Jason Bryant

I get it, you don’t like the terminology, just like I don’t like the archaic, redundant and misapplied term pinfall. Cheers

Which Points? The advent of points vs. a fall & time advantage? Team Scoring Changes? Match Points? Advent of the superior decision? Removal of the SD and advent of the major and technical fall? advent of overtime in dual meets? advent of criteria in team scoring events with dual advancement? advent of criteria in regular season duals? return of ties in duals? return of criteria in regular season duals? First takedown is 2 points, then all of them 1 point? Back to all takedowns being 2 points? Falls being 3 seconds? Falls being 2 seconds? Falls being 1 second? You see the issue with selecting an era based on a scoring rule? There's just too many. A scoring rule change didn't change the number of athletes who could or couldn't compete en masse and how many years they can compete like the FR eligibility did - Divisional Era is probably the most logical, since it set into motion what we have today. I'm not saying it's THE solution, but given the structure and history of the sport, the two above options make more sense to set clear eras apart from one another.

After 1969, freshman COULD wrestle, whereas before, there were rules against it. Pretty clear line of demarcation in regards to historical significance. No other changes, as of this moment, impacted eligibility and the sport's records like that change did. The exceptions are the 1947 year of freshman eligibility and the additional COVID year. The fact coaches became the arbiter of who wrestled when is immaterial - they were not allowed prior, making it a logical place to separate eras - the three-year era and the four-year era. Not sure why it's so bothersome. One other separator could simply be 1973-74 - the Divisional era, where the NCAA went to three divisions.

It's the era of four-year eligibility, that's the determining factor between wrestling before and wrestling after - save the one instance of 1947. Statistically, everything before then is different. Hence, why those of us who spend heavy time researching and archiving things that have never been properly chronicled have tended to look at it. Is the term "modern era" incorrect? It might be. Maybe it's the "four-year-eligibility era" but that's too annoying to write repeatedly. MLB's modern era is considered anything after 1901. MLB even designates some differences in stats from when they lowered the mound and the advent of the DH. I'm not saying its universally accepted or will be universally accepted, but that is the one clear line in the sport that separates the stats of old from the stats of today.

They lost to Arizona State and Iowa in that span.

Klingman, myself and a couple of the other wrestling historian types have tended to define the "modern era of college wrestling" to be full freshman eligibility (save the outlier '47 season), so from 1969 on. It's basically the era of "four time" anything ...

I made the clarification on the older post (From last year) after you posted it here. I figured it would make sense and go back to update the original post you linked to, so past references would be accurate.

The NWCA thing from last year is an error and is on me. I wrote that section - I handle the Coaches Poll - and when I was writing it, I meant to include a modern-era time descriptor, since the Iowa and Oklahoma State (one of them) streaks ended in 1999 and 2011, while the other Oklahoma State streak is from 1932. I've since updated that post from last year to avoid the issue arising again with something that was missing proper context. I've since written (multiple times, I believe) what the record is in NWCA poll releases. The "Division I" record is 76 (broken in 1951). The NCAA record is 77 (St. Cloud State, broken in 2022 one match after they set a new record). Since Oklahoma State's 76 was in an era prior to Divisions, I call that "major college" since it's a current Division I institution in an era that pre-dated even the college division. The modern era record would be 70. The all-time "D1" record is 76. The NCAA record is 77. Here's the working list (since that article was written in the midst of Grand View's win streak) https://almanac.mattalkonline.com/top-college-dual-meet-win-streaks/

Probably any match that involved Mike Faust.

Tennis is in the midst of a pilot program with split seasons. They do individual tournaments and qualifying for the individual championships in the fall. All team duals are in the spring. Individual titles determined in one half, team champs in another. https://wearecollegetennis.com/2023/09/01/ncaa-division-i-individual-championships/

This is true.

Scheduling/Calendar aside, what makes anyone think the power players are going to do anything to cede a perceived competitive advantage to one of their chief competitors? That's been a sticking points in the past - always having to go to Iowa in January. Now, climate in November is slightly more favorable in Oklahoma, but the point above has some merit. The power players are going to be for something if its on their terms.

That's sports. Got a killer defense that's adept at stopping a team's spread offense? But can't stop a triple-option? Your run and gun basketball team is great, but what if they can't sink a 3 and can't penetrate against a team with a pair of 7-footers? The best team doesn't always win a championship - and that's a good thing.

One thing we, as a wrestling community need to realize, is this movie isn’t “for us.” It’s for a more general, broader audience who isn’t hung up on the nuances of a niche sport as much as we are.

They have one of the GOATS, Andy Hamilton. Kyle Klingman’s resume also speaks for itself - so from a position of “professional” writers, they have two of the best the sport has. Andy coordinates a network of writers who do the “insider” stories they feature on a number of programs. Guys like Jim Carlson and Travis Johnson have bonafide careers in journalism, others like Brian Reinhardt are former SIDs. There’s also some guys like Nick Corey and Dylan Guenther who have written for different spots, usually centered around a certain region or school. The insider stories are consistent and good reads. Engagement headlines for the social juice is just part of the world now - like most places - there’s always going to be a stinker of a headline here and there.