State Wrestling Brackets

WIWRESTLING1010 · April 13, 2016, 09:24:58 AM

Back in the 80's there used to be state brackets that included all 3 divisions. The winner of Div 2 would face the winner of Div 3 and the winner of that bout would face the Div 1 champion. There were 16 wrestlers in Div 1 and 8 in Div 2 & 3. IMO this would give us some of those what if matches we are always talking about on here. Also, it would give a Wisconsin State Wrestling Championship a little more weight for recruiting purposes. Thoughts??

Barou · April 13, 2016, 09:36:30 AM

Quote from: WIWRESTLING1010 on April 13, 2016, 09:24:58 AM
Back in the 80's there used to be state brackets that included all 3 divisions. The winner of Div 2 would face the winner of Div 3 and the winner of that bout would face the Div 1 champion. There were 16 wrestlers in Div 1 and 8 in Div 2 & 3. IMO this would give us some of those what if matches we are always talking about on here. Also, it would give a Wisconsin State Wrestling Championship a little more weight for recruiting purposes. Thoughts??

I heard that they only did that one year....thinking like 1980 or 1981??? Heard they televised the event live as well.

Manty77 · April 13, 2016, 09:52:15 AM

In 1980 the WIAA went to 3 divisions. The Div 2 and 3 champs wrestled, and the winner of that then wrestled the Div 1 champ to determine the overall winner. Here's an example: http://www.rvwrestlingalum.com/Programs/1980_files/126%20lbs.jpg.

I wrestled in '77 when the change was being discussed, and was told it was because having more champs would actually increase visibility and recruiting.

Barou · April 13, 2016, 10:08:02 AM

Quote from: Manty77 on April 13, 2016, 09:52:15 AM
In 1980 the WIAA went to 3 divisions. The Div 2 and 3 champs wrestled, and the winner of that then wrestled the Div 1 champ to determine the overall winner. Here's an example: http://www.rvwrestlingalum.com/Programs/1980_files/126%20lbs.jpg.

I wrestled in '77 when the change was being discussed, and was told it was because having more champs would actually increase visibility and recruiting.

Nice, 1980 one of my guesses. My alma matter (Arcadia) had John Haines wrestle that year who was a Class B state champion. I'm told he defeated the Class C state champ and was beat by the Class A state champion.

npope · April 14, 2016, 04:29:04 PM

One of the reasons they left that format behind was that it was felt that the idea of wrestling-off (and losing) after having just won a state title was deflating for the athlete and possibly reflective of a lack of respect for the accomplishment of the champs. Additionally, there was a lot of chatter as to why the division A champ received a bye to the championship match.

I think it just had enough negatives attached to the process that everyone said, "Just let it go," and celebrate our three champs.

woody53 · April 14, 2016, 06:16:09 PM

Quote from: npope on April 14, 2016, 04:29:04 PM
One of the reasons they left that format behind was that it was felt that the idea of wrestling-off (and losing) after having just won a state title was deflating for the athlete and possibly refelctive of a lack of respect for the accomplishment of the champs. Additionally, there was a lot of chatter as to why the division A champ received a bye to the championship match.

I think it just had enough negatives attached to the process that everyone said, "Just let it go," and celebrate our three champs.

You understand Pope.

billymurphy · April 14, 2016, 07:59:56 PM

Fantastic event for the fans. I know I loved it.
But the idea of having a guy being a state champion
and then lose at state hurt the idea that he was a "state champion".
Personally, I saw nothing wrong with giving the class A guy a bye.

foose4 · April 15, 2016, 08:12:59 AM

Quote from: billymurphy on April 14, 2016, 07:59:56 PM

Personally, I saw nothing wrong with giving the class A guy a bye.

NO reason for Class A to get bye over others. Should've at best rotated or flipped coins.

Personally I think this is one bad idea. I would think that not many kids of the champs are truly ready to wrestle again the day after winning state. Leave them enjoy what they just accomplished. No need to go any further. Separate divisions, separate champions, I really don't see any issue with having 3 champs.

It seems to me that the only people that want to see something like this are people that have no skin in the game, just a fan that thinks they deserve to see it, which you don't. If the kids asked the coaches to see if it could be done, and then the coaches went to WIAA to see if it could be done, then do it. Don't do it if the kids don't want to.

From personal experience, the last thing on my wrestler's mind the Sunday after State Finals is I wish I could wrestle today.

Gutwrench · April 15, 2016, 08:51:25 AM

Quote from: npope on April 14, 2016, 04:29:04 PM
One of the reasons they left that format behind was that it was felt that the idea of wrestling-off (and losing) after having just won a state title was deflating for the athlete and possibly refelctive of a lack of respect for the accomplishment of the champs. Additionally, there was a lot of chatter as to why the division A champ received a bye to the championship match.

I think it just had enough negatives attached to the process that everyone said, "Just let it go," and celebrate our three champs.

Exactly.

My dad was a high school coach during this time. He was a strong advocate for the three class system, and a strong advocate against the mini state tournament with the three champions. Like Nat said, let's celebrate the three division state champs, and leave it at that.

leg turk · April 15, 2016, 09:04:24 AM

Div 1 should wrestle Div 2 Champ, and the winner gets Div 3 Champ. Everyone knows Div 3 has the toughest wrestlers!

bigoil · April 15, 2016, 10:30:57 AM

Quote from: Gutwrench on April 15, 2016, 08:51:25 AM
Quote from: npope on April 14, 2016, 04:29:04 PM
One of the reasons they left that format behind was that it was felt that the idea of wrestling-off (and losing) after having just won a state title was deflating for the athlete and possibly refelctive of a lack of respect for the accomplishment of the champs. Additionally, there was a lot of chatter as to why the division A champ received a bye to the championship match.

I think it just had enough negatives attached to the process that everyone said, "Just let it go," and celebrate our three champs.

Exactly.

My dad was a high school coach during this time. He was a strong advocate for the three class system, and a strong advocate against the mini state tournament with the three champions. Like Nat said, let's celebrate the three division state champs, and leave it at that.

Does he know why they went away from Class A to Division 1, assume that it was a PC issue.

Coach Q · April 15, 2016, 03:20:01 PM

I think that is about the time when they started expanding the other sports and Division 6 sounded better than Class F and so on.

Jimmy · April 15, 2016, 04:00:58 PM

Class a champ already had 4 matches under his belt .B and c only 3 , made perfect sense.

billymurphy · April 15, 2016, 05:22:49 PM

The proof was in the results. Class A won the most titles.