TwoPointsTakeDown84

Several coaches being investigated about the fostering of negative culture. Storni is the only 'coach' listed on the website. Thoughts?

So, yes. And of course there's a fundraising figure that has to be met. That goes without saying. So why did you? We've had good luck, recently, with new D1 programs in states without any. Texas would be the crown jewel of that group, for sure. But instead of dancing around the edge by saying, 'I hear' this or that. Point us to resources so that we can help with the raising of funds. Why are you keeping this a secret?

So, to confirm, still no D1 wrestling programs in Texas?

Not seeing it on NWCA. What's your source?

I'll take it as red that they have the jobs as long as they want. Who could, conceivably, take over after they decide to hang it up? Is it anyone we know today or is there enough time for someone to build their resume and step in.

Our Lady of Perpetual Exertion

They should look into making themselves a church. No rules there.

Not sure you meant that last question to come off so passive/aggressive, but I have. I'm not in hip deep in rules like I once was but it seemed as though the count only pertained to reaching down to grab the ankle. Other tactics seemed to me to fall under the umbrella of 'stalling' and should be called as such, if appropriate. I don't recall seeing, and this could just be my lack of data points, a ref count when an ankle was clipped/hooked or 'sat on' by a top wrestler.

'Threes' not withstanding, hasn't that always been the case. Younger kids want to learn technique on their feet not realizing until later that mat wrestling is what distances good from great. Was it just me or when NF went from 2&3 to 2&4 refs would anticipate exposure and start swiping just as someone started rolling and not necessarily when in criteria? If so, how might the 2&3&4 NF change this behavior? Also the 3 pt TD? 3+4swipes that's a heck of a swing. This one always bothered me, I always found it easy to get wrist control when someone tried to grab an ankle. I don't think we should've burdened refs with another thing for coaches to yell at them about. Teach better/more effective technique and that tactic dies a quick death. I forgot why I tagged this one but it was probably important and profound. Interesting thought. This might spur an offensive explosion on top. Kids being forced to at least 'act' as though they are interested in getting a turn. They might stumble upon an untapped resource by accident. My own thought: in addition to 3pt TD and 2&3&4pt NF, how about a 0pt E after a 2pt R? (translation, no escape point following a reversal). Would this work to encourage or discourage taking risks to turn/pin?

Matt King - Edinboro Or the famous freestyle referee team of Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe. I think they were in their prime in the 90's with a few of Kolat's matches.

Ya, what's with that? Too hot? Or just no interest, generationally? If UCLA took the leap, it would help a ton.

Established areas: Central Valley, California Pittsburgh, PA Lehigh Valley, PA Cleveland, OH North Jersey, Jersey Chicago Suburbs, IL Where is the next hot bed of talent? Where should there be more/better coaching to help build up the area?

Back in the day, at the NCAA tourney, matches were kept on VHS. One tape each for competitors and a third for... well, for what? Where are these matches, what are they doing with them, how can one get ahold of all/some of them? Posting a searchable archive of matches over the years would be invaluable to athletes and coaches to watch. With the new NIL are athletes owed the opportunity to take their matches to try to monetize their competitive years however for in the past? Same questions for D2, D3, NJ, and NAIA

As close knit a community as athletes tend to be at a university, how can you say someone wouldn't be able to either influence an outcome of a particular contest or be able to obtain substantial insider info that would give them a leg up on the odds? Its a tough call not to allow kids to imbibe in an activity that is legal in their state, assuming they are of appropriate age. But a typical gambler betting on a professional sport would be hard pressed to run across a member of that team at the cafeteria line at the dorm. Their sphere of influence is mitigated by the exclusivity of the players. Not so much at a college athletic department. Not sure how it would be accomplished, but to ensure a buffer within an athletic department I would like to see limits on the geographical area for which someone can make a bet if they are a college athlete. Say, not within your state or any adjacent state. In hopes of reducing the temptation to influence outcomes from your home or neighboring schools.

That's just the way these things happen. A whole world of possibilities that were cut off from previous generations are now available. It'll may be chaotic for a bit trying to figure out the best ways to proceed. I imagine somethings will turn out to be harmful and we should address those. But lets not clutch our pearls at a 'family' being broken up. Maintaining a place that kids want to spend these important years has always been the goal of a staff. This just adds a new wrinkle. If they can't adapt and earn their pay they will be replaced with someone who can. Prior to this era there were few things an athlete could do to leave a less-than-ideal situation. Some will work to game the system, but that's not new. I feel privileged to be here watching this play out. Its exciting. Athletes have a little more control of their situation and can cash in a bit too. Let's steer into the skid and see where this wild ride takes us.

Thanks! And Alex Clemson makes that much!? What's with Minnesota salaries, why such a dramatic difference?

I've been able to look up most of the coaches in the B1G but can't seem to find PSU, NU, and RU. How much of their 'salary' is covered through RTC or other means?

Good point. If the season gets adjusted to be later in the spring, where more of the country would be milder in temperature and the break is no longer a factor, the possibilities could be fun. I liked the idea of a football dome. Soldier Field would be fantastic if the plan they have comes to fruition. Seattle could be fun or Denver!

St. Louis has done a good job. Philly is looing for its second try. Where should it be held to get the most out of it as far as participation and exposure? Florida, Texas? Could help to grow the sport. Chicago or DC? Seems like if we pulled if off in NYC, there really is no city that is off limits. California? Should we be worried about the lack of teams at major universities? Seems like a bellwether that deserves more attention.

Trying to impugn my credibility doesn't bolster your argument. It only leads me to believe you're trying to convince yourself rather than put forth a competing idea. I gave numbers. Not opinion. With more resources, they should be expected to do more. They haven't. There should be accountability or transparency as to why. Here's where the bias comes in, they are comfortable with their situation. That's fine. Its not a good situation by any means but they feel its acceptable at this time for these results. Alums are happy, donors are happy. Fine. As a third party observer, it stinks. Like the situation in Norman. It looks as though the admins(at Penn) bungled things from the jump. Making it much harder for anyone to take over and succeed. Which seems like what wound up happening. They picked a comfortable band aid for everyone to rally around while they get their house in order. Threw a bunch of money at it, which they have plenty of and have experience using it as a crutch. But is it sustainable? No. And that is the point. When someone else takes over, and someone will need to, because RR is not going to be able to do this forever(or much longer, even) it will crash! Because they've built it around one man. Just think of what happened the last time he left. ZJ jumped ship shortly after taking over. Then RE took over with a good amount of success. Not sure of how or why he left or was asked to leave. AT was given the reigns as an outsider with no previous ties to Penn. MV sticks around for one year before becoming an admin. Things chug for three years then RR takes over again after an 'exhaustive' search for a new coach. Just smells fishy. Granted, you probably have some sunk cost into the program. You're praying that it works out so you don't have to alter your perceptions in any way whatsoever. But as someone invested in the program, why aren't you asking those questions? This doesn't seem like a process I would want to have associated with a team that I'm cheering for. The student-athletes get jerked around having 3 HC's in 5 years. How is that fair? Now they're throwing a ton of resources at the old guy in the hopes of righting the ship? Why didn't they do that to the previous HC's? They might have some good kids coming in, good for them. I hope they do well. Get a great education and learn to wrestle at the same time. I'm not going to be cheering against them, they just haven't won my support with the way they've handled themselves. To me that should be off-putting, because if all you care about is your clan for support then your vision is too narrow and they probably lost some of that support with the moves they've made.

What were the circumstances they inherited? The PRTC was built with RP and others representing it quite well. Did Penn admin and alums not love and value the program before? They do do a lot for the community. Several disappointing NCAA tournaments. Granted covid robbed the Ivies of two but that is not anyone's fault. No down year of recruiting, still getting notable recruits and more of them(table) than in previous years, which should tell you something. What is and has been done with the talent? Lets not focus on the word talent, just the numbers, they have a bigger team overall. More members, where is the considerable improvement? Not as much as would be expected in, even other Ivies. Now you have a young upstart in Brown to contend with. Overachieved expectations: great example. Glad for him. Does that translate to college wrestling? Will it? Hasn't yet. Might not. And you're overlooking the large examples of things going the other way. I understand you want to see them moving in the right direction. I wish they, actually, were doing that. CJ, great job. That looked like a tough weight class. Hope he can do it again and improve on his performance. He beat the guy who is now a returning national champ. The bar is set high. Year Roster Qualfiers team score place pts/qual 14 29 4 10 36 2.5 15 25 5 6.5 38 1.3 16 27 4 23.5 20 5.875 17 27 5 8 37 1.6 18 29 4 5 40 1.25 19 35 2 3.5 45 1.75 20 38 No NCAA tourney 21 30 Probably took the year off to save eligibility 22 45 9 15.5 27 1.722222 23 46 8 9.5 32 1.1875 They've had more time, more support(apparently), a (significantly)bigger roster, arguably better and more time recruiting and little if anything to show for it. Except more qualifiers scoring as many or fewer points at the NCAA tournament. If they're heading in 'a very good direction', in your opinion. What would it look like if they were headed in the bad direction?

No one mentioned Cornell. Although, it'll be interesting to see how they do in the next 3-5 years without Koll. I basically compared the current HC to the previous. If RR wasn't who he is he would've been shown the door by now. From what I've gleaned, Princeton is who Penn is trying to catch and has been the last 10 years. Quakers seem to be falling farther behind. The PRTC seems to be doing little to bridge the gap other than diverting donor funds away from the team budget.

Considering the circumstances that he inherited, why are these not serious questions? A long absence from coaching, brought in to right a ship that, arguably, was heading in a better direction than it currently is. He's been there for an entire recruiting cycle(more than the last guy had), without much to show for it as far as hardware. A few highly regarded recruits have come and gone, showing little improvement or in some case outright regression. How else can you frame it other then they would rather have the older alums happy and giving, with this HC then to risk stirring the pot for a suitable replacement. If you're looking at it critically, you've seen the same things. More qualifiers, sure. With average or below average performances. From the recruits that have been brought in, has there been one AA?

How long does Penn stick with the current HC? Is he in the hot seat in '23-'24? What needs to happen to buy him more time? Or is it even an issue? Who would be a good fit to step in to lead the Quakers, next?