SetonHallPirate 993 Report post Posted September 8, 2014 http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/September%20Cabinet%20Meeting%20Materials.pdf Starts on Page 307 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headshuck 2,627 Report post Posted September 9, 2014 I sprained my scrolling finger trying to get to page 307. Came up short but learned a lot about women's diving. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SetonHallPirate 993 Report post Posted September 9, 2014 Next time, there's a box for the page number. Enter the buttons 3, 0, and 7, and hit enter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quanon 161 Report post Posted September 9, 2014 Apparently the women's bowling TV ratings were the same as the DI wrestling tournament. Surprising. 1 GranbyTroll reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SetonHallPirate 993 Report post Posted September 9, 2014 quanon, I hadn't even noticed that! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grappler6 157 Report post Posted September 9, 2014 I like it!Did they change the points awarded? or did the champion always get 35? I thought they got more prior and there was a 10 point spread between 1st and 2nd, instead of the now 5 points.One question, the regional host is to absorb the cost of the event. Does that mean the regional host pays the travel, per diam and lodging for all the visiting teams as well? Or just the hosting expenses? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pinnum 846 Report post Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) Nice find! Review of 2014 Championship. "The [NCAA Women's Bowling] committee also was pleased with the broadcast ratings, noting that they were at the same level as Division I wrestling." Not knowing much about collegiate bowling... I did some digging and based on a youtube video on the 2014 ncaa womens championship, it looks like the television ratings were from a dual meet format. Edited September 9, 2014 by Pinnum Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HuskyHero133 52 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 God I hope this change doesn't go through... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redblades 322 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 Anyone know, who actually votes on this? (I assume TheMat straw poll doesn't count?) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CoachWrestling 436 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) For those too lazy: "(1) Recommendation. That a team component be added to the championships. Teams of sponsoring institutions shall compete in a minimum of six Division I intercollegiate dual meets to be eligible for the team component. The NCAA champion will be determined by a combination of team points earned through the team component, as well as points earned by individuals during the individual component. Twenty-four teams will qualify for the team component. Based on current bylaws, seven conferences would receive automatic qualifiers (AQ) for their top teams. The remaining 17 teams would then be selected by the Wrestling Committee, using similar selection criteria currently used for individuals, which will be calculated for team competition. Four regionals will be held on the campuses of the top four seeded teams. Each regional will include six teams. The 24 teams selected to compete in the team component will earn a minimum of five points. (See Attachment) The results of the team component will be tabulated and combined with the individual component results to crown the champion and determine the order of overall finish for institutions. (2) Effective Date. 2016 Championships." A points system, really? Things should be earned in wrestling. This is so stupid. What a joke. If this passes, it will only hurt the popularity. Try explaining that new point system to the casual. Edited September 10, 2014 by CoachWrestling 1 HuskyHero133 reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CoachWrestling 436 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 i sure hope this passes. college wrestling is begging to be disrupted. this is a relatively minor change to the season's format. more smart changes like this and the sport might actually get ahead of the curve for the first time since the 1930s. Wouldn't you rather just have a national duals than a point system? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jaroslav Hasek 2,067 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 i sure hope this passes. college wrestling is begging to be disrupted. this is a relatively minor change to the season's format. more smart changes like this and the sport might actually get ahead of the curve for the first time since the 1930s. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scribe 1,848 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 This seems sudden. I'm concerned no one has given Cael sufficient notice. 2 lu_alum and grappler6 reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jaroslav Hasek 2,067 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 Wouldn't you rather just have a national duals than a point system? you mean hand out the NCAA trophy to the winner of a national duals tourney? i could be down for that. i could be down for a lot of changes. but i also kind of like the proposed point system. its complicated but so is american football, and life is nothing but compromise. it makes the college teams care about dual meets. and you keep the individual tournament. those are priorities 1 and 1A. the rest is details, of which i don't sweat. 2 GranbyTroll and grappler6 reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CoachWrestling 436 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 you mean hand out the NCAA trophy to the winner of a national duals tourney? i could be down for that. i could be down for a lot of changes. but i also kind of like the proposed point system. its complicated but so is american football, and life is nothing but compromise. it makes the college teams care about dual meets. and you keep the individual tournament. those are priorities 1 and 1A. the rest is details, of which i don't sweat. By "hand out" you imply you don't like the idea. A national duals tournament would be much better/more fair than a point based champion IMO. Duals are the most exciting part of wrestling IMO, so I think we should use that to our advantage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CoachWrestling 436 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) Phew. But the system does need a change. IMO, dual meets show who the more complete team is compared to tournaments. They also are more exciting, IMO. Edited September 10, 2014 by CoachWrestling Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SetonHallPirate 993 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 No action was taken. 1 HuskyHero133 reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jaroslav Hasek 2,067 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 By "hand out" you imply you don't like the idea. A national duals tournament would be much better/more fair than a point based champion IMO. Duals are the most exciting part of wrestling IMO, so I think we should use that to our advantage. no i like the idea. leaving the "fair" argument for another time, i agree 100%, it is a better way to hand out the team trophy then to the winner of individual tournament, for a number of different reasons. if there were 3 choices, only points from individual tournament, winner of a dual meet tournament, or the combo, i'd be happy with either of the latter two. no strong preference either way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jaroslav Hasek 2,067 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 No action was taken. whats the mean exactly? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SetonHallPirate 993 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) whats the mean exactly? Normally, it would mean that it would be brought up again at the next scheduled Cabinet meeting, with more information from the NCAA Wrestling Committee, or alternately, pulled from the agenda. In this case, however, the Cabinet is being dissolved altogether, with this being its last meeting, and therefore, the replacement body, the Division I Council, would take it up. That being said, the Division I Council has yet to be constituted, and it remains to be seen when they would take up any proposals. Edited September 10, 2014 by SetonHallPirate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jaroslav Hasek 2,067 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 Normally, it would mean that it would be brought up again at the next scheduled Cabinet meeting, with more information from the NCAA Wrestling Committee, or alternately, pulled from the agenda. In this case, however, the Cabinet is being dissolved altogether, with this being its last meeting, and therefore, the replacement body, the Division I Council, would take it up. That being said, the Division I Council has yet to be constituted, and it remains to be seen when they would take up any proposals. interesting. thanks for the scoop! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flying-Tiger 617 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 When in Doubt, do Nothing. 2 HuskyHero133 and GranbyTroll reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TBar1977 4,611 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 Normally, it would mean that it would be brought up again at the next scheduled Cabinet meeting, with more information from the NCAA Wrestling Committee, or alternately, pulled from the agenda. In this case, however, the Cabinet is being dissolved altogether, with this being its last meeting, and therefore, the replacement body, the Division I Council, would take it up. That being said, the Division I Council has yet to be constituted, and it remains to be seen when they would take up any proposals. But wasn't this supposed to be voted on at this time? I could swear it was. You posted it was. Sounds to me like they don't have the votes to pass it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SetonHallPirate 993 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) TBar, that's the feeling I get as well. That said, it was the Cabinet that tabled it, not the wrestling committee. Edited September 10, 2014 by SetonHallPirate Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pinnum 846 Report post Posted September 10, 2014 That's not the feeling I get. I am curious how many other big changes were on the docket and how many were tabled. My guess would be that due to the major shifts in college athletics they don't want to make any changes without knowing what impacts will come from things like paying athletes and the autonomy of the Big 5. Moving this to the Division I Council seems like the appropriate course of action since they are the body that will be handling things in the years to come. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
