Some more stats from 2015 State

[AJ]

Do the  academies, RTC'S and other training opportunities that wrestlers have year round close the training and practice partner gap between big and small schools?

[CoachW33]

I have argued that individuals, if they want to be competitive, have that ability by going to RTC's and clubs. I still believe that. I also realize, as a state, we would like the sport to grow. When kids have success they stay with the sport more often, but not always. Do you water down the state finals by classing it? Maybe temporarily, but as a result, the sport would grow. 

 

If the kids placing and winning a state title are from the top half anyway, they only part that would be watered down would be your lower classes. Those small schools, as a result having wrestlers place and win a state title, would certainly create a buzz around their community making recruiting kids into your program easier. 

 

I hate the idea of every kid getting a medal as if it was a little league, but that wouldn't be the case. We have 300+ schools, instead of 8 per weight class, it might be 16 or 24.... still far from everyone getting a medal. 

[Clint Gard]

The point I was trying to make was why do you deserve it more than the Penn Varsity B (JV) Squad?  You made reference multiple times about why a small school doesn't deserve recognition over bigger schools based on their times.  You said you didn't understand it.  Penn probably was a bad example since they would be in a big class, but I could argue there are schools in 1A that deserve it more than Busco or another 1A school.  Why do you deserve it and they don't...just because you scored more points in the tourney?  So what...if you say the Culver Relay team or my daughters team didn't deserve it based on their scores, then you can't say you do based on some score.  

 

Listen, I agree Indiana puts on a very good state championship.  I was out in SD this week watching one of my former wrestlers take 2nd with his team.  Was our show better, yes.  Was our wrestling better, not always.  Their Class A took place in a different venue than the Class B.  Next year they are combining them.  Class A drew about 4,000 per day (remember they only have about 33 schools in Class A) and their Class B (small schools) drew about 6,000 per day.  The Class A was a good show and there was some good drama for the team title!  They even had cheerleaders!  Rocky and I talked a lot about the class side of things and he thinks we are nuts for not going to class.  There are numerous guys that I went to college with or that wrestled for me here in Indiana and they have all experienced class formats in other states.  They all say the same thing...wrestling should be classed in Indiana.  I would say 100% of them felt that we had the best format but when they went to other states with class, 100% changed their mind.

 

As I read through many of the comments, it just baffles me at how closed minded people can be when the data and examples are so glaring.  In reality, Sam, the argument you use could be used to show that the NCAA Div II and III programs should be done away with.  Their should be no NAIA.  Everyone should be in Division I because every kid has the same chance to become a Division I national champion.  It has nothing to do with resources, coaching, $$, etc.  

 

Clint

Edited March 2, 2015 by Clint Gard

[shoottowin]

Y2...

I was simply referencing your earlier post. Many of your posts, such as that one, are very condescending. You think you and your arguments are fact based, and others are based on "emotion" and the "hard work" methodology. Your obvious implication is that you win the argument based on your facts trumping others emotions and methodologies. I believe emotion and the hard work methodology (as you put it) are just as valid a basis for the single class argument as your "facts" are for a two class system. I have not chosen a side in the debate yet, but I think very valid points are made by both sides.

[Y2CJ41]

Y2...

I was simply referencing your earlier post. Many of your posts, such as that one, are very condescending. You think you and your arguments are fact based, and others are based on "emotion" and the "hard work" methodology. Your obvious implication is that you win the argument based on your facts trumping others emotions and methodologies. I believe emotion and the hard work methodology (as you put it) are just as valid a basis for the single class argument as your "facts" are for a two class system. I have not chosen a side in the debate yet, but I think very valid points are made by both sides.

How do you judge if someone works hard or not? Simply saying a group of people don't accomplish things because they don't "work hard" is a pretty absurd statement.

 

The constant statements like

"Let's have 15 classes"

"Just give everyone a medal"

"I won't go if it's classed"

"We should class the Olympics"

"Class wrestling is repulsive"

"We already have 14 classes, weight classes"

 

Don't show anything in support of a single class system. They actually show very little thought and reasoning why we have a single class system. 

 

Using numbers to show the disparity between big and small schools shows something is wrong with our system. Wrestling in this state is not going to survive at the small schools if we continue to be close minded about this.

[PreparetoWin]

No one said achieve success at a small school is impossible...but why is it fair that a small school kid has to work twice as hard, travel twice as far, have 1/2 the resources but expected to output the same results?? When really it doesnt need to be like that. 

[Fan4life]

I am not sure I understand classing the State tournament.  I am hearing both sides, just trying to understand it clearly.  Do you not want to wrestle the best at the State level and say you were the best that day.  If it is classed then you would only be wrestling the kids from the same class?  Is this correct?  To say that 1A schools wrestler can't get the same kind of workouts as a 3A schools wrestler, I don't believe is fair.  They can do Private lessons or go to clubs outside of the season just like everyone else.  Yes you may have to drive farther than others, but you do what you have to if you want to be the best.  As far as not having a full rostered team or the best wrestlers on your team, I do agree.  I think there are pluses and minuses to both sides.

[Y2CJ41]

I am not sure I understand classing the State tournament.  I am hearing both sides, just trying to understand it clearly.  Do you not want to wrestle the best at the State level and say you were the best that day.  If it is classed then you would only be wrestling the kids from the same class?  Is this correct?  To say that 1A schools wrestler can't get the same kind of workouts as a 3A schools wrestler, I don't believe is fair.  They can do Private lessons or go to clubs outside of the season just like everyone else.  Yes you may have to drive farther than others, but you do what you have to if you want to be the best.  As far as not having a full rostered team or the best wrestlers on your team, I do agree.  I think there are pluses and minuses to both sides.

What are the pluses to being at a small school? If there are that many positives to being a small school athlete then we should see equal participation at the semi-state and state levels.

[warsawwrestling]

So, let me get this straight.....You are saying since Indianapolis doesn't have a pro baseball team, that the Colts automatically win the Super Bowl this year!!!!!!

[KarlHungus]

I am not sure I understand classing the State tournament.  I am hearing both sides, just trying to understand it clearly.  Do you not want to wrestle the best at the State level and say you were the best that day.  If it is classed then you would only be wrestling the kids from the same class?  Is this correct?  To say that 1A schools wrestler can't get the same kind of workouts as a 3A schools wrestler, I don't believe is fair.  They can do Private lessons or go to clubs outside of the season just like everyone else.  Yes you may have to drive farther than others, but you do what you have to if you want to be the best.  As far as not having a full rostered team or the best wrestlers on your team, I do agree.  I think there are pluses and minuses to both sides.

 

Your statement makes the case for classing.  No one said they can't get a high level of instruction at a small school, but it is, for the most part, much more difficult to do so.  This is an ADVANTAGE for big schools from populated areas.

[ENoblewrestling]

The point I was trying to make was why do you deserve it more than the Penn Varsity B (JV) Squad?  You made reference multiple times about why a small school doesn't deserve recognition over bigger schools based on their times.  You said you didn't understand it.  Penn probably was a bad example since they would be in a big class, but I could argue there are schools in 1A that deserve it more than Busco or another 1A school.  Why do you deserve it and they don't...just because you scored more points in the tourney?  So what...if you say the Culver Relay team or my daughters team didn't deserve it based on their scores, then you can't say you do based on some score.  

 

Listen, I agree Indiana puts on a very good state championship.  I was out in SD this week watching one of my former wrestlers take 2nd with his team.  Was our show better, yes.  Was our wrestling better, not always.  Their Class A took place in a different venue than the Class B.  Next year they are combining them.  Class A drew about 4,000 per day (remember they only have about 33 schools in Class A) and their Class B (small schools) drew about 6,000 per day.  The Class A was a good show and there was some good drama for the team title!  They even had cheerleaders!  Rocky and I talked a lot about the class side of things and he thinks we are nuts for not going to class.  There are numerous guys that I went to college with or that wrestled for me here in Indiana and they have all experienced class formats in other states.  They all say the same thing...wrestling should be classed in Indiana.  I would say 100% of them felt that we had the best format but when they went to other states with class, 100% changed their mind.

 

As I read through many of the comments, it just baffles me at how closed minded people can be when the data and examples are so glaring.  In reality, Sam, the argument you use could be used to show that the NCAA Div II and III programs should be done away with.  Their should be no NAIA.  Everyone should be in Division I because every kid has the same chance to become a Division I national champion.  It has nothing to do with resources, coaching, $$, etc.  

 

Clint

I said that small school individuals do not deserve any more recognition for their accomplishments than big school individuals.  The fact that your situation and Culver's are relays does make the situation different because it would be more difficult to field a competitive relay team at a small school than at a big school.

As far as why do we deserve recognition as a team it is because small schools are at a disadvantage when it comes to fielding a full team.  With less people to choose from our team is at a disadvantage, thus the need for team sports to be classed.  As far as why do we deserve more recognition than other class 1A teams, I guess I would answer because we were better.  What is even the point of having a small school team state title but to determine the best small school team?  By your logic what is the point in keeping score at all, I don't understand what you are saying with that one.

 

Three years ago our team placed second at the 1A duals.  Our team was a good small school team, but could not compete with the bigger schools, thus the need for team sports to be classified.

That season our 220 lbs wrestler made it to state.  This wrestler not only overcame the affliction of attending a small school, but also only weighed 195 lbs.  He did not need a less difficult tournament to achieve what he did because individually he was good enough to make it on his own.  He lost twice his senior year to Fletcher Miller of Kokomo, and Conner Tolley of Avon.  He did not loose because he went to a smaller school, he lost because they were better than him when they wrestled.  Thus he doesn't need or deserve some special tournament to prove his accomplishments, he accomplished a great deal, and proved himself in the tournament we have.  This is were we differ, I don't believe that he accomplished anything different than the other kids that wrestled and lost that Friday Night, the fact that he was from a small school did not mean that he deserved more recognition than the kids who lost from bigger schools. 

 

As far as the second paragraph, their Class A finals consisted of 33 teams?  

 

Finally the argument about college classes doesn't hold water in any way.  They are not even remotely the same as classing high schools.  In classing an individual sport at the high school level you are saying- due to the fact that an individual attends a small school they are not as good as the individual that attends a big school, thus they need their own tournament in order to be competitive.  In college it is the opposite, the individual says that they are not at the same level as the division 1 athlete and thus are choose on their own to compete at a lower level.  It isn't even remotely the same, as a matter of fact it is essentially the opposite of classing at the high school level.  I always laugh when I see this brought up as a reason we should class, yes colleges have classes, but the individuals choose the level they will compete at.  

In other words instead of classing by school size you would make classifications by how "good" a kid is.  So if the kids from the individual schools would say that they want to compete in the "A" division, or "B" division. etc.  Its not even remotely the same.

 

Also before the pro-class group goes crazy about this post, let me say the following.

The swim and track relay teams from Rochester and Culver accomplished a great thing in making it to state and that should be celebrated.

If our tournament was classed and our 220 made it to state and placed in a classed system it would be a great accomplishment and should be celebrated.

All DII, DIII, JUCO, and NAIA athletes are talented and deserve to and should celebrate their accomplishments, DI athletes are not the only ones who should accomplish great things.

 

Finally I also realize that not all DII, DIII, JUCO, and NAIA athletes attend those schools because they are less talented than their DI counterparts, but generally speaking that would be the case.  While there are a ton of different reasons beyond athletics that could cause a kid to choose one school over the other, the DI kids are generally the better athletes, and this is why they attend DI schools instead of DIII.  

[ENoblewrestling]

Your statement makes the case for classing.  No one said they can't get a high level of instruction at a small school, but it is, for the most part, much more difficult to do so.  This is an ADVANTAGE for big schools from populated areas.

 

So why is size of school the only advantage that we take into account when we talk about classing the individual tournament.  Why not class by distance from large metropolitan areas, or by the what type of city the school comes from.  A kid from a small school in Indy has more opportunity to go to specialized clubs then a kid from Churubusco that would be an ADVANTAGE for the kid from Indy.  A kid from a bigger school like Jay County is further away from a large city like Fort Wayne than a kid from Churubusco that would be an ADVANTAGE for the Churubusco kid.  There are a million advantages and disadvantages that we could go through, at what point do we decide which ADVANTAGES matter and which ones don't?  You guys type out advantages that the big school kids face like it automatically means we should class, people have different advantages and disadvantages all the time.  

[wrestlerdad]

Given that this thread began with a discussion regarding the dominance of individuals in 3A schools in the Individual State tournament series and the difficulties faced by those in 1A schools in the State series; and, given the fact that the Team State selection criteria are based upon the results of individuals in the State Tournament Series, I wondered if there was any correlation between the 1A schools selected for the Team State event and the size of the schools in their respective sectionals. Here is what I found:

 

No. of sectionals with < 3 1A schools:16

No. of 1A automatic qualifiers from sectionals with < 3 1A schools: 1

No. of 1A schools in contention for vote-in invitation from sectionals with < 3 1A schools:3 

 

 

No. of sectionals with > 3 1A schools:14

No. of 1A automatic qualifiers from sectionals with > 3 1A schools: 9

No. of 1A schools in contention for vote-in invitation from sectionals with > 3 1A schools:3 

 

No. of sectionals with < 3 3A schools:11

No. of 1A automatic qualifiers from sectionals with < 3 3A schools: 8

No. of 1A schools in contention for vote-in invitation from sectionals with < 3 3A schools:3 

 

 

No. of sectionals with > 3 3A schools:14

No. of 1A automatic qualifiers from sectionals with > 3 1A schools: 1

No. of 1A schools in contention for vote-in invitation from sectionals with > 3 1A schools:  1 

 

It is difficult to post this in a format that is easy to read. In summary, 9 out of the 10 1A automatic qualifiers come from sectionals with an above average number of 1A schools. In fact 4 qualifiers come from sectionals with more than 6 1A schools and 3 of those qualifiers come from two sectionals with 9 1A schools each. There are two additional vote-in candidates that come from these same two sectionals. That means that 5 of the 16 schools in consideration for vote-in eligibility represent two sectionals with 9 1A schools each. One of those sectionals has only 2 2A schools and the other has only 2 3A schools.

 

Additionally, 8 of the automatic qualifiers and 3 of the vote-in candidates represent sectionals with fewer than 3 3A schools.

 

I don't mean to take anything away from the accomplishments of these schools or their wrestlers. I am confident that they will represent themselves and the state well at the Team State event next year. However, I wonder if there are other teams that are just as deserving of consideration for this event that did not get automatic bids and may be overlooked or are not even in consideration due to the fact that they faced more large schools during the tournament series?

 

Lake Station Edison, Churubusco, and Tecumseh are all schools that came out of sectionals with fewer 1A schools, more 2A schools, and more 3A schools than 9 of the 10 automatic qualifiers. One of these schools will not be invited to the Team State event.

[Y2CJ41]

Check the progression of semi-state qualifiers to state qualifiers to state placers....kinda interesting to say the least

 

[table]

[/td] SS SS % State State % Placers Placer % 1A 271 30.25% 43 19.20% 13 11.61% 2A 625 69.75% 181 80.80% 99 88.39% 896 224 112 1A 162 18.08% 21 9.38% 5 4.46% 2A 256 28.57% 62 27.68% 23 20.54% 3A 478 53.35% 141 62.95% 84 75% 896 224 112[td][/table]

[Y2CJ41]

So why is size of school the only advantage that we take into account when we talk about classing the individual tournament.  Why not class by distance from large metropolitan areas, or by the what type of city the school comes from.  A kid from a small school in Indy has more opportunity to go to specialized clubs then a kid from Churubusco that would be an ADVANTAGE for the kid from Indy.  A kid from a bigger school like Jay County is further away from a large city like Fort Wayne than a kid from Churubusco that would be an ADVANTAGE for the Churubusco kid.  There are a million advantages and disadvantages that we could go through, at what point do we decide which ADVANTAGES matter and which ones don't?  You guys type out advantages that the big school kids face like it automatically means we should class, people have different advantages and disadvantages all the time.  

There was a proposal to the IHSAA a few years ago that added multipliers based on reduced/free lunches. That however did not pass. 

 

Feel free to add your own proposal on how to class based on those factors. However, the general consensus is that it is probably most logical to class based on student population.

[wrestlerdad]

I suspect the drastic drop in participation percentages is due to kids who get to the SS level by seeing fewer kids from larger schools.  It is always an accomplishment to win a sectional title and it makes the road to the SS much easier, but a sectional title that goes through a Perry Meridian, Carroll, Penn, Avon etc. speaks volumes about the quality of a wrestler.

[Clint Gard]

But were you better or did you get there because your sectional, regional, or SS was weaker and thus got out more kids as compared to those that went through a tougher route?  I'm not saying you did or didn't but that is a valid question. The IHSWCA has set up a good system but it doesn't truly represent a true state champion because not all sectionals, regionals, and semi-states are the same difficulty.  There are teams that make it to team state that don't face nearly as tough as competition as others.

 

2nd paragraph...we will just have to agree to disagree.  I don't think we need a special tournament but a fair and equitable one could be argued.

 

Yes, 33 teams.  They have further to travel and they have less populated areas.  It's a little funky in SD.  They travel 3-4 hrs sometimes just for a dual meet.  Crazy!

 

Yes, the NCAA argument does hold water because back in the day, there was one champion.  My college coach, Tom Jarman, was an NCAA Champion back when everyone was in the NCAA or whatever it was called back then.  He was from Wheaton College.  Somewhere along the way, that changed to Div. II and III.  Why?  At some point, they realized that not all schools could compete because of resources, etc.  There is a big discussion right now on how they are doing the national duals and NCAA tournament.  There was/is talk of giving teams points for the NCAA Individual tournament for winning/competing in the duals portion.  The outcry from the bigger schools is that none of the small schools would even have a chance to place if they did that because they don't even have a chance to be invited to the national duals...so how could they have that chance to score points.  Even the DI coaches recognize there is inequity at their level and they are fighting to keep it from being more inequitable.

 

Clint

[AJ]

There was a proposal to the IHSAA a few years ago that added multipliers based on reduced/free lunches. That however did not pass. 

 

Feel free to add your own proposal on how to class based on those factors. However, the general consensus is that it is probably most logical to class based on student population.

 

Why most logical based off of population?  It then becomes a huge  issue based off of the type of population that makes up the school.

 

If population alone was the main factor, then our largest schools would dominate.  There are many, many large schools that are very bad at wrestling.  Population may be a factor, but in my opinion the population make up is more of a factor...

[Y2CJ41]

I said that small school individuals do not deserve any more recognition for their accomplishments than big school individuals.  The fact that your situation and Culver's are relays does make the situation different because it would be more difficult to field a competitive relay team at a small school than at a big school.

As far as why do we deserve recognition as a team it is because small schools are at a disadvantage when it comes to fielding a full team.  With less people to choose from our team is at a disadvantage, thus the need for team sports to be classed.  As far as why do we deserve more recognition than other class 1A teams, I guess I would answer because we were better.  What is even the point of having a small school team state title but to determine the best small school team?  By your logic what is the point in keeping score at all, I don't understand what you are saying with that one.

So if your team is good it deserves a watered down recognition, but if an individual is good he doesn't deserve that same type of recognition? 

 

Three years ago our team placed second at the 1A duals.  Our team was a good small school team, but could not compete with the bigger schools, thus the need for team sports to be classified.

That season our 220 lbs wrestler made it to state.  This wrestler not only overcame the affliction of attending a small school, but also only weighed 195 lbs.  He did not need a less difficult tournament to achieve what he did because individually he was good enough to make it on his own.  He lost twice his senior year to Fletcher Miller of Kokomo, and Conner Tolley of Avon.  He did not loose because he went to a smaller school, he lost because they were better than him when they wrestled.  Thus he doesn't need or deserve some special tournament to prove his accomplishments, he accomplished a great deal, and proved himself in the tournament we have.  This is were we differ, I don't believe that he accomplished anything different than the other kids that wrestled and lost that Friday Night, the fact that he was from a small school did not mean that he deserved more recognition than the kids who lost from bigger schools.

 Yet your TEAM needs a special tournament to prove their accomplishments.

 

 

Finally the argument about college classes doesn't hold water in any way.  They are not even remotely the same as classing high schools.  In classing an individual sport at the high school level you are saying- due to the fact that an individual attends a small school they are not as good as the individual that attends a big school, thus they need their own tournament in order to be competitive.  In college it is the opposite, the individual says that they are not at the same level as the division 1 athlete and thus are choose on their own to compete at a lower level.  It isn't even remotely the same, as a matter of fact it is essentially the opposite of classing at the high school level.  I always laugh when I see this brought up as a reason we should class, yes colleges have classes, but the individuals choose the level they will compete at.  

In other words instead of classing by school size you would make classifications by how "good" a kid is.  So if the kids from the individual schools would say that they want to compete in the "A" division, or "B" division. etc.  Its not even remotely the same.

 

All DII, DIII, JUCO, and NAIA athletes are talented and deserve to and should celebrate their accomplishments, DI athletes are not the only ones who should accomplish great things.

 

Finally I also realize that not all DII, DIII, JUCO, and NAIA athletes attend those schools because they are less talented than their DI counterparts, but generally speaking that would be the case.  While there are a ton of different reasons beyond athletics that could cause a kid to choose one school over the other, the DI kids are generally the better athletes, and this is why they attend DI schools instead of DIII.

Talk about throwing a bunch of kids under the bus...wow! Collegiate athletics is classed based on MONEY. If a school wants to put more money into their athletic programs they are in a higher class. It isn't classed based on perceived ability.of an athlete. There are many DII, DIII, NAIA kids that routinely defeat DI kids...heck I even beat some DI kids as a primarily backup at a DII school.

 

You show quite a bit of arrogance when you say kids choose a school based on what their perceived ability is.

[warsawwrestling]

I get the point about smaller schools not being able to break through.  I personally like the single classing of individual state. It's because I'm a product of the system and take pride in the fact there were only 16 kids in each weight at state.  I am also aware that it probably hurts the sport, but I don't feel it does as much as over zealous parents, bad coaching or bad grades.  If there were to be a class system, I would still want to see a championship round where the winners wrestle for a true champ.

Edited March 2, 2015 by warsawwrestling

[Galagore]

I get the point about smaller schools not being able to break through.  I personally like the single classing of individual state. It's because I'm a product of the system and take pride in the fact that I went to state in a state where only 16 kids can go to state.  I am also aware that it probably hurts the sport, but I don't feel it does as much as over zealous parents, bad coaching or bad grades.  If there were to be a class system, I would still want to see a championship round where the winners wrestle for a true champ.

 

So would you be in favor of two classes, 8 qualifiers each? 

[KarlHungus]

So why is size of school the only advantage that we take into account when we talk about classing the individual tournament.  Why not class by distance from large metropolitan areas, or by the what type of city the school comes from.  A kid from a small school in Indy has more opportunity to go to specialized clubs then a kid from Churubusco that would be an ADVANTAGE for the kid from Indy.  A kid from a bigger school like Jay County is further away from a large city like Fort Wayne than a kid from Churubusco that would be an ADVANTAGE for the Churubusco kid.  There are a million advantages and disadvantages that we could go through, at what point do we decide which ADVANTAGES matter and which ones don't?  You guys type out advantages that the big school kids face like it automatically means we should class, people have different advantages and disadvantages all the time.

Anecdotal fallacy again.  The data shows that numbers matter, they are an advantage.  You can try to cloud the issue all you want (There are a million advantages.....) but it doesn't change the fact that numbers matter.

Edited March 2, 2015 by KarlHungus

[Clint Gard]

His argument was way over your head, that's why you don't understand it

I didn't think it was that hard to understand...

[warsawwrestling]

So would you be in favor of two classes, 8 qualifiers each? 

This is hard to answer, because I do understand that more kids mean more people at state, means more money and popularity for the sport.  I would say yes to only 8 qualifiers with 2 classes as long as there were true wrestlebacks.

[Y2CJ41]

This is hard to answer, because I do understand that more kids mean more people at state, means more money and popularity for the sport.  I would say yes to only 8 qualifiers with 2 classes as long as there were true wrestlebacks.

So you understand that more fans and wrestlers at state is GOOD for the sport, yet you still cannot fathom a classed system? Is that what you are saying?