Coach Brobst

I’d say it has to do with both the Ihsaa and their policy of only the champion matters and a large percentage of the population who can’t handle change, even when it’s for the better. People in Indiana love their back when I was growing up start to a conversation 

Especially if we’re gonna randomly decide which girls make it when there are openings.
 
There are several weights where I believe the 1st 3rd or 4th best athletes are in same quarter bracket
 
i understand the IHSAA May do this next year, but why do it to ourselves?

Especially if we’re gonna randomly decide which girls make it when there are openings.
 
There are several weights where I believe the 1st 3rd or 4th best athletes are in same quarter bracket
 
i understand the IHSAA May do this next year, but why do it to ourselves?

I'm not really the biggest fan of adding wrestlers to the bracket like this.
 
1. It creates confusion
2. Since there are no wrestle-backs, the 5th or 6th placers might actually get a better draw than the 3rd or 4th place finishers and advance.

Especially if we’re gonna randomly decide which girls make it when there are openings.
 
There are several weights where I believe the 1st 3rd or 4th best athletes are in same quarter bracket
 
i understand the IHSAA May do this next year, but why do it to ourselves?

Especially if we’re gonna randomly decide which girls make it when there are openings.
 
There are several weights where I believe the 1st 3rd or 4th best athletes are in same quarter bracket
 
i understand the IHSAA May do this next year, but why do it to ourselves?

This could've been our opportunity to show that wrestle backs could work at this level. 

Yeah, not exactly using all seeding criteria at all.
Looks to mostly be record with a few head to heads counting but no common opponent or last seasons state series counted at all.
Oh well! We’ll go wrestle and see what happens!

I'm not sure what the actual attendance was, but there had to be 2500 fans or more at the Bellmont - Adams Central Dual last night. They delayed the start of the JV matches by half an hour because of the long line of fans waiting to get in. It was a great atmosphere and the fans weren't disappointed. The teams split the matches 7-7 and Bellmont won on bonus points 38-32.  Thanks to Nat Bryan for taking this picture of the crowd.
 
 

I agree halfway with your first statement. Building a lead doesn't mean you get to do nothing. However, controlling the ties is not doing nothing. That's wrestling. You have to clear my control tie that I'm using to move you before you can score on me. Can't do it? Too bad, I'm outwrestling you with just a hand fight. I'm forcing you into bad position with my tie to open up a low risk attack. Why does the Leading wrestler have to stay on the offense? Their job is to win, not entertain.
 
Exactly. There's a time to push the pace in the 3rd and there's a time to just win. We try to lay it on our sectional opponents and teach "slamming the door" against those you'll see again (sometimes they do it to us too). We don't want them believing they can beat us and when you hold position when up 2-3 when you could score again, it leaves that belief in your opponents' mind, so we teach go get another. But if we're wrestling anybody else. Get off the mat with the win ESPECIALLY in do our die rounds like Semi-state or first round of Regionals.
 

I agree halfway with your first statement. Building a lead doesn't mean you get to do nothing. However, controlling the ties is not doing nothing. That's wrestling. You have to clear my control tie that I'm using to move you before you can score on me. Can't do it? Too bad, I'm outwrestling you with just a hand fight. I'm forcing you into bad position with my tie to open up a low risk attack. Why does the Leading wrestler have to stay on the offense? Their job is to win, not entertain.
 
Exactly. There's a time to push the pace in the 3rd and there's a time to just win. We try to lay it on our sectional opponents and teach "slamming the door" against those you'll see again (sometimes they do it to us too). We don't want them believing they can beat us and when you hold position when up 2-3 when you could score again, it leaves that belief in your opponents' mind, so we teach go get another. But if we're wrestling anybody else. Get off the mat with the win ESPECIALLY in do our die rounds like Semi-state or first round of Regionals.
 

Not sure how long you have been coaching or if you are a coach, but I can tell you over the years, my opinions on things have been shaped by my experiences. About 10 years ago I had a senior that made it to the ticket round and had only 1 loss before then. This board had some posters that were talking about how he was overrated and would get beat in that match. He wanted to prove them wrong and he was wrestling his heart out and was up by 4 with about 30 seconds left. Their coaches and fans kept yelling that my kid was stalling, so he pressured forward and did a knee tap and then got headlocked and lost by a point. If I had a time machine and could go back and tell my kid to use the stall calls he still had, I would do it in a heartbeat. Now I coach to those situations and have that as an example. Thankfully that kid has turned into a great person and coach that I work with on the regular. And yes some jerk had the nerve to make a comment about how they were right after that match was over. I personally no longer care at all about what other coaches, wrestlers, or fans think in those situations. If my kid has earned the right to hold a position. We are going to hold a position.

I'm with Coach Diep on this one. Stalling needs more clearly defined criteria.
 
However, I'm opposed to eliminating the warning. The other athlete had the same 5 minutes and 30 seconds to score that the winning athlete had. This is why scoring early is important in our sport. I don't advocate for kids stalling with 30 seconds left, but As the leading wrestler, you have "earned" the right to play a little defense when you build a lead. Can't complain as the losing wrestler that he was "just stalling" because how the heck did he score the points in the first place? It sure wasn't by stalling.
 
I like the one warning and then a point. Why does the other kid get a point just for taking crazy shots at the end of a match that have 0 chance of landing?  Score early, score often, don't let it come down to the last 30 seconds.
 
We'd all love to see athletes do nothing but shoot and score and hit fun scrambles for 6 straight minutes but all the kids care about is the score at the end. They took risks earlier to score points, they have now got the right to take fewer risks late. 
 
I just hate when a kid has taken all of the risks all match and they don't hit the other kid for stalling for the first 5 and a half minutes, then want to throw up a stall call with 10 seconds left on the kid that had done all the work the whole match. It's like stalling doesn't exist until you're winning. Just let them wrestle. 
 
Just one coach's humble opinion.
 
 

I'm with Coach Diep on this one. Stalling needs more clearly defined criteria.
 
However, I'm opposed to eliminating the warning. The other athlete had the same 5 minutes and 30 seconds to score that the winning athlete had. This is why scoring early is important in our sport. I don't advocate for kids stalling with 30 seconds left, but As the leading wrestler, you have "earned" the right to play a little defense when you build a lead. Can't complain as the losing wrestler that he was "just stalling" because how the heck did he score the points in the first place? It sure wasn't by stalling.
 
I like the one warning and then a point. Why does the other kid get a point just for taking crazy shots at the end of a match that have 0 chance of landing?  Score early, score often, don't let it come down to the last 30 seconds.
 
We'd all love to see athletes do nothing but shoot and score and hit fun scrambles for 6 straight minutes but all the kids care about is the score at the end. They took risks earlier to score points, they have now got the right to take fewer risks late. 
 
I just hate when a kid has taken all of the risks all match and they don't hit the other kid for stalling for the first 5 and a half minutes, then want to throw up a stall call with 10 seconds left on the kid that had done all the work the whole match. It's like stalling doesn't exist until you're winning. Just let them wrestle. 
 
Just one coach's humble opinion.
 
 

Must have been typing this at same time as you, Andy. +1 to what he said. 

I'm with Coach Diep on this one. Stalling needs more clearly defined criteria.
 
However, I'm opposed to eliminating the warning. The other athlete had the same 5 minutes and 30 seconds to score that the winning athlete had. This is why scoring early is important in our sport. I don't advocate for kids stalling with 30 seconds left, but As the leading wrestler, you have "earned" the right to play a little defense when you build a lead. Can't complain as the losing wrestler that he was "just stalling" because how the heck did he score the points in the first place? It sure wasn't by stalling.
 
I like the one warning and then a point. Why does the other kid get a point just for taking crazy shots at the end of a match that have 0 chance of landing?  Score early, score often, don't let it come down to the last 30 seconds.
 
We'd all love to see athletes do nothing but shoot and score and hit fun scrambles for 6 straight minutes but all the kids care about is the score at the end. They took risks earlier to score points, they have now got the right to take fewer risks late. 
 
I just hate when a kid has taken all of the risks all match and they don't hit the other kid for stalling for the first 5 and a half minutes, then want to throw up a stall call with 10 seconds left on the kid that had done all the work the whole match. It's like stalling doesn't exist until you're winning. Just let them wrestle. 
 
Just one coach's humble opinion.
 
 

I'm with Coach Diep on this one. Stalling needs more clearly defined criteria.
 
However, I'm opposed to eliminating the warning. The other athlete had the same 5 minutes and 30 seconds to score that the winning athlete had. This is why scoring early is important in our sport. I don't advocate for kids stalling with 30 seconds left, but As the leading wrestler, you have "earned" the right to play a little defense when you build a lead. Can't complain as the losing wrestler that he was "just stalling" because how the heck did he score the points in the first place? It sure wasn't by stalling.
 
I like the one warning and then a point. Why does the other kid get a point just for taking crazy shots at the end of a match that have 0 chance of landing?  Score early, score often, don't let it come down to the last 30 seconds.
 
We'd all love to see athletes do nothing but shoot and score and hit fun scrambles for 6 straight minutes but all the kids care about is the score at the end. They took risks earlier to score points, they have now got the right to take fewer risks late. 
 
I just hate when a kid has taken all of the risks all match and they don't hit the other kid for stalling for the first 5 and a half minutes, then want to throw up a stall call with 10 seconds left on the kid that had done all the work the whole match. It's like stalling doesn't exist until you're winning. Just let them wrestle. 
 
Just one coach's humble opinion.
 
 

I'm with Coach Diep on this one. Stalling needs more clearly defined criteria.
 
However, I'm opposed to eliminating the warning. The other athlete had the same 5 minutes and 30 seconds to score that the winning athlete had. This is why scoring early is important in our sport. I don't advocate for kids stalling with 30 seconds left, but As the leading wrestler, you have "earned" the right to play a little defense when you build a lead. Can't complain as the losing wrestler that he was "just stalling" because how the heck did he score the points in the first place? It sure wasn't by stalling.
 
I like the one warning and then a point. Why does the other kid get a point just for taking crazy shots at the end of a match that have 0 chance of landing?  Score early, score often, don't let it come down to the last 30 seconds.
 
We'd all love to see athletes do nothing but shoot and score and hit fun scrambles for 6 straight minutes but all the kids care about is the score at the end. They took risks earlier to score points, they have now got the right to take fewer risks late. 
 
I just hate when a kid has taken all of the risks all match and they don't hit the other kid for stalling for the first 5 and a half minutes, then want to throw up a stall call with 10 seconds left on the kid that had done all the work the whole match. It's like stalling doesn't exist until you're winning. Just let them wrestle. 
 
Just one coach's humble opinion.
 
 

One of my biggest stalling pet peeves happens when wrestler A gets a takedown and wrestler B gets an escape in period 1. Wrestler A chooses bottom and gets rode out in period 2. Wrestler B chooses bottom and gets rode out in period 3 and even though it looked exactly the same as what was happening in period 2, wrestler A gets called for stalling 2x (because he was winning) to tie the match up at 2 and send it to overtime. 

Depends on what you call stalling the last 30 seconds. If the wrestler hasn't had any stalling calls, he has the right to hold a good position, have good head-hand defense, and only attack if there is a clear opening. Basically don't force anything and cost yourself the match. As much as we want our wrestlers to bang and attack the whole match, this is also a strategy for the sport. Should a basketball team that is winning drive down the court and take the shot when it isn't necessary and they can let the time run off? Should a football team make a long throw just to try and score one last time even though they are winning?
 
Yes, if the wrestler is blatantly backing up or running, call it and call it quick that is a gimme. But holding a position and not doing anything dumb is something different. Remember, he is the wrestler who earned the right to control the tempo and the match especially if he hasn't given up a stalling call yet. So many coaches and fans want to act like they got ripped off when this happens. Tell your wrestler not to give up the first 4 points, and this won't happen.

Really fun one. Aidan is going to be multi time placer in Indiana for sure. Zach lost a scramble in the first period which ended with Kincaide locking up a cradle and going up 5-0. Hard to battle back from that deficit against anyone who is good and Aidan certainly is. Will be a fun battle when they see each other again at Conference and perhaps Semi-State.

Aidan has a solid cradle. He was on my team at Heartland duals this past March and he was cradling everyone. 

Really fun one. Aidan is going to be multi time placer in Indiana for sure. Zach lost a scramble in the first period which ended with Kincaide locking up a cradle and going up 5-0. Hard to battle back from that deficit against anyone who is good and Aidan certainly is. Will be a fun battle when they see each other again at Conference and perhaps Semi-State.

Really fun one. Aidan is going to be multi time placer in Indiana for sure. Zach lost a scramble in the first period which ended with Kincaide locking up a cradle and going up 5-0. Hard to battle back from that deficit against anyone who is good and Aidan certainly is. Will be a fun battle when they see each other again at Conference and perhaps Semi-State.

Chatter among a few of the girls coaches: the rule limiting weight loss by 1.5% from the previous week weigh-in makes it hard to get qualified weigh-ins due to natural water retention during certain times of the month, followed by how quickly they drop again the following week. If we could simply follow the progression in the Alpha that is established at the beginning of the year, that would be really helpful instead of the week-to-week, weigh-in to weigh-in formula.
 
Example: Alpha 176.2, Min Wrestling Weight 145.1.
 
Weigh-in #1: 177.5; Weigh-in #2: 174.0 not qualified bc of water retention at weigh-in #1. But would have been qualified if original Alpha min weight of 171 was used.
 
This process repeats every four weeks.