New Qualifier and the ACC - D1 College Wrestling

The New Qualifying System and the ACC by Earl Smith

On Friday, the NCAA announced the allocations of the qualifiers for the 2009 NCAA Wrestling Championships. The only conference that improved its number of automatic qualifiers was the ACC. Since 2006, the ACC was only given fourteen automatic qualifiers in each postseason. This year the ACC has 27.

Each qualifying tournament was awarded qualifiers per weight class based on information from just this season instead of the past five years under the old system. This season, wrestlers were evaluated on three criteria, winning percentage against DI opponents, RPI (Ratings Percentage Index) and a coaches ranking. 278 of the possible 330 qualifiers were allocated to individuals who met two of the following three benchmarks, a 0.725 winning percentage, top 28 RPI, and a top 28 ranking in the coaches poll. The individuals who met two of the three benchmarks earned a qualifying spot for his respective conference. The additional 52 qualifiers will be selected after each conference tournament has concluded by the NCAA Division I Wrestling Committee.

It was unclear to most observers how this system would work out during its inaugural season. Many people suspected that the ACC would benefit, but just how much was the question. The conference is full of young talent, only one of the twenty ACC finalists in 2008 was a senior. Two ACC teams had top ten recruiting classes in 2007, and three had top twenty recruiting class in 2008, as per Intermat’s rankings.

Once the qualifying slots were awarded, D1CW sought opinions on the new system from four of the ACC’s head coaches. In our “round-table” of sorts, Coaches Kevin Dresser of Virginia Tech, Kerry McCoy of Maryland, CD Mock of North Carolina and Steve Garland of Virginia gave their opinions on this qualifying system as well as its predecessor, its impact on their teams and also helped us novice fans understand how and why the new system works.

1. The conference has 27 qualifiers prior to the wild card selection. Is this how you had pictured the qualifier allotment and are you satisfied with it?

Kerry McCoy: I knew the conference had a lot of potential. I thought we would be between 20 and 30. I am very pleased with the total number and I think the system is good.

Steve Garland: I didn't think we would get 27, but I did think we would increase significantly. If you look at the results from this past year, we've had some great things happen individually with guys in our conference. I thought we'd get at least 24 automatics, but obviously 27 is great.

CD Mock: Yes, and we are thrilled. It is extremely satisfying after being called "cry babies" for years to finally have some fairness to the system. I know all of us in the ACC are very thankful to all the people who were a part of fighting this fight; and it was a fight. There is no way anyone can say this new system is not a much fairer system than the previous one. You get qualifiers based on what you have done as a wrestler all year long; who you wrestled and how you did. It's the right way to do this.

Kevin Dresser: I was probably like a lot of people this first year and not quite sure how the new automatic qualifier system would finalize. However, I can assure you that it is a much fairer system than what had been previously in place. While I am satisfied today, that is probably a better question to ask next week at this time.

2. Coaches from the conferences affected negatively by the previous qualifier rules have stated that the old system hampered recruiting. Have you noticed any differences since this system has been implemented?

Steve Garland: I completely agree that the old system was a major recruiting obstacle for our conference. Every home visit I did, I heard questions and concerns about their child "getting to NCAA's". However, my first year here at Virginia we brought in a class that was ranked as high as third in the country in some polls and I believe the success with that class had a lot to do with the fact that we were able to promise a big change in the system. We couldn't describe exactly what was going to happen, but it was a big help to be able to assure parents that things were going to change. Doing away with historical data was a crucial step for our sport. Whether you agree with particulars of the new system or not, I think everyone can agree on the fact that an incoming recruit should not have to suffer because of things that went on for the previous 5 years. That just doesn't make sense!

CD Mock: ABSOLUTELY! What we found was that the coaches against changing the old system, the same guys who were telling us it was fine, were telling recruits out the other side of their mouths they would be crazy to go to the ACC because of how hard it was to get to NCAA's. That's history now......that's all we ever wanted, a fair chance to get there.

Kevin Dresser: In the ACC, we always heard from opposing non-conference coaches the following, “Why do you want to go to an ACC school, they only take a small amount of Qualifiers and regardless of how good you are, if you have a bad ACC tournament, you are NOT going to the NCAA tournament”. Guess what, those days are gone.

3. Can you explain why this is a fair system for everyone? Detractors of this system say that only the ACC will benefit.

Kerry McCoy: Fair is a relative term. I believe the system is good because it is completely based on the current year's performance and the athletes themselves determine the qualifying spots. Obviously there is no way to completely even the field, but this is pretty close. You get rewarded for wrestling tough competition; you get rewarded for a high winning percentage. I think the biggest area that will need to improve is the coaches ranking. I do not know how many coaches take the time to really look comprehensively at the weights they are ranking. The top 20 are relatively easy to rank, but 21-33 take some work. Those spots are crucial, and coaches must make sure those guys get ranked appropriately.

Steve Garland: I understand where the detractors of this system of coming from. I really do. Though, I'm not sure why people would say only the ACC will benefit. It's the first year for the system, so I think it's a touch premature to start making dramatic statements such as that. What I can tell you is that if you look at the kids who earned an automatic bid for the conference they were all very high up in the coaches ranking (which means a lot of guys thought that they were good...not just the ACC coaches) and their RPI levels were very competitive as well (which means the wrestlers in the ACC wrestled solid competition and had a solid win percentage). What I'm getting at here is that the wrestlers from the ACC didn't earn the bid with "inflated" win percentage or any other unfair measure. They earned the bids through the efforts of a very long season based on the parameters set forth by the NCAA.

Essentially, the major criticism I've heard is that the smaller programs are hurt the most by this system. I obviously don't have all the answers to this problem, but the way I think to get your RPI built up is to ensure your athletes are competing in open events as well as dual meets. There is a plethora of tournaments out there where great competition is available at a minimal cost. For example, if you are in PA you have the Penn State Open, the Mat Town tourney in Lock Haven, PA, the East Stroudsburg Open, the Keystone Classic Invitational, etc. etc. If you are down south you have the Hokie Open, the NC State Open, the Southern Scuffle, etc. So again, if you are anywhere near NJ, PA and even parts of OH and NY or anywhere down south, you have tournaments/competition available to you. If you are on the west coast you have both Vegas and Reno tournaments that are great. If you are in the Midwest you have Midlands, the Kaufman-Brand Open, etc. Those are opportunities to get great matches in. Get your kids there and then it’s the athlete’s job to win. We don't travel anywhere over 4 hours the entire second half of the season and I still have three athletes with an RPI in the top ten. So, we haven't spent a whole lot of money at all and we were still able to get our kids great competition. That being said, I understand that it's a lot harder for the West Coast and Midwest teams to do get from point A to point B without spending a lot of money. It's obviously a lot more expensive to travel the long distances teams must travel to get duals and tournaments in. Again, I don't have all the answers to everything. What I can say is that because there are 3 tiers to the system (winning percentage, RPI and coaches ranking) so there is a series of "checks and balances" in place. The most important check in my opinion is the fact that there are still 52 at large bids available. I say this because, now the way the new system is set up, if you have a bad conference/regional tournament you still have a great shot at getting to NCAA's, if you had a solid season. I think this is a crucial part of the new system. Last season, with the old system, a guy like Craig Henning from Wisconsin had to stay home. In the new system there is still a chance for your total body of work to be considered. Again, I just don't see how this isn't viewed as a great thing. If you are in a situation (as an athlete) you still have to fight and battle and earn your automatic bid to NCAA's by doing well at your conference tournament. It was very important to the committee that the conference tournaments retain their integrity and importance. With the new system this is certainly the case. But you also have the chance for guys to get to NCAA's after the fact when all the at-large bids are determined. I think this a great part of the new system and I think it will help a lot of deserving athletes get to NCAA's.

As far as kids who are not ranked high enough by the coaches, our committee does not rank the athletes. This is the part of the system that is completely in the coaches hands. I feel that it is very important that our coaches across the country have a part in the new system. If I remember correctly, this was a major concern of the coaches at the last two NWCA conventions. Well, in the new system they have a major part and ironically, this is the part of the system that I have heard the most criticism. Again, the NCAA Committee is not ranking the kids. Our peers are ranking them. If our coaches across the country are doing the job they are assigned to do correctly, then kids will get ranked where they deserve.

Lastly, I've heard complaints that some conferences should have more automatic bids. I don't disagree necessarily, but again, what I will point out is that with the new system there is a great chance to get to NCAA's through the at large bid selection process (obviously if you don't qualify through your conference tournament). I firmly believe that a lot of conferences will get several wrestlers through during this process and it will make a huge difference in how they view the system. We'll have to wait and see how it plays out however.

CD Mock: Of course the ACC will benefit; in fact, I think we are the only conference that actually increased in qualifiers. And, we nearly doubled! All that tells you loud and clear is we have been by far the most adversely affected for years. This system is not skewed to make up for past mistakes.....it is the same for everyone, and the fact that we will benefit more than others is only proof of what we have been saying. I'm certain the next thing we will hear about is the number of All Americas each conference brings home; if the ACC doesn't produce its fair share this year, the detractors will point to this as further evidence of their logic. Although I am confident we will produce this year, the bottom line is that this argument is irrelevant. To perform at the show, you first have to get to the show. The process to get there should be a result of what you have done all year long...the ends doesn't justify the means.

Kevin Dresser: First of all, two things. This system is not perfect and may have to be tweaked somewhat. Secondly, this is just year ONE and from this year's numbers, the ACC has improved greatly.

With that being said, if the ACC does NOT put up the same numbers next year, our qualifiers will drop and that is the beauty of the new system. Detractors of this system are reacting on emotion and probably are biased towards a conference that has been given a significant lower amount of qualifiers for 2009 than they historical have received. Plain and simple, they were living off the past four years which is no way to determine who the best 33 guys are right now, at this moment. This system is fair because it is designed for individuals and not conferences. The beauty of wrestling is it is an individual sport and we now have a system that really rewards an individual's performance each year more than a historical conference situation. As a fairly new D1 coach, the old system really made NO sense to me. Basically, it is as simple as this.....If you don't have a good RPI, then get out there and wrestle better teams. If you don't have a good enough WIN %, then get tougher and win more matches. I truly believe that every D1 school regardless of what coast they represent has affordable opportunities to get their guys on the charts with educated scheduling. The ACC coaches proved it this year.

To finish, I feel for the most part, the ACC on average, truly represents the 9 thru 25th spots in the nation right now. So if that plays true and you look at things after this season, the ACC probably won't get a bunch of All Americans, however we do deserve what we have earned and that is what a NCAA tournament is all about.

4. How have your wrestlers responded to the new qualifier numbers?

Kerry McCoy: They are excited and proud of what they have accomplished. We had 4 guys earn spots and 2 others that were on the bubble. Now they know what they need to do to go to NCAA's so everyone is focused on that, as well as the team tournament.

CD Mock: For me as a coach this is the first year in my short career that I have actually been relaxed and excited about our conference tournament. In the past, it has been very stressful because you know kids who deserved to go (from our conference) were going to stay home. As for the wrestlers, I don't think anything changes for them. They are going to train the same, work their butts off, and give it all they have because that's what we do.

Kevin Dresser: I told my guys not to pay any attention to any of this! We want 10 guys in the finals on March 7th. Once we achieve that, we are going to figure out how to win those 10 matches. Number of qualifiers isn't our focus.

________________________________________________________________________________

These coaches’ teams, along with North Carolina State and Duke will compete for the 27 automatic qualifier positions at the ACC Championships, Saturday March 7^th in Blacksburg, Virginia. The host school Virginia Tech finished the dual season undefeated in conference action and is currently ranked 22^nd in the nation by D1CW. Seven wrestlers who won ACC Championships in 2008 will be back to defend their titles. D1CW (www.d1collegewrestling.net) will provide live coverage of the event.