Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tofurky

What's the difference?

Recommended Posts

What's the difference between blue chippers who come out of high school and achieve success versus other blue chippers who come out of high school and don't live up the "hype" fans place upon them? Outside of the obvious statements such as injuries and academics, what sets apart the Jason Welches from the Scott Winstons? The Kyle Dakes from the Mike Benefiels? The Brent Metcalfs from the Jacob Palominos. Is it a mindset? Are there specific characteristics that some young men have that others do not?

 

This isn't meant to insight arguments, just discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about this exact question the other day. Specifically Dake and Grajales given that they were the same size and about the same aility level coming out of highschool (slight edge to grajales if anything). It's crazy to me that Dake was an NCAA champion less than a year later and Grajales is still struggling to make the podium.

 

I think somebody mentioned that Grajales had sufferd an injury, but the only infor I found was that grajales got injured back in 2007, well before these guys graduated from highschool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder that myself, and as UM158 says, recruiting would be that much easier if coaches understood this. This question really stood out to me after the 2009 senior nationals. Kyle Bradley (Missouri) lost a close 3-1 decision to Kyle Dake in the semi's. Dake went on to win 4 national titles, while Bradley hasn't earned AA honors. Bradley was always very dedicated, so it made me wonder...was it coaching, focus, practice partners...?? I have no idea. Great discussion topic, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it can be taken the wrong way but genetics and genetic luck come into play. sometimes its all nuture (ie training, coaching, etc) but other times nature can give a guy boost. an extreme example of that is david robinson growing several inches after joining the navy.

 

still have to put the work in but some people are born with higher mental and physical ceilings than others. also some also have the ability to reach their ceilings faster than others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
still have to put the work in but some people are born with higher mental and physical ceilings than others. also some also have the ability to reach their ceilings faster than others.

 

I think that can't be discounted. Some high ranked guys from high school have already reached their ceilings and will struggle in college no matter how hard they work. Other high ranked guys in high school have only begun to tap their potential and become monsters in college. Most are somewhere in between.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
still have to put the work in but some people are born with higher mental and physical ceilings than others. also some also have the ability to reach their ceilings faster than others.

 

I think that can't be discounted. Some high ranked guys from high school have already reached their ceilings and will struggle in college no matter how hard they work. Other high ranked guys in high school have only begun to tap their potential and become monsters in college. Most are somewhere in between.

Definately. I was coming back to this thread to post something along the lines of this. Look at how much guys like Taylor, Dake, and Burroughs grew from their later highschools year to the time they finished college. All three were very successful high school wrestlers, yet none of the three had come anywhere close to fully maturing physically.

 

Another factor is often coaching, or lack their of. Some highschool wrestlers already have already been receiving world class coaching before they even arrive at college. Others did not have this same oppurtunity and are likely to improve a lot more once they arrive at college. A prime example of this is Richard Perry of Bloomsburg who has improved tremendously since his highschool days in middletown, connecticut. He always had talent, but lacked coaching and training partners before he got to college.

 

These reasons are why I think Marsteller may not be quite as good as we all expected in college. He's already very physically mature and has been getting world class coaching for years. How much better can he really get? I do hope he proves me wrong though.

 

Brandon receives a lot of flak for not producing wrestlers who perform well in college, but maybe this is a testament to just how good their coaching is. Maybe they are able to get to their wrestlers as good as their potential will allow them to be and that's why their wrestlers never seem to improve that much in college. Food for thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it, sometimes, has a lot to do with athletes struggling with a lack of success. When you go from being a dominate high school wrestler to a wrestler struggling to even get in on legs in the room it can take its toll on kids.

 

Looking at all of the high school national events I feel comfortable saying that there isn't always much of a difference in the talent level of a lot of the top high school wrestlers in the best wrestling states and other weaker states.

 

But I think we all would agree that some states just do much better at the college level then others. And, I think, this has a lot to do with the week in and week out challenge that you face in college. Using Grajales and Dake as a comparison, I think Dake had many more challenging matches during high school than Grajales did.

 

Dake won the NY states as a Sophomore but then as a Junior he was beat in the finals by Ian Paddock (Ohio State) and then as a Senior, even as one of the top wrestlers in the country, his state title was in doubt by many with Mike Nevinger (Cornell) who Dake ended up beating in the finals 2-1.

 

It is easy to look only at national results and say an athlete can compete at the highest level but getting up for a few big events is much easier to do that to endure the challenge throughout the season. This is why I think states like Florida and Georgia, though making great improvements in high school wrestling, have struggled to transfer some of the success to the high school level and states like Iowa and Pennsylvania have such great success.

 

Though there are many factors, I think this one is significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This question, to me, has always seemed a classic nature/nurture conundrum. My best take in answering begins with accepting a premise that the successes of all “blue chippers” before college were achieved through various “optimal” combinations of natural abilities and environmental factors.

Any motivated high schooler with great genes and athletic abilities, for example, in a well-organized, highly competitive conference/district/region/state might be expected (aided by competent coaches and excellent workout partners) to earn recognition as a potential “blue chip” wrestling recruit by many elite college programs.

While many of the relevant environmental factors (eg. opponents, coaching, facilities, workout partners, administrative and student support ) continue to have impacts on each individual athlete’s performance, the qualities, intensity and importance of these factors usually increase at the college level. (Or, at least, it is extremely rare for them to be nearly the same as during the high school years).

How well a potential “blue chipper” adjusts to these changes often requires both physical and mental training. Basic health, strength, gas tank, and technique issues, of course, must all be addressed. And match and meet strategies based upon detailed knowledge of specific opponents can be significant. But the combination of all of these changing factors makes two very specific attributes extremely desirable for continued success at the college level: DEDICATION and FOCUS.

Just “wanting it more than the other guy” simply doesn’t cut it anymore. Before stepping out on the mat EVERY time, sine qua non is both mental and physical preparation to attend (at the exclusion of EVERYTHING ELSE) ONLY on what is required to WIN. With the proliferation of distractions today, my appreciation for elite athletes proving themselves capable of meeting such challenges continues to grow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A harder factor to predict is burnout. These are kids that have been cutting weight and doing spin drills for years, and some just don't really have their heart in it anymore. This is especially true for college freshman who suddenly have a huge amount of distractions at their finger tips. Some former high school studs will be dreaming about being an NCAA champ, while others will be dreaming about that cute coed in room 22b.

 

Sometimes this burnout is visible in highschool. It was clear Collin Palmer and Chris Phillips definitely did not have their heart in wrestling during their senior years of highschool even though they still dominated most of their competition (yes, I'm aware injury is technically the reason Collin stopped wrestling, but I don't think he had a passion for wrestling anymore). For others, this burnout won't start until they're already in the college room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nature cannot teach you technique. Take all of the cases of "nature" that you want (good builds, strength, balance, etc) and you can't win a wrestling match against a guy who doesn't have such "nature" but has actually been taught how to wrestle.

 

With that said, I wonder how much getting beaten in matches and getting thrown around in the wrestling room comes into play for these studs? if they've never experienced it, that could have a huge impact on these guys' psyches and their future success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
still have to put the work in but some people are born with higher mental and physical ceilings than others. also some also have the ability to reach their ceilings faster than others.

 

I think that can't be discounted. Some high ranked guys from high school have already reached their ceilings and will struggle in college no matter how hard they work. Other high ranked guys in high school have only begun to tap their potential and become monsters in college. Most are somewhere in between.

Definately. I was coming back to this thread to post something along the lines of this. Look at how much guys like Taylor, Dake, and Burroughs grew from their later highschools year to the time they finished college. All three were very successful high school wrestlers, yet none of the three had come anywhere close to fully maturing physically.

 

Another factor is often coaching, or lack their of. Some highschool wrestlers already have already been receiving world class coaching before they even arrive at college. Others did not have this same oppurtunity and are likely to improve a lot more once they arrive at college. A prime example of this is Richard Perry of Bloomsburg who has improved tremendously since his highschool days in middletown, connecticut. He always had talent, but lacked coaching and training partners before he got to college.

 

These reasons are why I think Marsteller may not be quite as good as we all expected in college. He's already very physically mature and has been getting world class coaching for years. How much better can he really get? I do hope he proves me wrong though.

 

Brandon receives a lot of flak for not producing wrestlers who perform well in college, but maybe this is a testament to just how good their coaching is. Maybe they are able to get to their wrestlers as good as their potential will allow them to be and that's why their wrestlers never seem to improve that much in college. Food for thought.

 

Talent is most important to succeed in college, followed by coaching. But, when I used to coach high school wrestling, I would tell students considering wrestling in college that they better LOVE the sport. It's easy to love anything that is easy - the grind of college wrestling is NOT easy. If you don't really love wrestling, college wrestling just sucks. No easy wins, no attention from your classmates, no parents or communities pushing/riding/counting on you. If a HS stud doesn't really love wrestling, it becomes easier to walk away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This ought to say something shouldn't it?

 

 

Then what happened when they met in college? Askren was on his way to either a major or a tech and he stuck him in the 2nd period.

 

What does that say?

 

We preach "hard work and dedication" ok. Well doesn't the fact that Askren went to Missouri and had workout partners like Raymond Jordan, Tyron Woodley and Kenny Burleson, while Palmer didnt' have those type of workout partners at Columbia account for something?

 

How about the case of Nathan Galloway? In high school he kicked the crud out of Trent Paulson

We all know how Galloways collegiate career finished in comparison to Paulson's.

 

Is it possible that Galloway still worked his tail off in college as did Paulson, and yet Galloway had peaked physically and technically where Paulson grew?

 

I just don't buy the theory that it always comes down to, "Who wants it more"

 

Hard work is the #1 ingredient in being successful no doubt about it, but it's not the only ingredient and other factors go into whether a person is successful or not successful. Ignoring those other factors is ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can you claim coaching or workour partners as the key when you have guys like james fleming who was 4th in pa beating up on blue chip champ alton

 

high school and recruiting rankings don't mean much for college just like being an accomplished youth means nothing in high school

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great topic for discussion.

 

I would guess there are many reasons why guys progress differently.

 

David Craig was Jr Hodge winner and top recruit, but reportedly didn't really enjoy wrestling all that much.

 

Billy Murphy was a top recruit, but had issues with grades and extracurricular stuff.

 

Jacob Palomino, I believe became a father as a teen, and tried to be a good family man.

 

Some interesting contrasts - besides Welch/Winston, the year before that it was Welch/Chaires. Welch went on to 3x AA status, the others not so well. Don't think Chaires ever qualified. And of course, Howe was below all these guys, but ended up doing the best.

 

Nate Moore and McDonough are two contrasts. They were pretty even in HS, maybe even an edge to Moore. I think Moore had wins over McD and Novachkov, and possibly Grajales (?) in HS. Sometime fr year in college McD seemed to take off.

 

Jaroslav alluded to it, and I believe genetics is very important. Some HS guys might not have access to the premier coaches and practice partners, but may really shine once that happens. Burroughs was a stud in both HS and college, but seems to have just kept going up afterward.

 

Pico is a guy that will be interesting to follow. I would've loved to see him in 4 years of collegiate. He is a guy that has had the very best training and is so advanced. Will he plateau soon? Will he go on to FS glory and win world and Olympic medals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Talent is most important to succeed in college, followed by coaching.

 

2. But, when I used to coach high school wrestling, I would tell students considering wrestling in college that they better LOVE the sport. It's easy to love anything that is easy - the grind of college wrestling is NOT easy. If you don't really love wrestling, college wrestling just sucks. No easy wins, no attention from your classmates, no parents or communities pushing/riding/counting on you. If a HS stud doesn't really love wrestling, it becomes easier to walk away.

 

1. I disagree, though talent certainly helps, coaching has to be there no doubt about it.

 

2. +100: Love practice. You have to Love to practice. You have to love to practice the same solid techniques 1,000,000 times. You have to Love giving and taking a beating daily. Competition is the only extrinsic reward your college career will render so you better enjoy practice.

 

Too many HS kids are great at wrestling, but don't love to work at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Talent is most important to succeed in college, followed by coaching.

 

2. But, when I used to coach high school wrestling, I would tell students considering wrestling in college that they better LOVE the sport. It's easy to love anything that is easy - the grind of college wrestling is NOT easy. If you don't really love wrestling, college wrestling just sucks. No easy wins, no attention from your classmates, no parents or communities pushing/riding/counting on you. If a HS stud doesn't really love wrestling, it becomes easier to walk away.

 

1. I disagree, though talent certainly helps, coaching has to be there no doubt about it.

 

2. +100: Love practice. You have to Love to practice. You have to love to practice the same solid techniques 1,000,000 times. You have to Love giving and taking a beating daily. Competition is the only extrinsic reward your college career will render so you better enjoy practice.

 

Too many HS kids are great at wrestling, but don't love to work at it.

 

Point two I find interesting. I think many people would agree with it.

 

I often hear people compare Russian training systems to those in the US and the refrain is typically that we compete too much growing up and they train and focus on technique.

 

What if we are allowing kids with the wrong motivations to succeed in our system and it is costing us in the later years? How many kids in the youth and high school system succeed in wrestling despite hating to drill? How many kids are very teachable and will work hard to drill but get pounded on by kids who can just walk out and win?

 

I would be interested in seeing what the burnout rate is in Russia compared to the United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great topic for discussion.

 

I would guess there are many reasons why guys progress differently.

 

David Craig was Jr Hodge winner and top recruit, but reportedly didn't really enjoy wrestling all that much.

 

Billy Murphy was a top recruit, but had issues with grades and extracurricular stuff.

 

Jacob Palomino, I believe became a father as a teen, and tried to be a good family man.

 

Some interesting contrasts - besides Welch/Winston, the year before that it was Welch/Chaires. Welch went on to 3x AA status, the others not so well. Don't think Chaires ever qualified. And of course, Howe was below all these guys, but ended up doing the best.

 

Nate Moore and McDonough are two contrasts. They were pretty even in HS, maybe even an edge to Moore. I think Moore had wins over McD and Novachkov, and possibly Grajales (?) in HS. Sometime fr year in college McD seemed to take off.

 

Jaroslav alluded to it, and I believe genetics is very important. Some HS guys might not have access to the premier coaches and practice partners, but may really shine once that happens. Burroughs was a stud in both HS and college, but seems to have just kept going up afterward.

 

Pico is a guy that will be interesting to follow. I would've loved to see him in 4 years of collegiate. He is a guy that has had the very best training and is so advanced. Will he plateau soon? Will he go on to FS glory and win world and Olympic medals?

 

Pico is an exception to the rule, IMO. Just like Cejudo was an exception to the rule.

 

The Moore/McDonough situation fits perfectly into this conversation though, and I think it answers the question better than any other. One guy had the coaching/competition in HS and perhaps reached his potential earlier (Moore), while the other maybe didn't really start to excel until he had Brands to push him. That's a great scenario where both had the same coaching/situation once they reached the college level, but achieved different results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great topic for discussion.

 

I would guess there are many reasons why guys progress differently.

 

David Craig was Jr Hodge winner and top recruit, but reportedly didn't really enjoy wrestling all that much.

 

Billy Murphy was a top recruit, but had issues with grades and extracurricular stuff.

 

Jacob Palomino, I believe became a father as a teen, and tried to be a good family man.

 

Some interesting contrasts - besides Welch/Winston, the year before that it was Welch/Chaires. Welch went on to 3x AA status, the others not so well. Don't think Chaires ever qualified. And of course, Howe was below all these guys, but ended up doing the best.

 

Nate Moore and McDonough are two contrasts. They were pretty even in HS, maybe even an edge to Moore. I think Moore had wins over McD and Novachkov, and possibly Grajales (?) in HS. Sometime fr year in college McD seemed to take off.

 

Jaroslav alluded to it, and I believe genetics is very important. Some HS guys might not have access to the premier coaches and practice partners, but may really shine once that happens. Burroughs was a stud in both HS and college, but seems to have just kept going up afterward.

 

Pico is a guy that will be interesting to follow. I would've loved to see him in 4 years of collegiate. He is a guy that has had the very best training and is so advanced. Will he plateau soon? Will he go on to FS glory and win world and Olympic medals?

Pico would have been interesting to follow.

 

There, fixed that for you. I don't consider checking results of a couple events and exhibitions a year "following".

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...