Jump to content

How much longer are we going to go on like this?


decbell1

Recommended Posts

Well I agree, that is a problem but lets face it some teams are still finishing up football when wrestling starts.


I agree Y2 but pleasing the IHSAA is kind of tough and they march the banner of everything the same although its not really the same as other sports.

 

I have changed my mind a bit on the individual side as far as classing goes but...I hate that I have haha. My preference is single class individual, but I think I'd enjoy a 2 class (no more) if that came about ever.

Edited by BlackshirtD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not really my decision.  That line was already drawn, and the people in charge voted not to change it.

 

The ideal event would be IHSAA sponsored, classed, all-in duals from start to finish (not just sectional champs), and separate from the individual post season.

 

Bracket tournament of duals on a Saturday, one weeknight dual on Wednesday, then team state the next Saturday.  It would take lots of organizing to make it happen, so the IHSAA would have to be in charge of it and give it the ultimate creditbility.

The problem with adding a two week process is it would conflict with a lot of scheduled events and current duals.   Most schools don't want to concede their events or compromise dates for something new.   Do we add more points/ weigh ins for the kids?  ISHSAA doesn't either.     Where would you add this?   And adding after the season would never work.   So wait after the state series, then have all the kids that have been sitting out 2-3-4 weeks dependent on when they lost, come back to wrestle when they're already going out for track, baseball and Golf.        Season is too long already.       One thing our current team duals is it is very accurate in getting the top teams in the state at the same event.  Of course that's contingent on the good teams accepting the bid.      The problem with an all inclusive format is that some of the top regional teams face each other in the first round and knock each other out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I agree, that is a problem but lets face it some teams are still finishing up football when wrestling starts.

I agree Y2 but pleasing the IHSAA is kind of tough and they march the banner of everything the same although its not really the same as other sports.

In the past the IHSWCA has had the notion that we need to FIGHT the IHSAA. Sadly that attitude has failed us miserably. It is interesting that other coaches associations get proposals to pass fairly easily and have very little issues with the IHSAA rules. Wrestling needs to take pages out of those association's book and work WITH the IHSAA, not against them.

 

I compare it to the kid in class that doesn't do anything wrong, but always toes the line. That kid isn't going to get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to grading because of his past history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right on all accounts, now explain that to the Ihsaa and see how they feel about it when top teams in the state often draw each other in sectionals in other sports.  Forget logic..forget the absolute best thing for the sport to see the for sure best teams. You have to do i like the other sports.


In the past the IHSWCA has had the notion that we need to FIGHT the IHSAA. Sadly that attitude has failed us miserably. It is interesting that other coaches associations get proposals to pass fairly easily and have very little issues with the IHSAA rules. Wrestling needs to take pages out of those association's book and work WITH the IHSAA, not against them.

 

I compare it to the kid in class that doesn't do anything wrong, but always toes the line. That kid isn't going to get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to grading because of his past history.

yep

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the past the IHSWCA has had the notion that we need to FIGHT the IHSAA. Sadly that attitude has failed us miserably. It is interesting that other coaches associations get proposals to pass fairly easily and have very little issues with the IHSAA rules. Wrestling needs to take pages out of those association's book and work WITH the IHSAA, not against them.

 

I compare it to the kid in class that doesn't do anything wrong, but always toes the line. That kid isn't going to get the benefit of the doubt when it comes to grading because of his past history.

 

That's sooooo 5-10 years ago! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but it's more than a couple can be bumped down, it would be closer to 25 to 1A and 15 to 2A. 25 and 15 are far from a couple.

 

The team state duals are doing nothing at all for the programs with less than seven kids on their team. Heck it really does very little for teams with even 10 on their team. Only in your fantasy world do you think a team with 5 kids is saying "hey look we need 100 more points and we qualify, yippee!

 

As stated earlier this is my only real complaint about the system.

 

If they have a full team they have a lot better shot of qualifying than one with 5 kids on their team. It's a lot easier to tell your team, "hey we need to get three more of you to regional and one more to semi-state and we'll be in the running" than "hey we need 8 more guys on the team next year and half need to go to regional for us to qualify."

 

Why is the line being drawn at 2 wrestlers then? What does a team with 2 varsity wrestlers have that is so much different than one with 3 or 4 in the team state qualifying?

 

In your world that team with 3 wrestlers is using team state to "grow" their program, but you want to exclude the one with 2 wrestlers from the ability to "grow" their program.

 

That's bull honkey and you know it!

 

We wrestled Central Noble when they only had they only had 3-5, they made the team state in the past, and looked to be in contention this season.  I have been told Knightstown used to have about 7 kids.  Tecumseh doesn't strike me as a team that traditionally had a ton of kids.  Look at Pioneer, they have had teams that have been very good, and are down a bit now.  Churubusco used to have teams with only 8-10 kids, and they were competitive.  Numbers and teams change, a team with 6-7 strong returners could sell team state as a way to grow their programs.

Edited by buscowrestling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to IHSAA guidelines, any classed wrestling tournament would need to have 3 classes. FYI

 

Do you know why they declared it must be 3 classes if it were to happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soccer only has two classes.

That's because there are less schools with soccer than wrestling. 

Do you know why they declared it must be 3 classes if it were to happen?

It's based on the % of schools that have a specific sports. 

 Numbers and teams change, a team with 6-7 strong returners could sell team state as a way to grow their programs.

 

Which is why many of us are saying that all of them would be eligible to qualify for Team State in 1A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We wrestled Central Noble when they only had they only had 3-5, they made the team state in the past, and looked to be in contention this season.  I have been told Knightstown used to have about 7 kids.  Tecumseh doesn't strike me as a team that traditionally had a ton of kids.  Look at Pioneer, they have had teams that have been very good, and are down a bit now.  Churubusco used to have teams with only 8-10 kids, and they were competitive.  Numbers and teams change, a team with 6-7 strong returners could sell team state as a way to grow their programs.

 

Central Noble NEVER made it to team state when they had 3-5 kids. Their rise wasn't because of team state, it was because about 8 years ago a group of parents and kids started hitting the ISWA spring tour. I saw this first hand and knew they had some very talented and hard working kids coming up. I'm sure the other schools have similar stories.

 

 

 

Numbers and teams change, a team with 6-7 strong returners could sell team state as a way to grow their programs.

If a team has less than 7 wrestlers being counted for the IHSWCA team state is the least of their worries. You want to act like having a number next to your school's name is some magical thing that helps them when in reality it has little affect. 99.9% of the teams outside the top 20 in each class do not care about their point total.

 

When a team has the requisite number of wrestlers then they will be counted. Having teams with less than 7 wrestlers counted is fruitless and only pads the classes with teams that have NO CHANCE of making the team state duals before the first sectional whistle.

 

What is the difference counting teams with 3 or 4 wrestlers vs. teams with 1 or 2 wrestlers? Why is the magic number to get a set of number 3?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could you post your original proposal?

 

 

It's been a few years, so that proposal is long gone from my records.  It was basically a Saturday, 1 or 2 weeknight duals, then the finals on the next Saturday.  By IHSAA rules, it would have eaten up 6 out of 18 weigh-in points since it wasn't consecutive days.  

 

If the IHSAA were to host it as a post season, it would work.  Shorten individual state to 3 weeks (combine sectionals & regionals).  Then the 2 Saturdays only cut into the regular season by 1 week.  Conferences and ADs will move around events for the IHSAA, but not for the IHSWCA.

 

Lots of things would have to fall into place for it to work.  The IHSAA would have to be willing to organize it.  And the IHSAA would have to be willing to crown their team champion before all the individual post season is finished.  (They don't do that.)  The old team state format failed because it was at the same time as the individual post season, so coaches made choices that pissed off the IHSAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a qualifying idea I've been tinkering with in my rare free time the past year.  NOTE:  It is not an official proposal, just an idea.  And it is not completely finished.  Nobody is going to hurt my feelings if you think it's terrible - It's just the start of an idea, that's it.

 

 

IHSWCA Team State Duals

Qualification Idea

 

The Idea

Use 2 weekends in December to select specific dual meet events as “Team State Qualifiers”.  These would simply be normal 6-ways, 8-ways, 10-ways, or whatever the host school chooses to do within certain guidelines (listed below).  Any team that wants to try to qualify for that season’s IHSWCA Team State Duals can participate by joining one of these qualifying events.  The event’s team champion automatically qualifies and would be required to attend the team state duals in January.

 

Qualifying Event Guidelines

1.       All teams in the event must be in the same class (3A, 2A, or 1A)

2.       The event must be a dual meet format where a team champion is crowned from head-to-head competition.

3.       Host schools must follow one of the IHSWCA pre-approved formats or submit an alternate format for approval.

4.       Host schools cannot refuse teams based on ability (too good or too bad).  The purpose is to be all inclusive, so violations would result in a loss of “qualifying event” status.

5.       Host schools organize and pay for all officials and hospitality but also keep all revenue.

6.       Teams are only allowed to enter 1 qualifying event.

7.       Only 1st string Varsity A teams are allowed to be entered. (No Varsity B teams)

8.        

 

The Benefits

·         Qualification for team state would be based on current season’s team. 

·         Every team that wants to try to qualify will have a chance to do so. 

·         2 possible weekends helps teams avoid Conference, County, or other special events.

·         Teams can choose to stay close to home or travel farther for a better chance of qualifying.

·         Nearby teams can separate to different events to give both a chance to qualify.

·         Creates more excitement at regular weekend events with more on the line than just a trophy.

·         Before Winter Break, the teams will have qualified for the Team State Duals.

·        

 

The Needs

·         36 events over 2 weeks (12 events per class)

·         A selection process to determine who will host the events (3 per class per semi state?)

·         Maximum average of 9 schools per event if every school chooses to participate

·         Likely only 6-ways or 8-ways are needed

·         Team State Duals would need to be scheduled in advance away from all holiday tournaments

·        

 

IHSWCA Responsibilities

·         Manage the schedule of 36 events.

·         Host schools do all the leg work (officials, teams, etc.)

·         Oversee & intervene in any reports of abuse by host schools

·         

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Central Noble NEVER made it to team state when they had 3-5 kids. Their rise wasn't because of team state, it was because about 8 years ago a group of parents and kids started hitting the ISWA spring tour. I saw this first hand and knew they had some very talented and hard working kids coming up. I'm sure the other schools have similar stories.

 

 

 

If a team has less than 7 wrestlers being counted for the IHSWCA team state is the least of their worries. You want to act like having a number next to your school's name is some magical thing that helps them when in reality it has little affect. 99.9% of the teams outside the top 20 in each class do not care about their point total.

 

When a team has the requisite number of wrestlers then they will be counted. Having teams with less than 7 wrestlers counted is fruitless and only pads the classes with teams that have NO CHANCE of making the team state duals before the first sectional whistle.

 

What is the difference counting teams with 3 or 4 wrestlers vs. teams with 1 or 2 wrestlers? Why is the magic number to get a set of number 3?

 

 

As a guy who voted for the three number I can tell you that it felt like a compromise in someways.  There were a number of coaches who wanted all in, there were a number who wanted 7 or more.  Through the process it came to light that the IHSAA only counts the score for teams with three or more kids, so that seemed like a good compromise for me, that is why I voted the way that I did.

You make this seem as though it is a black and white issue, as with most topics on this board (and in life really) it is more grey.  

 

What is the goal of the event?  To me, in classing the tournament we are creating an event where all of our teams have the opportunity to qualify, and be rewarded for their hard work.  It doesn't matter how big you are, or the tradition of your school, everyone has the chance.  That is why I feel that an all in tournament is the correct way to go.

If the goal is to set up an event that showcases who is best out of schools that we feel should be considered "small", "medium" and "large" then I dont think that creating the classes in the way that we do makes sense anyhow.  If that is the case then we should simply say 1A is schools under X number of kids, 2A is X to X, and 3A is above X.

 

Also either way you do it someone is getting hurt.  All in, hurts those tough teams like Southmont, and Delphi, etc who would be invited if they were 1a.  Changing it to 7 hurts teams that are on the boarder the other way.  I don't see why one group is more deserving than the other.  I get that adding Delphi, and Southmont made for a stronger event, but it also took away opportunity for other teams.  We could argue about who "deserves" to be there, but as long as we count classes the way we do there will always be a team that gets in, or left out based on just a couple of kids.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

As a guy who voted for the three number I can tell you that it felt like a compromise in someways.  There were a number of coaches who wanted all in, there were a number who wanted 7 or more.  Through the process it came to light that the IHSAA only counts the score for teams with three or more kids, so that seemed like a good compromise for me, that is why I voted the way that I did.

You make this seem as though it is a black and white issue, as with most topics on this board (and in life really) it is more grey.  

 

What is the goal of the event?  To me, in classing the tournament we are creating an event where all of our teams have the opportunity to qualify, and be rewarded for their hard work.  It doesn't matter how big you are, or the tradition of your school, everyone has the chance.  That is why I feel that an all in tournament is the correct way to go.

If the goal is to set up an event that showcases who is best out of schools that we feel should be considered "small", "medium" and "large" then I dont think that creating the classes in the way that we do makes sense anyhow.  If that is the case then we should simply say 1A is schools under X number of kids, 2A is X to X, and 3A is above X.

 

Also either way you do it someone is getting hurt.  All in, hurts those tough teams like Southmont, and Delphi, etc who would be invited if they were 1a.  Changing it to 7 hurts teams that are on the boarder the other way.  I don't see why one group is more deserving than the other.  I get that adding Delphi, and Southmont made for a stronger event, but it also took away opportunity for other teams.  We could argue about who "deserves" to be there, but as long as we count classes the way we do there will always be a team that gets in, or left out based on just a couple of kids.  

 

There is a difference, you are including teams that have no chance of qualifying to fluff up the class numbers. Including teams with 3 wrestlers versus not including teams with 2 wrestlers is stupid, neither has a chance of making it to the event. In 1A you are counting about 20 teams that have no legitimate shot of qualifying, that is 20% of the field! That means 20% of the field is eliminated after the first whistle of the state tournament.

 

You always talk about how an individual classed system would be watered down, BUT YOU purposely vote to water down 1A and in essence 2A at team state. 

 

hmmm.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean like the way they crown the NCAA team champions? You'd want that removed?

Big difference between IHSAA state and NCAA finals.  If we had full wrestle backs at each level of the state series it would be a better comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah the whole idea of using an individual tournament to prove who is the best team just doesn't work all of the time. Some teams bring less to state because they come from a tougher regional/semi state etc. then like mentioned above, you have to root for kids from other schools to beat kids from the team you are trying to out score. That whole set up just is not (in my opinion) the way to crown a team state champion. One year I was coaching at Anderson Highland, we sent 3 to state and each placed high. We finished 4th, or somewhere close to that, in "team scoring". We were a solid team but not sure we were 4th best in state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a difference, you are including teams that have no chance of qualifying to fluff up the class numbers. Including teams with 3 wrestlers versus not including teams with 2 wrestlers is stupid, neither has a chance of making it to the event. In 1A you are counting about 20 teams that have no legitimate shot of qualifying, that is 20% of the field! That means 20% of the field is eliminated after the first whistle of the state tournament.

 

You always talk about how an individual classed system would be watered down, BUT YOU purposely vote to water down 1A and in essence 2A at team state. 

 

hmmm.png

Come on man... LOL .  I love that because I believe that the team state should be an all in tournament, you feel that I have some sort of nefarious plan to water down class 1A.  You act like I alone made the decision to not set the cap at 7, and that I am the only person in the state who sees the merit in having an all in format for the tournament.  It was a group decision, and obviously I wasn't the only one who felt that way.

I don't get how you can think that because I don't agree with you on this that I am somehow out to not do what is best for Indiana Wrestling.  I voted for what I felt was honestly the best for the team state.  That doesn't mean that I don't see a lot of merit in what you are purposing, but at the end of the day I voted for what I felt was the best compromise given the choice that we had.  

Honestly do you really see no merit in having an all in format?  Do you feel that anyone who feels that way only wants to waterdown the lower divisions?

Edited by buscowrestling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You voted to include teams that have no chance of making the event even with all returning champions. You greatly increase the fighting turtle's chances of making the event by doing so.

 

There is no merit in counting team scores for teams with less then seven wrestlers for two reasons. The first being they cannot win a dual with a full team and secondly they cannot score enough points to qualify. You might as well give them participation ribbons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.