MattM Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) 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...Based on taking this approach to the issue would it be worth looking how many different schools had a state qualifier or state placer from each class (or the amount that didn't have one for that matter) rather than to total number of wrestlers that made it? That may help eliminate some of the outliers who brought a large number of wrestlers to the event. On a different numbers issue if we are truly looking at this from a athletic association change should the numbers that EMD generates go into the 3A class where they choose to compete for the coaches association team state or should they be in a lower class where the IHSAA would likely place them if a class system was instituted? Edited March 5, 2015 by MattM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 So, number of qualifiers should be.... 3A - 85 2A - 76 1A - 63 Placers.... 3A - 43 2A - 38 1A - 31 Champs.... 3A - 5 2A - 5 1A - 4 You have it wrong, we have to include all the population! Even the girls, the ones who never wrestled, the ones who hate wrestling, EVERYONE. I think we should use elementary kids too, and teachers, and schools without wrestling too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rookies03 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Feel free to gather the data, I think I've done my fair share. You have done your fair share, no doubt about it. Im guessing it supports the fact that 13% of the student population is well represented otherwise you would already have posted it to support class wrestling. So why can 1A kids make their allotment to state, but not as a placer or champion? Doesn't that also show a disparity? I already acknowledge the disparity. I wish you could acknowledge some points that others have put on here. Im not saying I am right and you are wrong. The great thing about debating is we can have different opinions. The bottom line is trying to identify the actual problem vs a perceived problem. Once you have the actual problem it is much easier to address. Maybe, just maybe these schools have the athletes that can place and win state, but lack of coaching, lack of quality partners, strength of schedule, multiple sport athletes, etc hurts them. I agree with statement but it is not a problem that only small schools have. I'm willing to change the state tournament for the 1800 varsity kids that are hurt by the above differences. You say that a 1 class system hurts 1800 kids, if we go to a 2 class system then how about all the Regional and Semi State qualifiers of big schools that will now not make it out of Sectionals. In an earlier thread, hypothetical results were posted. I noticed several big schools only advancing 1-2 kids out of sectional. Those same schools had 4-6 kids make it to Semi State in the current format. So changing to a 2 class system indeed does HURT some wrestlers and programs. Everyone wants to follow a winner, as you have stated, so these programs will most likely decline, right? Indiana is the 1st or 2nd TOUGHEST state tournament in the country! YES!!!! A lot of competitors think TOUGH = GREAT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Based on taking this approach to the issue would it be worth looking how many different schools had a state qualifier or state placer from each class (or the amount that didn't have one for that matter) rather than to total number of wrestlers that made it? That may help eliminate some of the outliers who brought a large number of wrestlers to the event. On a different numbers issue if we are truly looking at this from a athletic association change should the numbers that EMD generates go into the 3A class where they choose to compete for the coaches association team state or should they be in a lower class where the IHSAA would likely place them if a class system was instituted? 1A 19 schools with 21 qualifiers 2A 36 schools with 62 qualifiers 3A 61 schools with 141 qualifiers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) You have it wrong, we have to include all the population! Even the girls, the ones who never wrestled, the ones who hate wrestling, EVERYONE. I think we should use elementary kids too, and teachers, and schools without wrestling too. Yeah because the 12 kids on the 1A team that made varsity by simply being the only kid in the school at that weight class is clearly equal to the kid that beat out 4 other kids in order to get that varsity spot... Because the fact of the matter is those 1A schools have such a small sample size the kids who have never wrestled even maybe some who don't care for wrestling end up making the varsity team by default...Big schools don't face this issue because they have 3x larger sample size to find 14 kids who like and are good at wrestling Edited March 5, 2015 by Super_Fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarlHungus Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Yeah because the 12 kids on the 1A team that made varsity by simply being the only kid in the school at that weight class is clearly equal to the kid that beat out 4 other kids in order to get that varsity spot... Because the fact of the matter is those 1A schools have such a small sample size the kids who have never wrestled even maybe some who don't care for wrestling end up making the varsity team by default...Big schools don't face this issue because they have 3x larger sample size to find 14 kids who like and are good at wrestling How do you know those 12 kids on a 1A team are there by default? They might all have been working their tail off since 1st grade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You have done your fair share, no doubt about it. Im guessing it supports the fact that 13% of the student population is well represented otherwise you would already have posted it to support class wrestling.Go show the data then, do the work. Saying you guess when the data is available is fruitless. I already acknowledge the disparity. I wish you could acknowledge some points that others have put on here. Im not saying I am right and you are wrong. The great thing about debating is we can have different opinions. The bottom line is trying to identify the actual problem vs a perceived problem. Once you have the actual problem it is much easier to address. This is the issue, you want to count kids ineligible to qualify for the state finals. How do you count people that have no chance of making it? That is what gets me. There are only 3600..wait 3572(just for you grecocoach) wrestlers in the state that are eligible to qualify for state. No others should be considered at all. I agree with statement but it is not a problem that only small schools have.Small schools average over 4 forfeits per team...wait they should let's not work to help them. SUFFER SMALL SCHOOLS, SUFFER! You say that a 1 class system hurts 1800 kids, if we go to a 2 class system then how about all the Regional and Semi State qualifiers of big schools that will now not make it out of Sectionals. In an earlier thread, hypothetical results were posted. I noticed several big schools only advancing 1-2 kids out of sectional. Those same schools had 4-6 kids make it to Semi State in the current format. So changing to a 2 class system indeed does HURT some wrestlers and programs. Everyone wants to follow a winner, as you have stated, so these programs will most likely decline, right?We'd eliminate a step in the system, so yes we'd lose regional/semi-state qualifiers. That is natural to see that. With 16 qualifiers in each class big schools would see approximately 25% more state qualifiers. They wouldn't be hurt. A lot of competitors think TOUGH = GREAT.Just because it's tough or great doesn't make the sport better. Ohio is a tough tournament and it's classed. Illinois is a tough tournament and it's classed. Yeah because the 12 kids on the 1A team that made varsity by simply being the only kid in the school at that weight class is clearly equal to the kid that beat out 4 other kids in order to get that varsity spot... Because the fact of the matter is those 1A schools have such a small sample size the kids who have never wrestled even maybe some who don't care for wrestling end up making the varsity team by default...Big schools don't face this issue because they have 3x larger sample size to find 14 kids who like and are good at wrestling Why do the others matter if they have no ability to make it to state? Why are we counting people who are not allowed to make the state finals? randalllynch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warsawwrestling Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Small schools average over 4 forfeits per team...wait they should let's not work to help them. SUFFER SMALL SCHOOLS, SUFFER! Am I correct by saying you left a smaller school to go coach at a bigger one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Go show the data then, do the work. Saying you guess when the data is available is fruitless. This is the issue, you want to count kids ineligible to qualify for the state finals. How do you count people that have no chance of making it? That is what gets me. There are only 3600..wait 3572(just for you grecocoach) wrestlers in the state that are eligible to qualify for state. No others should be considered at all. Small schools average over 4 forfeits per team...wait they should let's not work to help them. SUFFER SMALL SCHOOLS, SUFFER! We'd eliminate a step in the system, so yes we'd lose regional/semi-state qualifiers. That is natural to see that. With 16 qualifiers in each class big schools would see approximately 25% more state qualifiers. They wouldn't be hurt. Just because it's tough or great doesn't make the sport better. Ohio is a tough tournament and it's classed. Illinois is a tough tournament and it's classed. Why do the others matter if they have no ability to make it to state? Why are we counting people who are not allowed to make the state finals? Those kids are not ineligible they just weren't the best 14 out of the sample size... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winwithike Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Just because a JV wrestler lost a challenge before the tourney began doesn't mean he had 0% chance to make it to state. Comparing only the 14 varsity on each team says exactly that. You have to compare every wrestler because every wrestler has a chance. Saying the 14 out of 80 and the 14 out of 20 aren't equal isn't an argument for classing the tourney because although the 14 and 14 aren't equal, the 100 individually all have an equal chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Am I correct by saying you left a smaller school to go coach at a bigger one. Yes I did, but there were a multitude of reasons for my move beyond big and small school. Those kids are not ineligible they just weren't the best 14 out of the sample size... Those kids are ineligible to make the state finals because they didn't qualify for sectional. You have fully admitted school size matters. Now please tell me why we classify sports? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warsawwrestling Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Hey I have it solved. Lets use a handicap score for wrestlers to even things. The kids with less experience gain a point for every year they have less experience, than if they compete in multiple sports they get extra points for how many they play, and if they come from a small school add 2 points for 2a and 4 points for 1a. Problem solved. Super_Fan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) Yes I did, but there were a multitude of reasons for my move beyond big and small school. Those kids are ineligible to make the state finals because they didn't qualify for sectional. You have fully admitted school size matters. Now please tell me why we classify sports? They are only ineligible at the time of sectionals... But from the beginning of the season all the way until that point they are your sample size.... Because on a team aspect, a larger school has more students (SAMPLE SIZE) to find 14 individuals to make a team and based on probability they are more likely to have "elite" individuals. A smaller school is exactly the opposite... This does NOT mean that the smaller probability of the small schools having an "elite" wrestler has any effect what so ever on that individuals ability to be better than a larger schools wrestler... Edited March 5, 2015 by Super_Fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Just because a JV wrestler lost a challenge before the tourney began doesn't mean he had 0% chance to make it to state. Comparing only the 14 varsity on each team says exactly that. You have to compare every wrestler because every wrestler has a chance. Saying the 14 out of 80 and the 14 out of 20 aren't equal isn't an argument for classing the tourney because although the 14 and 14 aren't equal, the 100 individually all have an equal chance. We started sectional with 3572 wrestlers eligible for the state finals. JV kids, kids that quit, cheerleaders, etc had zero chance of making the state finals on January 31st. Because on a team aspect, a larger school has more students (SAMPLE SIZE) to find 14 individuals to make a team and based on probability they are more likely to have "elite" individuals. A smaller school is exactly the opposite... This does NOT mean that the smaller probability of the small schools having an "elite" wrestler has any effect what so ever on that individuals ability to be better than a larger schools wrestler... Why do states like Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, New Mexico, etc class individual sports? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) We started sectional with 3572 wrestlers eligible for the state finals. JV kids, kids that quit, cheerleaders, etc had zero chance of making the state finals on January 31st. Why do states like Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, New Mexico, etc class individual sports? I'm assuming they have people like you in charge??? But by not taking the entire school population into consideration you are saying that before the school year even started those 14 individuals were already predetermined... Which is not true. If i interview 10 people for a job or if i interview 1000 people for that same job which would most likely land me with the best person to fill that position??? Edited March 5, 2015 by Super_Fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warsawwrestling Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 We started sectional with 3572 wrestlers eligible for the state finals. JV kids, kids that quit, cheerleaders, etc had zero chance of making the state finals on January 31st. Why do states like Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, New Mexico, etc class individual sports? Why did Alaska, Colorado, Oregon and Washington legalize marijuana. A bunch of people "worked" together on a common goal and made it happen. With this situation you are missing the common goal.........not everyone agrees about classing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galagore Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Just because a JV wrestler lost a challenge before the tourney began doesn't mean he had 0% chance to make it to state. Comparing only the 14 varsity on each team says exactly that. You have to compare every wrestler because every wrestler has a chance. Saying the 14 out of 80 and the 14 out of 20 aren't equal isn't an argument for classing the tourney because although the 14 and 14 aren't equal, the 100 individually all have an equal chance. You aren't making the selection during wrestle-offs or at any point during the regular season. You are making selections the day of sectional, when varsity rosters are set in stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I'm assuming they have people like you in charge??? But by not taking the entire school population into consideration you are saying that before the school year even started those 14 individuals were already predetermined... Which is not true. If i interview 10 people for a job or if i interview 1000 people for that same job which would most likely land me with the best person to fill that position??? So I'm a bad person for wanting to grow the sport? I'm a bad person for wanting small schools to succeed. I'm a bad person for wanting more kids to enjoy this sport? Thanks for the support, I guess I'm bad for the sport. I'll pull the plug on this site in 10 minutes. I can narrow it down to about 18 kids right now on who will start next year at Carroll. Why do I need to include the other 2000 again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You aren't making the selection during wrestle-offs or at any point during the regular season. You are making selections the day of sectional, when varsity rosters are set in stone. How can you guys not agree that a bigger schools varsity roster is not equal to a small schools varsity roster simply based on probability of having a good wrestler in their school system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrestling Scholar Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) I used that example because someone else said that my example of state level kid from a small school (Nick Borta) would have been just as happy winning a state classed title as winning a one class title. So would he have been happier winning a state tournament this was classed than not winning a state title at all in Indiana? Just to clarify, even though Nick Borta was a great wrestler, he falls into the category of the 3600 kids a year that tried to win the state title and didnt. Edited March 5, 2015 by Wrestling Scholar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warsawwrestling Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 You aren't making the selection during wrestle-offs or at any point during the regular season. You are making selections the day of sectional, when varsity rosters are set in stone. I thought this was done a few days before and you could list alternates. At sectionals you can only use the alternates and not add kids at that time if I am remembering correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) So I'm a bad person for wanting to grow the sport? I'm a bad person for wanting small schools to succeed. I'm a bad person for wanting more kids to enjoy this sport? Thanks for the support, I guess I'm bad for the sport. I'll pull the plug on this site in 10 minutes. I can narrow it down to about 18 kids right now on who will start next year at Carroll. Why do I need to include the other 2000 again? Lol your not bad at all. I respect your opinions I'm just trying to get you to see that everything you say isn't 100% correct and it's not law just because you think it... Other people have factual information that doesn't support your theory and you just deny it... There are many ways we can accomplish these things without making it a classed individual tourney. Edited March 5, 2015 by Super_Fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2CJ41 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 How can you guys not agree that a bigger schools varsity roster is not equal to a small schools varsity roster simply based on probability of having a good wrestler in their school system? We agree with it, but because we are bad people we say that due to this we should class the sport. Lol your not bad at all. I respect your opinions I'm just trying to get you to see that everything you say isn't 100% correct and it's not law just because you think it... Other people have factual information that doesn't support your theory and you just deny it... What factual information have you presented? The fact that big schools and small schools are not equal? Umm we have said that from the beginning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Fan Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 We agree with it, but because we are bad people we say that due to this we should class the sport. What factual information have you presented? The fact that big schools and small schools are not equal? Umm we have said that from the beginning. These differences work for teams not individuals... Just because a bigger school has a higher probability of having more "elite" athletes doesnt make those elite athletes better than a small schools elite athletes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winwithike Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Big schools and small schools VARSITY aren't equal. Big schools and small schools WRESTLERS are. Big schools and small schools varsity shouldn't be equal, but that doesn't mean it should be classed. If it was classed a wrestler from a smaller school would have a significantly easier chance to win state than a wrestler from a bigger school Super_Fan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts