It's May, let's talk rule change

[artradley]

I would really like to see a one point exposure reward for any back exposure with control. It's so hard to turn a guy, and so many matches come down to a single TD, I would love to see more scoring from the top.

Also, an earlier conversation about liking/disliking Freestyle rules made me think perhaps you should be allowed to score more than once with the same hold. For instance allow up to four exposure points with the same hold. Tilt for two, guy gets to his belly, tilt again, get up to two more points. Again, it could add more offense ion the mat.

 

[bawlmerhawk]

Rideouts -- boring. 60 second limit, then wrestlers up with no escape points. Also, no uniforms that look like pajamas (looking at you, PSU). And bring back ties for dual meets, seriously. Winning on criteria is for the birds.

 

[pumpdog20]

True step out

Don't accrue riding time unless it's off an offensive scoring move

3 point TD and reversal.

 

[anon_0pi0cv8t1ggvb]

Rideouts -- boring. 60 second limit, then wrestlers up with no escape points. Also, no uniforms that look like pajamas (looking at you, PSU). And bring back ties for dual meets, seriously. Winning on criteria is for the birds.

How is winning by criteria for the birds? I would say ties are for the birds. The criteria currently used for the tie breaker makes sense imo.

 

[CradleKing26]

I really hope they implement a 3 point takedown.

 

[artradley]

How is winning by criteria for the birds? I would say ties are for the birds. The criteria currently used for the tie breaker makes sense imo.

Eleven weight classes makes the most sense. How the heck college and HS both decided to have an even number of weight classes boggles my mind.

 

[bawlmerhawk]

I never had a problem w/ ties, but I know I'm in the minority. If you can't have ties, then decide it on the mat -- an 11th match or something. And in freestyle matches, have an overtime, instead of giving it to the guy who got the last takedown.

 

[Stanley75]

Take down attempts should be rewarded. Everyone wants to see action.

 

[Hawk3+1]

I really like the 3 point takedown- promotes more attempts and and action on the feet.

Something should be done with riding- gets so boring. The 60 second ride and then both up freestyle type suggestion is good. I like it!

 

[Pennstate1985]

I really like the 3 point takedown- promotes more attempts and and action on the feet.

Something should be done with riding- gets so boring. The 60 second ride and then both up freestyle type suggestion is good. I like it!

I would like that idea more if they awarded top guy a point after the 60 seconds as long as there was no stall on top called during that time. Would force more action from bottom.

 

[artradley]

I really like the 3 point takedown- promotes more attempts and and action on the feet.

Something should be done with riding- gets so boring. The 60 second ride and then both up freestyle type suggestion is good. I like it!

But if you provided more scoring opportunities on top as I described, then you will just naturally get more action on the mat.

 

[UndercoverHawk]

My issue for the 3 point td is that people get to a major faster so that will lead to just more stalling in the riding. If all a guy has to do is 2 td 1escape 1 rt to major you're just gonna see long ride outs in all 3 periods.

 

[lookleft goright]

How about you give the point for riding time after 60 seconds and then wipe the riding time off. You then put both guys on their get with both riding times at zero.

If the top guy gets called for stalling, the bottom guy gets to his feet and the riding clock is set back to zero. The second stalling call on the top guy is a point for the bottom guy and he goes back to his feet and the riding time is set back to zero. Basically, he is awarded an escape. That would punish stalling on top.

As long as no riding time point has been awarded, the riding time will be cumulative as it is now.

 

[championhawk]

I see all kinds of suggestions here that would be a nightmare. We don't want to give more judgement control to the shit officials. A true push out would be much better than the current judgement rule.

 

[tomsc]

I never had a problem w/ ties, but I know I'm in the minority. If you can't have ties, then decide it on the mat -- an 11th match or something. And in freestyle matches, have an overtime, instead of giving it to the guy who got the last takedown.

I agree. I think if there's a tie, then you should have the coaches of each team wrestle as the tie-breaker!!

 

[nitlion6]

My problem with a 3 point TD is it lessens the premium the new back exposure rules places on turning an opponent.

 

[pablow]

I'd like to see the freestyle step out rule.

I'd like a rule that awards an escape when the top guy pushes his opponent out of bounds to avoid losing control of the ride. [e.g. bottom man stands up, attempts to break grip, top guys pushes him out of bounds to avoid losing control]

Also, there should be a Mark Perry rule: if a coach challenges a call, he has 5 seconds to think up a reason for the challenge or one point penalty award.

 

[anon_0pi0cv8t1ggvb]

I never had a problem w/ ties, but I know I'm in the minority. If you can't have ties, then decide it on the mat -- an 11th match or something. And in freestyle matches, have an overtime, instead of giving it to the guy who got the last takedown.

It already is decided on the mat. Team with most pins, techs, majors, TDs, etc. I really don't see a problem with the criteria.

 

[artradley]

My problem with a 3 point TD is it lessens the premium the new back exposure rules places on turning an opponent.

Agree. I think folk style already has too many matches were a guy gets a TD then spends the rest of the match protecting those two points. It works because all other offensive points are so difficult to get.

I believe the best changes are a)simple, and b)provide more scoring opportunities.

Push out rule and one-point exposures fit both categories. Without changing the nature of the sport I believe these would provide more scoring and more excitement.

 

[bawlmerhawk]

It already is decided on the mat. Team with most pins, techs, majors, TDs, etc. I really don't see a problem with the criteria.

It's a problem because those are individual statistics for ten distinct matches, never meant to determine the outcome of a meet.

At the end of 9 innings, do we decide a baseball game by number of hits, walks, or strikeouts during the game? No, we keep playing till one team outscores the other. And yes, sometimes those games go 20+ innings into the wee hours, and the players are exhausted and my wife yells at me to come to bed, but the outcome is decided during the game.

Seems like we could do the same in wrestling.

 

[anon_0pi0cv8t1ggvb]

It's a problem because those are individual statistics for ten distinct matches, never meant to determine the outcome of a meet.

At the end of 9 innings, do we decide a baseball game by number of hits, walks, or strikeouts during the game? No, we keep playing till one team outscores the other. And yes, sometimes those games go 20+ innings into the wee hours, and the players are exhausted and my wife yells at me to come to bed, but the outcome is decided during the game.

Seems like we could do the same in wrestling.

Those are individual statistics, just like wrestling an 11th match would be an individual deciding the outcome. Adding a 11th weight class just isn't going to happen.

I really don't get the comparison to baseball...two completely different sports.

 

[grapplefann]

Freestyle is about initiating action. Folk style is about control. These are different sports. I prefer folk style.
Riding a quality opponent for a whole period is a beautiful thing, not a boring thing. And no, I don't like stalling any more than the rest of you, but I do like the "struggle." I like watching two quality opponents struggle against each other. I liked really big mats and the guys who used to go after it on them.

Making more rules is like making more laws. We need really good rules, and only the fewest of them that do the job we intend them to do. What we really need are changes in attitude more than new rules. If guys brought an attack mentality to the matches, then we wouldn't need new rules to incentivize attacking and discourage stalling. If we have to break tied meets, I could support using takedowns instead of falls. That's a fairly subtle way to support action in matches.

We're still assessing the results of the last set of changes. Let's go very slowly in making more changes to folk style until we gather more results.

 

[Cali_Nittany]

For the 11th weight class - women only. 117 or whatever weight class that can get the most participation.

 

[bawlmerhawk]

Those are individual statistics, just like wrestling an 11th match would be an individual deciding the outcome. Adding a 11th weight class just isn't going to happen.

I really don't get the comparison to baseball...two completely different sports.

Okay, then GOLF. At the end of a tied golf event, the two teams use a sudden-death tiebreaker. Are golfers tougher than wrestlers? I think not.

And you wouldn't need another weight class. Make one of the lightweights wrestle an overtime period -- he's had two hours off, now win one for the team. I think that would be pretty cool.

 

[Azchief32]

For the 11th weight class - women only. 117 or whatever weight class that can get the most participation.

Female Mud wrestling!! Genius. This will surely expand the fan base plus attract recruits. I'm hearing we might be able to lure Super stud Hwy Dewey Oxberger away from Army...Likes the ladies and rolling around in the mud from what I hear.

 

[Neo_Hawk]

Freestyle is about initiating action. Folk style is about control. These are different sports. I prefer folk style.
Riding a quality opponent for a whole period is a beautiful thing, not a boring thing. And no, I don't like stalling any more than the rest of you, but I do like the "struggle." I like watching two quality opponents struggle against each other. I liked really big mats and the guys who used to go after it on them.

Making more rules is like making more laws. We need really good rules, and only the fewest of them that do the job we intend them to do. What we really need are changes in attitude more than new rules. If guys brought an attack mentality to the matches, then we wouldn't need new rules to incentivize attacking and discourage stalling. If we have to break tied meets, I could support using takedowns instead of falls. That's a fairly subtle way to support action in matches.

We're still assessing the results of the last set of changes. Let's go very slowly in making more changes to folk style until we gather more results.

I actually appreciate a good ride out, but to be good in my opinion the guy on top has to be trying to improve the his position. College allows parallel ride and I would like to see this change. For an example of a good ride, look at Clark and Stoll. Those guy are locked in and getting out on the side trying to turn their guys. They control their opponent through holds, not by trying to saddle up. If your opponent is flatted out, their needs to be a countdown to get the guy on top out of the parallel position. I know many HS's have this rule and it make the ride more about skill and less about wearing you guy down and laying on him.

 

[Sandor45]

Push out rule. Plain and simple.
Get rid of riding time and bring guys to their feet with no escape points after 30 seconds of no points wrestling on top.

 

[Pennstate1985]

Push out rule. Plain and simple.
Get rid of riding time and bring guys to their feet with no escape points after 30 seconds of no points wrestling on top.

I like the push out idea. I don't like the 30 second return to feet idea. It would effectively eliminate mat based wrestling, and at that point, you may as well scrap folk for free. I might buy a 60 second clock, but 30 is too quick imo.

 

[artradley]

I like the push out idea. I don't like the 30 second return to feet idea. It would effectively eliminate mat based wrestling, and at that point, you may as well scrap folk for free. I might buy a 60 second clock, but 30 is too quick imo.

This. We should maintain the basic character of the sport. That's why I simply want to provide more ways to score from the top position. It's so damn tough to turn a guy, you ought to be rewarded for it even if you don't hold then there for two seconds.

 

[pumpdog20]

I think 30 secs if plenty of time to give a person to either turn or escape. I like that idea.

 

[Pennstate1985]

I think 30 secs if plenty of time to give a person to either turn or escape. I like that idea.

Freestyle gives about 15-20. My opinion is that 30 seconds gets you dangerously close to freestyle. Too close. At some point, someone is going to suggest eliminating folk to give us better olympic chances. In all honesty, if we adopt too many rules similar to free, what is the point of folk?

 

[HawkTalk3]

If you guys are interested, Doug Schwab came on our podcast a few weeks ago and talked about the new rules implemented this year and what his thoughts are going forward. For those that don't know, Doug is on the rules committee.

As of right now he personally isn't a fan of adding the pushout rule to folkstyle, and you can hear him go into more detail in the link below, but I thought it was a pretty insightful interview as far as the rules go.

https://iawrestle.com/2016/04/20/potentially-dangerous-44-doug-schwab-talks-ncaa-rules/

 

[Sandor45]

Whatever instigates more action and appeals to more casual fans is what we want.
Whatever rules that does that, I'm all for.
It's also crucial that we dumb these rules down or just flat eliminate them to take the decision out of the refs hands.
Having black and white rules like push out and set number time for riding is the way to go here.
Personally, I like takedowns over turns. If the top guy can't get something going within 30 seconds, I think you see a lot of the casual fans eyes start to glaze over.

 

[pumpdog20]

Freestyle gives about 15-20. My opinion is that 30 seconds gets you dangerously close to freestyle. Too close. At some point, someone is going to suggest eliminating folk to give us better olympic chances. In all honesty, if we adopt too many rules similar to free, what is the point of folk?

Well, you'd always have the control over exposure difference. To me, that's the big one.

 

[nitlion6]

Just my 2 cents. I like our sport and I pretty much am not in favor of changes that have high probabilities of altering the sport's personality.

I liked the new OB rules instituted last season. The proper way to make the call needs to emphasized at the beginning of each year, maybe remphasized half way through the season. Last year towards the end of the season the call was losing its consistency between officals.

My entire life it has been repeated over and over, the ultimate goal is to pin your opponent. Therefore I like the new back exposure rules.

I hate riding by just hanging on. The 5 second count when the top guy drops below the waist to a single leg ride is a rule I like, but improvement is possible. Example, if I ride your ankle for 5+ secs I am stalling. If I grab a leg by dropping down to it and hang for 5 secs I am stalling. However if I drop to a single leg and bump you forward and you get to your feet, even though I am still clinging to a single leg for my ride I am no longer stalling - bull crap I'm not. Call it what it is, stalling.
The same with top man riding legs and the bottom man gets to his feet - either return the defensive wrestler to the mat, release him or it should be a top stall.

I think we make a mistake when we argue that we must make a change so the sport is more appealing to casual fans. I believe instead our core fans, who understand the sport need to be listened too. If certain things bore the snot out of us (as a group), those things are what need addressed. It is our passion that attracts other fans.

 

[Hawk_82]

4 rules. only get riding time point if you have scored back points in the match

If bottom guy stands up with top guy on his back, either top guy returns him to the mat or its an escape, no more stalemate in that position.

If bottom guy is standing when he goes out of bounds, its an escape.

Change the leg count to a silent count, only arm wave.

 

[FineMaterial]

At any stoppage the rider has the option of starting neutral, no escape point.
Lots more action, more reward for takedowns.

 

[JasonBryant]

Don't award riding time unless NF is scored. I loathe riding time.

 

[Cal98]

Don't award riding time unless NF is scored. I loathe riding time.

Agreed. Take it a step further though and just get rid of it. However, if we don't get rid of it, we'll get to keep the golf clap from the 5% of fans who get excited when a wrestler reaches 1 minute of initial riding time.

Also, allow back points from neutral. We'll stop wrestlers from diving though and rolling across their backs constantly tying up neutral scrambles. Better prep for freestyle to learn to limit back exposure from neutral.

 

[Cali_Nittany]

Female Mud wrestling!! Genius. This will surely expand the fan base plus attract recruits. I'm hearing we might be able to lure Super stud Hwy Dewey Oxberger away from Army...Likes the ladies and rolling around in the mud from what I hear.

This might be a good idea. It would give Tognetti's sisters scholarship opprtunities that they otherwise wouldn't have.

However, I hear that there are a lot of Tognetti sisters and cousins in the mud wrestling pipeline so Iowa and PSU wouldn't stand a chance.