NCAA Dual Team Championship

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

32 minutes ago, Dogbone said:

I am not so sure.  I have attended 2 B1Gs tournaments and I am not sure I will ever go back.  It is really a qualifier and that's how teams treat it.  It's common to have forfeits in the finals, not to mention on the backside.   

I don't think a true National Duals any where close to the Individual tournament is realistic, but now that everyone's approach is the "only thing that matters is March (NCAAs)" the conference tournaments aren't as material.  

Heck, PSU has dominated college wrestling recently, but has only won 4 of the last 10 B1G tournament champions.  No one really cares.

Hopefully not with the newer ruleset.

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

20 hours ago, BruceyB said:

Flo released an interview with Tom Brands today and was asked about his thoughts on the National Duals. He said it was a very exciting announcement, and that it's a kind of event that would interest Iowa wrestling.  He sounded like he had some vague reservations about the format moving forward. But I got the impression that Iowa will likely be a participant.

Here is the interview. National Duals talk starts right at the 6:00 mark.

https://www.flowrestling.org/video/13549132-tom-brands-wants-to-put-his-best-team-on-the-mat-heading-into-ohio-state-dual

Impossible.  Minnow has stated with multiple posts and comments that Iowa is refusing to attend.  Done deal.

[fishbane]

18 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

Right it's only the second best tournament in college wrestling, and with Big ten Network has brought  national TV coverage to NCAA wrestling than anything else?

I attended the Big Ten tournament last year.  There were open seats even in the finals.  My group had extra tickets we couldn't give away.  Not that many hardcore wrestling fans aren't flying across the country to watch Big Tens like NCAAs.  Last year it was in MD a relatively easy trip from State College, PA where PSU sells out every home dual.  And the Big Ten tournament is the exception of conference tournaments.  The EIWA is set to be less compelling this year than last year with the split of the Ivy League.

[Gene Mills Fan]

11 minutes ago, fishbane said:

I attended the Big Ten tournament last year.  There were open seats even in the finals.  My group had extra tickets we couldn't give away.  Not that many hardcore wrestling fans aren't flying across the country to watch Big Tens like NCAAs.  Last year it was in MD a relatively easy trip from State College, PA where PSU sells out every home dual.  And the Big Ten tournament is the exception of conference tournaments.  The EIWA is set to be less compelling this year than last year with the split of the Ivy League.

Well you can flip the channel and see wrestling on cable TV, what other NCAA league tourney is on national TV?  And if its a dual with less match ups And your team isnt in it, even less hardcore fans are flying in to see it.

[JeanGuy]

They have been awarding a team championship in wrestling for around 90 years, and it seems to work. There has never been an NCAA Wrestling Dual Tournament. The NCAA isn't interested. It has always been some outside entity trying to get their piece of the pie. I'm not saying things can't change but what is the benefit of the change? Does it serve the competitors? Without NCAA sponsorship it isn't legitimate in my mind.

[Dogbone]

1 hour ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

Right it's only the second best tournament in college wrestling, and with Big ten Network has brought  national TV coverage to NCAA wrestling than anything else?

And more people watched the Iowa/PSU dual than the B1G Finals, both on BTN. 

[Dogbone]

39 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

Well you can flip the channel and see wrestling on cable TV, what other NCAA league tourney is on national TV?  And if its a dual with less match ups And your team isnt in it, even less hardcore fans are flying in to see it.

ACC and Big 12 finals have also been broadcast on cable TV

[fishbane]

34 minutes ago, JeanGuy said:

They have been awarding a team championship in wrestling for around 90 years, and it seems to work. There has never been an NCAA Wrestling Dual Tournament. The NCAA isn't interested. It has always been some outside entity trying to get their piece of the pie. I'm not saying things can't change but what is the benefit of the change? Does it serve the competitors? Without NCAA sponsorship it isn't legitimate in my mind.

The NCAA isn't that interested in wrestling as an institution.  The outside entity that is trying to get a piece of the pie is the NWCA the coaches association.  It was literally a majority of NCAA wresting coaches that voted for this back in 2012.

 

[VakAttack]

This is a situation where it seems like we are slowly (so ***ducking** painfully slowly) moving towards the team title being a dual championship of some format.  I think this is the right thing.

People who say that the tournament tells us who "the best" team is make a somewhat fair argument, but it's just based on their own subjective belief of what's "best."  The Cornell example is a great one.  Obviously Penn State is a heavy favorite in either format, just a slightly smaller favorite in duals because of the variability of small sample sizes.  People against the idea of a dual deciding the team championship call this, essentially, a bug of that plan, but it's actually a feature.

Sports is all an artificial construct anyway, rules are subjective and not truly based on anything other than the previous set of rules.  Why is a takedown worth three now?  Why was it worth two before?  Because the people who wrote the rules said so.

In sports, though, variability is not a bug, it's a feature!  The mere POSSIBILITY of upsets increases fan attention and interest, and the dual format is just much easier to follow. 

There's also the increased fan engagement of the team championship being decided between two different competitor teams!  Right now we'll often figure out that some team (usually Penn State) has locked up the title on Friday night because somebody from Minnesota beat somebody from Iowa (just random teams for the purpose of the example).  In a dual the champ is decided by beating somebody head to head, just a better product for a team championship.

In the end, we're going in circles on this topic (and have been for years).  The question for me has always been, what's a better product for the majority of people to watch and understand and get excited about:  a 3 day tournament with more complicated team scoring, the team champion typically being crowned sometime before the biggest viewership, or a head to head dual with less complicated team scoring, the winner decided right there between two teams?  To me it's an easy call.  And I say that as a person who has been to several NCAA championships and love my time there, and have already booked my flight and tickets for this year!

[Gene Mills Fan]

21 minutes ago, Dogbone said:

And more people watched the Iowa/PSU dual than the B1G Finals, both on BTN. 

only in 2023 for P2+ viewers    Big 10 had two extra days of 220,000 viewers not totally understanding the groupings

https://ustvdb.com/networks/btn/shows/b1g-wrestling/

[fishbane]

21 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I like the idea of national duals (even though I do not think it constitutes a better definition of best team), but November is a problem if you want to claim this as any form of championship. Championships happen at the end of the season. Anything at the start of the season would be illegitimate in most fans, and certainly all casual fans, opinions.

Imagine having the college football playoffs and then having the regular season.

I agree with all of this expect the part about national duals not producing a better definition of best team.  Their NCAA has the advantage of all teams participating and a lot of matches to rank the teams, but I think there is a large element of randomness and draw dependency in the outcome.  If two teams are close in team points I don't feel that confident in saying one team is better than the other.  Last year 12.5 team points separated 2nd place Cornell from 8th place Ohio State.  How confident would you be that the ranking Cornell>Michigan>Iowa State>Iowa>Arizona State>Virginia Tech>Ohio State is accurate?

From a fan perspective having two teams wrestle a dual settles things in a more straightforward and satisfying manner.  Take the 1998-1999 season as an example.  Iowa won NCAAs with 100.5 team points.  Minnesota was 2nd with 98.5.  Iowa had three wrestlers in the final with 2 champs (Doug Schwab and T.J. Williams).  Their 3rd finalist Lee Fullhart lost to Minnesota's Tim Hartung.  What ultimately sealed the championship for Iowa was Stephen Neal beating Minnesota's Brock Lesnar in the final bout of the tournament, but you could just as easily point to T.J. Williams pinning UNC-Greensboro's Melvin Saunders in the first round of the tournament as the difference in team scores.  Is Iowa a better team?  They lost two duals to Minnesota that season.  Once at the National Duals and the other a Big Ten dual in Iowa City.

Edit - NWCA National duals were in Iowa City in 1999.  MInnestora beat Iowa 2x in duals in their home gym.

Edited 5 hours ago by fishbane

[PortaJohn]

30 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

There's also the increased fan engagement of the team championship being decided between two different competitor teams! 

That's only theory at this point and like other sports depends on which schools are realistically in the hunt.  PSU/Iowa will draw more engagement than say NC State/Virginia Tech. 

The highest viewership in recent memory for the NCAA finals was 2013 (Dake/Taylor) 860k viewers compared to 2018 that had a team title on the line during the finals round and only drew 628K viewers.  Be great if I am proven wrong but the idea that National Duals will increase engagement and grow wrestling seems like a fairytale.

Edited 5 hours ago by PortaJohn

[VakAttack]

12 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

That's only theory at this point and like other sports depends on which schools are realistically in the hunt.  PSU/Iowa will draw more engagement than say NC State/Virginia Tech. 

The highest viewership in recent memory for the NCAA finals was 2013 (Dake/Taylor) 860k viewers compared to 2018 that had a team title on the line during the finals round and only drew 628K viewers.  Be great if I am proved wrong but the idea that National Duals will increase engagement and grow wrestling seems like a fairytale.

I agree it's only a theory, but I think the logic is sound.  I know my wife's eyes glazed over when I tried to explain tournament scoring and such to her before last year's tournament.  Purely anecdotal, I know.

[BruceyB]

11 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

That's only theory at this point and like other sports depends on which schools are realistically in the hunt.  PSU/Iowa will draw more engagement than say NC State/Virginia Tech. 

The highest viewership in recent memory for the NCAA finals was 2013 (Dake/Taylor) 860k viewers compared to 2018 that had a team title on the line during the finals round and only drew 628K viewers.  Be great if I am proven wrong but the idea that National Duals will increase engagement and grow wrestling seems like a fairytale.

Here is a hot take. The finals are kind of brutal to watch. If I wasn't a junkie, I would just wait until the following day online. The broadcast runs typically like, what 3.5-4 hours? You get the same amount of action in a dual in 2 hours.

I don't know if I'm the only one, but usually by the 7th match, my attention starts fading and I just want it to finish up so I can see who wins. Sitting down for nearly 4 hours to watch 10 matches is just a lot to ask of a casual fan.

This is coming from someone who refers to NCAAs as my "Superbowl."

Another appealing aspect of duals is it's easy for anyone who knows nothing about wrestling to pick a team to root for. If my wife joins me while I'm watching PSU vs Ohio State, I can just say "we are rooting for the red team," and she can follow that. In the finals, if you don't know the individuals or have a team preference, there isn't really anything to root for.

[davenowa]

rather than the exact tennis model (or ncaa golf), take the complete logically opposite approach.  Make first two months of the season all essentially tournaments, but culminating in a DUAL MEET Championship weekend as the first semester ends (just before Christmas), with either 8 or 16 teams, wrestling for 1-8 placement (non-qualifiers could conduct similar dual event for 2nd and 3rd groups, if desired).  Take a couple of weeks off, and start second semester with all the DUAL MEETS that determine regular season conference championships, maybe a quad or tri-meet sprinkled in on a weekend or 2 (no tournaments, other than some "opens" to get non-varsity more mat time) and then culminate that portion of the season with the INDIVIDUALLY BRACKETED TOURNEY (as it is now).  To top it off, and to maintain the tradition of only 1 national champion per academic year, use the ordinal finish from each event to determine the champ (low combined score wins, and anyone not placing top 8 at the Duals is awarded a "9" to be added to their trny placement).  Still torn on the tiebreaker being dual champ or trny champ (ie team A wins duals, 2nd trny while B is 2nd duals and 1st trny, or perhaps even the dreaded A wins  duals, 3rd at trny while B is 2nd at both and C is 3rd duals 1st trny, all scoring a "4").

[PortaJohn]

25 minutes ago, BruceyB said:

Here is a hot take. The finals are kind of brutal to watch. If I wasn't a junkie, I would just wait until the following day online. The broadcast runs typically like, what 3.5-4 hours? You get the same amount of action in a dual in 2 hours.

I don't know if I'm the only one, but usually by the 7th match, my attention starts fading and I just want it to finish up so I can see who wins. Sitting down for nearly 4 hours to watch 10 matches is just a lot to ask of a casual fan.

This is coming from someone who refers to NCAAs as my "Superbowl."

Another appealing aspect of duals is it's easy for anyone who knows nothing about wrestling to pick a team to root for. If my wife joins me while I'm watching PSU vs Ohio State, I can just say "we are rooting for the red team," and she can follow that. In the finals, if you don't know the individuals or have a team preference, there isn't really anything to root for.

I'm not anti duals nor against a dual team championship.  I just think it's a fairytale to think it will grow the sport.

Have yet to meet a former college wrestler who talked about the dual they lost.  It's an individual sport & I think if we wanted to grow the sport it should be marketed more like the UFC, boxing, PGA Golf, etc. 

Some like to poke fun of Bo Bassett because of his social media presence but he has done more to grow the sport of wrestling than decades of tinkering at the NCAA level

[VakAttack]

6 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

I'm not anti duals nor against a dual team championship.  I just think it's a fairytale to think it will grow the sport.

Have yet to meet a former college wrestler who talked about the dual they lost.  It's an individual sport & I think if we wanted to grow the sport it should be marketed more like the UFC, boxing, PGA Golf, etc. 

Some like to poke fun of Bo Bassett because of his social media presence but he has done more to grow the sport of wrestling than decades of tinkering at the NCAA level

Really?  All the college wrestlers I've talked to have great dual stories.  The NCAA tournament, while awesome for junkies like us, seems like way more of a grind and fewer people get true "glory" moments as compared to duals.  JMO.

[PortaJohn]

2 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

Really?  All the college wrestlers I've talked to have great dual stories.  The NCAA tournament, while awesome for junkies like us, seems like way more of a grind and fewer people get true "glory" moments as compared to duals.  JMO.

Sure dual stories are great as are tournament stories.  My point was I have yet to have a wrestler tell me how devastated they are about a dual meet loss.  It's not in the DNA of the wrestlers I know.  Everyone's focus I know was getting on the podium it was not winning duals.  

[fishbane]

3 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

I'm not anti duals nor against a dual team championship.  I just think it's a fairytale to think it will grow the sport.

Have yet to meet a former college wrestler who talked about the dual they lost.  It's an individual sport & I think if we wanted to grow the sport it should be marketed more like the UFC, boxing, PGA Golf, etc. 

Some like to poke fun of Bo Bassett because of his social media presence but he has done more to grow the sport of wrestling than decades of tinkering at the NCAA level

I don't think growing the sport is a good argument for National Duals.  To me it's more about choosing a team champion in a more easily understood way.  Most wrestlers couldn't tell you the exact scoring.  

Of the sports that you mentioned UFC, Boxing, and PGA Golf only the last one is contested in a tournament format.  The first two have cards with a handful of select bouts that are much closer to duals than tournaments.  

How much would you estimate Bassett's social media presence has grown the sport?  20%, 10%, 5%, 1%?  

[BruceyB]

2 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

I just think it's a fairytale to think it will grow the sport.

Grow the sport gets thrown around too often. I think we should just being doing what is best for the sport in creating excitement for fans in general. This will likely coincide with gaining some new fans, but how many, I don't know.

FWIW I could convince my old high school wrestling buddies to get together to watch a dual national finals where they'd at least have an association with which two universities were competing, but they could care less to watch 20 guys they've never heard of wrestle in the finals.

[BruceyB]

2 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

My point was I have yet to have a wrestler tell me how devastated they are about a dual meet loss.

I bet if they lost a dual in the national finals they'd feel some devastation.

[PortaJohn]

1 minute ago, fishbane said:

I don't think growing the sport is a good argument for National Duals.  To me it's more about choosing a team champion in a more easily understood way.  Most wrestlers couldn't tell you the exact scoring.  

Of the sports that you mentioned UFC, Boxing, and PGA Golf only the last one is contested in a tournament format.  The first two have cards with a handful of select bouts that are much closer to duals than tournaments.  

How much would you estimate Bassett's social media presence has grown the sport?  20%, 10%, 5%, 1%?  

Fair point on the National Duals.  

Bad job on my part on not clarifying what I meant on the UFC, Boxing, PGA.  Was not suggesting we use their format for competition.  Was speaking to how they market their athletes and create hype.

Would not be able to answer that.  It does appear his contribution to wrestling has been significant with the youth.  Maybe @Husker_Du or @Jason Bryant can answer that for you

 

[BruceyB]

3 minutes ago, fishbane said:

I don't think growing the sport is a good argument for National Duals.  To me it's more about choosing a team champion in a more easily understood way.  Most wrestlers couldn't tell you the exact scoring.  

Of the sports that you mentioned UFC, Boxing, and PGA Golf only the last one is contested in a tournament format.  The first two have cards with a handful of select bouts that are much closer to duals than tournaments.  

How much would you estimate Bassett's social media presence has grown the sport?  20%, 10%, 5%, 1%?  

I don't think Bassett has grown the sport. He has grown his brand within the sport. People only know who Bo Bassett is because they are fans of wrestling. People aren't becoming wrestling fans because of him.

[VakAttack]

9 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

Sure dual stories are great as are tournament stories.  My point was I have yet to have a wrestler tell me how devastated they are about a dual meet loss.  It's not in the DNA of the wrestlers I know.  Everyone's focus I know was getting on the podium it was not winning duals.  

I guess.  When i've talked to older wrestlers, I have heard some crazy stories about Iowa-Iowa State duals back in the 90 and 00's.  Even in modern times, some of the most crazy environments I've seen are some Iowa-Penn State duals, Iowa-Okie State, Va. Tech-NC State, etc.  The viewership of duals exceeds the viewership for tournaments...except for the big tournament at the end.  So the question is, is that because the NCAA veneer being slapped on increases the meaning of the event, or because of the event itself?  I tend to think it's because it's for the NCAA titles (both individual and team) and if we made a separate event for the team title and left the tournament to determine the individual champs, we'd see two high viewership events.  Plus, duals are just much more easily digestible time-wise.

[BruceyB]

3 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

I guess.  When i've talked to older wrestlers, I have heard some crazy stories about Iowa-Iowa State duals back in the 90 and 00's.  Even in modern times, some of the most crazy environments I've seen are some Iowa-Penn State duals, Iowa-Okie State, Va. Tech-NC State, etc.  The viewership of duals exceeds the viewership for tournaments...except for the big tournament at the end.  So the question is, is that because the NCAA veneer being slapped on increases the meaning of the event, or because of the event itself?  I tend to think it's because it's for the NCAA titles (both individual and team) and if we made a separate event for the team title and left the tournament to determine the individual champs, we'd see two high viewership events.  Plus, duals are just much more easily digestible time-wise.

Let's just say this.

two awesome events > one awesome event

Can't we all agree on that?