MassWrestling.com
Welcome
Username:

Password:


Remember me

[ ]
[ ]
Online
Guests: 13, Members: 0 ...

most ever online: 859
Members: 10064
Newest: Sean Brady
Support MassWrestling. Click a link!











Forums
MassWrestling.com :: Forums :: New England Wrestling

2013-14 New England Tournament  Go to page  1 2 3 4 5 [6]
Agatch22
Tue Mar 11 2014, 09:24PM
Registered Member #5260
Joined: Sat Jan 27 2007, 10:59PM
Posts: 80
Medic5392 wrote ...

Agatch, I am gonna keep this short and sweet before my Windows 8 crashes again.

One, the MA and CT Teams are at a huge dis-advantage and MA 5/6 have scored pretty high some years. Even a few points for your team at that level matter.

Two, "entitlement",- “You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means”. A spot earned is not a spot you are entitled to.

Three, if MA and CT were better just due to their numbers then by that logic ME, NH and RI should all be far better than VT as well due to their numbers. MA and CT are better due to quality overall and depth of that quality.

Four, adding extra spots is not "so wrestlers can get the experience", the point is that experience such as that is a huge advantage, acting as though it is not is not being honest or realistic.

Fifth, prestige is for the placers, there is no loss of prestige by adding wrestlers who only gain notice if they place. This is not like watering down standards for selection to a good school, team, in the military or a job, the top 6 place at New Englands or they don't.

Last, I am guessing you are a VT guy? Hats off to MAU, the team makes New England proud, I mean that, but at the same time the system is hardly fair when less than 25 teams produce 3 entries into the New Englands. If you want the best competition then 2-4 guys who you think won't score points anyway should not be a threat. Let the best compete, there is no more fair a place in the world than the mat.

I understand coachskp's point on time of tournament and logistics, it is a fair point, but other than that there is no real argument against it that I have seen presented.



OK lol, here I go

1) I understand the "disadvantage" you speak of in relation to wrestler to qualifier ratio, but MAU is winning with it's VT 1 and 2's by huge margins this year and last. This year 6th place Lincoln-sudberry scored 55 pts, 66 pts behind MAU, so I'm thinking a 7/8 are not going to make up that ground, it may have caught Timberlane at 56.5, last year MAU 109, 4th place N. Andover 61

2) en·ti·tle·ment noun \-ˈtī-təl-mənt\ : the condition of having a right to have, do, or get something. By working your @$$ off, and placing as a NE qualifier, you are now entitled to go, not everyone goes.

3) "MA and CT are better due to quality overall and depth of that quality." Exactly, due to your higher number of participants, as I said. Your bound to find tougher athletes/wrestlers in a pool of 1500, then 400. (fictitious numbers, but prob close MA vs RI). RI, NH, ME may be better then VT, just not MAU, who always seems to have the best kids in VT going to their school, hmmm...lol

4) I agree that the experience is a huge advantage for the following year, but that should be on the list of reasons to add a 5/6, 7/8. Unless I misunderstood you, then my bad.

5) the NE's are the best of each state which in my eyes makes this a prestigous tournament. By adding wrestlers who most likely won't place but "may" to me takes away from the tourny. Now I'm not saying the 5/6 & 7/8 are slouches, because to make it that far they would have to be very good wrestlers, but you have to draw a line. IMO

Lastly, lol, Im from RI, not VT, been coaching down here for 20 yrs now, but again in the last part your arguing numbers, MAU did nothing with any VT3's, but a 3 needs to be in in case of loss to 1 seed and a fair shake, or a true 2nd wrestled wrestled and drop the smaller states to 2 entries, which will not happen I'd gather. Adding 5/6, 7/8 is not going to help a team balance the force by adding 1 wrestler for a team. When 7/8 doesn't "even the playing field" then it'll be a 9/10, then 11/12. I'll agree that RI is inferior to CT and MA, and MAU when it comes to wrestling, some in part to our interscholastic regulations, but mostly in part to the number game.

It's always good to have friendly debates, I enjoy it, but I gather we won't see eye to eye, best of luck to all wrestlers this off season

Jim Maher
Tue Mar 11 2014, 10:24PM

Joined: Mon Mar 29 2004, 08:09PM
Posts: 4726
My suggestion is to just drop the teams scores entirely and this problem goes away. The focus becomes on the kids not the teams.
WICH1149
Wed Mar 12 2014, 06:59AM
Registered Member #1202
Joined: Mon Jan 24 2005, 10:00AM
Posts: 335
I'm curious to know how many of MAU kids live in the towns that are suppose to go to that school. I'm might be wrong but last I heard there are a ton of kids who go there from other schools to wrestle.
Medic5392
Wed Mar 12 2014, 08:16AM
Registered Member #6539
Joined: Tue Dec 11 2007, 04:11PM
Posts: 848
1) I understand the "disadvantage" you speak of in relation to wrestler to qualifier ratio, but MAU is winning with it's VT 1 and 2's by huge margins this year and last. This year 6th place Lincoln-sudberry scored 55 pts, 66 pts behind MAU, so I'm thinking a 7/8 are not going to make up that ground, it may have caught Timberlane at 56.5, last year MAU 109, 4th place N. Andover 61-

MAU will continue to win titles, so won't Timberlane and eventually other teams too, but the point is that if you are a freshman and go to New Englands, it is a wake up call. I think people need to step up their game to catch them, but at the same time a sense of fairness in opportunity should not be discounted. Adding two more kids from CT and MA is a good thing and it will also shut down this "MAU get's too many kids". MAU and Timberlane win because they have outstanding programs, but even an outstanding program from MA or CT cannot always get their best kids who could score some points there due to the set up.

2) en·ti·tle·ment noun \-ˈtī-təl-mənt\ : the condition of having a right to have, do, or get something. By working your @$$ off, and placing as a NE qualifier, you are now entitled to go, not everyone goes.


Again, "You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means". If a MA 7th or 8th and a CT 5th or 6th goes directly into the tournament instead of being an alternate then that is not entitlement. They earn it.


3) "MA and CT are better due to quality overall and depth of that quality." Exactly, due to your higher number of participants, as I said. Your bound to find tougher athletes/wrestlers in a pool of 1500, then 400. (fictitious numbers, but prob close MA vs RI). RI, NH, ME may be better then VT, just not MAU, who always seems to have the best kids in VT going to their school, hmmm...lol



It is not just numbers though, it is the programs. The MVC, Franklin, Springfield Central, etc...all consistently produce great wrestlers. The majority of clubs are in MA or right over the border in NH that a lot of MA kids go to. It makes a difference.

4) I agree that the experience is a huge advantage for the following year, but that should be on the list of reasons to add a 5/6, 7/8. Unless I misunderstood you, then my bad.


Nah, it is just a minor difference of what I meant. While a MA7/8 kid may not do much at first, they will eventually and even a few points matter. Little things add up. VT and other smaller states get a huge advantage for their kids by getting them that kind of experience. I do not think it is a reason to add more kids, but it is something that should be taken into consideration.


5) the NE's are the best of each state which in my eyes makes this a prestigous tournament. By adding wrestlers who most likely won't place but "may" to me takes away from the tourny. Now I'm not saying the 5/6 & 7/8 are slouches, because to make it that far they would have to be very good wrestlers, but you have to draw a line. IMO


Prestige is earned, a 5/6 and 7/8 have to beat kids to get into the tournament and then beat kids to score at the tournament. There really is no more objective standards than a one on one competition like wrestling. 99% of the time it is up to the individual if they win or lose and that rare time a ref causes a loss? Well, as my coach used to say, "You shouldn't have put it in the ref's hands". There is no change in the prestige of the tournament. The best kids are still at the top.


Lastly, lol, Im from RI, not VT, been coaching down here for 20 yrs now, but again in the last part your arguing numbers, MAU did nothing with any VT3's, but a 3 needs to be in in case of loss to 1 seed and a fair shake, or a true 2nd wrestled wrestled and drop the smaller states to 2 entries, which will not happen I'd gather. Adding 5/6, 7/8 is not going to help a team balance the force by adding 1 wrestler for a team. When 7/8 doesn't "even the playing field" then it'll be a 9/10, then 11/12. I'll agree that RI is inferior to CT and MA, and MAU when it comes to wrestling, some in part to our interscholastic regulations, but mostly in part to the number game.


I think all 3rds should be in there too, but MA 6th has also done well in the past. In 2014, MA6 beat RI3, ME3, VT2 and VT3. In 2013 MA6 beat CT4, NH3, ME3, VT3, VT2 and RI3 with MA5 beating MA5 beating NH2 and ME2. In 2011 MA6 beat RI2, VT1, NH2, CT4, RI3, NH3, ME2, VT2, VT3, ME3. I couldn't find some of the other years coachskp did, but I think 2010 or 2009 was even more dominant in terms of points. Anyway, a MA 7/8 will score some points and so won't a CT 5/6.

I always enjoy debates too. Even though I am obviously right

Side note, I do not really mind that kids move to MAU to go to school there, if I was a parent and I lived in the area I would move there too. I would go to New Hampshire though, move near Plaistow. It is a good "Live Free or Die" State without all those VT Hippies or MA lefties to worry about

Really though, you can't blame a kid or his parents moving to an area to help their kid in education or athletics. Look at ME, there is a school there that is the oldest prep school in the country (slightly disputed) and if you go there it costs as much as any college, but if you live in the town you go there for free as it is the "local high school". Wouldn't you think about moving there for an opportunity like that?


Medic5392
Wed Mar 12 2014, 08:18AM
Registered Member #6539
Joined: Tue Dec 11 2007, 04:11PM
Posts: 848
Jim Maher wrote ...

My suggestion is to just drop the teams scores entirely and this problem goes away. The focus becomes on the kids not the teams.


Slightly disagree coach, I think it is a great goal to shoot for and a very hard one to get. I also think that if you win that title, with rare exception, you are usually the best team in the region. Just my view though.
Shvarts
Wed Mar 12 2014, 08:50AM

Joined: Wed Mar 24 2004, 10:28PM
Posts: 245
I think Medic made a lot of these point while I was typing.

We have this discussion every year.

First of all Mount Anthony and Timberlane are the best team in New England, year in and year out. There is no secret why, it’s because they work harder than everyone else. If they have kids transfer in to wrestle for them it is because they are the best and people want to join their program. If I had a wrestler come to me and say I want to transfer to your school so I could wrestle for you I would take that as a tremendous compliment. This happens to all the top team, including in Mass. Lowell, Franklin and Winchester (to name a few) have all had kids transferring in to be on their team. I’m not saying these coaches recruit nor do anything wrong, they just have a program that others want to join.

No state should get less than 3 qualifiers, it put too much emphasis on seeding and if you get upset you might end up leaving your best wrestler at home. ME did this a few times when they would just take the 3 class champs.

As for Mass (and CT) getting more qualifiers, I’d be all for it. Very few Mass 7/8ths would be the worst wrestler in their bracket. Eric Kerr was a Mass 7 this year and finished 6th, Mike Bentley was a Mass 7 and won 3 matches.

I’ve seen weight classes that are tougher at Mass All States then they are at New Englands, look at 160 in 2009. Travis Moran who was one of the best kids in the weigh in New England, he had a bad match against a really good kid in the quarters, he then lost to Bedard (who would finish 2nd at New Englands that year) in the consi’s and didn’t place at all-states. The top 4 kids at New Englands were all from Mass, the 5th place kid was from NH, that NH wrestler has losses to at least 2 Mass kids that didn’t place at All-States, he was 5th at New Englands but if he was from Mass he would have had a very tough time qualifying. This isn’t the norm but Mass has had some VERY good kids have a bad match or 2 at All-States and finish 7th.

What kills Mass the most is the 3 weeks of qualifiers leading up to New Englands and all the different tournaments. It’s tough for teenagers to peak for 4 straight weeks. How many Mass teams main goal is winning a New England title, I’m guessing very few. There are plenty of kids that are very happy with a divisional state title and don’t wrestle their best at All-States, or kids that lose a heartbreaker in the All-State quarters and can’t mentally recover for their next match. Some kids just get beaten up, mentally and physically by the time they get to New Englands. Not having the dual meet states during the postseason has at least helped a little. In 2009 we had to wrestle the Dual meet state finals the Wednesday before New Englands.

Reality is a lot of Mass wrestlers don’t wrestle their best at New Englands, it’s a long season, they are beaten up and the focus isn’t there. They lose a close match in the championship and then hit the tank in the consi’s. This happens with wrestlers from other state as well. But if you are a Mass 7 or 8 and your team is in the running for a team trophy you would be better focused, you can pick up a couple wins and pins against a VT3 or a Mass 4 that doesn’t feel like wrestling anymore. That is how Timberlane and MAU clean up in the consi’s, look back at some bracket and see how many consi matches they win when they are clearly the underdog.

I don’t see the reason for getting rid of team score at New Englands; again Mount Anthony and Timberlane usually win because they work the hardest and are the best. But that is what makes it special when a Mass team finishes with a team trophy; I think a Mass team has finished 1st or 2nd at New Englands 4 times in the last 25 years. The most excitement we’ve had as a program was when we were in the running for a team title at New Englands. That year our goal from the first day of the season was winning New Englands and it was our only goal. I’m guessing those on the 2007 Lowell team felt the same way.
bostondad
Wed Mar 12 2014, 09:15AM
Registered Member #10956
Joined: Mon Jan 31 2011, 08:28PM
Posts: 130
WICH1149 wrote ...

I'm curious to know how many of MAU kids live in the towns that are suppose to go to that school. I'm might be wrong but last I heard there are a ton of kids who go there from other schools to wrestle.



[link]



Siamese Mike
Wed Mar 12 2014, 11:00AM
Registered Member #3486
Joined: Thu Jan 26 2006, 09:31AM
Posts: 417
Were there any weights this year at NE's where a mass alternate or a ct alternate made it in and won matches? I know 106 the franklin kid got in as an alternate and made it to the second day, he didn't place but he was on the level of competition. That's proof that a seven is talented enough to compete at NE's.
Mass complains about too many qualifiers, it's easy get rid of sectionals and have four divisions where everyone qualifies for divisional states it's one less weekend of qualifiers. What are divisionals anyways it's a glorified section.
Shvarts
Wed Mar 12 2014, 11:17AM

Joined: Wed Mar 24 2004, 10:28PM
Posts: 245
Siamese Mike wrote ...

Were there any weights this year at NE's where a mass alternate or a ct alternate made it in and won matches? I know 106 the franklin kid got in as an alternate and made it to the second day, he didn't place but he was on the level of competition. That's proof that a seven is talented enough to compete at NE's.


Mass had 5 alternates get in 106 - Franklin won 2 matches, 126 Lynnfield/NR placed 6th and won 4 matches, 170 Westfield won 1 match, 182 Woburn won 3 matches and HVY Billerica went 0-2, total record for Mass 7's was 10-11.

Siamese Mike wrote ...


Mass complains about too many qualifiers, it's easy get rid of sectionals and have four divisions where everyone qualifies for divisional states it's one less weekend of qualifiers. What are divisionals anyways it's a glorified section.



That won't happen, the argument is you are taking away a chance from many kids trying to win or place at sectional to benefit the elite few trying to win or place at New Englands.
Jim Maher
Wed Mar 12 2014, 11:18AM

Joined: Mon Mar 29 2004, 08:09PM
Posts: 4726
126 Kerr-LNR 7th at allstates, 6th NE's
John Stark Wrestling
Wed Mar 12 2014, 11:22AM
Registered Member #12193
Joined: Thu May 17 2012, 12:08PM
Posts: 38
Siamese Mike wrote ...

Were there any weights this year at NE's where a mass alternate or a ct alternate made it in and won matches? I know 106 the franklin kid got in as an alternate and made it to the second day, he didn't place but he was on the level of competition. That's proof that a seven is talented enough to compete at NE's.
Mass complains about too many qualifiers, it's easy get rid of sectionals and have four divisions where everyone qualifies for divisional states it's one less weekend of qualifiers. What are divisionals anyways it's a glorified section.



I believe Eric Kerr at 126 was a Mass alternate. He placed 6th.

coachskp
Wed Mar 12 2014, 11:37AM
Registered Member #847
Joined: Wed Dec 15 2004, 11:37AM
Posts: 915
UVJ wrote ...

Siamese Mike wrote ...

Were there any weights this year at NE's where a mass alternate or a ct alternate made it in and won matches? I know 106 the franklin kid got in as an alternate and made it to the second day, he didn't place but he was on the level of competition. That's proof that a seven is talented enough to compete at NE's.
Mass complains about too many qualifiers, it's easy get rid of sectionals and have four divisions where everyone qualifies for divisional states it's one less weekend of qualifiers. What are divisionals anyways it's a glorified section.



I believe Eric Kerr at 126 was a Mass alternate. He placed 6th.



he lost in the first round to the CT2 Cannone - who placed second -
then on the consi side won four in row over the VT1, then MA4 - Ellis, then MA2 - Forman, then MA3 Monteiro before losing to MA1 - Ryan in the consi semis and then to NH3 taking 6th
grapplejd
Wed Mar 12 2014, 12:37PM
Registered Member #7946
Joined: Wed Sep 17 2008, 09:37AM
Posts: 11
Cut participants from every state and give the ability to give wild cards. Wild cards per state would be based on number of participants in the given state and the prior year's placement figures. Bottom line every state has weak weight classes. Thus in order to optimize the best wrestlers, while not overloading the tournament a wild card scenario would be the only one that would work.


Just my two cents...
Medic5392
Wed Mar 12 2014, 01:04PM
Registered Member #6539
Joined: Tue Dec 11 2007, 04:11PM
Posts: 848
grapplejd wrote ...

Cut participants from every state and give the ability to give wild cards. Wild cards per state would be based on number of participants in the given state and the prior year's placement figures. Bottom line every state has weak weight classes. Thus in order to optimize the best wrestlers, while not overloading the tournament a wild card scenario would be the only one that would work.


Just my two cents...


That is too unpredictable, you might have a year that a slew of kids who should be able to go and I would rather increase competition than decrease it. If you do it on "prior year" placements you will always miss a lot of good kids that did not do well that past year for that state, but did work like crazy and then could place. A kid clicks and he and the top kids from his state travel around the country, place in the big tournaments and then are not allowed to go to New England's because the prior year their state did not do well does not make sense to me. It is like the old Commonwealth Cup, your team might have won the states the year prior, but all the kids graduated and now the best team in the state the current year is not in the Cup because they did poorly the year prior. Arguably it would be great for MA and CT, but would screw the other states and a lot of good kids.

Simple solution is to add 4 kids into the tournament from, 2 from MA and 2 from CT. This would not decrease any other states participation. MA7's scored points the first year they were allowed into it and will continue to do so as well, I am sure the CT5's will as well. The MA8 and CT6 may not do much, but neither do the 3's from any other state and ANY points help in the team race.

There is no real downside to adding the kids in except in terms of perception and reflexive resistance to change. The change to the old single elimination rules in New Englands were the only real previous legitimate arguments against MA7/8 and CT5/6.

The kids have to earn their way into the tournament, they will score points for their respective teams as already has been proven this year, it will increase revenue, allow MA and CT teams to get a fair proportion of kids into the tournament and the top kids will still be the top kids.

Side note-totally disagree with adding another Divisional State in MA unless we get another 50+ teams that have wrestling added. There are over 300+ high schools in MA and only a little over 150 programs, a concerted effort to increase teams in MA would be a good thing, but the coaches in MA already do more than anyone can ask of them.
merkle53
Fri Mar 14 2014, 06:30PM
Registered Member #13934
Joined: Mon Feb 24 2014, 11:15AM
Posts: 5
Ok I hate being this guy again haha, but someone must have finals videos right?
SciCoach
Mon Mar 17 2014, 06:41PM
Registered Member #11536
Joined: Thu Jan 26 2012, 10:38AM
Posts: 281
merkle53 wrote ...

Ok I hate being this guy again haha, but someone must have finals videos right?


Bump
AllISeeIsSilver
Sun Mar 23 2014, 06:59PM
Registered Member #13939
Joined: Mon Feb 24 2014, 07:43PM
Posts: 5
Alright I think enough time has pasted to ask again for the finals videos
Go to page: Go to page  1 2 3 4 5 [6]          << Previous thread | Next thread >>

Jump:     Back to top



Moderators: Mike Atlas, CoachMiller, The Rankings Team, JMode, Shvarts, eoghanjames, Jim Maher, plm_77, jubele135, Hill Billy, psch, tourneygeek, NE_07, Sam Shames, Chicken Wing Coach, New England Rankings, matchamp99, Nuge
Click to see our RSS feeds available -->
Recent Wrestling Boxscores
see all | submit | rss

12/14/2017----------
Bristol-Plymouth-54
Southeastern-12
12/13/2017----------
Newton North-40
Needham-22
12/13/2017----------
Weymouth-36
Brookline-31
Newest Posts
Re: Little Wildcats Youth Wrestling Tourn. @ Whittier Tech. H.S. = Sunday, Dec. 17th, 2017
Bumping for this Sunday.
Posted by Chicken Wing Coach
Dec 15 17 : 19:47

2017-18 Western Massachusetts Division 3 Sectional Rankings - 12-15-17
Please help me fill in the gaps, correct spel...
Posted by CoachMiller
Dec 15 17 : 12:26

Re: 2017-18 Western Massachusetts Division 3 Sectional Preview
Southwick wrestled Hampden Charter on Wednesd...
Posted by CoachMiller
Dec 15 17 : 08:24

Re: Massachusetts to College Wrestling
swassel wrote ...Total of 90 MA wrestlers on ...
Posted by MrBlastdoubles
Dec 15 17 : 08:22

Re: 2017-18 Western Massachusetts Division 3 Sectional Preview
If you arent going to be productive, leave. ...
Posted by CoachMiller
Dec 15 17 : 07:55

Re: 2017-18 Western Massachusetts Division 3 Sectional Preview
Wow a whole 17 matches ! That's good news for...
Posted by Wrestle2score
Dec 15 17 : 07:02

Re: 2017-18 Western Massachusetts Division 3 Sectional Preview
Wrestle2score wrote ...Higher possibility any...
Posted by Tomahawk85
Dec 14 17 : 21:36

Support MassWrestling. Click a link!