Jump to content

State tournament class statistics to not necessarily incite class wrestling discussion


Recommended Posts

Here's some info the Scholar compiled related to the new classifications from performance at State.

 

State champion by class based on team points. There's been a discussion in the past about recognizing champions with this method  IHSAA does not recognize the classifications.

4A- Indy Cathedral

3A-Roncali

2A- Bellmont, Northwood

1A-Shenandoah

 

State Qualifiers

4A-  92 or 41.1%

3A - 57 or  25.4%

2A - 53 or 23.7%

1A- 22 or  9.8%

 

State Placers

4A- 51 or 45.5%

3A - 26 or 23.2%

2A- 24 or 21.4%

1A- 11 or 9.8%

 

Analysis

Again the bigger schools dominate  again with class 4a with 11% of the schools getting 41% of qualifiers and 45% of placers.

Class 1A gets roughly 10% of placers and Qualifiers.

Surprisingly 3A and 2A are very similar statistically with 3A slightly beating out 2A.

 

Indiana probably will never have class wrestling, but are the smaller schools really happy with this?  You have some great athletes that will always have a very difficult time getting recognized at the state level.  Its just accepted  in Indiana,  and I have mentioned before that many small schools embrace the "Hoosier syndrome".  "Hoosier Syndrome" is the small school mentality that the small schools can compete with the big guys and occasionally pull off the big upset, and that's better  than just competing against the little guys,  a theme essentially inspired in the movie "Hoosiers". We've had the argument if it affects participation and stats are inconclusive in my opinion.     Ive been around and seen both sides.  

 

Just to explain another perspective.  Back in my home state "Kansas",  they are a believer in class wrestling and are immersed in class wrestling.  Ive discussed with some Kansans in the wrestling community and they have a hard time wrapping  there heads around one class.    But the state tournament there is broken into 4 classes similar to the surrounding states.  Its seriously flawed in that they wrestle the tournament in 3 locations.   The small class (made up of about 70 schools) goes out to a small town in Western Kansas called Hays and have their own tournament.  They host the tournament at Ft Hays State a D2 college wrestling program.    Most of the towns in western Kansas are small, so its geographically centered where most of the small schools are.     But the joy of it is there's a lot of kids and fans that get to participate.  Hotels are sold out,  and restaruants are busy during this weekend.  There's caravans of cars with windows  painted going to  state.  They really embrace it and love they get to spend the night at a hotel.    The ironic thing is the small school wrestlers  think they're great because they qualified and believe there level is close  to the bigger classes.  Its tremendously watered down level of wrestling compared to Indiana,  but the kids are ignorant of that and they believe that qualifying for state is just as  big of achievement as it is in any other state like Indiana.  Ignorance is bliss, but they kids are proud and having a good time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Wrestling Scholar
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 252
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In all fairness....I think Silas has solidified himself as a pretty special talent regardless of school size.  So with all do respect, I genuinely feel to draw a question about why aren’t more 1A or 2

This whole thread and group of replies has became ridiculous.  I feel that there's a lot of common sense left out of many statements made in this thread.   We just had a kid become a two tim

Let me just throw in here...   TEAM class wrestling = YES INDIVIDUAL class wrestling = NO   How in the wide world of sports did Silas Allred possibly manage to compete at the

Posted Images

One thing that Indiana has is a large disparity between the big and small schools in terms of size. We have schools with as few as 100 kids to one with over 5000.

 

The average school size is 962 students with a standard deviation of 808! Just so you aren't confused by math terms, here is a definition of standard deviation.

 

Quote

Standard deviation is a number used to tell how measurements for a group are spread out from the average (mean), or expected value. A low standard deviation means that most of the numbers are close to the average. A high standard deviation means that the numbers are more spread out.

 

This basically tells us there is a drastic difference between the enrollments of the schools within the state.

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

Here's some info the Scholar compiled related to the new classifications from performance at State.

 

State champion by class based on team points. There's been a discussion in the past about recognizing champions with this method  IHSAA does not recognize the classifications.

4A- Indy Cathedral

3A-Roncali

2A- Bellmont, Northwood

1A-Shenandoah

 

State Qualifiers

4A-  92 or 41.1%

3A - 57 or  25.4%

2A - 53 or 23.7%

1A- 22 or  9.8%

 

State Placers

4A- 51 or 45.5%

3A - 26 or 23.2%

2A- 24 or 21.4%

1A- 11 or 9.8%

 

Analysis

Again the bigger schools dominate  again with class 4a with 11% of the schools getting 41% of qualifiers and 45% of placers.

Class 1A gets roughly 10% of placers and Qualifiers.

Surprisingly 3A and 2A are very similar statistically with 3A slightly beating out 2A.

 

Indiana probably will never have class wrestling, but are the smaller schools really happy with this?  You have some great athletes that will always have a very difficult time getting recognized at the state level.  Its just accepted  in Indiana,  and I have mentioned before that many small schools embrace the "Hoosier syndrome".  "Hoosier Syndrome" is the small school mentality that the small schools can compete with the big guys and occasionally pull off the big upset, and that's better  than just competing against the little guys,  a theme essentially inspired in the movie "Hoosiers". We've had the argument if it affects participation and stats are inconclusive in my opinion.     Ive been around and seen both sides.  

 

Just to explain another perspective.  Back in my home state "Kansas",  they are a believer in class wrestling and are immersed in class wrestling.  Ive discussed with some Kansans in the wrestling community and they have a hard time wrapping  there heads around one class.    But the state tournament there is broken into 4 classes similar to the surrounding states.  Its seriously flawed in that they wrestle the tournament in 3 locations.   The small class (made up of about 70 schools) goes out to a small town in Western Kansas called Hays and have their own tournament.  They host the tournament at Ft Hays State a D2 college wrestling program.    Most of the towns in western Kansas are small, so its geographically centered where most of the small schools are.     But the joy of it is there's a lot of kids and fans that get to participate.  Hotels are sold out,  and restaruants are busy during this weekend.  There's caravans of cars with windows  painted going to  state.  They really embrace it and love they get to spend the night at a hotel.    The ironic thing is the small school wrestlers  think they're great because they qualified and believe there level is close  to the bigger classes.  Its tremendously watered down level of wrestling compared to Indiana,  but the kids are ignorant of that and they believe that qualifying for state is just as  big of achievement as it is in any other state like Indiana.  Ignorance is bliss, but they kids are proud and having a good time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When representation is considered, focusing on the number of schools instead of student population leads to Senate/House of Representative debates. 

 

What percentage of students does 4A cover? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to wager a gazillion banana's on @Galagore posting on this thread in 3 minutes and I'll take the under. And I'll bet another gazillion bananas on the over/under of 10 as the number of his posts in the thread and I'll take the over. 

 

Carry on with your class debate! Happy offseason! SSDY..

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Jcjcjc said:

 

When representation is considered, focusing on the number of schools instead of student population leads to Senate/House of Representative debates. 

 

What percentage of students does 4A cover? 

 

1A 11.16% (91 schools)
2A 22.13% (91 schools)
3A 29.27% (60 schools)
4A 31.42% (35 schools)
None(schools with less than 7 entered at sectional) 6.02% (35 schools)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Wrestling Scholar not trying to start another parochial vs public debate, but I think it would be an interesting stat to look at in terms of champions, placers and qualifiers. Also, I think the private vs parochial debate goes much further than just ‘recruiting’ and lends itself more to access to quality education and socioeconomic status. I’ll try to compile this list myself this weekend if you’re busy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Schools vs Population are 2 very extreme stats that neither represent wrestling very well.  I'd be more interested in seeing the percentages based on participation.  The weight certification data would be one way to get the number of wrestlers per school.  

 

There are very small schools with lots of wrestlers that overall do quite well.  And there are very large schools with very few wrestlers that overall don't do so well.  The number of wrestlers in the room is going to have a big impact on the success for that school.

 

Anyone know who has access to that data?  Just need the number per school, not all the alpha weights or plans.  

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

1A 11.16% (91 schools)
2A 22.13% (91 schools)
3A 29.27% (60 schools)
4A 31.42% (35 schools)
None(schools with less than 7 entered at sectional) 6.02% (35 schools)

 

1 hour ago, Wrestling Scholar said:

Here's some info the Scholar compiled related to the new classifications from performance at State.

 

State champion by class based on team points. There's been a discussion in the past about recognizing champions with this method  IHSAA does not recognize the classifications.

4A- Indy Cathedral

3A-Roncali

2A- Bellmont, Northwood

1A-Shenandoah

 

State Qualifiers

4A-  92 or 41.1%

3A - 57 or  25.4%

2A - 53 or 23.7%

1A- 22 or  9.8%

 

State Placers

4A- 51 or 45.5%

3A - 26 or 23.2%

2A- 24 or 21.4%

1A- 11 or 9.8%

 

 

 

 

It looks like our current system is quite equitable. 

1A has 11.16% of Indiana Students in (91 schools) and earns 9.8% of the medals and 9.8% of the qualifiers. (minimal under-performing)
2A has 22.13% of Indiana Students in (91 schools) and earns 21.4% of the medals and 23.7% of the qualifiers. (performing)
3A has 29.27% of Indiana Students in (60 schools) and earns 23.2% of the medals and 25.4% of the qualifiers. (under-performing)
4A has 31.42% of Indiana Students in (35 schools) and earns 45.5% of the medals and 41.1% of the qualifiers. (Over-performing)

 

4A over-represents itself by a bit. The other subdivisions are within a pretty close margin of their school population predicting their qualifiers and placers. I get frustrated by these talks because I think of students earning medals, and I don't think of schools as earning medals. I feel like a small group of students should earn a small group of medals. I feel like big groups of students should earn big groups of medals. The opportunities to qualify and place at state are pretty equal for students in any type of school based on these numbers. 

 

If we analyzed dual meet success between schools, I think you would find that the bigger schools have much more success, as they have more students to field their teams, so their teams are better; thus, a team separation of classes makes much more sense than an individual separation of a tournament that seems to give equitable opportunities. 

 

 

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

 

 

 

It looks like our current system is quite equitable. 

1A has 11.16% of Indiana Students in (91 schools) and earns 9.8% of the medals and 9.8% of the qualifiers. (minimal under-performing)
2A has 22.13% of Indiana Students in (91 schools) and earns 21.4% of the medals and 23.7% of the qualifiers. (performing)
3A has 29.27% of Indiana Students in (60 schools) and earns 23.2% of the medals and 25.4% of the qualifiers. (under-performing)
4A has 31.42% of Indiana Students in (35 schools) and earns 45.5% of the medals and 41.1% of the qualifiers. (Over-performing)

 

4A over-represents itself by a bit. The other subdivisions are within a pretty close margin of their school population predicting their qualifiers and placers. I get frustrated by these talks because I think of students earning medals, and I don't think of schools as earning medals. I feel like a small group of students should earn a small group of medals. I feel like big groups of students should earn big groups of medals. The opportunities to qualify and place at state are pretty equal for students in any type of school based on these numbers. 

 

If we analyzed dual meet success between schools, I think you would find that the bigger schools have much more success, as they have more students to field their teams, so their teams are better; thus, a team separation of classes makes much more sense than an individual separation of a tournament that seems to give equitable opportunities. 

 

 

The middle should be just that, the middle and the data shows that they are where they should be. Where you need to look is the extremes, the big and small. This data shows that the bottom schools are well under-performing, while the top 35 schools are over-performing. 

 

In a single class system it deems that everyone has a fair shot to advance to the state finals. This data shows that if you are in the top 35 schools in terms of enrollments you are 4X more likely to advance to state and 4.5X more likely to place at state.

 

Also, while this doesn't affect too much I added in the "none" schools that were dropped due to not having enough entries in the state series. Here is an updated statistic on enrollment percentage and number of schools. I like to be truthful when doing statistics on these things.
 

1A 112 13.12%
2A 103 24.98%
3A 61 29.81%
4A 36 32.09%

 

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

Let me just throw in here...

 

TEAM class wrestling = YES

INDIVIDUAL class wrestling = NO

 

How in the wide world of sports did Silas Allred possibly manage to compete at the state level being from a 1A school, let alone win the whole shebang?!?

Considering Allred was the only wrestler in 1A or 2A to win a state title, I think the better question is why aren't there others like him? 

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

Considering Allred was the only wrestler in 1A or 2A to win a state title, I think the better question is why aren't there others like him? 

 

Throw in the EMD wrestlers if this is based off of population alone and that changes things...

Edited by AJ
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

Here are some interesting stats, this is in terms of sectional participants, meaning total wrestlers entered at sectional.

 

  Wr Qual   Placers  
1A 1036 22 2.12% 11 1.06%
2A 1098 57 5.19% 24 2.19%
3A 761 53 6.96% 26 3.42%
4A 463 92 19.87% 51 11.02%


 

It’s harder to make a sectional roster at a big school, so how is this relevant to the stats I gave? If you are from a big school, your sectional qualifier (wrestle off) is harder than a small school. 
This seems to buy into the idea that schools deserve medals, where I think students deserve the chance at medals which is happening already. 

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

The middle should be just that, the middle and the data shows that they are where they should be. Where you need to look is the extremes, the big and small. This data shows that the bottom schools are well under-performing, while the top 35 schools are over-performing. 

 

In a single class system it deems that everyone has a fair shot to advance to the state finals. This data shows that if you are in the top 35 schools in terms of enrollments you are 4X more likely to advance to state and 4.5X more likely to place at state.

 

Also, while this doesn't affect too much I added in the "none" schools that were dropped due to not having enough entries in the state series. Here is an updated statistic on enrollment percentage and number of schools. I like to be truthful when doing statistics on these things.
 

1A 112 13.12%
2A 103 24.98%
3A 61 29.81%
4A 36 32.09%

 


The middle isn’t as you describe, since 3 A underperforms. The smallest class does better than 3A in matching its population with qualifiers and placers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Jcjcjc said:


The middle isn’t as you describe, since 3 A underperforms. The smallest class does better than 3A in matching its population with qualifiers and placers. 

The middle is right where it should be, and this is a 1 year look.  Here is the data over the course of the last 21 years. As you can tell the gap is widening between the small and big schools. Note that this data is using current enrollment categories so in 2000 some schools(such as Carroll) would not have been 4A. Also note the discrepancy for this year is that Elkhart Memorial qualified a wrestler for state and I put them as a 3A school instead of 4A as they are for next year.

 

The biggest takeaway is how much the gap is widening between the big and small schools. There is also a significant drop-off in the percentages compared to enrollments as we narrow it down to placers and champions.

 

21 Year Data.xlsx

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In all fairness....I think Silas has solidified himself as a pretty special talent regardless of school size.  So with all do respect, I genuinely feel to draw a question about why aren’t more 1A or 2A wrestlers like him, is a bit unfair. Almost as unfair as if I asked why aren’t more 4A wrestlers like him.

 

Admittedly....I certainly don’t have the answers regarding pros/cons of class wrestling.  I think there’s evidence of beneficial dynamics on both sides.  The class question is always intriguing to me because comparisons are frequently made to other power states whose classed (PA, Ill, IA, OH, etc).  But I question these comparisons as it pertains to the benefits of classing Indiana.  In other words....if those states weren’t classed, would they not be as strong?  I personally feel their strengths are elsewhere apart from the classification system. 

Specifically....their head start in club training, and especially collegiate RTC opportunities. Most notably in PA.  In PA alone there are 11 D1 wrestling programs, 8 D2, and 14 D3.  This equates to NEVER having to drive too far down the road to get your butt kicked for 2hrs.  And in my experience, that dynamic coupled with an athletes desire to close the gap....is the biggest catalyst in the evolving of more nationally elite kids.  And unfortunately....class or no class, at this point.....only a handful of young athletes are driven enough to embrace a “Get beat up, or get better” mentality.  In fact, classing things in hopes to raise 1A numbers, kinda caters to many of those athletes who are hesitant to compete because of that fear.  If numbers is the only goal, then classing definitely benefits.  But I’m confident that strictly more bodies on the mat isn’t the zeal motivating class wrestling advocates.

 

I’m fully aware that more participation will undoubtedly eventually mold some freak athlete whose a football player at the small school level into a great wrestler.  But what about the “in-betweens”.  The guys who literally just lack the drive, and want the accolades without the effort.  That’s one of my biggest issues with classing it here.  And full transparency......I’m definitely bias by what I’ve personally experienced at the small school level, in contrast to having graduated and competed athletically myself at Muncie Central. 

 

The Silas scenario is 100% the embodiment of hard work and extreme levels of self motivation. For 2 years, his daily partner was a 160lb’er.....and a true 170 wrestling up to benefit our team. So having a no excuse mentality.....we had to find partners, supplental/paid clinicians for live wrestling, stance and motion in live match format for 5 periods, old school Rocky like strength training, and literally driving anywhere & everywhere in the off-season....to ensure he’d taste humility and have to overcome a peak to close a gap.  Ultimately....it’s simply been a mantra of “Nobody will outwork me”.  That alone excited the recruiters.  Silas’ ceiling hasn’t even been close to established. He’s never had regular elite partners to push him.  He’s a product of self-push, and an overwhelming desire to succeed.

 

In fact, the argument could made.....that Silas is the example of what’s possible at the 1A level.  When you simply don’t make excuses about school size, strength of schedule, partners, etc.  And just literally make it a lifestyle.  Daily telling yourself....I’m going to be better today than I was yesterday. 

 

Again....I don’t have all the answers.  And I respect the opinion of those whose researched the benefits.  I’m just simply sharing what I know to be truth in the lives of my son Silas, and his overzealous dad who fell in love with sport a mere 6 yrs ago. 🤷🏻‍♂️  

 

That said......will classing create more elite athletes?  I can’t buy in.

 

But will it raise numbers and help even more young men become better men?  I’m sold on that.

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

The middle is right where it should be, and this is a 1 year look.  Here is the data over the course of the last 21 years. As you can tell the gap is widening between the small and big schools. Note that this data is using current enrollment categories so in 2000 some schools(such as Carroll) would not have been 4A. Also note the discrepancy for this year is that Elkhart Memorial qualified a wrestler for state and I put them as a 3A school instead of 4A as they are for next year.

 

The biggest takeaway is how much the gap is widening between the big and small schools. There is also a significant drop-off in the percentages compared to enrollments as we narrow it down to placers and champions.

 

21 Year Data.xlsx 15.39 kB · 12 downloads

 


Aren’t the biggest schools getting bigger populations as they are getting more placers? 
Portage, Fishers, Penn, and all the biggest schools, aren’t they much bigger than in the past while small schools are still small?

Edited by Jcjcjc
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Perseverance said:

 

 

In all fairness....I think Silas has solidified himself as a pretty special talent regardless of school size.  So with all do respect, I genuinely feel to draw a question about why aren’t more 1A or 2A wrestlers like him, is a bit unfair. Almost as unfair as if I asked why aren’t more 4A wrestlers like him.

 

Admittedly....I certainly don’t have the answers regarding pros/cons of class wrestling.  I think there’s evidence of beneficial dynamics on both sides.  The class question is always intriguing to me because comparisons are frequently made to other power states whose classed (PA, Ill, IA, OH, etc).  But I question these comparisons as it pertains to the benefits of classing Indiana.  In other words....if those states weren’t classed, would they not be as strong?  I personally feel their strengths are elsewhere apart from the classification system. 

Specifically....their head start in club training, and especially collegiate RTC opportunities. Most notably in PA.  In PA alone there are 11 D1 wrestling programs, 8 D2, and 14 D3.  This equates to NEVER having to drive too far down the road to get your butt kicked for 2hrs.  And in my experience, that dynamic coupled with an athletes desire to close the gap....is the biggest catalyst in the evolving of more nationally elite kids.  And unfortunately....class or no class, at this point.....only a handful of young athletes are driven enough to embrace a “Get beat up, or get better” mentality.  In fact, classing things in hopes to raise 1A numbers, kinda caters to many of those athletes who are hesitant to compete because of that fear.  If numbers is the only goal, then classing definitely benefits.  But I’m confident that strictly more bodies on the mat isn’t the zeal motivating class wrestling advocates.

 

I’m fully aware that more participation will undoubtedly eventually mold some freak athlete whose a football player at the small school level into a great wrestler.  But what about the “in-betweens”.  The guys who literally just lack the drive, and want the accolades without the effort.  That’s one of my biggest issues with classing it here.  And full transparency......I’m definitely bias by what I’ve personally experienced at the small school level, in contrast to having graduated and competed athletically myself at Muncie Central. 

 

The Silas scenario is 100% the embodiment of hard work and extreme levels of self motivation. For 2 years, his daily partner was a 160lb’er.....and a true 170 wrestling up to benefit our team. So having a no excuse mentality.....we had to find partners, supplental/paid clinicians for live wrestling, stance and motion in live match format for 5 periods, old school Rocky like strength training, and literally driving anywhere & everywhere in the off-season....to ensure he’d taste humility and have to overcome a peak to close a gap.  Ultimately....it’s simply been a mantra of “Nobody will outwork me”.  That alone excited the recruiters.  Silas’ ceiling hasn’t even been close to established. He’s never had regular elite partners to push him.  He’s a product of self-push, and an overwhelming desire to succeed.

 

In fact, the argument could made.....that Silas is the example of what’s possible at the 1A level.  When you simply don’t make excuses about school size, strength of schedule, partners, etc.  And just literally make it a lifestyle.  Daily telling yourself....I’m going to be better today than I was yesterday. 

 

Again....I don’t have all the answers.  And I respect the opinion of those whose researched the benefits.  I’m just simply sharing what I know to be truth in the lives of my son Silas, and his overzealous dad who fell in love with sport a mere 6 yrs ago. 🤷🏻‍♂️  

 

That said......will classing create more elite athletes?  I can’t buy in.

 

But will it raise numbers and help even more young men become better men?  I’m sold on that.

I don't think it could be said any better than this, absolutely perfect 100%. An addition to these points is that there are so few people willing to give everything they have to achieve their goals. In my opinion Silas may have had a goal to win State but I'm pretty sure his goals are WAY higher than that. Look at all of the state champs in any given year regardless of where they came from or where they're going they put a ton of work into their goals, if any individual wants it bad enough there will be a way and they will find that way. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For all of those people that think school size and location doesn't matter. Please move your child to a small rural school out in the middle of a corn field 2-3 hours away from all or just any Academies to wrestle at on any given day of the week. Then throw in the other sports they most likely are involved in.

 

If small school kids knew the had a chance to win a state title there would be more emphasis on club and off season wrestling. Which would increase those numbers as well. It would also keep those coaches more involved year around.

 

The numbers don't lie big school vs small school in any sport. The day of I might get a chance doesn't exist anymore. Kids move on to other sports that they know they can compete in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to argue this point like I usually do CFleshman, but how do you argue the post above from Sila's father? That's exactly his situation, I realize that Silas attends an academy but I don't think it's right next door to his house.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, CFleshman said:

..... Then throw in the other sports they most likely are involved in.

 

If small school kids knew the had a chance to win a state title there would be more emphasis on club and off season wrestling. Which would increase those numbers as well. It would also keep those coaches more involved year around.

 

...... Kids move on to other sports that they know they can compete in.

 

Although I agree with you, that is somewhat my argument that says class wrestling (while it may help wrestling) may not be the best solution for the kids. The flip side of your argument is this...

 

Why do some parents move their child from large schools to the smaller "country" schools?

- More individual attention

- A chance to be a starter (and/or possibly a star) at sports where they may not even make the squad at a large school

- Environment where everyone knows each other

 

Your comment "throw the other sports they most likely are involved in" is framed as a negative thing.  I would contend that it is not. If your child's goal is to be a possible college wrestler, then by all means focus on the one sport, put "more emphasis on club and off season wrestling". The 2-3 hour drive for a quality club is definitely an obstacle, I will agree with that.

 

However, since this is a wrestling board, these arguments always focus on the issue through the lens of the wrestling community only. One of the wonderful things about small schools is that a student can be (and is often expected to be) part of the football/wrestling/baseball/track teams.  And also be in the school play, student leadership, etc. Rather than see it as a problem, I see it as a benefit for the majority of students who will not go on to play sports in college. Since there is a team state, if the small schools see success at that level and want to be a part of it then that is a great selling point to get more kids out and fill the lineups.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious what the percentages are for other IHSAA individual sports.  For example, I wonder if the state qualifiers for cross country or track are more evenly distributed than us for small, medium, and large schools.  Or, maybe, they have a similar distribution as ours.

 

If I have a little free time, I'll look into it.  I'm just not that passionate about this topic one way or the other.  I enjoy our single-class tournament, but I would also enjoy a classed tournament.  There are probably a lot of people like me who would be fine with either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if this were actually classed from the beginning of the tournament, I believe the champion for the smaller schools would be different. Would be closer to those teams that fair really well at the team state duals, as teams would probably be moving more qualifiers to state facing 1A and 2A schools.

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



×
×
  • 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.