Complete Separation

[deaddux]

excellent outlook matfan -

[matfan]

Thanks chxian and deaddux!

[trackman]

walkenvol - No, I didn't intend to say I'm for a split of any kind. What I meant to say was that we need to do what's best for the kids. I think that to abitrarily split athletics into two groups (public and private) because of a single criterion is a rather simplistic way to solve a complex problem. If you even see it as a "problem."

 

The schools with strong feeder programs and good coaching will field competitive teams whether they're public or private. Perhaps TSSAA needs to rethink it's policy for segregating all its members, because other than public/private, the only other criterion is size. Then the implication is that size makes a difference. Sure it does, but not in all cases.

 

Look at the predictions in Nashville this year. Overton and FRA. Not hardly the same size schools, but it appears they will be knocking heads a lot. But I do believe that's the exception rather than the rule.

 

As for always having a bigger, stronger opponent out there waiting to beat you may be true, but if you carry that to the logical conclusion we must have a national championship, and then ... But that's not the only reason for prep sports. Most of us don't give a flip about who the 98 lb state champion was in 1962. Or who was the 103 in D I or D II in 2002 for that matter.

 

I go back to the idea of participation. Most teenagers are neither stupid nor masochistic: few of them would put their hands in a garbage disposal and turn on the switch. If a small school with 6 or 8 kids were starting out in Bradley Central's region, what chance do they have. I'm not talking about winning - I'm talking about surviving.

 

As for watering down the competition, what does it really hurt to have five state champions in football (public only, I realize)? That means that five groups of kids feel great at the end of the year. How about baseball, basketball, soccer, etc? Why do we have to have one heavyweight state champion? So we can get more slots in the nationals. Most kids don't even know about the nationals. Those who do and who care can will the state championship and compete. That won't make our athletes any more competitive at the national level. The same thing that builds competitive high school programs builds nationally competitive athletes: excited enthusiastic coaches, strong boosters, and supportive schools and communities.

 

In summary, there is a disparity in high school athletics which inhibits increased participation in some sports. And there are coaches who cry. There are parents and spectators who complain. But I'm still not sure that splitting schools is the best way.

[walkenvol]

Trackman - Anyone who places their focus on what is best for the participants certainly has their heart is in the right place. You speak of HS athletics on the level I equate with intermurals and little league. Many HS athletes have spent years

practicing, training, and anticipating their 4 years of HS competition. What is accomplished by lowering the bar to the extent that the level of "state championship" is attained with only an average amount of effort and preperation? Do we want to reward excellence or do we want to make everyone feel good? Are you in favor of HS students have GPA's or should we only state that they attended the classes and made a good effort? Alot of B/C students will feel really good, but do the A students continue to strive for their potential? A very slippery slope indeed.

[reftn]

I must be delusional (no posts to that please!).

 

Lets take it to its logical concluison Track.

 

We need, in TN wrestling, A Black State Champ, a Hispanic State Champ, Caucasian State Camp, Asian State Champ, Samoan State Champ, Girls State Champ, Girl with pigtails State Champ, Blonde Haired boys State Champ, A, AA, AAA, AAAA, AAAAA of each in both D1 and D2....I feel so much better just typing it. Is it meaningless? You bet, but dont you feel so very enlightened?

 

In fact, hey, just apply to TSSAA for the championship of your choice. They could ship it UPS complete with an awards ceremony tape. I mean, why go through all the sweat and time?

 

Track I dont mean anything personal here, but most state champs today dont have to work as hard as their counterparts did a couple of years ago. Some do, and are rewarded with college scholarships. But imagine if you had just the D1 and D2 wrestlers sharpening themselves against eachother how much better it would be? Or do I have that wrong?

 

So that begs the question, which is better for the kids? In some cases it might be better to finish a strong #2 and learn a hard life lesson than to be given a #1. In ALL cases, it is better to have competed for the #1 spot, period, than never to have competed at all.

 

There is no more passion for his sport, than a wrestler. Of that, I am convinced.

 

You dont "play" wrestling.

Never forget it.

 

reftn

[matfan]

Reftn- Again, well stated commentary!

[dblXface]

Trackman,

 

It needs to be one tournament. Father Ryans first match is with FRA (this is your Bradley scenario). FRA steps up to what they will see with Overton, Soddy, McCallie, MBA, and eventually Baylor when they go to Greenville. Their coach ought to be arrested.

[trackman]

Your enthusiasm for your sport is terrific; however, your overall view of athletics appears a bit narrow. You refuse to look at anything other than no separation. There are always alternatives.

Are you saying that the dedication and work rate of a 400 meter runner is less than a wrestler? I definitely think you're wrong there. Or a 5K runner? How about somebody that competes in the breast stroke?

Why would you think that a kid works any less hard because he's in A or AAA or Division II? I would think that the champion in D II works as hard to improve and compete as the champion in D I.

I didn't mean to imply that intramurals is the answer. I just said there are other ways to build athletic programs. The people who say the only way is for everybody to wrestle in the same division are as narrow minded as those who abritrarily chose to split by public and private.

I'm not going to get into some debate about which is the hardest sport in which to complete. I really don't care which sport is toughest . And I never implied we should have a blond champion, but what if we did? Would wrestling be hurt? No! Wrestling would still exist and be just as successful as it is today - maybe even more so. The only thing hurt would be the egos of people who have to something to prove. There is a world out there beyond wrestling or football.

There are always alternatives. Sometimes we need to look for them.

[dblXface]

Wrestling needs to be ONE champion. Dedicated 400 meter runners are phenomenal athletes willing to sprint a ridiculous distance. They can be seperated in a championship because their results are quantified by a stopwatch. If my kid is the DI 400m champ and his time is better than the DII 400m champ, I have an answer to who is faster because I have a time to prove it. Same goes for all Track and Field events.

The best and worst part about wrestling is - anything can happen. You can be winning the NCAA Div. I finals 14-2 with a minute left and get pinned. I am a huge track and field fan and appreciate their training and dedication.

The difference is the predatory nature of wrestlers. They practice mostly underground (everybody's wrestling room is in a basement or some other space nobody wants unless you have a benefactor or organization to provide you one). They run on their own after practice or the next morning. They are mostly appreciated by their competitors because their classmates go to basketball games. Wrestling and wrestlers will always be misunderstood by those who aren't in it, as competitors, coaches,parents,or fans. We've accepted that.

...and the best want one tournament. If not here, then they go to the Nationals. Nobody asks if the guy in your bracket was a prep wrestler or private school guy there...

they just find out who the best is.

[reftn]

Nicely put Dblx. All sports train differently.

 

I think track does offer some similarities to the individual nature of wrestling. The exception being in wrestling I can physcially put my hands on you and work to my advantage. Sort of a cause and effect plan . But I do respect what they do.

 

But it is that very reason, to a degree, sets our sport apart. I can cause your action and reaction in order to achieve victory. Anything can happen.

 

The shotput goes in a straight line. The track goes round and round. Maybe they should bring in figure 8 track meets?Or two figure 4's?..hahahaa.

 

It is that reason the sport needs to be together, not split. To work through a 32 team bracket is grinding. Being the best on the Third Saturday in February is all that counts.

 

Lock em up!

 

reftn

[trackman]

Hold on. We have one 400 meter champion. We don't compare times for the championship. Also, if you think track conditions don't make a difference, you're wrong. If you're comparing times, you're only indirectly comparing runners. Lots of things can happen in track and field too.

 

Yes, just last year in the one of the championship matches in Chattanooga I saw something I'd never seen before. One wrestler was leading by one point and on top with time running out. He looked at the clock, let go, and jumped up and down celebrating. His opponent stood up, earning a point which tied the score in regulation. That wrestler then got the takedown in OT - and won the state championship. That doesn't mean that kid was the best wrestler in his weight class; it only means on that particular day that wrestler scored the most points.

 

A couple of years before that in duals a kid was five points behind and on bottom with about 10 seconds left. In desperation, he reached up and grabbed his opponents head, flipping him to the mat. He pinned his opponent with about a minute left on the clock. His team went on to win the championship. The loser in this match was undoubtedly the better wrestler and probably would have won 9 out of 10 times.

 

Two instances of heart and endurance and skill - no doubt. But the same things occur in other sports, like track and field, cross country.

 

There seems to be a question of respect: working out in the basement, nobody caring because basketball rules, etc. People care; it's just that the vast majority of people still are not that familiar with wrestling - and track and field, volleyball, soccer, etc. There's no big conspiracy to keep wrestling in a closet somewhere.

 

You may be shooting yourself in the foot with your one approach.

[mtnrasslin]

Good point, dblXface. It is particularly important for a sport like wrestling for there to be one tournament for the reasons you state so well.

 

However, even in the case of the 400 meters, there are benefits to there being one championship heat. If the two champions are on the track at the same time, one or both may get pushed to shave a few hundredths off their time. Each will be better because of the additional competition.

 

The bottom line is that the seperation issue, which really is more football driven than other sports, is for the benefit of the coaches and administrators, not the athletes.

[Edited by mtnrasslin on 11-21-02 2:58P]