True state dual tourney

[knowledge keeper]

Talking to other coaches over the years...how can we, the IESA, organize a team state tournament? When can it be hosted...week after state...is that allowed by IESA rules? How many teams, who gets in? Running it like HS state is too much time and commitment. Do you just take the 8 sectional champ teams? Use the top 8 teams from state--which is probably unrealistic since a team can have 5 kids qualify, four kid place, take third in state, and only win 4-5 duals all season. Humphrey, Coal City and Rock Falls have all had this scenario. Who can host, facilities needed? What are some thoughts on the subject...besides it sounds like a great idea! It's been talked about for years, I think us coaches need to take the initiative and get this going, if not in 2010, shooting for 2011 season.

[wrestling observer]

Your top 8 sectional teams would be the easiest way, but it also falls into teams that have studs, but not lots of depth...I see every year teams win regionals and get beat by another team in sectionals because they had more studs...Maybe we take the top 2 from each Sectional and have a 16 team dual, or possibly just all the regional champions? If this were only placing the top 4 teams, it could be done in a day easy enough with 4 mats...The advisory board has thrown this question around for years, but cant seem to come up with a good answer for it...Maybe if us coaches can figure out a great system we can take this to the board for a vote?...I know they dont want the season any longer than it already is, but one more weekend might be viable...

[Statman JD]

Why not take the top two teams from each regional and wrestle a dual Tuesday and have the winner take on the dual team from the other Regional that feeds the sectional and wrestle that meet on Thursday. Then finish it up with 8 teams at Dual Team State that Saturday. One more week of wrestling plus money for the IESA. If we go this route though I think we need to designate a single team scorer for each weight class at the regional for sure. For example, this year we will have Homer, Troy and New Lenox in the same Regional. Homer and Troy may be the better dual teams, but New Lenox might win the Regional due to their JV scorers. I like the idea of a dual team tournament though. I still think that high school should have to wrestle a dual for the Regional.

[FishArt]

I have a feeling that this has been tried before and I wonder what the reason(s) were for not getting implememented???

Why not set everything up the way you'd want it, propose it to the IESA but don't hold your breath. Then, just do it. You could even do it this year. It could be two or three weeks after the State Finals (whatever weekend that is NOT conflicting with the National Duals that is run a week or two after State). Find a location - perhaps even in Danville where the IKWF Midget State Championships are run??? And go from there. It doesn't need to be governed by the IESA since it's after the season, but we could make the rules where only IESA teams are allowed. Invite the 1st top 16 teams - chosen however we deem fit. If no deposit rec'd from those schools, move on down the list or cut it to fewer teams. Of course cost would have to be covered by the parents. But, I think a lot of parents would be willing to go for it. I can't recall what Midget State cost, but I want to say it was like $40 bucks for the weekend. And then entry into the Palmer Arena for parents was more of course. Best scenrio would be to find a host school to save on capital. Just an idea...

[The Scrabbler]

I don't hate this idea, but...

Who is the we that decides the "top 16" teams. I'm sure there are Cahokia-Wirth like teams that would object to the teams that "we" would generally pick. I think everyone should have a run at it, even if it will never be truly fair because not all the regionals/sectionals are evenly matched.

If you are going to ask the kids to extend their season an extra couple of weeks, I would want the state team title to be official. Trophy, medals, the whole nine yards. To do it outside of IESA jurisdiction somehow seems out of place.

I like the idea of doing a dual between the top two at regionals and then moving forward bracket style. You could hold a 3 match dual (1st/2nd at from regional A, 1st/2nd from regional B, and then the winners on the Thursday before individual sectional. You could do it all in one night (3 duals, like a tri).

Then, you could do the state time title before individual title during the week, maybe even the Thursday before State's start. Do it on the mats at Dekalb. This keeps teams that have to travel super far (like Cahokia) from doing it multiple times. Plus more kids get the state experience.

Originally Posted by FishArt

I have a feeling that this has been tried before and I wonder what the reason(s) were for not getting implememented???

Why not set everything up the way you'd want it, propose it to the IESA but don't hold your breath. Then, just do it. You could even do it this year. It could be two or three weeks after the State Finals (whatever weekend that is NOT conflicting with the National Duals that is run a week or two after State). Find a location - perhaps even in Danville where the IKWF Midget State Championships are run??? And go from there. It doesn't need to be governed by the IESA since it's after the season, but we could make the rules where only IESA teams are allowed. Invite the 1st top 16 teams - chosen however we deem fit. If no deposit rec'd from those schools, move on down the list or cut it to fewer teams. Of course cost would have to be covered by the parents. But, I think a lot of parents would be willing to go for it. I can't recall what Midget State cost, but I want to say it was like $40 bucks for the weekend. And then entry into the Palmer Arena for parents was more of course. Best scenrio would be to find a host school to save on capital. Just an idea...

[Wildman]

The only problem that you run into using regional or sectional scores is that two wrestlers from each team are allowed to score for team points. This at times makes it very difficult to determine who really is a great dual team. There are great teams every year that would give other teams a run for their money but will never win a regional or sectional because the team only has a couple of extra wrestlers compared to teams that have two per weight. I love the idea but need to refine to have a equal playing field for all teams. This question reminds of the debate we have had for years regarding a 2 class system.

[throw_by]

Do it as it is done in the IHSA

[HadDad]

Coaches, a state team championship series is a great idea. If you will allow a non-coach to “weigh in,” I will summarize and observe:

I agree with Scrabbler that this should be an IESA-sanctioned event, with trophies, etc. In order to obtain IESA approval on such short notice, it seems logical that the team series should be structured to impact the regular state series as little as possible. It also seems appropriate to use Regionals – the IESA’s only comprehensive, every-team event – to determine qualifiers. This also ensures that every region has two team qualifiers (32 total). It’s low-impact to the regular state series,

Statman’s comments make sense: Regional scores should be adjusted (solely for determining team series qualifiers) to permit a team only one scorer per weight class. This addresses Wildman’s small school concern as much as possible in the short time we have. Note that this may force coaches to rethink some wrestlers’ choices of weight classes. For example, absent the new state team series, a coach may elect to put two quality kids at the same weight class at Regionals in order to enhance their individual chances in the regular state series, while leaving another weight class vacant. With the new state team series, that same coach may elect to have one of these wrestlers wrestle the vacant weight class in order to enhance the chances for team success. To me, introducing this choice is a good thing.

Statman and Scrabbler’s idea to narrow the field by having a mid-week tri-dual also makes sense. Using Sectional A (Regionals 1 and 2) as an example, I suggest that the #1 team from Regional 1 wrestle the #2 team from Regional 2, and vice versa. The winners then immediately follow with a dual to determine the Sectional A qualifier. 2 mats and 4 hours should do it for these tri-duals, manageable numbers for a mid-week event. This gets the number of teams qualifying for the team state event down to 8, a manageable number for the championship event. It also manages travel burdens. Importantly, it also maximizes the site choices for the championship event. 4 mats and 6 hours should do it. With 16 teams, double the mats or the time, which would make site selection more problematic.

The locations for Sectional tri-duals can be determined by the qualifying teams’ coaches by agreement. If agreement cannot be reached, I suggest that any school that hosts a Regional or Sectional be given lowest priority to host the tri-dual. The 8-team championship should be at a neutral site, in the middle area of the state in order to manage travel burdens. Again, 4 mats and 6 hours should leave IESA and you coaches a lot of venue choices.

Timing. Given the limited travel required for the Sectional tri-duals, these can be done mid-week, either between regular Regionals and Sectionals, or between Sectionals and State. I don’t think the same is true for the championship event. A 6-hour event involving substantial travel for some teams will impinge on school too greatly. Weekend timing seems more appropriate. Will IESA permit this event to be held March 21 (one week after regular State)?

Do these observations make sense? What are next steps, and who will take them?