Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tigerfan

RTC's - Wild, Wild West

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, tigerfan said:

http://www.trackwrestling.com/PortalPlayer.jsp?videoId=1102175132&TIM=1548180225054

Check out Missouri's Associate Head Coach Alex Clemsen's comments regarding RTC's.  Starts at about the 28 min mark.

Without naming names or being directly critical, his sentiments were decidedly less than enthusiastic, it sounded to me.  He came about as close to crossing the line as he possibly could, without blatantly calling people cheaters.  I wonder if that RTC tension is widespread in D1 and polarizing the coaches? 

Pretty sure Missouri still has a RTC, at least in title. I think Waters is the only post-grad that trains there though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RTCs are great for our senior level wrestlers because they can earn a paycheck and it greatly expands our pool of athletes that are able to train full time.  I think they're a big part of why the US has done so well internationally lately.  That said, everybody knows that their primary reason for existence is to provide workout partners for the college athletes. The tension comes because everybody who has a well funded RTC pretends that's not why they exist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, steamboat_charlie v2 said:

People talk about lack of parity like it's a new thing... can someone please point out to me this golden age of parity when any team had a chance to win?  

RTC's will not bring down college wrestling, ruin the sport, or destroy competition.  What, was Mark Hall headed to CMU if not for that sweet sweet NLWC funding?

there used to be 300+ D1 teams.  There was parity back then (after Iowa).  There are only 3-5 teams now that can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.  RTCs are killing small programs.  the unintended consequence of the RTCs is a consolidation of resources and power. only a fool would deny this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, steamboat_charlie v2 said:

People talk about lack of parity like it's a new thing... can someone please point out to me this golden age of parity when any team had a chance to win?  

RTC's will not bring down college wrestling, ruin the sport, or destroy competition.  What, was Mark Hall headed to CMU if not for that sweet sweet NLWC funding?

Yes and no.  When you hear stories like NLWC offered Burroughs a boat load to train there, it forced Manning to fundraise even more just to keep him in Nebraska.

That extra money could've been used for another partner in Nebraska's RTC which of course adds to potential recruiting for Manning.

I've heard other things going on at NLWC like high school RTC eligible wrestlers are not really welcome in the room if PSU isn't interested in recruiting them (and when they beat some PSU backups in the room).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DrStrange said:

there used to be 300+ D1 teams.  There was parity back then (after Iowa).  There are only 3-5 teams now that can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.  RTCs are killing small programs.  the unintended consequence of the RTCs is a consolidation of resources and power. only a fool would deny this.

You're being intentionally obtuse, and you're conflating two different issues.  The concept of an RTC didn't even exist when programs were closing left and right.  

What's the +/- on D1 programs since the first RTC opened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DrStrange said:

there used to be 300+ D1 teams.  There was parity back then (after Iowa).  There are only 3-5 teams now that can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.  RTCs are killing small programs.  the unintended consequence of the RTCs is a consolidation of resources and power. only a fool would deny this.

I don't know that I could point to RTCs as "killing small programs" yet but I think that's a risk for sure. If an RTC is required for a program to be viable (I'd call "viable" as being able to produce an AA at least every couple of years) then the cost of running a program goes up and at least a few schools will toss in the towel.  But so far I don't think an RTC is required to be viable. It's required to be a championship level team but not every school has that as a goal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Boompa said:

Yes and no.  When you hear stories like NLWC offered Burroughs a boat load to train there, it forced Manning to fundraise even more just to keep him in Nebraska.

That extra money could've been used for another partner in Nebraska's RTC which of course adds to potential recruiting for Manning.

I've heard other things going on at NLWC like high school RTC eligible wrestlers are not really welcome in the room if PSU isn't interested in recruiting them (and when they beat some PSU backups in the room).

If they want to be scumbags that's their prerogative, I don't see a problem with either of the issues you listed though.  If our senior level athletes get paid more as a result, that's a nice unintended benefit.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gowrestle said:

One result of RTC’s is providing a place for guys who don’t accept that it is over a place to hang out for a while. Sure it’s good for USA wrestling and the local college teams, but for the guy that ends up going no where, delays his entry into the competitive job market. Of course the decision to hang on is a personal one, I would advise someone to learn as quickly as possible the chances of obtaining a World or Olympic medal. If the chance is remote, bail out and get a real job. 

it is not just about getting a medal at a worlds... it's about still being able to compete as long as you want to with no regrets... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Also, if we don't have a dual national championship, then all duals are pointless and should be canceled.  We are the only sport w 2 competition formats and thats stupid as ****.


Duals bring in significant money for the PSU slush fund so they are not pointless. Besides for the last 52 matches I kinda like them.

Individual sports (gymnastics, fencing, track and field, swimming, diving, bowling, golf, rifle, archery) tend to have 2 competition formats.

Team sports are jealous and promote individual tournaments (home run derby, dunk contests)!

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When some schools bring in 1M+ a year with their RTCs, and others bring in less than 50K a year, the gap between those who have and those who don't is destined to grow.  I do like the impact on the quality of wrestling, but long term it has me worried. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not really about whether or not RTC's are a "good" thing or not.  The evidence of our performance at the world level strongly suggests that RTC's have improved our overall success.  That is clearly a good thing.  The problem is the gray areas between RTC's and NCAA regulations.  Since there are so many gaps, those who have tremendous assets can exploit those gaps to a far greater degree and produce disproportionate success in the short term.  That success creates a legacy that might be impossible to overcome once the regulations catch up and the gaps are closed.  Kinda like a pyramid scheme, if you don't get in early, you'll never get rich.  The rich are getting massively richer while the rest struggle to keep up and their struggle will that much more difficult once/if regulations level the field.  In the interview, Clemsen states that in the last 4 or 5 years, Missouri has the 4th best average NCAA finish in the country, yet I doubt they've ever raised more than 100k in any given year for their RTC.  The disparity of wealth is huge between #1 and #4, yet alone the other 70 programs.  What is the point of limiting scholarships if not to provide a level playing field?  If that limit is circumscribed by RTC's, bad things are going to happen.  It's just a matter of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LJB said:

i am waiting for RTCs to start offering scholarships for elite wrestlers to only train the real styles while still getting that piece of paper... then we will be cooking with gas... 

This already happened at Northern Michigan with the Greco program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jchapman said:

This already happened at Northern Michigan with the Greco program.

Not NCAA. I would assume that the wrestlers there that get paid in some fashion would be henceforth ineligible to wrestle in the NCAA unless it goes into some kind of escrow similar to what Snyder must have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gimpeltf said:

Not NCAA. I would assume that the wrestlers there that get paid in some fashion would be henceforth ineligible to wrestle in the NCAA unless it goes into some kind of escrow similar to what Snyder must have done.

Correct, it was Greco, like I said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, jchapman said:

This already happened at Northern Michigan with the Greco program.

well, yeah... but, that is greco (my favorite style by far) and let's be honest... they haven't produced much in the way of success stories internationally... and i haven't heard much at all about the school in arkansas that started a greco program... but, that is not really my point... 

greco is the most popular style worldwide and this country (as a whole) is scared to death of it, so, let's take michigan out of the picture... 

i am waiting for a fix/yanni/brooks/lee wrestler who prefers free over stalling out and to just plainly state he isn't going to bother with folk anymore... ala pico... and an RTC to sponsor their education while they train exclusively the real styles... that will be the tipping point in my mind...

but, hopes dreams and aspirations...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I read through this thread I am reminded how people can't separate the different entities.

As wrestling fans, and as (mainly) Americans here, the general refrain seems to be that RTCs are great for Team USA and has helped get more medals.  And that may be true.

But that is a completely different issue and question than if RTCs are good for college wrestling.

USA Wrestling and NCAA Wrestling are not the same thing.  There are different focuses, different goals, and different funding sources.  And to lump them together and say that what is good for the goose is good for the gander is misguided in my opinion. Not all levels of wrestling serve the same purpose.

Something can be good for college wrestling and bad for USA Wrestling.  The inverse can also be true.  And I believe that it is.

Why is it the job of college programs (or more specifically their boosters) to subsidize Team USA athletes and coaches?

Why should there be work arounds to the competitive balance policies the NCAA member schools agreed to adhere to, even if there is a net benefit to USA Wrestling?

We talk about how great it is that Senior Level Athletes are getting paid.  But they aren't really getting paid for winning or competing.  They are getting paid for coaching and training college athletes.  The Living the Dream Medal Fund pays athletes for their senior level competition success.  But we have many and possibly even a majority of the RTC Senior Level athletes getting paid from clubs who don't even compete in a year.

The only thing the RTC model has done is allowed college boosters to get around coaching and training limits.  Yes, some high level athletes are getting paid to train, but that would be possible either way.  There have always been paid assistant coaching positions and a volunteer assistant coach funded by boosters.

Sure, Team USA is getting the services of coaches who get paid a lot more money than USA Wrestling can afford.  And larger groups of Senior Level Athletes are able to come together and train together creating multiple locations all over the country providing more than simply the Colorado Springs option.  But those athletes are only being funded to serve the college team.

Yes, this helps USA Wrestling.  But that doesn't mean it is good for college wrestling.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, LJB said:

well, yeah... but, that is greco (my favorite style by far) and let's be honest... they haven't produced much in the way of success stories internationally... and i haven't heard much at all about the school in arkansas that started a greco program... but, that is not really my point... 

greco is the most popular style worldwide and this country (as a whole) is scared to death of it, so, let's take michigan out of the picture... 

i am waiting for a fix/yanni/brooks/lee wrestler who prefers free over stalling out and to just plainly state he isn't going to bother with folk anymore... ala pico... and an RTC to sponsor their education while they train exclusively the real styles... that will be the tipping point in my mind...

but, hopes dreams and aspirations...

 

RTC's are funded by donors that are connected to a school. Those donors fund the RTCs so that their school does better at NCAAs. They aren't gonna want to fund guys to not wrestle in college.  That would be contrary to their purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i am pretty sure you and most everyone else are making a pure generalization about RTCs/donors end goals primarily because it fits the doom and gloom narrative that everyone chooses to have... 

too many with an excuse mentality...

and according to everyone whining about the RTCs, bringing in a kid on the elite level coming out of HS performs the same function that you are attributting to someone who just graduated and is able to continue competing with RTC help... it is still someone working out with kids from the school, so, what exactly is the difference?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pinnum said:

As I read through this thread I am reminded how people can't separate the different entities.

As wrestling fans, and as (mainly) Americans here, the general refrain seems to be that RTCs are great for Team USA and has helped get more medals.  And that may be true.

But that is a completely different issue and question than if RTCs are good for college wrestling.

USA Wrestling and NCAA Wrestling are not the same thing.  There are different focuses, different goals, and different funding sources.  And to lump them together and say that what is good for the goose is good for the gander is misguided in my opinion. Not all levels of wrestling serve the same purpose.

Something can be good for college wrestling and bad for USA Wrestling.  The inverse can also be true.  And I believe that it is.

Why is it the job of college programs (or more specifically their boosters) to subsidize Team USA athletes and coaches?

Why should there be work arounds to the competitive balance policies the NCAA member schools agreed to adhere to, even if there is a net benefit to USA Wrestling?

We talk about how great it is that Senior Level Athletes are getting paid.  But they aren't really getting paid for winning or competing.  They are getting paid for coaching and training college athletes.  The Living the Dream Medal Fund pays athletes for their senior level competition success.  But we have many and possibly even a majority of the RTC Senior Level athletes getting paid from clubs who don't even compete in a year.

The only thing the RTC model has done is allowed college boosters to get around coaching and training limits.  Yes, some high level athletes are getting paid to train, but that would be possible either way.  There have always been paid assistant coaching positions and a volunteer assistant coach funded by boosters.

Sure, Team USA is getting the services of coaches who get paid a lot more money than USA Wrestling can afford.  And larger groups of Senior Level Athletes are able to come together and train together creating multiple locations all over the country providing more than simply the Colorado Springs option.  But those athletes are only being funded to serve the college team.

Yes, this helps USA Wrestling.  But that doesn't mean it is good for college wrestling.   

 

Yes, but RTC's essentially boost the amount of coaches, training partners etc., on top of the positions you already spoke of. If a 125 freshman has the opportunity to have a light weight coach, two high level RTC athletes, and potentially an additional RTC coach to assist as well vs. 1 light weight coach enrolled with a university I'm probably going to side with the former. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, wrestlingphish said:

Would love to hear exactly how RTC's are pushing the boundaries even if it doesn't name names.

Like LHU125 stated, they increase the number of coaches and high level training partners in a given college room.  They also provide a conduit for additional equipment, facilities, etc.  And most controversially, rumors abound that they even augment available scholarship money with promises of delayed payments after graduation.  There are strict rules about all of these things at the NCAA level, but effectively enforcing the rules is almost impossible unless coaches, their conversations, and activities are monitored 24/7. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DrStrange said:

there used to be 300+ D1 teams.  There was parity back then (after Iowa).  There are only 3-5 teams now that can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.  RTCs are killing small programs.  the unintended consequence of the RTCs is a consolidation of resources and power. only a fool would deny this.

Title 9 killed small programs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, LHU125 said:

Yes, but RTC's essentially boost the amount of coaches, training partners etc., on top of the positions you already spoke of. If a 125 freshman has the opportunity to have a light weight coach, two high level RTC athletes, and potentially an additional RTC coach to assist as well vs. 1 light weight coach enrolled with a university I'm probably going to side with the former. 

I don't know what you mean by "side with the former" here?

What you described is the reality.  Which is great for that kid.  But it puts other programs at a disadvantage.  Every other 125 in the country without the same options available to them is suddenly at a disadvantage.

This is the whole reason the NCAA has coaching limits and scholarship limits.  The NCAA limits are designed to help foster an environment of competitive balance.  They specifically seek to prevent having a large staff and a ton of qualified athletes.  These RTC options makes those competitive balance rules moot.

And even if we assume that the scholarship situation is handled completely straight up, it has an impact on the decision making of recruits.

Program with a well funded RTC: "We want you to come here and workout with the best athletes in the world and all six of our coaches are going to work to get you to become a National Champion and Olympian.  But in order to ensure you have quality training partners we can't offer you a full-scholarship.  You will need to pay $3k a year."

Program without a well funded RTC: "We want you to come here and all three members of our staff are committed to getting you to the highest level possible.  We could see you becoming a National Champion in our program.  And to show our faith and commitment to you, we are prepared to offer you a full scholarship so you don't have to worry about paying for college."

This is a very real situation that happens.  And the reality is for many high caliber high school recruits, their families are use to paying $3k a year on their wrestling.  So the idea of getting into such a great training environment for only $3k a year and being able to take out student loans (often subsidized so there is no interest accrued while they are in school) isn't a big deal for them.  They are focused on wrestling championships.  Making $3k a year won't be hard to do when you're being given all the support in the world to succeed on the mat and in the classroom.

Now, this isn't unique to RTCs.  There have always been kids willing to pay their own way to go to the best programs and compete for the best coaches.  That part isn't new.  And that isn't a problem.  The difference is that there were NCAA limits designed to minimize this impact.  It is one thing to think one coach is better than another.  People have preferences and some people really want to compete for a certain coach or at a specific school, even if it means paying their way.  But what is new and unique is the addition of coaches to a program that are not technically at the program and the addition of training partners at a program that are not technically at a program.

The gulf in wrestling has merely grown.  Which isn't a good thing for college wrestling.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I'll ask the question again. What sort of regulations would one propose to even out RTC's?

A cap for budget spending? Limiting the amount of RTC athletes? Let the NCAA decide? (terrible idea in my opinion)

I know it is coming eventually but I'm not sure what options they really have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...