What do you think of new rules proposed for college wrestling?

Grady

Well-Known Member
3 pts for a takedown. No riding time point without turn or back pts. 2-pt and 4-pt near falls eliminated and replaced with a 3 pt near fall after 3 second count instead.
Also changes regarding riding on top. Personally, I like nearly all of the proposed changes because they incentivize action. My only gripe is eliminating the 2 and 4-pt nearfalls -- both of which incentivize action. One of the rules committee members said they eliminated the 4-pt near fall to "balance out the 3 pt takedown" rule proposal....which makes no sense considering all the other proposed changes are designed to create higher scoring and higher action matches. It would be easy to simply score a 2-pt near fall after a 2 count, 3-pt near fall after a 3 count, and 4-pt near fall after a 4 count -- very easy for the refs to work with that.
 
3 pts for a takedown. No riding time point without turn or back pts. 2-pt and 4-pt near falls eliminated and replaced with a 3 pt near fall after 3 second count instead.
Also changes regarding riding on top. Personally, I like nearly all of the proposed changes because they incentivize action. My only gripe is eliminating the 2 and 4-pt nearfalls -- both of which incentivize action. One of the rules committee members said they eliminated the 4-pt near fall to "balance out the 3 pt takedown" rule proposal....which makes no sense considering all the other proposed changes are designed to create higher scoring and higher action matches. It would be easy to simply score a 2-pt near fall after a 2 count, 3-pt near fall after a 3 count, and 4-pt near fall after a 4 count -- very easy for the refs to work with that.
Not doing enough.

1. The riding time rule is pretty dumb, if a guy is getting back points (required for RT under these rules), how often is he going to need a point to win or tie? Not very often. Just get rid of freakin riding time altogether. It's a stupid, antiquated rule.

2. The 3pt takedown makes no sense. It makes takedown shots more risky if guys get countered and wont do anything to increase action. The reason guys aren't shooting now is because takedown defense has gotten so good over the past 20 years that it's too much of a risk. This does nothing to incentivize.

3. Still no push out rule. Guys are still allowed to run away to the edge of the mat and stalling is never called. If you get pushed out or go out voluntarily it should be a point for your opponent. That would eliminate the runaways on the 3rd period when a guy has no stall warning yet.

4. If you want to encourage action, make a rule that if the 1st period ends 0-0 both guys get a stall call, or better yet call it passivity. That's what it is.

5. Re: the above point thats stalling is never called, and the mouth breathers who say, "JUST CAWL STALLIN'!!" Well, stalling isn't defined. It's a pure judgement call that every ref calls differently and every crowd influences. Just give points for pushouts and go to a shot clock.

6. All restarts should be from neutral. Also would eliminate rides.

You know what would increase action, make the port watchable again, and benefit every American wrestler when compared to the rest of the international wrestling community? Shit can folkstyle wrestling and go to freestyle. The biggest American names in the sport have been behind it for years. Folkstyle sucks and there's no reason to keep it other than the "get of my lawn" geezer contingent who don't want change.
 
Not doing enough.

1. The riding time rule is pretty dumb, if a guy is getting back points (required for RT under these rules), how often is he going to need a point to win or tie? Not very often. Just get rid of freakin riding time altogether. It's a stupid, antiquated rule.

2. The 3pt takedown makes no sense. It makes takedown shots more risky if guys get countered and wont do anything to increase action. The reason guys aren't shooting now is because takedown defense has gotten so good over the past 20 years that it's too much of a risk. This does nothing to incentivize.

3. Still no push out rule. Guys are still allowed to run away to the edge of the mat and stalling is never called. If you get pushed out or go out voluntarily it should be a point for your opponent. That would eliminate the runaways on the 3rd period when a guy has no stall warning yet.

4. If you want to encourage action, make a rule that if the 1st period ends 0-0 both guys get a stall call, or better yet call it passivity. That's what it is.

5. Re: the above point thats stalling is never called, and the mouth breathers who say, "JUST CAWL STALLIN'!!" Well, stalling isn't defined. It's a pure judgement call that every ref calls differently and every crowd influences. Just give points for pushouts and go to a shot clock.

6. All restarts should be from neutral. Also would eliminate rides.

You know what would increase action, make the port watchable again, and benefit every American wrestler when compared to the rest of the international wrestling community? Shit can folkstyle wrestling and go to freestyle. The biggest American names in the sport have been behind it for years. Folkstyle sucks and there's no reason to keep it other than the "get of my lawn" geezer contingent who don't want change.
The 3-pt takedown rule makes sense, if for no other reason than 1 takedown should be worth more than 2 escapes. (Similar to how 1 TD is worth more than 2 FGs.)
I agree stronger enforcement of the push-out rule is needed. This is undoubtedly the beginning of the end of the riding time point.
If you're trying to reduce the impact of refs on matches, I'm not sure freestyle is the way to go. The freestyle matches I've seen are shockingly dependent on refs restarting guys in the freestyle neutral position, sometimes without rhyme or reason, with a wide subjective range of when to do that between refs -- much less consistency than in folkstyle.
What I like about folkstyle is that guys actually use a variety of wrestling moves to get out from underneath, including exciting moves like roll-thrus, etc. In freestyle, all the guy on bottom does is flop down to his belly, sprawl, and try to not get turned. Now THAT is boring.
 
The freestyle matches I've seen are shockingly dependent on refs restarting guys in the freestyle neutral position, sometimes without rhyme or reason, with a wide subjective range of when to do that between refs -- much less consistency than in folkstyle.
That's just plain false. I've watched and followed freestyle for decades through to the current evolution. Refs restart guys in freestyle because there's no activity going on. Freestyle is meant to be on your feet, if you're not creating exposure you get stood up. It's the way it's intended to be officiated. Unless you are working towards creating exposure, wrestling is done on your feet.

In freestyle, all the guy on bottom does is flop down to his belly, sprawl, and try to not get turned. Now THAT is boring.
It's not boring, though, because there's no riding and guys that go par terre get stood back up to neutral.

Freestyle is anything but boring, there's constant action. If not you get put on the shot clock and start losing points.

What I like about folkstyle is that guys actually use a variety of wrestling moves to get out from underneath, including exciting moves like roll-thrus, etc.
That might be a valid argument if that was what happens in real life. You see some rolling in high school, but the majority of top level collegiate wrestling is a 0-0 or 2-0 first period, trading escapes in periods 2 and 3, and then as long as a guy has a RT point and no stall warnings he just runs around the mat for the last 90 seconds, gets a stall warning that doesn't mean shit, and wins the match. That's how Cael Sanderson has trained his guys and he's won a closet full of nattys doing it. Cael knows the cheat code to folkstyle wrestling is riding and stalling, and he teaches that philosophy.
 
The 3-pt takedown rule makes sense, if for no other reason than 1 takedown should be worth more than 2 escapes. (Similar to how 1 TD is worth more than 2 FGs.)
I agree with the concept, but the purpose for the rule is to increase action and scoring, but it will likely have the opposite effect. Takedown attempts become waaaaay riskier and guys aren't going to want to get caught. I'm not the only one, there are a ton of high level past and former wrestlers/coaches saying it too.

Instead of increasing the point value and leaving it up to the wrestler to weigh the risks (which will err on the side of being conservative), you need to force guys to shoot by penalizing for failing to create scoring opportunities. Again, like they do with freestyle...
 
I agree stronger enforcement of the push-out rule is needed.
For clarity here, there's no push-out rule in folkstyle. It's just an OOB and restart with no points. They can call stalling, but stalling is a bullshit enigma.

In freestyle there is a rule and points are awarded. If you set foot out of bounds your opponent gets a point (unless he's in the process of attacking and the attack succeeds, then it's 2-takedown), simple as that. No warnings. This encourages working to the middle and staying in the middle which is the intent of both styles. There's no retreating in freestyle because you get hit right away, instead of how in folkstyle you have a get out of jail free card in your pocket in the form of a stall warning. Save that card until the 3rd period and you can literally run away from your opponent and never get punished.
 
Good conversation.

I actually don't mind folkstyle. There's something to be said for a hard ride, though I completely agree with eliminating RT. Folkstyle is kind of like watching a really good pitching duel in baseball. Not a lot of action, but an abundance of tension. I "feel" that tension much more with folkstyle than with freestyle, but there are several ways folkstyle could be improved.

I don't have a strong opinion on whether or not a takedown should be more points. I completely agree with the idea of adding a push-out penalty.

What I would propose:

1. Eliminate RT.

2. After a TD, incentivize both turns and bottom action. Any turn for more than one swipe is 2 points. Holding a turn for more points really doesn't make sense. It's either a 2 point turn or go for the pin. Make a reversal 3 points. If no escape or reversal by, say, 30 seconds, return to neutral and penalize the bottom by awarding the top a point. That effectively makes a TD 3 points IF you can maintain control for 30 seconds and promotes activity on the bottom. If there is a reversal, the clock resets with the new wrestler on top.

3. Anytime a body part is OOB, it's an automatic point for the opponent and return to neutral. No "cylinder." Any touch outside the line is out. Doesn't matter whether you are pushed out or stepped out. That would force wrestlers to circle back and be more aware. Any attempt to back away from engagement is a point for the opponent. No warnings.

4. Completely revamp SV (This is probably my biggest pet-peeve. The current system is asinine). Make it simple and exciting. First TD wins, period. No time limit.

The end result would be an amalgam of sorts but maintain some of the better aspects of folkstyle.
 
2. After a TD, incentivize both turns and bottom action. Any turn for more than one swipe is 2 points. Holding a turn for more points really doesn't make sense. It's either a 2 point turn or go for the pin. Make a reversal 3 points. If no escape or reversal by, say, 30 seconds, return to neutral and penalize the bottom by awarding the top a point. That effectively makes a TD 3 points IF you can maintain control for 30 seconds and promotes activity on the bottom. If there is a reversal, the clock resets with the new wrestler on top.
That would be a pretty complicated one to institute on the mat. Who would keep track of the 30 seconds? When does it start...at the time of the takedown? on the referee's signal?

4. Completely revamp SV (This is probably my biggest pet-peeve. The current system is asinine). Make it simple and exciting. First TD wins, period. No time limit.
Just go to criteria. That would also incentivize action in regulation.
 
For clarity here, there's no push-out rule in folkstyle. It's just an OOB and restart with no points. They can call stalling, but stalling is a bullshit enigma.

In freestyle there is a rule and points are awarded. If you set foot out of bounds your opponent gets a point (unless he's in the process of attacking and the attack succeeds, then it's 2-takedown), simple as that. No warnings. This encourages working to the middle and staying in the middle which is the intent of both styles. There's no retreating in freestyle because you get hit right away, instead of how in folkstyle you have a get out of jail free card in your pocket in the form of a stall warning. Save that card until the 3rd period and you can literally run away from your opponent and never get punished.
Refs in folkstyle can, and do, now award 1 pt if one wrestler completely controls the other and pushes them OOB. It may be under the rule of 'stalling', but it's really about being controlled & pushed OOB. And 1 pt can be, and is, awarded without any prior stalling warning. It's been a positive change in folkstyle, but it's diluted because it's a ref judgment call, and more than half the time you'll see the ref make a motion similar to a football ref's 'preliminary motion' signal, only in this case the ref is indicating the OOB occurred with both guys engaged in normal wrestling moves.
 
Refs in folkstyle can, and do, now award 1 pt if one wrestler completely controls the other and pushes them OOB. It may be under the rule of 'stalling', but it's really about being controlled & pushed OOB. And 1 pt can be, and is, awarded without any prior stalling warning. It's been a positive change in folkstyle, but it's diluted because it's a ref judgment call, and more than half the time you'll see the ref make a motion similar to a football ref's 'preliminary motion' signal, only in this case the ref is indicating the OOB occurred with both guys engaged in normal wrestling moves.
That's completely false. The NCAA rule book page 56-57 covers stalling in particular and wrestling infractions are covered in pages 51-60. Please find for me where stalling can be called without a prior warning.

1682352956175.png
1682352998648.png
 
It's not in there, but it's being done!
It is not being done, lol. Please provide me with an example of this happening anywhere in high school or collegiate wrestling.

If any ref, anywhere in the country, awarded a wrestler a point for a push out or awarded a stalling point with no warning, he or she would never officiate a collegiate match again.
 
It is not being done, lol. Please provide me with an example of this happening anywhere in high school or collegiate wrestling.

If any ref, anywhere in the country, awarded a wrestler a point for a push out or awarded a stalling point with no warning, he or she would never officiate a collegiate match again.
Well, I only watch college wrestling, so I will definitely let you know when/if I see it next season. If I never see it happen next season, at the end of the year I'll be the first to say you were right and I was wrong.
 
Well, I only watch college wrestling, so I will definitely let you know when/if I see it next season. If I never see it happen next season, at the end of the year I'll be the first to say you were right and I was wrong.
It has never happened. Any opposing coach would come out of his shoes if a ref called a made up rule like that. You would have to have both refs, the scorer's table officials, and both coaches and their teams in on it. That's such an egregious thing that if it happened the opposing team would forfeit in protest and be on the phone with the officiating office immediately.

It'd be more respectable if you just said you were bullshitting to begin with.

BTW, I have a coworker related through marriage to Tim Shiels (you can google that name with the word wrestling) and I had him text him that. He responded, "That would be ridiculous. I've never heard of something like that."

If the NCAA wrestling officials coordinator and member of the National Wrestling Hall Of Fame for officiating hasn't heard of something like that, it ain't happening.
 
That would be a pretty complicated one to institute on the mat. Who would keep track of the 30 seconds? When does it start...at the time of the takedown? on the referee's signal?


Just go to criteria. That would also incentivize action in regulation.
I don't really think it would be that difficult. My guess is it would start with the hand raise. We already see on-the-clock passivity warnings with freestyle.

Criteria is kind of like kissing your sister. Give me a true SV with no time limit. :cool:
 
I don't really think it would be that difficult. My guess is it would start with the hand raise. We already see on-the-clock passivity warnings with freestyle.

Criteria is kind of like kissing your sister. Give me a true SV with no time limit. :cool:
I get your point about criteria but it makes sense. It goes to the guy with the fewest cautions and then the guy who scored last. Hard to get mad about losing by criteria if you let the guy tie the score. Again it encourages activity. If your opponent ties the score you have no choice but to shoot until you score or the clock runs out.
 
I get your point about criteria but it makes sense. It goes to the guy with the fewest cautions and then the guy who scored last. Hard to get mad about losing by criteria if you let the guy tie the score. Again it encourages activity. If your opponent ties the score you have no choice but to shoot until you score or the clock runs out.
I'd be okay with it either way as long as the criteria makes sense and is simple. The wrestler should be able to easily calculate where he stands late in the third.
 
I'd be okay with it either way as long as the criteria makes sense and is simple. The wrestler should be able to easily calculate where he stands late in the third.
Freestyle criteria are the win goes to the wrestler with the fewest cautions, if that’s tied, it goes to the guy who scored last, i.e. the one who tied it up. Simple and effective.
 
Freestyle criteria are the win goes to the wrestler with the fewest cautions, if that’s tied, it goes to the guy who scored last, i.e. the one who tied it up. Simple and effective.
If I had a personal choice, give it to the guy with the most TDs. If tied, then the wrestler who scored last.
 
Top