New Alignments
- Thread starter lowcountrydad
- Start date
With so few regions having more than 5 wrestling programs, exceptions being 5A-2, 5A-5, 5A-7, 4A-3, will there be a "need" to have region tournaments in late January for qualifying purposes? Some regions already use regular season results to determine "All-Region" status. Will all classifications get rid of the region qualifier model and just allow all wrestlers to compete at Upper and / or Lower State?
5A - 40 wrestling programs?
4A - 36 wrestling programs?
3A - 34 wrestling programs?
26 programs in a combined 2A-1A.
The question now becomes what about the state duals? 16 team bracket? 32 team bracket still? Right now 4A and 3A use a 32 team bracket. Doesn't make much sense to do a 32 team bracket for the state duals if it means knocking out only 4 or 8 teams.
In theory chances of a kid making it to state in each class assuming you have 14 starters on all teams in each classification
5A - 20% (14x40 = 560 wrestlers, 14 weights x 8 state spots = 112 state wrestlers)
4A - 22.2%
3A - 23.5%
2A/1A - 30.7%
Some of these numbers will go up since we know not every team will field every weight class.
5A - 20% (14x40 = 560 wrestlers, 14 weights x 8 state spots = 112 state wrestlers)
4A - 22.2%
3A - 23.5%
2A/1A - 30.7%
Some of these numbers will go up since we know not every team will field every weight class.
I think in the long run this will be beneficial to the sport in the state. In the short run there will be those who see a kid who gets to state in 2017 and or 2018 and will assume he would not have made it under the old regime.
Maybe your foresight is better than mine, but I'm not entirely sure how watered down state titles help to grow the sport in a general sense. I suppose the argument is that if a state title is "easier" to come by more kids will be enticed to participate?
I think all the things you laid out make total sense. Region tournaments can go (cost saving for teams traveling for a day) and cut the dual playoffs down to 16 which would cut a weigh-in date for kids, a travel day during a prime training time. Last thing you want is something where making the state duals is not a goal because everyone is automatically in.
I think all the things you laid out make total sense. Region tournaments can go (cost saving for teams traveling for a day) and cut the dual playoffs down to 16 which would cut a weigh-in date for kids, a travel day during a prime training time. Last thing you want is something where making the state duals is not a goal because everyone is automatically in.
Last edited:
5 divisions is nonsense, lets all be honest. 1 State title is all you need. Not everyone needs to win a state title.
Kinda like the inflated stats with some kids posting 60 and 70 wins in a season. When wrestlers that only wrestled 30 to 35 matches in the past fall way behind them on the career lists.
I'm going to have to agree with Trent here. When you add yet another class to a low enrollment state like ours, you do make it easier to get to, place and be a state champ. I am not saying they don't have to still work. But it will make it easier. Man I think this is a set back.
Last edited:
If adding 1 more state champ helps our state, why not add 2 or 3 more. Imagine what that would do if adding 1 more helps.
I just think it diminishes what a state champion is. We might as well become Upward Wrestling and give everyone a trophy.
I understand the reasoning those in favor of adding 1 more are stating. Coaches also get to brag more because now they have a chance at another state champ. But I do not see this growing our sport.
These kids should be facing each other, best against best. If anything we should be consolidating to only 2 state champs. IMO.
I just think it diminishes what a state champion is. We might as well become Upward Wrestling and give everyone a trophy.
I understand the reasoning those in favor of adding 1 more are stating. Coaches also get to brag more because now they have a chance at another state champ. But I do not see this growing our sport.
These kids should be facing each other, best against best. If anything we should be consolidating to only 2 state champs. IMO.
The Spartanburg Methodist College Wrestling team is asking for donations for their program. We need to all come together and show our support. Any and all donations are greatly appreciated! The program has a brand new coach with a brand new vision, and is needing your help to get to where they want to be. The expenses for a quality wrestling program are considerable, but also a necessity for our student-athletes' future development. The fundraising goal is to raise $15,000 for the Spartanburg Methodist College Wrestling program.
Your sponsorship will contribute towards expenses required for tournament fees, travel expenses, team bags, team uniforms, new wrestling mats and an assistant wrestling coach. With your help we can continue to advance and improve our wrestling facility and the program!
We are excited to see the hard work pay off!
Please, use the link below to help out!
http://app.eteamsponsor.com/ETS/supportUs/8216231
Your sponsorship will contribute towards expenses required for tournament fees, travel expenses, team bags, team uniforms, new wrestling mats and an assistant wrestling coach. With your help we can continue to advance and improve our wrestling facility and the program!
We are excited to see the hard work pay off!
Please, use the link below to help out!
http://app.eteamsponsor.com/ETS/supportUs/8216231
Amen JerseyFresh, one individual tournament with 6 places awarded is all our small state needs. Only one kid per weight needs to be a champion of a state - isn't that what "State Champion" implies?
I'm not sure that would work DDT.What would happen when all state champs are 6A. I think its more about egos than about state titles. What are we watering down? So 14 more kids get a medal ,that in no way takes anything away from any other state champ. If so please explain what IT is. It can't be our national standings . Can't be a college scholarship.Someone please explain this to me. JUST not THAT SMART.
Personally I think there needs to be a team champion for every division. a 1A school just can't compete with a 4A school for several reasons but primarily lack of enrollment which limits the potential pool of prospective athletes.
I don't buy the argument that this is the same at the individual level. Do the same issues that limit 1A teams from competing on a level "playing field" (or wrestling mat as the case may be) with 4A squads exist? Probably so, but an individual can find a way to be a champion on his own. If a large state like California only has one champion per weight class (there is talk that they may change this) why does a state the size of SC with our much lower participation numbers need multiple champs? I have argued a system before that would allow kids to be a 1A, 2A, etc.. champ, but let the top kids battle to be THE State Champion.
Makes it a bigger honor and bigger event.
Two reasons. Its not difficult to figure out. 1) Football drives our state. Football A.D.'s made this decision. The HSL didn't consider wrestling or Girls Tennis when doing this. Football is king because they generate a lot of money.....2) Economics. More state titiles = more ticket purchases, sales, etc.
I've always wondered if football generating a lot of money at the SC high school level is perception rather than reality, WinFew. I would love to see the actual revenue to output numbers for SC schools. Seems to me, at least around where I live, they spend a great deal of money equipping the 80+ athletes on a football team, but I often see stadiums that are filled to half capacity at best.
I'm not saying wrestling generates money - I am not delusional - but let's remember high school athletics is not about making money, it is about giving students the opportunity to participate. Don't confuse high school sports with the twisted, perverse world of college athletics.
Besides, I think the SCHSL would save money with one individual tournament - think of all the cheaply produced medals they would save.
When does someone try and sue the HLS for fraud or something. Im sure there is something they are doing that is illegal. You want change, sue those people? Thoughts?
What is more troubling and misunderstood than anything where football is concerned is the false belief that because football brings in so much money, the coaches and their staff are paid so much more. What most people do not realize is that in most districts, ticket sales do not supplement coaches salaries. They are a budgeted item paid for by tax dollars....by people like you and me. The money taken in at the gate is often times used to supplement equipment for non-revenue sports, but certainly not to the extent of the cost of running a football program.
What is an even greater shame, and another little tidbit that most don't realize are the situations where districts have implemented the "pay to play" system. So every athlete pays a set amount to play that year, or in my case it is $100 per sport. Yes, a three sport athlete will pay $300 this year just to participate.
Here's where it gets really crazy.... Scenario....
Cross Country... 100 kids in the program. Total Pay to Play income..$10,000
Football Team...100 kids in the program. Total PTP income...$10,000
Coaches Salaries:
Cross Country..Two Coaches paid a total of $3,000
Football.....10 Coaches paid a total of $68,000.
Wow....looks like someone is getting a hell of a deal with that CC program, or many others like it, such as wrestling, track, swimming, lacrosse, etc...
So where tax dollars are concerned....why is the FB coach so much more financially valuable than the wrestling, track, baseball, softball, or CC coach?
If it were based on ticket sales, then it's a no brainer. But, it's not.
So that age old tired a*** excuse of "FOOTBAW makes all da money", is from a time long ago passed, when they had one bar on the helmets and took salt tablets to cure cramps.
JYMF, two thumbs and both my big toes up! What do you think about districts that hire a head football coach to also be an athletic director so that they can pay him $106,000 a year? Conflict of interest? Or just a blatant disregard for all other sports?
So, How many kids go to college for football vs Basketball, baseball and the other sports. If more kids have the opportunity to go to college on football than any other sport, would we not invest more into that sport with higher coaches salaries and such. Just food for thought.
Although school and district admin would deny it, these are both gross inequities among schools where hiring practices are concerned. Think about it...a school will go to the ends of the earth to get a FB coach that they want or feel qualified. Open up a nationwide search, screen 100 applicants, and interview five; to finally arrive at the next "Nick Saban, or Bobby Bowden". I an think of a local hire recently who many of the old school folks and supporters felt certain that he sat at the right hand of God, and was destined to lead their FB program to the promised land. After three years...not happenin. Ass beatings are as regular as a Raisin Bran induced bowel movement.
When it comes time to hire the new CC or wrestling coach, typically it is the "warm body" effect. Let's get that assistant FB or BB coach that we need, and see if we can entice him to also coach the SB team with a stipend of $1200. Again, an unfair, and misrepresented use of TAX dollars. Most importantly, it is blatant disrespect to the "non-revenue" athletes and their parents who work just as hard for their sport and program as any other. I'm sure they would love to have a former "specialized" collegiate athlete training their son or daughter. Those "non-revenue" athletes who do have coaches who are highly qualified with deep backgrounds in the sport are simply just lucky.
Simple.....because tax dollars are not based on how many kids get a scholarship. They are based on residential and commercial growth, situations, and provisions. If it were based on a system of scholarships of any kind, many districts would, and do produce far more scholarship athletes out of the non revenue sports than the football programs. I can think of one that places multiple kids in D1 schools off of CC, swimming, and soccer alone.
Now....be careful about what you consider a "scholarship". Because Bubba and his "Momma and Deddy", say he got a scholarship don't make it so. Every year a multitude of kids are "walking on" at some tiny JC or NAIA school in the middle of nowhere, only to be found every fall Friday night hangin out back at the local high school game.
Glad that those kids have that chance....but that ain't a scholarship.
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Probability-of-going-pro-methodology_Update2013.pdf
I know this is not news to anyone here, but there is more money for academic scholarships than anything else. Take care of business in the classroom and there will be money available, as well as financial aid. Basing any coaching pay off of the number of potential opportunities to receive a scholarship would be terrible. Rewarding coaches for getting their athletes to college (academic or athletic scholarships) would be nice though.
I know this is not news to anyone here, but there is more money for academic scholarships than anything else. Take care of business in the classroom and there will be money available, as well as financial aid. Basing any coaching pay off of the number of potential opportunities to receive a scholarship would be terrible. Rewarding coaches for getting their athletes to college (academic or athletic scholarships) would be nice though.
In our district they justify football getting more because they work summer time (like other sports don't work in the summer time)!!! Actually heard way back in the 90s, Tim Whipple (Irmo Basketball Coach) did a study on amount of hours he worked vs Football and he was rewarded a pay raise so all our district basketball coaches got the same raise. So basketball gets more then wrestling and other "minor" sports. With it being open season almost year round now a days, you would think pay raises for all coaches should be there as well. We spend way more hours then we use to because kids are specializing more and the demand of running a program now requires year round attention.
To your point jymf,
I have interviewed numerous times for Head football and wrestling jobs. Never had a committee interview me for a wrestling job but have sat in front of anywhere from 5 to 15 people at football interviews. How about those tax dollars being wasted on the football hire? Plus, there is usually more than one round. Anybody ever require a "2nd" interview to get a wrestling job? For that matter, anybody ever have multiple interviews and large committees to get a teaching job? Isn't that what most of us are employed to do first and foremost anyway?
TBowe
I have interviewed numerous times for Head football and wrestling jobs. Never had a committee interview me for a wrestling job but have sat in front of anywhere from 5 to 15 people at football interviews. How about those tax dollars being wasted on the football hire? Plus, there is usually more than one round. Anybody ever require a "2nd" interview to get a wrestling job? For that matter, anybody ever have multiple interviews and large committees to get a teaching job? Isn't that what most of us are employed to do first and foremost anyway?
TBowe
Actually the "work in the summer" is a bunch of BS. I have done research on this and presented to my school admin and district. The average length of season from opening practice to end of regular season is 14 weeks across the board. There may be a 1 week variance here and there. But if a coach chooses to spend his summer in the weight room or practice field, that's his business and not the responsibility of the taxpayer. Pay rates should be based on length of season, general participation numbers ( CC works with 100 kids and gets paid $1500 while girls basketball works with 13 kids and gets paid $6,000) ( Asst. FB works with 25 kids and gets paid $7,000...wrestling works with 50 and gets paid $2,000). Other considerations...experience, employment in the district ( 23 year old BB coach gets $6,000 while 26 year veteran baseball coach gets $2,000)
I could go on all day about this and have research data to back it up. Why is the coach turnover rate for non-revenue sports so much higher than revenue sports? Because they are paid at 4-6 times the rate of the others...at the expense of the taxpayer. Reminder...those supplements are not paid for by gate receipts.
Another slap in the face to the non-revenue kids and taxpayers.....Many schools are now paying FB coaches ridiculous amounts ( excess of $20,000) to coach, and also cutting deals where they only teach two classes per day, one or both of which is their football team, which means they can lift and practice before the school day ends. However; they are paid a full time teacher's supplement...once again on the taxpayer's dime.
That would be great if I could only teach four classes this year, but yet be paid for six.
Preachin to the choir brother. About ten years ago, I served on a committee to hire a coach of a non-revenue sport. We interviewed one person and she was given the coaching AND teaching job before she left the building.
I have served on many interview teams and committees and as you have stated, there are VAST differences in the care and concern of those positions and hires.
Granted, I understand that the FB position ( especially in SC) is what they call a "high profile" position and can serve as the face of the athletic program. I see the need to be careful there.
But, when it's my money ( tax dollars) that are being shuffled like cards, I have a problem with that.
JYMF might just have become my favorite poster, after myself of course. Very well said.
Win2 or less, how many kids at your school have actually gotten a football scholarship over the years compared to the total number who have played? Doesn't really matter as JYMF explained.
Kimrey03, I had always heard from a prominent coach who I assisted that wrestling coaches were NOT paid for work during the Christmas holidays - that is why their supplements are low. Not sure if this is true or not, but as we all know, wrestling coaches put in a great deal of time over the holiday break.
I would also point out that it is much easier to get a position in football than it is in wrestling as has been pointed out. And this isn't just because football programs have soooooooo many coaches (a wrestling program should feel fortunate to have 3 supplements). Let's look at Union High. Their coach is a former quarterback for USC. I do not believe he has an education degree and am not sure that he even has a Bachelors, but Union created a position for him. I believe he makes in the neighborhood of $60k a year. No chance a school would create a position for a wrestling coach paying a 1/4 of that....
Win2 or less, how many kids at your school have actually gotten a football scholarship over the years compared to the total number who have played? Doesn't really matter as JYMF explained.
Kimrey03, I had always heard from a prominent coach who I assisted that wrestling coaches were NOT paid for work during the Christmas holidays - that is why their supplements are low. Not sure if this is true or not, but as we all know, wrestling coaches put in a great deal of time over the holiday break.
I would also point out that it is much easier to get a position in football than it is in wrestling as has been pointed out. And this isn't just because football programs have soooooooo many coaches (a wrestling program should feel fortunate to have 3 supplements). Let's look at Union High. Their coach is a former quarterback for USC. I do not believe he has an education degree and am not sure that he even has a Bachelors, but Union created a position for him. I believe he makes in the neighborhood of $60k a year. No chance a school would create a position for a wrestling coach paying a 1/4 of that....
Considering some of these FB positions in my immediate area, $60,000 is low, although in the overall scheme of things; not a bad gig for coaching high school football.
Many HS FB coaches at some of the bigger schools are making $90-$100,000 considering that they are paid a full time teaching salary or AD position, plus the base head coaches supplement and up to 40-50 paid days for summer work. Generally, they are paid on the same scale and system as an assistant administrator. Again, the only coaching position that seems to be "negotiable" although taxdollars are paying the tab. Even more concerning is the lack of actual teaching responsibility that is involved considering that many of their "classes" are their football team.
Now...some who read this post might say, well that's just what they pay. I agree, good for them and they should take it if they can get it, just as anyone would.
The problem as previously mentioned is that school boards are funding/negotioating these positions without the general knowledge of the taxpaying public. However; these positions are typically posted somewhere in the gallows of a district website that you can find only after "cracking the code" to get there. But; were these and all other professional level positions made more openly public, my guess is that there would definitely be some public outcry at the lunacy of it all.
Years ago, served on a committee to hire a varsity BB coach. Made our selection, offered the job and that was that. Found out about three days later that the person would also serve as the AD. Wow; a slight conflict of interest as the BB coach/AD's season was in direct conflict of mine/wrestling.
Guess who lost most situations where gym space, etc... was needed on the same day....
Turned out, dude was a good guy, but there were always "situations."
Again....when tax dollars are at issue, why is any other position or person so much more valuable than another? Additionally, why are the non revenue/minor sports in many cases given the "scraps" as coaches that are left over after assuring that the 18 FB positions are covered?
Darth Vomitus....the number of kids at Columbia High getting football scholarships...no idea the actual number. A good bit (although we've hit a dry spell the last 3 years) from the late 80's to 2011. Incredible talent coming out of this school for football.
JYMF. Can you use all that data and research based numbers for your SLO. That would be awesome if you could.
But good point about tax payer dollars paying and equality. Didn't think about it. RCSD1 just got a raise this year for coaches so that helps us out.
JYMF. Can you use all that data and research based numbers for your SLO. That would be awesome if you could.
But good point about tax payer dollars paying and equality. Didn't think about it. RCSD1 just got a raise this year for coaches so that helps us out.