Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
buscowrestling

Team State Vote-In Results

Recommended Posts

On ‎4‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 10:00 AM, Clint Gard said:

Man, I feel like we suck...

I can attest that you do not. 

We felt the pain of being in the top 12 last season and not getting the vote in. It happens. We had it a goal the whole 2017-18 season to not leave it up the committee.

Thank you to the committee for doing your very best for this awesome event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2018 at 10:38 AM, nkraus said:

Just 8.  Plus two others kids who have started in the last two years.  So 10 of our starters next year will have been starters in the past. 

Considering you only have 6 regional qualifiers it should make sense as to why you were not voted in. Only a little over half of your returning starters are even regionals qualifiers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎4‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 8:10 AM, nkraus said:

Feels ridiculous to me.  Garrett has overshot their expectations the last few years.  Unseeded and placing 7th, with two injured starters two yeas ago. This season we were seeded 4th and placed 2nd losing 37-33 to Wawassee.  So, when in vote in consideration you don't vote the returning runner up who has exceeded expectations the last two, three seasons actually...seems pretty illogical.  The "we want new blood in the tournament" would be a pretty crappy argument.  

Garrett returns underclassmen with these records

106 21-9

126 9-21

132 20-17

138 12-22

145 19-22

152 28-7

170 14-14

285 19-18

Four guys with winning records.

You said "Actually, we will have 11 kids who have been varsity starters over the last two years"  What was the records of those other 3 guys?

 

Southridge returns

113 31-10

120 18-23

126 26-15

132 26-12

145 30-5

152 26-8

160 43-3

182 23-8

195 21-15

285 34-10

Nine guys with winning records. Also one wrestler who was injured and not able to wrestle most of the year. He had a record of 37-10 at 132 the year before.

 

Rochester returns

106 18-17

113 27-10

120 10-19

126 24-11

132 3-7

138 24-9

145 32-5

152 30-7

160 30-6

170 7-14

182 33-8

195 9-11

285 18-16

Nine guys with winning records.

 

Looking at what all three teams have coming back does it still feel ridiculous to you? Which team would you take out to move Garrett in?

Edited by chambers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the whole set up feels ridiculous to me.  We are returning runner ups!  The other kids:  Only 3-2, but was 500 as a sophomore and was behind a Semi State Qualifier and a Regional Qualifier this season, who had a winning record.(The 3-2 kid had beaten the kid in wrestle offs, but never won the series and couldn't get into our lineup.)  The second was 11-6 and stuck behind the Shearer brothers, but did have a solid win over a regional qualifier.(again, couldn't get in the lineup)  The third was a Regional Qualifier the prior year as a sophomore with a winning record who will be back next year and was not with us this year. 

ALL OF YOUR POINTS ARE VERY SOLID, but I'm not even making it just about those other teams.  I researched all of the available vote in teams and researched the teams that made it.  There are teams that made it because they have 3 absolute studs, or teams that make it because they get so many regional qualifiers based on where they're at.  There are teams that automatically qualified because they had 3-4 absolute studs.  Does that mean they win a dual against a certain team?  Does having 10 returning regional qualifiers from "this regional" make that team better than the team who has 6 returning regional qualifiers from "that regional?"  

 

Going into this previous season I had researched teams and already knew ahead of time some teams were in because of the points they accumulated by having Regional Qualifiers.  Did they truly belong?  Some of those Regional Qualifiers had 4-5 kids in their weight class.  So, basically next year if my team gets 12-13 kids to Regional we are automatically in because those kids are underclassmen.  We will see how the season goes...maybe we aren't worthy and not very good.  The returning runner up thing bothers me.  I don't consider our program a flash in the pan so I guess I'm just confident we will be solid again next year.  Maybe it's false confidence, but I guess if I didn't have that I wouldn't be a very good person to be leading this job.

What about Gavit?  I wasn't aware of how well they were doing until I researched them.  They went 31-1 in duals and beat New Prairie by a point margin one less than Yorktown beat them.  (Both teams won soundly.)

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The schedule makes a difference to me.  Just one example, because I've got to get back to work, but one of the returners from a team that qualified has the same exact record our kid had at the same weight.  Our kid tech'd that kid early into the 2nd period.  I think that could be the case at a few weight classes.  Sure we didn't have the best schedule in the state, but it was pretty good this year.  We had numerous times this year where our .500 kid would beat a kid who was 25-10, or whatever.  Our individuals ran into Al Smith, Yorktown, Jimtown x2, Prairie Heights x3, Central Noble x 2, Carroll x2/3 times, Indian Creek, Wawassee, Northridge, Leo, and other good individuals and decent teams.  So, just looking at Heights, Jimtown, Yorktown, Carroll, and Central Noble you could see how some of my middle light weights could rack up some losses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear ya Nick...Unfortunately this is the issue with our system.There is no perfect or purely objective solution. I know its frustrating as you guys have done great despite having to deal with poppe...keep doing what your doing good things will happen i am sure of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fabio Jr. said:

I hear ya Nick...Unfortunately this is the issue with our system.There is no perfect or purely objective solution. I know its frustrating as you guys have done great despite having to deal with poppe...keep doing what your doing good things will happen i am sure of it.

To be honest I went back and reread what I said and I really shouldn't have even posted, but you are 100% right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ehh frustrations make us act out...diff is you were respectful and you sign your name no one can be upset at that sometimes we let our frustrations show a little bit I dont think anyone took what you said as a shot to any of those programs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nkraus said:

The schedule makes a difference to me.  Just one example, because I've got to get back to work, but one of the returners from a team that qualified has the same exact record our kid had at the same weight.  Our kid tech'd that kid early into the 2nd period.  I think that could be the case at a few weight classes.  Sure we didn't have the best schedule in the state, but it was pretty good this year.  We had numerous times this year where our .500 kid would beat a kid who was 25-10, or whatever.  Our individuals ran into Al Smith, Yorktown, Jimtown x2, Prairie Heights x3, Central Noble x 2, Carroll x2/3 times, Indian Creek, Wawassee, Northridge, Leo, and other good individuals and decent teams.  So, just looking at Heights, Jimtown, Yorktown, Carroll, and Central Noble you could see how some of my middle light weights could rack up some losses.

If you are going to go in to specifics then lets be specific.  Your 152 teched my 152.  Your 152 might be better (was on that day) but my 152 had 2 losses to Calhoun from Plymouth, a loss to the Merrillville kid, and lost in OT in the ticket round.  He didn't wrestle punks.  Our 182 beat your guy pretty handidly at the Al Smith and he was pretty highly touted in the SS Rankings.  I think we have some kids that would beat some of your kids as well that might have a better record.   It goes both ways and I think we have earned our right to be there based on the data and the information everyone is provided.  You do too and should...I have no argument with that.

You seem to be hung up on the fact that we came out of the Peru Sectional and Regional.  So what's your solution?  My understanding is that calculations are adjusted for your argument.  Do we just not let those teams from a perceived weaker sectional/regional in for consideration?  The question you asked above could very easily be turned around and asked...does your 6 regional qualifiers automatically make you a better team than the team with 10 regional qualifiers (which we didn't have)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fabio Jr. said:

ehh frustrations make us act out...diff is you were respectful and you sign your name no one can be upset at that sometimes we let our frustrations show a little bit I dont think anyone took what you said as a shot to any of those programs.

Lol...you spoke too soon! :)  I'm not mad at Nick.  You gotta fight for your program.  But, I do believe I have a good argument as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

My initial argument doesn't matter if it's Rochester, Southridge, or somebody else that is in.  I'm blown away that we didn't get back in.  I wasn't so much hung up on the Peru argument.  That was more my buddy lol.  I don't care who we could have potentially replaced.  And after more research, maybe Gavit got hosed.  Simply put, some teams make it based on where they're at and I don't know that the adjustments do justice.  

Something needs to be changed.  I don't have an answer as to what!  For example, Jimtown brings some good kids back, and would kill us at an individual tourney with their firepower.  It's not unreasonable to think we COULD win 8-9 matches against them in a dual.  Some of their returners our returners have beat.  Now, we would be likely coming back from down 18 with those studs, but who is to say we couldn't beat them in a dual next year?  I am NOT saying we beat them, but I'm saying maybe we could.  So that being said, let's just assume for my argument that Jimtown will be undefeated going into team state with their toughest match being New Prairie before team state. (unless their schedule changes)  So Jimtown gets seeded top 4 hypothetically and will probably place top 4.  So if we could have a dual that is right there neck and neck or possibly beat Jimtown it seems wrong we aren't there.  This is not a knock on JImtown.  They are freakin' tough and placed 5th this year and had a crazy tourney team.  It's just an example of a team that could possibly be beat in a dual, at least a nice dual, but we couldn't touch in a tourney.

 

  Yes the 152 was a specific,  but the 6 regional qualifiers compared to 10 was not directed at anybody...I made two numbers up and went with that...the comment about teams getting kids through to regional was actually about a different regional on the other side of the state where they qualified this year and actually may have scored more points than us in qualifying the prior year.  At least the scoring was close.  I do not have a better alternative.  I'm just griping and it doesn't seem right. 

Edited by nkraus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clint Gard said:

If you are going to go in to specifics then lets be specific.  Your 152 teched my 152.  Your 152 might be better (was on that day) but my 152 had 2 losses to Calhoun from Plymouth, a loss to the Merrillville kid, and lost in OT in the ticket round.  He didn't wrestle punks.  Our 182 beat your guy pretty handidly at the Al Smith and he was pretty highly touted in the SS Rankings.  I think we have some kids that would beat some of your kids as well that might have a better record.   It goes both ways and I think we have earned our right to be there based on the data and the information everyone is provided.  You do too and should...I have no argument with that.

You seem to be hung up on the fact that we came out of the Peru Sectional and Regional.  So what's your solution?  My understanding is that calculations are adjusted for your argument.  Do we just not let those teams from a perceived weaker sectional/regional in for consideration?  The question you asked above could very easily be turned around and asked...does your 6 regional qualifiers automatically make you a better team than the team with 10 regional qualifiers (which we didn't have)?

The Peru sectional got a 4 rating this year, meaning it was decent.  I think it was a 3 in the past.    Its depth improved with some of the realignment,  so the Peru weaker sectional doesn't hold that much water in this case.   Looks like the C.O.P had a tough decision this year, but from arguments Ive seen, they made a logical choice.  Make sure you get it done in the state tournament if you don't want to be subject to the whim  of the C.O.P.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Fabio Jr. said:

Unfortunately this is the issue with our system.There is no perfect or purely objective solution.

True, true.  It is a challenge to use 'individual' tournament results to predict dual strength (at least at the margins).  I think the system used is an objective system that makes a measurement of the strength of returning kids.  It is very heard to measure depth. Even when they start ranking college teams and essentially know most of the line-up it is not always easy to predict outcomes of an actual dual.  Did anybody see Penn State beat Ohio State without Nolf and BECAUSE Cassar beats Moore???

I would love to see duals between some of these closely related schools.  Too bad our schedules are not flexible enough to add some in.

Edited by .02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nkraus said:

My initial argument doesn't matter if it's Rochester, Southridge, or somebody else that is in.  I'm blown away that we didn't get back in.  I wasn't so much hung up on the Peru argument.  That was more my buddy lol.  I don't care who we could have potentially replaced.  And after more research, maybe Gavit got hosed.  Simply put, some teams make it based on where they're at and I don't know that the adjustments do justice.  

Something needs to be changed.  I don't have an answer as to what!  For example, Jimtown brings some good kids back, and would kill us at an individual tourney with their firepower.  It's not unreasonable to think we COULD win 8-9 matches against them in a dual.  Some of their returners our returners have beat.  Now, we would be likely coming back from down 18 with those studs, but who is to say we couldn't beat them in a dual next year?  I am NOT saying we beat them, but I'm saying maybe we could.  So that being said, let's just assume for my argument that Jimtown will be undefeated going into team state with their toughest match being New Prairie before team state. (unless their schedule changes)  So Jimtown gets seeded top 4 hypothetically and will probably place top 4.  So if we could have a dual that is right there neck and neck or possibly beat Jimtown it seems wrong we aren't there.  This is not a knock on JImtown.  They are freakin' tough and placed 5th this year and had a crazy tourney team.  It's just an example of a team that could possibly be beat in a dual, at least a nice dual, but we couldn't touch in a tourney.

 

  Yes the 152 was a specific,  but the 6 regional qualifiers compared to 10 was not directed at anybody...I made two numbers up and went with that...the comment about teams getting kids through to regional was actually about a different regional on the other side of the state where they qualified this year and actually may have scored more points than us in qualifying the prior year.  At least the scoring was close.  I do not have a better alternative.  I'm just griping and it doesn't seem right. 

Yes.  All valid points and good talk.  Again, I seriously don't have a solution and it is hard to predict.  It was a cool tournament the last two years and I'll be sad to not be a part of it this year.  As for my comments above it was not a knock on any team or kids listed.  Purely opinion and perception.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, nkraus said:

It was a cool tournament the last two years and I'll be sad to not be a part of it this year

I'd really encourage you to reach out to some of the other schools that were 'just out' of this tournament.  Especially ones that had it on the schedule and might now be out....  A super-dual of 6 'just missed' teams would offer some good competition at a key point in the year.  Doesn't have to be by class either....

Edited by .02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, .02 said:

I'd really encourage you to reach out to some of the other schools that were 'just out' of this tournament.  Especially ones that had it on the schedule and might now be out....  A super-dual of 6 'just missed' teams would offer some good competition at a key point in the year.  Doesn't have to be by class either....

eyyyyy good idea! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, nkraus said:

eyyyyy good idea! 

I've seen this idea floated before.  But nobody has really taken the time to get this up and running.  I feel like it could become an annual event that just rotated venues based on which teams make it into the top 12 and which don't.  But it will take someone willing to start it:)

Edited by .02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, nkraus said:

Can you bump the thread of the final scores?  I'm going to discuss it with my AD

 

  Genius Qual  Genius rank Genius State  SS Reg  Ret Sectional
School  Record 2018 Score 2018 SOS rank Qual Qual Qual Wrestlers Rating
Garrett 22-3 69.96 151 30th 58 0 2 6 8 5
                     
Rochester 13-6 45.59 148 103rd 173 0 6 7 13 4
Southridge 20-12 55.17 151 63rd 118 1 4 10 10 3
Hammond Gavit 31-1 53.92 140 66th 292 0 3 8 11 3
Oak Hill 18-0 70.55 148 29th 217 0 4 8 11 4
Delta 7-11 45.12 147 106th 57 1 5 11 11

3

Edited by Wrestling Scholar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like numbers.......of our 11 sectional returnees......9 regional qual. 

106: 27-8

113: 25-9

120: 16-10

126: 33-8

132: 28-11

138: 32-8

145: 11-6

152: 16-6

160: 17-9

220: 23-11

285: 4-10

Due to circumstances our star 160 who was 20-2 had to sit out of the state tournament which would have made more of an impact. Our schedule isn't doing us an favors as we lost Rochester, Garrett, crown point varsity and Goshen in the last couple years due to rescheduling of their meets. That would have been a better indicator as we rolled with jv when we were ahead in duals. We would look forward to moving things around to schedule any team in the vote-in or the top #10 just so our team can know where we stand.

I would also like to point out our incoming freshman(about 14) which carried us to a 12th place finish at middle school state while only with 9 guys. Some our regional qualifiers will not have spots. But that is the nature of a competitive team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GWCoach said:

I like numbers.......of our 11 sectional returnees......9 regional qual. 

106: 27-8

113: 25-9

120: 16-10

126: 33-8

132: 28-11

138: 32-8

145: 11-6

152: 16-6

160: 17-9

220: 23-11

285: 4-10

Due to circumstances our star 160 who was 20-2 had to sit out of the state tournament which would have made more of an impact. Our schedule isn't doing us an favors as we lost Rochester, Garrett, crown point varsity and Goshen in the last couple years due to rescheduling of their meets. That would have been a better indicator as we rolled with jv when we were ahead in duals. We would look forward to moving things around to schedule any team in the vote-in or the top #10 just so our team can know where we stand.

I would also like to point out our incoming freshman(about 14) which carried us to a 12th place finish at middle school state while only with 9 guys. Some our regional qualifiers will not have spots. But that is the nature of a competitive team.

You guys dropped the War on the Wabash.  Theres always 3 or 4 pretty good teams that would have upped your schedule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wrestling Scholar said:

You guys dropped the War on the Wabash.  Theres always 3 or 4 pretty good teams that would have upped your schedule.

Money plays a big part.....overnight stay is what hurt us. We loved coming because it was great competition but our school isn't exactly willing to bleed money. On the other hand team state we coulda swung the school to financially back lol 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 3:17 PM, Wrestling Scholar said:

 

  Genius Qual  Genius rank Genius State  SS Reg  Ret Sectional
School  Record 2018 Score 2018 SOS rank Qual Qual Qual Wrestlers Rating
Garrett 22-3 69.96 151 30th 58 0 2 6 8 5
                     
Rochester 13-6 45.59 148 103rd 173 0 6 7 13 4
Southridge 20-12 55.17 151 63rd 118 1 4 10 10 3
Hammond Gavit 31-1 53.92 140 66th 292 0 3 8 11 3
Oak Hill 18-0 70.55 148 29th 217 0 4 8 11 4
Delta 7-11 45.12 147 106th 57 1 5 11 11

3

Where did you find the numbers for these again?  I can't seem to find the old post with the team points.  I am a little surprised CMA was not in the mix for a vote-in.  They beat Rochester head to head in a dual last year (which I realize isn't a criteria and lost a close dual with New Prairie with a couple of kids out of the line-up d/t injury).  CMA must have had 9 RQ, with 6 SSQ, and 2 SQ.

Not doubting the calculations, just wondering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MOWrestler said:

Where did you find the numbers for these again?  I can't seem to find the old post with the team points.  I am a little surprised CMA was not in the mix for a vote-in.  They beat Rochester head to head in a dual last year (which I realize isn't a criteria and lost a close dual with New Prairie with a couple of kids out of the line-up d/t injury).  CMA must have had 9 RQ, with 6 SSQ, and 2 SQ.

Not doubting the calculations, just wondering.

 

They just missed the vote-in process. Sadly, they forfeited a weight and had 4 guys not make it out of one of the thinner sectionals in the state. If they'd had one more guy make it to regional or had a warm body in that forfeited weight, they would have been in the vote-in discussion. It's true they beat Rochester head-to-head but remember scoring is heavily weighted toward returning guys and CA had 3 of their top guys graduate--meaning they bring back 10 compared to 14 starters from Rochester (I'm just speaking in terms of how scoring works...CA's incoming class could make them a force but that's not part of the scoring process.)

They would have been an amazing candidate, sadly, with all the credentials they've got coming in for next year. They'll be very good for the next few years it seems. We just don't have a fair way to consider incoming 8th graders, move-ins, etc. before the voting process, so you've got to get that far at least first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×