The reinstatement of the program should be celebrated. The wrestling community mobilized, made headlines, stayed respectful and pointed to the flawed logic AD John Parry used in asking for the removal of a sport endemic to the greater Cleveland community in favor of one not sanctioned by the high school state athletic association. Jason Bryant's interview also proved to be helpful in helping the wrestling community understand Parry's thinking, and it seemed to help him understand that counter argument to the elimination of the program.
One negative note to consider is that wrestling is being hijacked on college campuses and held for ransom, with few guarantees of long-term stability. Programs, both healthy and those that have been reinstated (Bucknell, Arizona State, Cleveland State) are doing so under conditions similar to a hostage-taking. Pay and you can have back your life, don't and you are no longer viable.
Wrestling should continue to fundraise ahead of these incidents, but something needs to be done to curb this behavior by athletic directors. This is no longer a matter of discussion of if they are holding the sport for ransom, but how many programs will be dealt with before something is done to stop the behavior.
The concerning part is that if wrestling were free of the university system there would be guarantees that the monies raised by each program's fundraising base would have direct oversight by the program. In places like Arizona State where large sums of cash were raised, the athletic directors have first dibs on the whole kit and caboodle. How the money is spent will never be something left solely to Coach Jones, or any of his counterparts.
The concern of course is that as the NCAA is pressured to pay players, sports like wrestling will face more of these ransom situations, be asked to pay up, but eventually be cut anyway. In the circumstance that schools begin axing large numbers of "non-profit" teams the club model seems much more effective in preserving the tradition and competition of traditional American wrestling.
For now the option of moving to a club system is only a thought, but with powerful alumni groups, media in place and traditions secured the move to an independent model might not be far off.
To your questions ...
Q: What moves in the other martial arts translate well to wrestling? Best moves from judo, BJJ, karate, etc.?
-- @alliseeis_
Foley: This question had me a little stumped when it came to karate, but I'm going to give this my best.
The first thing to recognize is the separation of sports styles between striking and non-striking. In your example are judo and jiu-jitsu, both of which are non-striking grappling arts that have been extended over time from traditional wrestling, mostly out of eastern and Central Asia. As such, there are a myriad moves seen across all three styles.
The move most frequently being transitioned (back) into freestyle wrestling is a simple kimura, or key lock. The move, which was just used by Henry Cejudo against Tony Ramos at Agon, and Reineris Salas versus Ed Ruth at the World Cup, is not illegal unless taken far outside the shoulder and exerted for pressure. Last year at the Golden Grand Prix Jake Varner used the same defense (unsuccessfully) against Azerbaijan's Khetag Gazyumov. No penalty was called because there was not intent to harm.
From judo the upper-body clinches and attacks from overhooks are brilliant. Though there is a loss from not having the gi to hold wrestlers have seen some great crossover at even the highest levels.
Karate is a striking sport so the crossover won't exist, though I suppose the speed and agility with which athletes strike and avoid strikes could be helpful to wrestlers from neutral.
Q: Why in the world did the finals between Iran-USA start before the TV broadcast?
-- @Rob_SwagginU
Foley: I was all dolled up for a wedding this weekend and therefore wasn't on site for the World Cup. My guess is that there was only room for seven live matches and they wanted to ensure that they captured the final action in case it had team implications. I know that is was annoying, though there was live stream available at the United World Wrestling site.
Logan Storley celebrates after defeating Kyle Crutchmer (Photo/Tony Rotundo, WrestlersAreWarriors.com)-- Gregg Y.
Foley: I could see Logan being a very good grappler and with a frame like his and maybe even a powerful striker. I wish him the best of luck in choosing his path, and I tend to think that it was the best one for him given the concentration of talent at 74 kilos in men's freestyle.
MULTIMEDIA HALFTIME
Jordan Burroughs looking sharp in win No. 101
Excellent comeback by Haji Aliyev
Q: Why the cheap shot at Duke? Do you have data to substantiate this claim (of grade inflation)?
-- @stollio3
Foley: There was nothing meant in the comment, but I appreciate that Duke feels attacked. Apologies to the wrestlers who work hard on the mat and in the classroom, and to the staff who comes to their defense. No harm meant in pointing it out, but I can see that it was misinterpreted. I'll do better next time.
Q: Do you think MMA will ever be a college sport like wrestling?
-- Gregg Y.
Foley: No. Absolutely not. And it will never be an Olympic sport.
Q: Did you see this? Wyoming will honor scholarship to Trout, who lost left leg
-- Jared H.
Foley: Total class move by Wyoming!
THOUGHT OF THE WEEK
By Chuck P.
I would like to see collegiate wrestling adopt the Olympic-style mat with a one-meter "zone" provided immediately adjacent to the out-of-bounds line. The reason for this will become apparent shortly. I would also repeal the current out-of-bounds rule and restore the previous rule. Again, why even have boundaries if we can wrestle outside of them and even utilize them as a protection against getting taken down. Too any wrestlers just run away to the out-of-bounds area rather than actually compete in the center of the mat. Additionally, I would eliminate riding time. As currently utilized by most wrestlers, this activity simply awards competitors with an extra point for being able to hold your opponent in your control for one minute. In current usage, it has nothing to do whatsoever with the offensive wrestler trying to turn his opponent for back points and/or a fall. Let's get real. The sport is not called "holding" or "riding." It's called "wrestling." Too many matches are determined by one wrestler just being more adept at holding onto his opponent.
There has been much talk in recent years about collegiate style wrestling adopting the pushout rule from Olympic-style wrestling. I would oppose this too. Way too many international matches are determined by one wrestler being more adept at pushing than the other wrestler. I'd hate to lose a match 1-0 just because my opponent was a better pusher. Again, the sport is not called "pushing," it's called "wrestling."
So where does that leave us? We need to make just one more simple adjustment. We need to reinterpret stalling! With the new mat, as defined above, any time either wrestler in the neutral position wanders into the "zone," the mat official would point at the wrestler, call out his color (red or green) and say, loudly, "ZONE." If the wrestler so identified works back to the middle and begins wrestling offensively again, no problem.
If he does not leave the zone and move back to the middle, he immediately gets a stall warning. When we see, below, how stall warnings are penalized, I daresay, wrestlers will not wander into the zone.
How do we score stalling in my new interpretation of the rule? Simple. The first warning is just that . . . a warning. The second warning provides one point to the aggressive wrestler. The third warning provides two points to the aggressive wrestler. The fourth warning results in disqualification of the passive wrestler. And here's an added proviso that will change everything. If you are disqualified from any match in a tournament, you are also disqualified from the tournament. No further bouts for you and no further points from you for your team. This is pretty simple stuff. Change the mat to include the zone. Eliminate riding time.
Repeal the current out-of-bounds rule and replace it with the former rule, actively call stalling in all positions, as defined above, and change the point awards and disqualification for stalling. I'm betting that within no time at all collegiate wrestling will graduate from its current state as a "yawner" for fans and return to a vital, exciting, thrilling sport replete with major decisions, technical falls, falls, and very very few bouts that proceed to one or more overtimes with 1-1 scores and no stalling calls.
Let's get on with it.
Recommended Comments
There are no comments to display.
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now