Word on twitter world from the wrestling guys is a weight class change is coming. 13 weight classes proposal. I havent seen the actual proposal yet. 

Let's discuss it. 

I wouldn't care if they change the weight classes. I just don't see any advantage in doing so. I've heard coaches over the many many years I've been involved in wrestling, Claim  it will cut down on cutting weight. Not buying that. "14 weight classes only help so called big schools". Perhaps!!  I don't think so. Good programs are just that, good programs. If it were up to me add the coveted 2lbs and go. 108,114 and so on. That's my 7 cent opinion inflation ya know.

I think less weight classes makes things more competitive, but what weight do you remove 106 or one of the heavier weights, what would prepare kids for the next level best?

The only weight that you could eliminate to get kids ready for college would be 220.  I've always been a proponent of a 235lb weight class in college. It grows the sport without 220 pound kids having to make a decision to lose 25 pounds or gain at least 30.  This would add 11 weight classes in college.  At the end of a dual, one team will definitely have more wins than the other team.  That would be an easy criteria to add.  Anyway, I digress. 105, 115, 125, 135, 145, 155, 165, 175, 185, 195, 225, 285 and fill in any weight classes (probably below 145) to make 13-14 weight classes.

I have always and will always disagree with dropping a weight class. It takes a spot away from a kid. Rather than trying to build a team up it simply moves the goal post backwards

I hope they don't drop anything. We keep saying we want to grow. Never seen anything grow by cutting one. I think if anything we should shuffle the weights to make better for college but we need to focus more on better for growing high school wrestling in our state.

For those who have twitter, there has been a lot of good discussion about it. I am against dropping a weight class. I think the reshuffle they did for our current weight classes makes sense. But taking an opportunity away to me is asinine.  

I understand the argument of growing the sport, but other sports don't add players to the starting line up. 

Reducing to 13 wt. classes does 2 things.

1.  Allows for an easy solution to the dual criteria, I know it won't solve every dual but most. 

2. The most important is that it will reduce time spent at tourneys.  The biggest complaint in wrestling is time.  In an 8 team bracket (2 mats) tourney it takes away 12-13 matches. reducing tournament time by about 45 minutes.  In an 16 man pool tourney (4 mats) it takes away 30 matches. This reduces the tourney as much as 1 1/2 hours. 

Considering only 17 teams has a full team at Region (about 15%) this greatly outweighs the argument of growing the sport. 

To truly grow the sport there needs to be more JV options available. 

I think JV options are always good but it should be only kids not Wrestling varsity. Way to many studs wrestle JV tourneys as it is now.

9 hours ago, grappler-of-old said:

I understand the argument of growing the sport, but other sports don't add players to the starting line up. 

Reducing to 13 wt. classes does 2 things.

1.  Allows for an easy solution to the dual criteria, I know it won't solve every dual but most. 

2. The most important is that it will reduce time spent at tourneys.  The biggest complaint in wrestling is time.  In an 8 team bracket (2 mats) tourney it takes away 12-13 matches. reducing tournament time by about 45 minutes.  In an 16 man pool tourney (4 mats) it takes away 30 matches. This reduces the tourney as much as 1 1/2 hours. 

Considering only 17 teams has a full team at Region (about 15%) this greatly outweighs the argument of growing the sport. 

To truly grow the sport there needs to be more JV options available. 

valid points

7 hours ago, panthers said:

I think JV options are always good but it should be only kids not Wrestling varsity. Way to many studs wrestle JV tourneys as it is now.

Depends on what you call a stud.  Go to a JV tourney in Ohio and they beat many KY "Varsity" kids. How many kids are varsity just because there is no one else in that weight at that school? How many kids are varsity in their first year wrestling? What you may call a stud in actually a JV kid on another team.  I remember Tom Ketchen-Carter was JV his freshman year after placing in state his 8th grade year because he had two bigger studs ahead of him.  (Wells, and Yenter). Should he not have wrestled JV, and sat out the year? 

I wasn't speaking of Ohio or the strange case of one kid that was a placer in the state and then a back up. But if he placed he really isn't JV to most schools in KY he should go to Ohio. I am not on here to argue any points just saying if you are a good enough varsity wrestler to have a winning record and I don't me forfeits u shouldn't be wrestling true JV kids. Doesn't help you or the jv kid. Go to a varsity match and wrestle on a different team in a dual that doesn't have someone your weight. Fill in kids can get 20 matches a year or more if they also go to some individual tourneys. Thanks all I am saying.

9 hours ago, panthers said:

I wasn't speaking of Ohio or the strange case of one kid that was a placer in the state and then a back up. But if he placed he really isn't JV to most schools in KY he should go to Ohio. I am not on here to argue any points just saying if you are a good enough varsity wrestler to have a winning record and I don't me forfeits u shouldn't be wrestling true JV kids. Doesn't help you or the jv kid. Go to a varsity match and wrestle on a different team in a dual that doesn't have someone your weight. Fill in kids can get 20 matches a year or more if they also go to some individual tourneys. Thanks all I am saying.

What happens when that kid wrestles for a school that doesn’t go to a bunch of dual tournaments? 

13 minutes ago, pin2win said:

What happens when that kid wrestles for a school that doesn’t go to a bunch of dual tournaments? 

Then go to individual tourneys that aren't full so he can Wrestle kids that won't take him 12 seconds a match. Lots of individual allow teams to enter more than one kid. There are lots of answers if people want them. It's also easy if you are the one with the good kid to justify it but when you are trying to get kids and it's not a popular sport in your area little harder. When those JV kids are getting distroyed by the same kids that beat the varsity kid a week ago in a different tourney. Parents and kids seem to leave and that doesn't build the sport either. Good kids can find places to wrestle but all kids need challenge not way better than there opponents. I wish all kids the best and like all coaches just look for what's best to build our program and someday be good enough to be a respectable program.

Dalton Russelburg was JV as a freshman. Union doesn't go to a bunch of tournaments where multiple kids are allowed in the weight class. They rarely send a jv squad to other locations the same weekend their varsity is somewhere else. He has to get matches somehow. Jarvis Elam (now a coach at union) was JV until his junior year. He was behind Adam and Aaron Carr for two years, placed 4th as a junior and won state as a senior. Union has a kid that is going to be a senior this year that hasn't been able to make the final varsity roster, and has won JV state the last two years (he has been behind Payne Carr, Trevor Pogue, Dalton Russelburg, and Stephen Little in some capacity). These kids still need matches to have mat time for when their time comes to step into the varsity role. BTW, look out for that Union kid this year. I believe if a kid wrestles the majority of his matches JV, then he should be able to wrestle in JV tournaments. Even kids who are first years should be allowed in JV tournaments if they are the defacto varsity kid. Second year and beyond varsity guys could be pushing it. Also, to get back on topic, I don't think they should cut the weight classes, but agree they should align more with college (plus the four others sprinkled in).

1 hour ago, panthers said:

Then go to individual tourneys that aren't full so he can Wrestle kids that won't take him 12 seconds a match. Lots of individual allow teams to enter more than one kid. There are lots of answers if people want them. It's also easy if you are the one with the good kid to justify it but when you are trying to get kids and it's not a popular sport in your area little harder. When those JV kids are getting distroyed by the same kids that beat the varsity kid a week ago in a different tourney. Parents and kids seem to leave and that doesn't build the sport either. Good kids can find places to wrestle but all kids need challenge not way better than there opponents. I wish all kids the best and like all coaches just look for what's best to build our program and someday be good enough to be a respectable program.

I do think “JV” can be abused at time, but you’ve gotta do what’s best for your wrestler and program. What’s good for one program isn’t good for the other. All we can do is hope the best judgement is used, but I can see circumstances where a kid who’s wrestling varsity might need “jv” matches. 

1 hour ago, panthers said:

Then go to individual tourneys that aren't full so he can Wrestle kids that won't take him 12 seconds a match. Lots of individual allow teams to enter more than one kid. There are lots of answers if people want them. It's also easy if you are the one with the good kid to justify it but when you are trying to get kids and it's not a popular sport in your area little harder. When those JV kids are getting distroyed by the same kids that beat the varsity kid a week ago in a different tourney. Parents and kids seem to leave and that doesn't build the sport either. Good kids can find places to wrestle but all kids need challenge not way better than there opponents. I wish all kids the best and like all coaches just look for what's best to build our program and someday be good enough to be a respectable program.

I am only arguing this point because it is an argument ive had with coaches in the past...... You cannot hold back your better kids to go to a tourney that will not push them. Knowing your kids are the way you look at it. I agree with pin2win some abuse the "JV" system. Always have and always will. But whats good for my program may not be what's best for his program. Comparing apples to oranges. 

12 minutes ago, halfhalfhalf said:

I am only arguing this point because it is an argument ive had with coaches in the past...... You cannot hold back your better kids to go to a tourney that will not push them. Knowing your kids are the way you look at it. I agree with pin2win some abuse the "JV" system. Always have and always will. But whats good for my program may not be what's best for his program. Comparing apples to oranges. 

Agree with this totally. Abuse is done that was all I was saying not throwing stones.  Just as you and pin2win said everyone must do what's best for each program. 

37 minutes ago, ukpridewrestler11 said:

Dalton Russelburg was JV as a freshman. Union doesn't go to a bunch of tournaments where multiple kids are allowed in the weight class. They rarely send a jv squad to other locations the same weekend their varsity is somewhere else. He has to get matches somehow. Jarvis Elam (now a coach at union) was JV until his junior year. He was behind Adam and Aaron Carr for two years, placed 4th as a junior and won state as a senior. Union has a kid that is going to be a senior this year that hasn't been able to make the final varsity roster, and has won JV state the last two years (he has been behind Payne Carr, Trevor Pogue, Dalton Russelburg, and Stephen Little in some capacity). These kids still need matches to have mat time for when their time comes to step into the varsity role. BTW, look out for that Union kid this year. I believe if a kid wrestles the majority of his matches JV, then he should be able to wrestle in JV tournaments. Even kids who are first years should be allowed in JV tournaments if they are the defacto varsity kid. Second year and beyond varsity guys could be pushing it. Also, to get back on topic, I don't think they should cut the weight classes, but agree they should align more with college (plus the four others sprinkled in).

wouldnt be opposed to that. I rly do not think decreasing is the answer. Reshuffle great. But take away.. Not the answer. 

Does anyone know what proposed weight classes will be?  I can only find what Pennsylvania has propossed and that is 12 weight classes. 

6 hours ago, grappler-of-old said:

Does anyone know what proposed weight classes will be?  I can only find what Pennsylvania has propossed and that is 12 weight classes. 

I hope they don't have inside info from NFHS!!

The proposed NFHS weight class changes for 2020-21 that I have heard second hand are: 107, 114, 121, 128, 134, 140, 146, 152, 160, 172, 189, 215, and 285.  This would be a reduction to 13 weight classes.  

Girls weight classes would be: 100, 106, 112, 118, 124, 130, 136, 142, 148, 155, 170, 190, & 235.  

Also, there are proposals to make changes on allowable hair length, hair coverings, and facial hair.  These proposals appear to be loosening the requirements on them.  

I am not sure if these have been voted on yet or not.  

7 hours ago, wc1992 said:

The proposed NFHS weight class changes for 2020-21 that I have heard second hand are: 107, 114, 121, 128, 134, 140, 146, 152, 160, 172, 189, 215, and 285.  This would be a reduction to 13 weight classes.  

Girls weight classes would be: 100, 106, 112, 118, 124, 130, 136, 142, 148, 155, 170, 190, & 235.  

Also, there are proposals to make changes on allowable hair length, hair coverings, and facial hair.  These proposals appear to be loosening the requirements on them.  

I am not sure if these have been voted on yet or not.  

so they ARE going to have weight classes for the girls now?

Yes the proposal that I saw also included girls weight classes.  That was not voted upon yet just the proposal that I saw. 

That would be a nice step forward even if all states are not sponsoring girls wrestling yet.  I hated going to high school tournaments where the girls used the same weights as the boys in a girls division.  

I am not a fan of the proposed lower weight changes on the boys side.  I can live with the upper weight changes since many small schools can struggle to fill both 220 and 285.

2 hours ago, wc1992 said:

Yes the proposal that I saw also included girls weight classes.  That was not voted upon yet just the proposal that I saw. 

That would be a nice step forward even if all states are not sponsoring girls wrestling yet.  I hated going to high school tournaments where the girls used the same weights as the boys in a girls division.  

I am not a fan of the proposed lower weight changes on the boys side.  I can live with the upper weight changes since many small schools can struggle to fill both 220 and 285.

Many big schools struggle filling weight classes. As you, I like them setting up weight classes for the girl/woman division. Good step in the right direction.

3 hours ago, wc1992 said:

Yes the proposal that I saw also included girls weight classes.  That was not voted upon yet just the proposal that I saw. 

That would be a nice step forward even if all states are not sponsoring girls wrestling yet.  I hated going to high school tournaments where the girls used the same weights as the boys in a girls division.  

I am not a fan of the proposed lower weight changes on the boys side.  I can live with the upper weight changes since many small schools can struggle to fill both 220 and 285.

To me, it doesn't seem like lower weights are affected all that much....all just bumping up a pound or two, and no weight classes lost in terms of numbers.  195 seems to be the weight that goes away, as those kids will have to cut to 189 or move up to 215 and will be affected the most.  A kid who's 220 now can either cut a little bit of weight, or just eat what ever they want.  I think it makes 220 and 285 more competitive.  Overall, I don't mind the proposal. I don't think it will be all that disruptive to the majority of teams as most teams now only have to find 3 big guys instead of 4, and one less weight class will make the days a little shorter.  Hard for me to argue against the proposal.

I agree with adjusting the weights to move closer to college, but I think they should let it be a few lbs under the college limits so kids can adjust and grow a little bit into the weight instead of cutting down if they’re still growing/maturing. I think they should be: 108,115,122,130,138,145,153,161,172,182,195,215,285.

in this case there are 13 weights but there is still the 106 range weight and 215/220 range

I like this with the 108 but I think as it goes up in weights I would like to see change in upper weights something like this might help.

108, 115, 123, 131, 143, 155, 167, 178, 189,  200, 230 & 285

I just think it would help a big guy 240 not to have to cut 20 or Wrestle someone 45 pounds bigger. This might help get more football guys out without cutting them.

Here is the breakdown of forfeits by weight in Ohio this year.

Here is the breakdown of forfeits by weight in Indiana this year.

Here is the breakdown of forfeits by weight in Kentucky this year.

106            32

113            25

120            31

126            32

132            25

138            29

145            19

152            20

160            24

170            35

182            27

195            33

220            30

285            31

total           393

per team 3.93

100 teams entered in region.   Is that number of teams correct??????

Keep it at 14 weigh classes. I would build around the college weight classes. 106, 113, 119, 125, 133, 141, 149, 157, 165, 174, 184, 197, 225, 285. I'd also do away with the 2 lbs. after Christmas.

On 4/27/2020 at 10:50 AM, BigBossMan said:

Keep it at 14 weigh classes. I would build around the college weight classes. 106, 113, 119, 125, 133, 141, 149, 157, 165, 174, 184, 197, 225, 285. I'd also do away with the 2 lbs. after Christmas.

I agree with this except for the doing away with the 2 lbs. Instead of doing away with the 2 lbs. let's go back to wrestlers having to make scratch weight one time to qualify for the weight class. 

25 minutes ago, naplesme said:

I agree with this except for the doing away with the 2 lbs. Instead of doing away with the 2 lbs. let's go back to wrestlers having to make scracth weight one time to qualify for the weight class. 

that I agree with 100%

https://www.teamusa.org/USA-Wrestling/Features/2020/April/28/High-School-Wrestling-Rule-changes?fbclid=IwAR1SS3wAscNNJdK_HYJHZ7mhiwMJbolbsh9Kh76cgTbOTbNzdhFzecg-EIU


Looks like the hair rule is gone folks. 

Also we will weigh in with singlets with NO Allowance. 

On 4/25/2020 at 2:58 PM, take em to the mat said:

Here is the breakdown of forfeits by weight in Ohio this year.

106	233
113	211
120	205
132	140
138	131
145	127
152	120
160	133
170	162
182	185
195	192
220	215
285	204
Total	2258
Per Team	3.873
	583 Teams

Here is the breakdown of forfeits by weight in Indiana this year.

106	110
113	103
120	94
132	59
138	52
145	41
152	50
160	49
170	51
182	69
195	73
220	75
285	63
Total	889
Per Team	2.877
	309 Teams

Here is the breakdown of forfeits by weight in Kentucky this year.

106            32

113            25

120            31

126            32

132            25

138            29

145            19

152            20

160            24

170            35

182            27

195            33

220            30

285            31

total           393

per team 3.93

100 teams entered in region.   Is that number of teams correct??????

When you take into account that in many circumstances we bump up a kid to fill an upper weight (which can’t happen at 106), it seems pretty clear that 106 isn’t as big of a forfeit issue as everyone makes it out to be. I guarantee a significant number of the non-forfeits at 220/285 are kids who weigh 185-200 pounds. 

I agree that a wrestler should make scratch weight before he gets the 2lbs its not a "growth allowance"' if never made scratch  its a "loss allowance" how Ky does it . I know Ohio has to make scratch first

2 hours ago, heavy83 said:

I agree that a wrestler should make scratch weight before he gets the 2lbs its not a "growth allowance"' if never made scratch  its a "loss allowance" how Ky does it . I know Ohio has to make scratch first

 

Must make scratch in Indiana. 

On 5/13/2020 at 4:31 PM, Ranger123 said:

When you take into account that in many circumstances we bump up a kid to fill an upper weight (which can’t happen at 106), it seems pretty clear that 106 isn’t as big of a forfeit issue as everyone makes it out to be. I guarantee a significant number of the non-forfeits at 220/285 are kids who weigh 185-200 pounds. 

I saw some small 220's at state. 

Pennsylvania started the talk about reducing the number of weight classes.  Their reasoning was the amount of forfeits that were occuring in dual meets as a great number of teams could not field full line ups.  They proposed going from 14 to 12 weight classes and at one time stated they were going to do that regardless of NFHS approval, though I don't know if that's still the case.  The addition of the 14th weight class in the mid 90s did open another spot for wrestlers, but I do understand that no one wants to see forfeits in dual meets.