NickS Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Sorry coming late to this discussion, but I've got to chime in here. This is going to be lengthly, so I'll break it up into different posts so you guys don't lose your minds reading. I have to ask what is the purpose of having a class system? Alot of this class system debate has been centered around having a "true" state champion. I'm against a class system, but this is the wrong take to have against a class system in my opinion. I look at it like this and ask, "what does a class system bring that a single-class doesn't?" The biggest reason I've read, not from this thread, but would be that it brings increased participation. I'm sorry, but I don't buy this because there are more classed-states that are worse than states that are better than Indiana. The states that are better than us have stronger wrestling culture and more people willing to put time into their wrestling product (on top of that, population). Then tell me the reasons why 75% of the state qualifiers the past 11 years were from big schools? I'm curious as to why there is such a discrepancy when they are all supposed to be equal? The reasons I have heard are that the big school kids work harder and thats about it. I'm going to be candid in saying that bigger schools do have a built-in advantage with size and funding power, generally speaking. I'm an "anti-class" supporter, but I won't fool myself into believing big schools and small schools are on a level playing field. With that being said, it's not necessarily that big school kids work harder than the smaller school kids. It's the quality of the workouts. Since big schools have the aforementioned built-in advantages, their likely to find more wrestlers. Assuming everything's equal with the program and coaches. Wrestler A will get more out of a workout wrestling 4 or 5 other kids from Big School; compared to if Wrestler A is working out against 1, maybe 2, at Small School. This is just a general comparison. Now add in the coaching talent, funding, parent participation all should be stronger at big schools. You can start to see the picture of why big schools have more state qualifiers. Again, I'm speaking generally so there are exceptions to the rule. This is my take on this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickS Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Why would I want to coach a team with 5 or 6 forfeits? I want to coach a TEAM not a couple individuals. So how does going to a class system limit this hypothetical team from having 5 or 6 forfeits? The top kids see eachother in many tournaments throughout the season and offseason. Yeah, but I would think that beating someone "under the lights" is a bigger sense of accomplishment than beating them in December. Would you rather beat a strong opponent at State or at some meet in December? Not that having both is out of the question, but just saying if you had to chose one. Tell me if these kids look disgusted that they aren't a "true" state champion? Tell me if they are going to throw their medals away because they aren't a "true" state champion. Tell me these kids haven't worked hard. Tell me these kids aren't as happy as an Indiana state champion. These kids aren't worried about a "true" championship. So your real reason for having a class system is so that the small school kids can stand atop a podium and call themselves state champions? Sorry, but that's the wrong reason to have a class system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickS Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Right now Indiana allows the least number of kids to advance to the state finals at 5.18% of the kids in the state earn a free ticket. States like Iowa, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin all have between 9-13% going to state. Going to a two class system, which I would prefer, will not kill wrestling like everyone wants to think. Those states are all surviving pretty well with classes wrestling and allowing double our state qualifiers to participate. So Indiana is at around 5% and those other states are between 9-13%. So what does this mean really? You'r right, it wouldn't kill wrestling. In fact, it wouldn't do anything at all. Our wrestling product would be exactly the same right now under a class system, as it is with the current system. So if it's not going to make the product better, why change it? An idea that I've just kicked around, instead of moving to a 2-class system. Re-align the Semi-States (with the Sectionals and Regionals under them) so that you'd have 2 big school Semi-States and 2 small school Semi-States. Organize the State Finals brackets so that in the first 2 rounds that big school kids wrestle big school and vice-versa with the small schools. Then when you get to the semi-finals, have big school vs. small school. The small schools would have half of the semi-final matches and placements guaranteed. I'll give you an idea what the State Finals bracket would look like... SS - Small School BS - Big School SS 1a SS 4b SS 2b SS 3a BS 1a BS 4b BS 2b BS 3a SS 1b SS 4a SS 2a SS 3b BS 1b BS 4a BS 2a BS 3b Just brainstorming here, so I'm sure some kinks can be worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldCoach Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 I think you are still fighting the issue of not really wanting a class with your proposal of the realignments. You are still setting the stage for the big schools to have the advantage. Let's say the IHSAA use the same type alignment with football or Basketball. Can you imagine the results if Tri West were to play Penn in football playoffs - sounds like the old basketball sectionals and regionals when we had those so-called Cinderella teams. Everybody remembers that--when the big schools literally cut to ribbons the entire state of small schools just to get them whittled down. So they wouldn't have to play another big school at the very beginning as they do now. Oh, occasionally one maybe two of the small schools might survive the onslaught but not often. Again one can check to see what size of school wins the state title year in and year out. Say why doesn't the NCAA use a non class system? What would happen if Butler could play Ohio State or DePauw(of Greencastle) to play Oklahoma in football. Not a pretty sight I bet. It is simple. The smaller schools do not have the resources, the coaches, the facilities, the numbers of athletes to choose from and the community support to draw from to compete day in and day out. Again some can and many can't. You just have to check past records to see for yourself. As I mentioned earlier, check out the state finals in Iowa. Not only in wrestling but in all sports. It is quite a scene. The whole state gets charged up for the finals. The sports section of the Des Moines paper is full of article after article of all levels. I have witnessed this many times and find it very rewarding and wondered why Indiana could not duplicate such an event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 I agree $$$ is part of the problem but in a different way...coaches. When a coach from a small school has success at a small school he gets the attention of the larger schools whom basically "buy" him for their program, taking him from the small school, thus making it harder for the small school to continue success. ff I will just state one name out of numerous that fits this mold. Jim Tonte coached at Tri West(I believe) for a couple years and was starting to have success, but then moved on to Perry Meridian. What did Perry offer that Tri West didn't? Well, more kids to choose from, better pay as a teacher, better facilities, more assistant coaches, amongst other distinct advantages. At the same time, why do coaches in football like Bud Wright stay at Sheridan or Bill Sharpe stay at Jimtown for their entire lives? I'll tell you why, its because they have success at that level and don't have to move to a school that has 1500 students to have a chance for success. I have seen many good small school coaches move up to biggest schools just for that reason in wrestling. This fall I went to a football game between two single A teams and noticed a HUGE difference in the teams than the usual team I watch(Garrett at 2A school). The first big difference was the size of the teams in terms of numbers. The 1A teams simply do not have the numbers walking the hallway to field as many kids as a 2A program. The second difference was the overall size of the kids. Sure the 1A schools had some big kids, but they had a lot less than a 2A program. Why, because there simply are less bigger kids in the school period at the 1A school. No, way would I expect those two 1A teams to compete against Garrett, year in and year out. Sure they will have some good years and be able to win once in a while, but overall these teams are going to face an uphill battle each and every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnatchSingle Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Class wrestling is dumb. It doesn't matter the class. Each wrestler goes out and wrestles to his or her ability. Who cares about how big a school is, you can only put 14 guys or girls on the mat. This isn't basketball. That's one thing about this sport that is great. SMALL school or big SCHOOL, you the same chance and opportunity. I know of many small school state champs or runner ups or placers. WRESTLING is fine the way it is. It makes it special and makes it stand out among the other class sports. DON"T go ruin something good for the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Would anyone care to get back on the original topic, or will the hijack continue?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Class wrestling is dumb. It doesn't matter the class. Each wrestler goes out and wrestles to his or her ability. Who cares about how big a school is, you can only put 14 guys or girls on the mat. This isn't basketball. That's one thing about this sport that is great. SMALL school or big SCHOOL, you the same chance and opportunity. I know of many small school state champs or runner ups or placers. WRESTLING is fine the way it is. It makes it special and makes it stand out among the other class sports. DON"T go ruin something good for the sport. There are 10X more state champions from big schools than small schools, why is that? Why are small schools only represented by 25% of the state qualifiers if everything is equal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnatchSingle Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Listen, a sport is a sport. You only put 14 guys out on the mat. GO WIN or SHUT UP. I haven't heard many small schools complain. You guys are making this a big big deal over nothing. Wrestling is a sport where you go out and the BEST man WINS. You all train the same, and that is when it comes down to who can win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnatchSingle Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 With Class wrestling you screw up a great tradition of wrestling in Indiana. NO CLASS. KEEP it the SAME. GO out and win because you are the BEST in the state, not because you are the best out of the class you are in. Small schools don't field a full team near as much as bigger schools, but that doesn't mean they can't and don't have state placers, champs or qualifiers. 2A, 1A schools have had great success and I think they would say the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarlHungus Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 With Class wrestling you screw up a great tradition of wrestling in Indiana. NO CLASS. KEEP it the SAME. GO out and win because you are the BEST in the state, not because you are the best out of the class you are in. Small schools don't field a full team near as much as bigger schools, but that doesn't mean they can't and don't have state placers, champs or qualifiers. 2A, 1A schools have had great success and I think they would say the same. Did class wrestling screw up tradition in Ohio, Oklahoma, Iowa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 GO WIN or SHUT UP. Go win or shut up? Thanks for adding important content to the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnatchSingle Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 You both are acting like you are from small schools where you didn't make it to state and are upset now. Small schools....Duckworth, Phillips, Chalfant, I know many small schools like Centerville, Winchester, Tri High, Union County, Hagerstown have had many wrestlers make it to state. MAN TO MAN...doesn't matter what school you went too, it comes down to who has the desire, determination and love for the sport to go out and make things happen. Little school wrestlers love going out and just wrestling, I have never heard a 2A or 1A school have a wrestler that said, I just beat a kid from a 5 A school, he is happy he won and is ready for next match. CLASS isn't important in our sport. It only is to those basketball schools who think its unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Wow you can name three wrestlers from small schools, I am very proud of you. Now lets name wrestlers from big schools. Sandefer, Harper, Quiroga, March, Graber, Galka, Cosgrove, McGill, Hinton, Tsirtsis, Escobedo, Hernandez I am glad you know three wrestlers from small schools, but there are many you do not know of that are very good wrestlers, but are put at a disadvantage because they are from a small school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clive2246 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Y2..when all of those guys were at Griffith it was a 3A school. I would hardly call that a large school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 You may not call a school of 962 kids big, but the truth is the median number is 741 students. They are easily in the top 50% of enrollment. If you want to call a school of 962 kids small, what do you call one like Garrett with 518 or Adams Central with 384? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pin2win1 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 y2 a school of 962 is much closer in size to a school of around 400 than it is a school of 4,000 or even 2,000.... so in all reality it is unfair to lump Griffith in with the "large school" category Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Well then if a school of 962 is considered "small" by you, then shouldn't a school of 1000 be considered small? If a school of 1000 is small, then a school of 1200 is small too. Then if that school of 1200 is considered small, then a school of 1500 is considered small too. We can continue that until we reach a school of 4000. Small schools are the ones in the bottom 50% of enrollment, plain and simple. Its the same way the classifications are used for all other class sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 This discussion is going in circles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pin2win1 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 bravo y2, bravo, you just made a slipery slope argument. I think you work in the school system so go ask an English teacher what they think of slippery slope arguments in persuassive writting. If I remember correctly (its been awhile since HS english), we were told that slipper slope arguments are absurd. Anyway I will play be your rules just for this post..... So big schools are in the top half and small schools in the bottom half huh. Well looking at your own stats, tou have drown the line between "big schools" and "small schools" but uh oh wait, you have the line between Blackford and Gary Wirt... both schools with an enrollment at 741, yet one is a big school and the other is a small school, that does not seem fair to me. What it comes down to in the end is small and big are very subjective terms, one might consider small to be one thing while another will consider it another. But to call a school like Corydon Central a big school when it is two students away from being in the bottom 50 percent of enrollment when there are schools two, three, four and even five times larger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 So where do you want that ONE state qualifier to be, with the big schools or small schools? You are really reaching for some straws there! So do you consider Rochester a 3A school or 2A school? They are one student from being a 3A school, but are classified as a 2A school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENoblewrestling Posted January 11, 2009 Author Share Posted January 11, 2009 As a coach of a small school I was just wondering who people think would be the best in a hypothetical situation. So does anyone else have any schools that they think would be considered for the best small school teams in the state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pin2win1 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 are you really that obtuse to miss the whole point of my post? My point is that big and small is a very subjective term that can only be assigned when there are certain perameters that defines them. At this point we have no perameters and in my mind and in others mind as well, small might be large and large might be small. Anyway your proposed "system" is one that you wish to implement based on what you find as being "fair" to all schools. I am just pointing out that total fairness can not be achieved because someone is always going to be left out. I however, promote a "system" that is already in effect that is not based off of fairness but instead is based solely off of finding the best wrestler in the state. In simple terms you favor trying to legislate something that can never happen, complete fairness. On the other hand i promote a system that can achieve its goal. PS if you want to see glimpse into a society that opperates solely off of the system of fairness I suggest you read the short story Harrison Bergeron, or if you wish you may watch the movie. You will see the only way in which "fairness" can be achieved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 So making two classes is going to handicap the best wrestlers? Getting more wrestlers recognition for their hard work hurts the sport for what reason? Does having classes hurt football or basketball? Basketball sells out Conseco every year.... thats something wrestling does not! Why do other states have class wrestling? I'm curious of your opinion why Ohio has class wrestling and if it has hurt their wrestling culture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarlHungus Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 are you really that obtuse to miss the whole point of my post? My point is that big and small is a very subjective term that can only be assigned when there are certain perameters that defines them. At this point we have no perameters and in my mind and in others mind as well, small might be large and large might be small. Every classed sport in every state in the union deals with this. Obviously there are parameters. Anyway your proposed "system" is one that you wish to implement based on what you find as being "fair" to all schools. I am just pointing out that total fairness can not be achieved because someone is always going to be left out. I however, promote a "system" that is already in effect that is not based off of fairness but instead is based solely off of finding the best wrestler in the state. In simple terms you favor trying to legislate something that can never happen, complete fairness. On the other hand i promote a system that can achieve its goal. No one said any classed system is 100% fair. But it would be a far more equitable system and the IHSAA should be in favor of ideas that benefit a majority of its membership. It is not the stated goal of the tournament to find the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts