The California Wrestler Forum

California Wrestling News => California Wrestling (general info) => Topic started by: 96Olympian on February 23, 2017, 05:15:47 pm

Title: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: 96Olympian on February 23, 2017, 05:15:47 pm
Wrestling Community:
Possible future topics in NO (I Repeat) NO particular order of importance. I have added a few other items and details based on YOUR feedback & comments which numbered in the hundreds and included over 7,000 views in two closely related posts over the last couple of weeks:
- Visiting other state dual/individual championships to gather ideas for discussion at the CA Wrestling Advisory Committee and the diverse wrestling community.
- Dual meet STATE championship by divisions- FORMAT TBD and details will be ironed out, lots of great ideas! I appreciate your responses.
- Single individual tournament with multiple team races by divisions to preserve single CHAMP format but create opportunities for other teams to vie for a team title (see TEAM Awards post as to why given CA's logistics/demographics)
- Bi-annual analysis regarding qualifiers by section- POSSIBILITY of Points scored via advancement, bonus points etc/AND Medal count included versus JUST medal count
- Are you excited by the reinstatement of the Fresno State program, I am!!??!! If you are... We need to find MORE ways to continue to partner up with Higher Education to ensure more and more opportunities for our men/women wrestlers at ALL LEVELS ...Community Colleges, Junior Colleges, Universities, D1, D2, D3, NAIA, NWCA and USA wrestling developmental and Olympic levels.
-Seeding at least the top 8 wrestlers in each weight at the State Tourney vs. formula
- Team Awards to top 8 teams (currently top 4)- 800+ teams fielding teams, almost 300 teams sending qualifiers PLUS some teams traveling hundreds and hundreds of miles with as few as 1-3 and as many as 12-14 qualifiers from the 3rd largest land mass state of the USA.... we could stand to honor a few more teams for competing at such a high level at one of THE toughest wrestling states in the country.
-Most pins in the least amount of time award- This recognition is given at many high level tournaments to award the ultimate win in the sport regardless of the match score- THE PIN.
-Continue partnership with the sport at all levels. At the league, section, state and national levels including NHSF CIF Staff, Section Commissioners, CIF Exec. Committee, and  CIF Federated Council.


Now that seeding has occurred ahead of schedule, we will take into account the feedback expressed from the wrestling community which appears to be overwhelmingly positive, so a big thank you.

I have had some coaches express that an interchangeable floor pass  would be real useful at the state tourney, so I will put this item up for discussion at the next Advisory Committee meeting.
Title: Re: Wrestling Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Update
Post by: cen-cal coyotes on February 23, 2017, 07:48:00 pm
1.0 - Visit other states dual championships. Yes, we should do this, add $3.00 to everyones CIF dues and that should be more than enough to send someone.
2.0 - yes, should be number 1 on the priority list.
3.0 - This can be easily done, but has little validity in a champion.
4.0 - Yes, this should be updated with the best information possible every 2 years.
5.0 - Go Dogs!
6.0 - Its tough to seed the top 8 out of 800, there will always be naysayers about politics with bigger programs getting better seeds.
7.0 - yes i agree, add this to 3.0 and we could have top 8 for 4 divisions ;)
8.0 - Great idea, promotes dominating opponents.
9.0 - Great idea
Title: Re: Wrestling Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Update
Post by: centralcoastgrappler on February 23, 2017, 08:26:58 pm
Why do we only place to 8 in state?  How about top 12? Ss and CS easily do it.  In a state of 35 million...1/10th the pop of the U.S.  We place 8. .  I suck I made top 12....really ?  "Oh let's give everyone an award by placing top 12."  WHY NOT?  Forget divisions place top 16?  Be innovative, think outside the box, why must we keep pace with the 70's.  Why divisions...nobody wants divisions.

Move CA wrestling back and have all placers compete NJCWA nationals instead of just crowning them all-American.

Women's CA JC wrestling...where is it?

Bring back the PAC 12 and compete against the MidWest so the top boys stay home. 

PAC 12 Women's wrestling .  Why not?

Change women's wrestling season like polo, volleyball, tennis and golf where there's no competition for facilities and an extra stipend involved.  Boys coaches are doing double duty and should get paid for it, plus no competition for facilities.

I realize many of these things are outside your preview but growing boys wrestling in CA will in terms of fans and opportunities at the next level is.
Title: Re: Wrestling Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Update
Post by: SCWAY Lawson on February 23, 2017, 09:03:11 pm
Marco, if you are brave I will travel with you to any state dual Championship and pay for everything, (driver, not it!).  No cost to the state.  You pick the state and let's make this happen.  Maybe you can persuade Kyle Iwanaga to come along too 8). Better yet, we will invite Tomazic and he will pay for all of us!
Title: Re: Wrestling Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Update
Post by: 96Olympian on February 24, 2017, 05:25:51 am
Marco, if you are brave I will travel with you to any state dual Championship and pay for everything, (driver, not it!).  No cost to the state.  You pick the state and let's make this happen.  Maybe you can persuade Kyle Iwanaga to come along too 8). Better yet, we will invite Tomazic and he will pay for all of us!

Ha the crazy El Dorado HS crew...are you kidding me!!! Oh, you had to throw Iwanaga in there! Tell Kyle I'm am definitely ready for our 1986 state semi-finals rematch! Bring it  :)
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Update
Post by: 96Olympian on March 01, 2017, 11:18:49 am
Wrestling Community:
Possible future topics in NO (I Repeat) NO particular order of importance. I have added a few other items and details based on YOUR feedback & comments which numbered in the hundreds and included over 7,000 views in two closely related posts over the last couple of weeks:
- Visiting other state dual/individual championships to gather ideas for discussion at the CA Wrestling Advisory Committee and the diverse wrestling community.
- Dual meet STATE championship by divisions- FORMAT TBD and details will be ironed out, lots of great ideas! I appreciate your responses.
- Single individual tournament with multiple team races by divisions to preserve single CHAMP format but create opportunities for other teams to vie for a team title (see TEAM Awards post as to why given CA's logistics/demographics)
- Bi-annual analysis regarding qualifiers by section- POSSIBILITY of Points scored via advancement, bonus points etc/AND Medal count included versus JUST medal count
- Are you excited by the reinstatement of the Fresno State program, I am!!??!! If you are... We need to find MORE ways to continue to partner up with Higher Education to ensure more and more opportunities for our men/women wrestlers at ALL LEVELS ...Community Colleges, Junior Colleges, Universities, D1, D2, D3, NAIA, NWCA and USA wrestling developmental and Olympic levels.
-Seeding at least the top 8 wrestlers in each weight at the State Tourney vs. formula
- Team Awards to top 8 teams (currently top 4)- 800+ teams fielding teams, almost 300 teams sending qualifiers PLUS some teams traveling hundreds and hundreds of miles with as few as 1-3 and as many as 12-14 qualifiers from the 3rd largest land mass state of the USA.... we could stand to honor a few more teams for competing at such a high level at one of THE toughest wrestling states in the country.
-Most pins in the least amount of time award- This recognition is given at many high level tournaments to award the ultimate win in the sport regardless of the match score- THE PIN.
-Continue partnership with the sport at all levels. At the league, section, state and national levels including NHSF CIF Staff, Section Commissioners, CIF Exec. Committee, and  CIF Federated Council.

A super thank you to Alan Paradise, Tod Tomazic, Lou Montano, Duane Morgan, Rob Wigod and Brian Seymour for making things happen in Bakersfield!
Best wishes in the 2017 post-season wrestling friends.....God Bless.

Marco Sanchez, Ca State Advisory Committee Chairman
Now that seeding has occurred ahead of schedule, we will take into account the feedback expressed from the wrestling community which appears to be overwhelmingly positive, so a big thank you.

I have had some coaches express that an interchangeable floor pass  would be real useful at the state tourney, so I will put this item up for discussion at the next Advisory Committee meeting.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: 96Olympian on March 01, 2017, 12:36:45 pm
Now that seeding has occurred ahead of schedule, we will take into account the feedback expressed from the wrestling community which appears to be overwhelmingly positive, so a big thank you.

I have had some coaches express that an interchangeable floor pass  would be real useful at the state tourney, so I will put this item up for discussion at the next Advisory Committee meeting.
Modify message
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: Rich Bordner on March 01, 2017, 01:10:56 pm
Any plan to discuss potential uniform changes (ie, option of having fight shorts and rash guard instead of singlet, doublet, etc etc)?
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: 96Olympian on March 01, 2017, 01:40:47 pm
That topic has not come up Coach Bordner.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: TheMoomAbides on March 01, 2017, 02:02:15 pm
What if you guys discussed having smaller sections brought into bigger sections for qualifying?

Or SF and Oakland could be combined for one spot and give another spot to another section. They just aren't winning or getting a medal. I've supported the city sections for years...but after looking at the recent data, the SF and Oakland sections just don't seem to be improving. 
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: 96Olympian on March 01, 2017, 02:06:13 pm
What if you guys discussed having smaller sections brought into bigger sections for qualifying?

Or SF and Oakland could be combined for one spot and give another spot to another section. They just aren't winning or getting a medal. I've supported the city sections for years...but after looking at the recent data, the SF and Oakland sections just don't seem to be improving.

That topic has come up and has been shot down by the SF and Oakland Commissioners unfortunately.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: North Section Coach on March 01, 2017, 02:38:56 pm
Coaches pass allotment at state is awful.

Currently, it is:
1-4 wrestlers = 2 coaches passes
5-8wrestlers = 3 coaches passes
9-11 wrestlers = 4 coaches passes
12+ wrestlers = 5 coaches passes


I strongly feel it should be:
1-2 wrestlers = 2 coaches passes
3-4 wrestlers = 3
5-6 wrestlers = 4
7-8 wrestlers = 5
9 + wrestlers = 6
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: 96Olympian on March 01, 2017, 02:52:10 pm
Coaches pass allotment at state is awful.

Currently, it is:
1-4 wrestlers = 2 coaches passes
5-8wrestlers = 3 coaches passes
9-11 wrestlers = 4 coaches passes
12+ wrestlers = 5 coaches passes


I strongly feel it should be:
1-2 wrestlers = 2 coaches passes
3-4 wrestlers = 3
5-6 wrestlers = 4
7-8 wrestlers = 5
9 + wrestlers = 6

We will discuss this item. Thank you North Section Coach.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: rydtime on March 01, 2017, 09:07:38 pm
I think that they need to eliminate the automatic coaches warning anytime a call is questioned. It can't be a total dictatorship. I can see if a coach is out of line but to question a judgement call is not out of line refs do make mistakes.  ncaas have video replay, and calls are often reversed. I don't have a firm answer on what should or shouldn't be a misconduct but not just for making a trip to the table.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: resnick66 on March 02, 2017, 08:04:00 am
DO SOMETHING SO THAT SS KIDS HAVE A MORE FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE IT TO STATE.

I am sorry, I'll never get past this.. Based on the number of high schools and wrestling programs a kid from SS has a 2% chance to make it to the state tournament. A kid from any other section in the state has anywhere from a 7% to 15% chance. There is no way on this green Earth that educated adults should think that is a fair proposition.

I am not saying there should not be extra spots allocated to Central because they are some of the best in the USA. I get it. Fine.

But one of several options would all work...
1. Give SS 1 more spot for an even 10. Then make Masters into a pair of 1 day tournaments and split SS into two parts. 1-5 from each part go to state. You increase the first round at state by 1 match. Big whip.

2. Give SS an even 12 spots. Then ever kid who makes it to day 2 is in. You increase the first round at state by 3 matches... Still not a big deal.

3. Divisions.

4. Call SS Masters what it really is-- Southern California CIF State Championships. Include SD and Poway into it. Medal the top 10. All of them get to go to The next week's event-- CA State.

I dont give a darn what gets done... anything will be better than what is going on now... Between the raw costs of it all, the days of travel, the insanity of the percentage odds.... across the board- it is nuts.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: Aztec on March 02, 2017, 08:41:13 am
1 to 3 more qualifiers for the SS isn't going to make the odds of qualifying meaningfully better. You still have to whittle down ~300 schools to 9-12 guys. No matter how you do this, it will require more travel and more matches than other sections need to determine their qualifiers.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: Aliso Coach on March 02, 2017, 10:29:32 am
3x14= 42 more athletes qualifying for Masters.  Right now 126 athletes qualify so that is a 30% increase.  Are these wrestlers likely to place at state?  No, but for many, many schools in the Southern Section, just getting to state is a HUGE accomplishment.  My school has had 3 qualifiers in its 20 year history.  I have been head coach for the past 7 years and I have had 2 of those, roughly every 3 years.  We compete in the 2nd toughest conference in the Southern Section (Coast View Conference, second behind the Big VIII).  Our conference includes San Clemente, Laguna Hills, Trabuco Hills, Dana Hills, Capistrano Valley, etc.  All schools that have had decent showings at Masters and State in years past.  All schools that "could" have multiple state qualifiers any given year due to numbers of Master's qualifiers (this year we had 34 CIF placers from our CIF- not bad considering our opponents- Palm Desert, Calvary Chapel, Santa Ana, etc).  Out of those 34 placers, we ended up with 6 state qualifiers.  If top 12 had qualified, our conference (of 9 schools), would have had 10 qualifiers. 

I know that qualifying for state means different things to different sections but it really is a big deal to most schools in the southern section, esp. to those of us who cannot recruit due to closed enrollment (my school hasn't allowed transfers even within the district for the last 7 years, so the kids that live in our boundaries are all that we get).  Many schools go years and even decades without seeing the state meet, even with running kids programs (where kids often attend who don't end up at your school), running year round programs with solid off-season competitions, and even financial funding to travel with your team.  It is just that competitive and seems to me, ridiculously so.  A large number of schools in the Southern Section celebrate CIF placers as others in the state celebrate State placers.

An example of this- here are the current Orange County rankings for teams published in the newspaper (source OC Register).  I am not sure how many schools are in Orange County but I would estimate around 90+ (??).

O.C. TOP 10
1. Calvary Chapel- 3 Qualifiers
2. Esperanza- 3 qualifiers
3. Trabuco Hills- 3 qualifiers
4. Servite- 2 qualifiers
5. Santa Ana- 3 qualifiers
6. Laguna Hills- 1 qualifier
7. Cypress- 1 qualifier
8. San Clemente- 1 qualifier
9. Aliso Niguel- 1 qualifier
10. Capistrano Valley- 1 qualifier

So for the "top ranked" programs in OC (something that is VERY subjective and changes week to week), you had a total of 19 state qualifiers using the existing system.  How is this inclusive?  It makes it so much harder to recruit and maintain kids when most of them never make it out of CIF or Masters and never even see the state meet.  Perhaps it is me and the way we run our program but looking at the numbers, we are not alone in the Southern section, even among schools that qualified many kids to Masters (Northview brought 14 and qualified 6?).

I totally agree with Resnick, something needs to be fixed in this system- either go to division and open it up to a huge number of new kids and give them a chance to place at state (something I don't see happening due to the people dedicated to the "one champion" system), or expand the state championship to be more inclusive.  All of us wrestle in at least a few 48- 64 man tournaments over the course of the season and they still only take 2 days (often with less than 10 mats).  Would it really be that much harder to expand the state tournament?


Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: save1more on March 02, 2017, 10:30:53 am
What about allowing some "B" wrestlers to compete in the Divisional and Sectional championships. My son beat each CIF Champion in our section. Unfortunately he didn't beat the one who is on his own team and ranked in the state. He has beaten a few of the top 15 wrestlers except for that one who happens to be on his team. If a "B" team wrestler has met certain qualifications, he should be able to compete. I am sure a few of the top 10 programs have the same issue. Not sure of the ramifications of a decision like this but I am wondering...do other states have "B" teams competing in their qualifying tournaments?
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: funkuntilyoufinish on March 02, 2017, 11:28:47 am
What about allowing some "B" wrestlers to compete in the Divisional and Sectional championships. My son beat each CIF Champion in our section. Unfortunately he didn't beat the one who is on his own team and ranked in the state. He has beaten a few of the top 15 wrestlers except for that one who happens to be on his team. If a "B" team wrestler has met certain qualifications, he should be able to compete. I am sure a few of the top 10 programs have the same issue. Not sure of the ramifications of a decision like this but I am wondering...do other states have "B" teams competing in their qualifying tournaments?

If the goal is to strengthen the tournament that is a good idea, but I think that would ultimately benefit only the best programs.  How many teams are deep enough that a guy like that couldn't bump up and win a wrestle off?
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: MattShoe on March 02, 2017, 12:51:56 pm
The formula will allow each section to earn up to 10 qualifiers. Should the formula be revised? What would the new formula look like?
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: n0mad0 on March 02, 2017, 12:58:24 pm
To continue the growth of our sport, keep parents happy, not keeping kids at tournaments that drag and keep the sanity of coaches.....there should be a rule that for every four people in a bracket there should be a mat added (32 man bracket must have 8 mats or more). I can't think of another sport that requires so much time. Big tournaments lacking the mats is definitely not good for the sport.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: DadCoach 0927 on March 02, 2017, 02:17:28 pm
Recruit?  High School wrestlers?  Who would do such a thing...
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: AMorris on March 02, 2017, 04:36:04 pm
Any plan to discuss potential uniform changes (ie, option of having fight shorts and rash guard instead of singlet, doublet, etc etc)?

This is a barrier for some kids coming out for the sport.  I hope the option to wear something else gets brought up. It has been somewhat controversial in online discussions, but why can't we run an experiment and allow teams the option to use rash guard and fight shorts, like Flo Nationals, to see how it goes?

Uniforms have changed over the years, from tights and bare chest, to tights and unitard, to singlet. No reason why we can't continue to change to best serve the sport and kids.
Title: Re: Wrestling Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Update
Post by: AMorris on March 02, 2017, 04:38:56 pm
...  Why divisions...nobody wants divisions.

...


Plenty of people want divisions. It has worked out pretty well for the states that keep the division numbers reasonable, like Pennsylvania. Not so well for states that have way too many, like Arizona and Oregon.
Title: Re: Wrestling Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Update
Post by: TANKMATT on March 02, 2017, 07:44:05 pm
Quote from: centralcoastgrappler link=topic=90057.msg560461#msg560461
date=1487910418
...  Why divisions...nobody wants divisions.


...


Plenty of people want divisions. It has worked out pretty well for the states that keep the division numbers reasonable, like Pennsylvania. Not so well for states that have way too many, like Arizona and Oregon.

Parents want divisions !!! 3 divisions would work out fine. You can't compare other sports to wrestling but it seems to work out for football and basketball. I mean D-2 athletes are receiving football and basketball scholarships from NCAA D-1 schools. Ultimately its about all kids pursing an educational career, for some kids a scholarship is the only way of achieving such a goal. There are currently kids in our top ten rankings from Divisional wrestling states. Im not buying the thought of it watering down our current system. I do believe some kids are not getting a fair shake, especially the Southern Section. If there were 3 divisions, couldn't there be a State Masters Event where the top 8 from each division compete. Crown a D1 state champ, D2 state champ, D3 state champ. Then hold a State Masters event...top 8.... 24 man brackets. That will declare a true State champ, but still show that divisional state champion some recognition. Please put the kids first. They are the ones grinding it out on the mat. Something needs to happen, real fast!

Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: DadCoach 0927 on March 03, 2017, 05:31:29 am
Why not four divisions, then a four man bracket to decide Overall Champion of each weight class?  It would add two matches and could be run in a day...
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: AMorris on March 03, 2017, 09:13:47 am
1. What do they do in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and other states where multiple division work well?

2. Reality is that the elite kids meet up at elite tournaments throughout the year anyway.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: Gymrat on March 04, 2017, 06:48:48 am
Why a 40 man bracket?   More matches first round. More kids..more parents...more money!!!! Second day the arena is less than half full...make the California state tournament..the event it should be.
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: Big Earl on March 04, 2017, 07:58:58 am
I like this idea but it runs into the 5 match rule. If your league has 8 teams it can finish the league tournament in one day. If two teams add a B wrestler and create a 10 man bracket then you have the possibility of wrestlers reaching their match limit and either tying for 3rd / 5th or forcing a two day tournament.
One idea is to eliminate the league tournament and have all A and B wrestlers compete in a divisional / regional tournament that feeds into masters .
What about allowing some "B" wrestlers to compete in the Divisional and Sectional championships. My son beat each CIF Champion in our section. Unfortunately he didn't beat the one who is on his own team and ranked in the state. He has beaten a few of the top 15 wrestlers except for that one who happens to be on his team. If a "B" team wrestler has met certain qualifications, he should be able to compete. I am sure a few of the top 10 programs have the same issue. Not sure of the ramifications of a decision like this but I am wondering...do other states have "B" teams competing in their qualifying tournaments?
Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: centralcoastgrappler on March 04, 2017, 08:40:51 am
SF and Oakland could be combined for one spot and give another spot to another section. They just aren't winning or getting a medal..SF and Oakland sections just don't seem to be improving.
That topic has come up and has been shot down by the SF and Oakland Commissioners unfortunately.
Since those two sections are ruining the state tournament...
1) 64 man bracket: There are many schools the host 64's and finish in two days and include a showcase for the finals See Doc B, Temecula, and CIT tournaments.  Bring in more people.
2) Move quarters to second day, not a half empty arena saturday.  Everyone gets more qualifiers and solves many issues...and not everyone gets medal, no divisions.  Brings in more people. 

SS gets 9/500 = 1.8%, LA gets 2/25 = 8%, O and SF about 10% of kids qualify and we can't do anything about it.  SS is being punished for O and SF being uncooperative.

I saw the Downey kid at SS masters (2017 State Champion) losing by 3 with 30 seconds left.  The closest match he had the last two weeks was in SS masters quarterfinals!

3) Medals in between matches?
4) place top 12?  Who decided only 8?  There's more deserving kids, plus if your an underclassman it will give seeding criteria for the following year.

Title: Re: Topics for Wrestling Advisory Committee- Last Call for INPUT
Post by: Gymrat on March 04, 2017, 08:51:50 am
64 man bracket..2 days. More qualifiers for  everybody.. more kids will go on to the next level..d2 d3 naia  Jr college. Investing in the future in the sport we love...