Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Tofurky

  1. We need more D 1 programs


    What does more Division 1 opportunity accomplish that can't be accomplished by schools in Division 2, Division 3, NAIA, NJCAA and NCWA? Is there enough Division 1 talent graduating from high school every year to necessitate this growth? The non-D1 levels WANT wrestling and are creating more opportunity annually than D1 schools have committed to in the last decade.


    Here is a list (data taken from Trackwrestling) showing how many colleges competed at the D1 Championships, how many scored one team point or less and how many scored zero team points or less.


    2018 - 72 teams competed - 17 teams scored one team point or less (24% of the field) - 8 teams scored zero points or less (11%)

    2017 - 69 teams competed - 13 teams scored one team point or less (19% of the field) - 4 teams scored zero points or less (6%)

    2016 - 72 teams competed -   9 teams scored one team point or less (13% of the field) - 4 teams scored zero points or less (6%)

    2015 - 69 teams competed - 12 teams scored one team point or less (17% of the field) - 3 teams scored zero points or less (4%)

    2014 - 72 teams competed - 10 teams scored one team point or less (14% of the field) - 7 teams scored zero points or less (10%)

    2013 - 72 teams competed - 13 teams scored one team point or less (18% of the field) - 7 teams scored zero points or less (10%)

    2012 - 70 teams competed - 12 teams scored one team point or less (17% of the field) - 7 teams scored zero points or less (10%)


    This data might lead one to believe that there isn't enough talent coming out of high school to support the number of Division 1 programs that currently exist, let alone creating more of them that will only add to the numbers above.


    Instead of adding more teams to D1 at this point, why not focus on improving the numbers above first? Financially support the programs that need it most, which are usually among this group consistently, and will be most in danger of being cut in the future. All of this can do this WHILE growing the numbers of teams in college wrestling, just at levels outside of D1, where most wrestlers exist.

  2. Here are the numbers I have for college wrestling (culled from association websites and track wrestling regional entries) from 2017-18:


    Division 1: 76

    Division 2: 58

    Division 3: 104

    NAIA: 56

    NJCAA: 48

    NCWA: 152 (34 Division 1; 118 Division 2 -I cannot find on their site what those designations mean)


    That is 494 collegiate wrestling opportunities for men alone. That's a lot of opportunity to not only find a college that is a right fit for student-athletes, but also to compete in the sport of wrestling after high school.

  3. What if we... I don't know... increased the number of high-quality wrestlers coming out of high school?  Or is that just crazy?


    On a totally unrelated note, I'm kind of short on money this summer.  Wondering how to pay for camps, vacations, and such.  I was thinking maybe I'd look for a way to make extra money, but... nah.  I'll just put my kids up for adoption.


    If only life were as easy as your first paragraph.


    That said, Ray, your second paragraph isn't lost on me in direct relation to this topic. One thing you do not do is have more children.

  4. Come up with an idea that has merit and I bet people will discuss the merits.  


    But come up with something this dumb and people will just punch holes in the 'idea'.


    I did a few times in this thread alone. You, on the other hand, want to make it personal and have provided nothing in return but personal attacks. You're arguing from the heart, not the head.


    Groupthink is not only unproductive, but it is dangerous, boys.

  5. More D1 programs gives more opportunities to student athletes who want to wrestle in college.

    More opportunities to wrestle in college encourages more high school athletes to stick with the sport.

    More kids wrestling at the high school level encourages more middle school kids to wrestle.

    More kids wrestling at the middle school level encourages more youth level kids to wrestle.

    More kids at the youth level interested in wrestling encourages schools to add middle school and high school teams.

    More people wrestling encourages more weight classes.

    More weight classes encourages more weight classes at the world and Olympic level.


    Let me get this straight, only D1 wrestling offers opportunities for young men who want to wrestle? That is one seriously specious argument.


    Quick question: how many collegiate men's wrestling programs existed in 2017-18?

  6. This is the worst take since the clown who thought a young coach who was moving to an area where he had no connection might not work out...


    For those wondering, that clown was some Britt Malinsky character. (that coach was Cael Sanderson, and the area was Centre County, Pennsylvania)


    No, it's not and it's not even close.


    What's a far, far worse take is convincing people that access to D1 is an issue. It isn't; not everyone scholarship-level student-wrestler NEEDS to go to Penn State, Ohio State, Iowa or Okie State to have had a successful career in D1. There are many programs out there offering ample opportunities to be a D1 student-athlete. 


    Even worse than that is convincing kids and their parents that they are the next Logan Stieber or J'Den Cox, when they were a two-time state qualifier and finished fifth once as a senior.


    What actually might be the worst is the prevailing ideology on this and almost every other wrestling comment board that the only real collegiate wrestling experience that matters can be had is in Division 1.


    This year in the NCAA, Division 1 wrestling makes up 31 percent (76 programs from 242 total; 62 in D2 and 104 in D3) of the opportunities available to aspiring college wrestlers. You're telling me that more than three out of every ten high school senior student wrestlers is a Division 1 athlete? I will stridently disagree with you immediately.


    In terms of access, add in NAIA (63 programs in 2017-18) and NJCAA (47 programs in 2017-18) and high school senior wrestlers have 352 different opportunities to compete in college in 2017-18. That number doesn't include the more than 100 NCWA "club" teams out there. Of those, roughly 70% (D1, D2, NAIA and NJCAA) have the opportunity to offer financial reward for student-wrestlers. Maybe right sizing kids to not only meximize their potentials, but also to use their talents to afford college, is a better slogan than "D1 or Bust."

  7. High school wrestlers, statistically speaking, are already the least likely of all high school athletes to compete at the DI level and you want to make it even more difficult for kids to compete at the next level. Sad.


    Is Division 1 the ONLY option in your mind? If you go back and read the original post, and not take the title at face value, you'll see I said, in the second sentence, no less, "Would the wrestling community be better off limiting the number of Division 1 programs to, say, 40 in order to keep the best talent there, so then as to focus on growth in D2, D3, NAIA (you can throw in NJCAA and maybe even develop RTC-type programs at institutions without an NCAA, NAIA or NJCAA program, as an addendum), but that aren't going to be in the running for the likes of the kids in the Intermat/Mat Talk/Flo rankings?" Right there, I gave a far more reasonable and cost effective solution for 98-99% of high school wrestlers out there to continue competing after high school.


    https://www.flowrestling.org/articles/5067286-you-do-the-math-high-school-participation-numbers - the numbers of high school wrestlers are shrinking. Of the 250,653 high school wrestlers in 2015-16, how many were girls who will not be competing for any men's programs in college? Take that number out and the number continues to drop. Then, how many of the remaining kids were high school seniors? My assumption is that the largest numbers you'll find are at the freshman level, where kids are trying the sport for the first time. Most won't stick with it, but they are among those numbers. Of those seniors, how many of them are "Division 1 athletes" who will ever be starters for the teams for which they intend to compete?


    Why would we push for more Division 1 opportunities, so wrestling can make an effort keep up with football and basketball to make the fan base feel better about where the sport stands in the landscape of collegiate athletics? So dad (and maybe mom) can boast to their friends that their kid is on X Division 1 team? So we can kid ourselves into further believing that wrestling is more important to American culture than it really is?


    American society has spoken... for the last 30-some-odd years. The numbers are not in our favor. Public perception is that wrestling is seen as little more than breeding ground for mixed martial arts and, to a far lesser extent, a core Olympic sport that people think happens once every four years. We, as a community, need to be more honest with ourselves about this and figure out how to adjust for the benefit of those involved with this sport we all enjoy. Part of this means growing programs at levels which are not D1 (because it costs a hell of a lot less and the interest is there) and to stop kidding ourselves that every kid out there is worthy of D1 designation, leading high school coaches, club coaches, dads, moms, grandparents, siblings and everyone in town that there just isn't enough access. There IS enough access at the D1 level, but the level of talent isn't there to support all those programs.

  8. If less than half of all teams that have reps at Nationals--and that is not all 76-odd teams every year that do qualify someone--are remotely competitive, what's the point in keeping the consistent cellar dwellers around?


    Why would fans want to increase the number of D1 programs if more than half of teams each tournament can't score double digit team points and a quarter of teams or more are scoring five points or less each year?


    Also, if fans already don't follow the teams that are currently in the bottom 60% of teams annually, why add more teams that will not be competitive?


    Why not reduce the amount of Division 1 teams to concentrate the top talent, get rid of the coaches who aren't producing at that level and make for a truly competitive division instead of pretending that any of us really give a $#!* about those teams that are never in contention for anything but who can score the least amount of points?

  9. Are there too many D1 programs out there to support the talent that Division 1 athletics is supposed to attract? Would the wrestling community be better off limiting the number of Division 1 programs to, say, 40 in order to keep the best talent there, so then as to focus on growth in D2, D3, NAIA, but that aren't going to be in the running for the likes of the kids in the Intermat/Mat Talk/Flo rankings? Without me citing names, we all know to which programs I am referring. 


    From a fan perspective, there seems to be very little support for teams who "don't produce" on a regular basis Is it time to significantly "thin the herd," so to speak and let "the cream rise to the top," to quote a well known coach?

  10. I like the idea but I don’t know about automatically qualifying ALL teams from the get go. An athletic director might look at a smaller wrestling program that is always knocked out in the first round by Penn State, Iowa, NC State, etc while not getting anyone to Nationals and say “why do we continue to fund this program?”


    I understand where you're coming from, but I would like to believe that most ADs know where their teams stand in the grand scheme of each sport and do not need a tournament of this magnitude to tell them that information.


    That said, with the first weekend being that only the two winners from each region move on, every other team is guaranteed at least two duals (and maybe more, if the coaches schedule them... though I am using my more of my kids level/high school mind on that one).

  11. i get you have to have this years results and perhaps transfers...tho you could transfer those points...


    but in your first post you have it seeded based on total points... not returning points. am i missing something?


    we just need to reserve the arenas ahead of time... just like they do with the tourney...


    we know 4 years into the future where it's going to be.


    Agreed on the accommodations. And, as I mentioned, if, for example, we can get that AMAZING Iowa fan base to travel to a place like Atlanta or have the Ohio State fans flood the KFC Yum! Center (I wish I were making that up) in Louisville, KY, this could mean investment in and growth for the sport of collegiate wrestling on the Division 1 level. 


    The reason I have been sticking with previous year point totals is that it's far easier to follow from a fan perspective; there's no deciphering what teams lost how many points and who transferred where. "Why is Penn State dualing Fresno State in the first round? Oh! I see last year's results; one versus sixty-four." There's no confusion involved.


    Also, not every team is going to be the same strength from year to year. I think this is where one is likely to see upsets occurring from teams that might be better dual teams than tournament teams and it adds another level of suspense to the tournament. Did Fresno currently stand a chance against Penn State this season? Obviously not, but next year they're going to be even better and more competitive than they were this season, so it makes for a more interesting match up going into 2018-19. Maybe in 2020, with this tournament and a different seed, you see the Bulldogs sneak into the Sweet 16 or Elite Eight. Maybe I am wrong.

  12. I’m sure it is a 6 figure role. They want to start a real program.


    6 figures isn’t what it used to be, even in wrestling. Are there any real D1 wrestling programs with a head coach making less than that? By real I mean a team that has an occasional AA and routinely qualifies a couple of guys at a minimum.


    One (presumably) on the way up is Jeremy Spates at Southern Illinois at Edwardsville. In 2016, Spates made $61,198.40. I am going to guess he didn't make an extra $40K on camps.


    In the same year, Doug Schwab made $121,601.


    Terry Steiner made $105,000 in his first season with the Bulldogs two years ago.

  13. go with returning ncaa points instead of last  years team scores.



    I'd like to think this is possible, but here are my arguments in opposition to your idea as of today:


    1. You want to have the tournament set as early as possible for scheduling/venue selection for the following season.


    2. The new transfer rules make it really hard to do just that in a reasonable amount of time and meet number one.


    3. I like the idea that last year's place winners have to defend something, but that another team could bump them off and change the order. Sure, we all know when a team is losing strength, but not all of us are superfans of the sport and to a lot of folks (fringe folks and others who might be interested), that adds the element of "instability" that you see in the NCAA basketball tournament and gets people to watch or check up on scores when they might not have otherwise.


    4. To bolster point three, if you want to win, you have to win out. Period.


    5. Maybe the NWCA and NCAA strategically set two of the two day regional tournaments each year in places where they want to grow the sport... For example, maybe they every year find two host schools they want to (re-)establish programs and contract with them for the tournament. Here are some examples: Syracuse U., Boston U., U of Louisville, Clemson U. Georgia Tech, Florida State U., U of Kansas, U of Texas at Austin, U of New Mexico, U of Washington and Washington State U, among others. Invite the university president, board of trustees, AD and a bunch of dignitaries to come and schmooze them.

  14. muay thai and jui jitsu have seen more growth not because it is easier to digest for a noob, but because it is more accessible. Go check out an mma training forum and you will find countless people looking to learn how to wrestle in their 20's and 30's, but there is nothing for them. On the other hand there is no shortage of jui jitsu and muy thai gyms. That said, I am unaware of how jui jitsu has grown as a spectator sport. Probably not much at all, but this sport is lacking where wrestling is already well established with our college system.


    I was talking more about the youth levels of the sports, not the adult levels. Where youth wrestling is losing ground, I am confident in saying that BJJ and other similar combat sports are and have been gaining some steam. That and these folks you mention who are becoming involved as adults are likely to involve their kids, too.

  15. Does anyone see this as of right now a 6 figure position?


    If it is under 6 figures, what big name coach in a very weak geographical area is going to want to start a new program from scratch?


    People need to be realistic.


    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


    Maybe there are incentives tied to this gig?


    Also, does anyone know if this position is similar to the Fresno State job in that X-amount of student-wrestlers must come from a specific geographic region, specifically Arkansas. I have to imagine that the AD understands the landscape of Arkansas wrestling as it stands now, specifically when thinking long term.


    Also, Erisman had his fingers in those eastern states, and Oklahoma. My guess is that the first few rosters have a good mix of kids from PA, NJ, some Ohio, New York and Illinois and some Oklahoma, given its proximity. I am going to guess, too, that you're going to see more of those kids from Texas taking a good, hard look at UALR.


    How many transfers from four year schools who might want to start in D1 sooner than later will they have? Does Erisman hit the NJCAA circuit, too? The 125 from Wyoming (by way of Uzbekistan) would have been a really nice get, as would have the 133 from Iowa Central, who is a native of Georgia (the state, not the country).

  16. I was in St. Louis last week, hanging with this board's own killdozer (supremely excellent dude, by the way), and he mentioned an idea about changing the season and an idea about tournaments. He mentioned something about regionals and it had me thinking... what if the dual team national tournament included EVERY team in Division 1? How is that possible you ask? Well, let me tell you MY thoughts!


    1. Break the tournament up into four distinct regions. Instead of tying them to geographic locations, let's call them regions 1, 2, 3 and 4.


    2. Break the tournament up into two weekends. The first weekend would feature (using the 76 teams in D1 as of the 2017-18 season) four, 19 team tournaments. The tournaments would have four rounds on the championship side of the bracket and would be designed to find the two finalists from each Region. Those two undefeated teams would not compete until weekend two, bringing the top eight teams from the four dual tournaments to another site two weeks later. The rest of the teams would finish the tournament out, guaranteeing each team at least two duals on the weekend, and maybe more if the coaches wanted to find a way to make it happen.


    For an example of this, see the NWCA Multi-Divisional Dual brackets for everyone except Division 3.


    3. Not unlike the NCAA basketball tournament, teams in each Region will be seeded 1-16, with proper seeding and the top four teams garnering the top seeds in each of the four regional tournaments. In this case, seeding is based on point scoring from the previous year's national tournament (let's use 2018, for example: found here). As you can see, Penn State would face Fresno State out of the gates in Region 1. In Region 2, Ohio State would face Cal Poly. Region 3 would feature Iowa versus Binghamton and Region 4 would start off with Michigan vs. Oklahoma U.


    4. As I mentioned, since there are 19 teams per Region (as of the 2017-18 season), for those final 12 teams outside of the top 64, three teams are randomly drawn into each Regional site.


    5. Those top eight teams would convene in a centralized location, say, Chicago (selfish me) and determine the top eight teams for that dual year.


    What does any of this accomplish? Here are my thoughts:

    1. Every single team is now included and has a stake in the game. That makes programs, colleges/university ADs and the NCAA very happy.


    2. It (typically) breaks up the traditional powers. While that will change year to year, you see no more than four B10 teams in any of the brackets. 


    3. Who can be the "bracket buster" each year? Yeah, I know... this isn't basketball. That said, what teams wouldn't relish the chance at making the "Elite Eight" by knocking off a highly ranked team? Maybe a non-traditional power each year can take advantage of injuries or lack of a gas tank... maybe?


    4. Teams that might not normally face one another are now facing one another in this format. It's great for the sport's fan base. Here are some of the rat tail match ups that I came up with at random to give you an idea of what I mean (not all are sexy, if any):


    Region 1:

    Gardner Webb face Northern Illinois and feeds into Lock Haven

    Northwestern faces Citadel and feeds into the winner of Eastern Michigan and Bloomsburg


    Region 2:

    SIUE and Stanford go at it with Pitt waiting in the wings

    Bono's Wisconsin team duals Davidson, the winner then seeing Rider

    Cornell and Air Force go at it, with Franklin & Marshall on the receiving end


    Region 3:

    Oklahoma State goes against VMI, who then feeds into the winner of Michigan State and Brown

    SUNY Buffalo takes on Columbia U, the winner moving on to see Duke U.


    Region 4:

    Cleveland State face Iowa State and feeds into UNorth Carolina

    Sacred Heart duals Clarion, with the winner going up against South Dakota State

    Oregon State battles Ohio U and the winner takes on Utah Valley


    4. Each year is something new! It's not always the same old teams dualing one another and it offers (somewhat of) an element of surprise.


    My final thought on this is that you could even do away with conference tournaments and go to this exact same medium for individual tournaments. You place the top eight wrestlers with the one wild card per weight going to the last kid who lost to the young man who finishes seventh in each bracket. Though the teams in each region are based on last year's results, the individuals are seeded based on individual criteria.


    Here would be the example of the teams in each region (again, based on 2017-18 results):


    Region 1                        Region 2                         Region 3                           Region 4

    1.Penn State                  2. Ohio State                   3. Iowa                               4. Michigan

    64. Fresno State            63. Cal Poly                     62. Binghamton                 61. Oklahoma

    32. Virginia                     31. Pitt                             30. West Virginia               29. Purdue

    33. CSU Bakersfield      34. Stanford                     35. Drexel                          36. Edinboro

    17. Minnesota                DI. SIUE                          19. Wyoming                      20. UNC

    48. Chattanooga            18. Wisconsin                  46. North Dakota State      DI. Cleveland State

    DI. Gardner Webb          DI. Davidson                   14. Oklahoma State           45. Iowa State

    49. Northern Illinois        47. Rider                          DI. VMI                              13. Illinois

    16. Lock Haven              15. Lehigh                        DI. Michigan State            52. Bucknell

    9. Nebraska                    50. Appalachian State     51. Brown                          12. South Dakota State

    56. American                  10. Arizona State             11. Rutgers                       DI. Sacred Heart

    24. Northern Iowa           55. Indiana                       54. Old Dominion             53. Clarion

    41. Penn                         23. Kent State                  22. Duke                           21. Oregon State

    25. Northwestern            42. Army                           DI. SUNY-Buffalo             DI. Ohio U

    DI. Citadel                       26. Princeton                   43. Columbia U                44. Utah Valley

    40. Eastern Michigan      39. Northern Colorado     27. Maryland                    28. Hofstra

    DI. Bloomsburg               7. Cornell                         38. Central Michigan        37. Navy

    8. Virginia Tech               DI. Air Force                     6. Missouri                       5. NC State

    57. Campbell                  58. Franklin & Marshall     59. George Mason          60. Harvard


    DI = Drawn In (finished outside of top 64)


    The teams (and their strengths) in each region change from year to year, and it keeps the 



  • Create New...