|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Greg Debbe added to this discussion on March 5, 2008
|
Bob you are correct. Cubberly did finish that match then defaulted his remaining matches. He looked to have the upper hand, attempted a throw and hurt his ribs in the process. After he was hurt he finished but did not look the same. As soon as the match was over, I knew he was going to default out.
The way he was grabbing his ribs late in the finals last weekend looked almost exactly the same as the Iron Man semis.
I would like to see Collin Palmer and Tony Jameson go at it. I think Palmer would catch him at some point. (OSU practice in 2 years)
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Scott Nicola added to this discussion on March 6, 2008
|
Call me crazy, but I think Jesse Dong vs. Jedd Moore would be a great match.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Steve Lester added to this discussion on March 6, 2008
|
When I saw this certain sophomore from, then Mount Vernon, give a game effort in the 2006 finals against Lance Palmer, I became a fan. Yes, he lost a major decision to Lance, 10-0, but this Palmer had pinned everyone in the tournament process for two straight years, with the exception of a 15-0 (I think was the score) tech of Mike Janik in the 2006 district finals.
I'm hoping we see Jedd Moore at Senior Nationals.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Has here ever been a year where the projected duals of teams consisting of the state champs from each of the divisions works out to be so close? A remarkable year and quite a set of 42 state champions.
|
Last edited by Steve Lester on March 7, 2008; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on March 6, 2008
|
California just had their state tourn with one 38 man per weight class bracket, how i envy them.
i don't think Ohio's 3 divisions works out well at all, but apparently others disagree with me on this.
Any one else have trouble following 6 Semifinal matches going on at the same time and spread all over the arena floor ???
as i said, Ohio could reward Team chamionships based on male enrollement numbers, as they do now, that would mitigate the advantage bigger schools have------ but imo theres no good reason to award
42 state titles, a total of 336 state placement plaques
each year in Ohio.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Ken Ramsey Sr. added to this discussion on March 6, 2008
|
|
Quote from Bob Preusse's post:
|
|
"California just had their state tourn with one 38 man per weight class bracket, how I envy them.
I don't think Ohio's 3 divisions works out well at all, but apparently others disagree with me on this.
Any one else have trouble following 6 Semifinal matches going on at the same time and spread all over the arena floor ???
as I said, Ohio could reward Team chamionships based on male enrollement numbers, as they do now, that would mitigate the advantage bigger schools have------ but imo theres no good reason to award
42 state titles, a total of 336 state placement plaques
each year in Ohio."
|
Bob:
Maybe it would help if you put this perspective to wrestling to the number of Ohio Campions & Placers: In D1 College Wrestling there are 87 teams listed on the NCAA Website, that would be 870 D1 wrestling slots possible for this year. D1 wrestling has 10 Champions (1 of every 87 wrestlers) and 80 AAs (1 of every 10.875 wrestlers). Compare that to the 3 Divisions of Ohio HS Wrestling, 531 schools with a possibility of 7434 wrestling slots. With those numbers only 1 of every 177 wrestlers is a Champion and only 1 of every 22.125 wrestlers is a Placer. In percentages an Ohio HSs Champion is .00565% of eligible wrestlers and only .0452% are Placers, as compared to the D1 percentages of .0115% for Champions and .092% for AAs. With those facts one could conclude that D1 has a much larger problem with diluted titles than the State of Ohio HS system. I do not have the California numbers to compare them to Ohio, but it is my quess that Ohio's numbers would compare with any of the states with only one division.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on March 7, 2008
|
Ken,
i trust your math, BUT since
its so so hard to even start for a Div I college
, as we know many state champs don't make it, i have to surmise its much much much tougher to place in Div I college than be a state champ in high school.
California btw has over 700 high school that wrestle with 14 state champs and 112 state placers every year--- Ohio as i said has 42 state champs and 336 state placers every year with about 540 schools that wrestle. I think Ohio per capita is tougher than Calif, still 3 Div in Ohio waters things down.
There is a reason California has had only ONE 4X state champ in their history, while Ohio anymore crowns a 4Xer almost every year. A great achievment in Ohio, but in Calif almost
an impossible goal.
and who can follow 6 Semis spread out in a hodgepodge manner from one end of the Schott to the other ???
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Ken Ramsey Sr. added to this discussion on March 7, 2008
|
|
Quote from Bob Preusse's post:
|
|
"Ken,
I trust your math, BUT since
its so so hard to even start for a Div I college
, as we know many state champs don't make it, I have to surmise its much much much tougher to place in Div I college than be a state champ in high school.
California btw has over 700 high school that wrestle with 14 state champs and 112 state placers every year--- Ohio as I said has 42 state champs and 336 state placers every year with about 540 schools that wrestle. I think Ohio per capita is tougher than Calif, still 3 Div in Ohio waters things down.
There is a reason California has had only ONE 4X state champ in their history, while Ohio anymore crowns a 4Xer almost every year. A great achievment in Ohio, but in Calif almost
an impossible goal.
and who can follow 6 Semis spread out in a hodgepodge manner from one end of the Schott to the other ???"
|
Bob: If California's 1 Division Champions were better than the D2 & D3 Ohio Champions wouldn't they succeed at a higher level in college? Look at how many of Ohio's D2 & D3 Champions have gone on to be AAs or have excellent college careers, I think their accomplishments far exceed California's 1 division Champions.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Mark Niemann added to this discussion on March 7, 2008
|
I think it is the fan on me that wants a single division for Ohio High School wrestling. But there is another part of me that recognizes the sheer depth that Ohio High School wrestling has. That alone is worth AT LEAST two divisions.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Maggie Lamantia added to this discussion on March 7, 2008
|
I honestly think this is the first time a thread I made has made it to two pages!
go me! <smile>
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Steve Lester added to this discussion on March 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on March 8, 2008
|
Mr Ramsey,
Ken, i merely stated i like California's one class, 32 man bracket (or in their case this year, 38) -- why should there be more than one state champ in the same state in the same weight class??
Thus in Ohio we dream of "dream matches" instead of having them
--- some people don't agree with me, but thats my 2 cents.
no one,
especially me
, said California produces as much talent as Ohio---- having covered the national high school scene for many years for Amateur Wreslting News, i know Ohio high school production in wrestling talent is 2nd to none and more than California's, imo. ----- But thats not the point.
and i say again,
can anyone really follow SIX semis
going on at the same time, spread from one end of the Schtott to the other end ???? of course not.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Rex Holman added to this discussion on March 14, 2008
|
This thread is very interesting in that it has evolved into a tougher competition versus more opportunity debate. I think some key issues need to be addressed. The issues are athlete opportunities, quality of wrestling, and showcasing the sport. I would like to deconstruct some of these issues as to clearly see what is at stake.
Athlete opportunities in Ohio as they are right now allow for three State Champions. Is that a good number? I’ll answer that later. The OHSAA seems to think so and it has evolved to what it is over a number of years in the name of “equity.” There are no quotas that I know of that limit the amount of participants on a team at the high school level. Thus, anyone who is interested can participate. However, achieving excellence goes well beyond participation and a state championship is about a commitment to excellence. The higher degree of difficulty is proportional to the greater commitment towards excellence.
Athletes stay with wrestling due to gravitational affinity. By that I mean that you pursue the interests to which you are drawn. Wrestlers who make a commitment to the sport do so out of an acquired or innate appreciation of all things wrestling.
Winning a state championship in wrestling in Ohio is very difficult. Winning an Ohio state wrestling championship relative to other states and other sports has to be considered in the 90-100% percentile of accomplishments in high school sports. This is a little known fact beyond the wrestling community.
Having goals is central to any sport and serves as direction in terms of a destination. However, the beauty of the sport is in the process that gets you to that destination. Oftentimes, as spectators we become consumed with our need for the final outcome. This is a problematic approach. It lends itself towards a hostile environment for the athlete. This is not always a good thing.
What we learn along the way as wrestlers can be summed up in terms of discipline sacrifice, effort, and attitude. If we utilize these qualities going forward in life there is little we cannot achieve relative to our talents. If we diminish their worth by placing a higher value on final achievement, then athletes learn that only final outcomes matter. Thereby, demeaning the importance of the attributes that wrestling teaches.
Wrestling is a process not a destination. That being said, I would like the State tournament to grow and take on bigger status. I think it should reflect the commitment to excellence that some individuals are willing to make.
The quality of wrestling at the state tournament is very good in Ohio. I would suggest that the tournament format be changed to a 64 man bracket, one division. (reminiscent of Junior Nationals.) It would create more opportunities for wrestlers. 64>48. I would have top 16 place. I know that takes away a couple trophies, but give the wrestlers a t-shirt that qualify and they will be happy. The sheer size of the tournament would increase demand and interest. Also, get some announcers that are great ( i.e. Ed Aliverti and Sandy Stevens). So, that when a big name is up on the mat, everyone knows. Also, singlets must be unique to a school i.e Claymont or must clearly indicate the school for someone in the stands. Also, quarterfinals, semifinals and finals should be highlighted, no consolations matches running simultaneously.
I spent my summers out in Cedar Falls (site of the Junior National tournament in the 80s). The tournament captured my imagination as a kid. I loved it and competed in it all four years allowable. I think it would be a wise move to run our state tournament with some of its better qualities.
I think Mr. Ramsey and Mr. Preusse are both on the right track.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on March 14, 2008
|
Rex: Fabulous post. I applaud your attention on the fact the process matters more than the destination. And I like your solution. While I've generally believed the three division system has served Ohio well (although I hated when they switched to 8 placers), your alternative would create an exciting state meet both rewarding great individuals and recognizing one state champion.
Curious as to your take on the current NCAA D1 meet. I'm not a fan of conference tourneys as qualifiers. I think either a regional format or an open national meet (Ken Ramsey's suggestion as I recall) would both be an improvement. Agree? Disagree?
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Rex Holman added to this discussion on March 15, 2008
|
Hank-
I am not in favor of the open NCAA tournament as I feel competing in it is a privilege, not a right. I would favor a regional format that was successful at splitting up talent based on overall team strength. I have not contemplated this very much, but I am sure there is a way to do it. A regional tournament will never happen as Conferences have gotten extremely powerful, second only to the NCAA. I don’t like the power that conferences wield as they will serve what is in their best interest, not so much the athlete.
I have not been to an NCAA tournament since ’98. I mostly like how they are run. I am not a big fan of attending live meets. I would rather watch video or catch the telecast. Thank you flocast.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Hypothetical Matches...
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on March 16, 2008
|
still no one has told me they can follow 6 Semis going on at the same time spread from one end of the Schott to another-- answer: u cant,
u miss alot
.
-------
We talk of "dream matches
" instead of having them. Three Div bad idea on many levels, imo.
Rex,
to me there is nothing
like being at
a great wrestling event in person,
the electricity
, wow---- no telecast or flo for me if i can actually be there, at NCAAs, at Ironman, at state tourn, at Fargo. i need to talk to other fans/media members and coaches,
to see the tension up close & personal at an NCAA tourn
,
wow--- not be there? only when i cant be there for a good reason.
Hank,
"Regionals" NOT as good an idea as it seems, in fact was discussed as an option by NWCA and
received very little support
among college coaches.
One drawback is concentration of teams, example Big Ten in the midwest stretches for Iowa to PA but theres not as much Div I out in the far west. To do a regional some teams in concentrated areas would have to journey far from home, would their fans follow ? it would break up traditonal conference rivalries, too.
Example, if we had a midwest regional and a far western regional, maybe Iowa and Minnesota would have to travel to western regional ??
i know the college coaches did Not like it
. Also impacts BUDGETS, how far a team has to travel to a regional, yes it is a budget concern in a low budget sport. Not the good idea some fans believe it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
