Jump to content
swoopdown

Fewer PA weight classes

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, 1032004 said:

 

The more than 1 106 wasn't the way I interpreted it, but who knows as I apologize I can't find where I read that.

Obviously it's simple math that raising the lowest weight will reduce forfeits in the short-term (might as well change 285 back to Unlimited while we're at it), but I think the argument is that it might not in the long-term if you lose kids who don't think they will really be big enough for 110.   I would like to think 4 lbs (although of course up from 103 previously) wouldn't make that much of a difference, but who knows.

I think the big question as far as retention is relative to the effect on JV.    Is 2 less weight classes really going to result in that many more JV matches?   With less weights, will kids quit if they don't make varsity and thus the JV situation may not actually get any better?

Personally I think we should keep 14 weight classes as I don't see much if anything improving with dropping to 12. We would definitely "reduce" forfeits dropping to 12 weights, but it would be artificially and not the right way. On top of that 12 weights would promote more weight cutting especially in the middle weights. 

More JV matches are good, but dropping two weights won't help that much as you stated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about PA, but looking at the National circuit (Super 32 and Cadet Nationals, for example) it seems there are a lot of freshmen out there that weigh ~100.  The problem is that there aren't a lot of 10-12 graders that light, hence less wrestlers "overall" and a false impression that the weight isn't needed.  I'd like to see head counts in PA of just freshmen broken down by weight.

I'd also like to see a list of 125 & 133-lb. NCAA qualifiers and what weight they were as HS freshmen.  Subtracting just 5-lbs per year from a 125-lb. college freshman puts him at 105-lbs four years earlier. Sure, those guys are studs and could've gone 110, but for each of them there are countless others not so lucky.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, wnywrestling said:

I don't know about PA, but looking at the National circuit (Super 32 and Cadet Nationals, for example) it seems there are a lot of freshmen out there that weigh ~100.  The problem is that there aren't a lot of 10-12 graders that light, hence less wrestlers "overall" and a false impression that the weight isn't needed.  I'd like to see head counts in PA of just freshmen broken down by weight.

I'd also like to see a list of 125 & 133-lb. NCAA qualifiers and what weight they were as HS freshmen.  Subtracting just 5-lbs per year from a 125-lb. college freshman puts him at 105-lbs four years earlier. Sure, those guys are studs and could've gone 110, but for each of them there are countless others not so lucky.

 

If your argument centers around a kid's NEED for success as a 105lbs freshmen then it's a weak argument. What about the freshman that weighs 120lbs or 150lbs...or 200lbs? 

That poor 105lbs kid will have to be JV or take more losses if the weight is 110lbs, but who cares about the 150lbs freshman who has to wrestle juniors and seniors just to get past the first level of the state series. 

How many NCAA qualifiers at 197lbs and 285lbs started out JV, had 10+ losses, or didn't qualify for state as freshmen? Why do the little guys get afforded a varsity spot and the big guys don't?

The argument to keep 106lbs shouldn't be to keep it so that little Johnny gets an easier pass to state because he's wrestling other freshmen and has competitors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, BobDole said:

If your argument centers around a kid's NEED for success as a 105lbs freshmen then it's a weak argument. What about the freshman that weighs 120lbs or 150lbs...or 200lbs? 

That poor 105lbs kid will have to be JV or take more losses if the weight is 110lbs, but who cares about the 150lbs freshman who has to wrestle juniors and seniors just to get past the first level of the state series. 

How many NCAA qualifiers at 197lbs and 285lbs started out JV, had 10+ losses, or didn't qualify for state as freshmen? Why do the little guys get afforded a varsity spot and the big guys don't?

The argument to keep 106lbs shouldn't be to keep it so that little Johnny gets an easier pass to state because he's wrestling other freshmen and has competitors. 

It's not about the 105lbs kid being afforded "success," it's about the 105 lb kid competing against other kids of the same weight - that's how/why wrestling works.

You ask, "What about the freshman that weighs 120lbs or 150lbs...or 200lbs?" That freshman will compete against other wrestlers of the same weight. Nobody's telling the 120lbs freshman he has to wrestle up in weight. He will, however, likely have to wrestle off against a 120-lb senior who's been a stud since he was one of the 100-lb freshman. If the 120lb freshman doesn't get a varsity spot, he will still get to wrestle other JV wrestlers of the same weight.

You also ask, "Why do the little guys get afforded a varsity spot and the big guys don't?" As far as I'm aware, nobody is talking about getting rid of the big guys' varsity spots, or JV spots for that matter. In my area, those little guy varlity spots are very hotly contested, including wrestle offs, changing schools, and holdbacks. In other words, I'm not seeing any free lunches for the little guys.

Moreover, there are also freshman at 88lbs, 94lbs, 100lbs, etc., as evidenced by cadet nationals. These kids exist, are working hard and participating in the sport, and should not have their weight classes eliminated, or bumped up. 

Edited by McycleRider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, McycleRider said:

It's not about the 105lbs kid being afforded "success," it's about the 105 lb kid competing against other kids of the same weight - that's how/why wrestling works.

You ask, "What about the freshman that weighs 120lbs or 150lbs...or 200lbs?" That freshman will compete against other wrestlers of the same weight. Nobody's telling the 120lbs freshman he has to wrestle up in weight. He will, however, likely have to wrestle off against a 120-lb senior who's been a stud since he was one of the 100-lb freshman. If the 120lb freshman doesn't get a varsity spot, he will still get to wrestler other JV wrestlers of the same weight.

The 120lbs freshman will likely have to cut weight or wrestle up to secure a varsity spot. Same with the 150lber or 200lber, their spots will be dictated by the returners in the weight class that are 2-4 years older in many cases.

7 minutes ago, McycleRider said:

You also ask, "Why do the little guys get afforded a varsity spot and the big guys don't?" As far as I'm aware, nobody is talking about getting rid of the big guys' varsity spots, or JV spots for that matter. In my area, those little guy varlity spots are very hotly contested, including wrestle offs, changing schools, and holdbacks. In other words, I'm not seeing any free lunches for the little guys.

"Your area" is anecdotal evidence, the data shows that the lightest weight classes are the least contested. That also shows how much these people place a HIGH value having success as a freshman, to the point of transferring or holding kids back. Surprisingly you don't see as much of that as kids get bigger as it is expected to take some lumps when you come in as a freshman at 150+lbs. This is EXACTLY what I was alluding to in my previous post. These parents/kids/coaches are putting an extreme emphasis that they "must have" success as a freshman. 

In all honesty this behavior will continue no matter what we do with the weight classes. This is an issue that goes way beyond weight classes. If we institute a 100lbs weight class people will continue to holdback and transfer for their vision of success.

10 minutes ago, McycleRider said:

Moreover, there are also freshman at 88lbs, 94lbs, 100lbs, etc., as evidenced by cadet nationals. These kids exist, are working hard and participating in the sport, and should not have their weight classes eliminated, or bumped up. 

There were 10 88lbers and 11 94lbers at folkstyle nationals this past year. The 100lbers are probably about the right size and even if a little undersized aren't much out of their weight class.

Remember that the 16U age group includes some 7th graders, many 8th graders, almost all 9th graders, and some 10th graders. It is a wide range of grades to lump into your theory. Just because there are some 90lbs freshmen doesn't mean we need a 90lbs weight class. 

 

With all that said I do like the light weights and don't want to lose one, nor do I want to lose an upper weight. We cannot use the argument that we need to keep the light weights so the small freshmen have a spot on varsity to have success while the middle and upper weight freshmen struggle mightily. This is a reason why we do lose talented bigger guys in this sport. They see a kid virtually gifted a varsity spot and even advancement in the state series while they struggle possibly being JV or having a losing record because they are wrestling 18 year old men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, BobDole said:

"Your area" is anecdotal evidence, the data shows that the lightest weight classes are the least contested.

I don't know about that - we'll have to agree to disagree. Show me a 106lb Pennsylvania state champ that wasn't a stud, or that didn't face tough competition. I'll go out on a limb here, and say that IMO the lighter weight classes are far more technical and have much less deviation in skill level than the heavier weight classes.

Otherwise, I can appreciate what you are saying. The lightweights are different from the heavies because some kids grow through the lighter weight classes as they progress in age, e.g., a 106lb freshman that is ultimately a 132lb senior. To be fair, those freshmen play a major role in justifying the lighter weight classes; we need places/classes for freshmen, too... especially if we want to see the sport grow.

Edited by McycleRider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, McycleRider said:

I don't know about that - we'll have to agree to disagree. Show me a 106lb Pennsylvania state champ that wasn't a stud, or that didn't face tough competition.

Show me any PA state champ that wasn't a stud, it's Pennsylvania which if you didn't know is regarded as the best state for wrestling. 

53 minutes ago, McycleRider said:

I'll go out on a limb here, and say that IMO the lighter weight classes are far more technical and have much less deviation in skill level than the heavier weight classes.

Different weight classes require different skillsets to be successful. This is something I really hope you know and this isn't earth shattering news.

55 minutes ago, McycleRider said:

Otherwise, I can appreciate what you are saying. The lightweights are different from the heavies because some kids grow through the lighter weight classes as they progress in age, e.g., a 106lb freshman that is ultimately a 132lb senior. To be fair, those freshmen play a major role in justifying the lighter weight classes; we need places/classes for freshmen, too... especially if we want to see the sport grow.

Take the freshman part out of it. If you look at other high school sports it is not easy to earn a varsity letter as a freshman unless you are a freak athlete. Wrestling is the only sport where you can almost guarantee a freshman will letter every year. Back in my day I was one of two boys to letter in the whole grade as a freshman. I lettered because I could fill 103lbs on the wrestling team, not because i was a superb athlete. I probably wasn't even a top 20 athlete in my grade at that time and everyone knew my letter jacket that I proudly sported was because of my size and willingness to wrestle, nothing else.

We need 106lbs just as much as we need 182, 195 and 220, because wrestling is a sport that size is not a limiting factor and with hard work and dedication you can have success. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, BobDole said:

Show me any PA state champ that wasn't a stud, it's Pennsylvania which if you didn't know is regarded as the best state for wrestling. 

Different weight classes require different skillsets to be successful. This is something I really hope you know and this isn't earth shattering news.

Take the freshman part out of it. If you look at other high school sports it is not easy to earn a varsity letter as a freshman unless you are a freak athlete. Wrestling is the only sport where you can almost guarantee a freshman will letter every year. Back in my day I was one of two boys to letter in the whole grade as a freshman. I lettered because I could fill 103lbs on the wrestling team, not because i was a superb athlete. I probably wasn't even a top 20 athlete in my grade at that time and everyone knew my letter jacket that I proudly sported was because of my size and willingness to wrestle, nothing else.

We need 106lbs just as much as we need 182, 195 and 220, because wrestling is a sport that size is not a limiting factor and with hard work and dedication you can have success. 

Maybe this discussion is getting pedantic and redundant - I thought Pennsylvania was the subject of the thread. There are 106-lb studs in all of the wrestling states, e.g., Pennsylvania, Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio, Illinois, California, Oklahoma, New Jersey, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc. Likewise, there are strong wrestling schools and weak wrestling schools in each of those states.

I'm glad you had a spot on your HS wrestling team. Now imagine the kid that IS a top 20 athlete in the entire country/world, but doesn't letter at their strong wrestling HS because their state is no longer willing to recognize their national/international weight class. Will everybody in that kid's HS know that they are, pound-for-pound, one of the best of the best? I doubt it, and I imagine that kid won't even bother to participate in HS wrestling after their weight class gets cut.

"We need 106lbs just as much as we need 182, 195 and 220, because wrestling is a sport that size is not a limiting factor and with hard work and dedication you can have success." I agree 100%.

Edited by McycleRider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BobDole said:

 

How many NCAA qualifiers at 197lbs and 285lbs started out JV, had 10+ losses, or didn't qualify for state as freshmen? Why do the little guys get afforded a varsity spot and the big guys don't?


I'd also bet there were a lot more NCAA qualifiers at 197 or 285 that only started wrestling in middle or even high school compared to 125 and 133.

Varsity letters shouldn't really be determined by age, they should be determined by ability.   I'd bet there are almost as many if not the same amount of heavyweights that get varsity jackets because "of their size and willingness to wrestle" than 106's.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, 1032004 said:


I'd also bet there were a lot more NCAA qualifiers at 197 or 285 that only started wrestling in middle or even high school compared to 125 and 133.

Varsity letters shouldn't really be determined by age, they should be determined by ability.   I'd bet there are almost as many if not the same amount of heavyweights that get varsity jackets because "of their size and willingness to wrestle" than 106's.

 

A heavyweight that is a freshman is a lot less likely to earn a letter than a 106lber. The heavyweight kid will likely have to cut his teeth wrestling JV for a year or two before getting his letter jacket. On top of that, even if they are varsity as a freshman or sophomore they will be wrestling mostly juniors and seniors the whole season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BobDole said:

A heavyweight that is a freshman is a lot less likely to earn a letter than a 106lber. The heavyweight kid will likely have to cut his teeth wrestling JV for a year or two before getting his letter jacket. On top of that, even if they are varsity as a freshman or sophomore they will be wrestling mostly juniors and seniors the whole season.

I wasn't even talking about age.   For one there's probably not a ton of teams with more than one heavyweight, so I do think it's likely that a freshman can be the varsity heavyweight.  

I was more alluding to the fact that I know of several juniors and seniors that were just pulled off the football field to wrestle 220 or 285 so they could fill a hole even though they had never wrestled before.   Is a junior or senior heavyweight that's never wrestled before more "worthy" of a varsity letter than a freshman 106 that's been wrestling for 10 years?  IMO, no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 1032004 said:

I wasn't even talking about age.   For one there's probably not a ton of teams with more than one heavyweight, so I do think it's likely that a freshman can be the varsity heavyweight.  

Keep reaching...just because you "think" it true, doesn't mean it is true. 
 

2 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I was more alluding to the fact that I know of several juniors and seniors that were just pulled off the football field to wrestle 220 or 285 so they could fill a hole even though they had never wrestled before.   Is a junior or senior heavyweight that's never wrestled before more "worthy" of a varsity letter than a freshman 106 that's been wrestling for 10 years?  IMO, no.

So we should just give spots to kids that have wrestled for 10 years or more? That's a great way to grow the sport and get as many people involved with it as possible.

Teams pull 106lbers out of the hallway all the time with little to no prior athletic experience. I'd much rather pull that football kid into the room than someone that has little to no athletic experience. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BobDole said:

So we should just give spots to kids that have wrestled for 10 years or more? That's a great way to grow the sport and get as many people involved with it as possible.

Teams pull 106lbers out of the hallway all the time with little to no prior athletic experience. I'd much rather pull that football kid into the room than someone that has little to no athletic experience. 

 

 

No, but if they've wrestled for 10 years or more chances are they're pretty good.   I just think varsity letters should be determined by ability, not age.

Agree with your second sentence.  But that's not mutually exclusive of the point that there are more talented freshman 106's than junior or senior heavyweights and I don't think that's even debatable.

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Agree with your second sentence.  But that's not mutually exclusive of the point that there are more talented freshman 106's than junior or senior heavyweights and I don't think that's even debatable.

Let's see you have a kid that wins 75% of his matches wrestling mostly against freshmen and sophomores or a kid that wins 50% of his matches wrestling juniors and seniors while at the same time not being as mature or physically developed as his counterparts. 

Bigger kids don't get the credentials that the smaller ones get as freshmen or sophomores because they are paying their dues. As stated previously it takes different skillsets to be successful at the upper and lower weights. For instance, the bigger guys need to spend a lot more time in the weight room than the smaller guys in order be successful. The smaller guys, while the weight room is super duper, is not as much of a necessity. 

Trying to compare the weight classes is asinine unless you truly understand that they are virtually different worlds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

But that's not mutually exclusive of the point that there are more talented freshman 106's than junior or senior heavyweights and I don't think that's even debatable.

I agree with this statement, especially if we define "talented" wrestlers as long-term wrestlers, i.e., wrestlers that have wrestled for more than five years. As BobDole noted, the heaviest weight classes tend to emphasize strength, while the lightest weight classes emphasize technique. For example, a strong heavyweight beginner can go much further than a strong lightweight beginner; lightweights have to put in serious time to acquire the technique needed to be competitive at 106, regardless of strength.

BobDole, just because the smaller guys might be young, don't underestimate the time that winning lightweights have already invested in wrestling prior to high school, thereby earning their "credentials."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BobDole said:

Let's see you have a kid that wins 75% of his matches wrestling mostly against freshmen and sophomores or a kid that wins 50% of his matches wrestling juniors and seniors while at the same time not being as mature or physically developed as his counterparts. 

Bigger kids don't get the credentials that the smaller ones get as freshmen or sophomores because they are paying their dues. As stated previously it takes different skillsets to be successful at the upper and lower weights. For instance, the bigger guys need to spend a lot more time in the weight room than the smaller guys in order be successful. The smaller guys, while the weight room is super duper, is not as much of a necessity. 

Trying to compare the weight classes is asinine unless you truly understand that they are virtually different worlds.

You’re right, they are different worlds.  I’m not saying to get rid of heavyweight, but let’s be real, it doesn’t take much skill set to be fairly successful at heavyweight in high school (college, different story).  There was a kid on my HS team that probably won 20 matches without getting a takedown or a pin/nearfall.

Again, I’m just saying that age shouldn’t be the baseline for varsity letters, wrestling ability should be.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2019 at 7:46 AM, 1032004 said:

You’re right, they are different worlds.  I’m not saying to get rid of heavyweight, but let’s be real, it doesn’t take much skill set to be fairly successful at heavyweight in high school (college, different story).  There was a kid on my HS team that probably won 20 matches without getting a takedown or a pin/nearfall.

Again, I’m just saying that age shouldn’t be the baseline for varsity letters, wrestling ability should be.

 

There was a 106lber in my state last year with over 20 wins...all forfeits. Obviously the team wrestled a crap schedule, but he still amassed 20 wins just by winning at the scale. 

People always dig at the big guys because they are "boring" or don't do as many moves, but it's a different game than the middle or lower weights. Heavyweight and 220 are two of the hardest weights to wrestle because there is a vast difference in the types of athletes they will see. I had a kid this year in back to back matches wrestle a kid that was 5'6" short and stocky, hard to move to wrestling a kid that was literally 6'7" tall and lanky and really funky. It's like saying a quarterback is the best athlete on the football field because he's involved in more of the plays and throws the ball the furthest. 

The skillset for a heavyweight is smaller, but that doesn't mean it is easier. 

Both 106 and heavyweight is needed in the sport and to call either easy or lessen the skills that it takes to be successful is a disgrace to the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, davenowa said:

so appears PA is petitioning NFHS for a national change to 12 weights for 2020-21, which if not approved by NFHS, will then be implemented by PA as a 3 year test.  

Seriously? What about the states and schools that have no issue?

As an outsider, it sounds like PA has gotten so good that it has created a barrier for new wrestlers to enter the sport at the high school level. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ptz305 said:

Seriously? What about the states and schools that have no issue?

As an outsider, it sounds like PA has gotten so good that it has created a barrier for new wrestlers to enter the sport at the high school level. 

Pennsylvania's biggest issue is they have MANY small rural schools that literally don't have enough kids to fill the roster. 

Every state obviously could improve athlete retention and marketing of their programs to keep kids involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...