|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
Todd Vennis added to this discussion on January 20, 2009
|
As many of you know, last summer it was proposed to the Northeast District Board to utilize a seeding system for sectional assignment. The District Board, based on the concerns of a group of coaches did not adopt the proposal. It is my belief, based on recent discussions with one of the coaches who spoke out, that the leadership within the coaches association did not do enough to educate the general coaching community on the benefits of this proposal. We believe that this proposal is the right thing to do and are going to try again for 2009-10. In the coming weeks, you will be approached by coaches who support this proposal asking you to join us. We are going to provide you with a letter for you and your principal to sign. We hope that you will join us in our effort for improving equity for all teams in the District.
I am including in this thread a list of concerns/myths many who oppossed it and attempt to dispel those myths.
I fully endorse this plan and hope that you will join me.
Todd Vennis
Head Coach E. North
OHSWCA District Representative.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
Todd Vennis added to this discussion on January 20, 2009
|
Myth: This plan was devised solely by the Greater Cleveland Wrestling Coaches Association.
Fact: Brett Powell of Austintown Fitch was on the committee that created the proposal and fully endorses the proposal. Brett canvassed the coaches at the Massillon Perry district in 2008 and there was a universal unhappiness with the current system.
Myth: This plan was put in place for the benefit of the traditional dominant teams in the northeast district.
Fact: This plan does nothing for teams like St. Edward, Massillon Perry, University, Walsh Jesuit, etc. These schools are succeeding under the current format and for the forseeable future will continue to be successful no matter how sectionals are assigned.
This plan will help the mid-level programs, such as my own. (Eastlake North would have been seeded 28th this year. We are in no way to be considered an elite team.) I feel my team would have benefitted from this seeding. It possibly could have given me the opportunity to choose between the Mentor and Massillon Peryr district. I can't imagine a coach in Division one or two who would not relish the opportunity to have a more direct say in the success of their athletes by picking which sectional/district they will compete in. Imagine, coaches, having your best team in years and being able to determine whether you qualify for the state tuornament out of Firestone or Ontario. Coaches will have to do their homework.
Myth: This plan will make it more difficult for the lower echelon teams to get their kids to the district or state tournament.
Fact: There can be no argument that there will be some lower echelon teams that will face the prospect of having a tougher sectional. However, there is more information than ever available to coaches about the wrestlers who have legitimate chances to go to state. Very rarely does someone fly under-the-radar. If you are a team that is unseeded and would be characterized as a "one- or two-man gang" type of team, the other coaches whose wrestlers would be effected by you will avoid you. This situation could result in your elite wrestler having an easier time qualifying to the next week - something that you could hang your hat onto to build your program up and eventually become a seeded team. Coaches will have to do their homework.
Additionally, there will be no sectional that will have more than 6 seeded teams in it. As noted earlier, the seeded teams aren't all the type of teams that have hammers in every weight class. This creates a more fair situation to all teams in the district.
Myth: This will force unusual travel for sectionals.
Fact: Seeded schools are given the option, in the proposed plan, for their superintendent to requests and be given sectional assignment in the nearest geographical sectional. This is something that is not happening under the current system. For example, Eastlake North and Willoughby South, two schools 5 minutes apart, went to different sectionals for many years despite being in the same division. South was often sent to Austintown Fitch. Both of those schools this year have to drive to Massillon Perry for districts forcing an overnight stay. All the while, Mentor is 5 minutes away and hosting a district. Quite frankly, economic and academic concerns are not being considered in the current system.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
Mark Viviani added to this discussion on January 20, 2009
|
seems like a good idea to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
Anthony Windsor II added to this discussion on January 20, 2009
|
I think that's how they do it for my Sectionals/districts
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
Jerry Des Forges added to this discussion on January 20, 2009
|
First off I am for the seeding (and hopefully I will be coaching again next season and can put in my two sense).
Couple questions
1. How would the district placements work - where the district is held? I know you guys would like to be at Mentor for the district this year because it makes for an easier trip to and from but what about all the NW teams that must travel 2 hours just to attend Mentor- would they instead be a Massillion Perry- they are facing the same issue?
2. Would they ever consider having just two locations holding yearly? i.e. somewhere NW and somewhere NE (I know we prob have more NE DI schools).
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
Todd Vennis added to this discussion on January 21, 2009
|
|
Quote from Jerry Des Forges's post:
|
|
"First off I am for the seeding (and hopefully I will be coaching again next season and can put in my two sense).
Couple questions
1. How would the district placements work - where the district is held? I know you guys would like to be at Mentor for the district this year because it makes for an easier trip to and from but what about all the NW teams that must travel 2 hours just to attend Mentor- would they instead be a Massillion Perry- they are facing the same issue?
2. Would they ever consider having just two locations holding yearly? I.e. somewhere NW and somewhere NE (I know we prob have more NE DI schools)."
|
District Assignment
Under the current proposal It would be predetermined prior to the seeding meeting which sectionals fed into which district.
NW Travel
I am sympathetic towards the NW people, that is why I feel the current 3 site 2 year rotation between between MP/Men/MHard is fair. The NW schools only have to travel every 3rd year. NE schools actually travel more than they do. OUr schools go out there 2 years, plus teams that traditionally have been at Mentor go to Perry. That is why the travel concerns are a wash under the proposal put forward last spring.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
Todd Vennis added to this discussion on February 5, 2009
|
bump.... because letters to all coaches in NE Dist. are going out next week.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
Shawn Andrews added to this discussion on February 5, 2009
|
I talked to Coach Powell about this at the Hepner tournament. It seems to really work well for the central district and but they aren't choosing which district they go to. It does seem to provide three relativley even sectionals. The coaches to talk to would be the Dayton Coaches as right now they are the only one who can pick thier district based on thier seeding.
One problem I have as a coach is ranking 38 teams. I can pretty much figure out the top 15-20 but after that if I am being honest I don't know who is ranked ahead of who. NE would have over 60 teams which would be quite a task to seed out.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Northeast District Coaches - Please Read!
John Joyce added to this discussion on February 5, 2009
|
|
Quote from Shawn Andrews's post:
|
|
"
One problem I have as a coach is ranking 38 teams. I can pretty much figure out the top 15-20 but after that if I am being honest I don't know who is ranked ahead of who. NE would have over 60 teams which would be quite a task to seed out."
|
One option would be to only rank the top twenty teams and then have the other eighteen order determined randomly by drawing from a hat. beyond the top twenty, I doubt there is much that separates. This is how the Dayton sectionals did their draw the first year, but have since gone away from it. But the only have 22 teams to rank, not 38.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
