Next year is Klapprodt's last year. I don't see redshirting Burak to wrestle Klapprodt next year. I say wrestle Burak and either get Downey, a true stud to fill the spot or accept the hole. If the goal is to win Nationals with the current scoring system, it is probably better to just accept the hole.
197
- Thread starter 93hawkeye
- Start date
197 prospects:Rankings are intermat.
Unsigned class of 2015:
Tyree Sutton, NJ #7 195- Just won Flo Nationals with a 9-1 win over the #6 guy.
Steven Holloway, IA #10 195
Jareb Aziz, CO #17 195 (3x champ, 6th as a freshman)
Class of 2016:
Keegan Moore, MN #3 182. Just won USA folk nats at 195.
Nathan Traxler, IL #7 182.
Sam Colbray, OR #5 195
Blake Rypel, IN #6 195. Just got second to #7 Sutton at Flo 195.
Matt Correnti, NJ #11 195. Lost in OT to Sutton in NJ state final for only loss this year.
Eric Schultz, IL #18 195. Lost to Wilke in OT to place 4th at USA Folk Nats.
Sam Cook, IA #19 195.
Wyatt Koelling, UT #20 195. Just placed 6th at Flo Nats. Lost in OT to #6 Rypel and by1 point 8-7 to #8 Chance Cooper. (Cooper beat Wilke like 7-3 a couple weeks ago.)
Free Agent:
Pat Downey, OTC next year, JUCO champ with some legal troubles on the score sheet.
Unsigned class of 2015:
Tyree Sutton, NJ #7 195- Just won Flo Nationals with a 9-1 win over the #6 guy.
Steven Holloway, IA #10 195
Jareb Aziz, CO #17 195 (3x champ, 6th as a freshman)
Class of 2016:
Keegan Moore, MN #3 182. Just won USA folk nats at 195.
Nathan Traxler, IL #7 182.
Sam Colbray, OR #5 195
Blake Rypel, IN #6 195. Just got second to #7 Sutton at Flo 195.
Matt Correnti, NJ #11 195. Lost in OT to Sutton in NJ state final for only loss this year.
Eric Schultz, IL #18 195. Lost to Wilke in OT to place 4th at USA Folk Nats.
Sam Cook, IA #19 195.
Wyatt Koelling, UT #20 195. Just placed 6th at Flo Nats. Lost in OT to #6 Rypel and by1 point 8-7 to #8 Chance Cooper. (Cooper beat Wilke like 7-3 a couple weeks ago.)
Free Agent:
Pat Downey, OTC next year, JUCO champ with some legal troubles on the score sheet.
There are a lot of programs that don't have R12 backups at every weight. We don't have R12 starters at every weight.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
More likely that I'm just blind.Originally posted by MVPFAN:
I have him under 2016, maybe just hard to see the header.Originally posted by HIWILLE:
I would bet my house that MVP new that, just a brain fart on his part.Well...on second thought not my house.Nice run down tho.
As much as we hate holes in the lineup, with the current NCAA tournament scoring system, it is the path to an NCAA championship.
You win the championship with 5 or 6 guys, period. You need to go out and get your studs (preferably about 3 or 4 top 3 overall type guys) - full scholly. Sprinkle in 8 top 30 type guys (average half scholly?) and another 8 top 100 guys (0.25 scholly?) and take your chances.
Depth and a solid lineup up and down is NOT where it is at. A round of 12 guy gets you very few points. The NCAA says this guy is nearly worthless to the team.. A guy that ends up in the top 2 or 3 is worth a full lineup of 1-2 qualifiers and round of 12 guys. Time to spend our scholarship money accordingly.
We need more studs (Hall, Lee, Snyder, BoJo type guys) and give them full scholarships. Then go out and get your Gilman, Clark, Marinelli, Kemerer, Mejia type top 20 guys and make them into champions. Get a few guys you like that aren't as highly touted that you think you can coach up (Dan Dennis type guys, Burak type guys, Alex Meyer type guys) and make them into AAs. You will certainly have your misses, but the misses on the top 3 guys will not be nearly as frequent.
Getting a bunch of top 20 guys and hoards of top 100 guys doesn't get it done. Might make you the best overall team (and best dual team), but isn't going to win you championships. We NEED those top 3 guys. Coaching up the guys and getting 1 or 2 to the NC finals and another 4-6 mid to low AAs is not an equation that gets you enough points for an NCAA championship.
The problem isn't coaching. The problem is our recruiting strategy. A top 10 to 20 guy (50 of these in a 5 year span). Add this to the 50 top 10 guys - 100 total. 80 AAs per year. Top 10 to 20 guys are expected to be low AAs. We are coaching these guys to be where they are at, or in many cases, even better. The problem is that we don't have the horses.
In short, don't spend the money on a R12 or qualifier for 197. Save the money and go get Hall and Lee!!
You win the championship with 5 or 6 guys, period. You need to go out and get your studs (preferably about 3 or 4 top 3 overall type guys) - full scholly. Sprinkle in 8 top 30 type guys (average half scholly?) and another 8 top 100 guys (0.25 scholly?) and take your chances.
Depth and a solid lineup up and down is NOT where it is at. A round of 12 guy gets you very few points. The NCAA says this guy is nearly worthless to the team.. A guy that ends up in the top 2 or 3 is worth a full lineup of 1-2 qualifiers and round of 12 guys. Time to spend our scholarship money accordingly.
We need more studs (Hall, Lee, Snyder, BoJo type guys) and give them full scholarships. Then go out and get your Gilman, Clark, Marinelli, Kemerer, Mejia type top 20 guys and make them into champions. Get a few guys you like that aren't as highly touted that you think you can coach up (Dan Dennis type guys, Burak type guys, Alex Meyer type guys) and make them into AAs. You will certainly have your misses, but the misses on the top 3 guys will not be nearly as frequent.
Getting a bunch of top 20 guys and hoards of top 100 guys doesn't get it done. Might make you the best overall team (and best dual team), but isn't going to win you championships. We NEED those top 3 guys. Coaching up the guys and getting 1 or 2 to the NC finals and another 4-6 mid to low AAs is not an equation that gets you enough points for an NCAA championship.
The problem isn't coaching. The problem is our recruiting strategy. A top 10 to 20 guy (50 of these in a 5 year span). Add this to the 50 top 10 guys - 100 total. 80 AAs per year. Top 10 to 20 guys are expected to be low AAs. We are coaching these guys to be where they are at, or in many cases, even better. The problem is that we don't have the horses.
In short, don't spend the money on a R12 or qualifier for 197. Save the money and go get Hall and Lee!!
So the exact plan that 90% of this board wanted to burn Zalesky at the stake for? It's still about developing talent, go look at the thread where it shows the HS rankings of this years AAs. Picking out these "sure fire" HS kids to build your team is a lot easier in hindsight than when they are still 17.
That is why I said top 3. They do a pretty good job on those guys these days. The 5-20 are somewhat of a crapshoot. I believe all of the recent #1s finished in the top 3 this year.
TNT are great coaches and will develop the supporting cast to make Iowa a great team. But you just cannot develop a guy into Metcalf, Taylor, Steibler, or Synder. They were born to be that way and are needed to form a nucleus around IMO.
TNT are great coaches and will develop the supporting cast to make Iowa a great team. But you just cannot develop a guy into Metcalf, Taylor, Steibler, or Synder. They were born to be that way and are needed to form a nucleus around IMO.
and there are countless guys who were born to be that way coming out of HS that don't turn out to be Metcalf, Taylor,.... remember how badly this board wanted Destin McCauley? Hell, can't miss was uttered more than his actual first name.
Yes, the team needs to hit on some top guys, that's not up for debate, but it's much more about recognizing and developing the talent than it is anything else. It doesn't change. Go back to Zalesky and look how he built his teams. Went hard after top guys, that every program wanted, that were "can't miss", gave the majority of schollie money to those guys, and when a couple didn't pan out as every person in the country thought they would, look where it ended up at.
Say only about half of the guys turn out like you would like:
3 or 4 top 5 overall guys in a 4 year period: 2 finalist type guys, maybe one mid to low AA and 1 total miss (3 weights).
8 top 10-30 guys like Sorensen, Clark, Gilman, etc.: Brands does very well with these guys: Maybe 1 finalist, 2 solid AAs, one nonAA (4 weights)
8 top 100 type guys - Meyer, Burak, etc. : Maybe 1 mid to low AA, 2 non AAs (3 weights).
That gives you 3 finalists, 4 other AAs.
Now we have a bunch of Mid AA type guys with some AA type guys on the bench (Gilman last year, Meyer this year)
Ohio State took the gamble and seems to take this approach. Some paid off, some didn't, but it got them a National Championship. And I would take TNT to develop and get the most out of their talent any day compared to Ryan.
3 or 4 top 5 overall guys in a 4 year period: 2 finalist type guys, maybe one mid to low AA and 1 total miss (3 weights).
8 top 10-30 guys like Sorensen, Clark, Gilman, etc.: Brands does very well with these guys: Maybe 1 finalist, 2 solid AAs, one nonAA (4 weights)
8 top 100 type guys - Meyer, Burak, etc. : Maybe 1 mid to low AA, 2 non AAs (3 weights).
That gives you 3 finalists, 4 other AAs.
Now we have a bunch of Mid AA type guys with some AA type guys on the bench (Gilman last year, Meyer this year)
Ohio State took the gamble and seems to take this approach. Some paid off, some didn't, but it got them a National Championship. And I would take TNT to develop and get the most out of their talent any day compared to Ryan.
If you take the top 5 guys from the past 5 classes and make a team out of them, you get:
125: Megaludis
133: Gulibon
141: L Stieber/Retheford
149: Tsirtsis
157: Martinez
165: B Jordan
174: Evans/Storley
184: J Rogers
197: Snyder/McIntosh
285: Coon
If you take the #21-25 guys from the past 5 classes and make a team out of them, you get:
125: Milhof
133: Brewer/C Clark
141: H Tuma
149: Collica
157: Minotti
165: D Milonas
174: N Wanzak
184: Dudley
197: R Solomon
285: Lawson
Cael, Tom Ryan, Zeke, and I are going with team #1.
Skeptic's response: "You don't get to choose a team from 25 recruits. You only get 9.9 scholarships."
My response: "All the more reason to pick from that top bunch. I only need 5 of those guys to win NCAAs every year."
Skeptic's response: "Zalesky tried it and it didn't work."
My response: "Cael and Ryan tried it and it did. Brands tried the alternative and it didn't."
Skeptic's response: "We just need to find guys who fit our mold and train them up."
My response: "Cough, Kelly, cough."
125: Megaludis
133: Gulibon
141: L Stieber/Retheford
149: Tsirtsis
157: Martinez
165: B Jordan
174: Evans/Storley
184: J Rogers
197: Snyder/McIntosh
285: Coon
If you take the #21-25 guys from the past 5 classes and make a team out of them, you get:
125: Milhof
133: Brewer/C Clark
141: H Tuma
149: Collica
157: Minotti
165: D Milonas
174: N Wanzak
184: Dudley
197: R Solomon
285: Lawson
Cael, Tom Ryan, Zeke, and I are going with team #1.
Skeptic's response: "You don't get to choose a team from 25 recruits. You only get 9.9 scholarships."
My response: "All the more reason to pick from that top bunch. I only need 5 of those guys to win NCAAs every year."
Skeptic's response: "Zalesky tried it and it didn't work."
My response: "Cael and Ryan tried it and it did. Brands tried the alternative and it didn't."
Skeptic's response: "We just need to find guys who fit our mold and train them up."
My response: "Cough, Kelly, cough."
Say I was Jordan Burroughs, and Texas decides to reimplement the wrestling program and hire me as head coach. I have good facilities and a solid assistant team assembled.
Assume that money is the number one deciding factor in a kid's college choice.
Assume that I am a great recruiter and I only recruit stars (top 3 at their weight class, top 25 P4P) who will average 14.5 points (Sorenson scored 14.5 points for placing 4th) per wrestler at NCAA's when they are in the line-up after a red-shirt year,
I'm limited to 4 wrestlers per year and I have 10 scholarships. I only offer full scholarships to eliminate location-talent bias.
I only have an average eye for talent, so half of the stars I recruit don't pan out and score no points. After 1 year I can identify those who don't pan out and reduce all of their scholarship money/run them off the team.
Assume I have an endless supply of walk-ons to fill out my line up so all my freshman can red-shirt, all walk-ons will score 0 points.
Year 0:
I recruit 4 stars.
4 true freshman.
They all redshirt.
10 walk-ons score zero points.
Year 1:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 Are run-off. 6 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman.
4 true freshman red-shirt.
2 wrestlers score 29 points.
Year 2:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run off. 8 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores.
4 wrestlers score 58 points.
Year 3:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run off. 10 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores. 2 juniors.
6 wrestlers score 87 points.
Year 4:
I recruit 2 stars. 2 are run-off. 10 wrestlers on the team.
2 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores. 2 juniors. 2 seniors.
8 wrestlers score 116 points.
Year 5:
I recruit 3 stars. 1 is run-off, 2 graduate. 10 wrestlers on the team.
3 true freshman. 1 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores. 2 juniors. 2 seniors.
7 wrestlers score 101.5 points.
Year 6:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run-off, 2 graduate. 10 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 1 red-shirt freshman. 1 sophomore. 2 juniors. 2 seniors.
6 wrestlers score 87 points.
Year 7:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run-off, 2 graduate. 10 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 1 sophomore, 1 junior, 2 seniors.
6 wrestlers score 87 points.
Year 8:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run-off, 2 graduate.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores, 1 junior, 1 senior.
6 wrestlers score 87 points.
Year 9:
I recruit 3 stars. 2 are run-off, 1 graduates.
3 true freshman, 2 red-shirt freshman, 2 sophomores, 2 juniors, 1 senior.
7 wrestlers score 101.5 points.
Year 10:
I recruit 2 stars. 1 is run-off, 1 graduates.
2 true freshman, 2 red-shirt freshman, 2 sophomores, 2 juniors, 2 seniors.
8 wrestlers score 116 points.
-
Obviously this model is in a vacuum, but this is how I would run my team if I was head coach.
Assume that money is the number one deciding factor in a kid's college choice.
Assume that I am a great recruiter and I only recruit stars (top 3 at their weight class, top 25 P4P) who will average 14.5 points (Sorenson scored 14.5 points for placing 4th) per wrestler at NCAA's when they are in the line-up after a red-shirt year,
I'm limited to 4 wrestlers per year and I have 10 scholarships. I only offer full scholarships to eliminate location-talent bias.
I only have an average eye for talent, so half of the stars I recruit don't pan out and score no points. After 1 year I can identify those who don't pan out and reduce all of their scholarship money/run them off the team.
Assume I have an endless supply of walk-ons to fill out my line up so all my freshman can red-shirt, all walk-ons will score 0 points.
Year 0:
I recruit 4 stars.
4 true freshman.
They all redshirt.
10 walk-ons score zero points.
Year 1:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 Are run-off. 6 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman.
4 true freshman red-shirt.
2 wrestlers score 29 points.
Year 2:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run off. 8 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores.
4 wrestlers score 58 points.
Year 3:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run off. 10 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores. 2 juniors.
6 wrestlers score 87 points.
Year 4:
I recruit 2 stars. 2 are run-off. 10 wrestlers on the team.
2 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores. 2 juniors. 2 seniors.
8 wrestlers score 116 points.
Year 5:
I recruit 3 stars. 1 is run-off, 2 graduate. 10 wrestlers on the team.
3 true freshman. 1 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores. 2 juniors. 2 seniors.
7 wrestlers score 101.5 points.
Year 6:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run-off, 2 graduate. 10 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 1 red-shirt freshman. 1 sophomore. 2 juniors. 2 seniors.
6 wrestlers score 87 points.
Year 7:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run-off, 2 graduate. 10 wrestlers on the team.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 1 sophomore, 1 junior, 2 seniors.
6 wrestlers score 87 points.
Year 8:
I recruit 4 stars. 2 are run-off, 2 graduate.
4 true freshman. 2 red-shirt freshman. 2 sophomores, 1 junior, 1 senior.
6 wrestlers score 87 points.
Year 9:
I recruit 3 stars. 2 are run-off, 1 graduates.
3 true freshman, 2 red-shirt freshman, 2 sophomores, 2 juniors, 1 senior.
7 wrestlers score 101.5 points.
Year 10:
I recruit 2 stars. 1 is run-off, 1 graduates.
2 true freshman, 2 red-shirt freshman, 2 sophomores, 2 juniors, 2 seniors.
8 wrestlers score 116 points.
-
Obviously this model is in a vacuum, but this is how I would run my team if I was head coach.
Klapp is 69 - 20 career- he'll do great at Carver Hawkeye if you give him the nod. He is a pinner as well.
That and Burak getting a year to work on whatever he needs or to just plain heal could be the smart move.
This post was edited on 4/6 8:39 AM by sweatybetty
This post was edited on 4/6 11:15 AM by sweatybetty
That and Burak getting a year to work on whatever he needs or to just plain heal could be the smart move.
This post was edited on 4/6 8:39 AM by sweatybetty
This post was edited on 4/6 11:15 AM by sweatybetty
Tyree Sutton, NJ #7 195- Just won Flo Nationals with a 9-1 win over the #6 guy.
Sutton will probably have to JUCO to start his career. He was a mess early in HS and didn't wrestle his sophomore year...Seems like he has turned that corner and can be a very good D1 college wrestler. Very good on top. He won a State title for his HS that never even had a placewinner. Half of his small town was on the boardwalk in Atlantic City to cheer him on.Just hope he ends up in New Brunswick, NJ.
http://www.app.com/story/sports/high-school/2015/03/08/keansburg-wrestling-tyree-sutton/24621641/
Sutton will probably have to JUCO to start his career. He was a mess early in HS and didn't wrestle his sophomore year...Seems like he has turned that corner and can be a very good D1 college wrestler. Very good on top. He won a State title for his HS that never even had a placewinner. Half of his small town was on the boardwalk in Atlantic City to cheer him on.Just hope he ends up in New Brunswick, NJ.
http://www.app.com/story/sports/high-school/2015/03/08/keansburg-wrestling-tyree-sutton/24621641/
You're picking and choosing the "top guys" that a school will be able to land. Do you think the Brands aren't recruiting the kids on the team you mentioned? They are a finite number, and if you offer full rides to the ones you deem to be the ones you want, you best better be right, they better be happy on campus, not get injured, etc. As well as, other schools are after those same kids. One or two misses, with this plan of using 90% of your scholarships on 5 guys, submarines your squad real quick. Take a look at Minnesota's sqaud last year. Full of highly ranked kids, this was their year.
Again, in a perfect world, with hindsight and everyone working out as you expected when they signed, your plan is great. It didnt' for Zalesky. Consider how many guys who have come in for Tom and not done as well as expected, or left the team. I am NOT saying "find guys to fill the mold and train them". I'm saying if you don't find the right guys for your team, and aren't able to coach them up, it doesn't matter what their HS credentials are.
You cite Cael and Ryan who are also using a lot deeper instate HS talent pool than Iowa has been able to take advantage of the last few years. You are using Zeke who basically cleaned house and has almost a full 9.9 scholarships to use on this one class, imagine Tom graduates EVERY scholarship next year and has 0 returning scholarhip dollars. How aggressive do you think he could be? Sunkist Club money doesn't hurt either I'm sure, but that's another debate.
Again, I'm not saying you're wrong about needing talent, but you are cherry picking examples and not considering all factors in your argument. If you dont' think the coaches are recruiting these kids you're crazy, you don't want the strategy to change, you want them to win the recruiting battles each and every time out.
This post was edited on 4/6 11:25 AM by MN.HAWK
I think we can probably agree that TNT and M* are recruiting all these studs. The question to me is, "is Tom willing to give them a full scholly to get them here?" Stories (true?) are that he isn't all that willing to give full schollies, even to the superstars. If this is true, it isn't too suprising that he isn't landing them.
Again, I think they do a tremendous job of coaching up and improving the top 10 - 30 overall guys (and even the top 100 type guys) and making them into studs. He is probably pretty descent at evaluating talent. [Personally, I would prefer that we recruit a little more raw talent that are not as polished and coach them up. Some guys with more limited athletic ability and great technique as HS seniors get passed up by lower ranked raw talent-type guys that improve their technique in college - but that is a separate discussion.] Iowa just needs a couple superstars and we would be in business.
Again, I think they do a tremendous job of coaching up and improving the top 10 - 30 overall guys (and even the top 100 type guys) and making them into studs. He is probably pretty descent at evaluating talent. [Personally, I would prefer that we recruit a little more raw talent that are not as polished and coach them up. Some guys with more limited athletic ability and great technique as HS seniors get passed up by lower ranked raw talent-type guys that improve their technique in college - but that is a separate discussion.] Iowa just needs a couple superstars and we would be in business.
