boconnell

Great questions and they promote good discussion. We do weighins for each day of competition. For duals it's an hour before. For tournaments it's usually 1-2 hours before the start. We don't have any tournaments where you wrestle only the finals on the final day. But you could have a decent gap before the semis (maybe noon). I think the rules could absolutely be improved. I think trying to promote less weight cutting in HS is good. The team I coach in Washington might seriously cut less weight than any decent team in the state. I don't like weight cutting. I just don't think it's matside weighins or you're prioritizing the lineup over a kid's best interest.

The current rule is one hour weigh ins. You declared that if a coach doesn't support mat side weighins, it's because they care about other things more than their wrestlers.

Great points. They don't make it any less absurd that you said a coach who supports one hour weighins doesn't care about kids.

So now we should be gambling friendly to attract imaginary casual viewers to the sport?

I guess if it's happening already we should try to create more gambling. Maybe if weight cutting is happening we should try to make that worse too.

Prop bets? So we want to make things healthier with matside weighins, but then encourage gambling on a sport that doesn't have a professional level? Genius.

College CC and track don't have weigh ins, but coaches body fat test their athletes and it's far unhealthier than weight cutting in wrestling.

You don't know about those sports if you think they all cut less weight. Weight cutting is nuts across every sport with weight classes. Horse racing goes beyond matside weigh ins and requires a weigh in and a weigh out after the race, and the jockeys still cut amounts of weight that would match or exceed wrestlers. But you make a great point about HS participation and a responsibility to young wrestlers.

None of this has anything to do with matside weigh ins vs one hour weigh ins. If coaches tell kids they are needed down 15 lbs, then they care about a lot of things, and the athlete probably isn't one of them. But they can tell kids they're needed down with matside weigh ins, and they can tell kids they aren't needed down with one hour weigh ins. If you want to argue that coaches who push unhealthy or unneccessary weight cutting don't care about kids, then you've got a great argument. If you want to push that coaches who prefer one hour weigh ins to matside weigh ins don't care about kids, then you have completely lost it.

Is it a black eye for MMA, Boxing, Jiu-Jitsu, Judo, kick boxing, power lifting, rowing, horse racing, sprint football, and youth football? I might seriously coach the HS team that cuts the least weight in the entire state of washington. I have no attachment to weight cutting, but vilifying it is silly.

It's interesting that you directly equate kids weighing in an hour before to coaches not caring about their wrestlers.

Again? You haven't responded yet. You just deflect and attack.

What goalposts have moved? I said nobody was faked out every time.

Serious question. What was I supposed to get from it? You've been massively unclear. So let's simplify. Do you really think Ferrari faked out anybody? Do you really think anybody is seething over this announcement? I think he made a joke that faked out nobody. I also think plenty of people don't like him, but I haven't seen anybody seething (or anything close) over this announcement.

You got faked out by a clip of a podcast?

It's awesome watching someone switch screen names back and forth and respond to themselves. The pathology is fascinating.

This makes no sense. The 'fake out' happened on a podcast. You couldn't have possibly been faked out without listening to the podcast with the 'fake out'. So which is it? Were you faked out by the podcast announcement, or does your full life prevent your from listening to podcasts?

This is an awesome thread title. He didn't fake out anybody. The news leaked days earlier and anybody who listens to FRL knew before he said anything. And the haters are mostly imaginary. More fans yawned then seethed.

I'd define it by the meaning of the word. I don't get to choose a new definition then what it actually means. So in other words, the way you're defining it. The idea that Hahn was loyal to those wrestlers is dumb. He was loyal to the team. That's why he asked the team. All of these coaches are loyal to the team and what's best for the team (in part because of how what's best for the team mostly lines up with what's best for them). The idea that a coach should be loyal to an individual wrestler over other individual wrestlers or to the team as a whole is dumb. Cael Sanderson owes loyalty to the PSU wrestling team. Not to every individual PSU wrestler in all situations. If he owed loyalty to every individual wrestler regardless of context, then he'd make it about 15 minutes before those individual loyalties would conflict. For example, he recruited Ryder with Jack Kelly on the roster. Nobody cared that he recruited a better wrestler over a worse wrestler. But now that's a big deal and it's disloyal because he owes the job to the guy who was brought in over someone else initially. This sport is built on the best guy winning the spot. The idea that a coach is supposed to counteract that and keep better wrestlers off the team is dumb. It's hand wringing from fans who want to find ways to make big teams that they don't root for into bad guys.

How does this work? He brought in 4 potential new starters but because the team was okay with it, it was loyal to the guys getting replaced? Absurd. Loyal would be letting the guys who are being replaced decide. But to be clear the idea of loyalty equaling not allowing better wrestlers on the team is absurd. The guy who made this thread is clearly trying to show that and did a pretty good job.

You didn't mention Wyatt but you made a post about pins at heavyweight in a thread called "Hendrickson wins the Hodge". More pins at heavyweight doesn't make majors or tech falls more impressive than pins at heavyweight. There are data points that say pins happen more at heavyweight, so you could say that 10 pins at 157 is more impressive than 10 at Heavy. But the biggest data point is that pins are worth more points and are the ultimate goal in collegiate wrestling. So it might be easier to pin at heavyweight, but it's still what every heavyweight is trying to do, so there is no reasonable world where a major at heavyweight is more impressive than a pin at heavyweight.

Where are you getting the idea he's a sergeant?

Do you seriously doubt that Wyatt Hendrickson was outclassing his opponents? Anybody who thinks percentage of matches with bonus is more important than average team points per match is making a good argument. I'd disagree, but I'd totally get it. I think Starocci had a great case for the Hodge. I'm not sure I can separate rooting interests from my vote, and if I could separate it, I'm not sure what I'd vote. If you threw out the criteria and just asked me who is the best 2025 NCAA wrestler I go Starocci. But comparing what Wyatt Hendrickson did at heavyweight to fat kids rolling over in HS wrestling is not a good argument. Saying that a HWT getting majors or techs for less team points is more impressive is not a good argument.

Bo was an awesome PSU wrestler and he is now an awesome PSU fan. I think it's incredible the way he supports them.

Not one person has said anybody is monetizing 6+ figures in this thread. But that's because you're the only one to mention 6 figures in this thread. You keep beating up a strawman while quoting people who didn't say anything close to whatever you're arguing against.