Topic ID: 14352 | 70 Posts
http://intermatwrestle.com/articles/19842?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
It’s way past due. I’d rather see a healthier sport that’s smaller than what we have now. You can still grow the sport and have fewer weight classes, especially when most schools are forfeiting multiple classes.
5 of the 8 state placers at 106 this year in Kentucky were not even in high school. The other three were freshman. Why in the world is the KHSAA sponsoring a varsity state meet with 13-15 year olds competing?
35 minutes ago, Nkawtg said:5 of the 8 state placers this year in Kentucky we’re not even in high school. The other three were freshman. Why in the world is the KHSAA sponsoring a varsity state meet with 13-15 year olds competing?
Kentucky had more than just 8 placers
28 minutes ago, GentleBeard said:Kentucky had more than just 8 placers
Whoops. Typo. Forgot to include “106”, which is the first weight to be eliminated. The article mentions 195 as well.
Wrestled with a guy who was 103 his senior year. It not always 8th graders and freshman.
I don’t believe that Nkawtg is just talking about 106. Just the idea of cutting high school weights down to 10 weight classes would absolutely make things more competitive. No doubt about it. Does is build the sport, one could argue either side. It’s similar to the argument that a 16 man State Tournament is better than a 32 man State Tournament. I can see both sides of either argument. My position overall, let’s make this sport more competitive. Not sure I completely agree with just 10 weight classes, but 12 would be ok. I definitely hate a 32 man State Tournament. 16 would absolutely be great. Everyone knows an exception to the rule, but this is overall a good idea.
So you want to eliminate a weight because of this year having a lot of talented young guys filling the weights for their HS team. Here is exactly why. Look at these kids who developed into some of the best in the state this past season. Or we can just eliminate their opportunity to get on the mat and learn and develop.
1 minute ago, Nike Man said:I don’t believe that Nkawtg is just talking about 106. Just the idea of cutting high school weights down to 10 weight classes would absolutely make things more competitive. No doubt about it. Does is build the sport, one could argue either side. It’s similar to the argument that a 16 man State Tournament is better than a 32 man State Tournament. I can see both sides of either argument. My position overall, let’s make this sport more competitive. Not sure I completely agree with just 10 weight classes, but 12 would be ok. I definitely hate a 32 man State Tournament. 16 would absolutely be great. Everyone knows an exception to the rule, but this is overall a good idea.
The problem I have with this idea is the easy approach is to just cut out the little guys because “they are always filled with middle schoolers” or too many teams forfeit the lightest weights. The bottom line is we as coaches need to do a much better job to get kids out and fill those holes because cutting them out is NOT the answer. If little old Walton Verona can field a full lineup then most everyone else should be able to do the same. These weights are some of the most talented wrestlers year in and year out.
Coach, I don’t disagree with your philosophy. I’m just agreeing to the fact that if you squeeze 14 weight classes of participants into 12 weight classes of participants, you will have deeper more competitive weight classes (in theory.) I was a “little guy” pretty much my whole career. I’m not trying to squeeze those guys out. I’m just saying we could close the gap in the middle weight classes, tighten the gap up top as well, and put a couple of lower weight classes together to make some really crazy competitive weight classes. This is all just talk anyways. Why not run wild with it. Nothing is gonna change overnight. Just making some good conversation that doesn’t include massive people with massive agendas that like massive arguments. Wink. Lol.
Ha ha. I hear ya. But this one hits a little close to home. I’m with you on the 16 man bracket.
It’s utterly absurd to contest high school meets with middle schoolers at weight classes virtually free of upperclassmen. Basketball has 5 starting positions and it’s extremely rare to see a freshman or sophomore competing at the varsity level. Meanwhile wrestling has 14 varsity positions. It’s ridiculous.
I have no dog in the fight. I’m not biased. Of course fathers of kids wrestling in the lower weights will continue to argue for the weight’s inclusion.
10 weight classes will enable competitive duals and not these painfully awful quads we have in Kentucky on school nights.
Want to grow the sport? Stop the madness that is 12 hour tournaments on weekends and get some duals going. If this makes sense in Minnesota, which is a much healthier wrestling state than Kentucky, it makes sense everywhere.
42 minutes ago, Nike Man said:Coach, I don’t disagree with your philosophy. I’m just agreeing to the fact that if you squeeze 14 weight classes of participants into 12 weight classes of participants, you will have deeper more competitive weight classes (in theory.) I was a “little guy” pretty much my whole career. I’m not trying to squeeze those guys out. I’m just saying we could close the gap in the middle weight classes, tighten the gap up top as well, and put a couple of lower weight classes together to make some really crazy competitive weight classes. This is all just talk anyways. Why not run wild with it. Nothing is gonna change overnight. Just making some good conversation that doesn’t include massive people with massive agendas that like massive arguments. Wink. Lol.
I’m not sure it’s just talk. I think within 5-10 years for sure.
12 hour tournaments have nothing to do with the number of weight classes, it has to do with coaches wanting to profit for their team off from their tournament by inviting multiple teams. I can undoubtedly have Kentucky’s toughest tournament/dual, and get it done before 4-5pm in one day. But most programs that are hosting, want to make a little money that day, so they get more involved with more teams. More teams=more kids, more parents, more $$.
Teams, clubs, counties, states, whoever, can’t opperate without funds. If schools can’t fund it, our argument is debunked.
52 minutes ago, Nike Man said:12 hour tournaments have nothing to do with the number of weight classes, it has to do with coaches wanting to profit for their team off from their tournament by inviting multiple teams. I can undoubtedly have Kentucky’s toughest tournament/dual, and get it done before 4-5pm in one day. But most programs that are hosting, want to make a little money that day, so they get more involved with more teams. More teams=more kids, more parents, more $$.
Ok, if you don’t see the issue with every Saturday from November to February being filled with wrestling tournaments because a team can’t get dual meets I don’t know what to tell you.
What are you taking about? No need to tell me anything. I clearly stated that long ass tournaments and duals were simply a booster money making event. I didn’t spell it out, but come on. You are a graduate of the Citadel. Let’s read between the lines.
I have mentioned this in the past. I was utterly against the 32 man bracket at the state tournament. Fought tooth and nail against it. They claimed that it would help wrestling increase teams in the state. I didn't think so. Guess what!! I was wrong. The 32 man bracket has caused the number of teams in KY to double since it was adopted.
Proof is in the numbers. I still don't really understand it but its the truth and I don't want to do anything that will cause numbers to decrease no matter how I feel about it, because I also liked the 16 man bracket better.
KHSAA holds a swimming state tournament that has numerous underclassmen in it.
Getting rid of lower wt. class will lessen the numbers. What is a kid who is 100lbs or less going to do? Wait until he is a Sr. and weigh 110 before competing? No they will seek out another sport.
Heck in my day (way back just after the dinos) We had 12 wt. classes and the lowest was 98lbs. (98,105,112,119,126,132,138,145,155,167,185,250)
I will do some digging and see what grade the placers were back then.
By the way basketball also has a JV team a Freshman team an 8th grade team and a 7th grade team along with non school leagues things we don't have in wrestling.
Here is a thought instead of dual meats on weeknights have mini tournaments. Invite 4 teams hold a 4 man bracket decide the winner and place the teams accordingly. Everyone gets 1 or 2 matches that night. You can even combine wt classes if needed because everyone can go up one wt. class and most do it during dual to get matches anyway.
9 hours ago, Nkawtg said:It’s utterly absurd to contest high school meets with middle schoolers at weight classes virtually free of upperclassmen. Basketball has 5 starting positions and it’s extremely rare to see a freshman or sophomore competing at the varsity level. Meanwhile wrestling has 14 varsity positions. It’s ridiculous.
I have no dog in the fight. I’m not biased. Of course fathers of kids wrestling in the lower weights will continue to argue for the weight’s inclusion.
10 weight classes will enable competitive duals and not these painfully awful quads we have in Kentucky on school nights.
Want to grow the sport? Stop the madness that is 12 hour tournaments on weekends and get some duals going. If this makes sense in Minnesota, which is a much healthier wrestling state than Kentucky, it makes sense everywhere.
It is not extremely rare for freshman and sophomores to play varsity in other sports. There are even more than a few 8th graders playing varsity in basketball, baseball,swimming etc.
While I understand the desire to reduce forfeits, taking spots away is not good for the sport. Pushing talented kids to JV and less opportunities to wrestle, pushes them out of the sport.
The article though isn’t really advocating eliminating weight classes completely. Only possibly, during dual meets, if the teams agree, to make duals more competitive.
I think there should be 11 weigh classes in college - adding one around 220-230. I’d imagine it’s tough to get recruited as a 220 - though clearly not impossible. However, you’re still looking at either cutting 20+ pounds or gaining 30-40. Seems like it could be a tough decision. Also, having 11 weight classes in a dual meet would help mitigate going to criteria (even though it doesn’t happen often). One team will always have more wins than the other.
Cutting out 106 would be a bad idea to me. Kind of on the same note as ranger, some of the most exciting and up and coming wrestlers hang out at 106 their first year or two of wrestling varsity.
1 hour ago, GentleBeard said:I think there should be 11 weigh classes in college - adding one around 220-230. I’d imagine it’s tough to get recruited as a 220 - though clearly not impossible. However, you’re still looking at either cutting 20+ pounds or gaining 30-40. Seems like it could be a tough decision. Also, having 11 weight classes in a dual meet would help mitigate going to criteria (even though it doesn’t happen often). One team will always have more wins than the other.
College needs a 220 for sure.
Question... I don't understand the angst against towards any of the 7th/8th graders. Can you explain why it is a problem? If they are good enough to qualify, they should be allowed to wrestle.
Competitiveness at state is no longer a glaring problem. Granted some draws are theoretically easier than others, but one loss can make it extremely difficult in a lot of brackets. In the end the state champ is the champ. The placers 2-8 however could be a toss up in just about any weight. Each year those factors are the same. On any given day it's any wrestler's mat, especially in high school. The facts are, kids are bigger these days, health studies are against cutting large amounts of weight. I have no problem with a middle school kid wrestling any weight class. If it is a safety issue I'm not going to let a kid get pummeled.
I do believe a change could be made to keep so many late season shifts from happening that also would more closely align our graduates to collegiate weights. Modify the weight classes slightly.
Weight Class Proposal
Current HS Proposed HS College
106 106 --
113 113 --
120 120 --
126 127 125
132 134 133
138 141 141
145 149 149
152 157 157
160 165 165
170 174 174
182 184 184
195 197 197
220 225 --
285 285 285
Heck if forfeits are the issue, I could probably make a pretty good argument that there are just as many holes in the upper weights as the lowers. I know our team historically has a tougher time filling the big boy weights than little guys. Could also argue if college doesn’t have a 220 range weight why does HS.
30 minutes ago, Ranger123 said:Heck if forfeits are the issue, I could probably make a pretty good argument that there are just as many holes in the upper weights as the lowers. I know our team historically has a tougher time filling the big boy weights than little guys. Could also argue if college doesn’t have a 220 range weight why does HS.
The upper weights not only have just as many holes, but also, overall, arguably less depth and talent. And that's not just here in KY. It's true even in states where wrestling is more popular.
1 hour ago, Ranger123 said:Could also argue if college doesn’t have a 220 range weight why does HS.
Giving up almost almost 100lbs to anyone in wrestling is not safe. We would have to reduce the Hwt maximum back to my day when it was 250 Max.
3 minutes ago, grappler-of-old said:Giving up almost almost 100lbs to anyone in wrestling is not safe. We would have to reduce the Hwt maximum back to my day when it was 250 Max.
When I wrestled we had 167, 185 and hwt max 250
There are tons of freshmen throughout the state that were always too small to be able to compete in any other sport and a high school coach told them they could compete to be varsity right away because they need a 106, and then wrestling changes that kid’s life. This is exactly how I got involved in the sport, and it has changed my life and continues to do so.
Robbing smaller kids of an opportunity is far from the answer to any problems we as a wrestling community may have.
16 hours ago, 385 said:There are tons of freshmen throughout the state that were always too small to be able to compete in any other sport and a high school coach told them they could compete to be varsity right away because they need a 106, and then wrestling changes that kid’s life. This is exactly how I got involved in the sport, and it has changed my life and continues to do so.
Robbing smaller kids of an opportunity is far from the answer to any problems we as a wrestling community may have.
385 that is almost exactly what happened to me. I was an OK basketball player but at 4'11 95lbs I could not compete at high school level.
Was told wrestling had a 98lb wt. class and I could make the team right away. Now 40 years later I am still involved with this great sport. Otherwise I would have had to wait till my Jr. year before I weighted enough for 112 wt. class.
I like the idea of proposed alignment with college. I would drop the 106 lb class though and make it 110. Get rid of 113 for a 118 weight then into the 20's. You still have a lower weight for the little guys and you give older wrestlers more of an opportunity to fill that weight. Best of both worlds.
19 minutes ago, 119Rider said:I like the idea of proposed alignment with college. I would drop the 106 lb class though and make it 110. Get rid of 113 for a 118 weight then into the 20's. You still have a lower weight for the little guys and you give older wrestlers more of an opportunity to fill that weight. Best of both worlds.
I agree. I don't see why we aren't exactly aligned with college. add 220, 119 and 113, maybe 106.
How about 11 weight classes? Perhaps will reduce the number of tiebreaker situations in dual meets as well by having a odd number of classes.
106
- 8lb difference
114
- 10lb difference
124
- 10lb
134
- 10lb
144
- 12lb
156
- 12lb
168
- 12lb
180
- 15lb
195
- 25lb
220
- 65lb
285
1 hour ago, DrBaker said:I agree. I don't see why we aren't exactly aligned with college. add 220, 119 and 113, maybe 106.
1 hour ago, 119Rider said:I like the idea of proposed alignment with college. I would drop the 106 lb class though and make it 110. Get rid of 113 for a 118 weight then into the 20's. You still have a lower weight for the little guys and you give older wrestlers more of an opportunity to fill that weight. Best of both worlds.
The problem is if you get rid of 106 how many kids do we lose state wide? there are several who barely weigh 80 lbs already wrestling 106 now add another 4 pounds? You may think only 4 lbs but for a little guy 4 lbs is like 20 lbs to a 160, it would be like a ton. if anything add a class in some of the heavier areas
Adding the 4 pounds gives upper class men the opportunity to make 110. I doubt we have very many high school wrestler at 80 pounds. We have middle school wrestlers at this weight which would keep them in middle school tournaments until they develop fully.
bdl; I think the problem most see is that we already have to many wt. classes. We need to reduce the number not increase the number. Its a slippery slope. You want to have enough weight classes to accommodate high school wrestlers but not to many to hurt the smaller schools without big squads, as to reduce forfeits at wt. classes.
I kind of like Thoman's proposal. keeps the lowest and highest wt. classes.
I think dropping 106 is a huge mistake. Your under the assumption that kids this small will just wait for their chance. Maybe if their school has a JV squad that competes every weekend, but my guess is those teams that already have trouble filling weights classes don't have a JV schedule and many probably don't have a Middle school squad. How many JV tournaments are there in the state of KY? I know of only 2 or 3 that happen here in NKy.
I think that going by 10's (100, 110, 120, 130, etc.) should be considered. If that was in place kids wouldn’t be able to drop weight classes as much. The way it is set up now a kid that is wrestling 138 at the start of the year could be tempted to drop to 134 after Christmas, because it’s only four pounds. If you went by tens and eliminated the growth allowance you could eliminate a lot of those temptation. Age shouldn't be a factor for cutting weights. Caldwell had an 8th grader finish third at state in 1982.
tekejew I agree with your point about kids dropping weight classes. But the past(pre-descent program) has shown us, kids will drop no matter what it takes. 10 pounds is a lot. 4 pounds is too tempting also. These kids need to be ready right out of high school to hit the mat collegiately, that's the biggest push for the classes I proposed. I also think that GOO point about dropping a weight class is a huge mistake. 106/113/120 have perennially been a breeding ground for young up and coming talent, why would we ever want to hinder that? I definitely think a better job needs to be done between football and wrestling in regards to getting big boys to wrestle.
I kinda wish we had 15 weight classes. Or crunch the lower together and make one somewhere around 250. So at least if your kid is 240 he isn't wrestling 285, but that's just me. I think you have some teams in some years can never have little guys and others big guys. This year for us it was the 2 opens in the middle so I think its a year to year thing. But with my thoughts and a dollar you might can get some coffee.
With the maximum weight for a Heavyweight getting higher every year (from 250 to now 285). There was a need for another wt class around 215, but I don't think we need more weight classes in the heavier weights. In general after the top 4 the skill level of those weights (180 and up) diminish greatly, unlike the middle or lower wt classes.
9 hours ago, Bulldoglife said:106 ,113,121,130, 142,157, 172, 190,230, 285
An almost 60 lb difference between two weight classes (which coaches are allowed to bump their kids up) 172-230
I know that many would like to have an odd number of wt classes but I actually think Minn has it right 12 wt classes seem to be the number. Most high school kids fall within the 125 to 160 pound range that is where the majority of the weight classes should be.
On 3/6/2018 at 1:20 AM, grappler-of-old said:I have mentioned this in the past. I was utterly against the 32 man bracket at the state tournament. Fought tooth and nail against it. They claimed that it would help wrestling increase teams in the state. I didn't think so. Guess what!! I was wrong. The 32 man bracket has caused the number of teams in KY to double since it was adopted.
Proof is in the numbers. I still don't really understand it but its the truth and I don't want to do anything that will cause numbers to decrease no matter how I feel about it, because I also liked the 16 man bracket better.
KHSAA holds a swimming state tournament that has numerous underclassmen in it.
Getting rid of lower wt. class will lessen the numbers. What is a kid who is 100lbs or less going to do? Wait until he is a Sr. and weigh 110 before competing? No they will seek out another sport.
Heck in my day (way back just after the dinos) We had 12 wt. classes and the lowest was 98lbs. (98,105,112,119,126,132,138,145,155,167,185,250)
Just make 106 a JV weight. NY still has 98 for that reason.
3 hours ago, Nkawtg said:Just make 106 a JV weight. NY still has 98 for that reason.
nkawtg;
You keep saying make it a JV weight but what you don't realize is that most teams don't have a JV team. Those that do don't wrestle in that many JV tournaments during the year. That would limit the number of matches a kid 100 lbs gets a year and they would move onto something different and leave wrestling all together.
3 hours ago, Nkawtg said:Just make 106 a JV weight. NY still has 98 for that reason.
Not sure what your NY reference means. They don’t have it for JV purposes only. Ask my buddy Yianni Diakomihalis if his first state title was JV.
10 hours ago, Ranger123 said:Not sure what your NY reference means. They don’t have it for JV purposes only. Ask my buddy Yianni Diakomihalis if his first state title was JV.
You can’t call 106 a varsity weight in Kentucky when it’s dominated with 8th graders and freshman. Of course we need a place for under sized kids to compete. They should compete with other under sized kids. You can’t just maintain a class where you need 8th graders to fill out a bracket.
25 minutes ago, Nkawtg said:You can’t call 106 a varsity weight in Kentucky when it’s dominated with 8th graders and freshman. Of course we need a place for under sized kids to compete. They should compete with other under sized kids. You can’t just maintain a class where you need 8th graders to fill out a bracket.
So what if it's dominated by freshman or even 8th graders. As mentioned before, Freshman (and some 8th graders) have an impact on pretty much every other sport outside of football at the varsity level. I've seen freshmen and 8th grade pitchers start games in the regional baseball tourney, Sweet 16 basketball tourney, Tennis, swimming, etc. Being a Freshman or 8th grader should not push you back to JV status. You mention NY....99lbs is not a JV weight. They crown a state champion at that weight. Nothing in those results designating it as a JV only.
38 minutes ago, Nkawtg said:You can’t call 106 a varsity weight in Kentucky when it’s dominated with 8th graders and freshman. Of course we need a place for under sized kids to compete. They should compete with other under sized kids. You can’t just maintain a class where you need 8th graders to fill out a bracket.
How can you say this? We have several 10th, 11th and 12th in 106 this yaer. Look how they stack against the 8th and 9th graders.How would those guys fair in a heavier weight class. If anything 106 is showing we are doing something right on the middle school level.The smaller kids are getting Stronger and more technical. I find the 106lbers to be a fun match to watch.
2 hours ago, Nkawtg said:You can’t call 106 a varsity weight in Kentucky when it’s dominated with 8th graders and freshman. Of course we need a place for under sized kids to compete. They should compete with other under sized kids. You can’t just maintain a class where you need 8th graders to fill out a bracket.
Last time I recall freshman is a HS age group. And while there are times when the ms kids are needed to fill out the brackets there are also many times when those MS kids are just flat out better than any of the HS kids and often earn those spots.
You still didn’t explain that NY reference.
Why is everyone assuming that aligning with college weights is the correct answer. I would ask the following.
Is there that big of a problem with transition from high school to college in weight class? Seems like there are a significant amount of freshmen that challenge for college championships at all levels.
Is there a problem with 14 weight classes? If there is, you would have to make a lagitament argument as to why. For every team that doesn't fill a weight class, there is at least 1 team that is 2 or more deep.
Are you assuming every kid that wrestles in high school will go on to wrestle in college? I know that there are high level wrestlers across the country that win big tournaments that have 0 intention of wrestling in college.
There is really no need to limit the ability of any kid to participate. If weight classes are eliminated, that is exactly what the result will be. Adjustments possibly, but not elimination.
56 minutes ago, CoachC said:For every team that doesn't fill a weight class, there is at least 1 team that is 2 or more deep.
That is hard to believe in KY because there were very few teams that were filled.
I believe the legitimate argument can go back to the article at the beginning of this thread.
1 hour ago, CoachC said:Why is everyone assuming that aligning with college weights is the correct answer. I would ask the following.
Is there that big of a problem with transition from high school to college in weight class? Seems like there are a significant amount of freshmen that challenge for college championships at all levels.
I was wondering the same thing. Aligning the weight classes seems silly to me.
Most kids move up at least one weight class every year already.
9 minutes ago, grappler-of-old said:That is hard to believe in KY because there were very few teams that were filled.
I believe the legitimate argument can go back to the article at the beginning of this thread.
Were not talking just Kentucky. We never are. This would come from the NFHS. And even if we were only talking Kentucky. The 32 man bracket at the state tournament is to big yet there is never a bye in the first round in any of the 14 weight classes. So if you eliminate even 1 weight class, you eliminate that many competitors that get to wrestle at the state tournament. Think about how that would affect the sport nationally.
So small schools in KY are SOL?? They can't get into duals because they are to small and its a waste for larger teams to wrestle them. If they do the team losses all duals and the wrestlers on those teams are left dejected, which leads to more kids quitting and a smaller team even yet. Many of those small schools have 1-3 upper level wrestlers on them and they need the competition to advance farther.
I'm not sure of the answer but I am just shedding light on the obstacles of the small teams, which many are those just starting out. When the weight classes expanded to 13 then 14 those small schools became less and less competitive. And I am not sure that Ky is large enough to go to a class system yet. I will say this when the state duals were divided into classes more small school competed at the regional qualifiers.
I know there are exceptions to the rule ie Union and Walton Verona and a few others. I'm not talking student population when I say small schools. I'm talking small teams.
I still have a hard time believing that all the small teams in the country don't outnumber the large teams. I'm not sure but there are not that many mega schools in a lot of states. Yet it is those mega teams that dictate the policy.
But I'm just an old fart that has outlived his usefulness anyway. 
That's an internal problem, not a state or national problem. Changing everything because a few can't win is a foolhardy notion.
Ah but I don't think it is a few.
It's not about winning its about competing and keeping kids out from all over.
Like I stated before. It's an internal issue. Better coaching, better youth programs, the list goes on. Besides, wrestling is an individual sport, as well as a team sport. You don't have to have 14 wrestlers to wrestle. You can wrestle with only 1 wrestler. You're basing your argument now on dual competition, the state association doesn't recognize a dual team champion. What they do offer is the possibility that every single wrestler that laces up rather it be on a team of 1 or a team of 50 can be a state champion!!
Like I said I don't know the answer. I have been on both sides of the spectrum, part of a mega team and a small team. I have seen the problems that both sides have. I was not for the 10 wt. classes but now after hearing your argument I am leaning now more toward the 10 weight class side, because it sounds like the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. There has to be a point in the middle somewhere.
But Ultimately what I think at least has little meaning in what will happen. Hopefully if the wt. classes increase or stay the same I will be proven wrong, like I was on the 32 man bracket, and this great sport will prosper. I believe that is what both (all) of us want it's just how do we get there.
I don’t know the exact number of teams in Ky. If I counted correctly, there were 85 teams that qualified at least one wrestler to the state tournament. Going by these numbers, eliminating one weight class would prevent 85 kids an opportunity to wrestle during the season. 340 kids if we eliminated 4 weight classes. Kentucky wrestling can not afford to lose one opportunity for a kid to wrestle. Each wrestler is not only a competitor now but also a future coach, parent, or even fan that will give back to the sport.
You can't say that by eliminating a weight class we will eliminate 85 kids an opportunity when the majority of those teams do not fill a complete line up to begin with. If you raise the minimum weight, then I believe you give more kids an opportunity to be successful at a lower weight. We might not have kids walking around that can get to 106, but I am sure we have kids that get to 110. Thus making it a good starter weight for high school and a competitive one.
Better yet, have the coaches committee send out a poll to all high school coaches. Ask them if they had eligible wrestlers at each weight. Find out what was the most forfeited weight last year to see where some of our problem areas seem to be.
5 of 8 State “placers” at 106 at the KHSAA State championships were 8th graders. The other 3 were freshman.
Thats part of the reason wrestling is a dying sport. I fear it won’t exist in 20 years. Thank God girl’s wrestling is slowly growing as it may save the entire sport.
10 classes of competitive wrestlers is absolutely what Kentucky needs. Crowning 8th graders as state champions in watered down brackets with not a single junior or senior placing in the top 8 is absurd.
1 hour ago, Nkawtg said:5 of 8 State “placers” at 106 at the KHSAA State championships were 8th graders. The other 3 were freshman.
Thats part of the reason wrestling is a dying sport. I fear it won’t exist in 20 years. Thank God girl’s wrestling is slowly growing as it may save the entire sport.
10 classes of competitive wrestlers is absolutely what Kentucky needs. Crowning 8th graders as state champions in watered down brackets with not a single junior or senior placing in the top 8 is absurd.
I really don't understand how this is killing wrestling. How is having a freshman or middle school kid place at the state tournament hurting wrestling. Those freshman/middle school wrestlers will continue to wrestle and we loose no one because of it. Actually we gain more because of it. If they were unable to compete they will move onto something else. When I say compete I mean actually wrestle because they will not wrestle JV because there is no JV wrestling in KY to speak of.
Who exactly is this hurting?
Why would you even look at what grade they are in? You must be the same type of person who looks at how much a professional ballplayer makes. Who cares and why does it matter? Just enjoy the wrestling, it matters none what grade they are in.
On 3/12/2018 at 8:44 AM, Bulldoglife said:How can you say this? We have several 10th, 11th and 12th in 106 this yaer. Look how they stack against the 8th and 9th graders.How would those guys fair in a heavier weight class. If anything 106 is showing we are doing something right on the middle school level.The smaller kids are getting Stronger and more technical. I find the 106lbers to be a fun match to watch.
I can say it because not a single soph or older placed at state at 106.
On 3/14/2018 at 11:53 AM, grappler-of-old said:Why would you even look at what grade they are in? You must be the same type of person who looks at how much a professional ballplayer makes. Who cares and why does it matter? Just enjoy the wrestling, it matters none what grade they are in.
Sure it does matter. High school sports should be for high school athletes.
Times have changed. When I was competing in the mid 1990s we almost lost collegiate wrestling. We really did. Weight cutting was out of control and I fear some of those lessons have been forgotten.
The sport is dying and we need to save it. Sometimes you have to cut off the dead brackets to get the plant healthy again.
5 hours ago, Nkawtg said:I can say it because not a single soph or older placed at state at 106.
Have you looked at other states? We cannot go on our own and change the weight classes. That would cause a problem for those competing in other states.
Here are the surrounding states states placers at 106
Ohio (8 places 3 divisions)
D1---- 2 Fresh---3 Soph---1 Jr---- 2 Sr
D2----2 Fresh---5 Soph---1 Jr----0 Sr.
D3--- 3 Fresh---3 Soph---2 Jr---0 Sr
Total 7 Fresh---11 Soph---4 Jr----2 Sr
Indiana (8 places 1 Division)
3 Fresh---2 Soph---1 Jr---2 Sr.
Illinois (6 places 3 Division)
3A---2 Fresh---2 Soph---1 Jr---1 Sr.
2A---3 Fresh--1 Soph--0 Jr---2 Sr.
1A--4 Fresh--1 Soph--1 Jr--0 Sr.
Total 9 Fresh--4 Soph--2 Jr--3 Sr.
Missouri (6 places 3 Divisions)
C1---2 Fresh--1 Soph--3 Jr--0 Sr
C2--1 Fresh--3 Soph--2 Jr--0 Sr
C3--4 Fresh--1 Soph--1 Jr--0 Sr.
Total 7 Fresh--5 Soph--6 Jr--0 Sr.
Tennessee (6 placers 3 Divisions)
D1AA---1 8th--1 Fresh--3 Soph--1 Jr--0 Sr.
D1AAA--4 Fresh--1 Soph--0 Jr--1 Sr.
D2---2 8th--2 Fresh--2 Soph--0 Jr--0 Sr.
Total--- 3 8th--7 Fresh--6 Soph--1 Jr--1 Sr.
West Virginia (6 placer 2 Division)
AA---5 Fresh--0 Soph--0 Jr--1 Sr.
AAA--4 Fresh--2 Soph--0 Jr--0 Sr
Total-- 9 Fresh--2 Soph--0 Jr--1 Sr.
Virginia (6 placer 6 Division)
1A--5 Fresh--1 Soph--0 Jr--0 Sr
2A--1 Fresh--1 Soph--2 Jr--1 Sr (1 no grade)
3A-- 3 Fresh--2 Soph--1 Jr--0 Sr
4A--4 Fresh--2 Soph-- 0 Jr--0 Sr
5A--0 Fresh--1 Soph--1 Jr--4 Sr
6A--0 Fresh--3 Soph--3 Jr---0 Sr
Total-- 13 Fresh--10 Soph--7 Jr--5 Sr (1 ??)
Grand Total
3 8th grade--55 Fresh--41 Soph--21 Jr--14 Sr (1 ??)
In your mind that would mean 35 UPPERCLASSMEN would NOT place in a state tournament.
15 hours ago, Nkawtg said:
Nkawtg,
If we cut the DEAD brackets as you call them, that is like cutting off our nose to spite our face. As i add the numbers there are 167 wrestlers at 107# at the state level that would leave wrestling and go to other sports. That does not count the other wrestlers in the state at that weight class. So do we want to grow our sport or kill it? those 167 plus kids will grow up to have kids who will probably wrestle and then they start coaching the next generation. This is how we grow. If we start eliminating opportunities for kids to wrestle we start eliminating our ability to grow.
8 hours ago, grappler-of-old said:Have you looked at other states? We cannot go on our own and change the weight classes. That would cause a problem for those competing in other states.
Here are the surrounding states states placers at 106
Ohio (8 places 3 divisions)
Total 7 Fresh---11 Soph---4 Jr----2 Sr
Indiana (8 places 1 Division)
3 Fresh---2 Soph---1 Jr---2 Sr.
Illinois (6 places 3 Division)
Total 9 Fresh--4 Soph--2 Jr--3 Sr.
Missouri (6 places 3 Divisions).
Total 7 Fresh--5 Soph--6 Jr--0 Sr.
Tennessee (6 placers 3 Divisions)
Total--- 3 8th--7 Fresh--6 Soph--1 Jr--1 Sr.
West Virginia (6 placer 2 Division)
Total-- 9 Fresh--2 Soph--0 Jr--1 Sr.
Virginia (6 placer 6 Division)
Total-- 13 Fresh--10 Soph--7 Jr--5 Sr (1 ??)
Grand Total
3 8th grade--55 Fresh--41 Soph--21 Jr--14 Sr (1 ??)
In your mind that would mean 35 UPPERCLASSMEN would NOT place in a state tournament.