awood1

The 40 match thing is a burr in the saddle of CA folks. I have tried to explain how IN does it and it makes a lot more sense to them. Here you will have the best kids "sitting out" conference duals and early season tnmts. to avoid using up all of their matches against "lesser" competition. Especially a lot of the better 160+ wrestlers that may be coming in late from football. They will hold of on wrestling at all until after the first of the year, while their other teammates serve as "interm" varsity guys while they hold out for the bigger tnmts. and better competition. CRAZY!

I double checked the list of 3x state champs...and I only see Harper listed? Then I checked the list of state champs in general...Spencer? Nope. Porras? Nope. (Christopher) Quiroga? Oh yeah he won one! That's a great accomplishment..but it says he lost 3 matches? I can't imagine that a guy could lose 3 matches and still be considered the best wrestler in the state? ;D

3x State Champ....who else at that weight has those credentials? : Babble on if you'd like, but nobody gets a ring for rankings. This is the most finite version of lack of respect for your elders.

California has 2,000+ HS's and one class....MAN is it tough to win!! ;D They could divide to 6 classes and still be competing amongst larger pools of kids. P.S. They also have a 40 match max? IN does some things that are pretty good and people in CA recognize them as such. Although they have no concept of the limited travel idea! Kids here regularly take Friday off (with the blessing of the school!) to travel to a tournament within the state and several take trips across the country to wrestle. Folks like Clovis have license to travel wherever they want to get the best competition and regularly do so.

I may end up hating myself for stating the obvious, buttt...I have never paid a dime to post 3,000+ tidbits of information, complaints, insight, whining, nonsense and stupidity on either of the sites! So why are we talking about "product" and acting as if there is a competition here? I believe (as Rex stated) when we are talking about wrestling, the more the merrier! I ended up here because one day I clicked dropped by my old friends house (the old site) and found the windows boarded up.....as I strolled down the street lost (aka. Google) looking for where all my friends had gone, I heard one of my old buddies shouting from an upstairs window (actually an email) saying "HEY, we moved here!" It was a modest place, but it had promise and a lot of the old guys that hung around the old place were partying here (the new site) now....so I did what any reasonable old friend would do and came in grabbed a seat and a cocktail (submitted to all the profile questions, passwords, etc. and started posting). It wasn't the same as the old place....new curtains and didn't have that old stale beer smell...but it had promise. So I settled in....now I find out that the old house was condemed for awhile and some of the old crew are trying to pull the boards off the windows and air out the place. I am pretty comfy at the new place, but when I walk by the old place I will surely stop by and poke my head in the door. And I can't understand why in the world anyone that used to party there would throw stones through the window on their way to the liqour store!? Either way, I am drinking for free and enjoy the company of my buddies...just wish they could all get along! ;D

It boils down to making money. Other than that, no impact. making money = IHSAA

wow...So much to say, I could write pages and pages on this topic. I will try to be brief and keep it in an outline format; Was one of family of 3 boys; 1.) Oldest graduated at 17 (Late May bday), was under 6' tall and smart. Excelled at grades, mediocre at sports but participated year round. Definitely was at a "maturity" disadvantage. By the end of frosh. yr. at college was 6'3" and 30 lbs. heavier 2.) Middle graduated at 19 (August bday), was same ht. at graduation as today. Struggled academically, but excelled grade wise out of hard work and desire. 3.) Youngest graduated at 18 (Novemeber bday), about the same height and weight at graduation as he is today, but was definitely not "fully matured". He was still taking some sort of "shape" when he graduated. Excelled academically with little effort and physically blossomed within a year of graduation as his body started to develop. Now am the father of 2 sons; 1.) Oldest is a September Birthday. The District he started in required age 5 before August 1 to start kindergarten. So he was 6 within a month of his first day of kindergarten. 2.) Younger son born late June. By the time he was born, the District had moved the date to June 5th (part of adjustments made as they implemented full day kindergarten). So he was actually 6 his first day of kindergarten So both kids are "old" relative to most of their classmates in IN....THEN we move to CA and find out that here the req. is that they turn 5 on or before the end of the calender year that they start! So a kid here with a December birthday spends half of his kindergaten year at 4! So almost everyone here is 17 at graduation! People here are obviouslly suspicious of our "motives" as both of my kids appear to be good athletes and much older then their classmates. Truth is, we just followed the rules we were under. But with the knowledge of my experiences as a kid, with me and my brothers, I can't imagine starting a kid at 4!! And at the same time, people here can't imagine a kid not starting school until he was 6? The folks here will SAY "Well he/she is so smart" or "They are ready!", but my knee jerk reaction is to look at the parent's motives. Often times it is from homes that have 2 parents working full time OR a single parent home. It's tough not to judge, especially when people are looking at your kids as "dumb jocks" (despite them getting straight A's!), but I see a lot more of parents rushing their kids in to school as daycare versus holding them back for athletics. That said, I know of a much greater percentage of my son's classmates who have repeated 8th grade for obvious maturity (mostly athletic) reasons. They will go to a public school one year, then a private school for a 2nd year of 8th grade. I had never personally witnessed this in IN and know of at least 6 of my sons classmates from last year that are doing just that now. Now for the straight scoop... I was a 14 year old 5'2" 112lbs. high school freshmen who ended up a 6'3" 210lb. college freshmen. My oldest son is a 15 year old 5'11" 171lb. freshmen. I am not sure where he will end up size wise, but I know life for him as a freshmen is much easier than I had it! If I had it all to do over, I would have requested to be held out as a 5 yr. old! ;D

HA HAHA HAHAHAHA....yup. Just like they understand the risk of unprotected sex, drinking and driving and guns. Heck they are practically geniuses by the time they hit that frosh. yr....man I can't wit till the youngest one hits HS and my job is done, cuz them kids is super smart! :o Haha actually awood the highest incidence of drinking and driving accidents occurs within the 21-34 year old demographic, not highschool kids ...Gun violence is similar 18-24. ...My point is highschool kids know they can get cauliflower ear from wrestling...If they choose not to wear headgear in practice, its their ears that are at risk...I say let them make their own decesion instead of forcing them...Whats next, are you gonna force your daughter to wear a chastity belt like in robin hood to stop her from having unprotected sex?? haha didnt think so YES!!...And that my friend is why I thank the lord every day for blessing me with 2 sons!! ;D Neither of the statistics suprise me, as they are both after these infinitly wise young men and women are allowed by the law and their parents to make choices on their own! HS kids are not allowed to buy alcohol or guns for a reason! Because a mistake has life altering implications! So if my kid wants to get an earring, or a hair cut, or wear clothes that I think are stupid, or "hang out" listening to music that gives me a headache...etc. I am cool with that, he can make those choices on his own and if he looks through the yearbook years from now and says "What the heck was I thinking when I got that haricut!?" I am OK with that. If he turns 40 and says "Geez Dad, what the heck were you thinking when you let me wrestle without headgear and now I am scarred for life with these "idiot tumors" on either side of my head!" Should I say, "Well gee whiz son, I thought that you were really smart and mature. I thought you realized that in your effort to show your new found machismo that you were choosing to live the rest of your life with those lumps on your head. I certainly didn't want you to feel like I was "forcing" you to do something that you didn't want to do, despite knowing that it could all be avoided with a $15 piece of equipment that you were required to wear when you competed. I thought it was best to avoid the confrontation and just let you make your own decisions....my bad OOPS." Now if at 40 he comes back and says, "Dad, I hold resentment for the controlling nature I felt as a youth when you made me wear headgear to wrestle!" I will tell him to grow up and get over it! HAHA

I will now be signing and sending my check directly to bigfan2001 and regionrat1 on alternating pay periods. Within a few years I am counting on these guys having my nest egg built! (Lord knows I know how to make it and spend it.....just can't seem to keep it!) ;D

The idea of awarding a pt. to the losing wrestler that scores and offensive pt., does not change any of this. In the example quoted, it would recognize the kid that GOT pinned, (while leading 14-0) was wrestling. It gives a tottaly differant representation of a match when a (1) score is awarded to the loser who scored an offensive pt. If you have a kid go out and "stay off of his back" for 6 mins (running, circling, tieing up, stalling...yawwwnnn, we have all seen it). The match would be scored 6-0. But if that same kid comes out with his team up by 5 (which is why he was just looking to avoid the pin) and knows that although he is facing a tougher opponent and he will most likely lose by some fashion....IF he can manage to SCORE an offensive T or R or NF...he puts himself in a no-lose situation. As a matter of fact, once the offensive wrestler has been scored on he knows that he HAS to work for the fall to even get the tie....it becomes even more urgent! If EVERY guy on a team can go out and get just 1 offensive T or R they could score 14 for their team. It makes the "better" wrestler better, because he now knows that even a slight error coudl result in giving up a T and in such , a team pt. This prepares good wrestlers for tougher matches where a momentary loss of focus, can be the differance in the match! It would be a very differant picture if I looked at a teams dual results and saw that they lost 84-0 than if they lost 84-14. That tells me that they didn't forfeit every match....they didn't go out (unsuccessfully) trying to "stay off their back....they actually came out and wrestled!! The team that loses 84-14 is a bunch of scrappy kids that are getting after it (and highly overmatched) ;D

HA HAHA HAHAHAHA....yup. Just like they understand the risk of unprotected sex, drinking and driving and guns. Heck they are practically geniuses by the time they hit that frosh. yr....man I can't wit till the youngest one hits HS and my job is done, cuz them kids is super smart! :o

My wife mandates it of our son as a requirement for wrestling, just like grades. He comes home with a swollen ear, or she happens to walk by the room during practice and see him without them on...he is done. No questions asked, end of discussion. He had one doozie a few years ago that ballooned up big, black and ultimately painful. Mom laid down the law then and it is no longer a question. I never understood why adults hesitate to enforce this idea with their kids? Would they let their kids practice football without a mouthgaurd? Why not? Heck they are just teeth and as long as the kid keeps his mouth shut the rest of his life, no one will even know that he was an idiot! And the cosmetic dentistry today looks better than most originals! Think of how COOL they would look walking around with no teeth! Then people would recognize them as football players! How awesome and tough is that! I have yet to see a good looking fake ear!

Again, I hate even participating in this argument because I am happy with the way things are....but I can't resist the compulsion to debate! That said.... The scenario being described doesn't change or contradict anything TAE is saying. The object remains to pin and is rewarded the same (6 for fall, 5 for tech). And with regard to "anything less" being considered less, I believe that is exactly what it does. If a kid goes out with the instructions of "just stay off your back!" it is damage control. The kid has no motivation to do anything other then that. He will score only when he is "cut" and gets the E .....he will be rewarded accordingly with a 0. Now if a kid heads to the mat with his team up against a superior opponent...coach and wrestler are both thinking that regardless of the score or outcome from the other side IF he can score an offensive point, he can have a signifigant impact on the outcome of the dual. If his team is up by 5, if he can score 1 T or R, he can save the tie even if he gets pinned! And if he stays off his back AND scores an offensive pt., he could actually win it for his team by being something other than an armadillo. Still not sure I tottaly support the idea, but it certainly is worthy of debate. ;D

I like it now, but I like debate also.... Sooooo you are saying that a T or R would score 2 in the match and one for the team? In this case, kid could be "dominated" via Tech or fall and score zero. He could actually SCORE 15 (via escapes) and get zero, opposed to a guy that lost 17-2 that got the 1st T, then was reversed and near falled resulting in the tech. hmmmmm So it's not really punishing the kid that would tech by takedown, it's encouraging the other guy to at least score something offensively....hmmm Scenario A: W1 scores a T and was reversed and pinned by W2 :: Team W1=1 Team W2=6 (5 pt. margin) Scenario B: W2 scores T and releases W1 for E to tech for the win 30-15 :: Team W1=0 Team W2=5 (5 pt. margin) Scenario C: W2 scores T and releases W1 for E, W1 manages to hit a switch for R before being teched for the win 32-17 :: Team W1=1 Team W2=5 (4 pt. margin) Instead of being the old "just stay off your back!" instructions to an inexperienced guy filling a slot, now it's "we need you to stay off your back AND score a T or R!" ...cool, it's growing on me. 8)

No set number of matches, you can have only 18 (or less) if you'd like. Or you could have 4 duals and 14 five-match super duals. Slight correction...super duals = 2 pts./each, so it would be 4 duals (4 x 1pt./each) and 7 (7 x 2pts./each) five-match super duals. This would result in 39 regular season matches prior to the start of the state tnmt.

The #1 Hard Rock song of all time! (as reported by the hacks at VH1) ;D

It's tough enough being a kid. If a kid thinks enough about me, our team, the program or whatever to spend his time with me/us I am proud of them. There are way too many other things that a kid could choose to spend his time doing that are much easier. Wrestling ain't easy if you are winning and is bordering on torture when you are getting your arse handed to you, god bless them for hanging in there, the least I can give them is the respect and admiration for being there regardless of the results.

Same logic would say that because very few TV points were awarded for not having tied shoelaces versus escapes, that it is much more difficult to not tie your shoes compared to an escape. : : Because there are fewer, does not have a direct correlation to "more difficult".

After several unsuccessful attempts to trip and throw Ditka, a second pd. that saw Howe ride Ditka like Paul Bunyon on a cyclone and a 3rd pd. that with 1:45 of hang time as Ditka launched Howe once he reached his feet, Howe shoots the low single in OT. Ditka stiff arms him in to the mat and the official calls stalling as Howe lays motionless (crippled by the stiff arm, clutching the ankle) 1-0 Ditka in OT (he got robbed!)

tiny Ditka or normal sized Ditka? ???

I'll give you a 1/2 pt. for that one!

never said "would" or "could" or "should"....had a chance [glow=red,2,300]and so does my 10 mo. old niece.[/glow]

MAN Howe was pushing him...but how hard is it to get a double leg on a guy that drops in to the splits!! OUCH!

Don't know the kid OR his situation helath wise, but he obviouslly is unable to wrestle do to circumstances beyond his control. For any of you peanuts that would like to pick at his resume' I will tell you to shut your pie hole and realize that any kid roaming the halls of any school anywhere whether they have ever donned a singlet or not has "a chance at being a four time state champ". And if you want to argue that, I will remind you that their are tons of ants on the sidewalk taunting you to bring on your magnifying glass tough guy!! :

Okay, I am braceing for the "politically incorrect" backlash that is sure to follow... I used to hate the 103 lb class. Watching teams get to sectionals and having numerous forfeits year after year after year at 98 and then 103 lbs is just frustrating. And to think that anyone other than a freshmen or a dwarf can be naturally walking around at <103 lbs is so far removed from my reality I just could never understand it. Watching every year as the highest percentage of freshmen lettermen in any sport were "lil guys" at 103 that made a varsity roster based more on size than skill. ....now, I have a more global view. When we moved, my oldest son was in the middle of his 6th grade year. Being a September birthday and coming from a district that required K enrollment age of 5 before August 1, he was 12 when we enrolled here. When we took him to the office of his new MS, they were shocked and actually called us in to the principals office to discuss "the situation". K enrollment here requires kids to be 5 by Jan 1 of their kindergarten year. So kids regularly start K here at age 4 if their birthday is between August and December of that year. So the vast majority of kids my sons age were 7th or 8th graders. But it wasn't JUST a question of age. He was a "normal" sized 6th grader at a MS in LaPorte...he was bigger than most 8th graders here! And it isn't/wasn't just our local community, generally speaking people are smaller here! I have had several discussions regarding this over the years we have lived here and the basic differance we can come up is that were we lived in the Midwest is comprised almost exclusively of "big" people on a global scale. The communtiy we moved from had an ethnic mix of German, Polish, and other European influences. Compared to here, that is a mono-culture of big people! Compare the following demographic numbers* from the 2 state capitol counties; SACRAMENTO COUNTY White 61.4% Black or African American 10.1% American Indian and Alaska Native 0.9% Asian 13.4% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.8% Some other race 9.2% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 19.2% MARION COUNTY White 67.4% Black or African American 24.9% American Indian and Alaska Native 0.2% Asian 1.6% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.1% Some other race 3.7% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 6.5% I can say with reasonable certainty that the west coast schools, because of their ethnic diversity, have a much better chance at filling the 103 weight than your typical midwestern community. Now you throw in the idea that a county like Marion county is one of the biggest in the midwest with a population of 800k+ compares to Orange County with a 3,000k+ population (and similar demographics to Sacramento) you can start to see where the national numbers reflect a differant distibution of weights than the Midwest or Indiana specifically. I know that the local HS last year was conference champs and had to forfeit 171, 215 and HVY. This year they have some kids at those weights, but they also still have (5) 103 lbers, 2 of them freshmen and all 3 upper classmen have "some" Asian descent. Well, thats enough of my rambling...talk amongst yourselfs. ;D *NOTE: before anyone starts yipping about the #'s not tottaling 100%, save it for the US census! I pulled their numbers directly for comparison purposes!