1A Oak Hill vs. Churubusco

[Y2CJ41]

Since Oak Hill was left out of the 1A equation due to a "miscalculation"(see here http://www.indianamat.com/perched-upon-the-oak-hill/2013/12/).  How would these two teams match up? Can we get a true 1A title dual in the next few weeks?

[decbell1]

I think Oak Hill and Lewis Cass are definitely right there

[maligned]

If you don't have time to read the entire article posted by Y2, it comes down to this: class distributions were determined by numbers sent out to Athletic Directors as part of the IHSAA press release.  The numbers that are posted at IHSAA.org today are different than those that were sent one year ago.  No comment from the IHSAA has been given as to the differences, but no "mis-calculation" was made.  The IHSWCA was either given the wrong information, or the information has changed.  Also, it could be understood misunderstood from Y2's article that Oak Hill would have been in the event for sure.  In fact, they would have had 195 points, right between Busco and West Central, and would have been in the voting from among those three teams and several others for the final 2 wildcard spots.  They would have been a strong candidate, but they weren't definitely in.

 

Finally, I should clarify that I'm only a consultant to the IHSWCA, so you will have to ask officers what their response was to Y2's concerns. 

[Y2CJ41]

Oak Hill vs Carroll

106 Joel Byman (Carroll High School) won by pin over Cole Ridgeway (Oak Hill) 3:57. 0 6.00

113 Travis Davenport (Oak Hill) won by forfeit over Unknown (Unattached) . 6.00 0

120 Ben Cauffman (Carroll High School) won by pin over Luke Buckle (Oak Hill) 1:52. 0 6.00

126 Kobe Raypole (Carroll High School) won by decision over Zach Gunter (Oak Hill) 3-0. 0 3.00

132 Tristan Smith (Oak Hill) won by pin over Tristan Lerch (Carroll High School) 3:24. 6.00 0

138 Shane Curtis (Oak Hill) won by major decision over Logan Jester (Carroll High School) 14-4. 4.00 0

145 Alex Arney (Carroll High School) won by tech fall over Brody Hardcastle (Oak Hill) 4:32 17-1. 0 5.00

152 Josh Garman (Carroll High School) won by pin over Riley Johnson (Oak Hill) 3:21. 0 6.00

160 Kayne Duncan (Carroll High School) won by decision over Breighton Mullinix (Oak Hill) 12-9. 0 3.00

170 Tristan Wilson (Carroll High School) won by pin over Chris Cunningham (Oak Hill) 4:16. 0 6.00

182 Eric Dunten (Carroll High School) won by major decision over Aaron Miles (Oak Hill) 13-3. 0 4.00

195 Corey Rickman (Carroll High School) won by pin over Jake Mullinix (Oak Hill) 3:58. 0 6.00

220 Brad Sadilek (Carroll High School) won by major decision over Keegan Scott (Oak Hill) 13-5. 0 4.00

285 Nick Cunningham (Oak Hill) won by decision over Ammon Carr (Carroll High School) 5-3. 3.00 0

Dual Meet Score 19.0 49.0

 

Oak Hill vs. Garrett

160 Breighton Mullinix (Oak Hill) won by pin over Derrek Metzger (Garrett High School) 0:22. 0 6.00

170 Gabe Gunion (Garrett High School) won by pin over Chris Cunningham (Oak Hill) 2:54. 6.00 0

182 Aaron Miles (Oak Hill) won by tech fall over Ryan Hathaway (Garrett High School) 6:00 23-6. 0 5.00

195 Bo Davis (Garrett High School) won by major decision over Jake Mullinix (Oak Hill) 14-5. 4.00 0

220 Keegan Scott (Oak Hill) won by pin over Cordell Camp (Garrett High School) 0:26. 0 6.00

285 Nick Cunningham (Oak Hill) won by decision over Ivan Jacobs (Garrett High School) 6-4. 0 3.00

106 Cole Ridgeway (Oak Hill) won by decision over Anton Novy (Garrett High School) 7-2. 0 3.00

113 Travis Davenport (Oak Hill) won by decision over Zane Hargrove (Garrett High School) 16-11. 0 3.00

120 Dylan DeMarco (Garrett High School) won by pin over Nate Shelton (Oak Hill) 2:56. 6.00 0

126 Zach Gunter (Oak Hill) won by pin over Dalton Halferty (Garrett High School) 1:01. 0 6.00

132 Tristan Smith (Oak Hill) won by decision over Jaden Barker (Garrett High School) 7-3. 0 3.00

138 Shane Curtis (Oak Hill) won by decision over Dustin Alwine (Garrett High School) 2-0. 0 3.00

145 Brody Hardcastle (Oak Hill) won by major decision over Michael Sexton (Garrett High School) 11-1. 0 4.00

152 Riley Johnson (Oak Hill) won by decision over Jordan Gunion (Garrett High School) 10-3. 0 3.00

Dual Meet Score 16.0 45.0

 

Carroll vs. Churubusco

106 Joel Byman (Carroll High School) won by decision over Dakota Keefe (Churubusco) 10-3. 3.00 0

113 Kobe Raypole (Carroll High School) won by pin over Tristan Stocksdale (Churubusco) 3:55. 6.00 0

120 Ben Cauffman (Carroll High School) won by pin over BJ Sonnenberg (Churubusco) 5:57. 6.00 0

126 Joe Israbian (Carroll High School) won by forfeit over Unknown (Unattached) . 6.00 0

132 Logan Jester (Carroll High School) won by pin over Nate Downing (Churubusco) 2:27. 6.00 0

138 Chase Downing (Churubusco) won by pin over Sebastian Hicks (Carroll High School) 0:47. 0 6.00

145 Alex Arney (Carroll High School) won by pin over Shane Shroyer (Churubusco) 4:27. 6.00 0

152 Lyle McParian (Churubusco) won by decision over Cody Zabolotney (Carroll High School) 2-0. 0 3.00

160 Kayne Duncan (Carroll High School) won by decision over Caleb Partin (Churubusco) 12-7. 3.00 0

170 Tristan Wilson (Carroll High School) won by pin over Travis Glick (Churubusco) 4:53. 6.00 0

182 Ryan Collins (Carroll High School) won by decision over Braydon Shively (Churubusco) 8-7. 3.00 0

195 Chase Blotkamp (Carroll High School) won by pin over Nick Helbert (Churubusco) 4:20. 6.00 0

220 Brad Sadilek (Carroll High School) won by pin over Adam Harmon (Churubusco) 2:47. 6.00 0

285 Brad Martin (Churubusco) won in sudden victory 1 over Ammon Carr (Carroll High School) 7-5. 0 3.00

Dual Meet Score 57.0 12.0

 

Garrett vs. Churubusco

195 Bo Davis (Garrett High School) won by pin over Nick Helbert (Churubusco) 3:27. 6.00 0

220 Adam Harmon (Churubusco) won by pin over Cordell Camp (Garrett High School) 1:05. 0 6.00

285 Ivan Jacobs (Garrett High School) won by decision over Brad Martin (Churubusco) 5-1. 3.00 0

106 Dakota Keefe (Churubusco) won by major decision over Anton Novy (Garrett High School) 12-2. 0 4.00

113 Tristan Stocksdale (Churubusco) won by pin over Dylan DeMarco (Garrett High School) 2:56. 0 6.00

120 BJ Sonnenberg (Churubusco) won by pin over Dalton Halferty (Garrett High School) 3:58. 0 6.00

126 Drake Stafford (Garrett High School) won by tech fall over Cody Thomas (Churubusco) 5:15 16-0. 5.00 0

132 Jaden Barker (Garrett High School) won by tech fall over Grant Sturgis (Churubusco) 2:35 19-3. 5.00 0

138 Chase Downing (Churubusco) won by pin over Carlos Jimenez (Garrett High School) 0:55. 0 6.00

145 Shane Shroyer (Churubusco) won by pin over Jordan Gunion (Garrett High School) 3:21. 0 6.00

152 Lyle McParian (Churubusco) won by pin over Sam Lawrence (Garrett High School) 4:27. 0 6.00

160 Caleb Partin (Churubusco) won by pin over Noah Hartman (Garrett High School) 0:18. 0 6.00

170 Travis Glick (Churubusco) won by decision over Gabe Gunion (Garrett High School) 7-6. 0 3.00

182 Braydon Shively (Churubusco) won by pin over Ryan Hathaway (Garrett High School) 0:26. 0 6.00

Dual Meet Score 19.0 55.0

[Y2CJ41]

If you don't have time to read the entire article posted by Y2, it comes down to this: class distributions were determined by numbers sent out to Athletic Directors as part of the IHSAA press release.  The numbers that are posted at IHSAA.org today are different than those that were sent one year ago.  No comment from the IHSAA has been given as to the differences, but no "mis-calculation" was made.  The IHSWCA was either given the wrong information, or the information has changed.  Also, it could be understood misunderstood from Y2's article that Oak Hill would have been in the event for sure.  In fact, they would have had 195 points, right between Busco and West Central, and would have been in the voting from among those three teams and several others for the final 2 wildcard spots.  They would have been a strong candidate, but they weren't definitely in.

 

Finally, I should clarify that I'm only a consultant to the IHSWCA, so you will have to ask officers what their response was to Y2's concerns. 

Well we know Churubusco would have been invited because their head coach in on the IHSWCA board. That is a given with the way the IHSWCA does things.

 

And in all honesty, I really don't think the IHSWCA cares since it doesn't affect anyone they have to deal with on a consistent basis.

[piscis1956]

Well we know Churubusco would have been invited because their head coach in on the IHSWCA board. That is a given with the way the IHSWCA does things.

 

And in all honesty, I really don't think the IHSWCA cares since it doesn't affect anyone they have to deal with on a consistent basis.

 

I think attacking the integrity of the IHSWCA board is rather hypocritical coming right after your "yellow journalistic" post.  I guess Captain Obvious can't help himself occasionally.

[Y2CJ41]

I think attacking the integrity of the IHSWCA board is rather hypocritical coming right after your "yellow journalistic" post.  I guess Captain Obvious can't help himself occasionally.

So a team getting slighted on a bid because they used incorrect data is yellow journalism?

 

I have dealt with the IHSWCA quite a bit in the past 5+ years and when people within the system tell me that the board is only in it for their own good, that tells me enough.

[JakeandBreighton]

We were hoping for a change, and an invite. We have a full, solid, not great team, and would have loved the opportunity to compete. I was told by Danny that they are correct, because they did the enrollment #'s last spring. Imho, should have wait till the new school year, but it is, what it is. We lost a tourney to the weather, here is our coaches # Andrew King  765-673-4991, see if you can set something up!

[Loki27]

So you say we should wait until August to invite the teams for next year? After the enrollment numbers are released. Why don't they just publish the list of schools and there respective class prior to selection and if anyone has a bitch they can bring it up then before selections are made.

[Y2CJ41]

So you say we should wait until August to invite the teams for next year? After the enrollment numbers are released. Why don't they just publish the list of schools and there respective class prior to selection and if anyone has a bitch they can bring it up then before selections are made.

Then enrollments were released last Feb/March for all IHSAA schools. The IHSWCA used these numbers but were using incorrect data. Thus the data had a few teams that were misplaced in the wrong class.

[Loki27]

Then enrollments were released last Feb/March for all IHSAA schools. The IHSWCA used these numbers but were using incorrect data. Thus the data had a few teams that were misplaced in the wrong class.

i understand what you are saying, my point is why don't they submit the info they are going to use to all the coaches and even publish it for the fans on this website prior to the selections. Then give all coaches with a dispute a chance to challenge which class they feel they have been misplaced in before any selections are made.

[KarlHungus]

That would make too much sense....

[JakeandBreighton]

So you say we should wait until August to invite the teams for next year? After the enrollment numbers are released. Why don't they just publish the list of schools and there respective class prior to selection and if anyone has a bitch they can bring it up then before selections are made.

Ya, why not? There's teams on the bubble any way, then you could factor in freshmen, things like that, maybe, I don't know. It's not that big of deal, to drop a tourney, and add this, if it's going to give you better, full, squads.

[maligned]

i understand what you are saying, my point is why don't they submit the info they are going to use to all the coaches and even publish it for the fans on this website prior to the selections. Then give all coaches with a dispute a chance to challenge which class they feel they have been misplaced in before any selections are made.

 

The IHSAA releases its enrollment data every two years, which determines classification for sports for the following two seasons.  It was known last year that the IHSAA would release its enrollment data "sometime in February" last year for this year and next year's classifications.  In an effort not to use last year's enrollment data for this year's tournament--after some good opinions from people on this site to "get it right"--the IHSWCA selection committee voted to use the brand new data, even if the data came out slightly after the season.  This decision was announced and applauded by everyone, and frequent updates to the information being provided by the IHSAA were posted--including immediate announcements of the new classes right here on this site the moment in the info was released to everyone by the IHSAA.

Now there is different data today on the IHSAA's site than what was originally sent out to schools and media, and what was posted on their site at the time.  I don't know when it was changed or why it was changed.  I found out about it a couple of weeks ago from Y2.  I haven't heard any of the IHSWCA's discussions about it from them, so I'm not sure what has been considered.  I'm sure the current numbers on the IHSAA site will be used to announce classes for next year's event, but I don't know what considerations were thought about for the Oak Hill situation. 

[JakeandBreighton]

I guess my biggest question is, why did they feel the need to reclass? We were 1a last year, and weren't invited because we didn't score well. Iirc, the ihsaa reclasses every 3 years. So why did they feel the need to reclass the very next year?

[maligned]

I guess my biggest question is, why did they feel the need to reclass? We were 1a last year, and weren't invited because we didn't score well. Iirc, the ihsaa reclasses every 3 years. So why did they feel the need to reclass the very next year?

 

It was a desire to get on an IHSAA cycle and, more importantly, to use the best data available rather than outdated info.  The event unfortunately started mid-cycle last year. 

[Y2CJ41]

Will the IHSWCA recalculate the data for this year's selection?

 

Will the IHSWCA implement a "tradition factor" such as the IHSAA has?

 

My money unfortunately is on NO for both.

[JakeandBreighton]

It was a desire to get on an IHSAA cycle and, more importantly, to use the best data available rather than outdated info.  The event unfortunately started mid-cycle last year.

well, since we seem to be the only team effected by this, will we be 1a, or 2a next year?

[KarlHungus]

I would certainly hope 1a.

[JakeandBreighton]

I would certainly hope 1a.

unfortunately, this year's team is probably stronger than next year's team.

[KarlHungus]

Coach em up!!!

[JakeandBreighton]

Coach em up!!!

I don't coach any more, but I did our club for 12 years, and put allot of time into the kids we have left doing it. That's what was cool about possibly going, I remember wrestling the "jets" kids, the penn kids, pm, cathedral, fc, yorktown, and we held our own, but we lost lots of kids over the years.

[maligned]

Will the IHSWCA recalculate the data for this year's selection?

 

 

Of course...with teams folding and starting wrestling programs every year, slight adjustments have to be made every season.  Certainly with the data that's now posted on the IHSAA site bringing about some changes, there's no way it won't be used.

[maligned]

From my comments on another thread:

 

SEE "OAK HILL" THREAD FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION

 

JakeandBreighton,

I feel bad that things have unfolded in a confusing way. But the bottom line is this: you were correctly in 2A.  Let me explain why things became confusing:

 

1. I posted the final scores according to new classification data last year without having calculated scores of some teams at the bottom of the standings (and therefore didn't switch them to their new classes on the list I quickly posted).  I stated this at the top of my post, but I understand why it was overlooked.  I also detailed exactly which teams were switching classes later in the same thread, but anyway, I left it as confusing and didn't come back later to finalize all scores as I should have.

 

2. Last year's team total has been miscalculated more than once because of one sectional (New Haven) having a wrongly-written number of teams (9 rather than 10) listed as its total in 12-13 IHSAA sectional information.  There were in fact 312 teams entered in last year's individual tournament--not 311 as some have thought erroneously. 

 

3. There was some thought that maybe the IHSAA changed its enrollment numbers from the original press release due to the discovery of Roncalli's changed total and due to a newly added non-wrestling school on the current IHSAA online list.  In fact the Roncalli change was the ONLY change.  I'm not sure when it was changed, but they should have been 3A and Northview should have been 2A.  No one else was affected.  (The only reason it seems like there were a handful of errors in my list is because of reason #1 above.  I had the same data as the IHSAA and this site all along.)

 

Here is the link to the IHSAA's current list, which is exactly the same as the one they sent out last year, except for the addition of Gary Lighthouse and the aforementioned Roncalli enrollment adjustment.  Here is the breakdown then:

http://www.ihsaa.org/Portals/0/ihsaa/documents/quick%20resources/Boys%27%20Basketball%20Classifications%202013-15.pdf

 

3A is the first 103 schools listed, plus Evansville Mater Dei--(104 total)

2A is made up of schools 104 (Columbia City) to 214 (Oak Hill)--(111 minus 7 non-wrestling schools equals 104 total)

1A is made up of the remaining schools that were entered in sectional in 2012-13 from 215 and higher (104 total)

 

Lastly, I should tell you that unless something changes in the coming week with sectional entrants, you will continue to be 2A for next year's event.  As things stand now, Gary Wallace is out and Lafayette Central Catholic is in.  That means subtracting a 2A team and adding a 1A team.  North Posey will then bump to 2A to even things out.  Roncalli would be 3A and Northview 2A, as stated above, unless a last-minute change is announced (which has happened before). 

 

I hope this helps, and again, I'm sorry I didn't/couldn't make things clearer sooner.  I'm also sorry that I gave the impression you would most likely be back to 1A.  I wasn't sure until I could do a bit more back research into all the unexpected reasons the waters got muddied.