Jump to content

Faulkens view on Class Wrestling


AJ

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Clint Gard said:

How many 1A-3A schools are there?  How many 5A-6A schools?  I believe 1A-3A make up more than 12% of the population don’t they?  

Again...there are 64 schools in 5A and 6A.  How many in 4A?  I don’t know but let’s say it’s 100.  That’s 164 schools out of 310?  That’s 53% of schools and they had 71% of the qualifiers.  So 1A-3A make up 47% of the population and had 29% of the qualifiers.  I’m guessing my 100 4A schools is high.  Maybe not.  Either way...that is a an advantage. 

6A—32 schools 

5A—32

4A—62

3A—64

2A—64

1A—64

Edited by Pug
126 schools had 162 qualifiers from 4A to 6A. 192 schools had the remaining 62 qualifiers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SIACfan said:

Large schools most definitely have a significant advantage over small schools.

 

Individuals from large schools do not necessarily have a significant advantage over individuals from small schools in an individual sport.

 

Now some large schools will offer better practice partners, better facilities & possibly better coaching. But the biggest majority of the kids who are qualifying for state are not wrestling only during the high school season. During the off season they are wrestling in tournaments, attending camps &/or are part of an elite club. Some may be all in on wrestling while others work this off season stuff around their other interests. But they are doing some wrestling in the off season.

Chesterton as a TEAM had as many placers this year than all 100 schools in the 1A class at team state. Let that sink in here....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Y2CJ41 said:

Chesterton as a TEAM had as many placers this year than all 100 schools in the 1A class at team state. Let that sink in here....

 

So are you saying that all the 1A schools had (8) placers?

 

Given the percentage of all 1A schools enrollment they should have had (9) placers. So if they had (8) then they weren't far off from what should be expected.

 

Did Chesterton far exceed their expectation given the enrollment at their school? Absolutely, but so did many other schools both large & small.

 

Given Chesterton has an enrollment of 2063 (per 2019/2020 data), they should expect to have 0.8 placers a year.

Given Mater Dei has an enrollment of 497 (per 2019/2020 data), they should expect to have 0.2 placers a year.

 

So Chesterton performed 10 times better than their enrollment would dictate, but MD performed 30 times better than their enrollment would dictate.

 

I have already stated that large schools have an advantage. They are going to have more state qualifiers & placers, but this should be expected because large schools make up such a large percentage of the overall enrollment in the state.

 

Garrett for example has an enrollment of 591, thus they should expect to have 0.44 qualifiers per year or approximately (1) qualifier every 2 years (precisely every 2.25 years). They had (2) this year, thus they performed 4.5 times better than what their enrollment would dictate.

 

I'm at a loss as to why this is so hard for small school coaches & fans to understand. I concede that large schools have an advantage. They have much larger enrollments & thus are going to have more elite athletes.  Do some large schools excel? absolutely, but so do some small schools. I am not actually against classing. I understand that small schools would benefit from it. But I also acknowledge that the individual participating in an individual sport is not at some huge disadvantage because he or she attends a small school. Some large schools offer an advantage to individuals in certain sports but so do some small schools.

 

The best argument for classing is that it will provide more kids with the opportunity to succeed. And success breeds interest which will then hopefully lead to growth within the sport. To say that small school individuals are at a disadvantage is at best a poor a poor argument. The small schools themselves are at a big disadvantage but not the individuals themselves. Would Garrett's (2) qualifiers been better had they attended a large school? Maybe, but that would depend on the large school. It is very possible that at some large schools they would not have been as good as they were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

So are you saying that all the 1A schools had (8) placers?

 

Given the percentage of all 1A schools enrollment they should have had (9) placers. So if they had (8) then they weren't far off from what should be expected.

 

Did Chesterton far exceed their expectation given the enrollment at their school? Absolutely, but so did many other schools both large & small.

 

Given Chesterton has an enrollment of 2063 (per 2019/2020 data), they should expect to have 0.8 placers a year.

Given Mater Dei has an enrollment of 497 (per 2019/2020 data), they should expect to have 0.2 placers a year.

 

So Chesterton performed 10 times better than their enrollment would dictate, but MD performed 30 times better than their enrollment would dictate.

 

I have already stated that large schools have an advantage. They are going to have more state qualifiers & placers, but this should be expected because large schools make up such a large percentage of the overall enrollment in the state.

 

Garrett for example has an enrollment of 591, thus they should expect to have 0.44 qualifiers per year or approximately (1) qualifier every 2 years (precisely every 2.25 years). They had (2) this year, thus they performed 4.5 times better than what their enrollment would dictate.

 

I'm at a loss as to why this is so hard for small school coaches & fans to understand. I concede that large schools have an advantage. They have much larger enrollments & thus are going to have more elite athletes.  Do some large schools excel? absolutely, but so do some small schools. I am not actually against classing. I understand that small schools would benefit from it. But I also acknowledge that the individual participating in an individual sport is not at some huge disadvantage because he or she attends a small school. Some large schools offer an advantage to individuals in certain sports but so do some small schools.

 

The best argument for classing is that it will provide more kids with the opportunity to succeed. And success breeds interest which will then hopefully lead to growth within the sport. To say that small school individuals are at a disadvantage is at best a poor a poor argument. The small schools themselves are at a big disadvantage but not the individuals themselves. Would Garrett's (2) qualifiers been better had they attended a large school? Maybe, but that would depend on the large school. It is very possible that at some large schools they would not have been as good as they were.

What percentage of the entries into the state tournament did 1A schools have?

 

Do you not realize that while you are counting 5000 students for Carmel, only 14 can wrestle in the state series? That's the same as Southern Wells or Delphi.

 

Using the total enrollment figures is assuming each school is entering their whole student body into the state series. In a one class system it assumes EVERYONE is equal and has an equal opportunity to win a championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Y2CJ41 said:

What percentage of the entries into the state tournament did 1A schools have?

 

That is not relevant. So are you saying that because 1A schools represent approximately 1/3 of the total schools that they should expect 33% of the qualifiers? If this is what you expect they you are putting unreasonable expectations on 1A schools. Because in reality they only represent 8.4% of the enrollment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

That is not relevant. So are you saying that because 1A schools represent approximately 1/3 of the total schools that they should expect 33% of the qualifiers? If this is what you expect they you are putting unreasonable expectations on 1A schools. Because in reality they only represent 8.4% of the enrollment.

 

If those expectations are unreasonable, why is it right for 1A wrestlers to compete in the same state tournament?

Edited by Galagore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are we using enrollment to determine how many qualifiers placers and champs each size school should have... all teams can only enter 14 per team... yes some schools have forfeits but by using school size alone to determine how many each size school should have is agree that big schools have a big advantage. The percentage should be based on sectional entries to determine if small schools are on par with big their percentage. Enrollment shouldn't have any baring if things are on even ground. but obviously they do. All stats should be based on kids actually wrestling not kids that are in school not participating in the sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SIACfan said:

 

That is not relevant. So are you saying that because 1A schools represent approximately 1/3 of the total schools that they should expect 33% of the qualifiers? If this is what you expect they you are putting unreasonable expectations on 1A schools. Because in reality they only represent 8.4% of the enrollment.

The one class system assumes that EVERYONE is equal and has an equal shot at thing such as qualifying for state or winning state. If there is not an equal shot at that "success" then we would go to a class system. That is why they classed team sports as they saw that the Southern Wells baseball team did not have an equal shot as the Carroll baseball team at success.

 

The data shows that the entries for small schools are MUCH more likely to not qualify for state, place at state, or win a title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Galagore said:

 

If those expectations are unreasonable, why is it right for 1A wrestlers to compete in the same state tournament?

 

Because we aren't talking about the expectations of individuals. We are talking about the expectations of small schools. This is exactly what I am talking about. Why is this so hard for you guys to understand. Small schools are at a disadvantage because they have fewer kids to draw there athletes from. But that doesn't mean that the few elite athletes they have are at a disadvantage in an individual setting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SIACfan said:

 

Because we aren't talking about the expectations of individuals. We are talking about the expectations of small schools. This is exactly what I am talking about. Why is this so hard for you guys to understand. Small schools are at a disadvantage because they have fewer kids to draw there athletes from. But that doesn't mean that the few elite athletes they have are at a disadvantage in an individual setting.

So you are fine with small schools having VERY little success individually?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Y2CJ41 said:

So you are fine with small schools having VERY little success individually?

 

Remember we are talking school success in an individual setting.

 

So yes, if small schools are succeeding at a rate that coincides with their enrollment rate then it is what should be expected. Why is that so hard for some of you to understand.

 

I understand that as a coach &/or a fan you want your school to be able to have success. From a school standpoint it makes total sense to class even an individual sport. But I am coming at this from the individual perspective.

 

I am not against classing, but I admit that I like that Indiana crowns one true champ in it's individual tournament. but I also recognize that from a team/school standpoint it is very unfair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

The one class system assumes that EVERYONE is equal and has an equal shot at thing such as qualifying for state or winning state. If there is not an equal shot at that "success" then we would go to a class system. That is why they classed team sports as they saw that the Southern Wells baseball team did not have an equal shot as the Carroll baseball team at success.

 

The data shows that the entries for small schools are MUCH more likely to not qualify for state, place at state, or win a title.

 

A one class system in an individual sport is fair to every individual but not every school. Is this really that difficult to understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SIACfan said:

 

A one class system in an individual sport is fair to every individual but not every school. Is this really that difficult to understand.

 

Large schools have advantages, which you have stated. Those advantages in turn get passed on to the individuals in those schools. Is that really difficult to understand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

Remember we are talking school success in an individual setting.

 

So yes, if small schools are succeeding at a rate that coincides with their enrollment rate then it is what should be expected. Why is that so hard for some of you to understand.

 

I understand that as a coach &/or a fan you want your school to be able to have success. From a school standpoint it makes total sense to class even an individual sport. But I am coming at this from the individual perspective.

 

I am not against classing, but I admit that I like that Indiana crowns one true champ in it's individual tournament. but I also recognize that from a team/school standpoint it is very unfair.

For the tenth million time, this is why the IHSAA needs work with the IHSWCA and we can have our cake and eat it too! No reason why this cannot be done to have both tournaments other than the IHSAA puts stupid match limit rule. I believe I read on another message board or here where their were wrestlers getting 60 to 70 matches a year. We get what maybe 40 to 45 tops?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Galagore said:

 

Large schools have advantages, which you have stated. Those advantages in turn get passed on to the individuals in those schools. Is that really difficult to understand?

 

Some large schools have excellent wrestling programs, but so do some small schools.

 

You could find some individuals from small schools that would benefit by transferring to a big school with a good program, but they would benefit just as much by transferring to a small school with a good program as well. The benefits that good programs provide are not limited to large schools. And Individuals who would benefit by transferring to a school with an excellent program are not limited to small school individuals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

Remember we are talking school success in an individual setting.

 

So yes, if small schools are succeeding at a rate that coincides with their enrollment rate then it is what should be expected. Why is that so hard for some of you to understand.

 

I understand that as a coach &/or a fan you want your school to be able to have success. From a school standpoint it makes total sense to class even an individual sport. But I am coming at this from the individual perspective.

 

I am not against classing, but I admit that I like that Indiana crowns one true champ in it's individual tournament. but I also recognize that from a team/school standpoint it is very unfair.

Do you realize that while Carmel 5200 students only 14 can enter sectional? 

Do you realize Southern Wells with 256 students can enter 14 wrestlers at sectional?

 

School size doesn't matter, everyone is limited to the number of entries at sectional. If entries were unlimited you would likely see much less small school participation at the state finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

Some large schools have excellent wrestling programs, but so do some small schools.

 

You could find some individuals from small schools that would benefit by transferring to a big school with a good program, but they would benefit just as much by transferring to a small school with a good program as well. The benefits that good programs provide are not limited to large schools. And Individuals who would benefit by transferring to a school with an excellent program are not limited to small school individuals.

Some people are billionaires, so why can't everyone be a billionaire?

Some people are 7' tall, so why can't everyone be 7' tall?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

Some large schools have excellent wrestling programs, but so do some small schools.

 

You could find some individuals from small schools that would benefit by transferring to a big school with a good program, but they would benefit just as much by transferring to a small school with a good program as well. The benefits that good programs provide are not limited to large schools. And Individuals who would benefit by transferring to a school with an excellent program are not limited to small school individuals.

 

So...you think good wrestling school with 2800 students, same thing as good wrestling school with 400 students? Prairie Heights basically the same as Crown Point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

Do you realize that while Carmel 5200 students only 14 can enter sectional? 

Do you realize Southern Wells with 256 students can enter 14 wrestlers at sectional?

 

School size doesn't matter, everyone is limited to the number of entries at sectional. If entries were unlimited you would likely see much less small school participation at the state finals.

 

If school size doesn't matter, then why are so many of you always arguing that it does?

 

Yes, Carmel is only allowed the same amount of entries as Southern Wells. But since they get to draw their 14 entries from 20 times more kids, it stands to reason that they might have 20 times more elite individuals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

If school size doesn't matter, then why are so many of you always arguing that it does?

 

Yes, Carmel is only allowed the same amount of entries as Southern Wells. But since they get to draw their 14 entries from 20 times more kids, it stands to reason that they might have 20 times more elite individuals.

If the size of the school matters then we should have classed wrestling, PERIOD!

 

That is the premise for classing high school athletics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Galagore said:

 

So...you think good wrestling school with 2800 students, same thing as good wrestling school with 400 students? Prairie Heights basically the same as Crown Point?

 

Well, based on Crown point should expect to have 2.1 state qualifiers per year while Prairie Heights should expect 0.3 per year based on their enrollments.

 

CP had (8) which is 3.8 times better than their enrollment would dictate.

PH had (1) which is 3.3 times better than their enrollment would dictate.

 

Would PH's lone qualifier have done better if he had transferred to CP?

Would CP's qualifiers have done worse if they had transferred to PH?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Y2CJ41 said:

If the size of the school matters then we should have classed wrestling, PERIOD!

 

That is the premise for classing high school athletics.

 

For team/school success I totally agree. But again, the Indiana State Wrestling tournament is an individual tournament with the goal of crowning one champ in each weight class.

 

It is unfortunate that we don't have a classed team tournament. And again, I am not against classing the individual one. I just don't believe that the individuals at small schools have such a big disadvantage that so many suggest. And the percentage of state qualifiers closely following enrollment percentages supports that thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SIACfan said:

 

For team/school success I totally agree. But again, the Indiana State Wrestling tournament is an individual tournament with the goal of crowning one champ in each weight class.

 

It is unfortunate that we don't have a classed team tournament. And again, I am not against classing the individual one. I just don't believe that the individuals at small schools have such a big disadvantage that so many suggest. And the percentage of state qualifiers closely following enrollment percentages supports that thought.

 

If each school were allowed to enter two per weight, do you expect the number of state qualifiers per school size to:

a) change in favor of small schools

b) change in favor of large schools

c) remain pretty much the same

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.