Some more stats from 2015 State

[Y2CJ41]

But you were building a program... Garrett was growing in success, and even had some success again this year.. Who knows what would have happened if you would have chosen to stay?  Maybe the upward trend would have continued at a higher rate...  The school you coach at now was not building a program but rather already had one in place.. 

We were 3-6 against Carroll in my 9 years as a varsity coach...including 3-3 in the first 6 years. Up until 5 years ago Carroll and Garrett were back and forth. Just as a note, Garrett probably had a top 4-8 team in their history this year and they won four matches against Carroll between a dual, sectional, and regional.

 

The point you are missing is I don't need to put 20,000 miles on my car just to get a random 2nd place team finish now. I don't have to spend every Saturday in a gym either. I have kids that can get the needed competition in their own room all year long. I have a handful of JV kids that beat semi-state qualifiers this year.

[AJ]

In this years tournament, 15 schools had 35.7% of the qualifiers... 9 schools had 25% of the qualifiers... It was a mix of 3A and 2A schools (if using a 3 class system) with a 2A school having the most qualifiers...

[swain358]

It is simple if you have a staff and kids that can give 300+ days a year.  This not realistic for most small school staffs or kids.  That is why the question was relevant.

In my opinion, this is the main reason why kids from small schools have trouble qualifying, placing, and winning state titles. Especially those kids in weight classes 160 and below. I have had the experience of coaching at what would be considered a big school (Anderson Highland) and a smal school (North Montgomery). Small school kids(106-160) have more opportunities to compete at the varsity level in other sports since the population of athletes at their schools are much lower. If possible, I would like to see the breakdown of state qualifiers, placers, and champs (106-160) that are also varsity athletes in other sports.

 

I'm personally not in favor of classing the individual tournament. I tell my wrestlers "If your goal is to compete at the level of state qualifier, placer, champion, you need to train at that level 365 days a year and for as many years as possible". We have some guys that buy into that mindset and training and we have some that don't.

[Y2CJ41]

In this years tournament, 15 schools had 35.7% of the qualifiers... 9 schools had 25% of the qualifiers... It was a mix of 3A and 2A schools (if using a 3 class system) with a 2A school having the most qualifiers...

 

60% of the 3A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 62.9% of the state qualifiers

35% of 2A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 27.7% of the state qualifiers

18% of 1A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 9.4% of the state qualifiers

 

In 2 classes

53% of 2A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 19.2% of the state qualifiers

23% of 1A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 80.8% of the state qualifiers

 

 

Even though the said team had the most qualifiers, they didn't have the most placers, nor did they finish in the top 10 as a team.

 

Picking one team out of 100 is only showing you can find an outlier and not something consistent.

[Y2CJ41]

In my opinion, this is the main reason why kids from small schools have trouble qualifying, placing, and winning state titles. Especially those kids in weight classes 160 and below. I have had the experience of coaching at what would be considered a big school (Anderson Highland) and a smal school (North Montgomery). Small school kids(106-160) have more opportunities to compete at the varsity level in other sports since the population of athletes at their schools are much lower. If possible, I would like to see the breakdown of state qualifiers, placers, and champs (106-160) that are also varsity athletes in other sports.

 

I'm personally not in favor of classing the individual tournament. I tell my wrestlers "If your goal is to compete at the level of state qualifier, placer, champion, you need to train at that level 365 days a year and for as many years as possible". We have some guys that buy into that mindset and training and we have some that don't.

 

Here are last year's qualifiers broken down by 145 and below and 152 and above

 

145 and below 152 and above

1A 13 30

2A 99 82

 

1A 8 13

2A 29 33

3A 75 66

 

Small schools pretty much double their qualifiers at 152lbs and above

 

The reason small schools don't succeed as much at the lower weights is probably because of

1. Lack of practice partners

2. Big school kids 145 and below are mainly one sport athletes, while small school kids play other sports, especially if they are good athletes.

3. Proximity to good off season training

[swain358]

Here are last year's qualifiers broken down by 145 and below and 152 and above

 

145 and below 152 and above

1A 13 30

2A 99 82

 

1A 8 13

2A 29 33

3A 75 66

 

Small schools pretty much double their qualifiers at 152lbs and above

 

The reason small schools don't succeed as much at the lower weights is probably because of

1. Lack of practice partners

2. Big school kids 145 and below are mainly one sport athletes, while small school kids play other sports, especially if they are good athletes.

3. Proximity to good off season training

1. Lack of practice partners

-In my opinion as you build your program the partners will become better. Early on in the development of the program at a small school the numbers/practice partners may not be as good but eventually they can become better.

2. Big school kids 145 and below are mainly 1sport athletes.

-Small school kids have the same option of being a 1 sport athlete as well. Most just choose not to which is fine but they are making that choice in sacrifice of getting more hours in the wrestling room or academies which will help develop their wrestling to hopefully state level.

3. Proximity to good off season training

-If you want it bad enough you will get in your car, car pool, coach take mini bus, or do whatever it takes to get to places you need to develop your wrestling. CIA is approximately 75-90 minutes away from our school in my first year we had one kid attend CIA all spring and summer. After that kid had a ton of success the following season, we've steadily grown to 8-10 going to CIA every year. There were years where we would load up in the mini bus after school on Mondays and make the drive to Cathedral high school during rush hour traffic. Now we have kids that drive and are able to take their buddies. So if being on that state level is important enough you will find a way to get to the practices you need to be at.

 

Are we the best team in the state? No.. Are we producing 5-6 qualifiers per year? No... (Last year I think we had 4-5 kids not qualify that had legitimate chances but it was not in the cards for them.. This year I think we had 3-4 kids that were legitimate state qualifier level kids as well but again it was not in the cards for them). I guess I just feel like it's possible to get to that level no matter your school size. It takes commitment outside of the season (as much as possible, 300+ days a year), commitment from parents, and a major commitment from coaching staff from elementary up through high school. And I am not saying that small school teams that don't have state qualifiers every year aren't committed but I am saying if you aren't on state qualifier level because you play 2 other sports and don't have the time to wrestle more then that's your choice.

[Galagore]

1. Lack of practice partners

-In my opinion as you build your program the partners will become better. Early on in the development of the program at a small school the numbers/practice partners may not be as good but eventually they can become better.

2. Big school kids 145 and below are mainly 1sport athletes.

-Small school kids have the same option of being a 1 sport athlete as well. Most just choose not to which is fine but they are making that choice in sacrifice of getting more hours in the wrestling room or academies which will help develop their wrestling to hopefully state level.

3. Proximity to good off season training

-If you want it bad enough you will get in your car, car pool, coach take mini bus, or do whatever it takes to get to places you need to develop your wrestling. CIA is approximately 75-90 minutes away from our school in my first year we had one kid attend CIA all spring and summer. After that kid had a ton of success the following season, we've steadily grown to 8-10 going to CIA every year. There were years where we would load up in the mini bus after school on Mondays and make the drive to Cathedral high school during rush hour traffic. Now we have kids that drive and are able to take their buddies. So if being on that state level is important enough you will find a way to get to the practices you need to be at.

 

Are we the best team in the state? No.. Are we producing 5-6 qualifiers per year? No... (Last year I think we had 4-5 kids not qualify that had legitimate chances but it was not in the cards for them.. This year I think we had 3-4 kids that were legitimate state qualifier level kids as well but again it was not in the cards for them). I guess I just feel like it's possible to get to that level no matter your school size. It takes commitment outside of the season (as much as possible, 300+ days a year), commitment from parents, and a major commitment from coaching staff from elementary up through high school. And I am not saying that small school teams that don't have state qualifiers every year aren't committed but I am saying if you aren't on state qualifier level because you play 2 other sports and don't have the time to wrestle more then that's your choice.

 

Have you ever taught or coached at a small school?

[ENoblewrestling]

60% of the 3A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 62.9% of the state qualifiers

35% of 2A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 27.7% of the state qualifiers

18% of 1A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 9.4% of the state qualifiers

 

In 2 classes

53% of 2A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 19.2% of the state qualifiers

23% of 1A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 80.8% of the state qualifiers

 

 

Even though the said team had the most qualifiers, they didn't have the most placers, nor did they finish in the top 10 as a team.

 

Picking one team out of 100 is only showing you can find an outlier and not something consistent.

Student percentages

1A- 12.9%  1A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 9.4% of the state qualifiers

2A- 24.4% teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 27.7% of the state qualifiers

3A- 62.6%  3A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 62.9% of the state qualifier

 

The "data" that is used to show a huge disadvantage for small school individuals all depends on how you read the data.  The numbers are pretty accurate to how they should be, in my opinion. 63 percent of the students go to big schools, and 63 percent of the students who qualify for state go to big schools.  If any thing there would be a small advantage in attending a 2A school, and a small disadvantage in going to a 1A school if that is how you read the data.

 

The way that class advocates use the data is to say that there is a huge disadvantage to going to a 1A school, they feel that if everything was equal then, 33.3% of the state qualifiers would be from big schools, 33.3% from medium schools, and 33.3% from small schools. 

 

Everyone is free to read the data how they choose, but it doesn't make any sense at all why anyone would expect 12.9% of the population to make up 33.3% of the state qualifiers.  If the qualifier numbers worked out that way I would see it as a huge advantage to go to a small school, as a matter of fact if 63% of the population accounted for only 33.3% of the qualifiers then attending a large school would be a big disadvantage.

 

I feel that the data shows very little correlation to school size having an effect on an individual making it to state.  If you randomly took kids from these schools and had them wrestle, you would expect that 63% of your top kids would come from big schools, 25% from medium schools and 13% from small schools.

 

The myth that there is this huge effect on individuals all depends on how you read the numbers.  

Edited March 4, 2015 by buscowrestling

[swain358]

Have you ever taught or coached at a small school?

I teach and coach at North Montgomery High School 611kids I think....

[bog190]

I think you are having issues comprehending the data, based on that rambling post. No class advocate thinks it should be 33% for each class. 

[Galagore]

I teach and coach at North Montgomery High School 611kids I think....

 

Thank you, I didn't realize North Montgomery was that size.  Have you ever taught at a large school?

[ENoblewrestling]

I think you are having issues comprehending the data, based on that rambling post. No class advocate thinks it should be 33% for each class. 

So where is the giant disadvantage for kids from small and medium sized schools then?

 

small schools 12.9% of the population made up 9.4% of the state qualifiers.

Medium schools 24.4% of the population made up 27.7% of the state qualifiers.

 

BTW I have been through this battle before and have seen numerous posts where Y2 argues that if everything was equal there would be just as many 1A qualifiers as there would be 3A, both teams start with 14 guys.....

[swain358]

Thank you, I didn't realize North Montgomery was that size.  Have you ever taught at a large school?

I did not teach at Anderson Highlang High School I only coached there (was in college finishing up my degree). I attended and wrestled at Anderson High school. I think I have a good idea of how things go at a big high school as well.

[KarlHungus]

I tell my wrestlers "If your goal is to compete at the level of state qualifier, placer, champion, you need to train at that level 365 days a year and for as many years as possible". We have some guys that buy into that mindset and training and we have some that don't.

 

This is why the current state tournament is flawed.  Larger enrollments naturally give you more kids that will adopt the specialization mindset.  Other states have come to the logical conclusion that it is best for ALL sports to class because of this.

[KarlHungus]

 

 

BTW I have been through this battle before and have seen numerous posts where Y2 argues that if everything was equal there would be just as many 1A qualifiers as there would be 3A, both teams start with 14 guys.....

 

Why are you looking at overall student population.  If there are no advantages to the individual then every Busco entrant into the state tournament should have an equal chance as every Carroll entrant and the numbers should reflect this.

[swain358]

This is why the current state tournament is flawed.  Larger enrollments naturally give you more kids that will adopt the specialization mindset.  Other states have come to the logical conclusion that it is best for ALL sports to class because of this.

So are you saying small school kids don't work as hard at becoming a state level wrestler in our current system as big school kids?

[ENoblewrestling]

Why are you looking at overall student population.  If there are no advantages to the individual then every Busco entrant into the state tournament should have an equal chance as every Carroll entrant and the numbers should reflect this.

So your saying that if there was not a disadvantage then 33.3% of the qualifiers would come from small schools correct?

[KarlHungus]

So are you saying small school kids don't work as hard at becoming a state level wrestler in our current system as big school kids?

 

Yes.  This is not to say they don't work hard.  But a much higher percentage are working at 1 or 2 other sports and are unable to go 365 at wrestling.  Other states have recognized this and classed all their sports.

So your saying that if there was not a disadvantage then 33.3% of the qualifiers would come from small schools correct?

 

It is your claim that all individuals are equal.  If that is the case then the numbers of qualifiers should reflect this.

[Y2CJ41]

So are you saying small school kids don't work as hard at becoming a state level wrestler in our current system as big school kids?

You stated that for a kid to be a state qualifier he needs to adapt the "state qualifier mindset for 360 days a year."

 

In our system it would then seem on 43 kids in 1A adapt that mindset, while 141 from 3A schools do.

 

Student percentages

1A- 12.9%  1A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 9.4% of the state qualifiers

2A- 24.4% teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 27.7% of the state qualifiers

3A- 62.6%  3A teams had an individual at state this year that accounted for 62.9% of the state qualifier

 

The "data" that is used to show a huge disadvantage for small school individuals all depends on how you read the data.  The numbers are pretty accurate to how they should be, in my opinion. 63 percent of the students go to big schools, and 63 percent of the students who qualify for state go to big schools.  If any thing there would be a small advantage in attending a 2A school, and a small disadvantage in going to a 1A school if that is how you read the data.

 

The way that class advocates use the data is to say that there is a huge disadvantage to going to a 1A school, they feel that if everything was equal then, 33.3% of the state qualifiers would be from big schools, 33.3% from medium schools, and 33.3% from small schools. 

 

Everyone is free to read the data how they choose, but it doesn't make any sense at all why anyone would expect 12.9% of the population to make up 33.3% of the state qualifiers.  If the qualifier numbers worked out that way I would see it as a huge advantage to go to a small school, as a matter of fact if 63% of the population accounted for only 33.3% of the qualifiers then attending a large school would be a big disadvantage.

 

I feel that the data shows very little correlation to school size having an effect on an individual making it to state.  If you randomly took kids from these schools and had them wrestle, you would expect that 63% of your top kids would come from big schools, 25% from medium schools and 13% from small schools.

 

The myth that there is this huge effect on individuals all depends on how you read the numbers.  

 

Carroll had 14 entries at sectional and Churubusco had 14 entries also

 

In a one class system it signifies EVERYONE is equal. That means no matter the athlete he has an equal chance to make it to state. The data shows that the kids that come out of a 1A school have a drastically less chance of qualifying for state.

So where is the giant disadvantage for kids from small and medium sized schools then?

 

small schools 12.9% of the population made up 9.4% of the state qualifiers.

Medium schools 24.4% of the population made up 27.7% of the state qualifiers.

 

BTW I have been through this battle before and have seen numerous posts where Y2 argues that if everything was equal there would be just as many 1A qualifiers as there would be 3A, both teams start with 14 guys.....

School entries into the state tournament are all EQUAL meaning the SAME

 

 

Does a wrestler from Churubusco have the same chance to make it to state as a Carroll kid?

[swain358]

Yes.  This is not to say they don't work hard.  But a much higher percentage are working at 1 or 2 other sports and are unable to go 365 at wrestling.  Other states have recognized this and classed all their sports.

So you are saying that you would like to see a new state tournament that rewards kids that cannot work as hard (for whatever reason multiple sports, not as interested in wrestling so no off season work, etc.)?

 

I personally wouldn't want to change the state tournament for the reason you stated above. My answer to the solution would be to wrestle more if you want to be at that level. Make the sacrifice of another sport if being a state qualifier, placer, champion is what ur ultimate goal is. I by no means make my athletes choose to wrestle 300+ days but most know if you want to be at that level, wrestling and training a lot more than just during the season is what you have to do. And again, some choose to and some choose not to which is fine because it's their choice. Those that choose to wrestle and train 300+ days a year will greatly increase their chance of reaching that goal.. Simple as that.

[Y2CJ41]

So you are saying that you would like to see a new state tournament that rewards kids that cannot work as hard (for whatever reason multiple sports, not as interested in wrestling so no off season work, etc.)?

 

I personally wouldn't want to change the state tournament for the reason you stated above. My answer to the solution would be to wrestle more if you want to be at that level. Make the sacrifice of another sport if being a state qualifier, placer, champion is what ur ultimate goal is. I by no means make my athletes choose to wrestle 300+ days but most know if you want to be at that level, wrestling and training a lot more than just during the season is what you have to do. And again, some choose to and some choose not to which is fine because it's their choice. Those that choose to wrestle and train 300+ days a year will greatly increase their chance of reaching that goal.. Simple as that.

That is what 40+ states have recognized and thus classed their wrestling state tournaments.

[warsawwrestling]

I have now seen 3 or so 1a people that do not seem to have a problem with the non-classed system.  I think the problem is more of difference of priorities.  In 3a (bigger schools) kids individualize themselves by being standouts in specific sports.  In small schools the focus is on filling all sports and being "the man or woman" that can be the best in a team concept on multiple sports.  I truly think that a program can be built in any size school, but starts with a kids club (also might depend on the "recruiting" schools around you.

[swain358]

I would be in favor of sending 20-24 kids to the state tournament though. Rewarding some of those kids that are right in that state placer/qualifier level that gets a bad draw or come from a loaded semi state etc. Take the top 5 from each semi state. If you place 5th at semi state you wrestle a pigtail match with a 4th place finisher for the chance to wrestle a semi state champ. That would make 4 extra matches per weight class at state if I'm not mistaken. State tournament would need to start 2 hours earlier in order to wrestle this round, then run everything else like normal.

 

Just an idea I've been bouncing around with my assistant coaches lately.

[KarlHungus]

So you are saying that you would like to see a new state tournament that rewards kids that cannot work as hard (for whatever reason multiple sports, not as interested in wrestling so no off season work, etc.)?

 

I personally wouldn't want to change the state tournament for the reason you stated above. My answer to the solution would be to wrestle more if you want to be at that level. Make the sacrifice of another sport if being a state qualifier, placer, champion is what ur ultimate goal is. I by no means make my athletes choose to wrestle 300+ days but most know if you want to be at that level, wrestling and training a lot more than just during the season is what you have to do. And again, some choose to and some choose not to which is fine because it's their choice. Those that choose to wrestle and train 300+ days a year will greatly increase their chance of reaching that goal.. Simple as that.

 

I am saying I want a state tournament that recognizes the inequity in the current set up and attempts to level the playing field.  The hardest working small school kids are still going to be the one's rewarded, whether they are working 365 on wrestling or working 365 on 3 sports. 

 

I feel that if most small schools adopted the 365 mentality, it would be a death blow to most small school programs.  I am willing to sacrifice the advantages of a one class system to ensure that wrestling is healthy at all schools.

Edited March 4, 2015 by KarlHungus

[Y2CJ41]

I would be in favor of sending 20-24 kids to the state tournament though. Rewarding some of those kids that are right in that state placer/qualifier level that gets a bad draw or come from a loaded semi state etc. Take the top 5 from each semi state. If you place 5th at semi state you wrestle a pigtail match with a 4th place finisher for the chance to wrestle a semi state champ. That would make 4 extra matches per weight class at state if I'm not mistaken. State tournament would need to start 2 hours earlier in order to wrestle this round, then run everything else like normal.

 

Just an idea I've been bouncing around with my assistant coaches lately.

But wouldn't that be watering down our state tournament by letting undeserving kids that don't work hard or dedicate 300+ days a year to wrestling into the state finals?

 

I think that we should allow less kids into the state finals, because I want to make sure none of those lowsy lazy kids make it with a good draw.

I have now seen 3 or so 1a people that do not seem to have a problem with the non-classed system.  I think the problem is more of difference of priorities.  In 3a (bigger schools) kids individualize themselves by being standouts in specific sports.  In small schools the focus is on filling all sports and being "the man or woman" that can be the best in a team concept on multiple sports.  I truly think that a program can be built in any size school, but starts with a kids club (also might depend on the "recruiting" schools around you.

Then why were there only 19 1A schools represented at state, while there were 60 3A schools. Are the coaches at 1A schools just not building programs the right way?