I think it's time...

[Ghetto]

Make FFs worth more? Ugh. That is a serious step backwards.

If we have 10 guys and the other team is full now, we are down 24-0. More? Geez. That makes no sense.

[Ghetto]

Ghetto,
I think your a couple months early!!!

I have heard several forum posters say "look at how well cutting kids work's in 8 man football". The FACTS DONT support that in Wisconsin, currently over 20% of the teams in 8 man football have Cooped with other school's. So cutting weight classes wont stop schools from needing to COOP, it will only hurt the schools that can fill or come close to filling all there weight classes.
Hardly any kids have to cut weight anymore if we cut weight classes we will lose more kids because the change will force weight cutting again.
I am an proud anti cut guy, please stand with me in not cutting kids.

If there aren't kids to fill weights, we clearly aren't cutting kids.

Having kids wrestle JV is not cutting them.

I waited this year. Didn't want to take away from any of the wrestlers.

I am for adjusting the amount of weights. We will be on opposite sides on this.

This class I am taking is killing me. I'll get the data up soon.

Cutting kids sounds bad and clearly mean, you should really reconsider cutting kids..

[wrastle63]

Make FFs worth more? Ugh. That is a serious step backwards.

If we have 10 guys and the other team is full now, we are down 24-0. More? Geez. That makes no sense.

Just like cutting opportunities for athletes.

[bigG]

I don't see making them worth more or less making much difference in strategic forfeits. It's not ducking if it's looking for the win for the team. No spectator can legitimately call it ducking ; save for the uninformed. Thinking one can read a coach's mind is what we call speculation. If anything, make the FF 5 points. Don't know what that'll do. If you're a coach, you think in terms of point swings. That's huge chink of your strategy as a coach.

[Ghetto]

Make FFs worth more? Ugh. That is a serious step backwards.

If we have 10 guys and the other team is full now, we are down 24-0. More? Geez. That makes no sense.

Just like cutting opportunities for athletes.

Getting rid of programs is the only way to cut opportunities for kids. Even if a team co-ops, they still have JV opportunities if they don't make varsity.

[FinalWord]

I you think the 14 weight format is a good idea then why not 17? It would  give 3 more non existing wrestlers an opportunity to forfeit!!

[aarons23]

I you think the 14 weight format is a good idea then why not 17? It would  give 3 more non existing wrestlers an opportunity to forfeit!!

Thats a terrible arguement for maintaining the current weight classes...but yes if we could grow the sport to that point it would be great!  Reducing weight classes only punishes those who are filling team by making thenm take wrestlers out of their line ups (thus another reason we lose wrestlers.), but also makes the good team better because they could squeeze out their weeker kids.  So instead of losing 56-10...you may now loose 46-6...is that better for the sport???  Also cutting weight classes does not necisarilly help more team than it would hurt...so your team only has 7 wrestlers and three of them are relivatively the same weight and one gets squeezed out...or do you expect to move that kid up another weight class that is now farther apart than it was?  Or should he cut more weight to get to that next weight class???Then spreading weight classes out more will create more weight cutting which is why these types of proposals will never get passed.  So lets stop whining about the number of weight classes and work on ways to promote the sport and builder stronger programs.

[wrastle63]

I you think the 14 weight format is a good idea then why not 17? It would  give 3 more non existing wrestlers an opportunity to forfeit!!

Thats a terrible arguement for maintaining the current weight classes...but yes if we could grow the sport to that point it would be great!  Reducing weight classes only punishes those who are filling team by making thenm take wrestlers out of their line ups (thus another reason we lose wrestlers.), but also makes the good team better because they could squeeze out their weeker kids.  So instead of losing 56-10...you may now loose 46-6...is that better for the sport???  Also cutting weight classes does not necisarilly help more team than it would hurt...so your team only has 7 wrestlers and three of them are relivatively the same weight and one gets squeezed out...or do you expect to move that kid up another weight class that is now farther apart than it was?  Or should he cut more weight to get to that next weight class???Then spreading weight classes out more will create more weight cutting which is why these types of proposals will never get passed.  So lets stop whining about the number of weight classes and work on ways to promote the sport and builder stronger programs.

Amen!

[ramjet]

Run through a bunch of team scenarios with a 1 point FF you will find out it's good idea to discourage FF. G you are wrong matches are ducked all the time to think that match ups are not us incredibly naive.


Think of total score wrestling the matches can have greater impact than not wrestling.

[DocWrestling]

So if I wanted to win the dual, I could forfeit 5 times to make sure I only lose 5 team points (FF=1 team point) and then I will want to send my stud out to pin their kid to take the lead 6-5 but then he forfeits so I am still down 5-1.

I don't see it. 

If you want more matches then you need to make forfeits worth 10 points.
If you want closer duals and fewer matches then you make forfeits 1 point.

Maybe we just make every weight class worth one point. A win is a win no matter whether it is a pin, forfeit, or overtime victory.  Scores would then be 9-5 or 11-3 and would not look as bad as 44-9.  Perception would be much better with this system and coaches would be willing to wrestle kids.

[npope]

Why not de-value the whole idea of duals; make them multi-team jamborees, or something like that. All of this angst and pulling of hair is based on one simple fact - that we think there has to be a winner in a dual format. Get rid of that format and much of the problem goes away. Yes, yes, some schools love duals (usually those that will win the dual), but to solve this problem you have to get outside the box. Maybe the box is the emphasis we place on duals?

[ramjet]

Doc thank you for playing.

You are correct so the  duals should only be determined by wrestled matches no points for FF at all. Then the matches are determined by those matches that actually take place. Also the FF does not go on the record as a win.

So head to head matches. Ghetto has good point about weight classes however the number of weight classes is not the issues as much as the unwillingness to have wrestlers compete a weight class higher to get the or a match in.

Keep in mind even COOPs are not increasing overall numbers just numbers on the COOP team.

I used think dropping weight classes was a good idea but think other things can be done like the above.

See low numbers at a school may or may not be something that can be remedied. So bring flexibility to dual meets emphasize the actual wrestled matches not the FF. No reason to punish one school because they have high girl count or low numbers in the school.

Like I said this all a mute point because no way no how you get the Coaches association or the WIAA to take bold moves to improve the sport. 

[Ghetto]

Facts:

In 2005 there were 347 teams. In 2017 there are 332. 15 teams times 14 weights is 210 lost opportunities.

In 2011-12, 8946 kids body fat tested. In 2016-17 there were 7737 kids tested. 1209 less kids body fatted this year compared to 2011-12.

In 2005, 56.7% of the teams in Wisconsin fielded a team at regionals of 12 or less kids.

In 2017, 68.6% of the teams in Wisconsin fielded a team at regionals of 12 or less kids.

In 2017, 79.6% of teams in D3 had 12 or less kids at regionals.

Since 2005, 72.2% of the teams in D3 had 12 or less. The number started at 66.7%, and has climbed as high as 83.5% and now stands at 79.6%.

If you take out kids with 0-0 records, and kids whose winning percentage is .201 or worse, that number climbs higher. In 2016, if you take out those kids who were more or less JV kids filling a spot at regionals, 87.5% of the teams in D3 had 12 kids or less. 72.0% of the D2 teams had 12 or less, and 68.0% of the teams in D1 had 12 or less.

[MNbadger]

I absolutely agree Nat.  The dual-crazy mentality is a big part of the problem. We had years where we won nearly all our duals and even then I preferred individual tournaments. Personal preference to be sure but it is an issue in regard to the subject at hand.

Why not de-value the whole idea of duals; make them multi-team jamborees, or something like that. All of this angst and pulling of hair is based on one simple fact - that we think there has to be a winner in a dual format. Get rid of that format and much of the problem goes away. Yes, yes, some schools love duals (usually those that will win the dual), but to solve this problem you have to get outside the box. Maybe the box is the emphasis we place on duals?

[MarkK]

Track is probably a good example of how this might be able to be dealt with.  Many teams at a meet.   I still like big duals and marquee team matchups but I really hate showing up to majority forfeits.  It is sooo bad.