One of the weakest posts I've read.

I have just two things to clarify and then I'm done on this subject that is to try to get the best 16 kids to the state tournament in 5A & 6A.

One:
I'm interrested in seeing this happen. Any other plan that reduces the number of state qualifiers will not get any support from me. If you are not directly involved with these two classes, stay out of it with any proposals. You will never convince me that this is good for kids.

Two:
I am not in agreement with all KSHSAA restrictions placed on wrestling. Until the time comes that changes are made, I do not support ignoring those restrictions because they stupid. There are consequences for operating outside KSHSAA guidelines that can go as far as having an individual's eligibility revoked or suspended and coaches terminated. Wink, Wink.

KSHSAA does allow wrestling coaches to do all they want with their athletes during summer recess, just not outside the season during the school year.

ORIGNALLY posted on April 27, 2007 by Kale Mann. I hope he does not mind my re-posting it, but in light of the current conversation going on it is probably good to read again:

"At the risk of beating a dead horse here, I would like to interject my two cents.

1st- We need to make sure that we maintain our focus of schools as educational institutions first and foremost. That is the main goal. We are fortunate enough to live in a society that also values competition and athletics, so that in our society schools and athletics go hand in hand. This is not the case in most countries. I think our athletic programs can enhance the learning that goes on in the classroom in several ways: getting kids to come to school who otherwise wouldn't, and by teaching team work, sacrifice, and self discipline. If we are talking about taking students out of school for large chunks of time in order to travel the country to compete, that is detrimental to the main priority of the school system.

2nd- I feel that it is not unreasonable to have some limit on matches. Under our current system of 30 competition points, it would be possible for a wrestler to wrestle 72 matches prior to Regional’s and State. Why this does not happen is because our coaches realize we are working with boys and young men. Coaches realize that the important time of the season is Regional’s and State, and schedule to try to get their athletes to peak at the end of the season. The vast majority of wrestlers could not/ would not survive a 70+ match season. The rate of injury and burn out would be very high. Granted, a very small percentage of wrestlers could handle that many matches, but as a coach who is interested in getting the TEAM to peak at the right time, it would probably be detrimental to that team to wrestle that many matches. Here are 2 things to consider in support of this position
1. In last month's (or 2 month's ago) edition of WIN magazine, Coach Spates of OU cited a major area of concern. His wrestlers that he was recruiting were not able to make it through a season. He attributed this to many of the wrestlers wrestling year round and wrestling too many matches during their developmental stages. He felt like many of these young men were already broken down.
2. There are no current wrestlers on this board posting in support of more matches. I would say that this would be evidence that they may not feel that 70+ matches in a high school season would be beneficial to them. Again, I think a small percentage could handle it, and in fact possibly thrive on that, but the vast majority would not be able to. We would lose them, and our numbers would decline even more.

3rd- If additional matches are desired by the student-athlete, there are (many) opportunities available to them. If higher level competition is desired at the national level, again that is available also. There are no limits on how far an individual can travel to a tournament outside of season. There are many tournaments around the nation (some even hear in our own backyard) that bring many of the nations top wrestlers together. For those interested, sign up and keep wrestling!

4th- Scholarships are mentioned several times on here. I agree with EGG, academics are where the money is at. In the recent past Mill Valley has produced 3 wrestlers that in my opinion could compete at some level collegiately had they so chosen to do so. All three chose not to, for various reasons. Fortunately for them (and a credit to them and their families) they were all very strong academically and did not need wrestling scholarships as they received academic scholarships. However, had they chosen to pursue wrestling, these young men would have been very attractive to college coaches. In today's climate at the NCAA level, where scholarship numbers are tied to graduation rates, college coaches are less likely to take a risk on a good wrestler with poor grades. He may not even be eligible to compete, and may end up costing the program scholarships in the future. Also full ride scholarships are rare in wrestling. Most wrestlers split scholarships, even the elite ones. This is so a coach can recruit more wrestlers to make the TEAM stronger. If the wrestler is able to accept less athletic money because they are also receiving academic money, it makes them more attractive to college coaches, and more valuable to the TEAM.

5th- Coaches "doing it for the money". What coaches are doing it for the money, and if so, what schools (rhetorical question, please do not post coaches names or names of schools!)? A fellow teacher in my school made more money 2 wrestling seasons ago than I did coaching wrestling. All he did was supervise tardies for about an hour a night 2-3 nights a week and he worked the clock at basketball games a couple of times a week. If people actually think that coaches coach for the money, they either have a strong misconception about what we get paid to coach (not much), or a lack of understanding of the immense amount of time, effort, and sacrifice that goes in to it. The sacrifices that go in to coaching quickly make anyone who is it in for the money get out. They can make more money pushing shopping carts at the Home Depot or Wal-Mart. The vast majority of coaches are also teachers, which is what they make the majority of their salary doing. If those coaches aren't getting it done in the classroom, the generally don't last very long either.

While I am not necessarily against change, I just want to make sure we keep the scope of the change to a rational level, and that we maintain focus on where it is most important: the development of STUDENT-athletes who are team players."

Kale Mann
April 27, 2007

Coach Ulmer,
While I can't speak for Gonz or Roy, I have been involved with Roy in trying to gain support for this change. The advantages are in a couple of areas:
1) No longer in 5&6A would a regional with 6 of the top kids in the state leave two of the probable placers at home. I've seen several regional meets that had to do this.
2) By sending the top eight, I can't forsee any regionals sending kids to state that didn't win a match at regionals. It should also make it much harder for guys with losing records to make it to state. I don't get too hung up in that, but I know that many people hate it.
3) You will no longer see the top two guys on the same side of the bracket at state, barring injury. I know people will jump on here about the upsets at regionals, so go ahead. I know that people get "caught," but that's just one of those things. Yes, it might put the two best on the same side, but it will happen much less often than the "luck of the draw" system we currently have.

Here is what I like: The two regional winners will automatically be on opposite sides at state. The regional runner ups will be on the opposite side from the guy that beat them at regionals. This should make for the best case scenario for getting the top two guys into the finals. It's not perfect, but hopefully better. I wish that there was a way to do something similar for 4-1A, but I'm not smart enough to figure out an efficient way of doing so.

I've got to run, but hopefully this clears it up a bit.

Have a good one,
Ryan

Ryan,

My thanks to you and coach Buckbee for your clarifications. To be fair Coach Oeser emailed me as well with his thoughts on 6A regional change.

This idea has merit. Once in awhile rule changes seem to benefit one geographic region over another or a certain school classification over others, but this one might actually benefit wrestling.

Gary Ulmer

Ryan:

It would be a logistical nightmare to figure out a similar system in 4A and 321A. Unfortunately, that's just one of those things we have to live with. But insofar as 6A and 5A I think it's a great idea.

Although, if we went to my 48-48-48-everyone system.....Right Gary? LOL

I have two separate thoughts in favor of previously stated proposals:

First - I also agree with the 48 school classification. I wrestled in high school in Kansas and now coach here, but did spend a 1 year coaching stint in Missouri 2 years ago. Our school was in Class 1 (smallest). This "even distribution" classification system gave a better depth to each weight class while still giving every one their fair share of glory and encouraging participation. I believe it would help, but not cure, the losing record dilema in some state tournaments.

Second - Being a coach in a 6A school, I also felt that Koch Arena provided a much better atmosphere than the Kansas Coliseum. Is there any possibility of keeping both 5A and 6A in Koch and switching to a 3 day tournament? They could be split between early and late sessions with the classes being brought together for the placing rounds or finals.

I know there are issues such as travel, referee expenses, and other financial hurdles that play into these issues but feel overall it would solve a few problems that have been on the table for a few years. Any suggestions?

For those of us that were not at the 6A tournament this year, how many mats did they use in the preliminary rounds? Also, was there enough floor space for any additional mats?

We used 3 mats and there is not enough room for any more mats. However, by switching to a 3 day tournament, which I have personally experienced with tremendous success, you could counter the space limitations. One class would go with a morning session and the other would wrestle in the late afternoon. This also gives spectators the option of watching the other class if they so choose. In MO they only wrestle the first round on Thursday and every one gets out of the arena at a pretty decent time.

I must preface all of this with the disclaimer that I am not blessed with good looks or a fully functioning brain - so my logic may be way off!

I do like the 48 x 3 model. Or a 72x2 for that matter. If we're talking about a three day tournament, let's try to get them all together. It could be rotated from Hays to Topeka to Wichita (or any other feasible city). I know that Hays puts on a great tournament, but I think it would still be very beneficial for them if the city could house such an event. FHSU would only have to host it every three years, but they shouldn't take a big financial hit since it would be at least three times larger than it's normal draw. I wouldn't want to do it if it meant that Hays couldn't do it. I believe they've earned the right to host it, not to mention I spent 6.5 of my best undergrad years there!

We'd all get to see the state's best in one location. With three years to plan each tournament, it could be a more spectacular event. I imagine the communities would donate or sponsor more since it wouldn't be a yearly expenditure. Heck, Wichita might even have time to come up with a decent hospitality room.

What do you think? I think there is always a way to improve our sport if we use our collective creativity rather than our divisive criticism.

Hays simply can't put down enough mats for such an event. If you are talking combining more than one class you are talking Wichita only. I have become convinced over the last year of so that we need to quit looking at combining all the classes at one venue and return to talking about a Grand State the following week. The coaches have had no luck getting the Dual State proposal passed so I think it is time to go back to what we know has already worked before and see if it would be accepted.

Speaking as one who has been through a three-day, three-class tournament, you're going to need more than three or four mats, trust me.
Before Iowa went to this asinine four-day format (translate: $$$$), each of the three classes ran their first round and first round of consolations on Thursday (on eight mats), then the quarterfinals, semifinals and three rounds of consolations on Friday. Saturday afternoon was just for consolation semis and medal matches and Saturday night was the finals. It would be a great format in the new arena in Wichita for 6A, 5A and 4A.
As for moving 321A, you might as well be talking about moving the Rocky Mountains to Salina....it ain't happening.

I would like to propose a plan that might satisfy a few of our wants!

That is ... having class/division regional, class/divisional State, followed by State on 3 consecutive weekends. I would not extend the season but push the classification regional back to what has traditionally been league weekend. All 3 would be sanctioned by KSHSAA and be part of the State Tournament Series!!

The class/divisional State would be like we have now ... but the All State would be like Grand State formally was! While we would still crown a divisional State Champ we could also crown an All State Champ!!

The All/Grand State could be rotated around ... the divisional State tournaments could be handled as they are right now.

Randy,

I really like that idea. I would change it slightly in that I would not like to see league go away so somewhere in the season I would like to see the league championship still being held. I guess that could be optional with each league. I have really enjoyed the EKL championships the last three years.

I think the final three weeks being the Class Regional Championship, then the Class State Championship, and the final week the All State or Grand State State Championship is an excellent State Championship Series format.

Would wrestling be prohibited from doing this currently by the KSHSAA? Does any other Kansas high school sport currently have a Grand State or All Class Championship?

Not that I am aware of ... and that is one of the hurdles to clear! What they do for one, KSHSAA has to do for the others!

That makes it a very tough hurdle to jump over. I would think it would be very difficult to have an All Class State tournament series in a sport like football.

I guess I don't get it! The seasons over why do we need the kshaa permission to have a all state? Can KWCA or USAWKS sponsor
it after high school state?

Because everyone but SR's are still bound by state rules. Like coaches cannot work with kids outside of the season during school year. This is one of the reasons Cokeley has voice such a strong opinion about the restrictions. It cuts off many different options.

24/7

In the opinion of some!

Hello Brian. I should send you a copy of the email I sent Coach Will Cokeley on the process for Rule recommendations. I will try to explain briefly cause as you know I can get long-winded. All Kansas public and private schools 7-12 that provide extra curricular activities are govnered by KSHSAA. If I as a coach want a rule changed.
1. I submit the change to KWCA class rep.
2. He submits to KWCA Board of Directors.
3. The President of the KWCA then complies all rule
recommendations to be passed out the state tournament for all
Kansas Head coaches to review.
4. We as rank and file members vote on the rule changes.
5. The recommendations/changes are then collected by the class
rep and returned to KWCA president.
6. The KWCA BOD meet a week after state high school tournaments
the recommendations/changes are reviewed/tallied for % of
yes coaches want or no coaches do not want.
7. President of KWCA reviews the recomemendations with the KCA
8. The KCA presents a package of rule recommendations to KSHSAA
staff for reveiw.
9. The staff of KSHSAA and the KCA and KWCA President is
invitied to present to the KSHSAA executive board.
10. If a recommendation has the % of votes from membership and
with support of KSHSAA staff the items are voted on by the
77 member KSHSAA BOD.
I hope this helps you and others understand it is a process and it is extremely diffuclt for me. I serve on four wrestling board and it is very rewarding and I enjoy working for Kansas wrestling. But as a member of KSHSAA BOD it is a diffuclt position and often times I can get lost in all the policy decision making process. I know on the USAW Kansas Kids Board. Many of you would just say Gonzo how in the hell did that rule get in their. Or on the NWHOF Board how do we get a person in to the HOF. Or the KWCA board most of you are very understanding that we are trying to get a dual state passed. But the KSHSAA board it is like living our American Government class our senior year. I think after two years on this board. I might be better suited to work in the Kansas House of Representatives? I learned how to PM today. Ianswered over 20 plus messages. Some as far back as 75 days ago. So you can PM me and I will respond! Now the process I listed above is the one we KWCA have generally followed. But Coach Harris of Baldwin may have some short cuts he used the past two years and this past month our new President James Stout of Abilene. I know he can not wait to get to Topeka with his recommendations. RMG