Realignment and State Duals Update

[pioneer_pride 1]

That's fine, have an unbiased committee but one thing that you said is to do like Tennessee. We need to learn from the mistakes of their tournament. The way the bracket is set up if you loose first round the only way you can wrestle back is if the guy who beat you won. I really think this is a flaw in the way that tournament is set up.

Yea, that would stink.  But the NCAA's either used to be ran that way or may still be ran that way.  I believe some of the rounds work like that.  Dave Barnes wrestled back to make NCAA AA and some of his rounds I believe if the guy beat him lost his next match he was out.  I don't know, nothing's perfect.  I just can't wait til February.

[Zeus 117]

Seeding the state tournament would be a great idea but the coaches aren't willing to sit through the meeting because it would take forever.  It would have to be done in person which means before the tournament and coaches from the far corners of the state would have to take an extra day to get there for the meeting.  I like the idea but think it should be the top 4.  Would be easier and take less time; most weights fall off around here anyway.

[wrestling4life 0]

That's fine, have an unbiased committee but one thing that you said is to do like Tennessee. We need to learn from the mistakes of their tournament. The way the bracket is set up if you loose first round the only way you can wrestle back is if the guy who beat you won. I really think this is a flaw in the way that tournament is set up.

Correct me if I am wrong, but that is how our state tournament use to be back in the 80's. Is that also the way they wrestle in the Olympics?

[dinubus 2]

Ever heard of a seeding meeting? You cannot tell me the 8 region champs are the 8 best wrestlers in a weight class. Based on statistics look at it the 8 region champs HARDLY EVERRRRRR become the top 8 placers, it just never happens. The top 8 seeds is a great idea. We already have a pretty good system for seeding at tournaments, WHY NOT THE BIG ONE???? Come on we have to grow and not seeding is just keeping us that much lower. We have several border states that run seeded state tournaments well. HECK even the NCAAS is seeded!! I think it will give this sport something to grow on and actually reward those who wrestle during the season and gives kids something to work for during the season. Take Rangers rankings as a seeding tool, I think we all can pretty much agree Ranger is pretty good with rankings and is very unbiased( Trust me I know where he's from and he puts kids exactly where they need to be based on results) If we worked off of Rangers rankings as the seeding I think it would be pretty easy beside the usual argumentitive coach. I think it's much need and would give the energy of state up a notch.

Obviously you have never coached and you have never been to a seeding meeting or you would not think seeding a 32 man bracket out to 8 places with 70 teams involved and with no regard to regional placement is feasible without a couple of 8 hour days devoted to it.

Oh, nothing against Ranger, but he is an assistant coach and I am pretty sure the coaches of all the other teams will not find him quite as "unbiased" as you do.

[dinubus 2]

That's fine, have an unbiased committee but one thing that you said is to do like Tennessee. We need to learn from the mistakes of their tournament. The way the bracket is set up if you loose first round the only way you can wrestle back is if the guy who beat you won. I really think this is a flaw in the way that tournament is set up.

Oh, now we pay an out of state group to watch our wrestling results all year long and set up seeds for the state tournament.  Lets open our wallets and shell out some extra cash at the state tournament then.

This is not to mention that the mere thought of seeding the state tournament completely negates placement at regionals.  Don't you think those kids earned something by proving themselves when it counts?  If we go completely to seeding, the underdog with a 20-10 record that beats an unbeaten wrestler to win the Region tournament gets squat out of it at state.  That is rediculous!

[dinubus 2]

Yea, that would stink.  But the NCAA's either used to be ran that way or may still be ran that way.  I believe some of the rounds work like that.  Dave Barnes wrestled back to make NCAA AA and some of his rounds I believe if the guy beat him lost his next match he was out.  I don't know, nothing's perfect.  I just can't wait til February.

We could always go to freestyle bracketting.  :-D

[385 109]

Oh, now we pay an out of state group to watch our wrestling results all year long and set up seeds for the state tournament.  Lets open our wallets and shell out some extra cash at the state tournament then.

This is not to mention that the mere thought of seeding the state tournament completely negates placement at regionals.  Don't you think those kids earned something by proving themselves when it counts?  If we go completely to seeding, the underdog with a 20-10 record that beats an unbeaten wrestler to win the Region tournament gets squat out of it at state.  That is rediculous!

Hey we finally agree on something! I don't like the idea of seeding a state tournament because of this exact reason.

[kdsmith27 14]

Just my opinion, But I am Hoping that the 5 match rule for tournaments will change!!

[PD 2]

This is not to mention that the mere thought of seeding the state tournament completely negates placement at regionals.  Don't you think those kids earned something by proving themselves when it counts?  If we go completely to seeding, the underdog with a 20-10 record that beats an unbeaten wrestler to win the Region tournament gets squat out of it at state.  That is rediculous!

I am not saying that we should go to seeding however I don't think this is a strong argument for not seeding.  Any regional results would have an effect on rankings and therefore seeding at the state tournament.  If someone beats a higher seed at the regional tournament then that would be considered when seeding the state tournament.  Head to head match ups are always one of the top criteria used for seeding.  I am sure Ranger's rankings that come out before the state tournament include results from regionals.

[dinubus 2]

Just my opinion, But I am Hoping that the 5 match rule for tournaments will change!!

That would be GREAT!

[dinubus 2]

I am not saying that we should go to seeding however I don't think this is a strong argument for not seeding.  Any regional results would have an effect on rankings and therefore seeding at the state tournament.  If someone beats a higher seed at the regional tournament then that would be considered when seeding the state tournament.  Head to head match ups are always one of the top criteria used for seeding.  I am sure Ranger's rankings that come out before the state tournament include results from regionals.

Sure, head to head, course that 20 - 10 record kid had lost to the undefeated guy 3 times prior that year (each one getting closer, but still a loss is a loss), so at the seeding meeting, this win is considered a fluke and he isn't even considered for a top seed.  I mean, if you look at head to head, he is 1-3 against the kid.  Sorry, your argument is not a good argument for seeding.  Not to mention (again) that Ranger is a Coach and any opposing coaches will not regard his rankings as unbiased!

[dinubus 2]

Seeding the state tournament is outragious.  The kids have to step up when it matters, or not.  That is the way it is and should be.

[The Bear 0]

Sure, head to head, course that 20 - 10 record kid had lost to the undefeated guy 3 times prior that year (each one getting closer, but still a loss is a loss), so at the seeding meeting, this win is considered a fluke and he isn't even considered for a top seed.  I mean, if you look at head to head, he is 1-3 against the kid.  Sorry, your argument is not a good argument for seeding.  Not to mention (again) that Ranger is a Coach and any opposing coaches will not regard his rankings as unbiased!

Tell me one coach that thinks Rangers Rankings are biased. I mean come on he's pretty much hit every weight on the nail the past years. The point for that 20-10 kid is if he's as good as he thinks seedings won't matter regardless, but you have to wrestle your tail off during the season I mean give me a break if  your good you'll perform regardless. Am I right I mean you say it yourself the best will pull through, but if we seed we'll make sure those wrestlers who deserve to have a shot in the finals instead of the semis. I'm tired of seeing a blow out in the finals but a close semis I want the best two wrestlers under the light and anyone who agrees with me will agree that is where seeding comes in to play.

[dinubus 2]

If that is your whole argument, when the true first place match takes place, why do we argue about seeding the tournament and instead argue about wrestling for a true second place.  In any case that the person who lost in the finals has not wrestled the winner of the consolations, they must wrestle an addition match against one another for a TRUE second place.  Then there is no argument.  I mean, the places would be the places right? 

[grappler-of-old 44]

We will never be able to solve the perceived problem at the state tourney.

I say perceived because none really knows who the best two really are. 

Only Derek Nickles close friends would have picked him in the top 3 when he won his state title.

My point is that no matter what type of system we use for the brackets.  The brackets will never be perfect.  Truth is we will never be able to prove if they were or weren't.  As someone stated. Some kids pick it up when the time comes.  Others fall on their faces. 

If you want to solve all the problems and find the true top 8. You need to have a round robin tourney.  This is impractical and impossible to do.  Once again people wrestle your best work hard and take each loss with dignity.  I know it is an old saying but life is not fair.  If getting 3rd place at the state tourney instead of getting 2nd is the worst thing to ever happen to you feel blessed. 

Taking losses and feeling things were unfair builds character, and makes you a stronger adult/person.  Wrestling is what it is.  A one on one contest of will and dedication.  We do it because we love the sport not for the pieces of metal we receive at the end of each Saturday.

[bluegrassbrawler 2]

We will never be able to solve the perceived problem at the state tourney.

I say perceived because none really knows who the best two really are. 

Only Derek Nickles close friends would have picked him in the top 3 when he won his state title.

My point is that no matter what type of system we use for the brackets.  The brackets will never be perfect.  Truth is we will never be able to prove if they were or weren't.  As someone stated. Some kids pick it up when the time comes.  Others fall on their faces. 

If you want to solve all the problems and find the true top 8. You need to have a round robin tourney.  This is impractical and impossible to do.  Once again people wrestle your best work hard and take each loss with dignity.  I know it is an old saying but life is not fair.  If getting 3rd place at the state tourney instead of getting 2nd is the worst thing to ever happen to you feel blessed. 

Taking losses and feeling things were unfair builds character, and makes you a stronger adult/person.  Wrestling is what it is.  A one on one contest of will and dedication.  We do it because we love the sport not for the pieces of metal we receive at the end of each Saturday.

You're right.  That's wrestling and life.  I don't think seeding the state tournament will do much good anyway.  We can't just negate the regional results.  Tennessee, I believe, seeds returning placers who win their region.  I could see doing something like that, but I doubt we could ever get the entire coaching community to agree on which two wrestlers are the best.  Sure, there are some years that it is obvious who are the best in each weight class, but other years some weights are loaded.  In the end, the best wrestler on that weekend is going to win, and more likely than not, the second best is going to get 2nd or 3rd. So, lets just keep it as it is.  It makes the quarters and semis a little more interesting...

[PackAttack 0]

We will never be able to solve the perceived problem at the state tourney.

I say perceived because none really knows who the best two really are. 

Only Derek Nickles close friends would have picked him in the top 3 when he won his state title.

My point is that no matter what type of system we use for the brackets.  The brackets will never be perfect.  Truth is we will never be able to prove if they were or weren't.  As someone stated. Some kids pick it up when the time comes.  Others fall on their faces. 

If you want to solve all the problems and find the true top 8. You need to have a round robin tourney.  This is impractical and impossible to do.  Once again people wrestle your best work hard and take each loss with dignity.  I know it is an old saying but life is not fair.  If getting 3rd place at the state tourney instead of getting 2nd is the worst thing to ever happen to you feel blessed. 

Taking losses and feeling things were unfair builds character, and makes you a stronger adult/person.  Wrestling is what it is.  A one on one contest of will and dedication.  We do it because we love the sport not for the pieces of metal we receive at the end of each Saturday.

Excellent point to bring up Derek Nickel.  In any individual sport, seeding should reward the individual for success during the season, but that being said, with the constant lack of head to heads and mutual opponents...it has to be somewhat arbitrary.  This is one sport where that should be irrelevant.  No state champion to date has been able to say that they didn't earn it, so in hindsight what is the real importance of a seed?  Their will always be those who may have had an easier path to state, but that doesn't guarantee them a championship

[385 109]

I really feel like the best wrestler in the state, will win the state championship every time. Some people could argue that the true finals where in the semi's or whatever, but all in all i think the best wrestler always wins.

[dinubus 2]

I would rather it be said that the winner of the state tournament is always the best wrestler for that day.  I Cannot really say that he/she is the best wrestler out of that group of wrestlers, just that they were the best that day.  And that isn't saying little of them.  It takes a big person to step up to the plate and perform when it counts.

[tc125 0]

Seeding the state tournament is outragious.  The kids have to step up when it matters, or not.  That is the way it is and should be.

i have always hated it when people say that. when it matters most...why doesnt the season matter? no one takes the season seriously, and i wish i knew why. whats so bad about the regular season that makes how you perform in it, not matter? there has got to be some way we can incorporate season finishes and and regional finishes. if not, what makes a regional tournament, any bigger of a win than a seasonal tournament? especially seasonal tournaments like the dragon, or the woodford invitational. if you ask me, more emphasis in seeding or placing seeds at the state tournament, should be placed on winning or placeing at these highly acclaimed tournaments. they are certainly tougher than regional tournaments, unless the best couple of kids at your weight happen to not be at these big tournaments. why should kids that do terrible during the season, but start to do good at regionals or have a fluke win be praised or rewarded more than a kid that has already beaten them three times during the regular season? oh well, i guess thats just my opinion.

[grappler-of-old 44]

tc125;

Being from the center of KY in the Lou/Lex area you may not understand what really goes on on the fringes of KY.

I know in the Nky area the only real option that these teams have is to go across the river into Ohio and participate.  This is done both out of necessity (Travel costs) and need (better competition).

I know many say that teams need to participate in Ky more, but only those in the Lou/ Lex areas say this because there are 30+ schools in a 25 mile radius to wrestle.  Nky only has 10 teams in a 50 mile radius to wrestle and Wky is in the same situation.  The Dragon and the WCI may be good KY tourneys but they pale in comparison to many of the Cincinnati area tourneys let alone the Dayton and further north tourneys.  Nky can either travel the 80-90 miles south into Ky and compete in some tourneys in Lex/Lou or travel the same 80-90 miles North and compete in tougher tourneys in Ohio. 

With that said.  The regular season is downplayed because it is what it is.  It is practice toward the Regional and State tourneys.  How many kids do you know have had extremely successfully regular seasons and either not qualify for the state or go 2 and out at the state tourney.  I have seen it dozens of times in my 20+ years.  I have also seen it go the other way. 

The champions bring their A game when the post season comes.  The Johnny come latter's do not. 

Once again I use Derrick Nickle as a prime example.  He brought his A game when it counted and used the regular season to get himself ready for the post season.

No-one remembers the kid who was 50-4 placing 8th in the state tourney.  But they will remember the kid who was 30-10 and earned the state title.  This is what makes this sport great.  Anyone can win when the post season starts.

[The Bear 0]

i have always hated it when people say that. when it matters most...why doesnt the season matter? no one takes the season seriously, and i wish i knew why. whats so bad about the regular season that makes how you perform in it, not matter? there has got to be some way we can incorporate season finishes and and regional finishes. if not, what makes a regional tournament, any bigger of a win than a seasonal tournament? especially seasonal tournaments like the dragon, or the woodford invitational. if you ask me, more emphasis in seeding or placing seeds at the state tournament, should be placed on winning or placeing at these highly acclaimed tournaments. they are certainly tougher than regional tournaments, unless the best couple of kids at your weight happen to not be at these big tournaments. why should kids that do terrible during the season, but start to do good at regionals or have a fluke win be praised or rewarded more than a kid that has already beaten them three times during the regular season? oh well, i guess thats just my opinion.

Exactly, great point tc125. I agree totally with you.

[grappler-of-old 44]

Oh I would also like to add.  A big tournament does not necessarily mean a good/tough tournament. 

The WCI is just this.  Many teams (mostly small) but not many quality teams. Not my definition of a tough tournament.

[dinubus 2]

Technically the regular season is not at all downplayed.  They use those results to seed the regional tournament.  Then, your placement at regional tournament essentially seeds you into the state tournament.  So, I don't see the problem.  The point I was making prior was that those individuals that desire the state win the greatest will achieve it.  You cannot tell me that all your wrestling combined could equate to one Olympic Gold Medal.  That proves, yet again, that certain times we need to bring it, or not.  Such is life.

[The Bear 0]

Technically the regular season is not at all downplayed.  They use those results to seed the regional tournament.  Then, your placement at regional tournament essentially seeds you into the state tournament.  So, I don't see the problem.  The point I was making prior was that those individuals that desire the state win the greatest will achieve it.  You cannot tell me that all your wrestling combined could equate to one Olympic Gold Medal.  That proves, yet again, that certain times we need to bring it, or not.  Such is life.

Kentucky wrestling will stay stuck in the mud, want to know why? People are too scared to take chances! There is a reason that just about every state surrounding us is better. Not everyone is going to get their way no matter what we do to the tournament but I'm tired of seeing people who DON'T DESERVE to be in the finals in the finals. Yes I said it don't deserve, the reason they shouldn't desrve it is because if that guy who was in the semis with the number one guy ( aka the finals match) was seeded right he would've ended up on the opposite side of the bracket and smashed the guy who didn't deserve to be in the finals. Ex. Courtney should have been in the finals his 8th grade year, not because he got a bad call but because he probably would've smashed Garrison Headley if he were on the opposite side of the bracket because it was obviously a see saw between Courtney and Sanders as number one and two the whole year.