BAC

I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time seeing how this is going to work. The main problem is that it's just freestyle. Don't get me wrong -- I love freestyle. No other sport I'd rather watch. But the truth is, the bleachers are pretty empty even in nationals and WTTs. It's a small community, not particularly moneyed, and it's hard enough to get them to come out when there's actually something on the line. We know the typical attendance figures for freestyle events, and we know they aren't financially viable. I just don't see the plan. It isn't that nothing's being done. I see the social media, I see the prize links to high school teams, the drawing for a free camp. That's nice. Maybe it bumps the attendance a bit. But even if it's on the above-average side of a typical freestyle event, that's still a long way from being financially viable. Forgive my rant, but: 1. Better Cross-Selling They could have tried to cross-sell it with another sport which similarly has a modest fan base -- e.g. BJJ, grappling, judo. Not seeing that. Even if it's just one or two match, these smaller sports can cross-sell. They'd also be wise to find a way to work with MMA on this, because otherwise, MMA will see them as competition. Maybe build in some advertising for them, and have some UFC people there. We can't portray ourselves as some sort of minor league for UFC, but the sports are symbiotic and both can play off that. Similarly, it sucks that Hulk passed, but I'd have thought they could cross-sell to the pro wrestling crowd too. Not my jam, but those guys fill huge arenas. Maybe they were trying, I don't know, but that's going to be a tough sell without a pro wrestling "face". They also could mix something else in the event which pulls out the non-wrestling crowd or at least wrestling fans' families or significant others -- e.g. some well-known performer at intermission, MMA celebrities, etc. Not seeing that either. The reason it's so important to attract an audience outside the typical freestyle crowd isn't just that the numbers are too low without them. It's sponsorships. Companies like Defense Soap and Rudis only have so much ad money to go around, and to be viable, you need to attract some of the bigger dogs. 2. Making the Event More Exciting If they're not going to do any of that stuff, then they really need to do something to amp up the excitement level in the wrestling itself. But I don't see that either. For example, build in mini events within the wrestling itself. A big prize if someone hits a 5 pointer, or a pin under a minute, or something that creates a huge incentive to do something wild. Something that totally changes the complexion of the match to see if anyone's going to pull it off. I'm not seeing that. They could shake it up by mixing up the rules to make it more offensive-action oriented or throw-oriented, or dramatically change the scoring, so it's constant attempts to score. (I made a separate post about that a while back.) Doesn't appear to be in the works. They also could mess with the scoring by giving guys a "handicap" like it's golf (e.g. spotting points to the underdog), so you can have more on-paper mismatches or bumping up weights. But everything I've heard so far is that it just isn't varying much from a standard freesyle dual that doesn't vary much from tradition. 3. Where's the "League"? The most frustrating thing to me is that what's billed as a "league" really just looks like a Flowrestling Night in America event. If you're gonna do a league, do a league. Have a draft, talk it up. Have the "teams" based in specific cities. Create an actual team, which develops actual fans, who actually follow said teams. Get creative about how team score is kept to keep it exciting. Get the smack talk going, get the interviews before and after going, have a process for trade, have a well-known coach for each team -- even if the coach(es) are crossover guys. Maybe have the coaches wrestle if the team score is tied. If this is too heavy a lift, maybe contract with the RTCs. Those are existing teams of freestyle athletes who have no one to compete against except themselves when not in international competition. Even better, if you do that, maybe doing a licensing deal with universities, you can tap into collegiate allegiances to build out your fan base. Why not link up with them? In fairness, my guess is that they know there's too small a demand to create an actual league right out of the gate, and they're doing this event more to whet the appetite and build a brand, sort of a "proof of concept." I agree that makes sense, as the fan base is too small as it is. But even if so, that should be made more clear, and the design of the event should serve as a buildup to that -- explicitly, and with some context for the vision, so it gets talked up. It's also all the more reason to really change things up and do something extraordinarily fan friendly and action-friendly, widening the audience while exciting the bases. 4. Unique matchups. What's more, even among existing fans of freestyle wrestling, you need to create a product that they want to see. For that, you need good matchups. Honestly, they're pretty lackluster. Several are decent, but it begs for a headliner. Get me a Gable vs. Snyder, or Spencer vs Jax, or Nickal versus an actual bear (OK maybe not), or AJ vs. Starocci, or Starocci vs. Bartlett (LOL), or Taylor vs. Dake part XVIII. Or go the generational route, putting in the top current guys against some top high school guys with huge social media followings. They've done some of this, pulling in Nickal and old-timers like Palmer and Caldwell. *** Bottom line is this: What I'm seeing is a lack of risk taking. The built-in audience is simply too small for this, so you need to do something more than just talk it up on twitter and having drawings, because even if that works you'll still fall short. A rehash of RPW or RWL is going to hit a wall real fast. Maybe they've got Elon Musk secretly bankrolling them for $500 million and so they're fine with taking a loss, so they can afford to make it an event for freestyle purists. But I suspect all they've really got it some decent seed money, which is going to dry up real fast if they can't present a viable vision with a path to profit.

Hmm. Seems inconsistent. Earlier you were saying that we don't need to convert folk into free since we just won Cadet free. By that logic (that changing folk rules depends on success in the international styles) I figured you were saying that since we got throttled in Cadet greco that must mean we ought to make folk more like greco. Seemed like solid logic to me.

So you're saying we should convert folkstyle to be more like Greco so we can make the Greco team better? Interesting thought.

The executive order is plainly unenforceable as impermissible executive legislation. Though directionally appropriate it's also ill considered and will serve only to inject added chaos to an already messy environment.

I agree it's a bad take by Pyles, but I can't get too upset. It's a fine line between stating the obvious (that Vito wasn't himself) and not giving due credit to the victor, and I think Pyles was just trying to make sure he wasn't disrespecting Jax. That's laudable, but here, he came off as denying the obvious.

It was hard to watch. After watching Vito slump off the mat in the first match, while Jax skipped off, the result of the second match seemed like a sure thing. It's been a while since I've seen a wrestler whose cardio was that bad. I don't want to judge since we all know Vito is coming off some sort of injury, but dang, I can't help but wonder if there was something else Vito could have done while he was getting wrestling-ready to keep his cardio up. Ride a bike, swimming, anything? Both matches his tank was empty at the 4 minute mark.

I've shuffled the rankings in my head of "who's the best P4P high schooler?" about 3-4 times the past 6 months, between Blaze, Jax and PJ. I wonder if I'll need to do it again after today. One thing's for sure -- the US has never had 3 current high schoolers who were as good as those three. And I doubt it ever will again.

Agree with this. If anything, it's a feather in Cornell's cap that they had 3 guys in Final X (including Dake), which is outstanding. Second only to PSU (with 4), right? What's more, each of these Cornell Final X'ers have world medals to their credit. Any recruit worth having is going to know full well how credentialed Vito, Yianni and Dake are, and that Cornell produced them. There's zero shame in losing to a high schooler when they beat everyone else too.

Some pretty crazy rankings in there. Here is the entirety of Luke Simcox's resume to be ranked #16 (per WrestlStat): #74 Navida, Elias (14 - 5) #17 North Carolina 02/23 Wildcat Open 141 W DEC 7 - 0 #154 Sly, Charlie (8 - 11) #61 Gardner-Webb 02/23 Wildcat Open 141 W FALL 6:28 #92 Reihner, Blake (10 - 7) #78 Davidson 02/23 Wildcat Open 141 W DEC 5 - 0 #65 Sherlock, Tyson (13 - 7) #78 Davidson 02/23 Wildcat Open 141 W FALL 1:57 #38 Basile, Braden (11 - 6) #25 Army West Point 01/04 Southern Scuffle 141 L MD 18 - 4 #154 Sly, Charlie (8 - 11) #61 Gardner-Webb 01/04 Southern Scuffle 141 W FALL 1:46 #68 Iamunno, Joey (14 - 13) #55 Brown 01/04 Southern Scuffle 141 W DEC 10 - 3 #77 Oswalt, Ian (17 - 7) #55 Brown 01/04 Southern Scuffle 141 L DEC 10 - 5 #151 Matthews, Devin (11 - 14) #65 LIU 01/04 Southern Scuffle 141 W DEC 6 - 1 #6 Frost, Jacob (28 - 9) #13 Iowa State 12/21 Iowa State - North Carolina Dual 141 L MD 10 - 1 #3 Wilson, Josh (D3) #101 Greensboro 11/25 Greensboro - North Carolina Dual 141 L DEC 4 - 1 In sum: Highest ranked win is vs. #65 (a back-up at Davidson), with losses to #6, 38, 77 and a D3 kid. I know it's all algorithm based but what kind for formula would make a computer say "yeah he's 16th"?

No one's saying that. But if he were ramping up for a competition, there's be a stronger inference of intent to cheat. Since he wasn't, the inference cuts the other way. The point is that the supplement was allegedly purchased *after* he was sick (according to his dad), and he didn't find out about the negative test result until *after* Final X had passed. It isn't dispositive, but that too cuts in favor if it being inadvertent. Um, OK. Whatever that means. Well, the problem here is we don't know exactly what he bought, or how that product lines up to his explanation. His dad says he was "looking at his doctor’s report and all the things he’s lacking in. And he went to get supplements to replenish whatever it is that needs to be replenished." If I'm the USADA, I want to see what the doctor's report says, and whether/how the product he bought replenishes that. Again, it isn't a defense, but it might tend to show it was bought more for healing purposes than competitive purposes. Conversely, some are claiming he bought supplements that are literally called "DHEA." But do we know that? His dad says he bought "a supplement, a natural, plant-based supplement," which doesn't quite track, unless he's referring to the soy/yam from which I understand DHEA can be synthesized. I guess we'll find out. If it was literally called "DHEA," that's some next-level stupid and you can't claim it was ingested accidentally (only that you didn't know it was banned). This we won't know until the report comes out, but don't see the point in definitively stringing him up without knowing the truth. What's the basis for tagging the "asshole" label on Brooks, besides his misfortune of having gone to a college that kicked everyone's butt? I could do without his Christian proselytizing too but he's entitled to his views and I'm entitled to mine. You may find his outward religiosity cringey but a-hole is a stretch.

That's actually what my first reaction was, except salary cap, not roster cap. By "salary cap," I mean that in a program that's dependent on just 1 or 2 major donors for NIL money, they only have so much money they can spend each year. That's the salary cap. If those funds get tied up in someone who isn't starting, it's that much less they can devote to some other recruit. To free that money up, the donor needs a valid reason to break the NIL contract -- and dismissal of the team is one such reason. Can't say that's what happened here, but since Arnold was already destined to ride the pine while still collecting Nicolls' NIL money, it would make some sense for Brands to seize on the first defensible reason they had to cut him loose, thus freeing up Nicolls' NIL money for some other recruit. Nicolls making his displeasure known on the Hawk boards may have accelerated that process.

DHEA is a hormone that your body naturally produces. I assume the supplements are a synthesized version but it's irrelevant -- the point is when you buy supplements, it's likely a non-FDA approved use, which means you need to be extra careful to check the ingredients. However made, DHEA is a steroid, full stop, so he's getting dinged for it -- rightly so. The only question is whether he intended to cheat. Here, there is zero evidence of it. The fact that he wasn't planning to compete anyway points the other way. (He didn't get his test results until WTTs were over.) Yet here you are, along with 90% of other "fans," celebrating the downfall of a world team member, accusing him of lying, and all but DEMANDING the USADA find him guilty of intending to cheat. Why? Because his alma mater kicked your favorite team's azz. That's all. Welcome to Team USA, home of the worst fans in the world.

I see the PSU haters are out in full force in this thread. If it were up to this crowd, Brooks would be banned for life, jailed, and sterilized for good measure. Brooks was boneheaded, no doubt. Not reading the label of a natural supplement is a inexcusable, pneumonia or not, so I'm not sympathetic. I'm also ticked that his actions will hurt the strength of Team USA. But saying he's outright lying and intending to cheat, without a lick of evidence, is pretty nasty stuff. If the USADA decides otherwise, then I'll defer to that finding, as there may be more to the story. But if the USADA determines this was a result of negligence, and not an intent to cheat, is this crowd going to collectively petition the USADA to reconsider, and to impose a harsher punishment? It used to be the case that when a guy graduated and was on the World team, the entire USA wrestling community would be behind him. I guess not so anymore. I can just see some of you guys cheering like maniacs when Ramazanov came from behind to beat him at the Olympic semis. Best day of your life, eh? I guess some guys just can't get over the beatings Brooks gave your team in his college days.

Thanks Caveira. I, for one, feel enlightened. I had thought perhaps a stolen watch was more the size of a breadbox and thus would be difficult to conceal without smoke and mirrors. Thanks for setting me straight.

I don't know Caveira. Why don't you delve into your history of petty theft to enlighten us.

I'm not sure why you would assume he *wouldn't* mention it. My read of the article is that Beau thought Carter was retaliating because Syd mentioned the sexual assault allegations to Carter, and Beau thought Carter's unwelcome photo of him while naked was an example of his vindictiveness. The article says "the photos were reported to Sanderson along with the theft," suggesting Beau thought they were linked -- i.e. each an act of retaliation and/or revenge. If Beau sees the photo as evidence that the theft was done by Carter, why wouldn't he mention that to police?

If someone steals your car, and you think your former neighbor did it since he did something really nasty to you lately, do you mention that to the police? Or just stay quiet, giving the police nothing to work with in their investigation?

Because Beau thinks Carter took his stuff as retaliation and wants the police to understand why he thinks that. Presumably Beau would inform the police of other vindictive stuff that Carter has done that back his theory, such as unwanted photo-taking. I could be wrong, but to me, it would be weird for Beau to point the finger at Carter without mentioning other douchy stuff he's done since his wife spilled the beans.

You're correct that the article doesn't say that the photo was uploaded to chat. In fact, it doesn't say that any of the photos shared on chat contained anything explicit. It doesn't say that the chat, or anything on it, was mentioned to Cael or any other coach. Many people are spreading lies about that, based on no facts or reporting. As for the photo itself, at the risk of splitting hairs, there's a difference between a naked photo showing private parts, and a "photo taken while naked," where you don't know what the photos shows. The author does refer to it as an "explicit photo" -- but that word choice appears to be based on Beau's description that it was taken *while* he was naked, not based on the author or Beau having ever seen the photo. Based on the reporting, it seems fair to infer that Beau at least *thought* the photo was explicit. Either way, inaction by a coach would be inexcusable. But that doesn't appear to be the case since the theft was reported to the police, and I assume the photo was too.

Doesn't say what the photo shows. Doesn't say it was added to chat. Doesn't say anyone on the chat was visibly exposed. Doesn't say the chat was reported to anyone. Could be true, but article doesn't say and we don't know. I'd say "reread the article" but you already know this, and are gleefully spewing as fact things that exist only in your head. We all know you've been jerking off in a bowl all day, hoping Beau will do what Iowa couldn't, unleashing a decade's worth of frustration. Easy there fella. The allegations here are serious, and the facts matter. No decent person wants PSU coaches to escape responsibility if they're culpable, but no decent person wants their career ruined if they acted properly. But then again, not everyone's a decent person, are they?

Maybe, but I still have a different take. He's toast if (a) the photo showed private parts, and (b) it was uploaded to Snap and shared, and (c) this fact was reported to Cael (and he admits it). That's a major reporting failure, and a bridge too far for admin. But I don't think that's what the facts are, based on what's come out so far. Beau never said the photo of him was uploaded/shared with others. He also never says he even saw it, or if it showed any private parts. He also never said that any of the photos being uploaded to Snap included any private parts. (And I sort of doubt it did, because ... WTF? Why wouldn't they all speak up then?) So, when he reported it to Cael (and I'm assuming he did, along with the theft), I'm envisioning it was more like, "And that SOB took a pic of me just as I got out of the shower and laughed and ran away." That's super sketchy, but I'm not sure that's illegal. Maybe it should be, but as a general rule, you can take pictures of whoever you want, with or without their consent. If they're naked, it can be a crime if not consented to (as here), but typically only if done for purposes of arousal/gratification. Maybe it was, but Beau describes it like Carter's being a jokester in poor taste, so maybe that's how it was reported -- and how it was interpreted. If done more than once, it can be harassment or stalking, and if it's shared it triggers a whole bunch of other laws, but again, it isn't clear that Beau reported any of that. Just a dbag teammate snapping a pic of him as he gets out of the shower as a supposed "joke", which, while tasteless and unfunny, is pretty borderline by itself as far as being a mandatory report. Even if I'm wrong, I question whether the PSU admin would see it as so clearcut a violation of mandatory reporting as to warrant serious discipline. This also assumes Cael didn't do anything. If he didn't report it, personally I'd be offended if Cael didn't at least go to Carter to say (a) WTF are you doing? (b) You better have deleted that, (c) if you shared that with anyone I'll kill you myself, and (d) don't do that ever again, not funny. Not his job to investigate, but if you're going to take the position it doesn't need to be reported, you better fix it. Again, there's lots we don't know. But on these facts, I don't see a major issue, unless the PR people tell the admin that they need a scalp.

Dude, you're out of control. You're making up stuff, and putting words in my and other peoples' mouths that they didn't say. You need to relax.

You may be right but, call me naive, I don't think the coach(es) are going to deny they were told about the photo. Not if they were, in fact, told. I just don't think that's how Cael rolls. I think that's where the greatest exposure is. The article's unclear about what was shown in the pic, whether it was deleted, whether it was shared in chat, whether Cael did anything. But it's the kind of thing I can easily see a coach writing off as standard locker room idiocy when, depending on the details, it might need to be reported, strictly speaking. I doubt it's a firable offense, but I wouldn't be surprised if it resulted in discipline.

I wonder if Carter is going to show up in all of Beau's missing gear just to troll him.

Scourge, see my above comments. I'll just be repeating myself if I keep going, but my last few comments: -- Counting up the number of black players isn't helpful. We already know that black athletes are dramatically overrepresented in high-end NCAA D1 athletics. That doesn't answer whether there's a racial disparity after taking that disproportionate representation into account. -- When you say things like "these schools want to WIN!", it tells me you're confusing the school with the NIL donors, which are kept separate by law. That was my whole point that indirectly led to this discussion: NIL donors aren't beholden to follow the university's obligation not to discriminate. Donors want to see their school win too, but they're also making an economic investment. That's why social media following is so central. There's a separate metric for it for every athlete shown on On3, though other intangibles apply too. That means if there's a racial disparity in social media following and overall fame, that will translate to what sponsors will offer. It's really not much different than male professional athletes earning more, on average, than women. I don't think the racial disparity is nearly as stark as the gender one, but it's existed every time someone's take the time to examine it. -- Although NIL is market driven, I agree that merit is the primary driver of NIL money -- both because excellence drives social media follows, and because many donors are motivated by desire to make their team win, not just to make money. On that, we don't disagree. But again, the question is whether there's a racial disparity, and the answer consistently has been yes, every time it's been critically examined. It's a separate question to ask how large that disparity is, and as I said above, I'd personally join the hypothesis that it's gone down in recent years as collectives have increased, leading to greater coordination more race neutrality than you are apt to find if left to individual wealthy donors. -- This is just a theory, but I'd wager the racial disparity is smaller in non-revenue sports, like wrestling. That's because donors to these sports are more apt to be driven by loyalty to a team, rather than to make money. They're not making an "investment" where they need to worry about their revenue-generation ability, so much as they're trying to build a winning team, where "marketability" is irrelevant. (See CStar.) In any case, I'm not sure if we really disagree all that much. Is NIL fund allocation 100% race neutral? 80%? 95%? My guess is the racial disparity has reduced, as I said, but some level of racial disparity is almost inevitable when (a) allocation of NIL dollars is left purely to the marketplace, where race plays at least a small role, and (b) when your main donors are old white men, some of whom may harbor old biases that the university is powerless to put in check.