NickS

A guy like me, which I just did. ;D C'MON, I like them separated. I had a lot of wahoo's. Now it looks like I'm just a total a-hole.

Yes, wrestling is a lot different from most other sport since it's an "all day affair" most of the time. That being said, I had another idea to throw out there I forgot to bring up. Not sure how well it would work for high school, but I feel college could benefit from it. I participated in the Connersville Invitational when I was in high school. Big tournament, long 2 days with only 4 mats. Day 1, they went through 2 Championship rounds and I think 4 Consolation rounds. For each round, they went through all the weight classes. What I suggest is start with 103 and 112 and blow through all the rounds of them weight classes for Day 1, send these kids home, then move up to 119 and 125. I feel this would benefit the fans, especially the fans who are there to see specific wrestlers. Instead of having to sit through a whole day to watch a couple wrestlers of your interest wrestle a few times. You'll have a good idea which hours a weight class or wrestler of interest will be going. This won't hurt the die-hard fans because they'll be there all day regardless. It's the fans that don't want to be stuck to a bleacher all day that it would benefit I think. Like I said, not sure if this would work for high school. I was just using the Connersville Invite as an example. I'm not sure rule changes would change anything either. I just think its something that needs to be addressed and discussed over. Hence, this thread. I'm not going to be like wildcatcountry and have the "wrestling is what it is, so deal with it" attitude. On the contrary, freestyle and folkstyle are fairly similar as far as the wrestling aspect. In the neutral position, the styles are pretty similar. The difference is in the mat wrestling and exposures. Folkstyle, you're pretty much allowed to ride a guy out for a period without necessarily trying to score. Freestyle, when they realize it's become a stalemate. They put you back on your feet. The other perceived differences is really from the rule changes in freestyle the past 5 years or so.

Mainstream like football, baseball, basketball? Probably never, but I'm ok with that. In my opinion though, I feel we can rival MMA if we're marketed properly. I just don't want to see wrestling programs keep getting cut at the rate they have been. I feel that wrestling can get a televised match on espn once a week or so if we do it correctly; instead of just having the NCAA Championships as our only one shining moment each year.

Important for folkstyle? Yes it is, I'll never dispute that. But entertaining? Not in the least bit. College wrestling is stupid for having riding time. All it does is encourage the top guy to virtually just stall, while getting rewarded a point for it. One guy riding another guy for 2 minutes is a bore compared to 2 guys on their feet hand-fighting and shooting.

I've only got about 1/5 the posts AJ has too!!! Imagine the destruction I can cause if I've had as many posts!?! ;D Most people don't like the changes I've suggested wrestling should make in order to "keep up with the joneses." Sticks and stones... that's all I've got to say.

Are people really this narrow-minded? This would be like telling Bengals fans, "Hey, your team wouldn't suck as much if they would just win." You think kids will just flock to this sport if you just ask them? You have to give them a reason to get and stay involved with the sport.

You figured me out, the whole reason I've made these suggestions is to screw lil ole Josh Harper.

Let me first say welcome back and... how did that LeClere beating out Tsirtsis for varsity guarantee work out for you wildcat? Yeah this is pretty much like telling a semi-state qualifer, "Hey, don't even dream of going to State because it just isn't happening for you no matter how hard you work." Just stop with the negative, pessimistic outlook. You're doing more of a disservice to wrestling with your attitude than what you think I am with my suggestions Yeah, talk to them Russians who keep whoopin everyone's butts about their grasp of wrestling. How much ground wrestling do you think they do vs. being on the feet? You do realize that a sport only thrives when there is an audience right? Similar to like how tv shows stay on the air because of tv ratings. So yeah, who would EVER want to appeal to an audience right??? :

The bottom man would not be rewarded an escape. It would be similar to freestyle wrestling when top guy gets a certain amount of time to work a turn. If unsuccessful, they go back to their feet. I want to keep the escape point though, to give the bottom man incentive to work up instead of just "bellying out."

I agree that there is a difference. My style back in the day was predicated on beating you up physically, not necessarily by scoring. When I was in the match, rarely did I feel like I was stalling. But after watching them on tape, my perception changed a little bit. My problem with defensive wrestling and stalling is, there's a grey area as far a referee and fan interpretation goes. One ref may feel a situation is deemed stalling while another may feel its defensive aggression, if that makes since. I feel this needs to be addressed in certain areas, like referee's position. After one guy has been riding another guy for a minute or so. At what point does it become stalling or is he still trying to work a turn? Different refs will perceive this situation differently. Plus, in my experience, fans get restless in these types of situations. So that's why I suggest giving top guy 15-20 seconds to work a turn, then back to your feet. Makes it easier for the ref, by eliminating a judgment call.

I love the "push out" or "step out" rule. Forces the line huggers to the middle of the mats and there's no discrepancy with fleeing the mat.

I personally disagree about the Olympics being tough to watch (don't know about the trials tho). I watched a lot of it this summer online, and found a lot of matches entertaining. Don't know if it were the rules or the speed of the matches, but I found many matches to be entertaining to watch. As for collegiate wrestling, that's the point I was trying to make. Back when the Brands were wrestling, and Gable was the head man at Iowa. Wrestling was fun to watch, in my opinion. Today's brand, is more defensive-minded and not quite as exciting. I'm looking at possibilities of tweaking the system to get back that excitement.

You make it sound like the bottom man wouldn't stall if he was up 2 points under the current rules.

So, hypothetically, bottom guy is losing in a match. Instead of working for an escape, he's just going to sit down there and stall? Makes sense. :

Geez, up to -23. Must be a negative point for every 103 lber in Indiana. ZING!!!

Something else I would consider is limiting the amount of time spent in referee's position. After a takedown, top man should be given ample amount of time to work a turn. 15-20 seconds should suffice, after that they should be brought back to neutral position. Referee's position isn't a very entertaining part of wrestling in my opinion and after about 15 seconds, generally becomes a riding fest. Which is a glorified way of stalling if you ask me.

Does one weekend of wrestling override a whole high school career when determining the better wrestler?

Hook me up with a wahoo. My cool points are starting to make me sweat. ;D

If you were IU, would you take Cashe over Harper knowing Harper has had his number everytime? I don't necessarily believe that in-state success is more important, per se. But we do have the luxury of having multiple head-to-head matches to look at, and everytime they've gone to Harper. However, I will say that if Cashe would've been a 140 lber, had never wrestled Harper, and with the same credentials. I could understand the argument a little more for Cashe. Just curious, how much more national success has Cashe had over Harper? I'm really curious because I don't know.

I disagree because I think aggression should get heavier reward. Blocking a shot and spin-behind shouldn't be the equivalent to someone initiating a blast double or high crotch.

I'd agree with this line of thinking of they hadn't had any or recent head-to-head matches. But Cashe said they've wrestled eachother every year and Harper has beaten him everytime. I have to believe that this, plus the 3 to 1 state title ratio, has to trump national success.

Here's an idea. Replace stalling with the old freestyle passivity call. The wrestler that forces a passivity call gets reward with a "leg clinch" situation, a lot like with how freestyle is with it's overtimes. No warnings, "leg clinch" after the first call. I think wrestlers get around stalling as a strategic element, knowing they'll only give up a warning then just 1 point. But if you force them into a "leg clinch," they could give up a 4 point takedown (under my takedown system). Much more penalization potential for not being aggressive.

Alright, I'm sick of playing the villain role in these 103 weight class discussions so I'm starting something new. Obviously, wrestlling fans enjoy the sport how it is. But the big issue is with the fringe fans. How do we get them interested in wrestling? How do we get the channel surfer to stop at a wrestling match on tv? Use this thread to brainstorm, and hopefully we can get some good ideas to talk and debate about. I'll start with making wrestling more of an offensive-minded style. From what I've witnessed the last few years, wrestling has become very defensive. You don't see many Andrew Howes' or Brent Metcalfs' of the college ranks. So how do you encourage this style of wrestling they possess? Well I would advocate changing the scoring system. Some of these ideas sound freestylish, but I feel folkstyle could benefit from them. Different levels of takedowns should be worth different amounts of points. 2 Point Takedown - A takedown in which your opponent is already on his knees and you spin behind (either by a snap down or blocking a shot attempt) 3 Point Takedown - A takedown in which you force your opponent to leave his feet to the mat (doubles, singles, high crotches) 4 Point Takedown - A takedown in which you force your opponent to leave his feet to his back, regardless if you get nearfall points (throws, fireman's carries) Obviously doubles and singles could be 4 point moves if you put your opponent to his back, I'm just speaking hypothetically. I have more ideas, but want other people to chime in and see what happens.

Problems? Yes. As big as problems as 103 and 112? I highly doubt it. I'm very curious about the states that allow 8th graders to wrestle and see what their forfeit rates are for 103 and 112. I would expect those forfeit rates to be dramatically less compared to states without 8th graders. Which in a way is not telling the true numbers of them states since they would be counting 8th graders as well. Also, I agree there's no telling how wrestling 112 would have affected kids like Harper, Eppert, Wright when they were freshman long term. I think it would really depend on the each kids' mental fortitude.

Don't forget to post the other point. You think 171 and 189 account for about another 1/4 of forfeits like 103 and 112 do? If you combined 103 and 112, essentially, that would take care of the 2 most problematic weight classes.