I have to assume you are speaking to me even though you weren't capable of getting my screename correct. Not sure if that makes your opinions more or less valid. How nice of you to decide if my opinions were of value. I simply asked a question which Chief couldn't answer and in the process proved he knows even less about the Constitution and Bylaws of USAWKS.
I am not sure if I support this proposal as yet but I too like hearing the debate. This much I am pretty certain of, anyone who thinks this proposal or any other, will create a grand state or increase overall participation, is being silly.

This is great conversation! I'm glad you guys liked my "weak" comment. I didn't mean you were sorry people, just that your position was sorry,(with all due respect). I could be persuaded to like Steve's idea about giving the 14U freshmen the option of wrestling the age group or HS division. This window should obviously be intended for JV level freshmen. It would be positive to allow the 8th graders to move up to the HS division if they choose.

Steve, "Because they do it" is not my entire closing argument. I firmly believe this proposal would enhance our competition and strengthen Kansas wrestling!

If we are unable to fix it then pass it, we need to pass it then fix it!

I can finally say, I agree with you 100% on both of these options.

This is what I having been trying to say, apperently I need to work on my communication skills. I also believe that we should add to it that any f14Uthat qualifeis for high school state be required to be in the high school division.

I'm not totally disagreeing with some of your points, but let's not make this into giving a kid a free pass to state. The idea should be making kids compete against kids their own ability or better. Getting beat isn't a bad thing a lot of times........

Kumbaya.....................

I am for this. Now, with that said, how will Subs be ran? There is the possibility of having 32 and 64 man brackets at Subs in the High School Division. This is a great problem to have. How do we handle it though? I would think a sub would have to have 4 full mats, just for the High School Division. The High School would be wrestled on Full Mats? Correct. Like I said, I am FOR this, I just want the Subs prepared.

lets pass this proposal then. It would be good for kansas wrestling

The proposal, as stated, may not be perfect for everyone but we will never find one that is. However, it is a step in the right direction. There is NO ARGUMENT that it will give an OPPORTUNITY for more to wrestle. We will never know how many will take advantage of this opportunity until we allow them a chance.

Our state tournament is at capacity but our sub districts are not. Too many brackets are not full and wrestling is not even needed to see who qualifies for Districts. This will hopefully have an impact. I would love to see some 32 man brackets at Subs but I seriously doubt that happens. If we double our number of 17-19 year olds we will only add roughly 15 total wrestlers to each sub. I am hoping that this plan will add 50 wrestlers to each tournament but that still won't force the use of a 32 man brackt.

Where does this all eventually need to go?

Two month 6U and Novice season 12/15-2/15 capped by a 6U & Novice state series. All that would be needed are a one day district and one day state tournament conducted on Sundays. It would be an OFFICIAL USA Kansas State Tournament. AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE WHO NOW DON'T HAVE A STATE TOURNAMENT. If they choose to they can move on to the open series. The State Tournament should be held in a centralized location that allows travel home to any part of the state during reasonable hours, not driving all night.

CADET and JUNIOR STATE...Districts the weekend after HS State followed by a state tournament the next weekend. Top six get their entry fee to USA Folkstyle Nationals paid. Same awards and format as it would be USAWKS SANCTIONED and an OFFICIAL State tournament. Cadets WOULD be allowed to participate as Juniors but not both. This will be as close as we will ever get to a grand state. Some SUPER AWARDS could be created to entice Seniors and those who wouldn't normally put their status on the line to participate.

KIDS STATE... 8,10,12, & 14 state or it could be modified to age groupings and MIDDLE SCHOOL. Same format as today's state tournament but it will be a smaller event allowing it to be more mobile. I still feel the season needs to shortened so we don't have conflict with many, mnay national events such as USA Middle School National Duals. However, given our shortage of officials, venues, and volunteers it might be difficult to pull off unless Sundays are utilized.

These are not radical ideas. They are a progression to giving EVERY Kansas USA Card buyer the chance to compete for a USA State Folkstyle title. This OPPORTUNITY does NOT exist today. It will promote wrestling and increase our membership. It will, hopefully, capture more interest in moving on to Freestyle and Greco wrestling (Honestly, the best thing for these two styles would be the relaxation of the KSHSAA offseason coaching restriction. MANY, MANY HS wrestlers would go to their room if their HS coach were allowed to work with them in the spring on FS and GR wrestling.)

These ideas are ALL about growing our sport. We should not beat each other up for creating more opportunities.

Will, I think that makes a lot of sense as to where you are suggesting things need to go.

I think you will get some post season high school senior participation from those seniors planning to wrestle in college. You will probably get little post season high school senior participation from those seniors not plannning on wrestling in college.

I really agree with your comment that the best thing that could happen for freestyle and greco participation in Kansas would be for the relaxation of the KSHSAA offseason coaching restriction during the school year. You are correct that this one change could do wonders for getting more high school wrestlers into the Olympic styles after the folkstyle season. To me this is the change we should focus first on the KSHSAA changing. In my opinion it should be a relatively easy change to get the KSHSAA to agree to. I think it could be sold to the KSHSAA as the coaches teaching their athletes a different sport since in reality the Olympic styles are very different from folkstyle. I would equate it to just about the same difference as a high school coach working with a cross country runner and a two mile track runner in the same school year.

Having just gone thru 12 years of Kansas youth and high school wrestling with my son, I would say that I would like to see a stronger emphasis on the freestyle and greco in Kansas wrestling. As I think of all the great wrestlers that I have seen over these 12 years one observation that I have made is that in general the wrestlers who ultimately achieve the most thru both high school and college are the ones who wrestled the Olympic styles in the spring and summer as youth and high school wrestlers. I believe anything that can be done to encourage more Olympic style participation for our youth and high school wrestlers will be a benefit both for them and Kansas wrestling in general. I would recommend any young wrestler to participate in freestyle and greco if their desire is to reach their full potential in wrestling.

Back to the 1st part of this thread...
Is there an attendence taken of the reps that attend (or do not attend) the state body meeting?
Where would we find that info and the minutes of that meeting?

BLT,

The Minutes have not been sent back to me yet. I hope to have them in the next week.

Attendance is as follows:

Director - Ned Price Both Days
Asst. Director = Tom Richards Both Days
Treasurer - Leanna Buckley Both Days
Secretary - Stephanie McDonald Both Days
Parliamentarian - Richard Salyer Sunday Only
Freestyle/Greco Director - Kyle Roberts Saturday only
Officals Rep - Denny Hensley Sunday Only
D1 Director - Tuff Hermreck Both Days
Asst D1 - Mark Stanley Both Days
Asst D1 - Will Cokeley Both Days
D1 Freestyle - Tom Peterman Both Days
D2 Director - Jess Keith Both Days
Asst. Director D2 Kenny Taylor Did not attend
Asst. Director D2 - Scott Biddle Did not Attend
D2 Freestlye - Charlie Knox Sunday only
D3 Director Lance Engel Both Days
D3 asst Director - Micheal Brownell Both Days
D3 Asst. Director - Darrel Loder Sunday Only
D3 Freestyle James Cook - Both Days
D4 Director Steve Woody - Both Days
D4 Asst Director Scott Edwards Both days
D4 asst Director -Kyle Wright did not attend
d4 Freestyle Kent Hahn - Sunday Only
State Chairman - Mike Juby Both Days

Ned

I forgot District 4 Joe Arellano both days.

Sorry

Ned

A few observations/questions:
Nice turnout from D1!
Why does D4 have more reps then everyone else?
Does D3 have a 2nd Assistant like everyone else?
What a poor turnout from D2!

How exactly will this proposal read when brought before the state? Also, I have read through the Constitution and can not find where it states that this can not be ammended. Would someone please let me know where it is found. Thanks in Advance.

Richard Salyer is the parliamentarian so he would be the best source for providing this. At the meeting he stated that we could NOT ammend the suggested rule change. The past couple of years we have changed the coach's pass rule on the fly at the state body meeting for the present season. Perhaps there is some distinction between a rule and a bylaw change. Richard?

Chad, good question. I couldn't find the verbiage in the bylaws where a proposed amendment can't be amended at the state body meeting either. The way I read it, only the original request needs to follow the time frame outlined in the bylaws. I can understand enforcing this on "rules which directly impact ations of the mat official during competition" given the officials meeting is prior to the state body meeting but should we have a good proposal and it just needs tweaked at the meeting, why postpone it for a year? That makes no sense to me!

Will, I believe the reason for the allowed amendments on the issue regarding coaching passes is the fact that this issue isn't a bylaw change and therefore falls outside the "preceived" rules.

I would leave the constitutionality of it to Mr. Salyer but my guess is, if allowed to be amended, the original suggested change could be amended over and over till it no longer resembled what the person submitting the change had in mind. This does leave open the question of, if and when a recommended constitutional change is not submitted in clear precise legal verbage. Does the Executive Council have the right to amend or change the proposal before submitting it to the body?

I understand I need to be patient and wait for an answer, but one more idea. From the Talk Forum, I think we can agree that a little tweeking could definately get this to pass. Could the Board call a "Special Meeting" as defined in the constitution. There is a 20 day notice. Have the meeting an hour before the State Body Meeting and work out the bugs so this will pass. I wouldn't think this would take longer than 20 min.

Pretty good idea...