Jump to content

weight changes for 20-21 season?


Recommended Posts

The rule changes are in the review stage so nothing has been done. Supposedly there might be a couple other alternative weight classes lurking out there.

 

Usually Indiana adopts the weights classes set forth by the NFHS.

 

Other potential rule changes include no hair restriction, relaxing of the facial hair rule, and some other smaller changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the 13 weight classes, but they are doing very little to tackle the issue of forfeits.

 

The three most forfeited weight classes are 106, 113, and 120 over the course of 2015-2019. This does nothing for those weight classes, instead it eliminates 182 so thus combining 195(4th most forfeited) and 182(9th most forfeited).

 

If we want to artificially affect the forfeit numbers the lowest weigh needs to be something like 110lbs. Increasing the lowest weights by 1lb will do nothing to the forfeit numbers.

 

OR we can tackle the REAL issue and look at how to increase participation. If we want to help participation we need to look at having the ability to enter multiple kids per weight at sectional. Something like 15 kids for 13 weights with no more than 2 per weight. This will help keep kids out for the sport longer and also keep kids from cutting drastic amount of weight to get into the lineup.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the chances  these weight changes happen?

 

What about different weight classes for tournaments and duals? 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

personally I would go to 15 weights with adjusting  weight classes with additional weight being added up top also.  Never for taking away an opportunity from a kid.  I know people struggle filing all the weights but I am selfish and would want the most chances for kids to see varsity wrestling as they can.  Also I like adding it up top as another spot to help encourage the football players to give wrestling a try.

Edited by tskin
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's time for Joe's statistical analysis.... 

 

This is under the assumption that the NFHS wants to eliminate a weight class based off of the forfeit issue.

 

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

 

Data updated in this section

The current proposal basically combines the current 182lbs and 195lbs weight into 189lbs. If a team has either a 182 or 195 they are counted as now having a 189lber and the teams with neither will now forfeit the new 189lbs. This would eliminate.... 107 forfeits. The average per team would still be 2.53. Based on the data we would need 34 195lbers to cut to the new 189lbs.

 

If we would attack 106lbs and lets say we combine 106 and 113 into a newly formed 110lbs weight class. Same as above in combining each weight and assuming all 113's that do not have a teammate at 106 could make 110, we would eliminate.... 154 forfeits. That means we would still have 2.37 forfeits per team. Based on the data we would need 51 113lbers to cut to the new 110lbs.

 

If we would go further and combine both scenarios we would only eliminate 261 forfeits. Thus again we would still have 2.032 forfeits per team. 

 

In conclusion, the elimination of ANY weight class will have very little affect on the number of forfeits. If every team in the state brings in two additional wrestlers we would do more for the forfeit issue than eliminating a weight class. At best we would eliminate 300 opportunities in order to save 154 forfeits. This is not worth it to cut that many opportunities to salvage a better looking forfeit statistic.

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

Is there a local/national campaign to try and influence NFHS ?  Less opportunity is not better....

I don't think so. I believe this is already voted on and just waiting for an announcement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did Ohio based on forfeits. Ohio has 583 schools with wrestling and MANY smaller rural schools. Here is the data.

 

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

 

The current proposal basically combines the current 182lbs and 195lbs weight into 189lbs. If a team has either a 182 or 195 they are counted as now having a 189lber and the teams with neither will now forfeit the new 189lbs. This would eliminate.... 270 forfeits. The average per team would still be 3.41. 

 

If we would attack 106lbs and lets say we combine 106 and 113 into a newly formed 110lbs weight class. Same as above in combining each weight and assuming all 113's that do not have a teammate at 106 could make 110, we would eliminate.... 311 forfeits. That means we would still have 3.34 forfeits per team.

 

If we would go further and combine both scenarios we would only eliminate 581 forfeits. Thus again we would still have 2.87 forfeits per team. 

 

In conclusion, in Ohio we are basically in the same realm that we would eliminate almost 600 opportunities to make the forfeit statistics look better by only half a forfeit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Additional Indiana information.

 

If we combine 106 and 113 we would have 157 athletes without a varsity position at sectional. That would be to "save" 154 forfeits.

 

If we combine 182 and 195 we would have 203 athletes without a varsity position at sectional. That would "save" 107 forfeits.

 

Ohio Information

If we combine 106 and 113 we would have 274 athletes without a varsity position at sectional. That would be to "save" 311 forfeits.

 

If we combine 182 and 195 we would have 311 athletes without a varsity position at sectional. That would "save" 270 forfeits.

 

Again, in both cases there seems to be no real reason to cut ANY weights for the sake of forfeits.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish they would just leave the low weights alone. I don't care about forfeits that much. I care more about who this sport reaches. A kid that weighs around 100 pounds doesn't have much of a chance at many other sports without getting just run over. I am still not happy they moved it away from 103. The higher they raise it the more that 98 pound kid that can't gain weight gets hurt and the more that 120 something pound kid thinks he can wrestle the lightest weight. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the NFHS wants to take opportunities away from kids?  They are looking at reducing weight classes to off-set the number of forfeits?  I don't get it.  I don't like seeing forfeits, but I hate the idea of seeing less weight classes. 

This happened at our junior high conference a couple of years ago.  Weight classes were cut by 3 or 4, and others classes were adjusted.  Some schools didn't have numbers. Great it helps them.  Other schools had great numbers, but now some of their kids are in between classes or sitting they may be out because they may be the back up, or they decide not to wrestle in general because there isn't a weight class close to their body weight.  

@nkraus 

Edited by rookie78
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate taking weights away from Football players because it helps get cross sport recruits.

 

Hate taking weights away from light weights because it helps keep the smaller or slower maturing kids in schools involved in something.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, rookie78 said:

So, the NFHS wants to take opportunities away from kids?  They are looking at reducing weight classes to off-set the number of forfeits?  I don't get it.  I don't like seeing forfeits, but I hate the idea of seeing less weight classes. 

This happened at our junior high conference a couple of years ago.  Weight classes were cut by 3 or 4, and others classes were adjusted.  Some schools didn't have numbers. Great it helps them.  Other schools had great numbers, but now some of their kids are in between classes or sitting they may be out because they may be the back up, or they decide not to wrestle in general because there isn't a weight class close to their body weight.  

@nkraus 

Wow.  This is stupid.  Just taking away opportunities.   Hopefully, Indiana can have a mind of their own and keep our weight classes as is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is possible to opt out of adopting new weights.  Michigan never adopted the last set of weight changes which is fine when competing in state, but does cause "problems" when you want to compete with teams from other states who have different weights.  Its not a huge problem but you do usually end up taking a starter out of your line up and adding a JV kid into your line up for duals or tournaments.  For MI, it meant taking out a kid in the middle of the weights and adding a bigger kid who didn't have as much experience.  Ideally the midwest or bordering states would also agree so this can be minimized.  The idea of national weights makes it so much easier but losing a weight class is a huge discussion to consider.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So is there a group of people that get paid to look at things and make changes? How does something like this come down the pipe? Honestly interested but not enough to try and look it up. My imagination says their is a group of people that gets paid by an association that has to at least make a couple changes a year in order for them to cash a check. They say "hey let's mess with weight classes again because that really shows we are doing something." Then the coaches don't come together and push back enough and little Tommy "Too Small" and Billy "Big Boy" suffer from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, aoberlin said:

So is there a group of people that get paid to look at things and make changes? How does something like this come down the pipe? Honestly interested but not enough to try and look it up. My imagination says their is a group of people that gets paid by an association that has to at least make a couple changes a year in order for them to cash a check. They say "hey let's mess with weight classes again because that really shows we are doing something." Then the coaches don't come together and push back enough and little Tommy "Too Small" and Billy "Big Boy" suffer from it.

Here is how rules are changed at the NFHS

 

https://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-content/rules-writing-process-video/

 

Here is a link to the wrestling rules committee

https://members.nfhs.org/committees?utf8=✓&group_id=18

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2020 at 6:46 PM, Y2CJ41 said:

I don't mind the 13 weight classes, but they are doing very little to tackle the issue of forfeits.

 

The three most forfeited weight classes are 106, 113, and 120 over the course of 2015-2019. This does nothing for those weight classes, instead it eliminates 182 so thus combining 195(4th most forfeited) and 182(9th most forfeited).

 

If we want to artificially affect the forfeit numbers the lowest weigh needs to be something like 110lbs. Increasing the lowest weights by 1lb will do nothing to the forfeit numbers.

 

OR we can tackle the REAL issue and look at how to increase participation. If we want to help participation we need to look at having the ability to enter multiple kids per weight at sectional. Something like 15 kids for 13 weights with no more than 2 per weight. This will help keep kids out for the sport longer and also keep kids from cutting drastic amount of weight to get into the lineup.

 

 

I'm not opposed to the 15/13 proposal as it gets more kids in the lineup but I don't know how much this will move the needle as many smaller programs will continue to have numerous forfeits. Again, I'm all for anything that increases opportunity for kids, just not sold that this will significantly move the needle. I would give my opinion on what I believe would increase participation but I don't want to start a holy war between wrestling traditionalists and progressives. 

Edited by AlaskanMountie
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AlaskanMountie said:

I'm not opposed to the 15/13 proposal as it gets more kids in the lineup but I don't know how much this will move the needle as many smaller programs will continue to have numerous forfeits. Again, I'm all for anything that increases opportunity for kids, just not sold that this will significantly move the needle. I would give my opinion on what I believe would increase participation but I don't want to start a holy war between wrestling traditionalists and progressives. 

Significantly? Not sure what you would consider significantly. We cannot make a rule that is a magic potion that will make coaches that aren't good at recruiting athletes become good at it. Coaches still need to work the hallways and promote the sport within the school.

 

Even with the 15/13 rule we would still have forfeits, but we'd get more participation at the sectional level. On top of that if a team didn't have a weight class filled they could put in a backup from another weight class. So for instance your team doesn't have a 106 or 113, you could then put your backup at 132, 160, 195, and 285...or whatever you want. 

 

This would help keep kids out for the team that are "varsity or bust" and help reduce weight cutting like in the above scenario the 126lber trying to cut to 113 for the team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Joe is on to something that has much merit. Back in my earlier days at Adams Central we hosted a MS Invitational for 10 plus teams and the ACAC. We allowed each school to enter up to 4 wrestlers per weight class for the Invitational and 2 per weight class for the ACAC. The point was not “stacking” the scoring possibilities but giving opportunities to compete. I believe that’s what we want to happen. Joe’s data for adjusting weight classes clearly indicates that shuffling weight classes is not the answer to increase participation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

Significantly? Not sure what you would consider significantly. We cannot make a rule that is a magic potion that will make coaches that aren't good at recruiting athletes become good at it. Coaches still need to work the hallways and promote the sport within the school.

 

Even with the 15/13 rule we would still have forfeits, but we'd get more participation at the sectional level. On top of that if a team didn't have a weight class filled they could put in a backup from another weight class. So for instance your team doesn't have a 106 or 113, you could then put your backup at 132, 160, 195, and 285...or whatever you want. 

 

This would help keep kids out for the team that are "varsity or bust" and help reduce weight cutting like in the above scenario the 126lber trying to cut to 113 for the team.

I would support the 15/13 proposal so there's no need to beat that drum any further. I see the benefits it would bring and I'm all for it. It's definitely a step in the right direction. The point that I was making that I think you missed was that this proposal would overwhelmingly impact larger programs. Yes, some smaller programs would benefit but that still doesn't reduce the number of forfeits you pinpointed as a major issue in our sport which are overwhelmingly coming from middle to smaller programs. 

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.