Jump to content
davecloud

Let's shake things up--new rules ideas

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Coach Duncan said:

Indiana becoming a state that allows middle school wrestlers to compete on high school teams.  This may help avoid FF's, especially with smaller school programs.  I believe other states that allow middle school wrestlers to wrestle on high school teams are Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Iowa=traditionally strong college programs?? I may be incorrect with the states listed, but if memory serves me correctly I thought some states at least allow 8th graders?? 

May not be a reality for this to happen in Indiana.  If it is taking place in other states, why not Indiana?  I imagine we can all argue that some 8th graders if not 7th graders could stand on the podium at Bankers Life......

 

States that I know allow 8th graders are New York, North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Kentucky, Florida(private schools only I believe). Iowa and Oklahoma do not allow middle school kids in high school.

I don't necessarily see this as a good thing as you'll be throwing out an under prepared kid just to save a forfeit. Retaining those kids after they took beating after beating would not be easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Y2CJ41 said:

States that I know allow 8th graders are New York, North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Kentucky, Florida(private schools only I believe). Iowa and Oklahoma do not allow middle school kids in high school.

I don't necessarily see this as a good thing as you'll be throwing out an under prepared kid just to save a forfeit. Retaining those kids after they took beating after beating would not be easy.

I don't disagree, was just a thought as I know some other states allow and wanted to see opinions of others.  Red, Lee's, Mendez, Howe, Tsirtis's, Parris, Escobedo, etc, may be a short list of wrestlers who could of placed as 8th graders.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Adopt different weight classes for freshman and JV than Varsity and eliminate Varsity 106 to add a larger weight class.  Zero seniors qualified for Semi-state at 106 this year.  No other sport caters to underclassmen.  New weight class could be in the middle or upper weights just get rid of 106.

2. Adopt college stalling rules for the offensive wrestler.  Hold on a leg for an audible 5 seconds and get called for stalling.

3. Add Fleeing to the Stalling penalty chart (so first stall/flee is warning but second stall/flee is a point - I think this could make it easier on officials to call - not that I agree with getting a warning for fleeing but if it helps it get called more it would help).

4. 4 pt nearfall.  This is awesome at the college level and promotes more activity on the mat.

5. Inbounds - 2 points no matter what.  On feet.  On mat.  In pinning situation.  Those 2 points must be on the mat and can be from either wrestler.  Knee, foot, toe.... doesn't matter.  Any 2 points.

Extreme rule (I dont really think this should happen but...) - Make out of bounds its own penalty chart... if official blows the wrestlers out of bounds its a warning to both wrestlers.... 3 warnings and 4th is double disqualification.  That might make them wrestling in the middle ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Rookies03 said:

1. Adopt different weight classes for freshman and JV than Varsity and eliminate Varsity 106 to add a larger weight class.  Zero seniors qualified for Semi-state at 106 this year.  No other sport caters to underclassmen.  New weight class could be in the middle or upper weights just get rid of 106.

2. Adopt college stalling rules for the offensive wrestler.  Hold on a leg for an audible 5 seconds and get called for stalling.

3. Add Fleeing to the Stalling penalty chart (so first stall/flee is warning but second stall/flee is a point - I think this could make it easier on officials to call - not that I agree with getting a warning for fleeing but if it helps it get called more it would help).

4. 4 pt nearfall.  This is awesome at the college level and promotes more activity on the mat.

5. Inbounds - 2 points no matter what.  On feet.  On mat.  In pinning situation.  Those 2 points must be on the mat and can be from either wrestler.  Knee, foot, toe.... doesn't matter.  Any 2 points.

Extreme rule (I dont really think this should happen but...) - Make out of bounds its own penalty chart... if official blows the wrestlers out of bounds its a warning to both wrestlers.... 3 warnings and 4th is double disqualification.  That might make them wrestling in the middle ;)

One your first point, isn’t that part of what makes wrestling so great? It’s available to kids of all grades and all weights. It’s the only sport where someone that weighs 100 lbs can actually contribute and be great.  

Share this post


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

One your first point, isn’t that part of what makes wrestling so great? It’s available to kids of all grades and all weights. It’s the only sport where someone that weighs 100 lbs can actually contribute and be great.  

Can't they contribute and be great at the freshman level or JV level?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rookies03 said:

Can't they contribute and be great at the freshman level or JV level?  

If they’re great, why throw them on jv? Would you rather have guys like Cernus and Cottey on jv? And no, if varsity is the highest level than can one really be great on jv?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would take stalling out of the penalty chart so that a person cannot be DQed for stalling, or a comnination of stalling and other penalties.  I believe that changing stalling a simple 1 point penalty for each occurrence would free Officials to call it more consistently throughout the match.  I feel like many officials pace themselves for fear of creating a situation where they will DQ someone.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Unpopular opinion: decrease the number of weight classes to 12. It makes the sport more competitive across the board; prepares kids for the next level (10 weight classes) and makes it easier for schools of all sizes to field a FULL team.

109

117

125

133

141

149

157

165

174

184

197

HWT

Edited by Riley McClurg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see a riding point. 

If you ride a wrestler out for an entire period, 1pt will be added. You can only earn 1pt in a match. No need for riding time clock. 

A wrestler should be rewarded for a ride out. Most of the time the are called for stalling at some point. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Coach Seltzer said:

I would like to see a riding point. 

If you ride a wrestler out for an entire period, 1pt will be added. You can only earn 1pt in a match. No need for riding time clock. 

A wrestler should be rewarded for a ride out. Most of the time the are called for stalling at some point. 

 

Coach I think that is a really interesting take on riding time.  I've seen people bring up riding time before, and have always felt that it would be too much of a pain with the clocks and all of that.  This is a simple solution that would reward a skill in our sport that is currently not scored.  This is a really good idea imo.  

I think it would produce more scoring too.  Getting away on bottom would be huge if this were the case.  I also think you would see more people choose neutral if this were implemented. This would really have a big effect on strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 point near fall

3 point take down

2nd injury time = 1 point and choice (too many kids using injury time as a break, and simply giving them the choice to go on bottom is not always beneficial)

Allowing teams to enter more than 1 kid per weight at sectionals and individual tournaments ( would have to cap it at a certain #)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Thor said:

If they’re great, why throw them on jv? Would you rather have guys like Cernus and Cottey on jv? And no, if varsity is the highest level than can one really be great on jv?

So maybe I'm not explaining my view very well.  106 generally has one of the highest forfeit rates.  A lot of schools just try to find any kid who weighs less than 106 (usually a freshman who hasn't started growing yet) to get forfeits.  If we started at 113 and added a weight in the middle or upper weights now that Varsity spot would be filled by a bigger and in a lot of cases a more "varsity" ready athlete.  

And to answer your questions...

If they’re great, why throw them on jv? Not throwing them on JV.  If they are a JV level wrestler then yes they could be great at the JV level (maybe this is a philosophical difference as I don't see greatness measured in Ws and Ls but rather everything else gained from being a wrestler - hard work, dedication, sacrifice, discipline, etc.  You can achieve greatness in these areas without being a state placer or champ).  Putting a 100 lb kid with no muscle tone on varsity seems more like throwing them on varsity rather than throwing them on JV if they are truly JV caliber.

Would you rather have guys like Cernus and Cottey on jv? No. They would most likely be on varsity just at 113.  They could cut less weight and I'm pretty sure they would still be great.  

What I would really rather see is upper classman get more opportunities to be a varsity athlete.  100 lb freshman getting to be a varsity athlete because he is the only one that weighs less than 106 over a junior or senior who is a back up wrestler in the middle or upper weights but is still pretty good.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Too many folkstyle matches end up being 1 minute of excitement and 5 minutes of the top man controlling the bottom man. If I was the wrestling czar...

  1. Push out points (I'll stretch the reach of my czar powers)
  2. Reset to neutral from top/bottom position if no scoring after 30 consecutive seconds. If top man scores back points reset the 30 second clock. 
    1. This way you add urgency and excitement to every top/bottom position, eliminate the staleness of when the top man holds down the bottom man for extended periods of time without scoring, and maintain the spirit of the folkstyle. As an added bonus, this increases the value of a takedown assuming that you can hold down your opponent for 30 seconds.

Obviously, this would be a major change for the sport. I don't expect it to happen any time soon. But if it did, I think that folkstyle wrestling would be a much more enjoyable sport to watch and participate in.

Edited by back2mat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 11:27 AM, Coach Duncan said:

Indiana becoming a state that allows middle school wrestlers to compete on high school teams.  This may help avoid FF's, especially with small school programs.  I believe other states that allow middle school wrestlers to wrestle on high school teams are Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Iowa=traditionally strong college programs?? I may be incorrect with the states listed, but if memory serves me correctly I thought some states at least allow 8th graders?? 

May not be a reality for this to happen in Indiana.  If it is taking place in other states, why not Indiana?  I imagine we can all argue that some 8th graders if not 7th graders could stand on the podium at Bankers Life......

 

Not in Iowa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#1 - Matside Weigh Ins - This would eventually eliminate improper weight cutting and the weight management plan.  And the added bonus of not having to wake up quite as early every Saturday will help keep some kids in the sport longer.

#2 - Step Out (1 pt) - I would make it 2 feet out gives the opponent a point.  1 foot really shrinks the wrestling area and does the opposite of the college out of bounds rule.  Also, 1 foot out is still technically in bounds.  Make it both feet out.

#3 - Stalling - First one is a warning.  Every one after that gives opponent choice of position.  If refs aren't "giving" points and they are earned/chosen instead, then they will be more likely to call it.  If a wrestler is called for it on top and bottom wrestler chooses neutral or top, then 1 point is awarded for either.  This also eliminates the dreaded (and lazy) "double stalling" call from refs (except for the warnings, which I'm okay with at times).  This takes the match result out of the ref's hands and gets rid of the end of match stalling call (or no call) that decides the match.

#4 - Five Match Limit - If a match ends in the first period, then it doesn't count towards the 5 match limit (similar to the thinking behind forfeits don't count).  This would allow for bigger brackets with fewer limit problems.  It will still happen, but a lot less often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since FF's are now part of the Sectional Seeding Criteria, and favor the wrestlers that don't receive them, why count them at all?  I say team score should be kept from matches wrestled.  If a team only has 10 kids then team score should be kept from just those matches.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, bulldog145 said:

Since FF's are now part of the Sectional Seeding Criteria, and favor the wrestlers that don't receive them, why count them at all?  I say team score should be kept from matches wrestled.  If a team only has 10 kids then team score should be kept from just those matches.  

I think this would encourage schools to not schedule teams that can't field a full team.  It also might encourage some cases of teams suddenly not having a wrestler at certain weight.  This creates the opposite direction that we would like to take our sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WOC said:

I think this would encourage schools to not schedule teams that can't field a full team.  It also might encourage some cases of teams suddenly not having a wrestler at certain weight.  This creates the opposite direction that we would like to take our sport.

But this could also turn a program around instantly.  Going from losing most of its duals to winning several which would gain interest of more kids and ultimately fill all 14 classes the following year eliminating the FF issue all together.  There are pro's and cons to every change but just my thoughts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, bulldog145 said:

But this could also turn a program around instantly.  Going from losing most of its duals to winning several which would gain interest of more kids and ultimately fill all 14 classes the following year eliminating the FF issue all together.  There are pro's and cons to every change but just my thoughts. 

Why would a coach recruit 14 guys when you could win a dual with just 3 hammers? Counting FF's as points force teams to recruit a full 14 if they want to be competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ENoblewrestling said:

Why would a coach recruit 14 guys when you could win a dual with just 3 hammers? Counting FF's as points force teams to recruit a full 14 if they want to be competitive.

When I have taken teams to Wabash's Camp in June in the past, they don't count forfeits and it used to peeve me off when teams wouldn't try to fill their teams because they knew they had 8 really good kids and maybe a couple duds, but instead of finding 4 other teams' back-ups  they would leave them as "forfeits" thereby not counting against them. I think this would happen frequently. I know as a scheduler, I would never schedule against a team without a full team then because it could mitigate my best wrestlers' effect on the dual. Right now, I have 7 kids who are huge point scorers for us and 7 that are young and win some/lose some. It'd be really easy for a team to beat the crap out of us if they just got to not face my better guys with no 6 point penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a small 106 son and so I'm, admittedly, biased and a bit prickly about this. Being that he's in a room(s) year-round, I'd sure like the idea of my son being able to compete against kids 'nearly' his size before he's a senior. 

Not that I think it's a swell idea, but couldn't we apply this logic and similar 'generalization' to the heavyweight class?

 

23 hours ago, Rookies03 said:

So maybe I'm not explaining my view very well.  106 generally has one of the highest forfeit rates.  A lot of schools just try to find any kid who weighs less than 106 (usually a freshman who hasn't started growing yet) to get forfeits.  If we started at 113 and added a weight in the middle or upper weights now that Varsity spot would be filled by a bigger and in a lot of cases a more "varsity" ready athlete.  

And to answer your questions...

If they’re great, why throw them on jv? Not throwing them on JV.  If they are a JV level wrestler then yes they could be great at the JV level (maybe this is a philosophical difference as I don't see greatness measured in Ws and Ls but rather everything else gained from being a wrestler - hard work, dedication, sacrifice, discipline, etc.  You can achieve greatness in these areas without being a state placer or champ).  Putting a 100 lb kid with no muscle tone on varsity seems more like throwing them on varsity rather than throwing them on JV if they are truly JV caliber.

Would you rather have guys like Cernus and Cottey on jv? No. They would most likely be on varsity just at 113.  They could cut less weight and I'm pretty sure they would still be great.  

What I would really rather see is upper classman get more opportunities to be a varsity athlete.  100 lb freshman getting to be a varsity athlete because he is the only one that weighs less than 106 over a junior or senior who is a back up wrestler in the middle or upper weights but is still pretty good.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.