Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tommygun

National Duals: Dead?

Recommended Posts

You might not have noticed the Olympics dropping the sport, either.

 

Because the IOC is holding wrestling for ransom means the sport is dying? Wrestling isn't being kicked out of the Olympics due to the sport not being popular or that countries aren't participating.

 

71 countries represented at the Olympics, 177 countries with wrestling means the sport is dying??

 

You need to look into things before you make stupid statements about wrestling.

 

YES - It is exactly being kicked out because it isn't popular. Not because there aren't enough countries participating, not because there aren't enough wrestlers participating -- but because it isn't popular among VIEWERS.

 

The very same reason we're looking at a NCAA D1 wrestling dying as well... and now we've just eliminated what was an attempt to EXPAND wrestling. Was it perfect? No - absolutely not. But at least we were doing something more. That tournament that expanded wrestling has now been replaced by ... NOTHING but wishful thinking.

 

Make no mistake - wrestling is on the decline at the collegiate level, and obviously at the post-collegiate level. MMA has helped grow wrestling at the HS levels, now we need to find ways to take advantage of it. It isn't translating into the collegiate level yet.

 

Here's the thing... Do we wait and wait and wait, until we come up with the perfect formula? Or do we get out there and make something happen - and improve it as we go?

 

I'm tiring of complaints that 'this' is wrong or 'that' is wrong - and that we should wait and think it over and come up with something at a later date that makes more sense... with no plan for 'who' will come up with something better and 'when' they'll meet, and 'when' the deadline is for something better. It's not tackling the problem head on - it's excuses to avoid it. It sounds a lot like the guy who's busy this week, but will start working out 'next week'... as wrestlers, we don't think that way. As coaches and leaders, we shouldn't allow ourselves to think that way either. It's undisciplined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You might not have noticed the Olympics dropping the sport, either.

 

Because the IOC is holding wrestling for ransom means the sport is dying? Wrestling isn't being kicked out of the Olympics due to the sport not being popular or that countries aren't participating.

 

71 countries represented at the Olympics, 177 countries with wrestling means the sport is dying??

 

You need to look into things before you make stupid statements about wrestling.

 

YES - It is exactly being kicked out because it isn't popular. Not because there aren't enough countries participating, not because there aren't enough wrestlers participating -- but because it isn't popular among VIEWERS.

 

The very same reason we're looking at a NCAA D1 wrestling dying as well... and now we've just eliminated what was an attempt to EXPAND wrestling. Was it perfect? No - absolutely not. But at least we were doing something more. That tournament that expanded wrestling has now been replaced by ... NOTHING but wishful thinking.

 

Make no mistake - wrestling is on the decline at the collegiate level, and obviously at the post-collegiate level. MMA has helped grow wrestling at the HS levels, now we need to find ways to take advantage of it. It isn't translating into the collegiate level yet.

 

Here's the thing... Do we wait and wait and wait, until we come up with the perfect formula? Or do we get out there and make something happen - and improve it as we go?

 

I'm tiring of complaints that 'this' is wrong or 'that' is wrong - and that we should wait and think it over and come up with something at a later date that makes more sense... with no plan for 'who' will come up with something better and 'when' they'll meet, and 'when' the deadline is for something better. It's not tackling the problem head on - it's excuses to avoid it. It sounds a lot like the guy who's busy this week, but will start working out 'next week'... as wrestlers, we don't think that way. As coaches and leaders, we shouldn't allow ourselves to think that way either. It's undisciplined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The very same reason we're looking at a NCAA D1 wrestling dying as well... and now we've just eliminated what was an attempt to EXPAND wrestling. Was it perfect? No - absolutely not. But at least we were doing something more. That tournament that expanded wrestling has now been replaced by ... NOTHING but wishful thinking.

 

Ah, but the PSU and Iowa fans will argue that ticket sales at their respective venues show that the sport is growing and healthy.

 

Of course, when only those two programs are left in D-1, everybody will be happy - because then the NCAA tournament will essentially be a dual meet! Dual and turnament champs crowned in a single event! :P

 

(Pssst - who's next? Lock Haven?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LMAO at you BIG RED fans thinking the PSU "Train" will wreck let alone the thought it was a Maryland to Lehigh train!!!

 

P.S. Via D.C.!!!

 

Scribe, where DID you find that train wreck photo? :?:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You might not have noticed the Olympics dropping the sport, either.

 

Because the IOC is holding wrestling for ransom means the sport is dying? Wrestling isn't being kicked out of the Olympics due to the sport not being popular or that countries aren't participating.

 

71 countries represented at the Olympics, 177 countries with wrestling means the sport is dying??

 

You need to look into things before you make stupid statements about wrestling.

 

YES - It is exactly being kicked out because it isn't popular. Not because there aren't enough countries participating, not because there aren't enough wrestlers participating -- but because it isn't popular among VIEWERS.

 

The very same reason we're looking at a NCAA D1 wrestling dying as well... and now we've just eliminated what was an attempt to EXPAND wrestling. Was it perfect? No - absolutely not. But at least we were doing something more. That tournament that expanded wrestling has now been replaced by ... NOTHING but wishful thinking.

 

Make no mistake - wrestling is on the decline at the collegiate level, and obviously at the post-collegiate level. MMA has helped grow wrestling at the HS levels, now we need to find ways to take advantage of it. It isn't translating into the collegiate level yet.

 

Here's the thing... Do we wait and wait and wait, until we come up with the perfect formula? Or do we get out there and make something happen - and improve it as we go?

 

I'm tiring of complaints that 'this' is wrong or 'that' is wrong - and that we should wait and think it over and come up with something at a later date that makes more sense... with no plan for 'who' will come up with something better and 'when' they'll meet, and 'when' the deadline is for something better. It's not tackling the problem head on - it's excuses to avoid it. It sounds a lot like the guy who's busy this week, but will start working out 'next week'... as wrestlers, we don't think that way. As coaches and leaders, we shouldn't allow ourselves to think that way either. It's undisciplined.

 

 

Olympic wrestling wasn't kicked because it wasn't popular. It was kicked out due to poor FILA management, and a corrupt IOC who probably knew it could get some palms greased.

 

This quote from a flo wrestling article says it best.....

 

"The utter disbelief and, in turn, the efforts to rationalize it, obfuscates what this is all about: money.

 

Let’s not get it twisted. The IOC wants a payoff from Fila and from the big money wrestling aficionados that support the sport around the globe. American entrepreneurs that fronted the “Living the Dream” fund in the U.S. Wealthy tycoons in Russia. Oil barons in the Middle East that just so happen to be the best emerging wrestling powers (Iran took 3rd as a nation in London)."

 

This has nothing to do with popularity and all to do with the IOC getting paid off.

 

 

I think you are mistaken when it comes to collegiate wrestling being in the decline. 9 new teams being added for next season.

 

Wheeling Jesuit University in West Virginia (NCAA D II) (2013-14)

 

Alderson-Broaddus College in West Virginia (NCAA D II) (2013-14)

 

Cokker College (NCAA D II) (2013-14)

 

Ferrum College (NCAA D III) (2013-14)

 

Doane College (NAIA) (2013-14)

 

Lindenwood-Belleville (NAIA) (2013-14)

 

Graceland Univ. (NAIA) (2013-14)

 

Northeastern Oklahoma Comm. College (NJCCA) (2013-14)

 

SUNY -Sullivan (NJCAA) (2013-14)

 

Hardly a decline. Is it struggling at the divison I level, yes it is, but other divisons are growing. I don't see the decline in other divisions.

 

In short, I disagree with your statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"YES - It is exactly being kicked out because it isn't popular. Not because there aren't enough countries participating, not because there aren't enough wrestlers participating -- but because it isn't popular among VIEWERS."

 

This comment has me curious too.

 

So EVERY SINGLE sport that remains in the olympics is more popular amoung viewers than wrestling? Every one of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"YES - It is exactly being kicked out because it isn't popular. Not because there aren't enough countries participating, not because there aren't enough wrestlers participating -- but because it isn't popular among VIEWERS."

 

This comment has me curious too.

 

So EVERY SINGLE sport that remains in the olympics is more popular amoung viewers than wrestling? Every one of them?

 

In London, Archery was reported as being the most watched Olympic sport:

 

http://espn.go.com/olympics/summer/2012 ... e-networks

 

I found this IOC report from after the 2004 games that was pretty interesting, since this is when FILA voted to make the radical changes. The wrestling begins on page 67.

 

http://www.olympic.org/Documents/Report ... rt_953.pdf

 

Interesting to see on page 70 what the IOC thought of FILA's strategic planning and on page 72, popularity by TV.

 

The following article, again is dated, tries to rank sports in popularity. The data presented is the average number of articles per publication for a period of two weeks before the Games, during the Games and a further two weeks after the Athens 2004 Olympic Games (from 30 July to 12 September 2004 inclusive). The sample was 67 publications from 25 countries that were selected to be representative of the global coverage.

 

http://www.topendsports.com/world/lists ... ympics.htm

 

What is interesting is Archery ranked pretty low in this media index after the 2004 games but did something over the course of 2 cycles to become very popular (TV) in 2012.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"YES - It is exactly being kicked out because it isn't popular. Not because there aren't enough countries participating, not because there aren't enough wrestlers participating -- but because it isn't popular among VIEWERS."

 

This comment has me curious too.

 

So EVERY SINGLE sport that remains in the olympics is more popular amoung viewers than wrestling? Every one of them?

 

In London, Archery was reported as being the most watched Olympic sport:

 

 

I found this IOC report from after the 2004 games that was pretty interesting, since this is when FILA voted to make the radical changes. The wrestling begins on page 67.

 

http://www.olympic.org/Documents/Report ... rt_953.pdf

 

Interesting to see on page 70 what the IOC thought of FILA's strategic planning and on page 72, popularity by TV.

 

The following article, again is dated, tries to rank sports in popularity. The data presented is the average number of articles per publication for a period of two weeks before the Games, during the Games and a further two weeks after the Athens 2004 Olympic Games (from 30 July to 12 September 2004 inclusive). The sample was 67 publications from 25 countries that were selected to be representative of the global coverage.

 

http://www.topendsports.com/world/lists ... ympics.htm

 

What is interesting is Archery ranked pretty low in this media index after the 2004 games but did something over the course of 2 cycles to become very popular (TV) in 2012.

 

As I stated here, Archery got a boost due to pop-culture. A flash in the pan that was huge for them as the timing was perfect. Remember that hollywood's global distribution is now the majority of their business.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=26470&start=25. (Mobile)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

YES - It is exactly being kicked out because it isn't popular. Not because there aren't enough countries participating, not because there aren't enough wrestlers participating -- but because it isn't popular among VIEWERS.

 

It's hard to increase the number of viewers when the IOC forces the sport to eliminate weight classes, makes the tournament last only one day and the tv networks relegate wrestling to an unheard of channel that most people don't have access to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you pinnum; however, when you look at the reports submitted by the sport's governing bodies to the IOC, you can see a marked increase in popularity in Archery, well before the Hunger Games came out. Much of this is due to FITA's strategic vision from 2004 to 2008. They increased exposure, media contracts, their program ect...FILA's strategic vision was pretty much status quo.

 

These reports identify the top 3 initiatives to develop their sport. This is an example from 2005-2008.

 

FITA (Archery)

1. MEAC (Middle East Archery Centre) – the MEAC was opened in Cairo in 2006 and is the FITA’s first archery centre. The Centre has hired a world class coach who has educated other coaches and prepared national teams for FITA major events and the 2008 Olympic Games, with participants of all levels coming from all continents. The FITA can now offer longer and more targeted training camps and courses for coaches and judges, something which especially benefits developing countries.

2. Regional/continental assistance – specific programmes have been designed for groups of countries where archery still requires development: Latin America, Africa, Maghreb, Oceania, the Mediterranean area and Russian speaking countries. Two development agents have been hired for West Africa and Oceania. Related programmes organised by the FITA include: archery equipment workshops from local products, development of the national sport structure and coaching education. The FITA has also organised equipment donations, training camps, etc. Several of these programmes were sponsored by different donors, such as foundations, the IOC, the JFA and the UNICEF.

3. Athletes’ scholarships – promising archers from developing countries (in particular Latin America and Russian speaking countries) are awarded with scholarships so that they can compete internationally. This programme is also supported by different donors.

 

FILA: (2 of these were also wrestling's intitatives for developing the sport prior to the 2004 games).

1. Competition mats and equipment have been sent free-of-charge to developing national federations;

2. Coaches have been sent to developing countries to provide long-term training courses ;

3. International training centres covered wholly by FILA have been created by FILA in Africa, America, Asia and Europe.

 

http://www.olympic.org/Documents/Commis ... IAD_EN.pdf

 

While Hollywood certainly significantly and positively impacted archery's popularity for 2012, I'd also submit that their governing body was also being a lot more proactive developing world-wide interest of the sport while FILA was content with the norm. FILA stated after Beijing "The FILA states that the intensity of wrestling matches has improved significantly due to the introduction of a direct elimination competition format and a new scoring process."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what better way to make sure things stay status quo than to boycott the "competition". Just goes to show how obtuse some folks in the wrestling community can be. All that was needed to get the NCAA to sanction the national duals, pay them a sanctioning fee, and the NCAA could have mandated all teams invited have to attend. At least that's my opinion on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree. Was just pointing out that the boost was largely inflated. I do know a lot of the archers ended up making good money providing instructional camps after the olympics to kids due to the film. It was kind of the perfect storm. But I do agree that they were doing all the right things before hand to help move in that direction.

 

You've seen this with other sports, and as much as people like to make fun of the likes of 'Issaka the Otter' and 'Eric the Eel' (worth looking up on youtube if anyone doesn't know about them) they have done a lot for their national bodies and the sport. There was a great follow up article on Eric (maybe before Beijing) and it was clear it was a huge success.

(Mobile)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly a one-weekend, 16-team event at MSG, according to Andy Hamilton:

 

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/articl ... ?Frontpage

 

Interesting...I think even a National Duals without the three biggest draws is better than no National Duals, and frankly, I think this may be the one way to get the "Big Three" back to the table.

 

Grapple in the Garden was a big success this past season - go for two?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few comments. I have always preferred the current Nationals scoring method for the team race. In a dual meet, if you lose a match, you get no points, even if it is a #1 versus #2 matchup. And the winner of 2 unranked men gets the same credit as if a #2 beats a #1. I do not like that as much as seeing how well someone can fight back through the consolation brackets, if necessary. Penn State did need extra points from non-studs to win this last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny to see some of you that just won't admit to being wrong. This version of National Duals was a failure, and you want to blame it on a few coaches who didn't cooperate with a poor plan. This trash was pushed down our throats in countless threads over quite a few forums and I read all kinds of nonsense about how the current team race was irrelevant.

This season proved you all wrong, it was relevant. Fans did care. I'm sorry that Lock Haven, or for Scribe's sake Cornell didn't have the muscle to be a player this year. PSU wasn't a player from 1953 until recently and I never cried about changing the format so they would have a chance to beat Iowa......

Time for a new argument. Move on now and let's get behind something that doesn't tamper with the greatest tournament in this sport or any other. It's what we should have done from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's funny to see some of you that just won't admit to being wrong. This version of National Duals was a failure, and you want to blame it on a few coaches who didn't cooperate with a poor plan. This trash was pushed down our throats in countless threads over quite a few forums and I read all kinds of nonsense about how the current team race was irrelevant.

This season proved you all wrong, it was relevant. Fans did care. I'm sorry that Lock Haven, or for Scribe's sake Cornell didn't have the muscle to be a player this year. PSU wasn't a player from 1953 until recently and I never cried about changing the format so they would have a chance to beat Iowa......

Time for a new argument. Move on now and let's get behind something that doesn't tamper with the greatest tournament in this sport or any other. It's what we should have done from the start.

 

We had better damn well tamper with what we're doing now. It is NOT working as it is.

 

You call efforts for improvement "trash". Not to be too harsh, but you're basically saying what others have actually DONE isn't good enough for you. Yet everybody else has done NOTHING, and have NOTHING to offer that is better except criticism of a bunch of people who have worked hard to put something together and get it DONE.

 

The Nat Duals weren't perfect - far from it - anyone can criticize, that's easy (and popular.) But except as being critics - what have the critics offered that is BETTER?

 

I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I'm simply trying to point out what seems obvious. We, as a wrestling community, need to act. The Nat Duals should be viewed as a significant attempt to act - successful in some ways, less successful in others. And we should now be focused on what the next act is going to be - and that we can get behind to save and grow our favorite sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds to me like Grapple in the Garden, or whatever we want to call it, is a premier event, but not National Duals. It can't be without Penn St, Iowa and Oklahoma St. More like Virginia Duals in its present reincarnation. JJH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×