Class Wrestling Question

[SIACfan]

1 hour ago, blueandgold said:

Because they did get better. They got better because they’ve properly presented their depth. Had they not, a whole lot of those teams would get swallowed at Illinois’ sectional level. A 1A team dominating a three-time state and national championship team, who was at one point ranked 12th in the nation, 55-4 is because they created parity and sharpened one another up at each level.

 

But you are making a leap by saying they would not have developed their program without class wrestling. We have several examples of small schools in Indiana that have developed very good programs that can routinely beat most big schools throughout the state.

 

I know nothing about Illinois HS wrestling or this program you are referring to. So was this program you are talking about not very good before Illinois went to class wrestling?

[SIACfan]

Lastly, I am not against class wrestling.

 

But I am merely pointing out that logically the number of qualifiers, placers & champs should closely follow the school enrollment numbers. And Y2 has provided evidence that they basically do.

 

The fact that a majority of the elite wrestlers come from the majority of the states student enrollment should be expected.

 

The best argument for class wrestling that I have seen is that it might help grow the sport.

Edited January 8 by SIACfan

[Y2CJ41]

14 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

First, you have admitted in the past that you lump MD & Cathedral in the large school category. While it is true that they choose to compete at that level, it is not accurate to include their numbers in the large school category when debating school size verses individual performance. Their wrestlers have to be included in the small school numbers for the study to be accurate in a debate of school size ability to produce elite individuals.

 

Secondly, even with the MD & Cathedral wrestlers included with the big school numbers, those percentages are not that far off what they should be. Based on the numbers in your spread sheet for a 2 class system, small schools should get on average 24.3 placers/year and they got 18.8 on average per year. Likewise, small schools by enrollment % should expect 3.0 Champs/year & got 1.6 on average per year. But if you place the MD wrestlers in their proper small school category, those numbers are going to lineup even closer to the enrollment percentages.

First off the only bump Cathedral has is in the 4 class system that utilizes the classes in the team state.

 

Secondly, Mater Dei is an EXTREME outlier. I cannot emphasize that enough, if you include them in 1A they have 11% of the state qualifiers for 2 classes and 27% for 3 classes. For placers they have 17% in 2 classes and 52% in 3 classes. For champs it's 30% in 2 classes and only 100% for 3 classes.

 

Doing any sort of data analysis and including them in 1A basically invalidates the data. If you can't see that Mater Dei is an extreme outlier then this conversation is worthless. Burying your head in the sand and saying look at how great these numbers are because ONE team is pulling all the weight does not tell you what is going on. That is akin to your kids telling everyone that the family makes $X per year, when he contributes $20 a week on a paper route.

 

There is also a calculation with the top 5 and lowest 5 teams in each class removed and it shows just as much disparity.

[SIACfan]

28 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

First off the only bump Cathedral has is in the 4 class system that utilizes the classes in the team state.

 

Secondly, Mater Dei is an EXTREME outlier. I cannot emphasize that enough, if you include them in 1A they have 11% of the state qualifiers for 2 classes and 27% for 3 classes. For placers they have 17% in 2 classes and 52% in 3 classes. For champs it's 30% in 2 classes and only 100% for 3 classes.

 

Doing any sort of data analysis and including them in 1A basically invalidates the data. If you can't see that Mater Dei is an extreme outlier then this conversation is worthless. Burying your head in the sand and saying look at how great these numbers are because ONE team is pulling all the weight does not tell you what is going on. That is akin to your kids telling everyone that the family makes $X per year, when he contributes $20 a week on a paper route.

 

There is also a calculation with the top 5 and lowest 5 teams in each class removed and it shows just as much disparity.

 

I totally get that MD is an extreme outlier but when we are looking at numbers as they relate to enrollment size, you are screwing the numbers by not putting MD where they belong.

 

Plus since you are dropping the top 5 teams you eliminate them as an outlier. But the problem is since you include them in the large school set, you are leaving the 5th best large school in the data that should be dropped. Likewise, you are dropping the 6th best team from the small school group that should be left in. This happens because you are incorrectly placing MD.

 

It simply fits your narrative to place MD with the large schools. A proper & unbiased statistician would place them correctly & then drop them as an outlier but from the correct data base.

Edited January 8 by SIACfan

[Y2CJ41]

32 minutes ago, SIACfan said:

 

I totally get that MD is an extreme outlier but when we are looking at numbers as they relate to enrollment size, you are screwing the numbers by not putting MD where they belong.

 

Plus since you are dropping the top 5 teams you eliminate them as an outlier. But the problem is since you include them in the large school set, you are leaving the 5th best large school in the data that should be dropped. Likewise, you are dropping the 6th best team from the small school group that should be left in. This happens because you are incorrectly placing MD.

 

It simply fits your narrative to place MD with the large schools. A proper & unbiased statistician would place them correctly & then drop them as an outlier but from the correct data base.

I'm fine throwing them out completely. Having MD in the biggest class doesn't do much to the data in all honesty.

Per the link earlier I have removed them from 2 and 3 class calculations, the 4 class one is based off IHSWCA team state classifications so they are in 4A. The outliers remove them as one of the top 5 1A teams in a 2 class system.

[Galagore]

If this whole "just work hard and you can do it" attitude is valid for all schools, regardless of size, some people from some of these elite programs should start branching off to help grow and enhance the sport.

 

Supposedly we all care about the sport...put your money where your mouth is and come make a difference. Can you imagine how one would be lauded for taking a program like Culver Community and turning them into a school that consistently produces medals at the state tournament? First ballot hall of fame for sure. So...please come and show us.

 

This is not a sarcastic post. This is a genuine request/challenge from a guy who loves wrestling, loves his school, and has two sons who he wants to see have as much love for and success in the sport of wrestling as possible.

 

Interested parties, send me a private message.

[ReformedPoster]

IHSAA has no desire to class individual sports.  Until swimming, golf, track and tennis are classed, wrestling will remain one class.  For better or worse, this is what the IHSAA wants.

[Y2CJ41]

1 minute ago, ReformedPoster said:

IHSAA has no desire to class individual sports.  Until swimming, golf, track and tennis are classed, wrestling will remain one class.  For better or worse, this is what the IHSAA wants.

If the IHSAA decides to class all the sports would you be in agreement?

[ReformedPoster]

3 minutes ago, Y2CJ41 said:

If the IHSAA decides to class all the sports would you be in agreement?

I couldn't care less at this point.  Either do it or don't do it.  Makes no difference to me.  But it will be all or nothing with the individual sports

 

I do wonder if the swimming coaches association wants class swimming given the strangle hold that Carmel has on the girls side.

Edited January 8 by ReformedPoster

[Y2CJ41]

3 minutes ago, ReformedPoster said:

I couldn't care less at this point.  Either do it or don't do it.  Makes no difference to me.  But it will be all or nothing with the individual sports

 

I do wonder if the swimming coaches association wants class swimming given the strangle hold that Carmel has on the girls side.

The swimming coaches want two divisions, Carmel and everyone else.

[jonah7474]

On 1/7/2024 at 4:26 PM, blueandgold said:

DISCLAIMER: I am not arguing for or against class wrestling, this is just a general question.

 

I am curious as to why the thought of class wrestling is such a controversial topic in Indiana. The concept of “one state champion” is nice, but I don’t think any state with classed wrestling is hurt by the fact they have multiple state champions. In fact, they seem better because of it. I’m not here to provide data, just a firsthand experience in the class wrestling argument.

 

At the 2014 Disney Duals, Perry Meridian was going for their fourth straight national championship in Community Division I that also featured Avon, Brandon, Oregon Clay, and Penn… And all of those teams got beat soundly by Dakota, a junior-senior high school with 400 total students, located in northern Illinois. In Illinois, Dakota competes in class 1A, and they were led by four-time state champion, multiple-time high school All-American, and eventual four-time NCAA Division I tournament qualifier for Northern Iowa Josh Alber (who also beat the state’s four-time 3A champion in Jered Cortez in the finals of the Dvorak that season). That Dakota team was also nationally-ranked for the previous two seasons and was one of many Illinois teams nationally-ranked along with juggernauts Oak Park and River Forest High School and Carl Sandburg High School, and all three, along with many others, featured many Division I wrestlers and All-Americans.
 

The point I’m making is that multiple classes in Illinois didn’t make the in-state competition weaker overall, in fact, they got better and outperformed everyone nationally and remain relevant to the national wrestling scene. In addition, Michigan has four divisions, allows teammates to wrestle one another in the postseason, and are consistently better than Indiana, along with Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
 

So, I must ask, what is the big debacle about class wrestling?

I think we should do it. At one point, the NCAA was one division and they evolved. You can make that same case for other states. I coached in TN and I thought it worked out well. I don’t think it hurt the sport and I actually think it helped. 
 

Down there, Division 2 is for private schools because they openly recruit… no one cares because they are separate. Then you have big and small public schools and girls. Kids tend to stay in their area but you still have some that move to other schools. You can’t avoid that completely. 
 

There was not a lack of talent coming out of the state either… so it really comes down to one question… can folks in Indiana handle the change? Probably not. 

[Brandon Sandefur]

For the data folks if we go to even just 2 classes we are doubling the number of state qualifiers and we are in fact making it easier to get to state. 

 

If memory serves me correct Brownsburg wasn't knocking on the door every year until Darrick Snyder arrived.

 

New Castle, Rochester, Western and Delta all have guys that can win state and several larger schools might not even get a qualifier.  School size does matter but it doesn't guarantee success.

 

 

[Brandon Sandefur]

As for the parity argument, OH has 3 divisions and since 2000 St. Ed's and St. Paris Graham have won nearly all the titles in their respective divisions.  If it was combined it would be more competitive.

IL has a little more parity but not much it's the same group of tough programs trading titles every year.  Again I would argue by combining them it would be more competitive and provide more parity. 

If we classed Indiana Parris, Allred, Griffith monsters from 04-05 and Mater Dei guys would've had less challengers.  

[jets]

Has anyone ever thought to ask the actual wrestlers what they prefer?? 

[Galagore]

1 minute ago, jets said:

Has anyone ever thought to ask the actual wrestlers what they prefer?? 

 

No. For the same reason I don't ask my students if they prefer to have to pay attention in class. Doing what the kids want is a step backwards. As adults, we are supposed to do what is best for their development, not what they prefer.

[Galagore]

9 hours ago, Brandon Sandefur said:

For the data folks if we go to even just 2 classes we are doubling the number of state qualifiers and we are in fact making it easier to get to state. 

 

If memory serves me correct Brownsburg wasn't knocking on the door every year until Darrick Snyder arrived.

 

New Castle, Rochester, Western and Delta all have guys that can win state and several larger schools might not even get a qualifier.  School size does matter but it doesn't guarantee success.

 

 

 

What about this has anything to do with data? Of course it will be easier to get to state if we have two classes. No one is disputing that. @Thor said it best - small schools and small school wrestlers aren't even playing the same game as large schools.

[Brandon Sandefur]

I brought it up because you guys have 2 pages on this thread where you're using various data to support your position, I'm simply doing the same to support my position.   

Small schools are still playing the same game and are trying to get to the same state finals.  Yes there are challenges with a smaller school population I simply don't believe in re aligning sectionals, adding wrestlebacks or classing wrestling for no other reason to simply qualify more kids to state. 

By that logic Delta and Rochester shouldn't have the Ws they have but they do. 

 

[blueandgold]

10 hours ago, Brandon Sandefur said:

For the data folks if we go to even just 2 classes we are doubling the number of state qualifiers and we are in fact making it easier to get to state. 

 

If memory serves me correct Brownsburg wasn't knocking on the door every year until Darrick Snyder arrived.

 

New Castle, Rochester, Western and Delta all have guys that can win state and several larger schools might not even get a qualifier.  School size does matter but it doesn't guarantee success.

 

 

You’re not making it easier to get to state, though. Keep in mind, our semi-state level guys are likely state caliber wrestlers considering we’re the only state in the U.S. with a four stage tournament series. As I pointed out earlier, most states, including the ones who are better than us, have three stages that look like some combination of district, regionals, and state with full consolation rounds to ensure the best get to state. Indiana has an extra level without consolations, so a lot of your best wrestlers are getting stopped there. I’m not saying it should be easy to qualify, that’s where consolations come in, but our tournament is flawed and we’re not showing our depth. A lot of those small schools get swallowed up at SS.

[Y2CJ41]

3 minutes ago, Brandon Sandefur said:

I brought it up because you guys have 2 pages on this thread where you're using various data to support your position, I'm simply doing the same to support my position.   

Small schools are still playing the same game and are trying to get to the same state finals.  Yes there are challenges with a smaller school population I simply don't believe in re aligning sectionals, adding wrestlebacks or classing wrestling for no other reason to simply qualify more kids to state. 

By that logic Delta and Rochester shouldn't have the Ws they have but they do. 

 

Indiana has the second lowest percentage of state qualifiers only behind California. Overall, Indiana has the lowest number of state qualifiers of any state. 

 

What you call easier, others call leveling the playing field. 

 

More kids having success in the sport won't hurt the sport at all. More qualifiers for state means more kids get to experience a great ending to their season/career. There is a line you cross when you have too many classes or qualifiers. Luckily our state association has not gone crazy with classes even in the team sports at this time.

[blueandgold]

10 hours ago, Brandon Sandefur said:

As for the parity argument, OH has 3 divisions and since 2000 St. Ed's and St. Paris Graham have won nearly all the titles in their respective divisions.  If it was combined it would be more competitive.

IL has a little more parity but not much it's the same group of tough programs trading titles every year.  Again I would argue by combining them it would be more competitive and provide more parity. 

If we classed Indiana Parris, Allred, Griffith monsters from 04-05 and Mater Dei guys would've had less challengers.  

You could say that about Indiana right now. Classing has nothing to do with it. For the past three years it’s been Brownsburg and Crown Point playing hot potato at Team and IHSAA State. In Illinois 3A, right now the dogs are East and Mount Carmel, but some years ago, it was Carl Sandburg, Montini, and Oak Park-River Forest. For a better look at parity, look at Indiana’s performance at high school national tournaments over the past year, then go look at the two states you mentioned plus Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania, and then go look at the data about how many NCAA Qualifiers and All-Americans are from those states, and then look at their classes… A lot of these kids from other states are outperforming us, regardless if they’re big or small class, and their numbers are typically pretty good.

 

[blueandgold]

14 minutes ago, Brandon Sandefur said:

I brought it up because you guys have 2 pages on this thread where you're using various data to support your position, I'm simply doing the same to support my position.   

Small schools are still playing the same game and are trying to get to the same state finals.  Yes there are challenges with a smaller school population I simply don't believe in re aligning sectionals, adding wrestlebacks or classing wrestling for no other reason to simply qualify more kids to state. 

By that logic Delta and Rochester shouldn't have the Ws they have but they do. 

 

I understand you’re preaching equality, but small schools need equity.

[SIACfan]

1 hour ago, Galagore said:

 

What about this has anything to do with data? Of course it will be easier to get to state if we have two classes. No one is disputing that. @Thor said it best - small schools and small school wrestlers aren't even playing the same game as large schools.

 

I have never tried to claim that small schools are on equal footing as large schools. In fact I have tried to explain the exact opposite.

 

To think a school "A" with 100 students can field 14 wrestlers that can stack up against the 14 wrestlers from school "B" with 1,000 students is nonsensical. But it is logical that for every 10 state qualifiers that school "B" produces, school "A" should be able to produce 1.

 

The problem is that it is hard for you small school guys to accept that on an individual basis, you should only have 1/10th the individual success of a school 10 times your size.

 

Now the reality is some schools way out perform their numbers. But that is mostly the result of coaching, community support for the sport & proximity to these elite wrestling clubs.

 

Once again, I am not against classing wrestling. I am merely trying to explain why it is logical & should be expected (on an individual basis) that the majority of qualifiers, placers & champs come from the majority of the student population.

 

Now can classing wrestling help grow the sport & develop strong wrestling tradition at more small schools? Perhaps, but it is also possible that the same few small schools with an already strong tradition will simply dominate, & not much will change in the overall growth of the sport in our state.

[Brandon Sandefur]

blueandgold I respect your enthusiasm but I do disagree and think equity is code for equality of outcome not opportunity.  I am very much against equality of outcome but very supportive of opportunity.

 

I don't think classing would eliminate our lack of parity throughout the state in fact I think it would further it by eliminating competition.  There seems to be a widespread belief that if we class the small schools would get better.   I don't believe that's the case without community support, great coaches and financial support.

 

I do concede that Indiana has been much more competitive nationally and even internationally with a lot of ticket rounders that are very tough. 

 

Y2CJ41 in the spirit of debate if we had single class and 32 state qualifiers would that level the playing field?  Essentially the ticket round is 1st round of semi state and guys in semis go for 1st and 3rd just like now and quarters losers go by how the guy they lost to advances. 

[jets]

4 hours ago, Galagore said:

 

No. For the same reason I don't ask my students if they prefer to have to pay attention in class. Doing what the kids want is a step backwards. As adults, we are supposed to do what is best for their development, not what they prefer.

?? Seems to be kind of a dangerous/arrogant way of thinking?? "I'm the adult in the room so I know best!" 

 

Granted, adults/professionals should make the decision - but has anyone stopped and considered what the athletes that are actually competing want/desire?? Maybe they like the idea of 1 champion per weight class ?? (Even though "we adults" realize this is a stupid concept??) 

[Galagore]

1 hour ago, jets said:

?? Seems to be kind of a dangerous/arrogant way of thinking?? "I'm the adult in the room so I know best!" 

 

Granted, adults/professionals should make the decision - but has anyone stopped and considered what the athletes that are actually competing want/desire?? Maybe they like the idea of 1 champion per weight class ?? (Even though "we adults" realize this is a stupid concept??) 

 

If you think allowing students to decide whether or not they should pay attention in class is dangerous, then my guess is you and I are not going to have a productive conversation.