Wrestle offs

[Nailbender]

OK, now that the HS season is over and the off season stuff begins, I'm looking for opinions and input. So many times this year I've heard that several high schools are not holding wrestle offs in their rooms. I see good points and bad points to this. Maybe I'm not up with the times and I've missed something, but can somebody tell me why a coach would not want to hold wrestle offs for spots?

I've always been in the understanding that the reason our sport is so unique is that you beat the wrestler at your weight class and it is yours. Totally takes the "heat" off of the coach as does happen in all other sports when picking the starting lineups. If I were a coach (and I'm not), I cannot see how this could be a bad thing, settle it on the mat. At the same time, I totally agree that a coach should have the right and authority to shift wrestlers around the lineup during dual meets so the team can win.

The reason this intrigues me is that I have been told of certain schools not holding wrestle offs, and these schools are some of the best, if not the best in the state.

Please share your thoughts on this.

[Kyle]

The first time I ever heard of a team not using wrestle offs back in the day was so the Coaches kid could wrestle varsity even though he couldn't win the wrestle off.
Kyle

[Nailbender]

Personally I don't know of that situation from what I've heard. But again, I don't know all the kids or the coaches either. I however did hear of this scenario which I do know to be accurate.....

Wrestler A; Senior, 3 time state qualifier, 3 time placer (1 time state finalist, the pride of the school to say the least)
Wrestler B; Senior; 1 time state qualifier, 1 time placer (4th)

Both wrestler A & B pinch for 160 (made up weights of course)

Once the season starts wrestler B is beating Wrestler A in drills, live matches, etc.

This goes on all season, Wrestler B is dominant, and is going wherever Wrestler A does not want to because of no wrestle offs. (160-170)

End of the year comes around and the returning state champ drops to 170 so Wrestler A goes to 160, Wrestler B has no choice but to go up, Wrestler B loses the finals match. Wrestler A loses by 1. Could Wrestler B have won a State Title @ 160? The weight he was at all year? True story other than the fact the guy's names are A & B and the weight classes....

[littleguy301]

I can see as the year goes on that at practice wrestle off you may not be getting the best match out of either kid.

example: they have wrestled and drilled so much they know each other game plan and will wrestle to counter the others go to move. It is difficult to judge and you have to think their are those certain wrestlers that are gamers, dont practice well but come game time they turn it up several notches!

[DocWrestling]

If I am a coach,  I want the wrestlers to decide everything.  Let wrestle offs decide it.  No politics at all.  Should bring in outside official for wrestle-offs.

[Ghetto]

If I am a coach,  I want the wrestlers to decide everything.  Let wrestle offs decide it.  No politics at all.  Should bring in outside official for wrestle-offs.

+1

We run a best of three. If it goes to a third we bring in an official when possible.

[FinalWord]

One of the most successful coaches in D1 told me that they do not decide their team based on challenge matches. He tells his wrestlers that every minute of every practice is your challenge match. Treat it that way. The coaches are always watching.

[Handles II]

Many college programs don't use wrestle-offs. I'm not always a firm believer that this is a good thing. Sometimes the older wrestler, or the one that has used up the most $$ to recruit gets the nod. Certainly not always, but it does happen.

[Ghetto]

Many college programs don't use wrestle-offs. I'm not always a firm believer that this is a good thing. Sometimes the older wrestler, or the one that has used up the most $$ to recruit gets the nod. Certainly not always, but it does happen.

I think high school is different. College kids don't have their mommies calling   

[aarons23]

Many college programs don't use wrestle-offs. I'm not always a firm believer that this is a good thing. Sometimes the older wrestler, or the one that has used up the most $$ to recruit gets the nod. Certainly not always, but it does happen.

I think high school is different. College kids don't have their mommies calling   

Don't be so sure of that...I have heard several college coaches who have talked about the parents.

[Jeff Farrell]

There are very few instances where a wrestle off is necessary...wrestle offs are not all they're "cracked up" to be!  Matter of fact, depending on the dichotomy of the team and how wrestle offs are managed, they can down right tear a team apart!  Don't they wrestle off every time they go live in practice?

Just my opinion!

[Nailbender]

Thanks for all the great input on this topic. I just find this to be very interesting. I have personally never known any other way than wrestling off.

[Ty Clark]

We got into this discussion at the beginning of the season over on the UW forum... http://wiwrestling.info/index.php?topic=49744.0

This was my spin for not having wrestle-offs...

I figured there would be more of a split on the efficacy of wrestle-offs, but I guess I'm one of the few who doesn't really believe in them. I think I've written and deleted this in one form or another without posting it about five times, since I'm sick of arguing with people who confuse opinions with facts.  If you use wrestle-offs and swear by them, I'm not ragging on you for it. That's your philosophy (opinion), and this is mine.

Wrestle-offs are kind of like picking a quarterback based on which one completes more passes during 7-on-7. It shows you who can make the best reads, but it doesn't show who can do it the best under pressure (both mental pressure of the game and the physical pressure of the pass rush) or against a non-scout D (teammates). Yeah, if one quarterback competes 9/10 while the other throws three interceptions (or one wrestler tech falls the other) you might know something (but nothing you shouldn't have already known). Anything short of that, I think there are much better ways for a coach to evaluate the situation and determine the best possible line-up. Wrestle-offs can be sort of a cop-out for coaches (see below) who don't want to take heat for making tough decisions and/or aren't confident in their own judgement.

Why would I want my starter sloughing off in practice, since he knows he can win in a wrestle-off over his back-up?

Why would I want my starter avoiding wrestling with his back-up (or not practicing his go-to moves against him) in practice, because he doesn't want his back-up to learn his stuff and/or get better?

I only do the "show" of a wrestle-off when I want to put an underclassman in the line-up over a senior (Me copping-out to avoid heat/ giving the senior closure); otherwise, I tell the team every warm-up, every drill, every live go, every sprint, every time I tell them to wash the mats, is a wrestle-off. If I'm not certain of whom I want to start, as a last resort, I will watch one of their 2-2-2's in a practice without telling them and keep score in my head (They already know everything in practice could be a wrestle-off, so they better be going hard or risk losing their spot). I'd rather have that competition in the room every day, not just every couple of weeks in a wrestle-off.

(Not to mention the friction between teammates, extra weight-cuts, lost practice time, etc. that I've found come with wrestle-offs.)

[meulendykej]

When I wrestled and coached at Milwaukee Lutheran in the late 90s and early 00s, we did not rely on wrestle-offs.  This was at a time when Milwaukee Lutheran was a good team, including the 2000 WISSA state championship.  There were only two wrestle-offs I recall.  Both were no doubt wins to show the loser that the winner was better.  There are many reasons for not having a wrestle-off.

1) Especially late in the season, the wrestlers know and wrestle each other in a much different way than they would against a random opponent.
2) Intangibles may lead the losing wrestle off wrestler to be the better choice for the team.  This isn't to say a much worse wrestler should be allowed over a much better wrestler, it is taking into consideration similar level of wrestlers.  Coaches may appreciate or need the fight in the slightly weaker wrestler depending on the unique personalities of different teams.  This year our 220 would get his butt kicked in the room by a couple of guys.  Yet, he had the most varsity wins this season.  Just a gamer that wouldn't make mistakes or let his head get to him in actual matches.  The other guys did.  On a side note, I have appreciated some tournaments allowing us to bring "unattached" wrestlers at the same weight class.  This helped show the guys who were winning in the room, that against the same competition the guy who would have lost a wrestle-off was more successful against similar competition.
3) Probably the biggest reason is coaches know their wrestlers better than anyone.  You mentioned that a lot of the better programs are not doing it.  I would imagine the coaches in those programs understand the meticulous, and important aspects better than most others.  This is what makes them successful.  Some of these meticulous aspects lead them to believe one guy is going to be better on Saturday than the other, even though the practice room doesn't show it the same way.  I would have a hard time arguing with this one.  If the best don't do it, there is probably a reason.  Just because it is something that makes sense for the small picture doesn't mean it's right for the big picture.  As a coach, I try to find the things almost ALL the mediocre programs are doing, and figure out how the great programs are doing it differently.  This might be one of those cases, that is if what you say about other top programs is true. 

[Jeff Farrell]

Amen Ty Clark!