Please guys, I really do not want to get into a mudslinginmatch. I think we are going the wrong direction with this post.
We all know that 4A is dirt tough, that is well documented and established. Surely, you got from my posts, that I was not saying otherwise. What I was showing was that 5A is just as tough as any class and I really believe that to think otherwise is an uninformed, outdated idea. I believe that the results that I gave verify this.
Valley Center (just 16th in 5A) placed behind 4A top ten powers at Rosehill but they placed ahead of 4A top ten powers at Colby. When I defend 5A or even 6A, I am not cutting others down to prove my point, while generally 4A and 3A advocates are cutting 5A and 6A down and there is no merit. "We" are defending, "you" are attacking. Just like the Salyer comments. How would anyone know that someone else had herpes unless they got it from them or they gave it to them? Someone's actual high school or college wrestling background has nothing to do with their wrestling knowledge or ability to analyze wrestling data.
There are always "weak" regionals in every class, that is, some that are weaker than others. In 5A and 6A there are always two regionals that are weaker than the others. This is a product of KSHSAA not making the effort, for what ever reason, to seperate the powers in the class. Usually 8 of the top 10 teams in 5A and 6A and sometimes 9 are put into two regionals while the other two regionals will have 1 or even no top ten teams. They are always the Topeka and KC regionals. This is what produces so many wrestlers with losing records and not the class itself. For every kid with a losing record that made it, there is a kid with 20 to 30 wins that did not. When Goddard was in 5A, almost yearly there were kids with 25-30 wins that did not qualify because they were thrown into the toughest regional with Carroll, Ark City, Valley Center, Kapaun, Winfield, Campus and Liberal. The top four in the regional could finish top four in the state. These said kids that did not qualify in 5A had beaten kids earlier in the year that placed at the 4A state tournament, but there was never a mention of that when the "toughnest vs. weakest" class thing came up.
As far as Norton (not Oakley) goes, yes they MIGHT have been the toughest or best team in the state this year as their win at Newton, barely over Bishop Carroll, would indicate. But you must consider that they did lose to Clay Center earlier and Clay Center lost to Carroll. So A beat B, B beat C and C beat A. They all three won their respective classes. What is logical to gather from this? They are all equally tough as are their classes.
Its all about wrestling. We should direct our cuts at other things and not other wrestlers, or other schools or other classes. I will be the first to bury the hatchet (not in anyone's head).
For the sake of argument, I will declare that a team composed of 4A wrestlers could defeat the Russians and I hope that everyone is happy.
