Is your state doing it worse than VA?

[BobDole 967]

New York is probably approaching 10 years of two classes

Texas just went to two classes less than 5 years ago I believe

 

Past them

Hawaii  1 class and 50-60 schools

Kentucky 1 class and about 75 schools

Delaware 1 class with about 40 schools

Vermont 1 class with about 22 schools

 

I tried getting California data and couldn't find school enrollments for ALL schools with wrestling. I would be interested in New Jersey's data especially since most of their schools are about the same size.

[1032004 889]

So basically what you are saying has no backing with physical evidence, just what you have heard or what may have gone on. I prefer hard evidence that no one recognizes classed champs. 

 

I have the statistics for Indiana.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18PWUXrlIjvzl_-I-HaflCB2w-r0a_sTkH-WWOcFKl2g/edit?usp=sharing

 

I don't disagree with your data and never said I did.

 

I also didn't say "no one recognizes class state champs," but I think it's common knowledge that state champs from strong wrestling states with only 1 champ (such as CA, NJ and IN) are MORE recognized than state champs from most states with classes.

 

That's why I said I think a Meet of Champions would be the best of both worlds.   I see you said you thought 2-3 classes would be ideal.   If there's 2 classes, you could have a Meet of Champs by literally adding one more match.  I don't think that'd be too difficult.   Again, I don't know how many states have a Meet of Champions or how many have failed miserably.  Do you?

[gimpeltf 1,531]

Pa did for a while.

[SetonHallPirate 836]

New York is probably approaching 10 years of two classes

Texas just went to two classes less than 5 years ago I believe

 

Past them

Hawaii  1 class and 50-60 schools

Kentucky 1 class and about 75 schools

Delaware 1 class with about 40 schools

Vermont 1 class with about 22 schools

 

I tried getting California data and couldn't find school enrollments for ALL schools with wrestling. I would be interested in New Jersey's data especially since most of their schools are about the same size.

Here's a list of the schools that sponsored wrestling this year, sorted by "Group" (their classification for duals): http://www.njsiaa.org/sites/default/files/document/Wrestling%20classifications%20%2718.pdf

 

Obviously, I don't have the statistics on how the results of their state tournament went this year, given that, well, my crystal ball is at the shop.

[BobDole 967]

I don't disagree with your data and never said I did.

 

I also didn't say "no one recognizes class state champs," but I think it's common knowledge that state champs from strong wrestling states with only 1 champ (such as CA, NJ and IN) are MORE recognized than state champs from most states with classes.

 

That's why I said I think a Meet of Champions would be the best of both worlds.   I see you said you thought 2-3 classes would be ideal.   If there's 2 classes, you could have a Meet of Champs by literally adding one more match.  I don't think that'd be too difficult.   Again, I don't know how many states have a Meet of Champions or how many have failed miserably.  Do you?

I would be curious as to what you mean by "more recognized" of your statement?

 

I put together New Jersey's data from this year(qualifiers only) and last year.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eTXsm6u3yevCikZ2b0ivcANTJurrtWMjjwb71MiddE8/edit?usp=sharing

 

Interestingly their data is much more evened out by class. The biggest differences is that New Jersey crams 2.4 million more people into an area that is 4.5 times smaller than Indiana. On top of that a lot less REALLY big schools or REALLY small schools makes a big difference.

 

Indiana

Three Class Enrollment Breakdown

1A 0-506

2A 507-1056

3A 1057-5000

Two Class Enrollment Breakdown

1A 0-700

2A 701-5000

 

Average Enrollment 948

Standard Deviation 775

 

New Jersey

Three Class Enrollment Breakdown

1A 0-672

2A 673-993

3A 994-5000

Two Class Enrollment Breakdown

1A 0-848

2A 849-5000

 

Average Enrollment 923

Standard Deviation 533

[SetonHallPirate 836]

 

I would be curious as to what you mean by "more recognized" of your statement?

 

I put together New Jersey's data from this year(qualifiers only) and last year.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eTXsm6u3yevCikZ2b0ivcANTJurrtWMjjwb71MiddE8/edit?usp=sharing

 

Interestingly their data is much more evened out by class. The biggest differences is that New Jersey crams 2.4 million more people into an area that is 4.5 times smaller than Indiana. On top of that a lot less REALLY big schools or REALLY small schools makes a big difference.

 

Indiana

Three Class Enrollment Breakdown

1A 0-506

2A 507-1056

3A 1057-5000

Two Class Enrollment Breakdown

1A 0-700

2A 701-5000

 

Average Enrollment 948

Standard Deviation 775

 

New Jersey

Three Class Enrollment Breakdown

1A 0-672

2A 673-993

3A 994-5000

Two Class Enrollment Breakdown

1A 0-848

2A 849-5000

 

Average Enrollment 923

Standard Deviation 533

 

Just curious, where does Bergen Catholic fit in this system? A bit surprising to see 9 of the 14 champions in the small-school classification!

 

Also, and this is true for Indiana as well, I'd like to see how those numbers broke down if you split them to have equal enrollments in each class, rather than equal numbers of schools.

[BobDole 967]

You can view the schools in the Teams tab.

Bergdon Catholic is in the middle with an enrollment of 980.

[BobDole 967]

 

Also, and this is true for Indiana as well, I'd like to see how those numbers broke down if you split them to have equal enrollments in each class, rather than equal numbers of schools.

For Indiana

2 Class

Schools

1A- 242

2A- 70

 

Qualifiers

1A- 53%

2A- 47%

 

Placers

1A- 49%

2A- 51%

 

Champs

1A- 49%

2A- 51%

 

3 Class

Schools

1A- 199

2A- 74

3A- 39

 

Qualifiers

1A- 34%

2A- 33%

3A- 32% 

 

Placers

1A- 28.7%

2A- 35.5%

3A- 35.8%

 

Champs

1A- 28.5%

2A- 29.5%

3A- 42%

[SetonHallPirate 836]

You can view the schools in the Teams tab.

Bergdon Catholic is in the middle with an enrollment of 980.

Gotcha...hadn't seen that...and further, didn't realize that Bergen Catholic didn't have a single state champ last year!

[1032004 889]

Just curious, where does Bergen Catholic fit in this system? A bit surprising to see 9 of the 14 champions in the small-school classification!

 

Also, and this is true for Indiana as well, I'd like to see how those numbers broke down if you split them to have equal enrollments in each class, rather than equal numbers of schools.

3 of the 9 were from previously mentioned Bound Brook.

 

2 more were from the all-male private school Delbarton which only has a tuition of $38K.

 

Of course, excluding schools like those is helping prove BobDole’s point.

Edited February 27, 2018 by 1032004

[1032004 889]

I would be curious as to what you mean by "more recognized" of your statement?

Here are a few examples:

 

In wrestling it is travesty to have more than one class in any state.

I could see the use for multiple divisions for a dual team tournament, but not for individual states.

 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

For individual sports (track & field, tennis, golf, wrestling, etc...) no state should have more than one champion.

NJ has real state champs.

[BobDole 967]

Thanks, I don't pay much attention to those types of statements because they are based on emotion instead of facts. If classed wrestling was so horrible you would have expected at least one state to revert back to single class out of 45. 

[SetonHallPirate 836]

Thanks, I don't pay much attention to those types of statements because they are based on emotion instead of facts. If classed wrestling was so horrible you would have expected at least one state to revert back to single class out of 45. 

That's because, to a point, more classes means more money. Many (most, all?) state associations are worried about the green stuff going into their pocketbooks, and not the best interests of the children.

[1032004 889]

Thanks, I don't pay much attention to those types of statements because they are based on emotion instead of facts. If classed wrestling was so horrible you would have expected at least one state to revert back to single class out of 45.

Here is an interesting article from Oregon:

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2018/01/resers_tournament_of_champions_18.html#incart_river_home

 

They apparently have a “Tournament of Champions” (although as far as I can tell it is just an invitational of some of the top teams in each class), that actually occurs BEFORE the state tournament. It also has a major sponsor (Reser’s) so it seems to be a pretty well-thought of event.

 

There are several comments in the article that seem to allude to the fact that this tournament is just as prestigious if not moreso than the state tournament. There is also a quote from a small school wrestler who talks about people downplaying his state championship in the smaller class.

 

Looking at their state tournament results (http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2018/02/osaa_wrestling_recap_top_highl.html), I think that is confirmed. For example, the team that placed 4th in the TofC won the state title.

Edited February 27, 2018 by 1032004

[BobDole 967]

Here is an interesting article from Oregon:

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2018/01/resers_tournament_of_champions_18.html#incart_river_home

 

They apparently have a “Tournament of Champions” (although as far as I can tell it is just an invitational of some of the top teams in each class), that actually occurs BEFORE the state tournament. It also has a major sponsor (Reser’s) so it seems to be a pretty well-thought of event.

 

There are several comments in the article that seem to allude to the fact that this tournament is just as prestigious if not moreso than the state tournament. There is also a quote from a small school wrestler who talks about people downplaying his state championship in the smaller class.

 

Looking at their state tournament results (http://www.oregonlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2018/02/osaa_wrestling_recap_top_highl.html), I think that is confirmed. For example, the team that placed 4th in the TofC won the state title.

I'd say there are big tournaments in states that are considered as prestigious as the state tournament, especially when they bring in teams across all classes. Obviously something like the Ironman is a different beast, but winning or placing high at Ironman will probably get you more attention than winning a state title. 

 

People always discredit the lower classes in any sport There are people on here that shun DII or DIII guys because they aren't DI. You have that in team sports also in high school. However, those are neither reasons to not class the sport. The thing is the school will still celebrate a kid winning a small school championship, he'll still get his picture on the wall, he'll get a ring, he'll get a big patch for his jacket, and so on. People discrediting other's accomplishments is nothing new and we will see it no matter what. If a kid wins a single class state title on a controversial call, people will discredit his title. That is sadly human nature to make yourself feel better by tearing down people that have some success.

 

 

That's because, to a point, more classes means more money. Many (most, all?) state associations are worried about the green stuff going into their pocketbooks, and not the best interests of the children.

Like I said at least one would have reverted and not thought solely about money. At least one would have tried it at least once. In Illinois for instance the COACHES voted to add a third class about 10 years ago. Why didn't they vote to only have once class? 

[leshismore 211]

For individual sports (track & field, tennis, golf, wrestling, etc...) no state should have more than one champion.  

This is the most intelligent post I have seen on THE MAT in a long time.  Thank you. I could not agree more.

[leshismore 211]

Thanks, I don't pay much attention to those types of statements because they are based on emotion instead of facts. If classed wrestling was so horrible you would have expected at least one state to revert back to single class out of 45. 

You are not correct sir.  The reason they don't revert back is because those "smaller schools" who get champions that they wouldn't get in a one class system lobby and fight to keep the multiple class system going... so they can still look like they are "succeeding". 

I know, for a fact, that NY went to a 2 class system specifically because of lobbing from a few smaller schools who had potential state champs if the state split, but they would not have had a state champ if it stayed one division. NY this weekend highlighted this again. No one knows who is the real state champ, and a lot of people missed out on some great matches.

[1032004 889]

I'd say there are big tournaments in states that are considered as prestigious as the state tournament, especially when they bring in teams across all classes. Obviously something like the Ironman is a different beast, but winning or placing high at Ironman will probably get you more attention than winning a state title. 

 

People always discredit the lower classes in any sport There are people on here that shun DII or DIII guys because they aren't DI. You have that in team sports also in high school. However, those are neither reasons to not class the sport. The thing is the school will still celebrate a kid winning a small school championship, he'll still get his picture on the wall, he'll get a ring, he'll get a big patch for his jacket, and so on. People discrediting other's accomplishments is nothing new and we will see it no matter what. If a kid wins a single class state title on a controversial call, people will discredit his title. That is sadly human nature to make yourself feel better by tearing down people that have some success.

 

 

Like I said at least one would have reverted and not thought solely about money. At least one would have tried it at least once. In Illinois for instance the COACHES voted to add a third class about 10 years ago. Why didn't they vote to only have once class? 

 

Earlier you asked what I meant by "more recognized," as if you did not agree that single class champions are more recognized than multiple class champions.  But here you seem to agree?

 

And again, I am not advocating for all states to go to single class - I think a state-sanctioned Tournament of Champions would be the best of both worlds.   I'm not sure how many if any states have or had this.  I tried googling briefly but didn't have much luck (although that's where I found the Oregon article).   I do know that NJ does it for track and cross country and that seems to work well.

 

If the concern is number of matches, they can easily scale back from earlier in the year, especially since states like NJ have continued to increase match limits anyway.

[BobDole 967]

You are not correct sir.  The reason they don't revert back is because those "smaller schools" who get champions that they wouldn't get in a one class system lobby and fight to keep the multiple class system going... so they can still look like they are "succeeding". 

I know, for a fact, that NY went to a 2 class system specifically because of lobbing from a few smaller schools who had potential state champs if the state split, but they would not have had a state champ if it stayed one division. NY this weekend highlighted this again. No one knows who is the real state champ, and a lot of people missed out on some great matches.

So you feel it is bad for small schools to have success, is that what you are saying?

 

I'm guessing you are the type to tell them to "just work harder" if they want to win.

[BobDole 967]

Earlier you asked what I meant by "more recognized," as if you did not agree that single class champions are more recognized than multiple class champions.  But here you seem to agree?

 

And again, I am not advocating for all states to go to single class - I think a state-sanctioned Tournament of Champions would be the best of both worlds.   I'm not sure how many if any states have or had this.  I tried googling briefly but didn't have much luck (although that's where I found the Oregon article).   I do know that NJ does it for track and cross country and that seems to work well.

 

If the concern is number of matches, they can easily scale back from earlier in the year, especially since states like NJ have continued to increase match limits anyway.

I wasn't disagreeing with your statement just was wondering what you meant by that. You see it in football or basketball or the individual sports, the big class winners are usually considered better or "the best." My guess is in team sports the big school championship gets more casual fans than the smaller school championships mainly because they are perceived to be the best.

[1032004 889]

I wasn't disagreeing with your statement just was wondering what you meant by that. You see it in football or basketball or the individual sports, the big class winners are usually considered better or "the best." My guess is in team sports the big school championship gets more casual fans than the smaller school championships mainly because they are perceived to be the best.

 

So what's wrong with making them prove it with a Tournament of Champions (moreso referring to the individual sports)?

[BobDole 967]

So what's wrong with making them prove it with a Tournament of Champions (moreso referring to the individual sports)?

The tournament of champions concept has been tried, but failed in multiple states. I believe Florida tried it recently and it even had a decent financial backing, but it failed.

 

Kids and coaches put their eggs into the state basket, when you go an extra week to "prove it" then you are basically trying to invalidate their titles. On top of that it makes the state finals look more like a "regional" to qualify for the ToC. Another factor is that you are likely to have kids that aren't invited that have defeated the ones that are invited, thus making the event a little less prestigious.

 

Again, looking at the 45 states with class wrestling, why hasn't this been successful in at least ONE state? 

 

I'm not a big fan because in most cases you have a pretty solid idea who the best guy in the state is at a weight class based on in-season and national success. A lot of the top guys in each state will see eachother during the season or in the off-season state level events. 

[leshismore 211]

So you feel it is bad for small schools to have success, is that what you are saying?

 

I'm guessing you are the type to tell them to "just work harder" if they want to win.

Sorry to give you a reality check.... Plenty of small schools, especially, in NY have had success.  What I don't like is for insecure coaches, who want to have a "State Title", lobby the system, to create a framework, so it appears that they have a state champ.

Many kids from small schools have placed and won NY championships.  Sorry, the facts get in the way of your notion of success.

And if a kid takes 3rd or 5th in the state with one class, but would win in a state with multiple classes.... are you telling us that the wrestler is not a "success"? 

Splitting into divisions creates a perpetual "what if" scenario while also robbing fans of great matches. 

[FloggingSully 21]

Again, looking at the 45 states with class wrestling, why hasn't this been successful in at least ONE state? 

 

I don't know what your definition of successful is, but MA has been running an All-State tournament for over 20 years.  It's taken seriously and doesn't devalue the divisional state championships.

 

NH and CT also have similar events.

[BobDole 967]

Sorry to give you a reality check.... Plenty of small schools, especially, in NY have had success.  What I don't like is for insecure coaches, who want to have a "State Title", lobby the system, to create a framework, so it appears that they have a state champ.

Many kids from small schools have placed and won NY championships.  Sorry, the facts get in the way of your notion of success.

And if a kid takes 3rd or 5th in the state with one class, but would win in a state with multiple classes.... are you telling us that the wrestler is not a "success"? 

Splitting into divisions creates a perpetual "what if" scenario while also robbing fans of great matches. 

Ohh yes a reality check, thanks a bunch.

 

Show me the statistics where "many kids from small schools placed." Stating it does not make it a fact. Show me that the small schools had equal the number of placers and champs as the big schools and then I'll be in for a reality check.

 

It's funny that you say "many kids from small schools placed," yet the small school coaches were the ones to blame for the change. So while many(in your mind) did well, the small school coaches still weren't happy and wanted more.