Jump to content

Super_Fan

Gorillas
  • Posts

    126
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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

Posts posted by Super_Fan

  1. "Money for college."  I keep hearing this same argument.

     

    When did college wrestling programs get flush with cash and become revenue generators for their athletic departments?  

     

    Am I missing something?

    Even if they don't receive any money at all just by getting the chance to wrestle in college might be what helps get that kid through school... I know if it wasn't for sports in high school I probably wouldn't have ever made good enough grades to get into college...

     

    Now whether college is right for that kid or not is a whole different topic of discussion... Lots of kids take on huge amounts of debt just to go to college and it ends up hurting them even more in the long run.

  2. Why does it matter if you guys think the tournament would be watered down? You aren't wrestling, the kids are! If it increases their chance of wrestling in college, let's do it. You're trying to limit a kids chance of wrestling in college because of your stubborn old fashion preference. You'd rather watch a one class system than let kids get the chance to better themselves and their life in college. That's extremely selfish of you. The three class system is a need, data points to it regardless of your opinion

    But it doesn't...

     

     

    The quote you used said 3 time champ vs 1 time placer.  Then you changed it to 3 time champ vs. a 2 time placer.  Hard to follow when you aren't on the same page.

    Is it really THAT important? lol I get your point but you're searching for things here... I would say its the same thing as you guys putting out data for 3 classes yet arguing for a 2 class system...

     

    But in your humble opinion is this a true indicator of how good said "3-time champ" is on the next level? Because that's what this whole argument is geared towards, the next level, not high school competition.

     

    Is the University getting their "money's worth" on a 3-time 1A champion vs. a 2-time place winner on the 3A level? Which wrestler is better? For that matter, which "class" is better? Who is the better investment? How do you compare without like opponents?

    This is a solid point but the fact of the matter is that is up to the college recruiter to decide. (Thinking about the kids here...) Does it really matter? As long as it is another one of INDIANA's kids going to wrestle and not IL or PA. What if you have a DIII college there who can't offer athletic scholarships so most "GOOD" kids wouldn't want to attend there but they find a 1A kid who doesn't have any other offers and this is the one opportunity he has to go to college? This is how I could see more kids going to college to wrestle from a classed system. Yes I would agree most DI programs aren't going to be heavily recruiting 1A high school kids but maybe smaller schools will...

  3. He has provided mounds of data to support his claim.  It is not enough for someone to say, "Yeah, but what about this data?  I am not sure what the data is, but I am pretty sure it supports my point."  Once a person makes a statement like that the burden of proof is on him/her.

     

    Haha, that's rich:}

    I do believe I am the reason you got that little nickname...

  4. I am definitely for, and here are my replies to your considerations:

     

    1. I totally agree, those should be classed provided that the sports have enough participating schools.

    2. Correct

    3. If you have numbers you think people should see, feel free to run them.  Why is it always up to Y2 to run everyone's numbers?

    4. Also, correct.

    I gotta get faster at replying....

     

    It's not always up to Joe. I leave it up to you MR. MATH! :)

  5. Well one could say that those kids from 3A schools have more experience being "under the lights" or in high pressure situations. Their schedules are certainly more difficult than most 1A schools thus they get more experience wrestling in big tournaments with lots of pressure on the line and many more fans in the stands.

     

    Having this experience could be the difference between making the right strategic decision with 20 secs left in the match compared to a kid who doesn't have the experience of wrestling those high pressure matches.

  6. I would argue that for any prospective wrestler, no matter what size school they are attending, the chances are about equal. A kid at a big school has to get through 2-3 wrestlers at his weight just to make varsity. At a 1A school (with only a few exceptions) a kid who has never wrestled can walk right on and get a varsity spot. So should that kid have an equal chance of making state as the kid that beat out 3 kids for the spot?

     

    I will concede the class argument has a great deal more merit when it relates to placers. 1A's at a rate of less than half the student populations, that doesn't suggest that their getting a completely fair shake. (but I still say the qualifier data suggests fairness)

     

    There are many very committed coaches at small schools, and they put obscene amounts of time into it, yet many of them still struggle to field full teams. Does class wrestling get them a full roster? (maybe it will help, but we don't have any real numbers on NY which is the only state which has recently changed from single to multi-class) It would be interesting to see what happened with not only small schools but the participation rates statewide. What has happened in the ten years since implementation? (are numbers up or down) This would be the closest to an apples to apples comparison as we could get and would give us the short-term and long term (10 year) perspective on how the changes have affected HS wrestling in the state.

    No the Forfeit data actually showed states with classed wrestling have about 1 more FF per team than we do in our single class system... There was another thread a while ago with all the data in it but classing actually hurt the overall participation rates...

  7. No they are doing it their own way... And like we discussed before actually have a worse FF % than we do here in our "horrible" single class system... So the classed system didn't in any way help participation % which is the whole idea of classing the sport... Yeah it helped the little schools but hurt the big schools and at the end of the day did more damage than good... So i see no point in shifting the pain from small schools to big schools just to cause even more harm to the sport in general...

  8. "Class wrestling" has only been around for four years...and that is in a non IHSAA sense.

    I mean "class wrestling" in the sense of people pushing to make it happen... They have been talking about this for years and nothing has ever came from it... Yet rather than try to compromise with a classed team dual and individual state tourney, they would rather stick with the my way or the highway type of thinking...

  9. How is Carmel an outlier? They have 10 state qualifiers in the six years of data I am using. The average per team over that span is 7 for two class and 8.5 for three class. That is NOT an outlier. They are almost spot on for the averages.

     

    Slight progress or major progress, what is better? We could conceivably affect 200-250 teams within a 3-5 year span by going to two classes. That makes a MAJOR impact on the sport.

    Ok well good luck with the change. I would take slight progress over the zero progress class wrestling has made over the last 10+ years...

  10. As stated earlier Mater Dei is an EXTREME example, they boost the 1A totals by 12% in a two class system and 23% in a 3 class system. In a 3 class system all other 1A schools have 125 state qualifiers, while Mater Dei has 37. I'll translate one school has 37, while the other 101 have 125 or just over an average of ONE! In a two class system the other 150 schools have an average of 1.58...while again Mater Dei has 37! That is almost 20 times the AVERAGE in two classes and 30 times the AVERAGE in three classes. 

     

    Here is a little definition of mathematical outlier

    http://www.mathwords.com/o/outlier.htm

     

    Team success will help, but there are only a couple of those each year...that help would only affect at most 10 schools. On the individual side we have usually between 90-100 schools at state each year. Add in another class we could conceiveably see 150-180 schools(or more) at the state finals. Instead of reaching 10 schools we are now reaching over half the schools in the state. That also doesn't include the schools that would have a few kids come close to state which would also be affected.

     

    I'd much rather affect 180 schools than 10 schools.

    Ok but did you not admit the Carmel was an outlier from the 3A class? Then why don't we include their stats in the 1A class since they are an outlier on the opposite end of the spectrum?

     

    I see where your coming from... But would you rather see slight progress towards your end game or none at all? Maybe by taking one small baby step and getting the IHSAA to take over the classed team state it will open their eyes to what classing the individual tourney would do... Because at this point in time, the same as it has been the last 10+ years, the IHSAA isn't going to make any big changes...

     

    I'm just trying to meet in the middle here find a way that all parties can be happy...

  11. Yeah it's always strange how they have "statistics" to back up their opinion but yet their "statistics" always add EMD to 3A and use a 3 class system when they are debating for a 2 class system...

     

    Why don't we continue what we already have? A classed dual tourney and an unclassed individual tourney?

     

    What is going to bring more kids into the room? When a school wins team state or when a single kid wins individual state?  I would venture to say a school would get much more publicity than an individual champion. Not to mention when the team wins all the kids get "rings" thus, giving more than just one individual, the experience of being a state champion. To me that will bring more new kids into wrestling rather than one of their friends winning state and getting a ring.

  12. Has everyone seen the updated Individual rankings ? Brownsburg has 10 ranked wrestlers . If they had 10 ranked wrestlers 1 week ago , nobody would of questioned their #2 seeding at team state . Well maybe we would of questioned why they are not seeded #1 . Hats off to coach Snyder , amazing what they have done in such a short time . And to RAJR , the team currently with the most ranked wrestlers , is the best team in the state . It's a fact that teams with 4,5,6 ranked wrestlers are not going to beat Brownburg or Warren with their 9-10 ranked . It was proven last weekend . 

    That's not how this works... That's not how any of this works...

  13. With regards to the financial issues holding the IHSWCA back from renting a larger facility, why don't they start a go fund me page or take donations yearly to help cover some of the costs? What about requiring the winning teams to participate in a fund raiser put on to raise funds for the next years team state? Or what about the IHSWCA providing special "attire" for team state so that the teams who wanted special gear for team state could purchase it through the IHSWCA and the IHSWCA could keep the profits off that? I'm just throwing out some ideas to help increase the funding.

  14. The program is going to be shockingly good for the foreseeable future... Most of the kids on the team have been wrestling since they started wearing diapers... I remember attending ISWA events when I was in high school and seeing these kids run around on the mat with a bottle in their mouths... It's nice to see their dedication pay off!

  15. I don't agree that they are allowing waivers, but I do agree w/ the process of growing at the grassroots level. They should have stuck to their guns, it would have dipped this year, more tourneys would have popped up next year, and growth would have been seen in 3-5 years. By allowing the waivers this process will be delayed by a year now. 

    By allowing waivers i think they are throwing up the white flag. Admitting the "RULE" was a mistake in the first place...

     

    They need to make it inclusive not exclusive...

×
×
  • 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.