Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
maligned

Team State adds 4A UPDATE: 8-8-12-12 teams (the people have spoken)

Recommended Posts

There was a survey put out to all IHSWCA coaches last fall regarding this. Overwhelmingly people felt 4 classes was best for the sport. 

 

You don't want the state duals to become watered down. So going 12 per class felt that it would be watered down and too big.

 

I understand the concern of having 8 in 4A but half the schools. I guess I consider it the same as football state. They have 32 in class 6A and the other classes have 64. 8 is a cleaner bracket. 8 per class makes it about the same as previous years. 

 

One of the good things about this setup is that in each class, the top is about twice the bottom. 3A, was currently 1000-5000

 

The state didn't want to keep this event. I believe the IHSWCA has made it a very good event. We have continued to propose Team State to the IHSAA each proposal year and they haven't been keen on it. I think that all of the great people putting time into this event have made it better than ever. You wouldn't believe how many people are just donating their time to make this awesome.

 

As always, we continue to evaluate things. If this doesn't end up being what is best, things can be voted on and changed again. I do appreciate reading feedback, especially suggestions on how to improve things. Understand we ultimately are trying to do great things for the sport and put out a great product.

 

Feel free to contact me anytime you have a suggestion or question @ gratliff@rbbschools.net

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mattyb said:

Several of the 4A schools have two varsity teams. Wouldn't that change the percentages? 

 

We hear from the smaller school guys of how hard and disadvantaged it is to wrestle at smaller schools. To be honest, its tough at the bigger schools too. There are tons of guys that would be varsity 1 at 90 percent of smaller schools. I know that the class wrestling debate is alive and well on another thread. But.. if we crunch the numbers, even with about half the schools making team state in the other classes (compared to 4A). As an individual, you may have a better chance of wrestling in this event at the smaller schools. Can we get a breakdown of actual wrestlers per each class (1A-4A), and the percentage of those wrestlers that have the opportunity to wrestle in this event? 

 

Not actual wrestlers, but here are the sums of student enrollment of each class.

 

4A- 88,302

3A- 106,113

2A- 50,602

1A- 28,889

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chris Cooper said:

 

Not actual wrestlers, but here are the sums of student enrollment of each class.

 

4A- 88,302

3A- 106,113

2A- 50,602

1A- 28,889

So a group of schools with a total student population a quarter of that of 3a has the same amount of teams and the same chance to win a state title? Seems more than fair to me. 
 

And... 4a really only has 6 bids. Because EMD and Cathedral are not going away any time soon and will bump every year. So to say 25% of those teams are going to make it is false. 

Edited by Mattyb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Y2CJ41 said:

If you look at it basically 3A got split up and gets 16 berths at state compared to the 12 they used to have. 1A and 2A both stay almost the same and only have 16 spots compared to 24 they used to have.

Yes,  1A and 2a will lose 4 spots going from each class,  but the number of teams in each class will be reduced  proportionately.    So if 36 teams joined the new 4A class pool,  wouldn't the number of teams in each class (1A, 2A, 3A) decrease by 12 teams, thus making it easier to get one of the 8 qualifying spots.         For simplicity sakes,  say  we had 300 teams eligible (which is close) due to having enough wrestlers to meet the criteria.    Then the prior  qualifiers to total teams ratio would have been 12 to 100 per each class.   Now it  would be 8 qualifiers  to 88 teams for classes 1A,2A and 3A.   So its not fair to say the small classes are loosing 4 sports exactly    In another way,   previously there was 1.2 spots for every 10 teams, under new calc there would be .9 spots for every team.  Doing the math we can quantify this, and the results are  class 1a and 2a are only losing 3 teams each and not 4 as previously reported.  A few teams might be shifted to a higher class, but that's not that a big of deal. 

 

With that said,  almost always the last 3 teams in  that previously qualified rarely had an impact on the championship and normally finished in the losers bracket.  That's logical due to that we predicted them to be not as competitive.  I'm sure Maligned can statistically confirm this.      I think the 8 team per class format is much more balanced and enables the tournament to run easier without a large amount of byes.   Under the new format, we will have more competitive matchups and a more fluid tournament, less sitting around and more schools and wrestlers participating.   Sounds like a win win, with only losers being small school bubble teams that know they do not have a realistic chance at winning the championship. 

 

 

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Wrestling Scholar said:

Yes,  1A and 2a will lose 4 spots going from each class,  but the number of teams in each class will be reduced  proportionately.    So if 36 teams joined the new 4A class pool,  wouldn't the number of teams in each class (1A, 2A, 3A) decrease by 12 teams, thus making it easier to get one of the 8 qualifying spots.         For simplicity sakes,  say  we had 300 teams eligible (which is close) due to having enough wrestlers to meet the criteria.    Then the prior  qualifiers to total teams ratio would have been 12 to 100 per each class.   Now it  would be 8 qualifiers  to 88 teams for classes 1A,2A and 3A.   So its not fair to say the small classes are loosing 4 sports exactly    In another way,   previously there was 1.2 spots for every 10 teams, under new calc there would be .9 spots for every team.  Doing the math we can quantify this, and the results are  class 1a and 2a are only losing 3 teams each and not 4 as previously reported.  A few teams might be shifted to a higher class, but that's not that a big of deal. 

 

With that said,  almost always the last 3 teams in  that previously qualified rarely had an impact on the championship and normally finished in the losers bracket.  That's logical due to that we predicted them to be not as competitive.  I'm sure Maligned can statistically confirm this.      I think the 8 team per class format is much more balanced and enables the tournament to run easier without a large amount of byes.   Under the new format, we will have more competitive matchups and a more fluid tournament, less sitting around and more schools and wrestlers participating.   Sounds like a win win, with only losers being small school bubble teams that know they do not have a realistic chance at winning the championship. 

 

 

 

  

By your calculations if 12 teams were given bids with 100 teams in a classification that means 12% of the teams received a bid. Now with only 8 teams of 88 total receiving bids, only 9% are being invited. On top of that the old 3A(now split up) is getting 16 bids for about 120 teams, thus just over 13% of the teams receiving bids.

 

Your hypothesis was about 2/3rds correct at best.

 

2019 Finishes

9th Place - Centerville- 6th in points
10th Place - Attica- 11th in points
11th Place - South Adams- 5th in points
12th Place - Eastern- 12th in points

9th Place - West Vigo- 10th in points
10th Place - Jay County- 5th in points
11th Place - Leo- 4th in points
12th Place - North Montgomery- 17th in points

9th Place - Roncalli- 9th in points
10th Place - Avon- 10th in points
11th Place - Carroll- 23rd in points
12th Place - Penn- 12th in points

 

2018 Finishes
 

10th Place - Penn- 10th in points
10th Place - Columbus East- 4th in points
12th Place - Portage- 8th in points
12th Place - Northridge- 17th in points

10th Place - Yorktown- 6th in points
10th Place - Southridge- 11th in points
12th Place - South Dearborn- 9th in points
12th Place - Rochester- 13th in points

10th Place - Wabash- 6th in points
10th Place - Attica- 2nd in points
12th Place - Shenandoah- 10th in points
12th Place - Frankton- 3rd in points

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Wrestling Scholar said:

Yes,  1A and 2a will lose 4 spots going from each class,  but the number of teams in each class will be reduced  proportionately.    So if 36 teams joined the new 4A class pool,  wouldn't the number of teams in each class (1A, 2A, 3A) decrease by 12 teams, thus making it easier to get one of the 8 qualifying spots.         For simplicity sakes,  say  we had 300 teams eligible (which is close) due to having enough wrestlers to meet the criteria.    Then the prior  qualifiers to total teams ratio would have been 12 to 100 per each class.   Now it  would be 8 qualifiers  to 88 teams for classes 1A,2A and 3A.   So its not fair to say the small classes are loosing 4 sports exactly    In another way,   previously there was 1.2 spots for every 10 teams, under new calc there would be .9 spots for every team.  Doing the math we can quantify this, and the results are  class 1a and 2a are only losing 3 teams each and not 4 as previously reported.  A few teams might be shifted to a higher class, but that's not that a big of deal. 

 

With that said,  almost always the last 3 teams in  that previously qualified rarely had an impact on the championship and normally finished in the losers bracket.  That's logical due to that we predicted them to be not as competitive.  I'm sure Maligned can statistically confirm this.      I think the 8 team per class format is much more balanced and enables the tournament to run easier without a large amount of byes.   Under the new format, we will have more competitive matchups and a more fluid tournament, less sitting around and more schools and wrestlers participating.   Sounds like a win win, with only losers being small school bubble teams that know they do not have a realistic chance at winning the championship. 

 

 

 

  

 

Not so much the case in 1A.

We were a vote in one year and won the title. I believe Prairie Heights was voted in once or twice. 

Bluffton was left out as a vote in this year and would have been a contender. 

 

The crazy thing with 1A is that 1-2 kids can make a significant impact for that teams competitiveness. Team depth is the over whelming factor that makes 1A different than 2-4A.

 

By dropping the number of teams in 1A, you are potentially going to continue (or increase) to leave out teams that could contend. 

 

Tony Currie

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jetwrestling said:

 

Not so much the case in 1A.

We were a vote in one year and won the title. I believe Prairie Heights was voted in once or twice. 

Bluffton was left out as a vote in this year and would have been a contender. 

 

The crazy thing with 1A is that 1-2 kids can make a significant impact for that teams competitiveness. Team depth is the over whelming factor that makes 1A different than 2-4A.

 

By dropping the number of teams in 1A, you are potentially going to continue (or increase) to leave out teams that could contend. 

 

Tony Currie

 

I think you're correct that 1A and to some degree 2A are much more unpredictable then 3A, and that a schools performance in the prior year state tournament is less indicative how they'll perform in the subsequent year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mattyb said:

So a group of schools with a total student population a quarter of that of 3a has the same amount of teams and the same chance to win a state title? Seems more than fair to me. 
 

And... 4a really only has 6 bids. Because EMD and Cathedral are not going away any time soon and will bump every year. So to say 25% of those teams are going to make it is false. 

the 25% was including EMD and IC in 4A....but yes you are correct it is false, its 22.85% while the other three classes will be around 13%.

Not sure why the classes cannot be more evenly distributed, this isn't football.

 

We want to grow the sport, making it less inclusive to smaller schools does not help in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Y2CJ41 said:

By your calculations if 12 teams were given bids with 100 teams in a classification that means 12% of the teams received a bid. Now with only 8 teams of 88 total receiving bids, only 9% are being invited. On top of that the old 3A(now split up) is getting 16 bids for about 120 teams, thus just over 13% of the teams receiving bids.

 

Your hypothesis was about 2/3rds correct at best.

 

2019 Finishes

9th Place - Centerville- 6th in points
10th Place - Attica- 11th in points
11th Place - South Adams- 5th in points
12th Place - Eastern- 12th in points

9th Place - West Vigo- 10th in points
10th Place - Jay County- 5th in points
11th Place - Leo- 4th in points
12th Place - North Montgomery- 17th in points

9th Place - Roncalli- 9th in points
10th Place - Avon- 10th in points
11th Place - Carroll- 23rd in points
12th Place - Penn- 12th in points

 

2018 Finishes
 

10th Place - Penn- 10th in points
10th Place - Columbus East- 4th in points
12th Place - Portage- 8th in points
12th Place - Northridge- 17th in points

10th Place - Yorktown- 6th in points
10th Place - Southridge- 11th in points
12th Place - South Dearborn- 9th in points
12th Place - Rochester- 13th in points

10th Place - Wabash- 6th in points
10th Place - Attica- 2nd in points
12th Place - Shenandoah- 10th in points
12th Place - Frankton- 3rd in points

Ok,   to put in percentages.  You're correct that  approximately 13% of the team 3A and 4A will get bids, but the 1A and 2A will only get 9% of their teams receiving bids.     Another perspective: 3A and 4A make up 71% of the enrollment, but only get 50% of the bids.   Where 1A and 2A will also get 50% of the bids even though there enrollment totals 29% of the total enrollment.

 

Ill admit that I overstated that the bottom 3 teams rarely finished in the winners bracket,  so Ill admit my mistake. But a majority of the time the last 3 teams in don't make it to the winners bracket.   The 1A and 2A teams results seem to deviate more from the prior year tournament points scored under Maligned's system.  The consequence would be having a team like Garrett in 2a that significantly outplaced their score, wouldn't be able to participate.

Ill add its a shame all teams don't have a shot to wrestle there team in the current year, and only have their circumstances based on the prior year state tournament results, but you still can help your team next year by doing well in the current year state tournament.  The system works and by expanding the current system by 4 teams,  more wrestlers will have a shot to participate.

Edited by Wrestling Scholar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, WoodJC82 said:

the 25% was including EMD and IC in 4A....but yes you are correct it is false, its 22.85% while the other three classes will be around 13%.

Not sure why the classes cannot be more evenly distributed, this isn't football.

 

We want to grow the sport, making it less inclusive to smaller schools does not help in my opinion.

35 schools and 6 spots is 22.85%??? Is that Jay County math??? I came up with 17%. A mere 4% difference. 

 

Again... If the ratio of actual wrestlers on a team to school population is anywhere near equal across the board (in all classes), the percentage of 1A wrestlers that have a shot to win a state team title is waaaaayyyy higher then if you wrestle at a larger school. A fact that cant be denied. See @Wrestling Scholar post above. 

 

IMO... the new system is more than fair. 

Edited by Mattyb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really. Your talking about percentages and being fair. What s the percentage of 1a wrestlers to winning a title at state compared to 3a.  Team state was the one thing we had a shot of going to and maybe placing or winning but now that is again moving in favor of 3a schools as well. I just don't get it I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mattyb said:

35 schools and 6 spots is 22.85%??? Is that Jay County math??? I came up with 17%. A mere 4% difference. 

 

Again... If the ratio of actual wrestlers on a team to school population is anywhere near equal across the board (in all classes), the percentage of 1A wrestlers that have a shot to win a state team title is waaaaayyyy higher then if you wrestle at a larger school. A fact that cant be denied. 

 

IMO... the new system is more than fair. 

35/8...if EMD and IC are in 4A they are 4A so its 8 spots not 6. If they don't move up is 33/8

 

And I really thought one of the reasons to class is to grow the sport...its just my opinion this new format divided the way it is creates less opportunity for the small school TEAMS to increase their participation numbers. And its obvious EMD and IC do not need the help to increase participation at their respective schools.

 

And it regards to my math, it must be from all the years I have lived in Yorktown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't look at going from 12 to 8 schools as a decrease in the chances of a 1A school going to or winning team state.  Yes there are less spots but all schools have the opportunity to compete this year for a spot next year.  There should still be motivation at smaller schools to draw athletes and grow the sport.  Ultimately Classed Team State alone won't grow a program but it can be a carrot to draw kids in.  Still takes a lot of work and dedication from the school, coaches, parents and athletes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, boomer said:

Really. Your talking about percentages and being fair. What s the percentage of 1a wrestlers to winning a title at state compared to 3a.  Team state was the one thing we had a shot of going to and maybe placing or winning but now that is again moving in favor of 3a schools as well. I just don't get it I guess.

The 1A wrestler generally has a disadvantage for not having workout partners, resources and stronger competition.  But looking at a small sample size,   7.1% of state championships were won by 1A wrestlers last year compared to that 10.1% of the enrollment comes from 1A schools.  So not that much of a disadvantage.  

Edited by Wrestling Scholar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was ok at math back in the day. 

You can can calculate stats or percentages to support pretty much whatever you want. 

 

All I know is that 12 teams per division pretty much included everyone who had a shot regardless of which division they were classified in. 

Splitting 3A up really just adds an opportunity for the lower enrollment 3A teams to have a legitimate shot to win a title. Which is fantastic. 

 

Now why would you take away that opportunity from programs that are smaller yet?

One of the initial goals when this was started was to increase excitement and try to grow small school wrestling. 

 

Back to percentages- on any given year we have 12-15% of our HS boy population out for wrestling. I feel that is a high percentage considering not all boys walking the hall are athletes, and you subtract out the basketball players and swimmers. 

 

Team State is something we highlight and use as a tool to recruit kids. I am sure by the excitement and fan support of the other 1A schools, that they also consider it an honor to compete in this event. 

 

I would like to see it stay at 12 teams per division. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we do 4 classes with 1A and 2A having 12 teams and then 3A and 4A having 8 teams each it would probably satisfy everyone. 1A and 2A could run their own schedule(with a bye round included) and probably get done about the same exact time as 3A and 4A.

 

Boom compromise done! Just call me the great negotiator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wrestling Scholar said:

 

  Under the new format, we will have more competitive matchups and a more fluid tournament, less sitting around and more schools and wrestlers participating.   Sounds like a win win, with only losers being small school bubble teams that know they do not have a realistic chance at winning the championship. 

 

 

 

  

Yeah, so kinda like Johnny Wrestler from Podunk High who doesn't really have a shot at an individual state title now..yet class wrestling supporters are clamoring and advocating for class so he can get his title shot in 1A/2A!!! So let me try to understand, as I'm getting confused...take away Podunk High's bids and deny them the chance for "growing the sport" due to their participation in team state (notice I didn't say winning) and that's fine cuz they don't have a realistic shot at winning...but then the same poster is gonna say how we need to class so Podunk High can have a state qualifier/placer/champ and thus promote wrestling in/for his school and grow the sport??! 

 

This is not a shot at you, Scholar, just the hypocritical justification on here about taking away bid numbers from the smaller classes to go to larger schools for team state (notice I didn't say percentage..I agree that is about the same) yet then advocating for individual classes to provide more opportunity and growth. To me, limiting team state chances are worse because you  have a "team" of 8-20 kids going to the event then back to school talking to their buddies about it as compared to one Johnny Wrestler going back and saying he participated/placed/won at an individual classed state tourney. Where's the Grow the Sport class supporters rancor? Beside boomer and WoodJC...and I"m not even a class supporter but I do feel the classed Team State is fantastic and I do support that. #Confused

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

If we do 4 classes with 1A and 2A having 12 teams and then 3A and 4A having 8 teams each it would probably satisfy everyone. 1A and 2A could run their own schedule(with a bye round included) and probably get done about the same exact time as 3A and 4A.

 

Boom compromise done! Just call me the great negotiator.

Yes. Give us our 12 team slots in 2A and we'll be happy. Reduce the amount of deserving teams being missed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

If we do 4 classes with 1A and 2A having 12 teams and then 3A and 4A having 8 teams each it would probably satisfy everyone. 1A and 2A could run their own schedule(with a bye round included) and probably get done about the same exact time as 3A and 4A.

 

Boom compromise done! Just call me the great negotiator.

That's almost as good as the 3/5 compromise made during the constitutional convention.    Brilliant.   Was that guy Jebadiah Caprino that signed the constitution you're great great great grandfather or at least an uncle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed a lot of people talking about growing the sport through Classed Duals.  Has anyone looked at the data to see if the sport is actually growing in 1A and 2A schools due to our classed dual system?  

 

Did the numbers at those schools who participated grow like we had hoped, and what about the schools that have never made it?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rookies03 said:

I don't look at going from 12 to 8 schools as a decrease in the chances of a 1A school going to or winning team state.  Yes there are less spots but all schools have the opportunity to compete this year for a spot next year.  There should still be motivation at smaller schools to draw athletes and grow the sport.  Ultimately Classed Team State alone won't grow a program but it can be a carrot to draw kids in.  Still takes a lot of work and dedication from the school, coaches, parents and athletes.

I completely agree.  Smaller school CAN grow their program just by making it to team state and 12 teams would allow the change in classes to be more fruitful.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wrestling Scholar said:

That's almost as good as the 3/5 compromise made during the constitutional convention.    Brilliant.   Was that guy Jebadiah Caprino that signed the constitution you're great great great grandfather or at least an uncle.

We didn't come to this great country until the 1920's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AJ said:

I noticed a lot of people talking about growing the sport through Classed Duals.  Has anyone looked at the data to see if the sport is actually growing in 1A and 2A schools due to our classed dual system?  

 

Did the numbers at those schools who participated grow like we had hoped, and what about the schools that have never made it?

 

 

 

2013-14there were 22 kids on the Garrett squad

2019-20 we started with 51 and are 49 or 50 now

 

16-17,17-18,19-20 we made it.  Felt we were snubbed one...maybe two years.  We knew we were close though.  Funny thing is that we were a “bubble” vote in team this year yet we got 2nd.  We’ve been seeded 5th twice and placed 2nd both of those years.  Unseeded to 7th another year.  We knew we could win it this year or compete before we were voted in. In 18 we knew we had a shot as well and came close in a runner up finish.  This has definitely attracted kids!  Believe it or not...our success has improved our feeder system and we have good wrestlers coming up.  ......I’d bet that the same exists for other programs who are excited for the opportunity to win team state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, nkraus said:

2013-14there were 22 kids on the Garrett squad

2019-20 we started with 51 and are 49 or 50 now

 

16-17,17-18,19-20 we made it.  Felt we were snubbed one...maybe two years.  We knew we were close though.  Funny thing is that we were a “bubble” vote in team this year yet we got 2nd.  We’ve been seeded 5th twice and placed 2nd both of those years.  Unseeded to 7th another year.  We knew we could win it this year or compete before we were voted in. In 18 we knew we had a shot as well and came close in a runner up finish.  This has definitely attracted kids!  Believe it or not...our success has improved our feeder system and we have good wrestlers coming up.  ......I’d bet that the same exists for other programs who are excited for the opportunity to win team state.

 

 

Exactly!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.