jchas Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I think we should evaluate how we choose the alternate for the State. I don't think the last guy who gets eliminated by the Champion is necessarily the best option. I was thinking you would need to start with. 1) Regional Champions. 2) Head to head matchups from the season 3) overall record. What are your guys thoughts on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Bell Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 they had the format last year with the true alternate wrestle backs, but that seemed to make the matches less desirable with the lack of performance by the athletes. Kayla Miracle and I were talking and she had just been put out, and she said that "she doesn't have the desire to wrestle knowing that she wont move on." So they dumped that format this year. I think that there should be a 5th and 6th place match to determine the alternate in case they are needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 If they won't have wrestlebacks I've said several times I'd like to see the highest regional placer eliminated in the quarterfinals (round to go). In the event of a tie (two eliminated wrestlers with same regional placement) it goes to the wrestler who is from the semi-state champions regional. If neither is from the champions regional then it would be the wrestler who was from the runner ups regional. That way it is earned by your ability in the previous competition with preference going to what would be considered the toughest regional to win based on the semi-state finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Wadkins Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 They eliminated the WB's for 5th Place because of the amount of time they took and because of the amount of discomfort caused at the cramped Merrillville Semistate. The IHSAA doesn't care about doing things right...or we'd have wrestlebacks throughout the tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Bell Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 They eliminated the WB's for 5th Place because of the amount of time they took and because of the amount of discomfort caused at the cramped Merrillville Semistate. The IHSAA doesn't care about doing things right...or we'd have wrestlebacks throughout the tournament. I agree coach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchas Posted February 17, 2014 Author Share Posted February 17, 2014 We are not asking for wrestle backs here. I would just like to see past performance come into play on who deserves the alternate position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Dawg Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 It's real simple Coach. I agree many talented wrestlers fall through the cracks from a bad match, or a bad call, or them and another really good wrestler meet up in the ticket round. 2 Solutions I can offer. a- Seed the semi-state make sure your best 4 -8 wrestlers are separated. That would take little to no effort. There are kids going down that got pinned in 7 seconds by kids that are staying home. b Still seed the tournament but wrestle 2 rounds on Friday night with true wrestle-backs and send your 4 best kids down to Indy. Then We truly have the best State Tournament with 1 class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchas Posted February 17, 2014 Author Share Posted February 17, 2014 If we used my way. Torres would be able to take Hartmans spot at State. You would have a hard time convincing anyone that he is not the most deserving of the spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCard Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I still say the Super Regional is the answer that feeds into an 8 man bracket at Semi-State. Full wrestlebacks from Round 1. It actually is less matches than is currently wrestled at the Semi-State Level. 56 less matches to be exact. Throw in a 5th/6th place match and you only add 14 more matches for the true alternate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchas Posted February 17, 2014 Author Share Posted February 17, 2014 I still say the Super Regional is the answer that feeds into an 8 man bracket at Semi-State. Full wrestlebacks from Round 1. It actually is less matches than is currently wrestled at the Semi-State Level. 56 less matches to be exact. Throw in a 5th/6th place match and you only add 14 more matches for the true alternate. Stop getting off track. They are not changing to that anytime soon. They could change the alternate criteria next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 They eliminated the WB's for 5th Place because of the amount of time they took and because of the amount of discomfort caused at the cramped Merrillville Semistate. The IHSAA doesn't care about doing things right...or we'd have wrestlebacks throughout the tournament. Same amount of paid customers with or without wrestlebacks so the IHSAA has what they need covered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCard Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Stop getting off track. They are not changing to that anytime soon. They could change the alternate criteria next year. Sorry jchas, I misunderstood your original post of what our thoughts were on determining the alternate. I think they should just get four pieces of paper, write the four quarterfinalists' names on them, put them in a hat, and random draw the alternate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Stop getting off track. They are not changing to that anytime soon. They could change the alternate criteria next year. There is a better chance that we get full wrestle backs before they change the criteria they way you suggested. And we know that we aren't going to get wrestle backs anytime soon. I think this is low on the priority list. It just doesn't affect that many wrestlers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madtownxwrestler Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 It's real simple Coach. I agree many talented wrestlers fall through the cracks from a bad match, or a bad call, or them and another really good wrestler meet up in the ticket round. 2 Solutions I can offer. a- Seed the semi-state make sure your best 4 -8 wrestlers are separated. That would take little to no effort. There are kids going down that got pinned in 7 seconds by kids that are staying home. b Still seed the tournament but wrestle 2 rounds on Friday night with true wrestle-backs and send your 4 best kids down to Indy. Then We truly have the best State Tournament with 1 class. It would be near impossible to seed semi state since half the competitors have never met each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Dawg Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Not True Coaches consensus is top And it affects kids every single year Common opponents Illinois is the latest state that does it at their sectional now that they went to 3 classes with 16 kids down state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madtownxwrestler Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Not True Coaches consensus is top And it affects kids every single year Common opponents Illinois is the latest state that does it at their sectional now that they went to 3 classes with 16 kids down state There are guys that don't have common opponents at sectionals due to guys changing weight classes. So how in the world do you think this would work at semi state ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Dawg Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Coaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kinko2423 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I believe torres should get the nod hes the best wrestler in that weight class that is not going to state and the slam was not intentional so he should get the spot. its not like it was a close match he was winning 5-1 with 10 seconds left. torres has a good chance as any to win the whole thing and to take it away from him by the refs is a joke that's why you have to refs but they wont overrule the others call if you watch the match on video you can tell it wasn't a slam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchas Posted February 17, 2014 Author Share Posted February 17, 2014 I would love to see the video. Anyone want to post it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madtownxwrestler Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Coaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is topCoaches consensus is top Coaches opinions are not a criteria nor should they be. It's unfortunate that he lost on an illegal slam but even if it fell into a criteria of naming the alternate in any other way. A disqualified wrestler should still be excluded from being an alternate. Team Howard. Scottsburg kid gets DQ'd in sectional final for a cross face bite mark where he was horse reigned. He is removed from tournament and doesn't place second or wrestle at regionals. Why would someone disqualified for a slam then be allowed to become an alternate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchas Posted February 17, 2014 Author Share Posted February 17, 2014 Coaches opinions are not a criteria nor should they be. It's unfortunate that he lost on an illegal slam but even if it fell into a criteria of naming the alternate in any other way. A disqualified wrestler should still be excluded from being an alternate. Team Howard. Scottsburg kid gets DQ'd in sectional final for a cross face bite mark where he was horse reigned. He is removed from tournament and doesn't place second or wrestle at regionals. Why would someone disqualified for a slam then be allowed to become an alternate? I really, really doubt that Tores slammed Hartman on purpose. Sometimes things like this happen in a wrestling match. These guys have done this a 1000 times. Sometimes your opponent doesn't react the way you expect them to. That is when problems happen. It is like driving down the road and another diver does not react the way you expect them to. That is how accidents happen. You can compare this with intentionally biting someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madtownxwrestler Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 I really, really doubt that Tores slammed Hartman on purpose. Sometimes things like this happen in a wrestling match. These guys have done this a 1000 times. Sometimes your opponent doesn't react the way you expect them to. That is when problems happen. It is like driving down the road and another diver does not react the way you expect them to. That is how accidents happen. You can compare this with intentionally biting someone. The rule doesn't ask if it were intentional. It states that if you lift someone you are responsible for their safe return. And the bite that was called was from someone forcing their arm into an opponents mouth. I was about ten feet away from it and if he would have bit down there would have been plenty of blood not barely visible teeth marks. The rule stood two sets of teeth and a DQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchas Posted February 18, 2014 Author Share Posted February 18, 2014 The rule doesn't ask if it were intentional. It states that if you lift someone you are responsible for their safe return. And the bite that was called was from someone forcing their arm into an opponents mouth. I was about ten feet away from it and if he would have bit down there would have been plenty of blood not barely visible teeth marks. The rule stood two sets of teeth and a DQ There is a very big difference between the two. Biting someone is not a normal occurrence in wrestling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madtownxwrestler Posted February 18, 2014 Share Posted February 18, 2014 There is a very big difference between the two. Biting someone is not a normal occurrence in wrestling. Disqualification isn't that common in the state tournament. But as for the "normal occurrence" there were two DQ's at Evansville that I know of and 50% of them were from a bite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jchas Posted February 18, 2014 Author Share Posted February 18, 2014 Disqualification isn't that common in the state tournament. But as for the "normal occurrence" there were two DQ's at Evansville that I know of and 50% of them were from a bite. I have no idea what you are talking about. Normal as in biting is in now way shape or form a normal wrestling move. Retuning you opponent to the mat in an unfriendly manner is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts