|
 Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: moeder]
#183864
02/23/11 06:13 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 452
moeder
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 452 |
D. J. Sorry, this is just a personal issue for me. I generally prefer to sit back and mostly read instead of commenting the majority of the time, and I definitely try to avoid the "controversial" topics. I've "cringed' at a couple of the topics that include my son lately. He's a kid that prefers to be out of the conversation and not a part of a topic of any controversy and I know he'll wish I would have just left this alone I can asure you, but I just couldnt! I know first hand what this sport has afforded a SMALL KID and what opportunites he now has available, as well as the financial assistance for his college future that it has provided.
I'll get off my soap box after this post and leave it alone. I had a great back and forth discussion last year with Vince Nowak, who I really like and respect, on this same issue so dont take my comments as disrespecfull to you at all.
Obviously, I'm going to have to say that YES, a freshman has more chance of getting to state at a lighter weight. I also have to say DUH! How many freshman would you estimate have a greater chance to make the football team if they weigh more than 152lbs, or make the basketball team if they are taller than 6'2?? Since the little/shorter guy gets screwed in the other sports does that mean we have to follow suit and treat them the same way in wrestling? My position is no, and I'm happy to voice that.
But 103 lbs is not nearly as dominated by the "9th grader" as you would suggest. Taylors Freshman year he had to face Stroot (a SENIOR)at regionals in the 103lb class. He won. At state he lost to the JUNIOR Ornelas in the semi's, who then beat the SENIOR Stroot in the finals. I think that scenario could be argued many years if researched. 103 is not simply a Freshman Bracket.
Now, lastly: I honestly do NOT have the answer and do not have the time or motivation to research it, BUT I am willing to "guesstimate" the result of the research of what I am about to suggest.
One of the hottest topics every single year is how to make Kansas wrestling more competitive and successful Nationally. And every year the replies are that we ARE competitive nationally and on the college level. SO... My question is: when we are talking about our success in the national spotlight and on to the college level, those athletes we are basing this success on: WHAT WEIGHT DID THEY START OUT AS FRESHMAN? I really dont know and I'm not going to reasearch it, but off hand I think of Tanner Gardner, Eric Luedke, Tyler Caldwell, Kendrick Maple, The Kellers, Slyter, the potential that Furches had, DeShazer, Madl,etc... Guys wreslting at KS. colleges like Vesta, Callahan(s), Barber, on and on. What weight did their high school career begin? Yep, lets make Kansas more competitive. Sit the little guys out a year while they grow. Whats a year of mat time? Once they grow they'll make us better nationally.... cmon.
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: moeder]
#183869
02/23/11 10:52 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,377
ReDPloyd
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,377 |
But 103 lbs is not nearly as dominated by the "9th grader" as you would suggest.
I just did a quick check of the 103 pound State brackets across all classifications and here are the numbers: 32 Freshman 22 Sophomore 7 Juniors 2 Seniors 1 Bye Mr. Moeder, I would agree with your statement.
Lee Girard
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: moeder]
#183874
02/23/11 01:11 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 543
Enetophobic
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 543 |
I think it should go like they are for Fila or whatever...98, 105 then on like normal. Let's gear it more around next level too. 220? A lot of coaches are looking for a 215 to go 197. 220 may actually hinder some big kids that want to wrestle in college from being taken seriously.
Enlighten Me!
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: ReDPloyd]
#183875
02/23/11 01:17 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 543
Enetophobic
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 543 |
But 103 lbs is not nearly as dominated by the "9th grader" as you would suggest.
I just did a quick check of the 103 pound State brackets across all classifications and here are the numbers: 32 Freshman 22 Sophomore 7 Juniors 2 Seniors 1 Bye Mr. Moeder, I would agree with your statement. Who are the 2 seniors? Hopefully they will petition to go to SR. Nationals if they don't make the finals.
Enlighten Me!
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Enetophobic]
#183878
02/23/11 01:29 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459
Husker Fan
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459 |
I think it should go like they are for Fila or whatever...98, 105 then on like normal. Let's gear it more around next level too. 220? A lot of coaches are looking for a 215 to go 197. 220 may actually hinder some big kids that want to wrestle in college from being taken seriously. How can you make that argument? How well then does 103 prepare a wrestler for 125 in college. I think 103 can prepare them for 125 in college just as I know that 215 can prepare for either 197 or 285 in college. Actually the 197 to 285 jump in college is absolutely ridiculous. In reality what is being hurt with that weight spread in my opinion would be the fact that in international wrestling the second highest weight class is about 212 pounds not 197! That is almost a 45% jump from 197 to 285.
Vince Nowak
Kansas College Wrestling Fund Supporter
Please join the fight with your contributions
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Husker Fan]
#183883
02/23/11 01:38 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 426
lakemats
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 426 |
I think the 2 seniors are 4a's Jake Roberts of Clay Center and 3a's Colt Skillman of Burlington.
Tim Horgan
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Husker Fan]
#183884
02/23/11 01:46 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 543
Enetophobic
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 543 |
I think it should go like they are for Fila or whatever...98, 105 then on like normal. Let's gear it more around next level too. 220? A lot of coaches are looking for a 215 to go 197. 220 may actually hinder some big kids that want to wrestle in college from being taken seriously. How can you make that argument? How well then does 103 prepare a wrestler for 125 in college. I think 103 can prepare them for 125 in college just as I know that 215 can prepare for either 197 or 285 in college. Actually the 197 to 285 jump in college is absolutely ridiculous. In reality what is being hurt with that weight spread in my opinion would be the fact that in international wrestling the second highest weight class is about 212 pounds not 197! That is almost a 45% jump from 197 to 285. What is really being hurt at the college level is coaches that can't fill 10 full weight classes. The top 3 teams at Kansas Cup provided the only full teams of the competition a few weeks back, thus one may assume that the more bullets in the chamber, the better shot you have...however, teams like NW Tech brought a dismal 5 (50%) of a team and stunk up the place, they also don't have roster on their website which shows the true passion they have in really wanting a team there. Maybe this is why it goes from 17 weight classes in middle school to 14 in high school to 10 in college. People have trouble filling the weights, even in the big schools with tons of kids roaming the halls. As for 103, sometimes that is genetic...other times it is ducking the competition. If you really want to wrestle 125 in college I would think you need to be at minimum at 112 lber to be taken seriously. 103's probably get looks from NAIA and Jucos only and Redshirt. 112's probably the same, but maybe an NCAA school or 2 (not very many if any DI's probably come knocking). 119 is probably where it opens up a bit more for the lower weights. Keep in mind though, you get kids that wrestled 215 in high school that commonly drop all the way to 184 if they want to be elite. It is about winning at the college level, not about earning a participation ribbon. I think some of the kids that are "almost a sure thing" to win a state title this year, are the guys that sacrifice and will make the lowest allowable weight class to be at their peak wrestling shape. Other kids meanwhile will step on the scales after eating McDonalds, and still be 2-3 lbs under at some weights, just because it's "Too Hard" to make the cut.
Enlighten Me!
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: moeder]
#183885
02/23/11 01:49 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 107
lylegeyer
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 107 |
D. J. Sorry, this is just a personal issue for me. I generally prefer to sit back and mostly read instead of commenting the majority of the time, and I definitely try to avoid the "controversial" topics. I've "cringed' at a couple of the topics that include my son lately. He's a kid that prefers to be out of the conversation and not a part of a topic of any controversy and I know he'll wish I would have just left this alone I can asure you, but I just couldnt! I know first hand what this sport has afforded a SMALL KID and what opportunites he now has available, as well as the financial assistance for his college future that it has provided.
I'll get off my soap box after this post and leave it alone. I had a great back and forth discussion last year with Vince Nowak, who I really like and respect, on this same issue so dont take my comments as disrespecfull to you at all.
Obviously, I'm going to have to say that YES, a freshman has more chance of getting to state at a lighter weight. I also have to say DUH! How many freshman would you estimate have a greater chance to make the football team if they weigh more than 152lbs, or make the basketball team if they are taller than 6'2?? Since the little/shorter guy gets screwed in the other sports does that mean we have to follow suit and treat them the same way in wrestling? My position is no, and I'm happy to voice that.
But 103 lbs is not nearly as dominated by the "9th grader" as you would suggest. Taylors Freshman year he had to face Stroot (a SENIOR)at regionals in the 103lb class. He won. At state he lost to the JUNIOR Ornelas in the semi's, who then beat the SENIOR Stroot in the finals. I think that scenario could be argued many years if researched. 103 is not simply a Freshman Bracket.
Now, lastly: I honestly do NOT have the answer and do not have the time or motivation to research it, BUT I am willing to "guesstimate" the result of the research of what I am about to suggest.
One of the hottest topics every single year is how to make Kansas wrestling more competitive and successful Nationally. And every year the replies are that we ARE competitive nationally and on the college level. SO... My question is: when we are talking about our success in the national spotlight and on to the college level, those athletes we are basing this success on: WHAT WEIGHT DID THEY START OUT AS FRESHMAN? I really dont know and I'm not going to reasearch it, but off hand I think of Tanner Gardner, Eric Luedke, Tyler Caldwell, Kendrick Maple, The Kellers, Slyter, the potential that Furches had, DeShazer, Madl,etc... Guys wreslting at KS. colleges like Vesta, Callahan(s), Barber, on and on. What weight did their high school career begin? Yep, lets make Kansas more competitive. Sit the little guys out a year while they grow. Whats a year of mat time? Once they grow they'll make us better nationally.... cmon. I agree 100%. Look at these 4 x champs. Do you really want to make them wait to grow. Duel 98 lbs treaster 105 drake 98lbs ware 103 lbs gabel 103 lbs maynes 100 lbs roberson 103 may 103 lbs kreigbaum 103 lbs madden 103 lbs deshazer 103 lbs All of these guys were 4 x state champions that started at the bottom weight, and I'm sure I missed some. If we are going to look out for the bigger guys, by adding some weights fine, but not at the expense of the little guys. Lyle Geyer
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Enetophobic]
#183886
02/23/11 01:51 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 649
badbo
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 649 |
There are 4 weights in the proposal from 126,132,138, 145 this loses one weight in this area from the current weights. There are 4 weights in the proposal from 182 and up. There are clearly more wrestlers from 126-145 than 182 and up. We are adding to the weights were there are less wrestlers and taking away from the core. Also as pointed out many of our top college kids started in the 103 ranks. And not just as 125 pounders in college. They fill out many weights as they grow. Heck the recent 285 at Iowa State was a 103 as a Fr at Manhattan.
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: lakemats]
#183890
02/23/11 02:06 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 543
Enetophobic
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 543 |
I think the 2 seniors are 4a's Jake Roberts of Clay Center and 3a's Colt Skillman of Burlington. Better watch out for Jake's DDT!
Enlighten Me!
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Enetophobic]
#183892
02/23/11 03:08 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 911
Mark J Stanley
OP
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 911 |
I don’t think NFHS started out with the goal of eliminating the 103# weight class any more than I believe it was their goal to eliminate the 215# weight class. They are simply readjusting (such that there are ~7% of participants within each weight) and renaming the weight classes. There has been a lot of comments about there are more kids at this grouping of weights or that grouping of weights. I think we can all agree that you can fit the wrestling participants into a bell curve. Has that bell curve shifted since 1995? NFHS suspected that it may have and has done the work, completed the surveys, tabulated the numbers, analyzed the data and compiled a bell curve of the athletes based on scientific data….no assumptions. They took that data and spread out the “Option A” weight classes so that based on their data there would be an equal distribution of the wrestlers in each class (100% / 14 weight classes = 7.143% /weight class).
I think we have problems filling brackets at both ends of the spectrum. Will “Option A” help with that? Matbe so; the data collected by NFHS says it will. Will “Option A” hurt some smaller kid’s chances to be competitive as freshman? Yes, most likely that is the case. Will "Option A" restrict participation of any current wrestler? Absolutley not...
Other than 103, how many weight classes in the State tournaments are populated with 85% underclassman?
Last edited by Mark J Stanley; 02/23/11 03:43 PM.
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Mark J Stanley]
#183902
02/23/11 04:20 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 411
Ed Wilson
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 411 |
Underclassmen by weight in all classes:
103- 54
112- 46
119- 21
125- 21
130- 21
135- 18
140- 18
145- 18
152- 8
160- 10
171- 16
189- 13
215- 4
285- 14
I did a real quick count, I don't think I missed any but I could have.
Did you see that Eckenbacherswartzendruber?
Lawrence Elite Wrestling Club
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Ed Wilson]
#183916
02/23/11 05:26 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 452
moeder
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 452 |
A quick portion of your post Mark: "I don’t think NFHS started out with the goal of eliminating the 103# weight class any more than I believe it was their goal to eliminate the 215# weight class."
You could be correct Mark, and that may not be the actual intention. But looking back to originally having the smallest weight being 98lbs and now potentially up to 106lbs is an 8lb difference. To me, while yes it took place over an extednded time period, you move the weight up 8lbs total and it is an elimination of the smallest weight class.
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: moeder]
#183923
02/23/11 05:55 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,555
Beeson
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,555 |
I would like to see it stay the same. Honestly, no offense here,(that is the first clue someone is going to be offended) do we want more heavyweights. These are some of the slowest moving, 1 point matches ever. I would much rather watch 103's going at it like a couple of tornado's, than more heavyweights pushing around on each other and seeing who can ride the other out in triple overtime.
Unnecessary Roughness is Necessary
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Beeson]
#183967
02/23/11 07:52 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 169
PurpleDad
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 169 |
Thats your opinion, I rather enjoy the big boys for the most part......could be I'm biased 
Richard Bennett
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: D.W.]
#183973
02/23/11 08:36 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 844
WillyM
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 844 |
I think the rules committee is on the right track - equal distribution of wrestlers in each weight class. Darn. I had just recently memorized the existing 14 weight classes. Now someone wants to change them. Give an ol man a break The rationale for Option A in the first post states the NFHS committee thought they needed a set distribution of 7.14% of wrestlers in each weight. WHY??? 7.14% is nothing more than 100% divided the number (14) of weight classes. That seems like an awfully weak rationale. I think you would need to bell curve the wrestlers across all weights and determine a rationale distribution based on the total population. Surely the middle weights, say 135 to 160, have the most wrestlers. Even Option A indicates that with retention of the 145, 152, and 160 weights (probably need to include the 171/170 bracket in the middle weights). In the old scheme there were 7 weights below 140 (103 to and including 140). Option A cuts that range to 6 weights (106 thru 138). Also, the weight differiential below 145 are in the 4+% to 5% range. The differientals above 170 are 7+%, 7+%, 13%, and 29+%. I think we need at least one more weight class (at the top end). Lowest weight should be 105--a good number--should not eliminate any smaller guys.
Bill Mason Lansing
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: PurpleDad]
#183978
02/23/11 08:59 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,555
Beeson
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,555 |
Thats your opinion, I rather enjoy the big boys for the most part......could be I'm biased As well you should. Not all matches are like that, but a majority. Your son was fun to watch in Ark City. Good Luck this weekend.
Unnecessary Roughness is Necessary
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: Beeson]
#183981
02/23/11 09:08 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 169
PurpleDad
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 169 |
Thanks.....We will need it.
Richard Bennett
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: WillyM]
#183982
02/23/11 09:12 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 32
hometown
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 32 |
I have 2 sons 1 just finished his sophmore year and the other is an 8th grader. Both boys eat like horses and have been lifting weights at school and during the summer for 3 years. Both have also wrestled since they were 5 years old. My sophmore was 87 lbs. as a freshman and after sophmore season is 95 lbs. He is looking forward to the youth season because of the 98 lb. weight class. He should also be set up well for next year at 103. My 8th grader is currently weighing 80 lbs.
Don't want to argue because it is pointless. This is just an example of two healthy athletic boys who will be put at a disadvantage by raising the bottom again.
|
|
|
|
Re: Weight Class Change Poll
[Re: hometown]
#184185
02/25/11 02:30 AM
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 16
14oldschool
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 16 |
In the lower-weight classes, every single pound makes a significant difference. In the upper-weight classes, weight differences matter less. 98 vs 106 is not a fair competition. However, the same weight spread over 152/160 is a completely different ballgame.
The defining factor should be fairness to the competitors - not equal distribution of competitors.
Last edited by 14oldschool; 02/25/11 02:30 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered members (),
117
guests, and 3
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics35,943
Posts250,375
Members12,298
| |
Most Online709
Nov 21st, 2011
|
|
|
