BAC

Whatever you think of Askren, he's not entirely wrong here, and if anything may be understating the severity of Iowa's missteps here. A few related reasons: 1. They will lose top high school recruits who view Iowa as overly disloyal, as Iowa is the first to hit "zero loyalty" threshold. Yes, there's been "recruiting over" before, but until now, there's always been a sense that, for wresters of a certain seniority and skill level, the coaching staff will be like "naw, I'm good" when transfers come knocking or donors are asking coaches on encrypted Telegram threads who to go after. Glazier/Buchanan changes all that. The idea that a school would go out on the open market to try to financially lure in someone to displace a 5th year senior who had only 1 loss going into B1Gs is stunning. It means no one is safe. High school recruits will see this and know, for a fact, that unless you just won a national title, Iowa is going to be trying, every year, to pull in someone better than you. For the most part, other schools have used the portal to fill holes, but only Iowa has sought to use it to upgrade everywhere. As long as other top schools don't follow suit to the same extreme extent, that's going to push recruits away from Iowa, and be a huge recruiting advantage for their competition. 2. This turn toward transfers and away from loyalty is especially harmful to Iowa, which historically has been so reliant on their branding to lure in recruits. Come to Iowa for the "Iowa style," Iowa once said. "Oh that Johnny, he really wrestles the Iowa Style, he'd be great for them," wrestlers hear. But not anymore. They can't say that's their brand when they just have a hodge-podge of guys from different programs who each wrestler their own pre-developed style, most of which don't really mesh with Iowa in any particular way. Kids might go to Iowa because they fare well, but their branding, already eroding, is down the tube. They're losing their cache and sales pitch. 3. Ben was right to cite the loss of culture, too. It's the difference between a bunch of close-knit guys who came up from the farm system, and a bunch of guys who came on as free agents. They just aren't going to be that tight, with no sense of solidarity or brotherhood. Recruits doing their on-campus visits won't see the camaraderie, and existing guys will find easier to leave without feeling bad or nostalgic. (As is clearly the case with 5 leaving in 3 days.) I suspect the guys that remain will be that much harder to coach, too, as these aren't guys who have "bought in" on the Iowa way or the Tom/Terry coaching style. They are guys who are bought and paid for, and have no reason to care much about what Tom/Terry have to say. They'll yammer on about what it means to put on a black and gold singlet, and these guys will just laugh. 4. Iowa's spending is also too high on transfers relative to existing athletes. It isn't sustainable. I have no idea if the money being speculated on Twitter is accurate (e.g. $500K each for Parco, Teemer, Buchanan), but as some have pointed out, now guys like Ayala are going to look since they're being paid a fraction of that. That means you aren't just losing the guys at the weights where you recruited over them, you're also losing top guys at other weights who feel they aren't being treated fairly. 5. Admittedly, none of points 1-4 really matter if they have the bankroll to turn Iowa into the New York Yankees every season, buying a near-full roster every year. But the money won't be there forever. As I understand it, it's pretty much coming from one guy, and he's a pretty shady dude as it is. What happens when his money runs out or he crosses one too many lines, whether in recruiting or in any other seedy dealings? Iowa isn't nearly as flush with alumni money as many other schools. When that money dries up, then what? They'll need to rebuild their brand, their culture, the illusion of loyalty all over again, from scratch. Have fun with that. This whole thing reminds me of the Ferrari fiasco from last year: sacrificing integrity on the altar of winning, compromising whatever principles are needed to get ahead. At least AJ saved them before that went too far. But I don't think there's any saving Iowa from themselves this time.

Sure, I'll play. I'm kind of disgusted at Iowa/Brands by seeing Iowa guys who dedicated their careers to the Hawks, like Glazier and Kennedy, get run out of town for the short-term benefit of one-year-wonders like Buchanon and Teemer. I'm all for competition, but isn't there a point at which a coach should be like, "Hey thanks but we have our guy?" I can't decide if I'm being fair in my disgust or if I just don't like Iowa. I'm fine with transfers, but usually when we see it, the guy getting displaced has another weight he can go, or can use a redshirt, or will just lose a year, or wasn't any good. Or the guy coming in has a ton of eligibility, so it's more like a new recruit than a hired guy. Until now the worst example was probably Beard/Dean, but even that didn't annoy me as much, because Beard was just a freshman while Glazier/Kennedy invested their whole career, only to get shown the door at the end. Especially Glazier: after a 20-4 year, it's his last year of eligibility and he can only go 197, and he's booted out for a guy coming in who also only has a single year of eligibility? Really? No loyalty at all? So is it my bias, or are Iowa's efforts (esp. Glazier) a new low in selling out your homegrown guys?

You're not wrong, Jimmy. I don't know how much Iowa/Nichols shelled out, but if I were Iowa, I'd rather have Nolf's services for 5 years (which $1 mi likely would get you) rather than Teemer/Buchanon. Not close.

Who wouldn't want to see Askren in his prime vs Nolf in his prime? In folkstyle, of course. Break out the popcorn for that one.

Yes you haven't heard of it? It's an international database portal maintained by the IOC. You should see how the big-name countries go after the big names when their name drops on the portal; it's like one big international auction. But sometimes athletes who have already picked a new country have a "do not contact" label, so you know that some sultan somewhere already bought them off.

Does the IOC (or UWW) set any sort of minimum standards to allow a competitor, especially one from a barred country to compete for another country? Should they? I know it's been discussed before, but the number of Russians in the Olympics was crazy. Flo has a good breakdown here: https://www.flowrestling.org/articles/12787978-2024-paris-olympics-mens-freestyle-wrestling-by-the-numbers. It also caught the eye of the mainstream press in Paris, giving a bit of a black eye to wrestling: https://sportstar.thehindu.com/olympics/paris-2024/news/paris-olympics-2024-russians-wrestling-medals-representing-other-countries-controvery-russia-ukraine-war-ioc-action/article68514966.ece. And now, post-Olympics, the Russian parades are happening, as someone pointed out re Zhamalov: https://www.instagram.com/reel/C-7t2zLs_t5/?igsh=YzJkY3ExZ3oyaXox. Come on. Zhamalov is Russian. He wasn't born in Uzbekistan, he never had dual citizenship in Uzbekistan. Rather, in the first half of 2024, after Russia was banned, Zhamalov was able to change citizenship to Uzbekistan a few months before the Olympics, but never moved there. Zhamalov competes in the Olympics -- defeating 4 other Russian-born wrestlers in his first 4 matches (all competing for other countries) -- and wins. He goes back to Russia and Russia throws a parade for him. I don't mean this as sour grapes. Rivera, after all, competed for PR and had a parade in NJ. In general, I'm fine with athletes of dual citizenship parentage choosing who to represent, and there's nothing wrong with changing citizenship in general. In fact, as a wrestling fan, I like seeing all the skilled Russians, as it ups the level of competition. But I'm not a fan of the "hired gun" citizenship swap, where a country alters and dumbs down its citizenship criteria solely to bring in someone for their athletic prowess. (I'm sure the citizens of Bahrain are still celebrating the win of their favorite son, Tazhudinov.) To me, it undermines the country-vs-country ethos that undergirds the world/Olympic games. Now it's more like one big open tournament. Almost half the 74kg wrestlers in the Olympics (freestyle) were Russian (including 4 of the top 6). I'm also not a fan of athletes from barred countries who don't meet AIN criteria, circumventing it by taking faux citizenship elsewhere. Not making any accusations, but Zhamalov could literally be a Russian soldier occupying Ukraine and blowing holes in their skulls, and a day later he can fly to Paris to compete since he has dual citizenship with Uzbekistan. I read that UWW head Lalovic, embarrassed at the ease with which Russia invaded the Olympics via other countries, wants to set a cap on the number of transfers a given country can accept. That's a start, but I'm thinking more along the lines of minimum standards of new citizens, e.g. you have to be a citizen for at least two years before you can compete for a new country. And for athletes hailing from a IOC-barred country, maybe require relinquishment of citizenship from the prior country, instead of allowing dual citizenship. That seems a fair substitute for having to pass the AIN clearance process. Thoughts?

Has Zhamalov ever even set foot in Uzbekistan?

Oh I hope they continues with free and folk too, and definitely not foregoing college. But eventually they'll reach a point that they need to focus on free or Greco when going for world teams, and I hope they choose Greco. Our Greco program is kind of in the toilet right now, and they can win at the highest level. In free, they are very good too, but there will always be 5 or 6 guys at their age/weight just as good as them, whereas in Greco there's a huge drop-off at their weight after the Raneys.

Thanks. I'll agree my BJJ eye is untrained. Just curious, what was Bradley doing that I missed? And what was Downey doing that qualifies as stalling on his part (but not Bradley's part)? Anyway, I like your idea that conceding bottom position should be treated as the same as getting taken down, i.e. you start in a deficit. That at least puts the offensive onus on them. Also, how about the ref stands them up if nothing happens after 30 seconds or so? It's pretty painful to watch otherwise.

Just wanted to chime to say that, my non-BJJ eyes agree with this 100% -- although after watching Downey's second match, I'm not sure I even see how there's another side of the argument. You can see it here at the 4:00 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyneYOMCvI0 Admittedly I'm biased by my wrestling background, as it's hard for me to take seriously a guy to drops to his back like a submissive dog. But even accepting that legit BJJ offense can be initiated from there, what's the rationale for rewarding a guy who pulls guard and then initiates zero offense? That's what happened to Downey. Downey spent 14:50 of the 15 minute match on top, because Bradley pulled guard. And once he was on his back like a stuck turtle, Bradley attempted NOTHING. Nothing at all. Granted, Downey didn't seem to have any clue how to initiate a submission, so he pretty much spent the whole match grinding Bradley's head and back into the mat, squeezing, and occasionally flinging Bradley's body around to try to get a better angle. But I don't see how anyone could question that Downey was the aggressor from start to finish. The most you could say for Bradley is that he was defending effectively and waiting for Downey to make a mistake that he never made. Why wouldn't that mean Downey wins? Even granting ZERO credit to Downey for smashing Bradley against the mat the whole match, why wouldn't Downey's offensive effort be the tiebreaker? The only way you can say Downey lost is if you put the impetus on action in that scenario to the guy in the dominant position (on top). Which, apparently, is how the judges saw it, and the ref too, as even he stopped the match to warn Downey for stalling, despite initiating all the action. Again, I'm not a BJJ guy, but how is that not insane? It's basically saying you can curl up into a tight little ball for 15 minutes, laughing and saying "la la la you can't get me" like a 3 year old, and as long as you survive without being seriously threatened or scored upon, you win. Bradley even had the gall to whine about Downey in the post-match interview for making the match boring. First time I ever felt solidary with Pat Downey. It does seem like there's some dissent within the BJJ community about this, as the announcers thought Downey did enough to win. And props to guys like the Ruotolos and Thacketts who thrive on offense. But man, to this outsider's eyes, if BJJ is going to thrive it needs to stop rewarding defense.

The Raney brothers are a blast to watch. Always going for the big move, always fearless. Each now has a Cadet world title in this style, right? I hope they stick with Greco, as they're a pleasure to watch. Their style is to high-risk to win consistently in freestyle against the top guys, but it's just so hard to beat in Greco.

Interesting. Chael’s take seems mostly on point. Supposedly they announced a CJI 2025 event, so maybe that means the benefactor, whoever it is, is committed. Wonder if this will be the new grappling standard?

Where did he get that kind of money? I mean…. 10k to enter, 1 million for the winner of each weight class? I thought Craig Jones was just some early-30s grappler dude. Has some random billionaire somewhere decided to bankroll him?

This is what I was thinking. Unfortunately I think this cross-over is sort of a one-off, solely for kicks, since the rules are so clearly tilted to BJJ while offering nothing for wrestlers. With a takedown meaningless, the most the wrestlers can really do is keep their opponent at bay and wear him out. If anything, I think wrestling is the LEAST compatible of disciplines with BJJ/submission grappling, since all the positions wrestlers strive for are only going to put them in danger of being submitted. There was exactly zero path to victory for Nolf since his white-belt-level submissions won’t work and any offensive wrestling move he makes is going to put him in a spot where he has to tap out. That said, it was a fun watch! Nope didn’t really have a strategy except to do a quick TD attempt and immediately bail out, and hope he gets points for “initiating action.” That was doomed to fail but at least his opponent decided to mix it up on his feet instead of doing the sit-on-my-butt thing that is so annoying. Btw is it true the wrestlers got 10k just for agreeing to compete?

I might agree if this was a one-off alcohol arrest. New coaches who want to be seen as "cleaning up the program" can be anxious to put out a so-called "zero-tolerance" policy, which usually backfires, both in alienating the team (which sees it as overly draconian) and in inconsistent application (as no one's dismissing a defending national champ over a one-off arrest for a minor crime). But I don't see that at all if, as is reported, this comes on the heels of a DUI last year. No one's going to see that as draconian. I don't think there's many big programs in the country where you can expect to be arrested twice of the same infraction and expect to still be on the team. I can't imagine Taylor, or any coach, would want to send the message to the team, "here at OSU you can get arrested for alcohol-related crimes twice in a year and still compete for a spot."

I'd argue that the 2020 (aka 2021) men's freestyle Olympic team was our best in modern memory. Six weights, five medals: Gold (Taylor, Gable), Silver (Snyder), Bronze (Gilman, Dake). That's a medal in over 83% the weights, and that's with Russia completing (under the Olympic banner) along with all the former Soviet republics. That's a far higher percentage than the '72 team (83% vs 60%), and even a higher percentage of gold medals (33% vs 30%), and that's with only a single Soviet bloc competitor. The '92 team had the same percentages as the '72 team, so the same comments apply. And remember we didn't even qualify 65kg in '20, so of the actual competitors, we were 5-for-5 in medals.

NLWC is obviously the top club in the US, and proved it by their international success over the years, by attracting so much top talent from other clubs, and by putting so many guys in the Olympics. But everyone can't be an Olympic Champion. The NLWC medal haul (2) was more than any other club. It was short of their goals, no doubt, but there's no one you can look at and say "NLWC didn't have him prepared." The guys who lost fought hard and came up short, and there's no reason to think they'd have fared better with another club.

I thought Burroughs was excellent. Had a good beat on the rules and often knew the outcome of challenges before they happened. Talked about himself less. I was worried we might see a hint of sour grapes with Dake or the PSU guys, but not a whiff. And he called it down the middle; without an overly-US bias. I miss Smith but the truth is he has lost a bit of his passion in recent years. JB hasn’t. I don’t know much about Knapp’s background but he did his homework very well. Maybe not a wrestling guy but solid announcer and knew when to defer to JB. Couldn’t hear the arena announcer from the Peacock video but from what I heard Jason Bryant was outstanding as usual. The Scottish dudes (or Irish or English) on the other Peacock feed were a train wreck as usual. WTF, why do they keep bringing those guys back, it’s like watching wrestling at a pub and overhearing drunk Englishmen who have never seen the sport before commenting on it (“oooh she did a ‘body press’ to end the ‘fight’”)

Best wrestling move in the Olympics. Even Dake, with his bomb against Tsabalov, would have to agree that Blades’ 5 was technically prettier.

Honestly I was happy to see Geno get it back. He looked broken after his loss to Gable, and Zare was absolutely gifted his finals berth when they put Akgul in the clock about 10 uneventful seconds after Zare got off the clock.

I have little doubt the weight cut plays a big role here. If it didn’t, then I’d expect he would weigh in tomorrow and make a game-day decision about on how he feels. I assume it’s also true that the concussion symptoms are what makes it too hard for him to safely make the day 2 cut. But I also think if he were at 70kg, where the cut is easier, we would see him weighing in tomorrow and deciding then about whether he can go. If I’m right, I wish Zain would be more open about the weight cut issue, since it’s another arrow in the quiver to fight to get the 4 lost weight classes back. With the Indian wrestler not making weight against Hildebrant, I think the time is right for UWW to make a hard push. The way only negative PR that wrestling took this Olympics was the horrors of the Indian weight cut, even having blood drawn to try to get down, and I think UWW has a chance to turn that blemish into a positive: there is too much of a gap between weights which is resulting in unsafe weight cuts. Though the Indian is an obvious example, I highly suspect Zain is one too. It’s a 70kg guy going down to 65, and basically he needs to be in perfect health after day 1 to safely be able to make the arduous cut for day 2. That won’t happen all the time, and didn’t with Zain. Really hope Zain comes clean on his weight cut (if my assumption is on point) and that UWW brass seizes on these news stories to make a hard push to reinstate lost weights for 2028.

Dake would like a word about this topic.

Did anyone else notice a pretty big disconnect between Kyle and his coaches? Cody seemed as confused what Kyle was talking about as the refs.

I thought the same thing. I liked Snyder's strategy: be cautious, since being overly-aggressive last time burned him, and use his conditioning to pour it in at the end. Unfortunately he got turned and the 6-1 gap was a bit much to overcome, and Snyder's conditioning wasn't quite as on point as it usually is. But I still think it's the right strategy as Taz pretty much collapsed at the end. A fitter Snyder would've taken him.

Amouzad has always been like that. Just for kicks, go back and look at his match against Poulin at the Cadet level: