Alternate regional formats

[grasshopper]

After seeing all of the posts discussing the issues with the WIAA's regional format I thought that it would be good to open up a thread dedicated to people's ideas/ opinions on this issue. Personally I think that it is a shame when arguably the best 3 wrestlers in a sectional are sorted into the same regional, while in that same weight class a sub .500 wrestler will be wrestling at sectionals from another regional.  It isn't "fair" to one of the wrestlers at the tough regional, and it doesn't make for as exciting of a sectional tournament.  Last season in the Cadott regional the 4 best teams in the sectional (in my opinion) were stuck in the same regional, and it came down to the wire between all 4 teams (final scores SVE 204- they actually scored 203 points with 1 point for tie-breaker criteria, Boyceville 203, Clear Lake 197, and Cadott 190.5). This type of issue I think can and should be avoided to help make both the team and individual sectional tournaments more exciting and competitive.

Currently there are two potential solutions that I've heard of that I think would work the best to solve these issues:
1) 2 Super regionals with the top 4 moving on from each regional moving on to sectionals: This would help solve the issue of the 3rd best wrestler in the sectional staying home after regionals. However, in order to make this tournament a 1-day tournament there would be no wrestle backs for 2nd place through 4th place to accommodate for the 5 matches/ day WIAA rule. For team sectionals I would think that the top two from each regional would move on to the team sectional tournament.

2) Divide the Sectional into two geographic locations (ex: north and south) and then seed/ sort the teams into the 4 regionals (2 in the north and 2 in the south) at some point in the season:  For this the WIAA would sort out the teams at some point in the season (perhaps in mid January) into their assigned regionals based on their rank/ assigned seeding.  This would allow the WIAA to keep the same tournament format for their regionals and sectionals, and it would still allow for geographic location to play a role in regional assignments. Also seeding/ sorting of teams should help avoid the issue of the best teams from a sectional being all stuck in one regional. Also this would indirectly help lower the amount of "3rd best wrestlers in the sectional" losing out in regionals (although it does not prevent this issue from ever happening). Some drawbacks to this format include the potential for longer travel times for teams to get to regionals and also the logistical challenges that assigning teams to a tournament halfway through the season would bring.

I'm interested what other people think about these ideas, or what they think would work best (even if you think that the current format is the best format).  I'll admit that my post is focused toward D2/ D3 regional formats, as that is what I am most accustomed to, but please comment on D1 format improvements if you have any.

[shouldvewrestled]

If there's anyone in the know, can you explain the logic or decision-making process that would lead us to vastly different systems for Division 1 versus 2 & 3?

Division 1 advances 4 from Regionals, and 2 from Sectionals
Divisions 2 & 3 bring 2 from Regionals, but 3 from Sectionals

It's so bizarre. There has to be a reason for it.

8 man brackets, 4 regionals in D2/D3 for 4 sections.  Only 2 regionals in D1 for 8 sections.

D2/D3 used to only bring 2 from sectionals as well but upped it to 3 to get more state participants.

[shouldvewrestled]

I'm sure it deals with the number of teams being more in D1 than the other divisions so broke it up into 8 sections.  It's strictly numbers, as been said definitely different ideas that are better than current format.

Combine 2 regionals in D2/D3 would be a good option with more teams struggling to fill full lineups.  Make the team tournament all duals and get the individual regional aspect out of it.  Could set it up like football does really making in season duals mean more.

[shouldvewrestled]

I'm sure it deals with ...

Someone called me a name yesterday for being mean to you, so I'm going to try to refrain here. Instead I'll just point out that if you didn't know the answer to my question, which you obviously didn't, there was an option to say nothing. Every other person took that option.

Then don't post on a public forum and call the WIAA.     If you can't see it's strictly based on numbers than wow, especially being a "numbers guy."

[ramjet]

well let's try and be open minded here.

If numbers are up and competition is elevated today's system works.

If the WIAA was more interested in quality compitition than "everyone gets a trophy" we would have system that designed to get those results. Even though this sounds like a shot at the WIAA it is more shot at the entirety of the organization not the decision makers.

I can assure you many coaches in that 3-Lakew regional are just fine with it. Why because there kid goes to sectionals. They do not care about the results when they get there other than thier wrestlers who have a shot at moving on to the State tournamanet. But those who go and get toasted it's like "Oh well at least they made it to sectionals". 😱

So as much as it may appear to be the WIAA not all the fingers should piont at them. The idea of super regionals is a great idea it will "fix" the quality of wrestling it will not fix the participation issues.

Everyone knows enrollment is declining through out Wisconsin as whole. So is this a bubble that causes the low participation or a cultural issue will changes to the State Tournament qualification series fix any of this?

Again I am convinced changes will assure the best wrestlers move on.

[grasshopper]

I'm sure it deals with the number of teams being more in D1 than the other divisions so broke it up into 8 sections.  It's strictly numbers, as been said definitely different ideas that are better than current format.

Combine 2 regionals in D2/D3 would be a good option with more teams struggling to fill full lineups.  Make the team tournament all duals and get the individual regional aspect out of it.  Could set it up like football does really making in season duals mean more.

I'm not sure on the total number of teams in D1, but unless there are more than 128 teams (which I don't believe there are) the D2/D3 format of 4 regionals with up to 8 teams per regional, and 4 regionals per sectional, with 4 total sectionals would still work. If D1 still wants 16 total wrestlers at state they could just send 4 from one of those sectionals as opposed to the 2 they currently send. Currently D1 does 16 teams/ sectional with 8 total sectionals. They could do 32 teams/ sectional and 4 total sectionals just like D2 and D3. So I'm not so sure it is such an obvious numbers issue as you make it out to be.

[bigoil]

If you can't see it's strictly based on numbers than wow, especially being a "numbers guy."

NWIS, it seems pretty obvious the only way this guy is going to understand, that there are multiple ways to distribute the exact same number of teams across different regional & sectional structures, is explain it the way I would to my five-year-old. Are you going to call me a "horsebutt" again if I do? I don't really see any other way, at this point.

A little harsh and quick to be defensive here. What shouldvewrestled is saying that D1 was designed with the notion of 128 teams and the balance of the teams are divided to be in d2/d3.

D1 -128 divides into 16 separate 8 team regionals. 2 teams per sectional, 8 person sectional bracket, 16 person state bracket.

D2/3 isn't so neat and you end up with 16 6-7 team regionals. Originally had an 8 person state bracket and changed it to a 12 person state bracket.

so what everyone is kind of saying, go to a 2-super regional of 12-14 teams with the same sectional format.

[DocWrestling]

I just have to guess that nothing changes because there are just too many coaches looking out for their own teams and not for the sport as a whole.  I get that but I wish more would look at the big picture and not necessarily how it affect their team.

For ever coach that wants to vote to remove his team from a tough regional, there is another coach voting no because his team is benefiting from the easy regional.

Honestly I wish the WIAA was more transparent in how they determine regionals and sectionals in all sports.  Many say geography but that does not always make sense either.

It should not be that hard to create large geographic sections and then develop an objective matrix based off of past success to assign teams to a regional.  At least to identify the top 6-8 teams in a sectional and separate them out and then fill in with geography.  Maybe the matrix can do a better job of separating teams in the same conference for regionals.  We do have computers for this to develop models like NOPIN.  It won't be perfect but that is not an excuse to not do it because it will be better.  Just like many sports are now seeding.  Tennis seeds their individual state tourney but wrestling does not.

Everything is subjective and secret right now with the WIAA.  Honestly a 30 minutes coaches committee could do a better job of spreading out the teams to regionals but yes there might be some bias.

The best wrestlers deserve to wrestle at sectionals.  The best of the best deserve to wrestle at state.  Win or lose they deserve the experience.

[bigoil]

Doc,

It is geography but if the coaches want, the WIAA is willing to give latitude in the regionals as they say "basketball coaches desired to get the best teams to the sectional semi and finals. However, as you point out, good luck getting the coaches to change though they did in hoops so you're telling me there is a chance

[shouldvewrestled]

I'm sure it deals with the number of teams being more in D1 than the other divisions so broke it up into 8 sections.  It's strictly numbers, as been said definitely different ideas that are better than current format.

Combine 2 regionals in D2/D3 would be a good option with more teams struggling to fill full lineups.  Make the team tournament all duals and get the individual regional aspect out of it.  Could set it up like football does really making in season duals mean more.

I'm not sure on the total number of teams in D1, but unless there are more than 128 teams (which I don't believe there are) the D2/D3 format of 4 regionals with up to 8 teams per regional, and 4 regionals per sectional, with 4 total sectionals would still work. If D1 still wants 16 total wrestlers at state they could just send 4 from one of those sectionals as opposed to the 2 they currently send. Currently D1 does 16 teams/ sectional with 8 total sectionals. They could do 32 teams/ sectional and 4 total sectionals just like D2 and D3. So I'm not so sure it is such an obvious numbers issue as you make it out to be.

How many gyms can hold a decent number of fans coming from 32 different towns or just to watch wrestling?  If each town brought 100 people that's 3200 people, do we have high school gyms that hold that many easily?  There are logistics involved not just dividing teams up evenly.  I've only been to D2 sectionals but it gets to be a tight fit in those gyms.  I'm sure it is same way at D1 sites, now combine 2 would need a big place.  If it could work that would be nice.

[grasshopper]

I'm sure it deals with the number of teams being more in D1 than the other divisions so broke it up into 8 sections.  It's strictly numbers, as been said definitely different ideas that are better than current format.

Combine 2 regionals in D2/D3 would be a good option with more teams struggling to fill full lineups.  Make the team tournament all duals and get the individual regional aspect out of it.  Could set it up like football does really making in season duals mean more.

I'm not sure on the total number of teams in D1, but unless there are more than 128 teams (which I don't believe there are) the D2/D3 format of 4 regionals with up to 8 teams per regional, and 4 regionals per sectional, with 4 total sectionals would still work. If D1 still wants 16 total wrestlers at state they could just send 4 from one of those sectionals as opposed to the 2 they currently send. Currently D1 does 16 teams/ sectional with 8 total sectionals. They could do 32 teams/ sectional and 4 total sectionals just like D2 and D3. So I'm not so sure it is such an obvious numbers issue as you make it out to be.

How many gyms can hold a decent number of fans coming from 32 different towns or just to watch wrestling?  If each town brought 100 people that's 3200 people, do we have high school gyms that hold that many easily?  There are logistics involved not just dividing teams up evenly.  If it could work that would be nice.

Good point, I didn't consider that. They would probably be forced to use larger event centers in in places like Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, or La Crosse. So I see your point there. I've never been to a D1 sectional tournament, is the gym typically completely packed for those tournaments? Bear in mind that more fans per team probably go to the tournaments when there are 16 teams/sectional than if there was 32 teams/sectional due to the fact that more people per team make it to sectionals under the current D1 format.

[Coach V]

3 equal divisions. Seed/sort the regionals within each sectional. Yes you could still have 3 studs in a bracket. Take 3 out of Regionals. Run a 12 man at Sectionals. Wrestleback to 3rd if that's possible with the 5 match limit. If not, stay with what we have until we figure out super regional. Bottomline- Start somewhere.

[wrastle63]

3 equal divisions. Seed/sort the regionals within each sectional. Yes you could still have 3 studs in a bracket. Take 3 out of Regionals. Run a 12 man at Sectionals. Wrestleback to 3rd if that's possible with the 5 match limit. If not, stay with what we have until we figure out super regional. Bottomline- Start somewhere.

YES!

[shouldvewrestled]

3 equal divisions. Seed/sort the regionals within each sectional. Yes you could still have 3 studs in a bracket. Take 3 out of Regionals. Run a 12 man at Sectionals. Wrestleback to 3rd if that's possible with the 5 match limit. If not, stay with what we have until we figure out super regional. Bottomline- Start somewhere.

In this the 3rd place match has a possibility for wrestlers to have a 6th match that day.  Could there be a rule stating this tournament could have a 6th match but only this tournament in the season?  Would have to see what coaches think.   Because we then could bring 4 from regionals, and 4 from sectionals.  16 man WB 5th with 5th placer potentially being able to wrestle for 4th is same number of matches (possible 6th match) Then all divisions would have 16 man state brackets.

[ramjet]

I just have to guess that nothing changes because there are just too many coaches looking out for their own teams and not for the sport as a whole.  I get that but I wish more would look at the big picture and not necessarily how it affect their team.

For ever coach that wants to vote to remove his team from a tough regional, there is another coach voting no because his team is benefiting from the easy regional.

Honestly I wish the WIAA was more transparent in how they determine regionals and sectionals in all sports.  Many say geography but that does not always make sense either.

It should not be that hard to create large geographic sections and then develop an objective matrix based off of past success to assign teams to a regional.  At least to identify the top 6-8 teams in a sectional and separate them out and then fill in with geography.  Maybe the matrix can do a better job of separating teams in the same conference for regionals.  We do have computers for this to develop models like NOPIN.  It won't be perfect but that is not an excuse to not do it because it will be better.  Just like many sports are now seeding.  Tennis seeds their individual state tourney but wrestling does not.

Everything is subjective and secret right now with the WIAA.  Honestly a 30 minutes coaches committee could do a better job of spreading out the teams to regionals but yes there might be some bias.

The best wrestlers deserve to wrestle at sectionals.  The best of the best deserve to wrestle at state.  Win or lose they deserve the experience.

I absolutely agree with your post here.