Upper/Lower state seedings????

It is hard to disagree with the all knowing Ron Burgundy. A true icon.

RazorRock~I don't think the issue with some of the softer teams is that the tougher schools won't add them to a quad. I know that a lot of times, they just won't wrestle teams that they know they cannot compete with. You can't force competition on some people.

oh and you can't schedule some people because we are 1 mile out of their travel radius......i've heard that a whole lot this year........I wouldn't mind wrestling them at all, but it would have to be one date, the other 12 are reserved for us getting our butts handed to us. See one thing I've learned is that records are overrated. 26-18 doesn't sound glorious until you put State Champs behind it!!!!!

I tell you what we can do, military magnet can host a date during the winter break next season. We can have a two day 11 team dual that can settle it all. I think that we are locate in an area where everyone can come and leave it on the mat. How does that sound

Sale shirts for the event:

With whatever name you decide to call the duals on the front and but put this on the back!

Check your record at the door,
head to head is where it is at.

Then no matter the creteria decided on, there will be head to head matches to be used!

Sweet I'm in......think its a great idea

Cool, we have three teams we need eight more. Hopefully everyone is serious, because this is what make wrestling great, not the critics or anaylist, but going toe to toe.

For all of the people in the lowerstate that question the reasoning behind why certain teams are upper and some of them are lower. First of all, if it has been a problem for the past decade the best place to start changes is not at the seeding meeting. It would be best to start at the March AD/Principal meeting with the SCHSL. Second, it is all based on numbers. Being that there are more 2A teams, they take all of the 2A teams that competed as a team in there respected places (upper vs. lower) and end up with equal numbers of teams. Afterwards they use 1A teams and disperse them accordingly to attempt to even the numbers at both the upper and lowerstate qualifying tournaments. Being that certain coaches did not want certain teams to travel to there closest qualifying tournament to even the numbers, I am going to give you a couple of facts.
Lowerstate 103-9 112-10 119-13 125-16 130-16 135-16 140-18 145-15 152-15 160-18 171-18 189-16 215-16 HWT-16 TOTAL of WRESTLERS SEEDED=212
Upperstate 103-20 112-19 119-19 125-23 130-19 135-18 140-19 145-17 152-21 160-22 171-23 189-22 215-20 HWT-22 TOTAL of WRESTLERS SEEDED=284
So in essence, there should be more 1A teams to come down to the lowerstate qualifying hideout to take more lowerstate state qualifying spots. We, the lowerstate are off by 72 wrestlers. This causing one qualifying tournament to be run differently than the other. Fair??? Who's to say? Should it be done differently? Some of everyones message board theory seems right, but who is it right for? The newest debate is whether or not 1A should have their own individual state tournament. Is the reasoning behind it to "have a chance to expand the sport of wrestling in the state of SC" or is it to give more mediocrity to SC wrestling as a whole and water down being a state champ in SC. Or to give more qualifying spots for the 2A wrestlers. There are a lot of good 1A wrestlers, but to make it have there own state tournament is not the answer. My own personal opinion is wipe the slate clean of classifications and really see who is the best pound for pound wrestler in the state. 4 qualifying tournaments, 8 qualifiers per tourney, and 1 32 man bracket state champion when all of the smoke and bs clears.
But to end all of this crap, when you feel that you and your school/team is not being treated fairly/do not take it upon yourself talk about things you have no understanding of how they work in places where they can not be taken care of. Coaches can find problems, make assumptions, devise a plan, write an ammendment, take it to their AD, there AD can bring it to the SCHSL, all of the AD/principals can vote on it, and maybe it can be changed. Until you have gone through the proper channels, take it for what it is and keep your mouths shut. Because in the end, it is what it is. Tomorrow is going to be a great day because Ive been feeling the love all week.

P.S. If you want to know the rules. Go to the SCHSL rules meetings during the summer and maybe you will start to understand.

William P. Gainey III

boooooooyaaaaahhhh!!

I missed the seeding meeting for the first time in 10 years, but I never can get over how the first question asked by the hosting coach is" Ok guys , How do you want to do this?" Im just wondering why there has never been a set criteria, Itseems to change everywhere we go. It stays basicly the same but I heard state placers and qualifying did not count for anything this year. strength of schedule would be tough cause one coach could say they beat Summerville this year and then sure as I am sitting here another coach is going to say

"Well they are having a down year" What do yall think is the best order for criteria?

shut up c-lewis!!!!!!!

Well I know a 2 time State placer that is a #5 seed because his win percentage is lower than some patsy schedule records; easily the #2 or #3 wrestler in the State! That is the travesty in all of this!!! Last year at the seeding meeting State Placers and qualifiers held precedence!!! Criteria should be set well before the season begins to prevent agendas from being pushed and pursuaded. I agree that is will be settled on the mat but with erroneous seeding, the two best wrestlers from the LowerState or UpperState will not have a chance to meet in the finals of State cause they will knock the other out to third place this weekend and then will meet again in the semi's at State.

How about assigning points to the following categories and then adding them up for an overall score that recognizes accomplishments as well as records. Start with a certain amount of possible points (say 10) per category and assign them from best down to 0:

-Head to head (should trump everything. then go from there) Obviously if a kid pins the top guy, but otherwise has a spotty record, he will not be given the top spot.

10 pts possible-Last year state champ (Needs to be recognized after head to head) thenLast year state placer (higher placers taking precedence)
10 pts possible-Record (win %)
10 pts possible-Event victories (If someone wins the Southern Slam, NMB, WRAL, or the Bearcat, etc) that should hold some weight. Obviously some events are tougher than others. Coaches would need to be honest and not vote for the B-Town Throwdown over the Southern Slam.
5 pts possible-Previous years placers

I think it is important to use common sense and recognize both accomplishments as well as current record. !/2 Nelson is dead on as to why the current voting was bad. There does need to be some sort of comprehensive evaluation system. That being said, if coaches are too lazy or just don't care enough to show up to the seeding meeting or coaches whatever meeting, then their voice will not be heard and they are doing their kids a disservice. I was told a lot of the seeding issues were due to that.

Just a thought.

I hope everyone wrestles to their potential this weekend. Let's avoid excuses. Go Pit Bull guys!

For anybody who thinks that kyle123 was me, it was NOT!