Badger Fan 30 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 I think college wrestling should implement an 11th weight class for light heavyweight. Around 220 - 225. I think it would be a strong weight class. Quite a bit of talent 1 DocBZ reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1032004 1,514 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 no 4 simple, Creech, PSUSMC and 1 other reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lu_alum 924 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 (edited) The NCAA is not going to allow more than 330 qualifiers. Are you willing to reduce the number of national qualifiers for each weight class to 25 or 26? Edited March 22, 2021 by lu_alum Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HurricaneWrestling2 902 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 Excellent idea - also they could use the criteria of team with the most wins as a tiebreaker for duals. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grecojones 206 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 4 minutes ago, Badger Fan said: I think college wrestling should implement an 11th weight class for light heavyweight. Around 220 - 225. I think it would be a strong weight class. Quite a bit of talent Looking to get Hilger a few notches up on the podium? ;) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boompa 208 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 No no no no no Big guys have their sports that despite being better athletes, the little guys cannot do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gimpeltf 2,085 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 (edited) They'd be more likely to drop a weight. And why have two less skilled weights (I realize 197 is at least entertaining off the mat). Adding 215 (then 220) in HS never helped and made two weak weights. Edited March 22, 2021 by gimpeltf 1 Husker_Du reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sheerstress 174 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 Collegiate wrestling has enough problems finding talented heavyweights to stay with the sport. This will only add to the burden. 1 Antitroll2828 reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Force118 150 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 No. Bring back 118. 4 1 Ogalthorpe Haywood, Yellow_Medal, Alwayswrestling and 2 others reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Show_Me 341 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 No. All for an 11th weight class but not between 197 & 285. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
4awrestler 72 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 No it’ll only make 197 and HWT weaker like it has done in high school Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 wamba reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ShakaAloha 430 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 I'm against adding 220 weight class. There's already a shortage of depth after the top 10-20 guys at 285 and 197. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wrestlingphish 1,032 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 I wouldn't add a new class but would adjust the weights. 125 133 141 150 160 170 180 190 210 285 4 Show_Me, Elevator, Noodler and 1 other reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyingcement 916 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 59 minutes ago, Force118 said: No. Bring back 118. This is more like it. We have great 103-112 high schoolers in this country who can't get up to 125. Id rather see Bobby Weavers of the world get to shine in NCAA 2 Force118 and Yellow_Medal reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Show_Me 341 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 (edited) 37 minutes ago, wrestlingphish said: I wouldn't add a new class but would adjust the weights. 125 133 141 150 160 170 180 190 210 285 120 127 135 144 154 165 177 190 205 285 This keeps it at 10 classes. Moves the lowest class down slightly & reduces the gap between the highest 2 weight classes (effectively creating a light heavyweight class). Edited March 22, 2021 by Show_Me 3 Yellow_Medal, Elevator and Grecojones reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lu_alum 924 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Show_Me said: 120 127 - close to 57kg (125.6 lbs) 135 144 - closer to 65kg (143.3 lbs) 154 165 - close to 74kg (163.1 lbs) 177 190 - closer to 86kg (189.5 lbs) 205 - closer to 97kg (213.8 lbs) 285 - close to 125kg (275.5 lbs) This keeps it at 10 classes. Moves the lowest class slightly & reduces the gap between the highest 2 classes. These align better with the Olympic weights as well. Edited March 22, 2021 by lu_alum 1 Yellow_Medal reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LJB 2,093 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 we need less bear dancing not more... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headshuck 2,626 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 No. Bring back 118.The Sanders Amendment 1 Force118 reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shieldofpistis 156 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 2 hours ago, Badger Fan said: I think college wrestling should implement an 11th weight class for light heavyweight. Around 220 - 225. I think it would be a strong weight class. Quite a bit of talent I think 10 weights are good. But maybe more spacing. Maybe space it out so there is a 210 and heavyweight is umlimited Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Columbia_Lou 14 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 2 hours ago, lu_alum said: The NCAA is not going to allow more than 330 qualifiers. Are you willing to reduce the number of national qualifiers for each weight class to 25 or 26? Regardless of an 11th weight, The nattys should be a 24 man brackett. 33 out of 77(this yr. 33/72) make the show,thats over 43% of all participants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teach 175 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 11 won't happen but would help duals. A weight between 197 and heavy would be great, in my opinion. I know several kids personally who were stuck between being a very light 285 or have a huge cut for 197. So, they stop wrestling, or stop competing. Of course there are ways to get big. I don't really like when we compare " better athletes", because that depends o what you mean by a better athlete. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ShakaAloha 430 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 2 hours ago, Force118 said: No. Bring back 118. No one wants to see a Malik Heinselman-Kirk McHenry final. Could they even fill a 33 man bracket? 4 cjc007, DocBZ, Noodler and 1 other reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
treep2000 1,152 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 11 weights wouldn't help duals unfortunately. * Team A wins 6 weights, and techs in all 6 matches = 30pts * Team B wins 5 weighs, and pins in all 5 matches = 30pts of course, there are numerous combinations and permutations of the scores and results, but the end is the same. Some type of "criteria" still needs to decide those ties. I like the notion of aligning our US Collegiate weights with the Olympic/World Freestyle/Greco weights (freestyle moreso, given the current environment). I think this alignment will assist our future teams greatly. Aspirations of nearly all highly successful collegiate wrestlers are world level accolades. They all say it in their interviews, from the time they're in youth wrestling, to the time they win their NCAA championship(s). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jchapman 1,339 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 1 minute ago, treep2000 said: 11 weights wouldn't help duals unfortunately. * Team A wins 6 weights, and techs in all 6 matches = 30pts * Team B wins 5 weighs, and pins in all 5 matches = 30pts of course, there are numerous combinations and permutations of the scores and results, but the end is the same. Some type of "criteria" still needs to decide those ties. I like the notion of aligning our US Collegiate weights with the Olympic/World Freestyle/Greco weights (freestyle moreso, given the current environment). I think this alignment will assist our future teams greatly. Aspirations of nearly all highly successful collegiate wrestlers are world level accolades. They all say it in their interviews, from the time they're in youth wrestling, to the time they win their NCAA championship(s). Ummm, just a thought: maybe have the team with more match victories be the first (and only ) tiebreaker criterion? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Force118 150 Report post Posted March 22, 2021 (edited) 12 minutes ago, ShakaAloha said: No one wants to see a Malik Heinselman-Kirk McHenry final. Could they even fill a 33 man bracket? If only we had historical precedent. Looked stacked in 1998. Edited March 22, 2021 by Force118 1 Yellow_Medal reacted to this Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
