Proposed college wrestling rule changes

[flyingcement]

Just now, PencilNeck said:

(Effectively) Taking away riding time just encourages stalling on bottom.

Being on bottom is usually the least enjoyable spot - catching cross faces, getting bow leg turked...

I think it is basically saying shit or get off the pot to the top guy.  If you can't turn him, you've earned nothing.  I like that 

[BlacknGold]

If you don't like getting rode then do something about it and escape. Not a fan of trying to force action with every rule twist we can think of. Perhaps these rule changes will further complicate the sport and that's not good for new fans

[BlacknGold]

Think the match pace has more to with the wrestlers and the matchup than it does the rules. There's 15 minute mma fights with little or no action sometimes

[BlacknGold]

On the contrary one rule I would like to see is removing the figure four leg lock to opponents leg from top position, that is stalling

[scourge165]

13 hours ago, Le duke said:

Why was the FRL crew talking about these proposed rules as if they are actually in effect?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, that was the first video I'd seen on it since I'd known it was proposed and they were just kinda explaining what the rules WILL be. And they didn't even tough on the pushout. 

I wonder if they have some idea which way it'll go or if it was just poor reporting or a poor job articulating their point.

[Scouts Honor]

8 hours ago, billyhoyle said:

No.  You are still 1 takedown away from tying the score. 

so... how is this different from a 2 pt takedown

 

[Scouts Honor]

8 hours ago, PencilNeck said:

(Effectively) Taking away riding time just encourages stalling on bottom.

TRUE

[Scouts Honor]

8 hours ago, BlacknGold said:

If you don't like getting rode then do something about it and escape. Not a fan of trying to force action with every rule twist we can think of. Perhaps these rule changes will further complicate the sport and that's not good for new fans

taking riding time away means i dont have to get out

[Scouts Honor]

saw these and began to wonder...

I'm not sure i agree with them.. but it made me think

I have been in organizations enough to know that change usually isn't driven by numbers... but by cronies who have ear oif someone in power and say... 'i hear....' and then the change is made

 

as to 1? we will see if baseball pitch clock has an effect

2. almost certain this is true.

3. wouldn't really work b/c the match would have been wrestled differently..potentially b/c of scoring etc...

but the point remains... this should be tested somehow. not waste an entire season.

4. the top subjectivity of are you trying to turn is the only real problem i see here

a 3 TD instead of 2 wont be hard... we adjusted to the 4pt NF pretty quick.

[Scouts Honor]

this is an example of data driven changes

https://thesportjournal.org/article/strategically-driven-rule-changes-in-nba-causes-and-consequences/

[Wrestleknownothing]

48 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

saw these and began to wonder...

I'm not sure i agree with them.. but it made me think

I have been in organizations enough to know that change usually isn't driven by numbers... but by cronies who have ear oif someone in power and say... 'i hear....' and then the change is made

 

I am not sure who the author of those points was, but with regard to point one above, point two applies. I get that it is hard to prove the negative, but I am highly skeptical that rule changes do not lead to increases in viewership, or decreases in decreases in viewership. After all it is usually when viewership is decreasing that changes are made (see the first bullet point below). To not make changes at such a time would be the irresponsible thing to do.

And while specific data was not presented, committee members did referred to data that was used to make these decisions. Examples from the Flo article:

• Viewership was down for the NCAA tournament with probably some of the best storylines we’ve ever had all in one year
• national tournament match points down 19 percent since 2019 and takedowns down almost 17 percent during the same time frame
• If you look at the numbers statistically, takedowns have gone down, backpoints have gone down, tech falls have gone down. Everything has decreased in the last 10 years in our numbers, so we’ve got to figure out how to create more action, more points, more opportunities

 

[Gus]

10 hours ago, PencilNeck said:

(Effectively) Taking away riding time just encourages stalling on bottom.

Being on bottom sucks. No one wants to sit down there and get pounded on.

[Not134]

I would imagine that stricter pass interference rule changes in football years ago and basketball not calling fouls and traveling with too much veracity have both increased viewership.  Those rule changes (or interpretations) increased scoring and action which has to increase viewership.  For that matter, if soccer wants more viewership in the USA, call more fouls.  That should have the consequence of inducing more scoring which fans seem to appreciate.  Wrestling any different?

[Scouts Honor]

44 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I am not sure who the author of those points was, but with regard to point one above, point two applies. I get that it is hard to prove the negative, but I am highly skeptical that rule changes do not lead to increases in viewership, or decreases in decreases in viewership. After all it is usually when viewership is decreasing that changes are made (see the first bullet point below). To not make changes at such a time would be the irresponsible thing to do.

And while specific data was not presented, committee members did referred to data that was used to make these decisions. Examples from the Flo article:

• Viewership was down for the NCAA tournament with probably some of the best storylines we’ve ever had all in one year
• national tournament match points down 19 percent since 2019 and takedowns down almost 17 percent during the same time frame
• If you look at the numbers statistically, takedowns have gone down, backpoints have gone down, tech falls have gone down. Everything has decreased in the last 10 years in our numbers, so we’ve got to figure out how to create more action, more points, more opportunities

 

Do you have those numbers? I am not saying they dont exist or weren't used... just would like to actually look at them.

I have heard many times that the step out caused increased action in freestyle, but have never seen numbers to compare pre/post pushout...

help a guy out? 

[Scouts Honor]

13 minutes ago, Not134 said:

I would imagine that stricter pass interference rule changes in football years ago and basketball not calling fouls and traveling with too much veracity have both increased viewership.  Those rule changes (or interpretations) increased scoring and action which has to increase viewership.  For that matter, if soccer wants more viewership in the USA, call more fouls.  That should have the consequence of inducing more scoring which fans seem to appreciate.  Wrestling any different?

when they stopped calling fouls in bball i quit watching.. 

but i agree with your premise in general 

im just not sure more people are going to watch b/c we change a TD point

[Wrestleknownothing]

18 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

Do you have those numbers? I am not saying they dont exist or weren't used... just would like to actually look at them.

I have heard many times that the step out caused increased action in freestyle, but have never seen numbers to compare pre/post pushout...

help a guy out? 

Sadly I do not. I was just quoting from the article. I would like to look at them as well.

[Scouts Honor]

I started thinking about the football passing rules... that did cause more scoring. and that is what was wanted... 

however, would like to see the data on increased viewership based on this scoring.. i may have to do some digging.

 

I think the increased availability of betting on games and parts of games has increased viewership more than any actual rules change however...

[Eagle26]

taking riding time away means i dont have to get out

In what situation, would that actually happen? If you are losing, you would try to stall on bottom?? If you are winning, and the top guy can’t turn you, he would just cut you… the 3 point takedown makes it much easier for him to make a comeback from his feet.

[Eagle26]

saw these and began to wonder...
I'm not sure i agree with them.. but it made me think
I have been in organizations enough to know that change usually isn't driven by numbers... but by cronies who have ear oif someone in power and say... 'i hear....' and then the change is made

 
as to 1? we will see if baseball pitch clock has an effect
2. almost certain this is true.
3. wouldn't really work b/c the match would have been wrestled differently..potentially b/c of scoring etc...
but the point remains... this should be tested somehow. not waste an entire season.
4. the top subjectivity of are you trying to turn is the only real problem i see here
a 3 TD instead of 2 wont be hard... we adjusted to the 4pt NF pretty quick.

Point 1 is clearly not true. I don’t even really follow others sports to know if it has happened elsewhere, but freestyle wrestling has made huge gains in popularity and viewership as a direct result of rules changes. Compare the world championship viewer ratings now to the “ball grab” era. Rules were horrible back then and the changes they made brought more fans to the sport

[WrestlingRasta]

I've seen a few remarks that adding the criteria of nearfall for riding point, would add complexity to even some table workers scoring the match?  It's documented in the match, whether handwritten on the bout sheet or in track.  Wouldn't it be, like a two to three second exercise, to verify whether or not the athlete scored a nearfall?  An exercise a scorekeeper could verify, maybe as the clock runs down under ten seconds.

[Scouts Honor]

4 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

Point 1 is clearly not true. I don’t even really follow others sports to know if it has happened elsewhere, but freestyle wrestling has made huge gains in popularity and viewership as a direct result of rules changes. Compare the world championship viewer ratings now to the “ball grab” era. Rules were horrible back then and the changes they made brought more fans to the sport

would love to see numbers on this.

it may or may not be true... im not sure... 

[Scouts Honor]

13 minutes ago, Eagle26 said:

In what situation, would that actually happen? If you are losing, you would try to stall on bottom?? If you are winning, and the top guy can’t turn you, he would just cut you… the 3 point takedown makes it much easier for him to make a comeback from his feet.

maybe its 0-0, 2nd period. im down.

[Scouts Honor]

4 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I've seen a few remarks that adding the criteria of nearfall for riding point, would add complexity to even some table workers scoring the match?  It's documented in the match, whether handwritten on the bout sheet or in track.  Wouldn't it be, like a two to three second exercise, to verify whether or not the athlete scored a nearfall?  An exercise a scorekeeper could verify, maybe as the clock runs down under ten seconds.

yes, this would'nt be hard

[Wrestleknownothing]

50 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

when they stopped calling fouls in bball i quit watching.. 

but i agree with your premise in general 

im just not sure more people are going to watch b/c we change a TD point

I remembered that I have looked at NCAA tournament bonus points in the past, so I dug it up and updated for 2023. They have been down the past two years.

[ionel]

1 hour ago, Not134 said:

I would imagine that stricter pass interference rule changes in football years ago and basketball not calling fouls and traveling with too much veracity have both increased viewership.  Those rule changes (or interpretations) increased scoring and action which has to increase viewership.  For that matter, if soccer wants more viewership in the USA, call more fouls.  That should have the consequence of inducing more scoring which fans seem to appreciate.  Wrestling any different?

What!?  Soccer is an international game, it is the "the beautiful game" you don't just change the rules for one country just for their viewers.  Plus it doesn't need to be changed.  Went to a USA v Ireland friendly recently, sold out.  There was a USA v Mexico friendly just a few days ago 65k fans in attendance.  Nothing wrong with current foul calls.  I used to think soccer and wrestler were the related ultimate team and individual sports.  Both continuous action with no time outs, coaching needed to be done prior to competition, wrestles need to react to opponent in real time (no stopping to think about it) same with soccer but its an entire team reacting in real time to their opponent and team mates.  Sure there's a little bit of coaching, soccer can change formations or pressure points etc. while wrestlers can get coached to change first moves some strategy but the athletes still have to react in real time.

Well wrestling changed, it is no longer the near equivalent individual sport.  We know have time outs, if the coach sees his wrestler needs a break he can throw a brick.  Just like soccer it used to be a conditioning sport, needing to go hard non stop for 7 minutes.  I saw a match this last year where the wrestler who was gassing got close to a 10 min break from a handy coach brick.