GrecoCoach

The IHSAA does flip flop. When team state first started, the coaches association asked if they could keep the individual score. The IHSAA said yes. Then years later used that in their reasons to drop it. There are many discrepancies with IHSAA rulings, decisions, and information. Anyone that has tried to track weight loss plans and Sectional seeding has seen it. The people in charge of our sport don't understand our sport. They've never wrestled or coached wrestling. And it's unfortunate that they refuse to listen to any suggestions that aren't their own ideas. The coaches association can propose anything they want, but if the IHSAA hasn't already decided to do it, then it will get voted down 0-18.

At 160, Warren (PM) & Ruberg can't both qualify - They wrestle in the ticket round. If you meant Warren Central (Herrick), he has Bane in the ticket round. Rough draws in a tough weight class.

Here's a qualifying idea I've been tinkering with in my rare free time the past year. NOTE: It is not an official proposal, just an idea. And it is not completely finished. Nobody is going to hurt my feelings if you think it's terrible - It's just the start of an idea, that's it. IHSWCA Team State Duals Qualification Idea The Idea Use 2 weekends in December to select specific dual meet events as “Team State Qualifiers”. These would simply be normal 6-ways, 8-ways, 10-ways, or whatever the host school chooses to do within certain guidelines (listed below). Any team that wants to try to qualify for that season’s IHSWCA Team State Duals can participate by joining one of these qualifying events. The event’s team champion automatically qualifies and would be required to attend the team state duals in January. Qualifying Event Guidelines 1. All teams in the event must be in the same class (3A, 2A, or 1A) 2. The event must be a dual meet format where a team champion is crowned from head-to-head competition. 3. Host schools must follow one of the IHSWCA pre-approved formats or submit an alternate format for approval. 4. Host schools cannot refuse teams based on ability (too good or too bad). The purpose is to be all inclusive, so violations would result in a loss of “qualifying event” status. 5. Host schools organize and pay for all officials and hospitality but also keep all revenue. 6. Teams are only allowed to enter 1 qualifying event. 7. Only 1st string Varsity A teams are allowed to be entered. (No Varsity B teams) 8. The Benefits · Qualification for team state would be based on current season’s team. · Every team that wants to try to qualify will have a chance to do so. · 2 possible weekends helps teams avoid Conference, County, or other special events. · Teams can choose to stay close to home or travel farther for a better chance of qualifying. · Nearby teams can separate to different events to give both a chance to qualify. · Creates more excitement at regular weekend events with more on the line than just a trophy. · Before Winter Break, the teams will have qualified for the Team State Duals. · The Needs · 36 events over 2 weeks (12 events per class) · A selection process to determine who will host the events (3 per class per semi state?) · Maximum average of 9 schools per event if every school chooses to participate · Likely only 6-ways or 8-ways are needed · Team State Duals would need to be scheduled in advance away from all holiday tournaments · IHSWCA Responsibilities · Manage the schedule of 36 events. · Host schools do all the leg work (officials, teams, etc.) · Oversee & intervene in any reports of abuse by host schools ·

It's been a few years, so that proposal is long gone from my records. It was basically a Saturday, 1 or 2 weeknight duals, then the finals on the next Saturday. By IHSAA rules, it would have eaten up 6 out of 18 weigh-in points since it wasn't consecutive days. If the IHSAA were to host it as a post season, it would work. Shorten individual state to 3 weeks (combine sectionals & regionals). Then the 2 Saturdays only cut into the regular season by 1 week. Conferences and ADs will move around events for the IHSAA, but not for the IHSWCA. Lots of things would have to fall into place for it to work. The IHSAA would have to be willing to organize it. And the IHSAA would have to be willing to crown their team champion before all the individual post season is finished. (They don't do that.) The old team state format failed because it was at the same time as the individual post season, so coaches made choices that pissed off the IHSAA.

I gave my opinion on both questions. You want my direct answers, fine. Every IHSAA member school that enters Sectionals should be included, even if it's only 1 or 2 kids. Yes it's stupid, but fair. Just be glad I don't get a vote. I have never been to the IHSWCA Team State so I cannot state what specific improvements would make the event better. When the event was first being developed, I submitted a written proposal for an all-in series where schools could choose to participate or not. It was discussed and deemed not logistically feasible without a weigh-in exemption from the IHSAA.

That's not really my decision. That line was already drawn, and the people in charge voted not to change it. The ideal event would be IHSAA sponsored, classed, all-in duals from start to finish (not just sectional champs), and separate from the individual post season. Bracket tournament of duals on a Saturday, one weeknight dual on Wednesday, then team state the next Saturday. It would take lots of organizing to make it happen, so the IHSAA would have to be in charge of it and give it the ultimate creditbility.

So let's exclude 41 schools so that a couple of others can be bumped down a class and qualify? What is really better for the overall growth of wrestling in the state? What other "rules" can we add to exclude teams with no chance of qualifying? How about if a team gets beat 80-0 or worse during the season, they don't get included either? They aren't going to qualify this year. Why include them when some other team could drop a class and qualify? When lines get drawn, people are going to push it one way or the other to help themselves. Those in charge just need to keep the big picture and ultimate goal in mind.

Joe, I'll ask again - How does excluding teams help their programs grow? Why can't a team with 5 or 6 solid young wrestlers see how they compare? A coach could use that as motivation to say "See how we did with just a few guys - let's get more guys so we can do even better." If you're concerned with the data managers wasting their time calculating scores for teams with no chance, don't you think they would have complained if it was really a problem? I've done it for them. With the spreadsheets they've created, it's not too difficult to do.

I completely understand the rationale behind this since teams with less than 7 wrestlers cannot win a dual against a full team. However, that's for this season. The event is for next season. A team with 6 successful young wrestlers could very likely fill most of the weight classes the next season and be competitive. The only benefit of not counting teams with less than 7 wrestlers at Sectionals is that bigger schools will be bumped down to the lower classes. A couple of different teams would qualify for the event, a couple others wouldn't qualify. The downfall is that we're telling struggling programs that they don't count. Doesn't that go against the purpose of classing the event? How does excluding teams help their programs grow?

All IHSWCA member coaches have an opportunity to nominate Juniors and Seniors for Academic All-State. This year, all nominations will be done through email. The deadline to submit nominations is February 9th. Information & Criteria: Click Here IHSWCA Membership: Click Here Questions can be directed to IHSWCA Executive Director JD Minch - jsaminch123@sbcglobal.net

Hartman was a senior and won state that year. Humphrey was a freshman who wrestled up a weight at 112 and was a state qualifier. I don't know if there was ever an official wrestle off between the two.

Couldn't North America also include Cuba, Dominican Republic, etc? (Geography was never my strongest subject and for a few reasons I haven't been keeping up on current events)

If you are involved with multiple clubs, not counting Warsaw, then you should have multiple opportunities to receive information. The coaching card and athlete card are not from ISWA - you got those directly from USAW. I agree that you should receive important information. If Warsaw eventually grows and becomes a club, then you'll get monthly newsletters of information. Until then, you could be resourceful to get it.

Where does your wrestler practice?

AAU Wrestling hasn't been around in over 25 years. The AAU organization had documented corruption spanning many, many years. At least the ISWA (which is part of USAW) tries to be as open as it can, short of personally calling over 9000 wrestlers. Sure it has made some questionable decisions, but they have always been what the Board of Directors (~30 volunteers) have felt was best for Indiana wrestling at the time. Making changes and trying different things usually gets complaints and causes unforeseen problems. I trust that the ISWA will continue to learn from mistakes and make improvements like it normally does. The ISWA is club-based organization. They send out information every month to each club's representative. That representative is responsible for passing along the information to the club's coaches and members. If your rep isn't doing that, then find out who it is and request that he/she share it each month. Or better yet, become more involved in your local wrestling club's organization.

If it was evenly distributed perfectly, there would be exactly 9 (of the 36) from each semistate. 7 is pretty darn close to that, so I'm not sure where the complaint is coming from. The system in place guarantees every semistate is at least represented in each class, but it also gives equal chances for teams to earn their way into the tournament to balance it out as much as it should be. Y2's post above shows that upping it to 2 auto bids per semistate would only include 1 team per class that didn't qualify or get voted in. (not sure why the voted in spots would have been different, Joe)

If your small school has the facilities to be able to host this kind of event, then consider yourself very lucky. I am at one of the newest buildings/schools in central Indiana that is also really big (6A in football). My 2 gyms combined can barely fit 10 mats with almost no seating. My aux gym only has a few portable bleachers, and my main gym can only hold 3 mats with seating or 4 mats with 1/4 the seating. Schools simply don't have the mega-arenas that used to be built. The problem isn't about not wanting to host it. The problem is having the facilities to do so. I agree with Y2 that holding this in the right type of arena could make or break the event's popularity and growth. It would be nice to have a centrally located place that's consistent every year, but until that is found, it will have to float around a bit. The IHSWCA isn't out to screw anyone, and I'm sure they are open to all kinds of new ideas to help the event in the future.

Anyone else find it odd that the picture in the rules article shows an illegal starting position?

How about #bump?

Yes he can, maybe Wrestlers are allowed to change weight classes as long as there is a spot there for our state. States are limited to 4 wrestlers per weight class and those who qualify through USAW Regionals don't count in that number. So if he wants to drop a weight class for Fargo, that new weight class would need an opening for him to do so. It's usually an option, but sometimes it's already full.

I've stated in this thread that I am for class wrestling. I fully acknowledge that big schools have an unfair advantage in many ways. Joe's stats assume all schools start equal when they clearly don't.

Let's make the starting point state. Sample size of 224 wrestlers. Hey! 100% of 1A wrestlers qualified for state. I know. Ridiculous. We can pick any starting point we want and we have different opinions on what it should be. My opinion remains that if you argue practice partners are important then they should be included in the starting point. Also, we've all had JV kids in our line up for sectionals due to illness, skin infections, grades, whatever. All JV are eligible up to Sectional entry list and then only 28 are eligible up until weigh ins of sectional. This is available with the NWCA body fat data. The IHSAA posts total participants for each sport every year. If I didn't have so many kids at home, I'd do it myself.

Did you just say you don't care about JV kids? If you're arguing that big schools have better practice partners then you should include JV numbers as the starting point of your statistics. You also cannot count forfeits as sectional entries, so many small schools do not start with the same number as big schools. Use the most accurate starting point for your stats. It will still prove your point, just not as extreme.

We used to get 2-3 proposals through every year until we took the IHSAA's advice to focus on just a couple we felt were the most important. After that we've rarely gotten even one to pass. They were tired of listening to 20 proposals but at least we continued to get little steps passed towards better things. Maybe we should go back to lots of proposals knowing only a couple will pass each time.