Which colleges will add men's wrestling now that Title IX's restored to its original (more gender-fair) legislative intent?

[Offthemat]

6 hours ago, ionel said:

Ok ... if we just go Crayola 8 instead of 64 on the charts will that reduce my cost by a factor of 8?  Or how about a nice 8 year bourbon for the Crayola 8 work? 

8 year?  Will there be any left. 

[wrestlingshoe]

Washington also just started up it's first NAIA varsity program in many years... guys and gals at Evergreen State College. Maybe the movement will continue.

[ionel]

11 hours ago, Offthemat said:

8 year?  Will there be any left. 

After Wkn gets his hands on it ... hah ... doubtful.

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

10 hours ago, wrestlingshoe said:

Washington also just started up it's first NAIA varsity program in many years... guys and gals at Evergreen State College. Maybe the movement will continue.

Thanks for sharing that.   A few years ago, Ben Askren suggested that we consider focusing our energies on building up wrestling in the NAIA and the NCWA rather than continue to feel excluded and frustrated with the NCAA D1 league.    When the U. of Oregon demands tens of millions of dollars to reinstate wrestling, and is (reportedly) hardly alone in that regard, it's difficult to disregard Ben's suggestion that we evaluate our efforts and consider refocusing regarding their destinations.     

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

The U.S. Supreme Court (i.e. the "SCOTUS") is making preparations to rule before July of 2024 on whether or not folks must defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes, as long as the interpretations are "reasonable". 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4254920-supreme-court-adds-second-case-in-battle-over-chevron-doctrine/

 I predict that the "Chevron deference" doctrine will finally be withdrawn by the high court in 2024 and it's an uplifting forecast.    If this happens, it will give folks the chance to litigate Title IX and other statute-based interpretation matters in courts throughout the land, without having to defer to know-it-all bureaucrats in the Washington D.C. beltway.   This pending breakthrough has the potential to enable us to get more college wrestling teams launched, ultimately enabling more women to wrestle, too, but without killing men's wrestling if women won't wrestle in sufficient quantities and / or if football has a healthy roster.    Stay tuned, folks!  Better times appear to be approaching for wrestling for members of both genders.       

[Jason Bryant]

The optimism surrounding the potential withdrawal of the “Chevron deference” doctrine by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2024 might overlook certain crucial aspects of federal governance and judicial efficiency. The Chevron deference, which mandates judicial deference to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutes, plays a significant role in maintaining a level of expertise and efficiency in federal decision-making.

The notion that withdrawing the Chevron deference would lead to a more democratic judicial review process may not account for the potential bottlenecks and delays in litigation that could arise. The federal agencies tasked with interpreting these statutes are often equipped with a level of expertise and understanding that is crucial for making informed and nuanced decisions. Reassigning this interpretative authority to courts, which may lack the requisite expertise, could lead to inconsistent interpretations and prolonged legal battles, exacerbating the already existing backlog of cases.

Furthermore, the assertion that this change would foster a more conducive environment for the growth of college wrestling and gender equity within the sport may not fully consider the complexity and multifaceted nature of Title IX interpretation and enforcement. Title IX’s mandate to ensure gender equity in education and athletics extends beyond merely the allocation of resources or the establishment of college wrestling teams. It encompasses a broad range of issues including sexual harassment, equal opportunity, and fair treatment across all genders.

The argument also seems to oversimplify the process of launching more college wrestling teams by assuming that a change in legal doctrine would directly translate to a growth in the sport. The factors influencing the establishment and support of college wrestling teams are multifarious and not solely dependent on federal statute interpretation. They include, among others, funding, infrastructure, interest, and community support.

Additionally, the perspective that moving away from Chevron deference would diminish the power of “know-it-all bureaucrats” might not acknowledge the importance of having centralized, expert-driven interpretations in maintaining a level of national standardization and coherence in the application of federal statutes.

Lastly, while the aspiration for a more inclusive atmosphere within college wrestling is commendable, the pathway to achieving this inclusivity may require a more comprehensive approach than merely altering judicial deference doctrines. It necessitates a holistic examination of the existing challenges and a collaborative effort among all stakeholders, including educational institutions, athletic associations, federal agencies, and the courts.

Thus, while the forecasted withdrawal of Chevron deference sparks a hopeful discourse about decentralizing decision-making and promoting gender equity in college wrestling, it may also usher in a realm of legal uncertainty, potential judicial inefficiency, and an oversimplification of the broader challenges at play.

[TitleIX is ripe for reform]

I'm glad whenever I see anyone putting thought into the post-Chevron deference opportunity, for better or for worse.   

By being aware of the potential pitfalls and hurdles before they emerge, we can fine-tune our strategies for wrestling's and society's benefit.   

Yes, with increased freedom there will be more waves getting made.    Returning some authority back to the provinces will lead to differences in opinion (also known as "circuit splits").   Those can be managed, especially if enough thought's put into them.   Meanwhile federal laws can be updated in ways that we could not previously force due to bureaucrats' having seized so much power (and money) for themselves.   

As for centralized bureaucrats' purported expertise, sometimes they're just plain sold-out, nonresponsive and (of course) biased.   Folks in the college wrestling community typically don't miss the (unelected) Ed. Department's Norma Cantu, for example.   It hasn't helped wrestling to have the Chevron deference doctrine intact since circa 1984.   We had far more wrestling teams before then.   Title IX went into effect over a decade beforehand.   I've not seen a graph of the drop in programs correlated with those two years.   @Wrestleknownothing might be intrigued (or not).   There may be some other years that seem worth potentially keeping in mind for such a possible graph, too.   

Losing Chevron deference wouldn't solve all of college wrestling's elimination risks, but it would open new doors for us as we strive to address them in novel, potentially more impactful ways.   
  

[Jason Bryant]

While it's encouraging to see enthusiasm for the potential changes that could come with the withdrawal of Chevron deference, it's crucial to remember that this legal doctrine serves as a stabilizing force in the American legal system. The idea that removing it would automatically lead to a more democratic system and benefit sports like college wrestling might be overly optimistic. For one, the removal of Chevron deference could lead to a chilling effect on federal agencies, making them less willing to issue rules or guidance. This could result in a regulatory vacuum, leaving important issues unaddressed. Additionally, the absence of Chevron deference might encourage more litigation as parties test the boundaries of agency authority, leading to a more adversarial and less collaborative approach to governance. Therefore, while the aspiration for a more inclusive atmosphere within college wrestling is commendable, achieving this goal may require a more comprehensive approach than merely altering judicial deference doctrines.

[Show_Me]

On 10/12/2023 at 2:27 PM, ionel said:

Ask yourself what have Cael, Tom & B10 done lately to expand/support wrestling?  When Stanford dropped John Smith went out of his way to put them on the schedule and encourage wrestlers to stay at Stanford.  What did Brands do, spent 6 figures to steal their best wrestler.  Sanderson, nothing i know of.  They both killed the Ntl Duals or maybe that was Carl's plan.  When B10 announcers spend all their time downgrading other conferences and bragging about themselves how does that grow the sport?  Look at the money Michigan, Oh St etc spent to grab wrestler away from other programs.

This

[MPhillips]

10 hours ago, Show_Me said:

This

 What money did TR spend to, "grab wrestlers away" from other programs...

[ionel]

3 hours ago, MPhillips said:

 What money did TR spend to, "grab wrestlers away" from other programs...

6 figs/yr for an out of state HS kid 

[MPhillips]

15 minutes ago, ionel said:

6 figs/yr for an out of state HS kid 

Figs went to ASU. Keep up...

[ionel]

4 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

Figs went to ASU. Keep up...

[Wrestleknownothing]

I think we can safely say it will not be Texas A&M to next add wrestling.

After firing Jimbo Fisher and triggering a $76+ million buyout (with no offsets if he gets another job. Huh?) and probably having to pay assistant coaches to leave and pay new coaches to come in, it will likely cost the school north of $100 million to fire a coach slightly above .500 (19-15 overall, 10-13 against the SEC, 12-14 against Power 5) since signing this very reasonable, and totally worth it, contract.

But, let's face it, the real problem with college athletics is athletes transferring, collecting NIL payments, and betting on women's college basketball.

[ionel]

15 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I think we can safely say it will not be Texas A&M to next add wrestling.

After firing Jimbo Fisher and triggering a $76+ million buyout (with no offsets if he gets another job. Huh?) and probably having to pay assistant coaches to leave and pay new coaches to come in, it will likely cost the school north of $100 million to fire a coach slightly above .500 (19-15 overall, 10-13 against the SEC, 12-14 against Power 5) since signing this very reasonable, and totally worth it, contract.

But, let's face it, the real problem with college athletics is athletes transferring, collecting NIL payments, and betting on women's college basketball.

Ok ... you got that last part right ... but .. back to the A&M thing.  Maybe it means A&M has so much money to throw away that no one would notice if they lost $10M on wrestling.  

[1032004]

On 10/12/2023 at 3:27 PM, ionel said:

Ask yourself what have Cael, Tom & B10 done lately to expand/support wrestling?  Whe Stanford dropped John Smith went out of his way to put them on the schedule and encourage wrestlers to stay at Stanford.  What did Brands do, spent 6 figures to steal their best wrestler.  Sanderson, nothing i know of.  They both killed the Ntl Duals or maybe that was Carl's plan.  When B10 announcers spend all their time downgrading other conferences and bragging about themselves how does that grow the sport?  Look at the money Michigan, Oh St etc spent to grab wrestler away from other programs.

You want to grow D1 wrestling, get coaches onbord.

With all the NIL $s maybe we need a better way to share like NFL.  Although I prefer the Euro football league & relegate/promote model.  My plan anyone can qualify for a national individual tournament (no team score) but leagues would be dual meet for promotion & relegate.  

If I were running it I'd start PSU in the national league so it'd take a couple years to promote to Premier, but thats just me.  

Its a perfect beautiful plan & Wkn has all my data for making big tables & colorful charts. 

If Brands had any part in bringing the womens team to Iowa (and I have no idea if he did) would that count?

IMO, Cael is “supporting wrestling” by helping it actually become a viable career after college due to the success of the NLWC.

Most of Michigans transfers came from another B10 school and IIRC most (in total, so including Griffith) are also grad transfers.

I thought tOSU is (allegedly) spending most of their NIL money on incoming recruits and not transfers? But they would always get great recruiting classes so that’s not much different and you could argue the ability for wrestlers who haven’t even wrestled in college yet to get NIL money is in fact helping to grow the sport.

 

[ionel]

1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

If Brands had any part in bringing the womens team to Iowa (and I have no idea if he did) would that count?

IMO, Cael is “supporting wrestling” by helping it actually become a viable career after college due to the success of the NLWC.

Most of Michigans transfers came from another B10 school and IIRC most (in total, so including Griffith) are also grad transfers.

I thought tOSU is (allegedly) spending most of their NIL money on incoming recruits and not transfers? But they would always get great recruiting classes so that’s not much different and you could argue the ability for wrestlers who haven’t even wrestled in college yet to get NIL money is in fact helping to grow the sport.

 

To the one question: no its a different sport.

Cael puts out a great product but he is growing his kingdom not supporting or growing NCAA wrestling.  Review the national duals etc.

MI and tOSU are similar.  Yes one is mostly grad transfers the other incoming recruits.  But when you have kids with options but offered $100/200k for a one year grad transfer or half million for 5 year out of high school they mightve really wanted to consider other options but its mostly now about the money.  And everyone knows most programs can't compete with the MI, PSU and tOSU money.

Sure that train has left the station, Cael threw the first coal in the boilers but there's only a small handful of programs that can keep up.  It destroyed the 9.9 parity and it isn't growing the sport.  But maybe we don't really want to grow the sport as we'd really rather go to NCAAs every year just to see PSU double the score of a possible 3 teams vying for second?

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

2 hours ago, ionel said:

To the one question: no its a different sport.

Cael puts out a great product but he is growing his kingdom not supporting or growing NCAA wrestling.  Review the national duals etc.

MI and tOSU are similar.  Yes one is mostly grad transfers the other incoming recruits.  But when you have kids with options but offered $100/200k for a one year grad transfer or half million for 5 year out of high school they mightve really wanted to consider other options but its mostly now about the money.  And everyone knows most programs can't compete with the MI, PSU and tOSU money.

Sure that train has left the station, Cael threw the first coal in the boilers but there's only a small handful of programs that can keep up.  It destroyed the 9.9 parity and it isn't growing the sport.  But maybe we don't really want to grow the sport as we'd really rather go to NCAAs every year just to see PSU double the score of a possible 3 teams vying for second?

 

I think a lot of these numbers are urban legend.

[1032004]

2 hours ago, ionel said:

To the one question: no its a different sport.

Cael puts out a great product but he is growing his kingdom not supporting or growing NCAA wrestling.  Review the national duals etc.

MI and tOSU are similar.  Yes one is mostly grad transfers the other incoming recruits.  But when you have kids with options but offered $100/200k for a one year grad transfer or half million for 5 year out of high school they mightve really wanted to consider other options but its mostly now about the money.  And everyone knows most programs can't compete with the MI, PSU and tOSU money.

Sure that train has left the station, Cael threw the first coal in the boilers but there's only a small handful of programs that can keep up.  It destroyed the 9.9 parity and it isn't growing the sport.  But maybe we don't really want to grow the sport as we'd really rather go to NCAAs every year just to see PSU double the score of a possible 3 teams vying for second?

 

I disagree that Cael "doesn't want to support or grow NCAA wrestling."   Yes he may have killed National Duals and I'm definitely on the side of wanting a duals championship, but for example other than forfeiting to Zahid a few years back he doesn't usually sit guys out for duals.

There have pretty much always only been a small handful of teams that can keep up, but that's more due to Cael being the best coach than NIL/transfer portal.

The guys supposedly being offered half a million out of high school weren't going to go to a mid-major.

The one concern with NIL/transfer portal is big schools stealing guys from small schools, and yes that has happened but in most of the bigger name cases there have been extenuating circumstances such as being a grad transfer or coaching changes at the former school.  And of course the B10 doesn't have a monopoly on this - Olejnik to OSU and Feldkamp to ISU are two B12 examples this season.  There have also been a non-insignificant number of guys transfer from "big name" schools and having success at smaller schools.

Edited November 14, 2023 by 1032004

[ionel]

1 minute ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I think a lot of these numbers are urban legend.

Nope.

[Wrestleknownothing]

2 minutes ago, ionel said:

Nope.

Persuasive.

[1032004]

Half a million out of high school may be a stretch, but I definitely believe six figures for the recent transfers.   Gannon Gremmell has recently stated he declined an offer of $40K to come back, and he's not even on the same level as some of these other guys.

[Idaho]

2 hours ago, ionel said:

Cael puts out a great product but he is growing his kingdom not supporting or growing NCAA wrestling. 

He has done his part in helping Oregon State IMO.... wOSU went out the last two years to dual PSU... they are now coming out this season on Feb 5th to dual Oregon State. Will be a huge dual meet for wOSU at home. 

[ionel]

7 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Persuasive.

Some times horses do speak but as you recently said, perhaps I've said too much.  

Edited November 14, 2023 by ionel

[ionel]

Just now, Idaho said:

He has done his part in helping Oregon State IMO.... wOSU went out the last two years to dual PSU... they are now coming out this season on Feb 5th to dual Oregon State. Will be a huge dual meet for wOSU at home. 

This is a good thing.