, but to those of us old enough to remember when the field was just 32 it was probably more exciting as the "bottom" teams were not there to basically waste the first round. One George Mason every blue moon is not enough to justify the vast majority of terrible first round games. But again, it is all about money and is surely never going to go back.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: NCAA Wrestling Tournament
Tim Courtad added to this discussion on April 1, 2010
|
I understand the field is watered down, but the competition is the same. The same kids are still in the bracket to be All Americans. People don't say the Junior Nationals tournament is a watered down tourney, because there are lots of non state placers there and 64 man brackets.
The definition of watered down should be when the state of ohio has two youth state tournaments or the the fact that there are two national tourneys contested on the same weekend for high school. In those scenerios you never have a true champ or placewinners. At least in college you will still have all of the athletes conmpeting on the same days and will have a true champion and placewinners.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: NCAA Wrestling Tournament
Gary Sommers added to this discussion on April 2, 2010
|
|
Quote from Tim Courtad's post:
|
|
"I understand the field is watered down, but the competition is the same. The same kids are still in the bracket to be All Americans. People don't say the Junior Nationals tournament is a watered down tourney, because there are lots of non state placers there and 64 man brackets.
The definition of watered down should be when the state of ohio has two youth state tournaments or the the fact that there are two national tourneys contested on the same weekend for high school. In those scenerios you never have a true champ or placewinners. At least in college you will still have all of the athletes conmpeting on the same days and will have a true champion and placewinners."
|
I understand it most likely won't affect the guys who finish at the top, But to make the tournament only because the field was expanded, and to know that you would not have made it under the old format, is that really that much of a thrill? Honor? That is probably what they are going after, well that and money, but I don't see it. But that might just be me.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: NCAA Wrestling Tournament
Dan Cosimi added to this discussion on April 2, 2010
|
You're arguing different points.
Gary is saying that qualifying 64 would make the honor of becoming a national qualifier "watered down."
Tim is saying that qualifying 64 would not make the honor of becoming an All-American "watered down."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
