Galagore
-
Posts
1,547 -
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 Galagore
-
We're on the same page, you and me. -
This is a really good point, but what alternative have we? If that is the logic of the advantage/disadvantage, then why do we class team state by school size? Shouldn't the money logic apply to the team as much as the individual?
-
If that's a huge concern with two classes, there's always Fargo, Flo Nationals VA Beach, Folkstyle state, etc.
-
This is the part I did not say, but you seem to attribute to me. No big deal if you were just speaking generally, then misunderstanding. Either way, we'll move on.
-
For someone who claims to have words put into their mouths, that is quite a doozy. But to your point, what about sports not being classed because life is not classed: Then why do we have different tax brackets for different levels of income? Why are some scholarships/grants/aid awarded based on financial need?
-
Our job as the adults is not to give the kids what they want, it’s to give them what’s best for them. That statement is not intended to be slanted either direction. If single class is best for them, then that’s why we should do it.
-
Yes, I do point that out as a response to people arguing that the percentage of students enrolled roughly matches the percentage of qualifiers and medal winners. I think if schools have 2 quality entries they should be allowed to enter both, even though I don't like it. It seems like it's more fair, even though it's not something that would make me happy. That would put my wrestlers in a more difficult situation than they are in now, which I would not like, however I think it would be more appropriate for the wrestling community as a whole.
-
You make a good point. You want single class because you like it, and that is not a reason that I think we should consider. I "like" watching and experiencing the single class tournament. I do not think a single class tournament is the best kind of tournament for state wrestling finals.
-
I have been to varsity meets with Penn's JV team. Yes, many years they have guys who could beat small school state qualifiers. Maybe not their whole lineup, even one guy per school of the top 20 biggest teams puts a pretty big dent in the small school number.
-
I do recognize that. I think, however that is justification for classing the individual tournament. Not justification against classing it. Because they are so much more likely to have the resources to produce elite wrestlers, they are playing a different game than the smallest half of the schools, which are far less likely to have such resources.
-
Also difficult when the club coach is the varsity head coach and one of two middle school coaches. Resources are the issue, and they become more likely to be the issue the smaller the school is. Doesn't mean that big schools are never short on resources, doesn't mean small schools are never flush with resources. Just means that as the school gets smaller, the likelihood that resources also gets smaller grows.
-
This here is where we disagree. I think if even the top 20 teams were allowed to entries per weight at sectional, that would dramatically reduce the number of small-school qualifiers.
-
Do you think that if schools got 28 entries into the state tournament the number of small school qualifiers would go up, go down, or stay about the same?
-
If everyone has an equal shot, and the percentage of qualifiers should roughly reflect student population percentage, shouldn't the number of qualifiers from big and small schools be independent of the number of sectional entries? A big school should be able to enter as many as they want and the small schools should still have somewhere in the 9%-13% range of state qualifiers.
-
Do you think if we allowed 28 entries into sectional small school qualification numbers would go up, go down, or stay about the same? Sorry, somehow missed your reply to this in a previous post.
-
Do you think if schools were allowed multiple entrants into sectional the number of small school qualifiers would go up, go down, or stay about the same?
-
Do you think if schools were allowed multiple entrants into sectional the number of small school qualifiers would go up, go down, or stay about the same?
-
Do you think if schools were allowed multiple entrants into sectional the number of small school qualifiers would go up, go down, or stay about the same?
-
No one wants to tackle this one?
-
If big schools were allowed to enter as many entrants as they wished into sectional would you expect the number of small school qualifiers to be: a) less than we have now b) about the same as we have now c) more than we have now
-
If proportional enrollment accounts for one school being more successful, then why bother classing the team duals? Small schools should only expect about 1 out of 8 of those spots. Why isn’t that a fair system?
-
Things change in 9 years. Not every reading the board now was doing so 9 years ago. Also, if each individual has the same chance, then one class is fine. If not, then more classes should be used. We disagree on what an equitable chance means. And that is ok. It is also ok for both of us to restate our position and logic from time to time as it may help others form come to a conclusion of their own.
-
if everyone has the same chance, then population should not be an issue, number of entries should be an issue. Suppose schools size is the only information available. If a 4A school enters 14 at sectional and 1A school enters 14 at sectional, should we expect that the 4A will advance the same number to semi state as the 1A?
-
With all the talk on the board about lifting the travel restriction (which I am against lifting it) and classing the individual tournament (which I am in favor of classing it), would people be willing (as a compromise) to do both? Obviously neither change is coming in the near future, but knowing where we stand as a community is useful so that we can be ready if and when the time comes that they look to make these kinds of changes. My stance is yes, I would be willing to lift the travel restriction if it means that we could also divide the individual tournament into two classes. What say you?
-
Again, I am in favor of wrestle backs. Just think arguments for/against wrestle backs often work for class wrestling.