IRAs 2022

[Magis12]

An uncomfortable truth in our sport is that the resourcing gap is so big that it’s really hard to measure coaches (not impossible, just hard.)

Most major American college sports look vastly different than rowing.

College basketball, for example, has a set number of scholarships.

1-2 elite recruits can change a program from a bottom-dweller to a championship contender.

A team can only care a set number of players, so everyone’s roster is the same size.

There isn’t a competition for the 6-10 guys on the bench, so there’s a better case to be made for going to a lower-ranked program.

And then strategy and tactics of the coach play a huge role too in non-rowing.

In rowing, tactics are almost irrelevant in comparison to American football/basketball/soccer/etc.

And—due to the nature of racing an 8-person shell as our de fault event—for a program to really turn around you need a bunch of quality guys…which is really hard if you don’t have Admissions support and scholarships.

Reischman is a great coach and has been since before Syracuse was great. But he’s also benefitted tremendously from the new training facilities they have.

Penn’s various coaches are all talented. But until the administration ups their support they may not see real, meaningful change.

This is just how men’s rowing is. Unless we level the playing field for funding/scholarships/roster sizes.

[FullSend]

I agree to an extent, but who was the last major winner in college basketball that didn't have some major investment? Memphis got some stud dudes and barely made the tournament. Baylor is a newcomer to the top, but that made massive investments in athletics over the last 10-15 years.

College football is nearly impossible to break into the top tier unless you are already there - Oregon was probably the last to really do it and that took Phil Knight $$$

College athletics has always been about haves and have nots. If you exceed expectations at a have not, you get hired by one of the blue chip programs where you have amazing facilities, NIL money, recruiting budget to fly all over the place, ability to hire "analysts", etc

Bill C (college football writer for ESPN) says that coaching CFB comes down to 3 things: 1) talent acquisition (recruiting), 2) talent development (technical coaching), 3) talent deployment (tactics). I would agree that the difference in rowing is that 1 and 2 massively outweigh 3. Though Columbia lights is a good example of a deployment tweak making a big difference.

[FullSend]

Harvard over Yale today in the coxswain race by nearly 6 seconds. Just so you know I am collecting receipts on all you Charlie Butt haters.

Now this is the content I crave! Please tell me there is video of this

[sandor]

I agree to an extent, but who was the last major winner in college basketball that didn't have some major investment? Memphis got some stud dudes and barely made the tournament. Baylor is a newcomer to the top, but that made massive investments in athletics over the last 10-15 years.

College football is nearly impossible to break into the top tier unless you are already there - Oregon was probably the last to really do it and that took Phil Knight $$$

College athletics has always been about haves and have nots. If you exceed expectations at a have not, you get hired by one of the blue chip programs where you have amazing facilities, NIL money, recruiting budget to fly all over the place, ability to hire "analysts", etc

Bill C (college football writer for ESPN) says that coaching CFB comes down to 3 things: 1) talent acquisition (recruiting), 2) talent development (technical coaching), 3) talent deployment (tactics). I would agree that the difference in rowing is that 1 and 2 massively outweigh 3. Though Columbia lights is a good example of a deployment tweak making a big difference.

If my numbers are right...

about 20% of D1 basketball programs make the NCAA tournament (68 of 350)
about 40% of varsity rowing programs (D1 D2 & D3) make the IRA championships (34 of 89 - V8+ only here)



You can roughly compare the Sweet 16 to the medal winners (as a percentage of overall potential competitors)
How much school diversity is there among the Sweet 16 year-over-year compared to medal winners @ IRA?

While there is a definite concentration of talent at the top, especially running 4 boats deep, etc, you could argue that the path to "the big dance" in men's rowing is actually fairly open to the field.

[asdad123]

Conflicted on the parity topic. As a fan I'd like to see more variability with the talent pool spread out, but I can't blame kids who want to go to Yale and are content to sit in the 3V, instead of being forced to a "lesser" education due to roster limits.

[sandor]

Conflicted on the parity topic. As a fan I'd like to see more variability with the talent pool spread out, but I can't blame kids who want to go to Yale and are content to sit in the 3V, instead of being forced to a "lesser" education due to roster limits.

But is MIT really a lesser education than Cal? (overall i agree though, especially with the conflicted part.)

[TheNatureBoy]

Here’s something to contemplate. Do you think the Harvard alums would be this forgiving if it was any other person other then Charley? Or is he getting this much leeway for his track record with the lights?

I really can’t imagine a world where the alums would let someone not named Harry or Charley slide this much. It seems like an eternity since the last time Harvard won Sprints or the H-Y race.

[Remomex]

If my numbers are right...

about 20% of D1 basketball programs make the NCAA tournament (68 of 350)
about 40% of varsity rowing programs (D1 D2 & D3) make the IRA championships (34 of 89 - V8+ only here)

You can roughly compare the Sweet 16 to the medal winners (as a percentage of overall potential competitors)
How much school diversity is there among the Sweet 16 year-over-year compared to medal winners @ IRA?

While there is a definite concentration of talent at the top, especially running 4 boats deep, etc, you could argue that the path to "the big dance" in men's rowing is actually fairly open to the field.

If we're comparing basketball and the NCAA tournament to rowing and the IRA regatta, then on a parity standpoint it's not even close. How many different teams have made the GF at IRA since ~2010? It's certainly fewer than 8. Even the petite is a re-hash of the same teams. The NCAA tournament is very top heavy, but there are way more teams that make the elite eight/final four/championship/win. There is no "luck" element in rowing the way there is in other sports like basketball. You can have an off race, but let's be real, there are no cinderellas.

[sandor]

If my numbers are right...

about 20% of D1 basketball programs make the NCAA tournament (68 of 350)
about 40% of varsity rowing programs (D1 D2 & D3) make the IRA championships (34 of 89 - V8+ only here)

You can roughly compare the Sweet 16 to the medal winners (as a percentage of overall potential competitors)
How much school diversity is there among the Sweet 16 year-over-year compared to medal winners @ IRA?

While there is a definite concentration of talent at the top, especially running 4 boats deep, etc, you could argue that the path to "the big dance" in men's rowing is actually fairly open to the field.

If we're comparing basketball and the NCAA tournament to rowing and the IRA regatta, then on a parity standpoint it's not even close. How many different teams have made the GF at IRA since ~2010? It's certainly fewer than 8. Even the petite is a re-hash of the same teams. The NCAA tournament is very top heavy, but there are way more teams that make the elite eight/final four/championship/win. There is no "luck" element in rowing the way there is in other sports like basketball. You can have an off race, but let's be real, there are no cinderellas.

I don't follow college basketball -
what % of the total 350 D1 programs have made the Sweet 16? Elite 8? In the past 25 years? Past 5 years?
Wondering if the concentration talent @ the top of rowing & basketball is similar, but spread among more teams because of sport popularity/participation, roster size restrictions, scholarship restrictions.

Percentage wise, 8 boats out of 40 D1 programs @ IRA would equate to the 68 teams out of 350 program at the NCAA basketball tournament.

Game sports definitely have more of an x-factor than head-to-head races, especially with multiple advancing places, etc.
There is no defense that can stop Olympians from rowing through you.

[FullSend]

Percentage of field in rowing is odd to me just because of the number of "D1" schools that really shouldn't be. MIT was slower than the entire D3 field. Santa Clara? I don't think even bottom D1 basketball schools would get trucked by a D3 team but maybe I'm wrong

[sandor]

Percentage of field in rowing is odd to me just because of the number of "D1" schools that really shouldn't be. MIT was slower than the entire D3 field. Santa Clara? I don't think even bottom D1 basketball schools would get trucked by a D3 team but maybe I'm wrong

That's the talent compression difference between 1200 college basketball programs & 90 college rowing programs.

[Sarge]

I agree to an extent, but who was the last major winner in college basketball that didn't have some major investment? Memphis got some stud dudes and barely made the tournament. Baylor is a newcomer to the top, but that made massive investments in athletics over the last 10-15 years.

College football is nearly impossible to break into the top tier unless you are already there - Oregon was probably the last to really do it and that took Phil Knight $$$

College athletics has always been about haves and have nots. If you exceed expectations at a have not, you get hired by one of the blue chip programs where you have amazing facilities, NIL money, recruiting budget to fly all over the place, ability to hire "analysts", etc

Bill C (college football writer for ESPN) says that coaching CFB comes down to 3 things: 1) talent acquisition (recruiting), 2) talent development (technical coaching), 3) talent deployment (tactics). I would agree that the difference in rowing is that 1 and 2 massively outweigh 3. Though Columbia lights is a good example of a deployment tweak making a big difference.

Wouldn't the overhaul we've talked about before help address #3 and perhaps introduce an entirely different idea? To refresh everyone: the IRA would have the following events:

8, either a 4+ or 4-, 4x, 2-, 2x, 1x and Novice 8. All boats score the same number of points. No JV 8, no 3v 8, no parade of guys just rowing 8's. If you allowed each school to enter 2 1x's you would have 30 seats. You could have a national champion in the 1x! You would only need 1 recruit to make that happen!

Wouldn't coaches have more fun and lose more hair and wouldn't we all have more fun wondering who is gunning for which boats?

[FullSend]

Yea I love that idea for so many reasons, this included. I was even thinking about it while watching Youths thinking how I wish there wasn't a 2V at Youths. If you're Marin or whoever you can figure out the logistics of practicing 8+ 4- 4+ 4x 2- 2x 1x. $h!t put in a 4x+ 2+ 8x+ for all I care!

Even if the 8+ is always the premier, enough of the idea you have to be rolling out 1V 2V 3V 8s or else you are somehow lesser than

[sandor]

+100

[Magis12]

Sorry, but these examples that attempt to suggest that the parity is rowing is the same as NCAA hoops is all wrong.

If they have 360 teams, and we have 40, then their Sweet 16 by percentage is roughly our top 2.

According to Nothing But Nylon, in the 2010s alone there were 67 teams who made the Sweet 16.
https://nothingbutnylon.com/mens-sweet- ... breakdown/

That’s about 20% of their membership finishing in the top 5% in that time.

How many teams rowing teams have finished top 2 in the past decade? UW, Cal, Yale…and Harvard, maybe? The first 3 there have accounted for every title since 2009.

So that’s 15% of our membership who have finished in the top 2 in that time frame.

Maybe it's best to use a sport like FBS football, where there is an inequality of wealth (compared to most other sports) and ~129 programs, about 3x as many as we have.

Since 2010, the Top 20 (which would roughly to equate to our Grand Final) has featured 72 teams from just the Power 5 (13 SEC teams, 10 Big Ten teams, 14 ACC teams, 11 PAC 12 teams, 9 Big 12 teams, and 15 non-Power 5 teams).

So roughly 60% of their membership has finished in their equivalent of the Grand Final.

We’ve had about…9-10 teams, if I remember correctly?

So that’s about 25% of our membership finishing in the Grand Final.

Scholarship and roster size being equivalent make a massive difference, sling with the stuff I said before (I.e. if you aren’t a starter at Alabama you don’t get to play a separate game with your fellow backups against other schools’ backups, meaning there is some advantage to playing at Ole Miss and starting vs. going to Alabama and being on the bench.)