Re: Rankings should be expanded
[Re: REVOLUTION]
#222798
01/06/14 01:08 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,326
Cokeley
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,326 |
Heck, the poor 4A rankers can't even get six per weight class done on time. Promotion? Heck, no one even cares that these aren't done. Apathy is our enemy so I happy to see something on the forum!
Will Cokeley (708)267-6615 willcokeley@gmail.com
|
|
|
Re: Rankings should be expanded
[Re: Cokeley]
#222809
01/06/14 02:54 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 76
mfe
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 76 |
While i have had a tremendus amount of joy watching my Sons and Grandsons and great Grandsons wrestle over the years, i have never been concerned whether they were ranked or not. That is what State is for. I know it is a tool used for seedings and some what usefull for that. All i was concerned about was the next match and that they were improving and humble and respectful of their opponent. State is the final ranking and the only one that matters. I appreciate the efforts of the Chief and others hard work to satisfy some kids or parents ego's, it most certianly not necessary for our family. I love the sport and the hard work these young men put forth for my enjoyment. They will grow up to be better men for it. Thanks, Matt Eck
|
|
|
Re: Rankings should be expanded
[Re: Scooter]
#222811
01/06/14 03:17 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,555
Beeson
Member
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,555 |
So the NCAA is way off base ranking 20 and only having 8 all americans? They should only rank 8. Here is a nice article on the Big 10 wrestling. http://www.bigten.org/blog/2013/12/ranking-the-wrestlers-27.htmlThey boast 70 ranked wrestlers, but it should only be 38, because 32 of them won't be all americans if they wrestle to rank. Media is supposed to lie so I guess Scooter is right. We should lie and tell them that there are 28 ranked kids, when in reality we only expect 21 to place. Water it down enough and everyone will have their kid in the rankings. I think top 10 in the All Class is great. Having a top 8 or 10 in each class is ridiculous. That means 40 kids in the state at each weight would be "RANKED". I'm sorry but we have bigger goals than to be just ranked. This is equivalent to 4A dividing in to two groups so more people will have a chance to be a state champion. I think top 20 in the United States is a lot more impressive than the top 40 in Kansas. Your comparing Apples to Watermelons.
Unnecessary Roughness is Necessary
|
|
|
Re: Rankings should be expanded
[Re: Beeson]
#222820
01/06/14 07:04 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 143
Mahan
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 143 |
Misssing the point scooter, is little johnny any BETTER because hes "ranked" 35th?
is he any worse? there are 16 state qualifiers per class, Kansas is geographically huge, ranking more kids (not a lot more) would without doubt increase interest equivocal to the increase in information available to all of us who are constantly searching the internet to see who's out there and what are the tough tournaments. crap there are probably at least 3 to 4 threads on here about this tournament or that tourney that is soooo tough. why? cause there are x# of ranked kids at a certain weight. yeah 16 ranked in a weight class too many...8 to 10 not bad.
And news flash it helps grow programs the more kids you can "say" you have ranked. sure we all want to win state, but if your having a dual or coming off of tournament and writing something up for the paper its nice to say...John Dow currently ranked X#3 in 4A etc... also notice all the people that "don't care about rankings" and think that rankings are stupid are freaking ranked really high...with lots of kids who will be state placers so no of course they don't care about them...but for the majority of programs we need ranked kids to sell our programs and build them etc...
|
|
|
Re: Rankings should be expanded
[Re: Mahan]
#222840
01/07/14 04:32 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,326
Cokeley
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,326 |
I could see expanding for 4A and 321A but not for 6A or 5A. With only 32 schools in each class, ranking nearly 19% of the competitors is plenty. That would be equivalent to ranking 12 in 4A and 18 in 321A. I personally like only ranking the placers as it is easy to grade them after state. I am in favor of rankings and promoting the sport. I prefer to leave the ranking to rankers or media outlets so that coaches can focus on coaching.
Will Cokeley (708)267-6615 willcokeley@gmail.com
|
|
|
Re: Rankings should be expanded
[Re: Cokeley]
#222841
01/07/14 12:09 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 34
doinasipleaz
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 34 |
Will, they must be focused on coaching. Or something other than rankings, 4A hasnt been updated.. Maybe with an extra day off because it was toooo cold will help them get caught up.
|
|
|
|
0 registered members (),
300
guests, and 2
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics35,989
Posts250,449
Members12,302
|
Most Online709 Nov 21st, 2011
|
|
|