Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WRfan1

Adopted Rules Changes Do Very Little

Recommended Posts

I post on here now and again, and enough to know that there is literally no end to the debate over what rules to change, and what will make the sport more exciting, more marketable, etc. I also know that there is no right answer to this question and it is impossible to win.  That being said…

 

For my money, the new rules that were adopted have done and do little to improve what ails folkstyle wrestling at the collegiate level. For well over a decade now, savvy wrestlers have realized that getting good defensively and slowing down matches, playing the edge, stall riding, etc.,  is the quickest and easiest (to the extent anything is “easy” at that level)  to close the gap and stay in matches with wrestlers whose talent would overcome them otherwise. There have been no rules changes to counterbalance this shift.  I have a couple that WOULD NOT change the “control” based nature of folkstyle wrestling.

  1. Push out, with a uniform competition mat size required within a certain amount of time.  1 point push out, both feet out.  Nothing forces action like losing a point because you refuse to engage.  Every legitimate argument to this have been refuted, but I’ll tackle one.  The offensive wrestler rarely pursues to the edge, only to have the tables turned and be thrown out for a push-out point (a common red herring to those opposed to this rule).  To the extent that happens – tough nuggets, don’t attack like that without control of your body.
  2. No more riding time.  Most states (I think) have done away with riding time in HS and it HAS NOT changed or effected the control-based nature of folkstyle or diminished the style in any way.  On the flip side, the riding point has become an absolute crutch in NCAA wrestling. Wrestlers use tactics designed solely for the riding time point, with little to no attempt to turn their opponent even possible.  And you know what?  That’s okay! As long as they aren’t blatantly stalling, they should be rewarded by their opponent not getting a 1 point escape.   They should not, however get both a riding point, and the nullification of an escape.  That 2 point swing is as valuable as a TD or 2 point NF, and involved taking zero risk.  Ridiculous! No wonder everyone is doing it! Riding time must go.  
  3. Finally, less rules are ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, better than more.  Also, objective rules (locking hands, push out, no riding time) are ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, better than subjective rules (stalling… stalling, and Carver Hawkeye Stalling).  Less is more.   Getting too nuanced in our rules turns off even former wrestlers (hello freestyle for the last 15 years, until recently), let alone folks that are new to the sport.

I’m willing to donate my time and fly out to the next NCAA rules committee meeting on my own dime to help with these concepts if need be, forfeiting my attorney rate of $250 an hour (j/k).  We all just want things to be better. I truly think these changes would help. Okay, rip’em apart…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree except for push out but I am not going to engage that argument anymore. Getting rid of riding time could negate the drop to an ankle as a tactic. A better push out rule would be get hit with one it is a point, get hit with two, it is a dq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree except for push out but I am not going to engage that argument anymore. Getting rid of riding time could negate the drop to an ankle as a tactic. A better push out rule would be get hit with one it is a point, get hit with two, it is a dq.

 

How about baby steps? 

 

1) 1pt Riding Time awarded if you have 1:00 riding advantage and a 2pt nearfall

2) Two foot step-out = stall call

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't post here very often,but the issue  of eliminating riding time bothers me.

 

First off,a number of high school wrestling coaches I've spoken to in N.J. think bringing back riding time would be a good idea.

 

From the matches I've seen,too many high school wrestlers have become take down specialists, with little mat skills.

 

I wrestled D1 in college,going back to the time when you got 2 points for 2 minutes of riding time.

 

I was a leg wrestler,but didn't use riding to stall.In fact, one season I was first or second in pins for dual matches.That being said,I also won several matches on riding time.

 

I think riding is as much a skill as any other part of the sport.

 

I disagree that you should have to get near fall points to get riding time.

 

In my experience there are some wrestlers you just can't turn.

 

The refs just need to make sure the guy on top is working to turn the guy on the bottom,or call stalling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Push-out deniers are just like socialists from the 70s: "My theory has never actually worked, but that's because nobody has ever done it right." 

 

It's a good thing science doesn't work that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HuskyHero,

A 3 pt td will bring back the old takedown-escape scenario. Reaching a tech would be quicker, especially now w/o a nearfall requirement it'd be so much easier and more desirable. Who'd want a pin? So...there'd have to be a change to the tech margin, say 20 points?

 

The only good thing about overtime now is the first 30 seconds on the feet. I pray it doesn't go any further. I can't stand the rideout-escape back and forth. Too complex and time consuming. It's too bad the rules makers don't trust turning off the clock for a td, probably because of the heavyweights. But if we're going to have "two feet out" that would speed things up. I also think referees would naturally respond to calling stalling faster in a no-clock neutral round. Ironically, it might even be the best kind of action since there's literally no end in sight so the pressure to finish will be felt by everyone, wrestlers and refs! Experiment with that for a year or two. I'll bet, with the new rules, it would work, heavyweights included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have no problem increasing the tech limit since we're increasing the number of points for TD and backpoints. . 

 

Takedowns should be worth a lot... there very hard to get against good opponents and take a huge amount of energy, setup, risk, etc.

 

Pins immediately end the match and with now what a 1 point riding time and possibilities of 2, 3, & 4 sets of back points there is more than enough incentive not to just play "take em down and let me up".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't post here very often,but the issue  of eliminating riding time bothers me.

 

First off,a number of high school wrestling coaches I've spoken to in N.J. think bringing back riding time would be a good idea.

 

From the matches I've seen,too many high school wrestlers have become take down specialists, with little mat skills.

 

I wrestled D1 in college,going back to the time when you got 2 points for 2 minutes of riding time.

 

I was a leg wrestler,but didn't use riding to stall.In fact, one season I was first or second in pins for dual matches.That being said,I also won several matches on riding time.

 

I think riding is as much a skill as any other part of the sport.

 

I disagree that you should have to get near fall points to get riding time.

 

In my experience there are some wrestlers you just can't turn.

 

The refs just need to make sure the guy on top is working to turn the guy on the bottom,or call stalling.

Riding is a skill, but 20 years ago it was not taught as a offense unto itself - it used to be a precursor to attempting to turn  your opponent.  Do we give a "set up" point, for whichever wrestler attempts the most take-downs, but fails to score? 

 

To the extent that the loss of riding time would shift the sport, perhaps 10-15% towards neutral wrestling - good!  Neutral wrestling that requires control for a takedown is every bit as pure a form of Folkstyle as riding.  It also has the advantage of not being industrial strength boring for even diehard fans.  

 

I had a group of old HS wrestling buddies over when I got the Big 10 network to watch a dual.  It was Iowa vs. somebody (can't remember) and they were bored to tears. The mat wrestling was an absolute buzz kill. There was very little action.  Needless to say, it was a tough sell, and these guys were really into wrestling for quite a few years of their life, but now they'd rather get together to watch an NHL game than an NCAA dual, and none of them can skate!  

 

As far as not liking "takedown specialists", what about the "top specialists" who do all they can to do nothing in neutral, so they can just ride the snot out of someone on top or make up the difference in refined leg riding and/or turning skills?  Is that kind of specializing okay, but the same in neutral is not?  The idea that "Folkstyle is about control" has somehow morphed into "Folkstyle is about control AND control is about Mat Wrestling."   This idea is inaccurate and leading to some very boring displays of the worlds oldest and greatest sport. 

 

And yes, I know we'll never agree, but I had to try...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riding is a skill, but 20 years ago it was not taught as a offense unto itself - it used to be a precursor to attempting to turn  your opponent.  Do we give a "set up" point, for whichever wrestler attempts the most take-downs, but fails to score? 

 

To the extent that the loss of riding time would shift the sport, perhaps 10-15% towards neutral wrestling - good!  Neutral wrestling that requires control for a takedown is every bit as pure a form of Folkstyle as riding.  It also has the advantage of not being industrial strength boring for even diehard fans.  

 

I had a group of old HS wrestling buddies over when I got the Big 10 network to watch a dual.  It was Iowa vs. somebody (can't remember) and they were bored to tears. The mat wrestling was an absolute buzz kill. There was very little action.  Needless to say, it was a tough sell, and these guys were really into wrestling for quite a few years of their life, but now they'd rather get together to watch an NHL game than an NCAA dual, and none of them can skate!  

 

As far as not liking "takedown specialists", what about the "top specialists" who do all they can to do nothing in neutral, so they can just ride the snot out of someone on top or make up the difference in refined leg riding and/or turning skills?  Is that kind of specializing okay, but the same in neutral is not?  The idea that "Folkstyle is about control" has somehow morphed into "Folkstyle is about control AND control is about Mat Wrestling."   This idea is inaccurate and leading to some very boring displays of the worlds oldest and greatest sport. 

 

And yes, I know we'll never agree, but I had to try...

 

 

I agree with everything you wrote here... especially about the ex-wrestlers and watching wrestling.  It's depressing to me when all they talk about is baseball, basketball, hockey when they were so into wrestling most of their lives.  But with the product out there right now I find it impossible to argue with them to get them back into it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^

 

Agree. It's so obvious that wrestling rules need to be updated. The fan's experience in particular needs to be considered. Right now the folkstyle product is really boring. You have to wonder about how terrible it is to watch when schools drop wrestling and add lacrosse. 

 

Freestyle went from a horrible product to a great one pretty quickly. The fact that the NCAA can't follow freestyle's lead is embarrassing. Freestyle had no blueprint for how the push-out would work, whereas the NCAA does. It's a proven rule, and it works, yet the NCAA won't adopt it. 

 

A second a more controversial point is how boring mat wrestling is. I am in favor of no riding time and 30 second standups. I have no interest in seeing how awesome a guy is at laying on top of another guy. Do you think you can turn him? Great, you have 30 seconds. 

 

Those three rules (push-out, no riding time, and 30 second stand ups) would go a long way toward making folk more offensive oriented. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The day will come when NCAA wrestling will have to start switching over to freestyle or else lose popularity. This can be done incrementally but it'll have to be done. Hanging on to the past out of pride for our unique brand won't cut it. Even Henry Ford had to offer something beside black as a color option. Change is normal and desirable for the sake of improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing over to freestyle is no guarantee of increased fan attendance. The freestyle product was decent prior to the ball grab and two out of three period era. There also is no guarantee that a push out or step out in folkstyle will have the same effect as it does in free. I will never be a fan of step out/push out rule because it is not an actual scoring move such as a td, a turn, a throw, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing over to freestyle is no guarantee of increased fan attendance. The freestyle product was decent prior to the ball grab and two out of three period era. There also is no guarantee that a push out or step out in folkstyle will have the same effect as it does in free. I will never be a fan of step out/push out rule because it is not an actual scoring move such as a td, a turn, a throw, etc.

i dont think anybody prefers a step out point over a TD, turn etc, but i think most people prefer a step out point to either a stalling point or a non scoring restart. i know i certainly do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If refs enforce the new "two feet out" rule then there may not be a need for the F-S pushout. We're running out of options for keeping action centered. The restarts and edge wrestling don't go over well with intolerant fans who want to see a continuous slugfest despite wrestlers wanting to take a break any clever way they or their coaches can think of. Getting into top condition is hard as hell and imo the primary reason for all the inactivity, except notice how wrestlers come alive at the end of a match or in the 30 sec. sudden death. Where does that energy come from? Obviously they aren't putting it all out there. They don't start out going for broke, so they end up digging into their energy savings account when they can see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cooch1... 

I think you're correct.. if there is a push to keep wrestling action active.. there will never be a need for the push out rule.

I'm not in favor of it... plain and simple.. It's NOT wrestling.  That being said, I do understand the rational for it, we think that the rule will keep wrestling in the center... and that result may be true, but I'm not sure.

That being said... I question this:

If a wrestler goes out.. full go.. and gains a 'fair' lead... why hasn't he EARNED the right to, let's call it, "Wrestle Smart".

I've always felt that, that wrestler has earned the right to no longer 'Go For Broke'.

Think about it... you're winning the Big 10 finals by 4 points... Why on earth would you continue to Go Balls to the wall, and Go for Broke... If you ended up losing because you did something stupid,  you'd spend the rest of your life wondering, "why the hell did I do that"... !!

NO other sport requires it... !!

It would be like saying, why doesn't EVERY football team use an 'on side kick' or 'flee flicker' every time that they have possession.

Simple... they are VERY, VERY, low probability plays...!! When they do get it, it's a game changer... but that's only maybe 1 out of 15 times.  When they don't get it... it's just bad play calling.

Why would we require a wrestler to use very low probability holds or actions after he's wrestled a hard and aggressive match.

I don't mean to say that he can stop wrestling.. but he doesn't have to do anything stupid. The losing wrestler can ALWAYS go for broke... he's got nothing to lose.

I'm not saying cheat... but I'd rather be the guy standing on the top of the podium, because I wrestled smart... that they the guy who "had it all locked up, because I EARNED it," and blew it.

 

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  

×