Jump to content

Class Wrestling - Participation


Westforkwhite

Recommended Posts

Ha. You guys missed the irony. I'm also on my phone so I don't know if the goofy emoji came thru.

 

I just don't think you do water down the single greatest high school event. Especially after another sport did the same thing to pretty noticeable results.

 

So if you guys would like a few hundred in the gym for "small school State", a "big school state" held at perhaps New Castle or Southport or UIndy, then have at it.

 

But I'm just failing to see a problem. It's not all about championships. Perhaps there should be some value in placing in a sectional or regional.

 

I grant you that increased numbers in the practice room are an advantage for the larger schools, and georgraphic proximity to academies helps...but you also can't explain to me how a school like Lawrence Central gets zero to state and North Central and Ben Davis (Top 5 in enrollment) gets 1 respectively. There's much more to it than that, which you know.

Edited by Kookie953
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The facts don't all point in the same direction on this. There are numbers that support multi class and numbers that don't. My hope is that we can sift thru them and get some people to see the other side, regardless of which side they now reside. I also hoped to avoid some of the tired arguments such as...

 

"Why don't we just give everyone a trophy" - Adding 2 or even 3 classes is hardly everyone gets a trophy, we still are only giving medals to a very small % of wrestlers, and they still mean something.

 

 

"I bet those kids from multi class states bury their medals in the back yard" - A single state championship means more, period. Of course those multi class kids are proud of their accomplishments (as well they should be) but you can't say it doesn't mean a little less. Our tournament is recognized as one of the 6 best in the country(USAW and others), classing would more than likely cause us to lose this distinction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha. You guys missed the irony. I'm also on my phone so I don't know if the goofy emoji came thru.

 

I just don't think you do water down the single greatest high school event. Especially after another sport did the same thing to pretty noticeable results.

 

So if you guys would like a few hundred in the gym for "small school State", a "big school state" held at perhaps New Castle or Southport or UIndy, then have at it.

 

But I'm just failing to see a problem. It's not all about championships. Perhaps there should be some value in placing in a sectional or regional.

 

I grant you that increased numbers in the practice room are an advantage for the larger schools, and georgraphic proximity to academies helps...but you also can't explain to me how a school like Lawrence Central gets zero to state and North Central and Ben Davis (Top 5 in enrollment) gets 1 respectively. There's much more to it than that, which you know.

Or explain how Yorktown finishes 4th as a team, Prairie Heights has 40+ kids on their team, and Shenandoah has 3 State placers?

 

It's all about the organization within your program, the support from parents in your program, and the quality of coaching at your school. I would take 0-1 State Qualifiers a year at a small school rather than 5-6 every year in a watered down State Finals. We have one of the best State Tournaments of any sport in the State, classing it will not get more numbers in the rural, small schools, it will just water it down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha. You guys missed the irony. I'm also on my phone so I don't know if the goofy emoji came thru.

 

I just don't think you do water down the single greatest high school event. Especially after another sport did the same thing to pretty noticeable results.

 

 

We didn't miss the Irony.  Were just recognizing the lack of creativity in the comment.  Every year, somebody says something similar when they start losing the argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha. You guys missed the irony. I'm also on my phone so I don't know if the goofy emoji came thru.

 

I just don't think you do water down the single greatest high school event. Especially after another sport did the same thing to pretty noticeable results.

 

So if you guys would like a few hundred in the gym for "small school State", a "big school state" held at perhaps New Castle or Southport or UIndy, then have at it.

 

But I'm just failing to see a problem. It's not all about championships. Perhaps there should be some value in placing in a sectional or regional.

 

I grant you that increased numbers in the practice room are an advantage for the larger schools, and georgraphic proximity to academies helps...but you also can't explain to me how a school like Lawrence Central gets zero to state and North Central and Ben Davis (Top 5 in enrollment) gets 1 respectively. There's much more to it than that, which you know.

State could still be held at Bankers Life. You can add mats or have different sessions like other states do. 

 

Lawrence Central had Jesus Mancera qualify for state this year.

 

Picking out random schools and saying "look they have 2000 students and didn't have qualifier" is meaningless. 58% of 3A schools had a qualifier, 37% of 2A, and 14% of 1A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being from a school with a program that's 4 years old and a 2a school. My observation is it takes dedicated parents , youth program , middle school program and good coaches to build a successful team.

 

I've never heard a kid say "if we were in a

Class sectional we would win !"

Kids that compete typically want to compete against the best.

 

"If you build it , they will come" That's the motto I'm taking with our program. Starting at the youth level and moving up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picking out random schools and saying "look they have 2000 students and didn't have qualifier" is meaningless. 58% of 3A schools had a qualifier, 37% of 2A, and 14% of 1A.

 

It's amazing to me that these percentages consistently match the percentage of total student enrollment in each class. 63% - 3A 24.5% - 2A. 12.5% - 1A

Its almost as if it takes a special kid to make it to state regardless where he goes to school. And when you have 2000 kids walking the halls you're gonna end up with more special athletes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Where is the private school class???? Not to mention home schooled. We can have 2 classes for that measured in $'s per house hold. 3 classes for the rest. Now we have at least 6 champs per weight class. 

 

:blink:  :blink:  :blink:  :blink:  :blink:  :blink:  :blink:  :blink:

 

For those who missed the sarcasm This is a joke

Edited by takemtothemat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being from a school with a program that's 4 years old and a 2a school. My observation is it takes dedicated parents , youth program , middle school program and good coaches to build a successful team.

 

I've never heard a kid say "if we were in a

Class sectional we would win !"

Kids that compete typically want to compete against the best.

 

"If you build it , they will come" That's the motto I'm taking with our program. Starting at the youth level and moving up.

So the kids in 1A for football are sad because they can't play Carmel?

 

The kids won't care and will go against anyone you put them against. 

 

 

Picking out random schools and saying "look they have 2000 students and didn't have qualifier" is meaningless. 58% of 3A schools had a qualifier, 37% of 2A, and 14% of 1A.

 

It's amazing to me that these percentages consistently match the percentage of total student enrollment in each class. 63% - 3A 24.5% - 2A. 12.5% - 1A

Its almost as if it takes a special kid to make it to state regardless where he goes to school. And when you have 2000 kids walking the halls you're gonna end up with more special athletes.

 

Yet those numbers are not the same in terms of placers....hmmm.

 

Nor do those numbers match the number of entries into the state tournament by each class....hmm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe has provided some really good forfeit statistics in the past. If I recall correctly it spoke to fewer forfeits in surrounding states smaller classes vs. ours, but it showed an increase in forfeits at the larger class level.

 

As it relates to overall participation numbers, I think it's worth a closer look.

 

Let's say that multi class wrestling has the same effect here, how would then numbers be effected?

 

How many wrestlers represent a forfeit in 1A vs the wrestlers represented in 3A forfeit? In other words, if we have one less forfeit in 1A how many wrestlers could we expect to add to the rosters is it 1.2? or a little higher?

 

Now let's look at how many wrestlers we would expect to lose by adding one forfeit in the large class. Since 3A rooms are much larger on average, if we had one more forfeit it would likely mean 1.5-2 less wrestlers per team.

 

Even though it would be a net wash for participants entering the state tournament it would have adverse effects on our participation numbers in the state as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the kids in 1A for football are sad because they can't play Carmel?

 

The kids won't care and will go against anyone you put them against.

 

 

Yet those numbers are not the same in terms of placers....hmmm.

 

Nor do those numbers match the number of entries into the state tournament by each class....hmm.

You're comparing apples and oranges. It's illogical to think that Linton-Stockton playing against Carmel in football is the same as Black wrestling against Mattingly at 106. In both examples, the schools are similar sizes. The reason the class system was put into effect was for football and it was to protect kids from getting hurt. 1a programs cannot physically compete with the 6a programs because of size, speed and numbers. That's not to say their aren't 1a athletes who can't compete at that level, but 1a programs cannot compete with Carmel, Penn, Warren, etc. Using the football comparison doesn't make sense when we have several small school athletes who can compete with other wrestlers at the bigger schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're comparing apples and oranges. It's illogical to think that Linton-Stockton playing against Carmel in football is the same as Black wrestling against Mattingly at 106. In both examples, the schools are similar sizes. The reason the class system was put into effect was for football and it was to protect kids from getting hurt. 1a programs cannot physically compete with the 6a programs because of size, speed and numbers. That's not to say their aren't 1a athletes who can't compete at that level, but 1a programs cannot compete with Carmel, Penn, Warren, etc. Using the football comparison doesn't make sense when we have several small school athletes who can compete with other wrestlers at the bigger schools.

So why do we(and every other state) class things like volleyball, baseball, basketball, etc? Do those players hit or throw the ball harder or something?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm for keeping single class and adding multiple class wrestling for both the team duals and individual tournaments if the schedule could allow it. I'd treat the class individual tournament like Al Smith, Evansville, and etc. as a precursor to the single class individual tournament. I believe that the current class team dual has helped our AC program maintain and hopefully strengthen. Rarely will we have enough studs to overtake Bellmont for individual sectionals, so it was harder to get more kids to come out. When the IHSWCA came about and we had multiple top 2 to 4 finishes, I personally believe it helped gain more interest. Tony would be better to answer this, so I don't want to step on his toes on that aspect. As for single class team duals, I loved listening to our rivals Bellmont and the other power programs battle for the best team. So much tradition with Perry Meridian, Bloomington South, Mishawaka, Mater Dei, and others renewing rivalries.

Edited by casualwrestlingfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picking out random schools and saying "look they have 2000 students and didn't have qualifier" is meaningless. 58% of 3A schools had a qualifier, 37% of 2A, and 14% of 1A.

 

It's amazing to me that these percentages consistently match the percentage of total student enrollment in each class. 63% - 3A 24.5% - 2A. 12.5% - 1A

Its almost as if it takes a special kid to make it to state regardless where he goes to school. And when you have 2000 kids walking the halls you're gonna end up with more special athletes.

 

As Y2 stated above, where do these "special athletes" go when it comes to placers and champs?  Why don't the 1a schools follow their population percentages in that area?  Every single time we have this discussion, I have posed this same question, and have yet to hear a relevant answer.  I'm open to changing my mind, but I've never heard anyone answer this question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So why do we(and every other state) class things like volleyball, baseball, basketball, etc? Do those players hit or throw the ball harder or something?

As to why they do it, I can't give you that reason. I think it has hurt other sports' State Tournament though. One of the posts above shows you how the attendance to the basketball state tournament was cut in half when they went to a classed tournament. Is that what we want?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We didn't miss the Irony. Were just recognizing the lack of creativity in the comment. Every year, somebody says something similar when they start losing the argument.

I know. I guess I forgot that I'm "unknown" here even though I've lurked for awhile. I was parroting the argument.

 

I do think it waters down the tournament, but my "just give them 6 classes" was tongue-in-cheek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Y2 stated above, where do these "special athletes" go when it comes to placers and champs?  Why don't the 1a schools follow their population percentages in that area?  Every single time we have this discussion, I have posed this same question, and have yet to hear a relevant answer.  I'm open to changing my mind, but I've never heard anyone answer this question.

This is another very valid point. When you apply the entrant factor of 82% (they only put 82% of what would be their 1/3 of participants) it levels out a bit, but is still lower than where it should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know. I guess I forgot that I'm "unknown" here even though I've lurked for awhile. I was parroting the argument.

 

I do think it waters down the tournament, but my "just give them 6 classes" was tongue-in-cheek.

So does having 14 weight classes, why not just 1 or 3?

If we are against watering down the tournament how about only champions from sectional, regional, and semi-state advance. Let's make it a real achievement to get to state instead of constantly letting losers advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is another very valid point. When you apply the entrant factor of 82% (they only put 82% of what would be their 1/3 of participants) it levels out a bit, but is still lower than where it should be.

Based on the forfeits from this year here are the projected numbers for state qualifiers and placers

 

 % of Wrest--# Qual--# Place

1A--28.32%--63.4---31.7
2A--33.59%--75.2---37.6
3A--38.09%--85.3---42.7
 
Even if we go that route...we are still coming up short.

This is like arguing politics! Like a conservative versus a liberal, and neither is gonna change the other's view.

Except there have many that have come over to the good side over the years due to logical thinking and arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be careful when debating Joe on Class wrestling.  He has a huge file full of data, stats and other relevant info.  He can dig deep.  Many a poster, has gone away with their legs  between their tails after taking Joe on class wrestling.

 

"legs between their tails" ....that's funny right there ; )

 

 

All of the statistics are nice and all. As a mathematics teacher I should appreciate them more.  But mathematically speaking, even if you show a correlation it does not mean a causation.  MY OPINION is that the decline is wrestling numbers has to do with several factors that we probably don't have statistical evidence for.  I do not think single v. multi-class is significant. Here are 2 factors that I think are contributing:

  1. Despite all our societal lip service to things like grit, persistence and personal accountability, these are on the decline in actual practice.  Since wrestling has a high demand for all of these, it is not surprising to me that fewer kids are interested.
  2. Increase in other sports and the ability to do those sports year round.

 

hard to argue point number 1 so hear it goes

 

Reasons the qualifiers are closely attached to enrollments

1. No wrestle-backs so our true state qualifiers are hindered by a draw.

2. Big schools are handicapped by only having 14 entries, many JV kids at these schools could be knocking the smaller school kids out earlier in the tournament

3. Regionals are made up of mostly same size schools. This produces more semi-state champions from those similar sized schools and better chances for a draw...see #1

 

agree on wrestle-backs except think it pertains to all wrestlers and on pt 2 not that many big schools are affected but wood be nice to see some of these "JV" men get a chance

 

Or explain how Yorktown finishes 4th as a team, Prairie Heights has 40+ kids on their team, and Shenandoah has 3 State placers?

 

It's all about the organization within your program, the support from parents in your program, and the quality of coaching at your school. I would take 0-1 State Qualifiers a year at a small school rather than 5-6 every year in a watered down State Finals. We have one of the best State Tournaments of any sport in the State, classing it will not get more numbers in the rural, small schools, it will just water it down.

wood hate too lose our Tournament and it not work

 

State could still be held at Bankers Life. You can add mats or have different sessions like other states do. 

 

Lawrence Central had Jesus Mancera qualify for state this year.

 

Picking out random schools and saying "look they have 2000 students and didn't have qualifier" is meaningless. 58% of 3A schools had a qualifier, 37% of 2A, and 14% of 1A.

am I reading that correctly?  58% of 3A schools had a qualifier ?  that can not be right

Edited by fearless fly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.