KarlHungus
-
Posts
5,698 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
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 KarlHungus
-
Plenty of elite wrestlers wrestle in their state's smallest division....the doomsday prophecy holds no water.
-
....and practice partners and coaching and access to off-season training
-
Skills are learned ability. Should have nothing to do with enrollment numbers
-
If it is a skill that can be learned, the 14 for for Busco should be able to be as skilled as Carroll.
-
If being a qualifier or skill based and not genetics or numbers dependent, there have to be other factors that cause the huge disparity in the number of qualifiers/placers.
-
Small school kids must do 2-3 sports or sports die. I can't think of one example in 22 years of coaching where a kid was forced or pressured to play a sport they didn't want to. That's a recipe for disaster.
-
Why? If the student population doesn't matter for one individual, why should it matter for 14 individuals?
-
Being a complete troll here but I agree. It would seem that some outside the box thinking might be needed.
-
And we are saying that the IHSAA should recognize what most other states recognized 40 years ago and class all sports to keep them alive. If kids at small schools "make the same sacrifices" to become state level wrestlers, they stop participating in other sports. This kills programs.
-
A state champ does not make a program....I can attest to this.
-
If you feel you are being "ripped", I am sorry, that is not my intention. The working hard point might be a legitimate point of confusion. I have always defended the hard working small school kid with the understanding that that kid is much more likely to be working hard at 1 or 2 other sports while still trying to get in as much off season wrestling as possible. Is he working 365 on wrestling...no. Is he working hard....yes. It would obviously be an easier tournament. That should go without saying. But that is not the reason for classing sports. Keeping the sport alive is the reason.
-
I am saying I want a state tournament that recognizes the inequity in the current set up and attempts to level the playing field. The hardest working small school kids are still going to be the one's rewarded, whether they are working 365 on wrestling or working 365 on 3 sports. I feel that if most small schools adopted the 365 mentality, it would be a death blow to most small school programs. I am willing to sacrifice the advantages of a one class system to ensure that wrestling is healthy at all schools.
-
Yes. This is not to say they don't work hard. But a much higher percentage are working at 1 or 2 other sports and are unable to go 365 at wrestling. Other states have recognized this and classed all their sports. It is your claim that all individuals are equal. If that is the case then the numbers of qualifiers should reflect this.
-
Why are you looking at overall student population. If there are no advantages to the individual then every Busco entrant into the state tournament should have an equal chance as every Carroll entrant and the numbers should reflect this.
-
This is why the current state tournament is flawed. Larger enrollments naturally give you more kids that will adopt the specialization mindset. Other states have come to the logical conclusion that it is best for ALL sports to class because of this.
-
It is simple if you have a staff and kids that can give 300+ days a year. This not realistic for most small school staffs or kids. That is why the question was relevant.
-
1. Marginal. Still benefits larger schools disproportionately 2. Marginal. Does very little for the smaller programs. 3. Marginal. Maybe a few. 4. Numbers unlikely to go up at smaller programs 5. Unlikely. Smaller school teams would not have any more success and the marginal number of small school increases would have limited effect. No....simply increasing the number would not have much of an effect. I would guess that classing cross country, track and wrestling would be easier than having 32 at state.
-
The numbers don't support your first sentence. I trust the data more than your opinion. But just for kicks...What percentage of your semi-state qualifiers have qualified for state? Yes you are shifting the goalposts. You have done it throughout this thread. Your last sentence continues the theme of logical inconsistency. You have stated that a classed team tournament has helped you recruit kids....are these just the dumb Busco kids? Smart kids would realize that it is a classed tournament and your team success comes only because it is now classed?
-
Shifting the goalposts again. You said 75-80% have a realistic shot at being a state qualifier and then use silly examples trying to prove your point. And now you are saying at least semi state. You seem fixated on state qualifiers but a classed individual tournament would also give you more sectional champs, regional qualifiers, etc, etc. The same logic that allows you to recruit for a classed team tournament would help you recruit for a classed individual tournament.
-
You said 75-80% have a realistic shot at being a state qualifier. And then you use your heavy being a regional qualifier as an example of someone who "had a chance". Do you not see the silliness?
-
You are making up your own criteria again. I noted that your claim that a team state tournament helps you recruit and a class individual tournament is not logical. You twist it into talking about state qualifiers. It is a state tournament....Busco would have more individual sectional champs, regional qualifiers, semi state qualifiers, and occasional state qualifiers. Instant gratification for some, more realistic long term possibilities for others. A win, win. Come to the dark side of logical consistency. 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. Yes 4. Yes
-
A classed team tournament helps you recruit more athletes to your program. A classed individual tournament would not help you recruit. Does not compute.....
-
If the purpose of high school sports was to entertain the average fan, you would get no argument from me. I just don't think that is the purpose of HS sports.
-
Not true....the data shows that kids entering the tournament from larger schools have significant advantages.
-
You are shifting the goalposts with the highlighted statement. It is yet another logical fallacy. The point being debated is whether individuals at schools with higher enrollments have an advantage. The data clearly shows they do. State high school athletic associations for decades have classed high school sports for that reason and that reason alone.
