Jump to content

ironmonkey

Members
  • Content Count

    513
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by ironmonkey

  1. They aren't that far off really. They have had multiple AAs the last few seasons and their dual meet attendance and atmosphere are great. New Brunswick as a destination for out of state recruits who don't value the access to NYC probably works against them a bit but not much the coaches can do about that.
  2. I was thinking about football. When a football team no longer plays meaningful games after locking up the playoff spot, they rest their starters. Do fans care less about those games because the games don't matter or because the stars aren't playing? I suppose preseason exemplifies the same thing, whichever it is. Though to be fair, that is an example of a professional sport. Random thoughts. I totally get wrestlers missing matches. Especially following the holidays. It stinks but I get it. Peak performance at the right time is the name of the game for better or worse. I do think if duals had some bigger meaning for the teams we would likely see less wrestlers taking matches off **when the outcome isn't certain** but I doubt the problem would go away entirely. In the case of Iowa vs Northwestern, it wouldn't have made any difference at all for the teams as an example. Changing seeding criteria might help but all the ways I envision seem to have their own problems.
  3. That seems reasonable to assume and you are likely right. I'm not sure viewership from home is a shot in the arm though. I agree with your point about stars attracting attention but I'm just not sure the example illustrated it well. One of the things Rutgers has done really well is attract a local fan base enthusiastic about the sport with few if any stars outside of Ashnault.
  4. Rutgers was doing really well in attendance before Suriano arrived
  5. I don't have Flo (I did years ago and all the yelling by the announcers made me crazy so I cancelled). So to me, this seems a bit off to blame Flo for hyping matches wrestling fans know are coming and are excited about regardless of Flo. Wrestling fans can and do follow college wrestling without Flo (like the Big Ten network and their plus offering for instance). Flo isn't responsible for dual meets not mattering or coaches sitting guys. Someone above suggested hyping the dual rather than the individual matchups but the duals iare the individual matchups when team wins and losses don't really matter.
  6. Breaking attendance records is great but is it evidence that the duals matter as much as they are promoted and made to be more entertaining? I guess we would have to clarify what we mean by matter. I suppose you are absolutely right but that doesn't mean I am wrong. I'm not trying to be clever with semantics either. I agree with you based on what you posted above. I think this is more or less true too. I didn't imply teams don't care. Nevertheless, there is a lot of evidence that teams care less than they do in other sports about the regular season and that they possibly/arguably care less than they did in the past within this sport about it. I wasn't looking for a national duals debate. You are right, saying that they don't matter is an overgeneralization and an exaggeration. I guess it would be more accurate to say they matter less than they could. If coaches are prioritizing individuals preparation for the end of the season over winning dual meets (which makes perfect sense), I am not sure flip flopping weights which may or may not have starters on the mat makes duals any more interesting and might even make it confusing to fans. When I said matter, I meant it in the context of winning and losing as a team. Nevertheless, that is not an all inclusive perspective and I stand corrected.
  7. interesting. I don't know what this would do though considering teams don't really seem to prioritize winning duals. It seems like change for the sake of change that might even make things more confusing for all but the most attentive fans.
  8. Maybe. I suppose there are people in other places who have never heard of Rutgers. Would a name change convince this type of recruit to consider this school? I don't see it but there is a vocal group of local fans who swear it would help with recruiting.
  9. I definitely agree a name change would do next to nothing for enrollment and recruiting, this has been an ongoing topic. It isn't new. I have heard it for a few years from Rutgers football fans.
  10. While it sounds almost ridiculous, it is a significant improvement. Rutgers teams during the start of Goodale's tenure were notoriously soft. I'm not sure you need to shoot guns at opposing benches but the guys are fighting at least and have a chip on their shoulders. As for inclusion in the big ten, Rutgers showed fairly recently they can be a top 10-20ish team in football. All it took was a coaching change to unfortunately dismantle what was built but it can be done again.
  11. I get the frustration but wasn't Lizak-Suriano a skin issue? is that really a duck? I skipped out on a gathering for the playoff game to tune in to specifically watch that match so I was let down too. Curse of the wresting fan sitting home alone to watch a matchup that doesn't even happen while friends and/or family get together to watch a different sport. Nevertheless I assumed the skin problem was legit. It hadn't occurred to me it was a duck especially considering Lizak has a history of wrestling tough no matter his seed at the end of the year. I'm not entirely sure sitting wrestlers who need time off physically, mentally or emotionally is something new, but the total disregard for the value of winning as a team might be. Maybe backups used to be more capable or we saw coaches juggle lineups more to at least attempt to win? Nobody is even pretending anything but the end of the season matters now. I don't think Stoll wrestles. The mission to beat everyone on or off planet has been suspended.
  12. I think I agree with this sentiment. I root for the local teams but outside of that I just have wrestlers I enjoy watching and/or rooting against.
  13. Didn't he toss his headgear after the finals last year? I may be mistaken. Regardless, he seems like a decent guy. I don't buy into what people say or don't say during interviews much though. People have learned to say what they think certain fans want to hear. I was only pinned once in college but I did get teched a few times. I wouldn't have wanted help getting up. I remember extending a hand to hopelessly outmatched opponents at the high school level because it was awkward. Being on the receiving end of that in college was a humbling experience. I wouldn't refuse it but I get why some would in the heat of the moment. I think a good sign of sportsmanship is the handshake following the match. How many barely shake, slap the hand, refuse to face their opponent or look at them following a loss for instance? They are already running off the mat while the ref holds them there in an awkward tug of war. There are exceptions where bad calls are involved and wrestlers just need to get away and make sense of it but most of the time it is just an athlete upset about losing. Composing yourself for the handshake while your opponent's hand is raised shows more to me than winning and running all over the mat thanking opposing coaches and refs with handshakes which I never really understood.
  14. I hope Gravina can get back to form by the end of the season.
  15. People do grow and/or he wouldn't be the first wrestler to possibly decide against cutting weight. It's not like 33 is a vacant weight class. It is arguably a tougher run to the finals at least. Not sure this easier way out narrative holds up.
  16. Lack of training and missed time right before the end of the year crunch could definitely affect both his energy levels and overall performance. Though I tend to agree that he looked like himself, we can't accurately judge what went on in his head during the semi and final with no other national tournament experience to compare it to. On a different note, I love that Lee was beatable after midlands last year, unbeatable after nationals, and is now beatable again. Maybe he hates wrestling during the holidays or peaks when it matters most. I wouldn't bet against him (made that mistake last year) and I am a Rutgers/Suriano fan!
  17. Like most of you, I have been following this story since it broke. It has been interesting to note differing opinions of family, friends, and coworkers based on race, age, education, and sex. Granted, this sample is biased in countless ways, not the least of which is nearly all are from one area and are filtered through me; far from empirical evidence for much of anything. Nevertheless, it was interesting to note that people who on the surface share at least some common variables had widely different perceptions of the event. I admit what I initially thought seemed like a clear case of media manipulation of facts to "create" a story, is more to many people. When it first broke, I assumed the story would eventually be debunked as junk by the wrestling community itself. Clearly I was wrong. I have seen some questionable social science offered as explanations for certain perceptions of the incident. With all of the sociology being thrown around, I have been waiting for someone to draw upon psychology to offer additional insight. I am surprised nobody has mentioned confirmation bias and belief perseverance when seeing rational fact based arguments discarded in favor of possible explanations. Confirmation Bias occurs from the direct influence of desire on beliefs. When people would like a concept to be true, they end up believing it to be true. This error leads the individual to stop gathering information when the evidence gathered to a point confirms the views one would like to be true. Once the view is formed, information is embraced that confirms it while other information that casts doubt on it is ignored or rejected. Confirmation bias strongly suggests we don't perceive circumstances objectively. We pick and choose data that confirms of prejudices. This can often explain how seemingly neutral circumstances can be interpreted differently by different people. Belief perseverance is the tendency to cling to one's initial belief despite receiving new information that contradicts or disconfirms the basis of that belief. In other words, people tend to hold on to their beliefs even when it appears they shouldn't. Conclusions drawn from experience during different circumstances bias our beliefs during the specific one being examined. The interesting catch here is that it potentially applies to people on both sides of the argument and/or even those somewhere in between. With that said, comparisons to Jim Crow laws and Auschwitz, both of which were offered during this discussion, seem outlandish to me. I am not overly interested in discussing institutional racism on a wrestling forum though I certainly think it exists (though I dispute it as evidence that particular races are or aren't more or less guilty of racism. If racism is objectively wrong as a moral absolute, it follows that it applies to everyone. Logically. Otherwise it isn't absolute.). Respectfully, shouldn't the burden of proof lie on those making accusations rather than on those defending against the accusations? I understand this isn't a court of law so we don't have to presume innocence, but if racism is a charge we want taken seriously, is it fair to make accusations based on suspicion without proof? I have yet to see any proof that this was a racist incident. I only see proof that some perceived it as racially insensitive which makes sense in retrospect while others suspect sinister intentions motivated a ref they likely don't know based on their personal experiences and or preconceived ideas. The ref may very well be racist and may have been motivated to enforce the rule on proper hair cover because of it, but is there any proof of this *in this incident*? Those focusing on the rules and the application of the rules may not be saying racism didn't play a part and/or doesn't exist. Rather, they likely are focusing on what they see as the only facts to be analyzed to determine if the argument has merit. I don't think they are saying the ref isn't a racist. I think they are saying there is no way to know based on the evidence which conversely explains why they are arguing against the racism charge. On a more relevant note considering the forum, I assumed based on my personal experience these hair rules were applied more to white wrestlers than other races. I admit having wrestled in the 90s though, haven't been to a high school match in nearly a decade, and attend duals for two specific colleges which both are located in the same area. Is the charge that the rule is affecting some races more than others accurate?
  18. No worries. Intent is often lost in text. I understand what you meant now. Yikes. Whatever truth there was in this incident is long lost at this point. Now seems like a good time for me to stop posting about this. I hope the kid does well this season and doesn't let this incident distract him from his goals (on and off the mat)!!
  19. How is the rule unfair or racially biased? It doesn't target any specific race. You could argue that the rule is unfairly enforced. However, I see no objective argument that the rule itself is racially biased. Any athlete can compete with long hair if they have the proper equipment. I don't think the ref from the prior week is a hero or a villain. I assumed he allowed the athlete to compete because he didn't want him to miss out on the competition which was early in the season and not a major tournament, but I won't pretend to understand what motivates other people without knowing them. It never occurred to me he was making some sort of social stand.
  20. I'm not defending the ref. If what he was accused of earlier is true, he should have been removed from the position which I said in my initial post. Not only to punish him, but to prevent a situation like this where his judgement would be questioned. I am loathing the justice by mob rule without facts. The head official in the state already stated the rule was applied correctly. The rule is question is documented. You are right that the mob doesn't care about the rule but that stinks. Not for the refs sake if he is a known racist, but because it shows the truth doesn't matter. Anyone can step in a landmine and be tarred and feathered via social media. Look at the poor trainer for instance who neither made the rule nor enforced it. She was simply assisting the wrestler who wanted to compete and now she is being attacked and accused of racism. I don't think this kind of thing is good for anyone even if it is the reality we currently live in. When governors are weighing in after reacting emotionally to edited clips and false narratives without investigating the rules or circumstances of the clips, isn't that scary?
  21. Semi related - I always thought the shave rules were sort of discriminatory based on pseudofoliculitis barbae. If someone looks like this after shaving, should they be forced to do it? Since one particular race is known to have a higher probability of suffering from shaving related ailments, I am surprised nobody has taken issue with it. Can you get a shave exemption from a doctor? I remember shaving dry a number of times in college and I had sensitive skin and it annoyed me. I imagine if my neck looked like this after, it would have really annoyed me and potentially seemed unfair.
  22. This seems to be a far more clear issue than you are making it out to be. There is a rule in place. The rule wasn't followed either willfully or accidently. The athlete was given time to be in compliance or forfeit so the rule was enforced objectively. The athlete chose to deal with the problem the best he could in the moment and chose to have his hair cut. Nobody could forsee this turning into what it did. The athlete wasn't put on display or purposely shamed. The trainer wasn't taking delight in attacking the young mans identity. This is all coming from people who have never wrestled being outraged over a clip they didn't understand. That outrage ends when they log off the internet. If they log off the internet. Are you suggesting we cater to the mad herd that is twitter in deciding when to follow rules and when not to? Not just in wrestling but in life? Is Twitter really our first concern?
  23. Props to the kid for keeping focus and winning! Seems to be an afterthought but should be highlighted. Refs using racial slurs at social gatherings with other officials shouldn't be allowed to continue to officiate if there is sufficient evidence of the usage. Past incidents shouldn't be used as evidence of latent motivations that can't be proven. The rules are the rules and the ref evidently was just enforcing them which is his job. Any other narrative isn't very objective. Unfortunately most news sources are running with narratives that ignore investigating the equipment issue that led to the hair cutting altogether. It is sad that a kid is in the middle of a story blowing up on Twitter where thousands of "adults" will argue endlessly. I imagine that would be super confusing at that age and impossible to ignore. I hope his coaches find a way to reframe all this into a positive growing experience for him.
  24. I bet Kentucky Mudflap would be interested.
×
×
  • Create New...