On Guillotine, varsity numbers...

[Handles II]

Has anyone seen this thread? http://forum.theguillotine.com/topic/11011786/1/

Something similar to what Ghetto has done with regional entries, but apparently plans to go through the season. I'd be curious to find out how WI numbers are and how they compare to MN (or other states).
Ghetto's numbers are always eye-opening, but perhaps too late in the season to create a solid discussion with representatives?
Amazing that even with JHI, MN is averaging about 10 wrestlers per team !?! Would we be worse?

[Ghetto]

Seems like a rational discussion. People trying to come up with answers. I offered my information up to the guy who started that thread, in hopes that more information can lead to something happening nationwide. I am certain that nothing will be done in Wisconsin (and it seems to be in Minnesota as well) until the national federation takes the lead and changes the weights.

[Ghetto]

So far in MN, with JHI, they fill an average of 10 wrestlers per weight this season.

I still believe we should split the difference at 12.

There is discussion to have a separate class of 10 man teams (on the Guillotine), like they do 9 man football. I do wonder how many teams would decide to go that route here in Wisconsin?

[Handles II]

Get points,
In reading other threads over there, there is another thread exactly about co-ops and how creating them to fill teams is actually hurting the sport and that cutting programs is far more harmful to the sport and takes away more opportunities than cutting weights.
It sounds like there are some major concerns with co-ops. Certainly they work in some occasions and situations, but two wrestling programs combined into one absolutely reduces opportunities for wrestlers (as well as other logistical problems for families/transportation costs etc) more than cutting a couple of weights.

Team A  and Team B had 28 varsity spots (14 weights) between them, they co-op, there is now 14 varsity spots.

Team A and Team B had 28 varsity spots (14 weights) between, We cut two weights, they now have 24 spots combined.

Which option reduces more opportunities for kids to wrestle? This isn't even equating the kids who can't make the 15 mile drive to the other school for practice.

[FinalWord]

Get points,
In reading other threads over there, there is another thread exactly about co-ops and how creating them to fill teams is actually hurting the sport and that cutting programs is far more harmful to the sport and takes away more opportunities than cutting weights.
It sounds like there are some major concerns with co-ops. Certainly they work in some occasions and situations, but two wrestling programs combined into one absolutely reduces opportunities for wrestlers (as well as other logistical problems for families/transportation costs etc) more than cutting a couple of weights.

Team A  and Team B had 28 varsity spots (14 weights) between them, they co-op, there is now 14 varsity spots.

Team A and Team B had 28 varsity spots (14 weights) between, We cut two weights, they now have 24 spots combined.

Which option reduces more opportunities for kids to wrestle? This isn't even equating the kids who can't make the 15 mile drive to the other school for practice.

Quit trying to trick us with facts, logic, and math.

[DocWrestling]

Co-ops only can partially work for programs in big cities.  They do not work in rural communities. 1) They increase travel just for practice, 2) each time a co-op is created a conference team is likely lost.

Programs tend to ebb and flow also with numbers.  Teams that used to have great teams and great numbers don't now.  Some teams that had low numbers now have huge numbers and success.

Keeping programs is #1 priority above worrying about keeping individual varsity opportunities.

The debate could be long and harsh between the haves and have-nots.   I think for a healthy sport you need a structure that allows for full JV and full varsity teams.  I think taking drastic steps and even going to 10 weight classes would be a great thing. 13 and 12 would not make a big difference especially where numbers are plus you need all those kids spread out.

A compromise may be needed and here is my proposal.
1) Get rid of 3 divisions and go to two divisions for team state.  Individual state could stay at 3 divisions if you wanted.  Get rid of overlap between team state and individual state at regionals.
2) Let schools choose what division they want to compete in for teams state- Divisions are not by school size but by chosen structure.  Schools can decide to be in the 14-weight class division or the 10-weight class division.  Two team state champions.  Can create conferences by sections and would reduce travel and top 2-3 teams in each section advance to playoffs/post-season
3) Duals would be based on choice of school
4) All individual tournaments would still use 14 weight classes including regionals and state.

Seems like a win/win all the way around.  I think they only negative is that I think you would see very few schools pick the 14-weight class system and that would then tell everyone a lot.  

[Handles II]

Get points,

I don't have an answer for "what weights?". I think nobody needs to jump to that right away, though unfortunately it's the first thing people want to know. Maybe following their thread and if someone would have the courage to start our own (?) to first find out what type of an issue we are really dealing with, and 2nd to try to come up with some viable solutions is more important than worrying about what weights.

It does seem that based off of Ghetto's numbers from past years, and some of these from another state, that we really need to draw the attention of those suggesting/making rules.

As for the guillotine suggestion of making fewer weights for small-sized schools, one thing they talked about is if there is a dual or tournament between divisions (A vs AA or AAA), that the host school's weights would be the ones that are followed. It's possible that it could work. In MN they don't have a 1/2 lb (or %) per day/week rule. So a kid who wants to wrestle at 120 at Saturday's tournament could still weigh-in at the 116 (hypothetical) weight class in the dual on Tuesday without negative repercussions. That wouldn't work here unless the "per day" rules were eliminated.

[Handles II]

Co-ops only can partially work for programs in big cities.  They do not work in rural communities. 1) They increase travel just for practice, 2) each time a co-op is created a conference team is likely lost.

Programs tend to ebb and flow also with numbers.  Teams that used to have great teams and great numbers don't now.  Some teams that had low numbers now have huge numbers and success.

Keeping programs is #1 priority above worrying about keeping individual varsity opportunities.

The debate could be long and harsh between the haves and have-nots.   I think for a healthy sport you need a structure that allows for full JV and full varsity teams.  I think taking drastic steps and even going to 10 weight classes would be a great thing. 13 and 12 would not make a big difference especially where numbers are plus you need all those kids spread out.

A compromise may be needed and here is my proposal.
1) Get rid of 3 divisions and go to two divisions for team state.  Individual state could stay at 3 divisions if you wanted.  Get rid of overlap between team state and individual state at regionals.
2) Let schools choose what division they want to compete in for teams state- Divisions are not by school size but by chosen structure.  Schools can decide to be in the 14-weight class division or the 10-weight class division.  Two team state champions.  Can create conferences by sections and would reduce travel and top 2-3 teams in each section advance to playoffs/post-season
3) Duals would be based on choice of school
4) All individual tournaments would still use 14 weight classes including regionals and state.

Seems like a win/win all the way around.  I think they only negative is that I think you would see very few schools pick the 14-weight class system and that would then tell everyone a lot.  

Doc I'm not sure how your proposals (other than going to 10 weights) would help increase our numbers or fill 14 weights. You seem to be focusing on the win/lose aspect of the sport. 

[DocWrestling]

If anyone thinks we can get over 50% of our high school teams to fill 14 weight classes ever, I think you are fooling yourself.  Sports are just different to kids now and the structure just does not match.  I am not looking for wrestling to fill 14 weight classes for everyone because I think that is impossible.  It takes a special coach at the right time and for a long time to make it work.  I commend those that can do it beyond anything else accomplished in wrestling but it is very hard.  Many schools have done it and can no longer and then others raise up.

I do think their are subtle improvements that would help most noticeably improving what we do at the middle school level and JV level with more dual and team activities.

My fear is that wrestling will move towards what hockey looks like.  Green Bay has one team.  Appleton has one team.  Milwaukee has a few teams. Then you have a town like Fond du Lac that has two teams or in Madison area where each high school has a team.

Wrestling has also been a proud sport in many rural communities.  At 10 weights I think we can save programs, improve the team concept, maybe prevent transfers, build excitement, and ultimately draw more into the sport.

[goldmedal]

Less weight classes means less opportunities and equals less kids in the program plain and simple. Not saying you wouldn't have better dual competitions but kids already look at where they might or might not fit in and if you have less weight classes in means less kids. We can say they just need to put in there time and get better and so on and there are some that will but as we all can agree wrestling is tough sport thus if kids can't see an opportunity to make the varsity in near future you just left some more behind by cutting weight classes. If we could still retain al the kids less weight classes would be great but my biggest fear is that isn't going to be the case you will see overall numbers in our sport go down drastically.

[DocWrestling]

What defines a healthy sport?

Wrestling- teams with 20 kids?
Varsity team incomplete
JV team- no team aspect- same format as youth wrestling

Basketball
Varsity- 10-12 kids
JV- 10-12 kids
Freshman squads at D1 schools- 10-12 kids
Basically only the very best freshman and sophomores in the state get to play varsity

It seems that basketball has fewer kids on teams overall at many schools and has even fewer actually competing at varsity level (7-8 kids play at most) and yet many kids go out and work hard and wait for their "possible" chance at playing varsity when they are juniors and seniors.  Is basketball a healthier sport because they make kids move up the ranks.  Do they care that tons of kids are quitting because they are not good enough?  We all know the numbers are much higher in youth basketball compared to youth wrestling in most communities and yet fewer kids actually play varsity basketball.  When does the sport become more important than the individual.  There are not nearly the co-ops or lost programs in basketball.

My pride in wrestling just hates the loss of the team concept and the fact that we now want to hand kids everything to keep them out.  It is now much harder and takes more work to make varsity in just about every other sport.  Maybe we need to go backwards and stop celebrating the kid that weighs the right amount and gets to wrestle varsity early and celebrate the hard work and dedication it takes to earn a varsity spot! Teams with 14 weight classes filled now would have even more competition in the room making them better and they could even send their varsity reserves to varsity tournaments like many do now.  Essentially nothing is stopping any team from having two varsity squads!  Stoughton has it going on right now and sent two squads to the Dells varsity duals.  Congrats and good for them and those wrestlers

[Barou]

I think we need to get away from this idea that a team that doesn't fill 14 weight classes needs to recruit harder and it is somehow on the coaching staff for not recruiting.  To get 14 varsity ready athletes spread out to the 14 different weight classes is nearly impossible even for our big schools.  Some of our small schools only have a pool of 15-20 boys to choose from in their school to begin with.  

I'm a die-hard wrestling fan and I have zero interest in going to 90% of the duals in my area.  Watching forfeit after forfeit at duals is terrible for the sport.  

I can't give you hard facts so blast away but I don't think going to 12 weight classes is going to have this huge down spiral effect on participation.  Individually our weight classes are watered down.  Ask anyone who's been going to the state tournament for 20+ years and they can tell you that.  Dual competition wise it is almost unwatchable.  Of course there are exceptions and we generally have some good duals at team state.  However, I don't think it's doing our sport a lot of good when 90% of our in season duals are non-relevant or non-competitive.  Maybe 90% is too high but it's gotta be close.  Take a look at track wrestling dual results and it's peppered with "forfeit".

IMO - 106, 115, then college weights.  I've mentioned that idea before and it doesn't seem too popular.  

Just my $.02 from a wrestling fan if anyone cares.  I'm not a coach and not tied to a program.  I go to 1-2 dual meets a year and try to make it to the state wrestling tournament annually.  Again, just a fan perspective as I think I'm part of a market that some fans would want to tap into.    

[Ghetto]

If you take the bodyfat data from the past five years, and divide it into 12 equally represented weights (keeping 285 as the high limit), they would be:

114
124
131
138
144
151
158
167
178
194
221
285

I could do the numbers for 10 weights if needed.

We bodyfatted 939 less kids this year than in 2011-2012, and it's on a steady decline.

[DocWrestling]

wow!   I like those weights and they are backed up by data!

I might tweak the upper weights a bit and lower 221 to 215 or even 210 and drop 194 to 190.  makes it a bit easier for kids that are wrestling up to fill those weight classes.

[aarons23]

wow!   I like those weights and they are backed up by data!

I might tweak the upper weights a bit and lower 221 to 215 or even 210 and drop 194 to 190.  makes it a bit easier for kids that are wrestling up to fill those weight classes.

they are not backed up by any data....each year when Ghetto does his yearly cry to cut weight classes I go through track and count which weight classses has the most FF....it is rarely ever 106....so why would you want to take away the lightest weight class for the kids whom most only get to wrestle because of their size.  We are doing something wron if when we have D1 schools with only 7 wrestlers!!!   Lets look at that problem and find a way to fix.....the fix isn't going down to 7 weight classes...it figuring out why kids in those schools are not participating and finding way to get them to participate and retain them...lets start with the middle school programs....take a look at those same schools and their middle school programs generally mimic their high school programs.