I have been hearing that the coaches say down with Wade and this is going to the board of control and possibility the big meeting in June. 16 events instead of the 7 and 7 with a match count of 50 before regionals. Also seeding the state tournament is on the docket. I havent heard any chatter about this on the forum so is it just idle talk and dreams or is this really something that is being looked at?
I am hoping to get rid of the 7/7 rule. That would be spectacular. Whatever the amount of events, this would be a nice improvement.
Seeding the state tournament would also be nice.
If the coaches association pushes for change they can get it. A few years ago boys and girls basketball coaches pushed for adding two more games. No reason wrestling cannot have a few more matches or change the 7-7 setup. Be a United front and present what you want. Be sure to tell your AD how to vote on the issue.
I have heard this also so is it going to happen?
I am not sure I read that correctly you are saying that we would then be wide open to wrestle 70 matches if we feel fit or that you can do your events however you want, but that you cannot have more than 50 prior to regionals?
Thanks in advance for the clarification!
16 events to schedule how you want.
No more than 50 matches going into Regionals.
Both will need to be followed if they pass it the way it was recommended to them.
V
I think adding the events can be a positive for teams to use how they want to generate excitement. Adding duals for the top teams against other top teams out of conference could create some nice crowds and excitement. Lesser programs can add out of conference quadrangulars to get matches. Also allows teams to maybe have more home events in front of their fans and students.
I see more events like that being added rather than more Saturday tournaments.
Maybe the days wrestlers have to monitor weight for 1 match (or a forfeit) will be reduced.
That might be the change wrestlers will appreciate the most!
16 dates and 50 matches by regionals is not a good idea. The slow death of wrestling continues.
SP-ideas?
Quote from: SP on April 29, 2021, 07:23:31 AM
16 dates and 50 matches by regionals is not a good idea. The slow death of wrestling continues.
This gives coaches and wrestlers a lot of options to manage THEIR programs and THEIR individual wrestlers.
I truly hope not every program feels the need to use all 16 events. At least not for every wrestler. But it does allow the diehard wrestler to wrestle a ton and challenge themselves possibly more as long as everything is managed for the seasonal wrestler.
There is nothing wrong with one varsity wrestler having 50 matches and another 30. Give wrestlers time off that want it.
If I was coach I could now use a holiday tournament as an "event" but only take those wrestlers that want to go. Others might want a winter break. Maybe the two additional events on the schedule are really only for the top 5 wrestlers on the team that can't get enough wrestling. Instead of feeling the need to go to 7 Saturday tournaments to get matches I could replace a tournament with two weekday duals or quadrangulars and free up weekends and get same amount of matches.
Lots of opportunities to manage your schedule for your team or individuals.
Quote from: SP on April 29, 2021, 07:23:31 AM
16 dates and 50 matches by regionals is not a good idea. The slow death of wrestling continues.
I agree
Interesting to see the different viewpoints. We are at 16 dates. We used to be 18 dates, 36 matches max before sections. I much preferred 18 dates. It allowed more teams to have tournaments(fund raising). Fewer dats(going to 16 as we have) made for more tris and quads which I hate. It makes for too late school nights. It is also very difficult for us to host quads as we don't have the numbers to move mats. A good system for strong programs but not good for growing the sport.
A coach does not have to use all 16 events for his team and certainly not for every athlete. Many other programs in other sports do not play the maximum number of games for many different reasons.
If I was building a program I would shoot for 35 matches before regionals. If I had a stud that wanted to wrestle more then I would make his dad a volunteer assistant coach and he could take his son to a tournament for one of the "team" events.
Only real problem is tournament directors knowing how many teams to invite etc, which is why I think a couple "open" tournaments would be good throughout the year.
Doc makes a good point. Tournament directors and programs that host tournaments are looking for full teams to compete to fill those brackets. Sending only 3-5 of your top wrestlers makes it difficult for tournament hosts to know how many teams to invite to fill that 16 or 32 man bracket.
SEED THE STATE TOURNAMENT!!!!
Quote from: MatScoutWillie on April 30, 2021, 12:02:04 PM
SEED THE STATE TOURNAMENT!!!!
You bet! Here is my question, do you only seed sectional champs and randomly draw in everyone else or would you seed top 4 for D2/D3 and top 8 for D1? Who would do the seeding? Track or coaches?
I have said this before... and will say it again. Take a look at the way the IHSA seeds their state individual tournament. Seeding is done for sectional champions based on a points' system. This would be a good start in terms of seeding.
Quote from: justwrestle on May 03, 2021, 12:03:57 PM
I have said this before... and will say it again. Take a look at the way the IHSA seeds their state individual tournament. Seeding is done for sectional champions based on a points' system. This would be a good start in terms of seeding.
That is the key. Nothing we do will be perfect, but at least start and work towards something better.
Quote from: tigerking on April 30, 2021, 12:44:21 PM
Quote from: MatScoutWillie on April 30, 2021, 12:02:04 PM
SEED THE STATE TOURNAMENT!!!!
You bet! Here is my question, do you only seed sectional champs and randomly draw in everyone else or would you seed top 4 for D2/D3 and top 8 for D1? Who would do the seeding? Track or coaches?
Seed the state tournament absolutely yes. We look ridiculous as a sport that our pinnacle tournament is random draw. Under no circumstances seed just the sectional champs. How stupid would it be if a wrestler from DC Everest takes second place at Bi State with a 18-1 record and the following week rolls into the "Sisters of the Holy Mary Invite" and gets the second seed over a 19-0 kid from No Name Prep High who just last week beat BYE in the finals of the "Bannanarama Good Times Invite". Seriously, every tournament get seeded on your credentials of the current year and past years. Why not the state individual tournament? I don't know what is more pathetic, that we don't seed the state tournament or that where you get placed in the state tournament is on a somewhat random matrix grid that doesn't include all sectionals. It is so cumbersomely ignorant.
You either give all of the coaches 1 hour to seed all of the wrestlers at their qualifying wrestlers weight class except their own kid on Sunday morning at 9 am. So 1 thru 16 in D1 and 1-11 in D2 & 3. Add the numbers up and lowest to highest scores get the lowest to highest seeds. If there is a tie more wins on the season, still a tie...sectional champion, still a tie Wade Labeki flips a quarter. You will successfully get the top 4 kids away from each other and give the others a fighting chance to place because they will be seeded very close to their ability.
Or if people are that jammed up thinking that high school coaches are going to collude with each other and rig the system (which is a ridiculous theory). Then give out the following points for state seeding.
Previous Year State Placement
1-100 points
2- 80 points
3- 60 points
4- 50 points
5- 40 points
6- 30 points
Q- 20 points
Sectional Placer - 10 points
Then they get 1 point for each win they have accumulated this season. This will work at every weight, even 106 which is usually full of stud freshman who could get seeded based upon their unblemished record. Even if you are a returning state champion who was injured all year you would still have 106 points going into the state tournament which would put you way out of reach even in front of an undefeated 50 win kid who was just a sectional placer the previous year.
I do not get a vote but I vote for seeding only sectional champs and then putting sectional runners up cross bracket. So a sectional runner up to a 1 or 2 state overall seed at sectionals you could not hit a overall 1 or 2 seed until the state semis.
But some will not agree to seed 4, some will want everyone seeded by track, so we will never get to discuss criteria for seeded top 4 (or just sectional champs). Just continue with 30 plus years of a flawed matrix (that alone is a reason to try something different).
I'm curious how much seeding would have changed the outcome of the state tournament in regards to placewinners in each division and weight class? Does anyone have that?
I'm also curious which wrestlers that in theory would have been "unseeded" this year, but placed, didn't earn their medal? Someone have names of those kids?
And finally, at the end of the day, what actual impact will seeding have on the future of the sport in our state? How will it improve wrestling in part or as a whole if wrestler A gets a medal rather than wrestler B?
I'm not against seeding per-say, but I think double elim would actually make the state tournament a better tournament and should be a higher priority, as should several other things.
The problem with using section champs/runners up is quality of section. People argue on here all the time about the section make up. I know in MN our sections are regularly unbalanced talent wise. In some cases a section champ is nowhere near what another section champ is. I agree with Handles that a far more important goal should be double elimination. I never had a problem with our old MN system that had predetermined match ups from each section(done years ahead). I preferred the chance of getting a crappy draw to the assuredness of getting a crappy draw if you weren't from a school with a strong name.
Now with computer criteria it is somewhat better but again, section champ may or may not mean anything.
Quote from: Handles II on May 04, 2021, 10:31:10 AM
I'm curious how much seeding would have changed the outcome of the state tournament in regards to placewinners in each division and weight class? Does anyone have that?
I'm also curious which wrestlers that in theory would have been "unseeded" this year, but placed, didn't earn their medal? Someone have names of those kids?
And finally, at the end of the day, what actual impact will seeding have on the future of the sport in our state? How will it improve wrestling in part or as a whole if wrestler A gets a medal rather than wrestler B?
I'm not against seeding per-say, but I think double elim would actually make the state tournament a better tournament and should be a higher priority, as should several other things.
100% agree with double elimination before seeding. Seeding the sectional champs and putting the runner-up on opposite side is kinda what we have now.
We need to make changes that will grow our development level(jv).
Agreed SP...although I still would like to see the state tournament seeded. ;D But more importantly we need to put more focus and emphasis on non-varsity participants in order to grow our program. It was a good step having "JV State" up in Wausau (despite giving out T-shirts instead of medals...ugh), but we need to get back to having more opportunities for the JV's and make it more appealing to wrestle even if you aren't on varsity...JV should hold as much importance in a program than the varsity. I know...must of the things I said were like "DUH"...and definitely easier said than done.
Quote from: SP on May 05, 2021, 07:41:59 AM
100% agree with double elimination before seeding. Seeding the sectional champs and putting the runner-up on opposite side is kinda what we have now.
We need to make changes that will grow our development level(jv).
Kinda what we have but it can be better with some simple thought. Not sure why acknowledging the flaws of the matrix is so difficult.
Quote from: tigerking on April 30, 2021, 12:44:21 PM
Quote from: MatScoutWillie on April 30, 2021, 12:02:04 PM
SEED THE STATE TOURNAMENT!!!!
You bet! Here is my question, do you only seed sectional champs and randomly draw in everyone else or would you seed top 4 for D2/D3 and top 8 for D1? Who would do the seeding? Track or coaches?
Seed top 8 for D1. Coaches determine seeds. In the same breath you can make state double elimination. These 2 things are not hard to do. Just have to be done. Figure it out and make it happen.
Quote from: MatScoutWillie on May 05, 2021, 01:11:00 PM
Quote from: tigerking on April 30, 2021, 12:44:21 PM
Quote from: MatScoutWillie on April 30, 2021, 12:02:04 PM
SEED THE STATE TOURNAMENT!!!!
You bet! Here is my question, do you only seed sectional champs and randomly draw in everyone else or would you seed top 4 for D2/D3 and top 8 for D1? Who would do the seeding? Track or coaches?
Seed top 8 for D1. Coaches determine seeds. In the same breath you can make state double elimination. These 2 things are not hard to do. Just have to be done. Figure it out and make it happen.
Top 8? I don't see that. If you can somehow accurately as possible get top 4 it would be nice but really the argument is generally top 2.
Seeding top 4 probably balances the bracket much better in most instances.
Seeding 5-8 or even more probably is about the same as a random draw but would generate a lot more excitement if seeded. Fans love seeds so they know who is "predicted" to win and fans love to cheer for the upset, etc. It also helps media cover the event to create more coverage.
Have to have a way to seed and acknowledge if the top two wrestlers in the state are in the same sectional.
I personally would seed all wrestlers at state in a similar fashion to Bi-state or Oshkosh. Seeding everyone may not be better than a random draw but it certainly is not going to be worse so the benefits outweigh the negatives.
If we think we can seed the top 4 them sometimes it is just as easy to identify the bottom 4. The middle can be hard but seeding would be no different than random draw.