DATE: December 20, 2007
TO: Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet
Bracket and Format Subcommittee
FROM: NCAA Wrestling Committee
SUBJECT: Selection Procedures for Future NCAA Wrestling Championships Update
In response to the cabinet’s direction to provide a draft of its proposed selection procedures, the NCAA Wrestling Committee has not only developed revised selection criteria for the NCAA Division I Championships that eliminates the use of historical data, but the committee has also developed a comprehensive strategic plan for the sport that has the support of the entire wrestling community.
The need for a strategic plan is not new but became more apparent (and urgent) when the committee evaluated the impact of changing the championship selection procedure to include a ranking system. The committee believes that a ranking system has a place in the new selection process but the committee also feels strongly that changes to the selection procedures cannot me made in a vacuum. Changes made in isolation to the NCAA Championships - the sport’s premier event - will have both immediate and long-term ripple effects including a further decline in NCAA member institutions’ motivation and ability to sponsor the sport of wrestling.
There are a number of positive things currently happening within
the wrestling community. High school
and youth participation are on the rise, the Olympics will once again sponsor
women’s wrestling in 2008 and the most recent NCAA Division I Wrestling
Championships Finals set an attendance record of over 17,780 fans this past March
in
The Wrestling Committee believes that it has assembled a package of recommendations that will:
This package of recommendations is not the exclusive work product of the six-member NCAA Division I Wrestling Committee nor do the recommendations comprise the entire strategic plan. The committee received input and support from member coaches and administrators, the National Wrestling Coaches Association (NWCA), USA Wrestling (USAW), the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) and refined preliminary ideas by working with NCAA staff. This package of recommendations formulates an effective “Phase I” of the committee’s strategic plan and there is ongoing work being performed to address other important issues including seeking ways to improve the wrestling’s APR, professionalizing the sport’s officiating program, and addressing underlying reasons for the large number of individual forfeits. The committee hopes to forward additional recommendations that address these issues within the next 18 months.
The following recommendations are accompanied by both financial and academic impact statements and are presented as a package that reflects the interdependence the recommendations have on one another.
Package of Recommendations
1) New Selection Procedures for NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships
2) Add 30 qualifiers to NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships
3) Increase Competition Dates and Require a Minimum Number of Dual Meets
4) Create NCAA Sanctioned Dual Meet Championships Event
Recommendation #1 – New Selection Procedures for
NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships
Effective with the 2009 championships:
a) Champions in every weight class in each eligible conference tournament and regional qualifying tournament will automatically qualify for the NCAA Championships. Based on 2008 qualifying events, champions would amount to 110 qualifiers.
b) Remaining qualifiers will be allocated to conference and regional qualifying tournaments by the NCAA Wrestling Committee one week prior to the first qualifying events using the following current-year data:
i) Individuals’ won-lost records
ii) Individuals’ pre-seed committee rankings
iii) Individuals’ records vs. the top 10, top 20 and others under consideration
iv) Conference or Regional RPI ranking developed by the NWCA
v) Conference or Regional performance ranking developed by the NWCA
vi) Size of the qualifying event
The sequence of allocating the number of qualifiers prior to the qualifying tournaments is similar to the current system. However, the criteria that the committee will use to determine the number of qualifiers will no longer consist of historical data and the timing of awarding the allocations will be delayed to allow for the most current-year data to be considered.
c) An individual’s finish at their respective conference and regional qualifying tournaments will determine at-large selections for the NCAA Championships. If a qualifying event receives an allocation of qualifiers not evenly divisible by the 10 weight classes, the coaches of that qualifying event shall determine the remaining at-large selections at the conclusion of the qualifying event. (Example: If a qualifying event receives an allocation of 35, the 1st, 2ndand 3rd place finishers in all 10 weight classes and five at-large selections determined by the coaches at the conclusion of the qualifying event will qualify for the NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships. Coaches will no longer have the option to reduce the number of qualifiers determined by place finish by 10 and increase the number of at-large selections determined by the coaches by the same amount.)
Rationale: The Wrestling Committee believes that it is important to have the competition at the qualifying events determine as many of the qualifiers as possible. Not only does this system give the participating student-athletes control of the vast majority of the qualifiers, but it also reinforces the importance of the conference tournaments as a meaningful competition and as an effective way to market the sport.
Academic Impact: None.
Financial Impact: The cabinet has already approved an additional $14,135 for an annual in-person meeting of the committee at the NCAA national office to determine the championship field.
Recommendation #2 – Add 30 qualifiers to NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships
Increase the field of wrestlers at the NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships from 330 to 360.
Rationale: Only with an increased field size can selections to the NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships satisfy the requirement to select the most deserving student-athletes and the need to optimize regional representation for the long-term sustainability and growth of an endangered sport.
NCAA regulations pertaining to selection philosophy state the following:
· Bylaw 31.01.2 - Postseason Championship Opportunities. NCAA championships are intended to provide national-championship competition among the best eligible student-athletes and teams at the conclusion of the respective sport seasons, with consideration for regional structures that may be approved for certain championships.
· Bylaw 31.3.5 - Selection of Balance of Championship Field. Once the official representative(s) of each qualifying conference is determined, the governing sports committee responsible for selection of the balance of the championship field shall consider objectively and without prejudice the competitive records of all other eligible student-athletes and teams (including representatives of the other members of the conferences receiving automatic qualification). To the best of its ability, the committee shall select the most highly qualified individuals and teams to complete the championship field in accordance with the regional structure, if any, approved for the particular championship.
The committee supports the NCAA’s selection philosophy that awards championship participation to the most highly qualified individuals but the committee is equally concerned with the detrimental impact this could have on the sport of wrestling. More than a token amount of regional representation is critical for the sustainability and potential growth of the sport.
A significant reason for the past success of the NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships is the broad representation of the member institutions. For instance, there were 74 of the 88 eligible institutions sponsoring the sport being represented at the 2007 NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships. The committee acknowledges that the wrestling championships field size is already among the highest for NCAA individual-team championships but the committee believes that this broad representation is exactly the strategy needed to market the sport of wrestling. The exposure gained by participating in the NCAA Championships is extremely beneficial for programs that are trying to elevate their stature in their communities and in front of potential recruits.
With the existing cap of 330 wrestlers the committee is torn between awarding qualifiers to the most deserving individuals and awarding qualifiers in efforts to help an endangered sport. Regional representation at the NCAA Championships has declined over the past several years and the committee believes this trend will continue even under the new qualifying system. Increasing regional representation to a meaningful level will be at the expense of some of the most deserving individuals. The committee believes that its recommendation to increase the championship field size to 360 will allow it to satisfy the selection philosophy and address the strategic marketing needs of an endangered sport.
Academic Impact: An additional 30 student-athletes would each miss three days of classes to compete in the NCAA Championships.
Financial Impact: NCAA staff estimates an additional $57,000 in expenses offset by an additional $14,000 in ticket revenue for a net financial impact of $43,000.
Impact on Championship Format: The impact on the NCAA Division I Wrestling Championships format is minimal. 30 additional wrestlers will result in 60 additional matches that will lengthen sessions one and two by approximately 30-45 minutes each. There is enough time currently scheduled between sessions to accommodate the additional matches without altering the times of the sessions. Sessions three through six would not be affected.
Recommendation #3 – Increase Competition Dates and Require a Minimum Number of Dual Meets
The committee is evaluating legislative proposals that would increase dual meet competitions with minimal academic impact to student-athletes or financial impact to member institutions sponsoring wrestling. Once finalized the committee will forward its specific legislative proposal to the cabinet.
In addition, the committee is appreciative of the cabinet’s support of proposals 2007-96 and 2007-100 as these legislative changes will benefit wrestling programs by increasing scheduling flexibility. Future scheduling proposals from the committee will look to compliment these two positive changes.
Rationale: The committee is concerned that using a ranking system in the selection procedures will create a competitive incentive for coaches to fill their schedules with more open tournaments and less dual meets. While this may not initially sound like a reason for concern, the committee believes that wrestling’s ability to create a meaningful regular season is of paramount importance.
Just as track and field schedules are designed to “chase times” across the country in efforts to maximize student-athletes’ opportunities to meet minimum qualification standards for NCAA Championship competition, wrestling schedules will now focus on open tournaments where wrestlers would compete against highly-ranked opponents in efforts to increase RPI and other performance rankings that would be factors in NCAA qualifier allocations.
One could argue that these systems do create faster times and potentially higher RPIs but the committee believes it is done so at the expense of a school’s local fan base. Open wrestling tournaments, not unlike open track and field competitions, can be accurately described as three-ring circuses. While avid fans enjoy attending these events, they are inconvenient and confusing for most people, especially potential new fans. Dual meets are much more fan friendly in that most meets last less than two hours and fans can follow and support their team for the entire event. More importantly, teams can use dual meets as a means to develop a legitimate home event schedule that nurtures a local fan base – a concept that if successful, could benefit other sports that struggle with local support, including track and field, swimming and diving and other Olympic sports.
To ensure that dual meets are prioritized by member institutions after the adoption of the new qualification standards for the NCAA Championship, the legislation should be amended to require that institutions participate in a minimal number of dual competitions annually. The open tournaments where student-athletes pursue the opportunity to participate against ranked opponents will be important for institutions and conferences attempting to qualify the most qualified and deserving student-athletes for the Championship, but this should not come at the cost of eroding traditional institution versus institution competitions.
In order to achieve this, a competition schedule that permits a balanced schedule that focuses primarily on dual meets is vital, while still giving opportunity to compete in a large open competition where a student-athlete can improve his overall rank and conference’s potential qualifier count.
Another critical element is the use of the dual meet as an important opportunity to expose the sport of wrestling to different areas of the country where it is largely underrepresented. Indicative of the wrestling community’s support of this plan are the commitments made by two of the strongest conferences in terms of wrestling resources. The Big 12 and Big Ten conferences have agreed to use at least one of the four additional dual meets to annually travel to areas of the country that do not have a strong wrestling tradition, thus providing a marquee opponent that a home team could market as a special event.
Another important benefit of adding dates of competition with minimal dual meet requirements is that the committee expects this will lessen wrestling’s dependence on “unattached competition”. With only 16 dates of competition (excluding exempted events) currently allowed over the 144-day season the demand for additional competition has produced a growing cottage industry of open tournaments where student-athletes compete unattached. Student-athletes, with and without the encouragement of their coaches, want to compete more often than current NCAA regulations permit and have found a way to do so at open tournaments through unattached competition.
This is a significant student-athlete welfare issue as student-athletes cannot receive any financial, transportation, medical or coaching support from their institutions when competing unattached at open tournaments. Student-athletes are driving themselves, often times several hours, to open tournament sites, spending their own money on entry fees and meals, competing in anywhere from two to eight matches over the course of the event and then driving themselves back to campus at the conclusion of the event. The student-athletes are putting themselves at unnecessary risk during their travels to and from the event and during the competition as they have no athletic trainer accompanying them.
Finally, assuming wrestling teams embrace dual meets for the reasons previously cited, additional dates of competition will be necessary to maintain a sufficient number of competition opportunities to produce valid RPI and other performance measurements.
Academic Impact: To be determined pending specific legislative proposal.
Financial Impact: To be determined pending specific legislative proposal.
Recommendation #4 – Create NCAA Sanctioned Dual Meet Championships Event
The NWCA currently hosts an annual “National Duals” event in mid-January that determines national team champions using dual meet competition for all three NCAA divisions, the NAIA, the NJCAA and club programs.
An NCAA sanctioned dual meet championship would only include teams from NCAA Divisions I, II and III competing for their respective divisional team championships. The NWCA would continue to host national dual meet championships for the NAIA, NJCAA and club programs. The NWCA event would ideally take place at a separate venue but in the same city and on the same dates as the NCAA event in an effort to jointly promote the sport of wrestling to a single community.
To encourage coaches to increase the number of dual meets they schedule during the regular season, the committee would establish a minimum dual meet requirement for a team to be eligible for selection to compete in the NCAA sanctioned dual meet championships event. This new event would also be included in the list of annually exempted events that do not count toward an institution’s or an individual’s maximum number of dates of competition.
Rationale: Creation of an NCAA sanctioned dual meet championship is consistent with the committee’s goal of placing renewed emphasis on dual meet competition. An NCAA sanctioned event would legitimize the dual meet format of competition and would expose the sport to a broader audience.
An NCAA sanctioned dual meet championship is the type of event envisioned by the September 1, 2005 report of the NCAA/USOC Joint Task Force. Such an event would highlight collegiate competition in an at-risk sport and create value, monetary and otherwise, for the NCAA and other wrestling stakeholders. An NCAA sanctioned dual meet championship will be another revenue-producing center for the NCAA thus assisting the NCAA’s efforts to diversify its revenue streams.
In recognition of the NWCA’s goodwill associated with
the creation of the National Duals and the NWCA’s current and future
services provided to the NCAA (i.e. weight certification program, statistical
support for the selection committee, coordination of NCAA Championship ticket
sales and ancillary events, etc.) the NCAA would annually compensate the NWCA
an agreed upon amount in exchange for the NWCA continuing to provide requested
services and for the NWCA’s agreement to transfer the opportunity to host
a national dual meet event to the NCAA.
(Note: In 2007, the NCAA
awarded the NWCA a $50,000 grant for providing services related to the weight
certification program and future assistance in the development of selection
criteria for use by the committee during the selection process.)
Academic Impact: It is anticipated that most, if not all, teams competing in an NCAA-sanctioned dual meet tournament are already competing in the NWCA national dual meet tournament. There is no anticipated additional missed class time with this recommendation.
Financial Impact: An NCAA Division I, II and III Wrestling Dual Meet Championships would be another profitable wrestling event for the association. The NWCA has averaged an approximate $50,000 annual profit on the event but the committee expects that with the NCAA’s marketing support and event management expertise the event will generate significantly more revenue.