ADVERTISEMENT

PIAA dropping from 14 to 12 weights?

El-Jefe

Well-Known Member
Jul 27, 2012
31,825
75,596
1
They're gonna study it -- but the fact that they have a target number of weights says it's likely.

Also some paper rule changes on transfers, but at first glance, when combined, seems like no real change from the current -- am I missing something there?

 
MN is giving coaches a "choice" to reduce to 12 in events or something. The implementation of the study in our state is so convoluted and stupid.
 
Mixed emotions. Obviously it allows fewer kids at each school to participate (potentially), but we've all been to dozens of high school duals and tournaments where one or more schools couldn't field an entire team. Admittedly, I live in a rural area, where it's not uncommon for a team to have only 15 or 18 kids total, but...….Dual meets should ideally be decided on the mat and not be won by the team who is the most creative with their roster to pick up or to avoid byes/forfeits.
 
Last edited:
We live in an instant gratification society. I'm afraid there will be more kids that drop out, because they aren't wrestling varsity right away.
 
Hate hearing such a thing.

As I was hoping the NCAA would add a weight btw 195-285, instead PA may drop 2 weight classes?

Trading off less kids participating for less forfeits... honestly sounds plain stupid to me!!
 
Hate hearing such a thing.

As I was hoping the NCAA would add a weight btw 195-285, instead PA may drop 2 weight classes?

Trading off less kids participating for less forfeits... honestly sounds plain stupid to me!!

When I was in HS in PA, (admittedly a long time ago), we had 12 weight classes; 98, 105, 112, 119, 126, 132, 138, 145, 155, 167, 185, and HWT.

Since kids are getting bigger, why not drop 98 (I know it’s been done), add something in the range of 182, move 185 to 195 and keep HWT. I could see adding a 225 for a total of 13 weight classes.
 
When I was in HS in PA, (admittedly a long time ago), we had 12 weight classes; 98, 105, 112, 119, 126, 132, 138, 145, 155, 167, 185, and HWT.

Since kids are getting bigger, why not drop 98 (I know it’s been done), add something in the range of 182, move 185 to 195 and keep HWT. I could see adding a 225 for a total of 13 weight classes.
I'm not sure how it is statewide, but what I've seen locally on occasions (District 6) is that the heavier weights are forfeited almost as much as lower weights. I know numbers are low, a lot of times good football programs run far into wrestling seasons, but I've never seen as many forfeits in dual meets as I have in the past five or so years. Dual meets are hard to justify knowing that some are completed in around an hour or so. Also, even when you expect a good match up at a certain weight usually one of the kids end up moving up to the next weight.

On another note, while looking up a wrestler a little ago I noticed NY still has a 98lb weight class. I typically thought most high schools weights were fairly standard across the country.
 
I'm not sure how it is statewide, but what I've seen locally on occasions (District 6) is that the heavier weights are forfeited almost as much as lower weights. I know numbers are low, a lot of times good football programs run far into wrestling seasons, but I've never seen as many forfeits in dual meets as I have in the past five or so years. Dual meets are hard to justify knowing that some are completed in around an hour or so. Also, even when you expect a good match up at a certain weight usually one of the kids end up moving up to the next weight.

On another note, while looking up a wrestler a little ago I noticed NY still has a 98lb weight class. I typically thought most high schools weights were fairly standard across the country.

New York allows 7th & 8th graders wrestle varsity.
 
Truth be told, a good part of the reason why I stopped following high school wrestling was the move to 14 weight classes. Watching a dual or tournament became grueling, long events to me.
 
History shows the following. I went back further than planned, as the data interested me. Data is courtesy of the National Federation of High Schools Participation Survey, as well as a couple state wrestling sites.

1970-1980: Rapid growth, from about 7000 High School programs nation-wide, and 225,000 or so total wrestlers, in 1970, to a bit more than 8700 programs and nearly 275,000 wrestlers in 1980. Data shows, on average, 35 wrestlers per team. Several years show over 9000 teams and the number of wrestlers exceeding 300,000.
Each state sets their weight classes, and in this time frame, as examples, Ohio went from 12 weight classes to 13. If my info is correct, Pennsylvania was at 12 the whole decade.

1981-1990: Number of teams stable, at around 8500. Number of wrestlers (average) per team dropped from the 35 range in the previous decade, to 28 per team in 1990.
Ohio went from 13 weight classes to 14 during this decade (which is where they stand today), and Pennsylvania went from 12 to 13 in 1989.

1991-2000: Total number of teams nation-wide increases during the decade, to about 9000, though the average number of wrestlers per team decreases to about 26.

2001-2010: Team count continues to grow, as there are around 10,000 nation-wide. The number of wrestlers per team holds steady compared to the previous decade, at around 26.
Pennsylvania moves to 14 weight classes early this decade, in 2003.

2011-Present: Number of teams grows slightly, to today's 10,600+. There is a decline in the number of wrestlers, from 26 (previous decade+) to 23.

Pennsylvania: During this same time-frame, PA wrestling (in the 1970's) had 550 to 650 or so high schools with wrestling programs, and a range of 21,000 to 28,000 wrestlers, or about 40 wrestlers per team. The 1980's and 1990's saw the number of teams stabilize in the 470 range, though the number of wrestlers per team plummet from 40 (in the 1970's), to about 20, where it is today.

Discussion: This is complicated. There's far more data to consider than just what is above. The numbers are averages, so for every team with numbers of wrestlers above 20 (PA) or 23 (nation-wide), there will be teams below. When thinking about 14 weight classes and average number of wrestlers in the 20-23 range, it's not hard to understand the number of forfeits, though it's only one side of the argument.

Just since 2012 (to 2017), the total number of High School Wrestlers dropped from 272,149 to 244,804, or 10%. The PA numbers held steady in that time, while the national numbers did not.

As an aside, there were 146 D1 Wrestling programs in 1982, and 76 today.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: backdrft76
I think on the face this sounds really good to me. The smaller schools can now field fuller lineups and not have the forfeit game come into play during duals. This is happening increasingly more. However, it allows the powerhouse recruiting schools like a BECA to only have to get 12 people instead of 14.
 
I don't have a problem moving back down to 12 weight classes but I think the PIAA needs to look at the root cause of the decline in participation as well. Some of this they brought on themselves and reducing weight classes is not going to fix the underlying problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sullivan
When I was in HS in PA, (admittedly a long time ago), we had 12 weight classes; 98, 105, 112, 119, 126, 132, 138, 145, 155, 167, 185, and HWT.

Since kids are getting bigger, why not drop 98 (I know it’s been done), add something in the range of 182, move 185 to 195 and keep HWT. I could see adding a 225 for a total of 13 weight classes.
Might want to check the current weight classes. 182, 195, and 215/220 have existed for a while.
 
Roar,
Pennsylvania went from 11 weight classes in 1959 to 12 weight classes in 1960. The 12th weight was done by adding unlimited. First PIAA unlimited champ was Jim Nance.
 
It kind of boggles my mind. When I started wrestling in 1970 (10th grade in HS), we had full varsity and jv teams with no forfeits. My weight class had 6 guys in it, which meant (obviously) four guys did not wrestle in matches. We were not a powerhouse program by any means.
 
It kind of boggles my mind. When I started wrestling in 1970 (10th grade in HS), we had full varsity and jv teams with no forfeits. My weight class had 6 guys in it, which meant (obviously) four guys did not wrestle in matches. We were not a powerhouse program by any means.
Through the 70s PO and Bald Eagle Area would have a varsity match that was preceded by a jv match, full squad each and in the home team wrestling room there would be 10 to 20 exhibition matches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: papa_ed
History shows the following. I went back further than planned, as the data interested me. Data is courtesy of the National Federation of High Schools Participation Survey, as well as a couple state wrestling sites.

1970-1980: If my info is correct, Pennsylvania went from 11 to 12 during this decade.

1981-1990: , and Pennsylvania went from 12 to 13.
.

Not totally accurate. As someone noted, the PIAA added heavyweight in 1960 and Jim Nance was champ the first two years of the weight class. It's my understanding that heavyweight was added just for Jim Nance. Still one of the all time great heavyweights IMHO.

From 1960 thru 1988 there were 12 weight classes. In 1989 the PIAA slipped in a weight class between 125 and 145 to go to 13 weight classes. Then in 2003 they added 215 to go to 14 weight classes.

I have no problem with going back to 12 weight classes. I'm not sure about the necessity of 220, for example --- many football players and there is nowhere for them to go in college without losing or gaining a good deal of weight. And they can take back that extra weight between 125 and 145. No big deal and fewer forfeits.
 
Reducing weight classes a terrible idea imo

Does it really matter we spend an extra 20 secs watching the ref raise the hand of a wrestler in a forfeited match?

Further, what happens if/when the number of wrestlers begin to increase? Free style is bringing lots more attention to the sport, so are the ESPN NCAA championships, the UFC and Flo. What happens when those new kids are shut out because we're limiting teams to 12 weight classes?

Think, does anyone wish the NCAA had a 220 weight class? No team would want that more than PSU.

Never decrease the weight classes because it doesnt harm anyone to sit through an extra forfeit. Build the wrestling brand and attract more participants, not the other way around.

In business, reducing expenses because your top line is decreasing is a strong signal your business is unhealthy and headed in the wrong direction
 
Reducing weight classes a terrible idea imo

Does it really matter we spend an extra 20 secs watching the ref raise the hand of a wrestler in a forfeited match?

Further, what happens if/when the number of wrestlers begin to increase? Free style is bringing lots more attention to the sport, so are the ESPN NCAA championships, the UFC and Flo. What happens when those new kids are shut out because we're limiting teams to 12 weight classes?

Think, does anyone wish the NCAA had a 220 weight class? No team would want that more than PSU.

Never decrease the weight classes because it doesnt harm anyone to sit through an extra forfeit. Build the wrestling brand and attract more participants, not the other way around.

In business, reducing expenses because your top line is decreasing is a strong signal your business is unhealthy and headed in the wrong direction
That's not the issue. Forfeits are rampant, and it's not just an occasional one-off because the only 106-lb guy got sick, or because the football team made the playoffs.

Worse yet, been a rash of alternating forfeits because the coaches don't want to risk losing a dual. And by that I mean sometimes 6 or 8 weights forfeited instead of having 3-4 matches. That's just awful, deprives the athletes of the opportunity and benefits of competing.

From a fan perspective: often the very best wrestlers, who the fans would most want to see (and might pay to see) get the forfeits. For example: Gavin Hoffman won 7 of 24 duals by forfeit, and not just to the small schools -- Erie McDowell forfeited to him. Trent Hidlay got 4 forfeits -- including Central Dauphin and Bald Eagle Area.

I'm not advocating cutting weights, as it deprives athletes of opportunities. But I do think someone should gather forfeit data and determine if there is a risk to the sport -- could it be causing lower attendance (which also seems to be an issue)? Is there a risk of schools dropping the sport? (Of course I don't trust PIAA, and it appears they have in true PIAA tradition already decided and are using a "study" to justify that decision after the fact.)

Also not sure there is a good solution. The problem seems to be hitting the small schools hard -- let's face it, if your school has 100 boys in 9-12, filling 14 weights is a challenge before having to share those 100 boys with other winter sports like basketball and swimming. (But the big schools are not immune to it either.) PA probably has too many very small school districts, but consolidation in rural areas brings a lot of other challenges and is far outside the PIAA's scope.

But if the issue is too many forfeits at State Duals -- which also wouldn't surprise me because PIAA -- that's often coaches strategically saving their guys for the next match and can be cured with a rules change for the duals tournament: you forfeit a weight, you've forfeited it for the entire tournament.
 
There is an easy and more equitable solution to the problem of schools not being able to fill all of the weight classes, without punishing those that can fill lineups, by eliminating them. If a school does not have anyone for a particular weight class then that class should be excluded from the meet without a forfeit/points going to the other team. These are not for injuries, illness or avoidance. It must be that the schools would have to report any unfilled weights basically for the year to receive the exclusions. It seems misplaced to eliminate weight classes and therefore wrestlers because some schools can't fill all of the weight classes.
 
There is an easy and more equitable solution to the problem of schools not being able to fill all of the weight classes, without punishing those that can fill lineups, by eliminating them. If a school does not have anyone for a particular weight class then that class should be excluded from the meet without a forfeit/points going to the other team. These are not for injuries, illness or avoidance. It must be that the schools would have to report any unfilled weights basically for the year to receive the exclusions. It seems misplaced to eliminate weight classes and therefore wrestlers because some schools can't fill all of the weight classes.

But this would be punishing teams that can field a full lineup by not having any consequence to the team that can't. I don't see any good solution. Maybe having fewer weights for the 2A schools than the 3A schools but even that is far from perfect.
 
But this would be punishing teams that can field a full lineup by not having any consequence to the team that can't. I don't see any good solution. Maybe having fewer weights for the 2A schools than the 3A schools but even that is far from perfect.
Could you please explain how it is punishing anyone?
 
How do I give El Jefe 10 million likes for his post?!?! That's it!!! Right above this post!!!

I love 10 weights in college, 99.95% of the time WE the fans get to see the matches happen ( unless you are Tan Tom ) ...

I want that for HS ... I'm greedy! I don't care what anyone else says, 84-0 is NOT a competitive match, I'd rather see 21-15 ... 12 reg decision bouts!

If 10 weights are on the table as an option, I'd say HELL YEAH!!!

2nd added bonus to less weights, for those of us that watch AA and AAA in Hershey --- MORE TIME at the BORO!!!!
 
Could you please explain how it is punishing anyone?

Your team has wrestlers at all 14 weights and mine only has 10. So your team has 4 guys sitting on the bench without being able to score just because my team doesn't have as much depth as yours. You don't consider that punishment?
 
Your team has wrestlers at all 14 weights and mine only has 10. So your team has 4 guys sitting on the bench without being able to score just because my team doesn't have as much depth as yours. You don't consider that punishment?
It certainly seems fairer than the school with 14 receiving 24 points just because the other school isn't able to fill all of the weights. Is it that offensive to you that a school with only 10 might win the meet?
We are talking about scholastic sports here aren't we?
 
It certainly seems fairer than the school with 14 receiving 24 points just because the other school isn't able to fill all of the weights. Is it that offensive to you that a school with only 10 might win the meet?
We are talking about scholastic sports here aren't we?

OK, I'm done. I thought we were having a reasonable discussion but apparently not since you are just making things up. See bolded part of your post which I never said or even implied in any way.
 
There is an easy and more equitable solution to the problem of schools not being able to fill all of the weight classes, without punishing those that can fill lineups, by eliminating them. If a school does not have anyone for a particular weight class then that class should be excluded from the meet without a forfeit/points going to the other team. These are not for injuries, illness or avoidance. It must be that the schools would have to report any unfilled weights basically for the year to receive the exclusions. It seems misplaced to eliminate weight classes and therefore wrestlers because some schools can't fill all of the weight classes.
That is just not well thought out at all. Sorry. My thoughts go to hyper-competitive coaches. Of which there are more than a few - especially when they are young.
 
There is an easy and more equitable solution to the problem of schools not being able to fill all of the weight classes, without punishing those that can fill lineups, by eliminating them. If a school does not have anyone for a particular weight class then that class should be excluded from the meet without a forfeit/points going to the other team. These are not for injuries, illness or avoidance. It must be that the schools would have to report any unfilled weights basically for the year to receive the exclusions. It seems misplaced to eliminate weight classes and therefore wrestlers because some schools can't fill all of the weight classes.
The only way this might work is, as you mentioned, if the team officially declares a weight off limits for the year.

But that comes with challenges too -- namely, no other wrestler could cut or bump there for the postseason, and nobody could join the team at that weight after the declaration.

I don't think this could be allowed after some point in the season, otherwise would be abused by the coaches. If you have a sub-.500 wrestler at Hidlay's or Hoffman's weight at state duals, and you don't think your guy will get past sectionals anyway ... You and I wouldn't tell him his season is over, but we all know it will happen.

Forget state duals: the regrettable coach behavior at the Central Dauphin - Cumberland Valley match a couple years ago says it'll happen for rivalry duals. The match where one coach ordered his wrestler to fake an injury after a questionable eye poke call, to get a DQ call that won the dual ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: chalkstream1
That is just not well thought out at all. Sorry. My thoughts go to hyper-competitive coaches. Of which there are more than a few - especially when they are young.
So here's a hypothetical: the recent Franklin Regional team that was crazy loaded in the lower weights, but not very good in the upper weights.

That was the team with Spencer Lee, Mike Kemerer, Josh Shields, Josh Maruca, Devin Brown, Dom Gianangeli, Gus Solomon ... I'm probably forgetting someone.

That team won both state tourneys, though a couple close matches at state duals (IIRC they beat Beca by around 3 pts).

If they were so inclined, they could have cut all their 182-195-220-HWT wrestlers before the season started and saved 15+ points in every dual for the entire year.

Not saying FR would have, but that's a poor incentive.

Not how we would have handled it.
 
So here's a hypothetical: the recent Franklin Regional team that was crazy loaded in the lower weights, but not very good in the upper weights.

That was the team with Spencer Lee, Mike Kemerer, Josh Shields, Josh Maruca, Devin Brown, Dom Gianangeli, Gus Solomon ... I'm probably forgetting someone.

That team won both state tourneys, though a couple close matches at state duals (IIRC they beat Beca by around 3 pts).

If they were so inclined, they could have cut all their 182-195-220-HWT wrestlers before the season started and saved 15+ points in every dual for the entire year.

Not saying FR would have, but that's a poor incentive.

Not how we would have handled it.
Yeah, FR wouldn't have done it, but good example that shows you the downside. And I can guarantee there would be more than one AA squad competing at only 6 or 7 weights with wrestlers on their bench and probably a bunch of AAA's competing at 10. Also, probably more than 1 or 2 teams gunning for BECA shaving a few weight classes off their dual meet roster with half the state cheering them on despite professing a love for a fair playing field.
 
Roar,
Pennsylvania went from 11 weight classes in 1959 to 12 weight classes in 1960. The 12th weight was done by adding unlimited. First PIAA unlimited champ was Jim Nance.
Thanks much, went back and looked again...the results for PA go back to 1938, well before the NFHS data.
In 1940, there were 10 classes.
In 1950, there were 11.
In 1960, as you noted, there were 12.
In 1989, it expanded to 13 classes.
In 2003, it expanded to 14.

Just as interesting, seeing the names of some of the greats over the years, just glancing through the results.
 
Not totally accurate. As someone noted, the PIAA added heavyweight in 1960 and Jim Nance was champ the first two years of the weight class. It's my understanding that heavyweight was added just for Jim Nance. Still one of the all time great heavyweights IMHO.

From 1960 thru 1988 there were 12 weight classes. In 1989 the PIAA slipped in a weight class between 125 and 145 to go to 13 weight classes. Then in 2003 they added 215 to go to 14 weight classes.

I have no problem with going back to 12 weight classes. I'm not sure about the necessity of 220, for example --- many football players and there is nowhere for them to go in college without losing or gaining a good deal of weight. And they can take back that extra weight between 125 and 145. No big deal and fewer forfeits.
Thanks, as well...
 
It kind of boggles my mind. When I started wrestling in 1970 (10th grade in HS), we had full varsity and jv teams with no forfeits. My weight class had 6 guys in it, which meant (obviously) four guys did not wrestle in matches. We were not a powerhouse program by any means.

same for my high school in the early 90s

hell, we often had what they called "exhibition" matches, which were guys who weren't even in the "starting" JV line up

and this was in district 1 .... not the 11 or 7 hotbeds
 
I don't know how they classify schools in Pa, but why not have divisions based on participation. Some states do this in football, where the small schools play 7 on 7 since they don't have enough students to field full teams.

Are there teams so small they can't field a full team. I wrestled in high school in NY and was not that good. When I didn't win the wrestle off for my weight at JV, I frequently wrestled up a weight class or two just for the experience, and to save the team points from a forfeit. It was tough to be competitive at 134 weighing 118, but I never got pinned :) Are these teams that small, and if so a division with fewer weights could solve the problem.
 
same for my high school in the early 90s

hell, we often had what they called "exhibition" matches, which were guys who weren't even in the "starting" JV line up

and this was in district 1 .... not the 11 or 7 hotbeds

I was one of the first two in a long while 'called' up to wrestle with the varsity guys instead of the 9th grade team in the late 70s. Felt special. Regardless, I thing 12 sounds and feels like a good number for HS and should go back to that number.
 
Yeah, FR wouldn't have done it, but good example that shows you the downside. And I can guarantee there would be more than one AA squad competing at only 6 or 7 weights with wrestlers on their bench and probably a bunch of AAA's competing at 10. Also, probably more than 1 or 2 teams gunning for BECA shaving a few weight classes off their dual meet roster with half the state cheering them on despite professing a love for a fair playing field.
The smart ass in me would love to see one year where the D11 teams all colluded to self-limit to 3 or 4 weights in a blatant attempt to stick Beca with a bunch of losses. Call it Revenge of Palisades.

Of course it would be awful for the rest of the wrestlers on those teams, so I don't really want to see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dbldoofus
State-to-state comparisons show big differences in # of wrestlers per school for year 2016-17. 14 states had over 300 High Schools participating in wrestling, only looked at those.

Virginia was highest, at an average of 39 wrestlers per High School, followed by Illinois (33), and New Jersey (30).
California had the most programs, by far, with 835, and over 22,000 wrestlers (avg. 27 per school), while Ohio was second, 608 schools and about 11,500 wrestlers (avg. 19 per school).
Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin had the lowest number of wrestlers per school, averaging 19-20.
 
It kind of boggles my mind. When I started wrestling in 1970 (10th grade in HS), we had full varsity and jv teams with no forfeits. My weight class had 6 guys in it, which meant (obviously) four guys did not wrestle in matches. We were not a powerhouse program by any means.

same for my high school in the early 90s

hell, we often had what they called "exhibition" matches, which were guys who weren't even in the "starting" JV line up

and this was in district 1 .... not the 11 or 7 hotbeds

yes things appear to be going in reverse. I had a friend who wrestled for Clearfield in the '50s. He showed me a newspaper article about a Clearfield-Belefonte dual meet: had to be moved to Penn State's Rec Hall to handle the crowd of over 5,000. This was in like 1958.

We had about 100 kids try out for our team in the mid 60's, then whittled it down to about 60 wrestlers. Forfeits were unheard of. I did receive a forfeit once. His coach said his kid was sick, "suffering from a lack of intestinal fortitude". We averaged around 2,000 per dual, more for the big matches.
In the 80's attendance and participation was still pretty good. I went to a Downingtown-Great Valley dual and had to sit in the cafeteria and watch the meet on closed circuit TV. (It was great!)

But now we have smart phones and Facebook and Twitter. To take a couple hours a day for wrestling practice is a totally unreasonable demand on kids' screen time. So there is ever dwindling participation and attendance.

And another factor is specialization. Heinlein said specialization is for insects. In one thread Geof Petrie was mentioned, a true three sport superstar. But today, the really good kids specialize, wrestle year round, get fantastic training, great coaching, scientific weight training. A lot of average Joes don't want to deal with those guys. It's a deterrent to participation when you know you are often going to face some fanatic who has been fine tuned in the art of wrestling, while you are just doing it for the fun of it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT