No more waiting!!!

[Ghetto]

Ok, my friends. Here is my annual plea for 12 weights. The data, as always, confirms that our state does not have the numbers to fill 14 weights, as it has done every year that I have been able to compile data. Trackwrestling goes back to 2005 covering regionals, so that is as far as we can get real data. I have in the past sent this information to the WWCA, and will do so again this year.

This argument always brings up what the weights, if we were to cut, should be. I won't get into that discussion. I think it was Nat Pope who said that we'd be best suited to name the weights. I'm all for that. It takes the emotion out of saying we should cut 106, etc. It's my opinion that we have enough body fat data from Trackwrestling to really get hard data on where kids lie, and spread from a small weight (flyweight, let's say) to heavyweight. I did ask track wrestling for that data a few years ago, and they referred me to the WIAA, citing confidentiality, which frankly is bogus. I can look at every kid's weight class right now.

Anyway...

Background: Years ago, I looked at straight numbers. Who could simply fill weights with a body. I also considered what I thought was a varsity wrestler, and at that time if you had a 0-0 record, or less than a .200 winning percentage, then I listed that wrestler as a non-varsity wrestler. Really, IMO, that winning percentage should be higher, considering the scramble tournaments where 5-20 kids will wrestle other 5-20 kids, but I left it the same for the sake of keeping the data relatively simple.

Sorry about the formatting in some spots...

This season, teams at regionals with 12 or less wrestlers in their lineups:

Division 1: 56%  (56.7% last year)
Division 2: 67.89% (64.7% last year)
Division 3: 80.05% (83.5% last year)

This season, teams at regionals with 12 or less varsity wrestlers in their lineups:

Division 1: 67.97% (69.9% last year)
Division 2: 72.04% (77.5% last year)
Division 3: 87.49% (92.2% last year)


Past numbers: (12 or less bodies)

   D1   D2   D3   Avg   Teams
2005   46.4   56.9   66.7   56.7   347
2006   38.6   55.0   69.4   54.3   344
2007   48.4   57.8   69.2   58.5   344
2008   45.7   61.5   70.4   59.2   344
2009   50.8   57.0   72.9   60.2   342
2010   50.7   54.3   64.4   56.5   337
2011   53.9   64.4   63.9   60.7   336
2012   49.2   61.2   67.6   59.3   333
2013   56.7   61.9   76.9   65.2   336
2014   54.1   61.5   74.3   63.3   334
2015   56.7   64.7   83.5   68.3   332
2016   56.0   67.9   80.0   68.0   333

[Ghetto]

I tried to add a chart, but idk know how. Sorry. If you'd like the spreadsheet I'd happily send it to you.

PM me with your email address if you want that document.

[Wisconsin Wrestling Fan]

Nationally, around 1980, an average team had 33 wrestlers to cover 12 weights, an average of 2.75 wrestlers per weight. Around 2012, an average team had 25 wrestlers for 14 weights - less than 2 per weight.

In Wisconsin, probably less than 50 teams in the state could fill every varsity and jv weight. Based on participation, there could be an argument for 10 weights.

That being said, I attended the team wrestling last Saturday.  The final round in each division was unbelievably exciting. If more teams had full rosters, wrestling would be a much better spectator sport.

[Troy Grindle]

So we have lost 14 teams since 2005?  That is the most disheartening thing.  Not being able to fill weight classes sucks, but losing whole teams is the worst.  The chances of those teams ever coming back are close to zero.

[TomM]

There are, most likely, less than 20 teams (all three divisions combined) who have 14 weight classes filled who actually can reach team state.
Sixteen of those were at team state this year... so is your team one with 14 weights filled and the ability to fill one of those 16 team state spots?

[aarons23]

So here is our yearly lets give up and start reducing arguement.  Sorry won't buy it.  Random Lake, Stratford and Coleman prove small schools can recruit and do recruit to get the numbers.  No excuse for big schools to just throw in the towel.  No excuse for wrestling to give AD's and school boards the idea its a dying sport.  It takes work, its takes the right people in the right places, it takes many to grow programs.  Pretty sure I read just a couple of weeks ago that wrestling is on the rise in popularity and numbers.  Don't be so quick to give up and give in....that is not what this sport is about.

[littleguy301]

So here is our yearly lets give up and start reducing arguement.  Sorry won't buy it.  Random Lake, Stratford and Coleman prove small schools can recruit and do recruit to get the numbers.  No excuse for big schools to just throw in the towel.  No excuse for wrestling to give AD's and school boards the idea its a dying sport.  It takes work, its takes the right people in the right places, it takes many to grow programs.  Pretty sure I read just a couple of weeks ago that wrestling is on the rise in popularity and numbers.  Don't be so quick to give up and give in....that is not what this sport is about.

Recruit from where? Another school?

I get it to recruit from with in your district 100%. But the ugly thing is that school are recruiting from other districts. While that is helping one team get better it is also slowly eliminating the competition from other schools. Sure 1 school gets better but the schools that are losing wrestlers get worse.

I am not saying giving in but this is a honest look at numbers. If we continue to think it is alright to FF multi weights than lets go forward.

Having school give up 2-4 weights a meet will open the AD eyes alot more than a reduction of weight classes.

Not sure where to go with this either.

[CoachC]

I agree 14 weights is just too many.  I like to think about it this way.  Every major sport requires less athletes to fill a Varsity lineup, and yet we insist on needing 14 weights.  Football needs 11, and smaller schools have even shifted to 8 man.  Baseball 9, basketball 5 and so on and so forth.  Having less weights would create more team competition and allow wrestlers to develop on JV.  With less weights JV duals may be possible as well.

[crossface21]

I was against going to 14 when it happened. I think 12 is good, and I'm fine with going back to 13. I don't buy the argument that eliminating weight classes reduces opportunities. That's why there is JV.  Having 12 or 13 weights I think increases the level of competition and may allow coaches to stop throwing kids that aren't ready into the varsity line up in order to avoid giving up a forfeit. A lot of people against this on here say it's the coaches fault for not recruiting, not knowing what they are doing, etc. I disagree. I think that's a very small percentage of coaches. I think most coaches would love to have full line ups and do their best to try and get kids out. We're all wrestlers, we know what our sport is about. We understand we need to recruit. We need to be proactive getting kids. But what if the kids just aren't there?

[aarons23]

I agree 14 weights is just too many.  I like to think about it this way.  Every major sport requires less athletes to fill a Varsity lineup, and yet we insist on needing 14 weights.  Football needs 11, and smaller schools have even shifted to 8 man.  Baseball 9, basketball 5 and so on and so forth.  Having less weights would create more team competition and allow wrestlers to develop on JV.  With less weights JV duals may be possible as well.

Having less weights will not create more team competition...it will make the good teams better and very well could make the team that struggling worse...cutting two weights guarantees nothing but cutting kids out of a line up from schools that are making it work.  You don't punish everyone else for those who aren't making it work.  The sport is growing....why would you take a step backwords?

[aarons23]

I was against going to 14 when it happened. I think 12 is good, and I'm fine with going back to 13. I don't buy the argument that eliminating weight classes reduces opportunities. That's why there is JV.  Having 12 or 13 weights I think increases the level of competition and may allow coaches to stop throwing kids that aren't ready into the varsity line up in order to avoid giving up a forfeit. A lot of people against this on here say it's the coaches fault for not recruiting, not knowing what they are doing, etc. I disagree. I think that's a very small percentage of coaches. I think most coaches would love to have full line ups and do their best to try and get kids out. We're all wrestlers, we know what our sport is about. We understand we need to recruit. We need to be proactive getting kids. But what if the kids just aren't there?

so which two weight classes didn't deserve to be at the state meet this year? 

[Ghetto]

More math.

22 teams in D1 had 14 "varsity" kids. (see above for definition)
18 teams in D1 had 13


We've lost 14 teams since 2005. That is 196 lost opportunities.

In 2005, 56.7% of all teams had 12 or less kids on their regional roster.
In 2016, 68.0% of all teams had 12 or less kids on their regional roster.

Less teams now.
Less kids on the regional roster now.

[Ghetto]

More math.

11 teams in D2 had 14 "varsity" kids. (see above for definition)
16 teams in D2 had 13

[Ghetto]

7 teams in D3 had 14 "varsity" kids. (see above for definition)
6 teams in D3 had 13

[aarons23]

More math.

22 teams in D1 had 14 "varsity" kids. (see above for definition)
18 teams in D1 had 13


We've lost 14 teams since 2005. That is 196 lost opportunities.

In 2005, 56.7% of all teams had 12 or less kids on their regional roster.
In 2016, 68.0% of all teams had 12 or less kids on their regional roster.

Less teams now.
Less kids on the regional roster now.

UMMMM   so now you get to choose what a varsity wrestler is to try to make your argument look more legit? 
there are several basketball, football, cross country teams ect....that doesn't win a single game all season should we make them play JV?  I know a wrestler that was 6- 32 last year...this year he was 32-7... yeah he should have been on JV last year...lol.  Also with your more math tell us which weights don't deserve to be varsity and then re run your numbers and see how they associate with those weights.