ADVERTISEMENT

Iowa HS wrestling classes

MizzuHawk

HR All-State
Jan 18, 2005
716
302
63
Was looking at HS wrestling classes vs student enrollments. Does anyone think there should be 4 classes? Seems to be a huge disparity in class 3a.
 
Keep it the same. From an individual standpoint size of school matters very little when you look at some of these studs in 1A. Biggest obstacle for a lot of teams is filling all 14 weights, especially 195 - 220.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lsanders20
Keep it the same. From an individual standpoint size of school matters very little when you look at some of these studs in 1A. Biggest obstacle for a lot of teams is filling all 14 weights, especially 195 - 220.
Respectfully disagree W. A school like Waukee with 2700+ students has a much better chance of filling 14 weights with top wrestlers than a school like Albia with 288 students. Each may have a more equitable chance at the number of state finalists, but, from a team chance at a championship, my money would be on Waukee 9 out of 10 times.
 
No way 4. We have more people in Iowa than Nebraska but no way do we want to dilute it and look similar to them.
 
Keep it the same. From an individual standpoint size of school matters very little when you look at some of these studs in 1A. Biggest obstacle for a lot of teams is filling all 14 weights, especially 195 - 220.
This always blows my mind. There wasn't a single 106lb boy in hs when I was there but a shit ton of 195-220. We never had a problem at that weight. Our problem was anything under 130. Is iowa the land of midgets?
 
Wouldn't be a bad idea. So few schools take wrestling seriously that the class-based system makes little sense. Don Bosco might have won the state tournament last year regardless of class. While we are making improvements, it's time to get rid of weights under 120. Then increase the number of weights starting at 145. No reason a sport should have weights just to let young kids wrestle varsity sports, and no junior nor senior should be wrestling below 120 unless they've been stunted by the sport itself for years. Hopefully with the removal of lower weights, fewer kids would be stunted and more kids would be allowed to carry healthier weight through a fall sport.
 
Not true. DB would not beat the best 3A schools in a traditional state tournament with 64 teams. They just don't have enough "superstars". They are balanced. Tough kids. Well coached. Great tradition and program. But IMO they have a very little chance to top WSR, SEP, Bett, FD in an individual state tournament format. Duals? May be a different story.
 
Not true. DB would not beat the best 3A schools in a traditional state tournament with 64 teams. They just don't have enough "superstars". They are balanced. Tough kids. Well coached. Great tradition and program. But IMO they have a very little chance to top WSR, SEP, Bett, FD in an individual state tournament format. Duals? May be a different story.

I would think teams like DB would have a better chance in a tournament format versus a dual. Teams have won state merely by getting 3 guys in finals and a couple other place winners. Conversely, I've seen a lot a LOT of really balanced 3A teams qualify 10 wrestlers and only a few place and not get in top 10 in team race. But like the old saying goes, in 3A: Easier to get to state - tougher to place. Vary's year to year. Now that seeding is in play at state it makes it a little more predictable. I like the old format better. You could get a 1-2 matchup in 1st or 2nd round
 
  • Like
Reactions: fanpujols5
I would think teams like DB would have a better chance in a tournament format versus a dual. Teams have won state merely by getting 3 guys in finals and a couple other place winners. Conversely, I've seen a lot a LOT of really balanced 3A teams qualify 10 wrestlers and only a few place and not get in top 10 in team race. But like the old saying goes, in 3A: Easier to get to state - tougher to place. Vary's year to year. Now that seeding is in play at state it makes it a little more predictable. I like the old format better. You could get a 1-2 matchup in 1st or 2nd round
I wish they would back to the random pairings. I think that what sets us apart from other states and makes it very intriguing. I get people want the best matchups on Saturday night and it takes away from your accolades and season long success to get stuck with a tough matchup up 2nd round or so, but tie your shoelaces and embrace the challenge!
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDMHawk72
I would think teams like DB would have a better chance in a tournament format versus a dual. Teams have won state merely by getting 3 guys in finals and a couple other place winners. Conversely, I've seen a lot a LOT of really balanced 3A teams qualify 10 wrestlers and only a few place and not get in top 10 in team race. But like the old saying goes, in 3A: Easier to get to state - tougher to place. Vary's year to year. Now that seeding is in play at state it makes it a little more predictable. I like the old format better. You could get a 1-2 matchup in 1st or 2nd round
Tournaments are with with superstars. Duals are won with balance. Sure DB is a small school but they have plenty of wrestlers walking their halls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artradley
No reason a sport should have weights just to let young kids wrestle varsity sports, and no junior nor senior should be wrestling below 120 unless they've been stunted by the sport itself for years. Hopefully with the removal of lower weights, fewer kids would be stunted and more kids would be allowed to carry healthier weight through a fall sport.
There are tons of junior and seniors under 130lbs in HS. Where do they the college and international athletes fit in if you cut those bottom weights? Some of those guys would be up a weight class or two if not for the cut, but most of the real muscle grow will happen when they turn 18. In football heavy schools (and parts of the country) anything under 180 is way easier to fill than above it.

I would keep the 3 classes, but I would love to see an all class tourney/dual.
 
Wouldn't be a bad idea. So few schools take wrestling seriously that the class-based system makes little sense. Don Bosco might have won the state tournament last year regardless of class. While we are making improvements, it's time to get rid of weights under 120. Then increase the number of weights starting at 145. No reason a sport should have weights just to let young kids wrestle varsity sports, and no junior nor senior should be wrestling below 120 unless they've been stunted by the sport itself for years. Hopefully with the removal of lower weights, fewer kids would be stunted and more kids would be allowed to carry healthier weight through a fall sport.
Most of the best wrestlers in Iowas history started their careers under 120. The best p4p in the state and top 10 in the country was barley 106 as a freshman. Flo did a piece on this a few years ago (iirc smalls wrote it) and it was crazy how many of the best college guys started their HS careers at the bottom 2 weight classes. The arguement was smaller kids spend more time focusing on only wrestling, that's why 132-152 you can usually find your best technical Jr./Sr's. David Taylor was once a 106 or 103.
 
I'm in the "Two Class" camp. The Iowa Sports Assns have watered down the competition to get as many fans to attend post season events as possible to generate $$$ in all the sports, imo.
 
Last edited:
Most of the best wrestlers in Iowas history started their careers under 120. The best p4p in the state and top 10 in the country was barley 106 as a freshman. Flo did a piece on this a few years ago (iirc smalls wrote it) and it was crazy how many of the best college guys started their HS careers at the bottom 2 weight classes. The arguement was smaller kids spend more time focusing on only wrestling, that's why 132-152 you can usually find your best technical Jr./Sr's. David Taylor was once a 106 or 103.

I remember an Ironman final between Tailor and Streebler.
 
Can barely fill 1A duals the way it is now. Sectionals are a joke.
i agree about sectionals I remember seeing a couple 1a district brackets over the last few years with byes in them. It also has become a trend that long time combined school are splitting because combined enrollment bumps them to 2a. I heard a rumor that was the case when Dever dropped Tripoli. It seems every year since they've ended up in toughest 1A district. Other teams have split and neither can fill half their line up. CMB comes to mind.
 
There are tons of junior and seniors under 130lbs in HS. Where do they the college and international athletes fit in if you cut those bottom weights? Some of those guys would be up a weight class or two if not for the cut, but most of the real muscle grow will happen when they turn 18. In football heavy schools (and parts of the country) anything under 180 is way easier to fill than above it.

I would keep the 3 classes, but I would love to see an all class tourney/dual.
Hmm, I guess I don't see many kids nowadays that are athletes that are under 130 pounds unless they are intentionally doing it. I did say 120 lbs. to be fair anyway, but that number probably wouldn't be needed if we weren't forcing kids to maintain a low weight throughout their formative years. Having more weights in the 140-180 range would open up for more normal growth patterns and might get more football players on the wrestling mat as they wouldn't need to start worrying about their slotted weight at the end of September.
 
Most of the best wrestlers in Iowas history started their careers under 120. The best p4p in the state and top 10 in the country was barley 106 as a freshman. Flo did a piece on this a few years ago (iirc smalls wrote it) and it was crazy how many of the best college guys started their HS careers at the bottom 2 weight classes. The arguement was smaller kids spend more time focusing on only wrestling, that's why 132-152 you can usually find your best technical Jr./Sr's. David Taylor was once a 106 or 103.
Exactly. No reason to starve those kids out as 10 year olds so that they can get an eagle in Tulsa at 56 pounds. Also, no reason that we create weights at the varsity level for kids just so they can wrestle as freshmen. It's stupid. Freshmen football players don't get to play on 80 yard fields, on 8 foot hoops, or run 350 meter quarter miles just so they can be varsity athletes.
 
This always blows my mind. There wasn't a single 106lb boy in hs when I was there but a shit ton of 195-220. We never had a problem at that weight. Our problem was anything under 130. Is iowa the land of midgets?

Thus isn’t an Iowa problem, it is nationwide.

The average HS male is about 145 pounds. Boys over 190 pounds represent a very tiny percentage of the population. On top of that, most big kids are going to play football, and more and more HS coaches discourage multiple sports.

On the other hand, for kids 150 pounds and lower, wrestling is a sport where their size doesn’t work against them.

So, there are already more boys under 140 than over 180, and wrestling appeals more to those boys. Combine the two and the fact is there are very few talented big kids in wrestling, and for small schools it’s hard to fill their rosters.

The NFHSA greatly exacerbated the problem about ten years ago when they changed weight classes, inexplicably adding a “big boy” weight class while removing 140lbs. One of the more destructive moves ever.
 
i agree about sectionals I remember seeing a couple 1a district brackets over the last few years with byes in them. It also has become a trend that long time combined school are splitting because combined enrollment bumps them to 2a. I heard a rumor that was the case when Dever dropped Tripoli. It seems every year since they've ended up in toughest 1A district. Other teams have split and neither can fill half their line up. CMB comes to mind.

In NJ schools can compete individually in football, basketball, etc. but combine with nearby schools for wrestling, which works well.
 
Exactly. No reason to starve those kids out as 10 year olds so that they can get an eagle in Tulsa at 56 pounds. Also, no reason that we create weights at the varsity level for kids just so they can wrestle as freshmen. It's stupid. Freshmen football players don't get to play on 80 yard fields, on 8 foot hoops, or run 350 meter quarter miles just so they can be varsity athletes.
I realize there are kids cutting before Jr high, which is bad. Those are not the norm nationally. I still disagree with you on eliminating lower 3 or 4 weights will promote better growth for the athlete. I was 5 foot entering high school, there was not way I would have been able to wrestle 130 without a major length/reach disadvantage even if I put on 20 pounds of muscle. As a kid weighing 109 lbs naturally, I couldn't make 103, as our pre-season body fat percentages test wouldn't allow it, I was already to lean. This was 1989, new weigh in rules are designed to prevent aggressive cuts anyway.

My main point is those bottom 3 weights typically feed the middle weights, to remove them would definitely not grow the sport. Obviously we won't agree on this point, but I just wanted you to hear the small guys side.
 
I realize there are kids cutting before Jr high, which is bad. Those are not the norm nationally. I still disagree with you on eliminating lower 3 or 4 weights will promote better growth for the athlete. I was 5 foot entering high school, there was not way I would have been able to wrestle 130 without a major length/reach disadvantage even if I put on 20 pounds of muscle. As a kid weighing 109 lbs naturally, I couldn't make 103, as our pre-season body fat percentages test wouldn't allow it, I was already to lean. This was 1989, new weigh in rules are designed to prevent aggressive cuts anyway.

My main point is those bottom 3 weights typically feed the middle weights, to remove them would definitely not grow the sport. Obviously we won't agree on this point, but I just wanted you to hear the small guys side.

Good points. Even though my son was a 103-pound varsity wrestler as a Freshman, I had no problem when they bumped that weight to 106. And, frankly, I wouldn't be bothered with 110 as the first weight; all it would really mean is that some good wrestlers might not be varsity until their Sophomore year, and that is no tragedy; especially if it results in more middleweight kids.

But even starting down at 106, the quality of wrestling in the first three or four weight classes far exceeds the quality of wrestling the the last three or four weight classes; AINEC.

And to reinforce what you said, my son was 103, 126, 145, 145. He was a committed wrestler from 2nd grade up, as are most varsity kids in the lower and middle weight classes.
 
But even starting down at 106, the quality of wrestling in the first three or four weight classes far exceeds the quality of wrestling the the last three or four weight classes; AINEC.

I like and agree with this but would argue that 106 and HWT are more similar than those above/below. There are a LOT of really bad HWTs and really bad 106s.

I'm for bunching weights more logically around the size of HS kids. I think the weights should seriously be reviewed every 3-5 years. I do think 106 is too small but 120 is too drastic, as wrestling has traditionally honored the small kid and that sentiment shouldn't go away completely, IMHO.
 
I like and agree with this but would argue that 106 and HWT are more similar than those above/below. There are a LOT of really bad HWTs and really bad 106s.

I'm for bunching weights more logically around the size of HS kids. I think the weights should seriously be reviewed every 3-5 years. I do think 106 is too small but 120 is too drastic, as wrestling has traditionally honored the small kid and that sentiment shouldn't go away completely, IMHO.

Agree with all of that.

Although I do believe there are more quality 106 pound wrestlers than HWT, there are definitely a lot of cases were the coach grabbed the smallest kid he found walking the hallways and gave him a singlet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPOONER
There is enough talent in Iowa to have all 3 divisions. As a fan would love to see 1 division but there a lot of hard working kids that place lower at the state tournament. Also if u go 1 division it might cause less kids to try wrestling. After looking at national ranking we have 4 teams ranked in top 50 25 WSR 26 SEP 36 Lisbon 37 Bosco. West Delaware beat WSR and had tight duals with Lisbon and Bosco. The depth of talent is improving in the state.
 
@artradley the year before I started wrestling, 98 lbs was the lowest. In the small side of 1A, we could always fill 103, but usually had a severely undersized guy bumping up to heavy (275) at the time. You saw more forfeits at 103 than you did for heavy, just because of the ability to bump. But sometimes you hated to see our heavy go out against a full sized 275 guy. Outside single or die for those guys.

Going to 1 class would be the death of wrestling for a lot of small schools that can't even fill a complete line up. Even from 1A to 2A there is huge gap in depth of a team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artradley
There are plenty of lightweight wrestlers from 106-120 and the technical quality of those wrestlers is vastly greater than the technical quality of those in the three heaviest weights from 195-285....saying this, I would not vastly change either of the bookends.
 
I don't understand wanting to get rid of the little guys. BTW...Gable won state his senior year...at 112. His first title was at 95lbs.

.

Not particularly relevant. Kids are much bigger today on average than 55 years ago.
 
There is enough talent in Iowa to have all 3 divisions. As a fan would love to see 1 division but there a lot of hard working kids that place lower at the state tournament. Also if u go 1 division it might cause less kids to try wrestling. After looking at national ranking we have 4 teams ranked in top 50 25 WSR 26 SEP 36 Lisbon 37 Bosco. West Delaware beat WSR and had tight duals with Lisbon and Bosco. The depth of talent is improving in the state.

I believe there are two distinct questions:

* Team tournament
* Individual tournament

Absolutely there should be multiple divisions for the team tournament, but size of school does not affect an individual's chances to place. I've always thought having three (or four, or five, or as in Virginia six!) state champions at each weight class seems odd.

My son competed in NJ, where there was just one division for individuals and, in his Junior and Senior years, over 1200 kids at his weight. He was a damn good wrestler, and never placed. But as disappointing as that was it didn't drive him away from the sport. And if we had three division he probably would have made the medal stand, but he always acknowledged the victory would have seem less fulfilling. It didn't make the whole experience less rewarding.

In an individual sport, there should be one state champion.
 
I believe there are two distinct questions:

* Team tournament
* Individual tournament

Absolutely there should be multiple divisions for the team tournament, but size of school does not affect an individual's chances to place. I've always thought having three (or four, or five, or as in Virginia six!) state champions at each weight class seems odd.

My son competed in NJ, where there was just one division for individuals and, in his Junior and Senior years, over 1200 kids at his weight. He was a damn good wrestler, and never placed. But as disappointing as that was it didn't drive him away from the sport. And if we had three division he probably would have made the medal stand, but he always acknowledged the victory would have seem less fulfilling. It didn't make the whole experience less rewarding.

In an individual sport, there should be one state champion.
I don't think being a state champion in 1a is less than being a state champion in 3a. It's not the defining moment in anyone's career if they aspire to going to the next level. There are plenty of opportunities, probably more important, with the big national level individual tournaments where classes don't make any difference. If you're good, it will show.
 
I believe there are two distinct questions:

* Team tournament
* Individual tournament

Absolutely there should be multiple divisions for the team tournament, but size of school does not affect an individual's chances to place. I've always thought having three (or four, or five, or as in Virginia six!) state champions at each weight class seems odd.

My son competed in NJ, where there was just one division for individuals and, in his Junior and Senior years, over 1200 kids at his weight. He was a damn good wrestler, and never placed. But as disappointing as that was it didn't drive him away from the sport. And if we had three division he probably would have made the medal stand, but he always acknowledged the victory would have seem less fulfilling. It didn't make the whole experience less rewarding.

In an individual sport, there should be one state champion.
State tournament would not be the same if there wasn't 3 classes. My high school excused all absences for the tournament so everyone who wanted to could go support their guys. I think that would effectively cut revenue in half. Day 2 and 3 attendance would be gutted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chopper25
State tournament would not be the same if there wasn't 3 classes. My high school excused all absences for the tournament so everyone who wanted to could go support their guys. I think that would effectively cut revenue in half. Day 2 and 3 attendance would be gutted.
For those who have only heard stories about the Iowa State Tournament a lot of the small rural communities literally shut down and send hundreds of people to support a couple kids. Nothing beats day 2 when 1a and 2a are together and you can't find a seat. Except for vets of coarse..
 
  • Like
Reactions: redghost1974
Iowa depth is growing year by year. The Solon kid who placed 4 at WAMAC conference. Was than able to go on in win state at 170. All 4 of those wrestlers placed at state tournament. I’m not saying Iowa Is the top state but we our working our way back to the top. There are a tons of Iowa natives becoming AA in the lower divisions.
 
ADVERTISEMENT