Jump to content

Westforkwhite

Gorillas
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    293

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Articles

Coach

Teams

Team History

Wrestlers

Wrestler Accomplishments

Dual Results

Individual Results

Team Rankings

Individual Rankings Master

Individual Ranking Detail

Tournament Results

Brackets

College Signings

Media

State Bracket Year Info

Team Firsts and Lasts

Family History

Schedule-Main

Schedule-Details

Team History Accomplishments

Current Year Dual Results

Current Year Tournament Results

Forums

Events

Store

Downloads

Everything posted by Westforkwhite

  1. Westforkwhite
    Everyone on the class side is up in arms about the couple percentage point gap for 1A to achieve their proportionate share. But class wrestling would mean that 11% of the athletes get 1/3 of the medals, and 63% would get 33% of the total medals. If we are concerned with 2-3% gap on 1A why doesn't it bother you we'd have a 30% inequity in 3A? If we perceive the current status of 1A medals an injustice, how could we perceive the 30% gap that would be created for 3A any differently?
  2. Westforkwhite
    But the largest gains in participation from your example are coming from 2A and 3A. In your example (using avg 1A school size of 350) that would constitute 1750 total 1A participants. Lets say there are 1200 wrestlers in 1A(this may be low) that would yield about 550 new wrestlers. Which means that you expect 650 wrestlers to be added to 2A & 3A, which is more than you would expect to add to 1A. Most (if not all) of the multi class discussion centers around the perceived inequity to 1A schools. Yet even in your example you cite the potential for greater gains in 2A & 3A. Doesn't it make sense to shift the argument to how multi class would impact the schools containing 88% of our student population, as opposed to spending 99% of our time talking about 11%?
  3. Westforkwhite
    Only listed the states used in the spreadsheet I attached. MO however didn't have their historical tournament information posted to their MSHSAA website, nor could I find a complete listing of past tournaments elsewhere. If you have additional info on the years and classes for MO, please share.
  4. Westforkwhite
    I still don't that experience or that it could and would happen elsewhere. My real question is how many schools can we realistically expect to field 20% or more of their available boys on the wrestling team. This takes an enormous time commitment(as you well know), that simply having a kid medal at state won't replace. Its relish on the hotdog, without having the hotdog first the relish only contributes so much
  5. Westforkwhite
    Very true, but you tend to dismiss these teams as anomalies when they are brought up as disproving that 1A teams can't compete. So now to hold them out as the rule rather than the exception as it relates to participation seems contradictory.
  6. Westforkwhite
    The goal behind this topic was to discuss exposure, and it seems we've digressed (myself included). So to redirect I'd like to ask the question... Can anyone put forth a solid argument that multi class wrestling won't help exposure? As it seems this topic strongly favors class wrestling.
  7. Westforkwhite
    25-30 in a school of 500 is excellent. Heck 15-20 is very good. And you were able to have success in a single class environment that drove participation. Albeit you would have had more success in a multi class system, but would that have translated into numbers greater than 25-30 than they've achieved in the single class format? My point is that 25 wrestlers in a school of 500 means that 1 in 10 boys are on the wrestling team, those are astronomical numbers. Example: If Penn is getting 10% of their boys to wrestle they have 150 kids on the team. We know Penn has huge numbers, but they are nowhere near this mark. So I'm struggling with the expectation that 1A schools will all be filling their rooms with the success they've had in multi class. I just can't see that many 1A schools being able to recruit 25 kids, class environment or otherwise. Lets say 30 of the 100 1A schools all got a 5 wrestler bump from class wrestling. That would yield us 150 more wrestlers in the state. And would represent a gain of 3% of the available boys in the school. (avg school size 350) Or even 30 of the 100 1A schools got a 10 wrestler bump, we'd be talking 300 new wrestlers (gaining 6% of the available boys) So depending on where you started 10 kids (6%) or 15 kids (9%) 20 kids (12%) you could be looking at nearly 20% of the the schools boys involved in wrestling. I know there are schools that have these types of numbers but I just can't expect this will replicate on a mass scale.
  8. Westforkwhite
    I think there is very real potential for this. We certainly see it in our surrounding states. I'm not sure this is the worst thing though, providing class wrestling created benefits in quantity and quality, we could probably live with it
  9. Westforkwhite
    All very logical anecdotal evidence. But how big of a jump in numbers could we expect from the 1A schools? How many kids would you expect class wrestling to add to the total number of wrestlers in 1A (varsity & jv)? Would it be 100, 200, 500, 1000? We should be measuring the health of the sport by total kids wrestling in IN HS(7300), not on which schools are having success.
  10. Westforkwhite
    I see the potential benefit for them and others, don't get me wrong, but they seem to see it differently. It's quite possible they are in the minority among their 1A peers in feeling that way, but they are also in the minority of 1A schools in terms of their commitment to the sport. I don't know if there is a correlation, but there might be.
  11. Westforkwhite
    I think what you are suggesting could be true, and I would bet there would be a few programs that would benefit. However in all the anecdotal examples provided by you and others at small schools, they have one thing in common, they cared about wrestling. If a tree falls and there is no one there.... Just the same with additional placement opportunities created by class would fall on mostly on deaf ears at 1A schools. It won't go unheard at places like Prarie Hgts or Shenandoah, but interestingly enough they have shown mostly opposition towards class. So if the schools that stand to reap the greatest placing benefits from multi class are against, who are we really advocating for? I would argue its schools that largely don't care as much about wrestling, which won't have the expected impact of driving real gains in participation statewide.
  12. Westforkwhite
    Tha That fails the fairness sniff, but it it's very logical from an exposure perpestive.
  13. Westforkwhite
    but that wasn't your question/statement. You insinuated there should be an equal chance to make/place at state, and I disagree for the multitude of factors that make those wrestlers different (and of course their probability as male students at the school are near equal to their 3A counterparts)
  14. Westforkwhite
    I don't think even the most staunch of single class guys would argue that class wrestling caused this dropoff. There is a lot of other things going on from a societal perspective. I wonder if consolidation played a factor? I know OH hasn't gone as consolidation crazy as we did in the 60's and 70's, but maybe that plays a role?
  15. Westforkwhite
    Does Johnny JV who makes the varsity spot via injury have an equal chance of qualifying/placing as Joe Lee? Does a swimmer have an equal chance just because they entered the race?
  16. Westforkwhite
    Here are the participation rates (population/not students) Example: IN has 7300 wrestlers in HS, and a population of 6.6M thus the participation rate is = .114% State 1976 1989 2006 2015 California 0.122% 0.072% 0.065% 0.068% Florida 0.074% 0.055% 0.042% 0.041% Georgia 0.132% 0.069% 0.079% 0.082% Illinois 0.193% 0.136% 0.121% 0.117% Indiana 0.223% 0.178% 0.129% 0.114% Iowa 0.431% 0.263% 0.241% 0.218% Kansas 0.207% 0.182% 0.191% 0.171% Michigan 0.199% 0.113% 0.119% 0.095% Minnesota 0.318% 0.168% 0.149% 0.149% Missouri 0.257% 0.143% 0.118% 0.112% New Jersey 0.191% 0.135% 0.099% 0.109% New York 0.102% 0.074% 0.067% 0.069% Ohio 0.293% 0.153% 0.115% 0.096% Pennsylvania 0.263% 0.132% 0.070% 0.077% Washington 0.261% 0.179% 0.131% 0.106% Wisconsin 0.437% 0.169% 0.135% 0.124% As you can see we are 3rd out of 16 in terms of rate of participation from the general populous. Outpacing OH, PA, NJ & NY in terms rate of participation.
  17. Westforkwhite
    I took the data for 16 states from the NFHS report and added to an excel document. I added the state populations to a few respective years to demonstrate the participation rate. (Ideally I would have used HS enrollment #s but unfortunately I couldn't track them down for all states, and wanted to have uniform data to compare) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HNBS484FDpdlZkoTzRwNW3A5whhDcaxSDx8n4l4KeCE/edit?usp=sharing
  18. Westforkwhite
    Population of OH has increased since 1976, but I couldn't find exact #s on how many kids were in grades 9-12 looking backwards.
  19. Westforkwhite
    There are years missing from the data in 69-76, and I couldn't find any data prior. It would be interesting to see. OH and PA 30K wrestlers back in 76 and now PA has 9K and OH has 11K.
  20. Westforkwhite
    1) False, when would this ever be true? Even with the exact same environment, room size and coaching they will not be equal because each kid is different. 2) True 3) True, but you seem to expect that the # of students shouldn't matter as it relates to equal representation in qualifiers or placers 4) True, but with exception of the placers being slightly below their expected average, they are experiencing a fair environment. Unless you expect 11% to have 33% of the success. Why doesn't anyone want to discuss the impacts of multi class wrestling on 2A or 3A schools? We spend all our time talking about 11%, and zero time talking about the 89%. We are never going to be able to have much impact on the total participation numbers while ignoring the 88%. The best case scenario for gains in 1A is a 300-400 new wrestlers, whereas if we could put forth initiatives that help participation in 2A & 3A we have potential to add a 1K or more to our totals. It doesn't require a mathematics degree to see that no matter how much you squeeze you'll never get as much juice from an orange 1/8 the size. Maybe class wrestling helps both? But there is little to no discussion.
  21. Westforkwhite
    I tend to agree with this statement. I however don't have the experience dealing with College Coaches that many of the posters on the board do, but I'm not seeing much of an argument against it.
  22. Westforkwhite
    Which is more important - Having more wrestlers competing in HS wrestling at all size levels in IN? or Having fewer forfeits at the 1A level?
  23. Westforkwhite
    This negates the number of students a respective wrestler must compete against to gain a varsity spot. You don't have the same chance of making the varsity spot at 3A that you do in 1A, so therefore the chances of being an entrant in the tournament goes up exponential at a smaller school.
  24. Westforkwhite
    Probability dictates that this would be true.
  25. Westforkwhite
    How do you see multi class wrestling helping our kids get recognized and recruited by Colleges? Or let everyone know why you feel it would hurt Exposure?
×
×
  • 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.