BRGuy 37 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 being great at both will make a good program but which is more important top 20 recruiting classes every year but average development or a team full of walk ons but great at developing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VakAttack 2,699 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 In this hypothetical, recruiting wins easily. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snapspinscore 0 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 College wrestling is all about developing your wrestlers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tofurky 596 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 Development; I think of my alma mater which has a knack for recruiting very good high school wrestlers and turning them into mediocre college wrestlers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TBar1977 3,812 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 Getting wrestlers to score is the key to winning. I think that is a little bit of both, recruiting and development. The team that gets the most bonus at NCAA will probably win the Tournament. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Serial_Thriller 77 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 Getting wrestlers to score is the key to winning. I think that is a little bit of both, recruiting and development. The team that gets the most bonus at NCAA will probably win the Tournament. I'm gonna say that the team with the most overall points will win. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TBar1977 3,812 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 I'm gonna say that the team with the most overall points will win. Do you have any other pearls of wisdom for us? Things we could not possibly figure out, like, say, fire is hot, rain is wet, and Saturday comes 1 day after Friday? I'm literally on the edge of my seat in anticipation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jvallstar 0 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 someone who has the time could use d1cw.com's recruiting classes and plot them against ncaa finishes for the past 2 or 3 years years and get an idea Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigApple 84 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 Stan Abel said when he started he was called a great recruiter, by the time he was done they said he was a great coach. He got a lot bluechippers, but also developed several wrestlers who weren't highly recruited into AAs and NCAA champs. Joe Reynolds was his 15 th NCAA champ. Joe wasn't highly recruited. Stan said about Dan Gable, he have a kid seeded 6th and coach him up to a national chsmpionship. He said Dan saw something in Jesse Whitmer that apparently no one else saw. A coach can't win a NCAA team title most of the time with just bluechippers. You have to have the unheralded kids that you develop into quality depth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zebra 545 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 Which makes me wonder; is it easier to turn a 6th place kid into a champ or turn a .500 kid into an AA? Once you answer that you have the answer to the original question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paboom 204 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 Are we talking about tOSU? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VakAttack 2,699 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 You're overselling development in this scenario. A team of top 20 recruits coached by me is going to beat a team of walk-ons coached by Dan Gable every day of the week and twice on Sundays. being great at both will make a good program but which is more importanttop 20 recruiting classes every year but average development or a team full of walk ons but great at developing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KTG119 819 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 You're overselling development in this scenario. A team of top 20 recruits coached by me is going to beat a team of walk-ons coached by Dan Gable every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Vak I'm with you on the recruiting thing, bottom line you gotta have the talent, but I'd add this caveat-ish comment to you beating Gable...define walk-on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VakAttack 2,699 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 Vak I'm with you on the recruiting thing, bottom line you gotta have the talent, but I'd add this caveat-ish comment to you beating Gable...define walk-on. TBar and and HurricaneWrestling as the Walk-Ons. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
southend 155 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 Good coaches will try to find recruits than will fit in with their, and assistants coaching strengths. To fit in with how the coaches like to coach. Not. regardless of the wrestlers talent or national ranking. I think this separates the good programs from the alsoran programs. This helps retain bodys in the room for development. So I have to say recruiting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teach 164 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 So recruit good kids but don't really develop them > recruiting average kids and developing them? I don't think its that easy? Recruit good and develop > recruit average and develop For sure You have to do both. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Billyhoyle 1,987 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 This type of question is always strange. The best kids are highly motivated and want to wrestle for the best coaches. Also, recruiting rankings aren't always indicative of how prepared a kid is going into college to compete. There are many factors, including how the person handles the adjustment to college, that just can't be factored in by rankers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teach 164 Report post Posted March 4, 2015 I would be interesting in knowing how many kids that start wrestling in a division 1 school and actually finish 5 or 4 years if no red shirt? I think there would be some schools that do a good job of keeping kids, (developing them in one way or another), and some that have large amounts that do not make 5 years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
