Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JohnnyThompsonnum1

Championships won through work or recruiting?

Recommended Posts

Very curious to get everyone's opinion on this. Are you better off in the route of success to focus on developing wrestlers in your room and working hard or in recruiting? I imagine that most of you will say that it is a combination of both but I can't help but think back about a few cases at the University of Iowa.

 

Gable of course did often recruit the cream of the crop, but I can think of more than one occasion where he took a kid that took 3rd a couple of times over a multiple state champion. I can remember him once telling at 3 time state champion to go somewhere else because he didn't like his attitude and more than a handful of wrestlers who ended up AA's for him, that I don't think would've AA'd at any other school.

 

Are today's coaches who are having great successes having that success based on the techniques and strategies and work ethics they are teaching in the room or is their success more of a result based on the fact that these kids were already that good to begin with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Hall of Fame coach once told me "the better I recruit the better coach I am."

You can't pull the wagon without the horses. Certainly kids do develop but you better get a bunch of studs around them while they are developing.

If a whole team could be developed from lessor (for the lack of a better term) HS kids, it would be accomplished with regularity. As I think there are some excellent coaches that are not at the top tier (wrestling) schools.

I would name a few but do not want to slight those I didn't mention. Tho several come to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In college, I think it's about 60-75% recruiting. That said, you can't recruit if you don't have the resume of producing results. So the coaching helps the recruiting, which helps the coaching, …

 

College coaching is less about "teaching" and more about training athletes mentally and physically to perform at their highest level.

 

Just my two cents from having been there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In college, I think it's about 60-75% recruiting. That said, you can't recruit if you don't have the resume of producing results. So the coaching helps the recruiting, which helps the coaching, …

 

College coaching is less about "teaching" and more about training athletes mentally and physically to perform at their highest level.

 

Just my two cents from having been there.

 

I agree with this 100%. I would even say recruiting is maybe 85%.

 

BTW, I really find it annoying when people put this mystique around Gable that implies that he takes hard working turds and polishes them into gems. Gable was getting very good wrestlers when he was a coach. If you arent already a very skilled wrestler with the inclination to work hard, you are gonna get injured or cut in most college rooms. Iowa is no exception to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without the blue-chip recruits already in place in a room, how are you going to develop those lesser-skilled wrestlers into studs? I'd say 75% of Championship success is recruiting, with the other 25% being hard work and dedication. You wouldnt have the James Vollraths without the David Taylors honing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrestling's 90% talent, 10% developing/maintaining that talent.

 

It's like being a math prodigy. If you don't have the natural talent for math then no amount of studying is going to make you as good at it as those who are naturals at it.

 

Same concept applies to wrestling. You think guys like Cael, Dake, Saitiev, Fadzaev, Smith, etc became the legends they are through "hard work"?

 

Nope.

 

They had the raw talent that surpassed other wrestlers and they practiced enough to refine and maintain it.

 

Other guys can practice as hard as possible and they'll not come close to their level because they don't have to raw talent to build upon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had one very successful college coach tell me that you must recruit but you must now recruit athletes. He claims that he can teach a great athlete to become a great wrestler but he can't teach a great high school wrestler to become a great athlete. The day's of winning national championships with marginal athletic ability and hard work are all but over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Metcalf was a great wrestller but Caldwell was a superior athlete.

 

Jordan Burroughs is clearly the best athlete competing for the USA at the moment. And he obviously has a great skill set and work ethic.

 

Now, let's go a step further. Was Dake a better athlete than Taylor? Or is their another explanation as to why Dake was better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a favor to ask. This is not a response to any particular post (including the one above), but can we stop using the word athlete as code for black people? It makes me cringe.

 

I would venture to guess that almost everyone in this forum are ex-wrestlers on at least the high school level. From this experience I would think everyone here understands the variation of physical gifts that are useful for wrestlers. Just because Howe looks like an oaf hitting the speedbag doesn't mean that he isn't a physically gifted athlete.

 

This is part of what makes wrestling great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a favor to ask. This is not a response to any particular post (including the one above), but can we stop using the word athlete as code for black people? It makes me cringe.

 

That statement makes my vote for most idiotic post/statement of the year. And that says something. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a favor to ask. This is not a response to any particular post (including the one above), but can we stop using the word athlete as code for black people? It makes me cringe.

 

That statement makes my vote for most idiotic post/statement of the year. And that says something. :roll:

 

Just run the statistics for how often that word is used and what percentage is towards each ethnicity...staggering. Especially given the racial profile of D1 wrestling. Can you dispute that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess the consensus to be a combination of both. A very wise man, who wrestled for Oklahoma State, and Iowa once said, "At Oklahoma State if a technique doesn't work, they try another technique, and at Iowa, if a technique doesn't work, they try it harder." While you would be very wrong if you believed Iowa had bad technique or that OSU doesn't try hard, there is a vein of truth in that it would seem to me. So imo each has more of one philosophy than the other, but both share certain percentages of each philosophy. Seems to me the exact same thing would be said for how championships are won. Some do it with a particularly gifted group, and some do it with an inspirational effort, but any championship absolutely must have good athletes, and work very hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a favor to ask. This is not a response to any particular post (including the one above), but can we stop using the word athlete as code for black people? It makes me cringe.

 

That statement makes my vote for most idiotic post/statement of the year. And that says something. :roll:

 

Just run the statistics for how often that word is used and what percentage is towards each ethnicity...staggering. Especially given the racial profile of D1 wrestling. Can you dispute that?

 

Didn't know there was a data base for words used in wrestling forums where people speak in "code" so the white people can speak racially and we will all know the wrestler is black if we call him an "athlete". Got it.

My opinion is the racial profile in D1 wrestling has more to do with opportunities and what sports their peers play. There are less black athletes playing college baseball than wrestling in the last ten years. Wrestling in D1 has surpassed baseball. Statistically. 1999-2011

 

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/pub ... ive+trends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In college, I think it's about 60-75% recruiting. That said, you can't recruit if you don't have the resume of producing results. So the coaching helps the recruiting, which helps the coaching, …

 

College coaching is less about "teaching" and more about training athletes mentally and physically to perform at their highest level.

 

Just my two cents from having been there.

 

I agree with this 100%. I would even say recruiting is maybe 85%.

 

BTW, I really find it annoying when people put this mystique around Gable that implies that he takes hard working turds and polishes them into gems. Gable was getting very good wrestlers when he was a coach. If you arent already a very skilled wrestler with the inclination to work hard, you are gonna get injured or cut in most college rooms. Iowa is no exception to that.

 

Both of these statements couldn't be more true.

 

As to olddirty's quote, "If you arent already a very skilled wrestler with the inclination to work hard, you are gonna get injured or cut in most college rooms." This is true at every level in college. The last thing any team needs is a lazy, but exceptionally talented s.o.b. who believes he's above the program and that special rules should be made to accommodate him and his poor work ethic. There's a rather high burn out/injury/release rate among guys of that mind set, both athletically and academically.

 

We always tell our guys, "We'll meet you half way, but we cannot, nor are willing to do your half of the work." Some studs will rise to the occasion, others will allow the outside distractions to become priorities to their studies and athletic commitments.

 

Overall, college coaches are teaching their guys some of the finer points and details (harder hand fighting, positioning, chain wrestling BEYOND two moves, etc.) that make their athletes' skill sets even more effective against improved competition. College wrestling is about making you much better at what you already do (through coaching and the team around you) instead of completely reinventing you into Jordan Burroughs, Cael Sanderson, John Smith or Dan Gable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Didn't know there was a data base for words used in wrestling forums where people speak in "code" so the white people can speak racially and we will all know the wrestler is black if we call him an "athlete". Got it.

My opinion is the racial profile in D1 wrestling has more to do with opportunities and what sports their peers play. There are less black athletes playing college baseball than wrestling in the last ten years. Wrestling in D1 has surpassed baseball. Statistically. 1999-2011

 

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/pub ... ive+trends

 

I'm going to make this as short as I can so as not to take away from the intention of this thread. I was originally making an aside, but perhaps it was more inflammatory than I anticipated (I honestly thought what I said was an opinion shared by most).

 

By disproportionately labeling black people as "athletic" (I also hear "explosive" quite a bit) the implicit message is one of difference. I am sure this is unintentional for many people, but it is still damaging to race relations...it also isn't a good thing for wrestling (which already is seen as a "white" sport). I agree that progress is being made (as evidenced by your link), but things could be better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In college, I think it's about 60-75% recruiting. That said, you can't recruit if you don't have the resume of producing results. So the coaching helps the recruiting, which helps the coaching, …

 

College coaching is less about "teaching" and more about training athletes mentally and physically to perform at their highest level.

 

Just my two cents from having been there.

 

I agree with this 100%. I would even say recruiting is maybe 85%.

 

BTW, I really find it annoying when people put this mystique around Gable that implies that he takes hard working turds and polishes them into gems. Gable was getting very good wrestlers when he was a coach. If you arent already a very skilled wrestler with the inclination to work hard, you are gonna get injured or cut in most college rooms. Iowa is no exception to that.

Gable got the wrestlers he wanted when he was coaching that fit his mold true most were state champs so had talent/skill set but this is not myth Gable brought them above what was projected of them and I would say pretty dang close to their full potential. JMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although there are some "dead end" programs out there, the fact that in the last 10 years, wrestlers from 39 different programs have made it to the NCAA finals shows it is more the individual than the coach.

 

It's just that most of the top individuals gravitate towards just a handful of programs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to think we're actually in an age of wrestling (this age having only started a few years ago) where coaching is becoming a more important factor. Recruiting will still always be important and especially inside the top 20 recruits each graduating year.

 

BUT, I think with the amount of access that kids have to higher level technique today and the fact that the scale of separation between a #40 recruit and a recruit outside of the top 100 is getting smaller that coaches have a greater ability to super refine that midrange talent and raise their ceiling considerably.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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...