Kansas Wrestling
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 03:56 AM
Kansas Wrestling - Weight Class Changes

As of March 11, 2005 we have the following numbers:

7763 Total Competitors

6-under 1673
8-under 1581
10-under 1471
12-under 1302
14-under 1092
16-under 644

I see on the Kids Division page that the weight classes were modified at the State Body Meeting in 1995, and modified in September of 1999.

Recognized Weight Classes: ( Qualifiers )

KS. USAW
6-U 0 9
8-U 18 13
10-U 20 15
12-U 22 19
14-U 24 17
16-U 20 15

Total 104 88


Why not use the recognized weights by USAW with minor modifications.

6-U 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, HWT. ( modify to add 35)
8-U 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 87, 95, 103, 112, 120, HWT. ( modify to add 40, 45 )
10-U 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 105, 112, 120, 130, 140, HWT. ( modify to add 50, 55 )
12-U 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 105, 110, 115, 120, 125, 130, 145, 165, 185, 205, 225, HWT. ( modify to add 60, 65 )
14-U 84, 91, 98, 105, 112, 119, 125, 130, 135, 140, 145, 152, 160, 171, 189, 215, HWT. ( modify to add 70, 77 )
16-U 98, 105, 112, 119, 125, 130, 135, 140, 145, 152, 160, 171, 189, 215, HWT. ( modify to add 245 )

This would bring the number of total weight classes to 98, with the modifications listed.


I want to point out these are just my thoughts, but with the number of deserving kids that make up the largest age group in Kansas, why would we exclude them from wrestling kids, in their age bracket, at STATE!

FACT: It is illegal for a 14-under kid to wrestle a 16-under kid at Subs, District and STATE.

Why would I want my preschooler ( 5 year old ) wrestling a possible 3rd or 4th grade ( 9 year old ) kid?

And why does the age not start 1-1-2005 as it does according to USAW?
I will let somebody else argue that point.

What are your thoughts?
Posted By: d3666 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 04:09 AM
Good post Jeff, you are correct. The 6 & under money is great to take all year long, but not good enough the last three weeks of the year when it is the most important.

Kit Powell
Posted By: Cokeley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 04:33 AM
It appears there are opportunities for us to save money, time, and have enough space to give 12,14, and 16 full size, circular area mats. To me it is unacceptable to have shared out-of-bounds lines at the state tournament. It causes officials to compromise their focus on the match, possible injuries to competitors on both surfaces, too many out of bounds situations, and just an overall unsafe situation.

I agree with everything Jeff says. I am not a big supporter of either 16 or 6 state but there is a much more valid argument for 6 and under. The data speaks for itself. The 16's can wrestle Freestyle and Greco if they didn't qualify for high school state. Our high school state tournaments are already so watered down (another topic) why does USA have to give them another chance?
Posted By: Mike Flood Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 11:27 AM
I'm for considering the USAW weight classes. I think there needs to be a 125 & 135 lb. 12 & under. However, the USAW 15 lb. jump from 130 to 145 at 12 & under seems to be a bit much. I realize my son will be 14 & under next year, but I still believe changes should be considered.
Posted By: Mom160 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 12:39 PM
I dont see what everybody has against 16 and under wrestlers. Kids club gives them more experience for their junior and senior year. There are some kids that dont make it to state in high school that would like to, so they compete in kids club to get that chance.
Posted By: sportsfan02 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 01:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Mom160:
I dont see what everybody has against 16 and under wrestlers. Kids club gives them more experience for their junior and senior year. They have just as much right to be on that mat wrestling as the 6-8-10-12 and 14 and under kids. There are some kids that dont make it to state in high school that would like to, so they compete in kids club to get that chance.
Mom160,

It's not that anyone has anything "against" the 16U division. But in the opinion of many it's time has come and gone with the growth of freestyle and greco wrestling. Many of us given the choice would rather have the 6U kids at state and let the 16U kids start earlier with freestyle/greco. That doesn't mean once a child reaches 15 yrs. of age that we suddenly begin hating them. To use your example why do we cut it off at 16 yrs of age and why not 18? Plus, there is no individual or group "rights" involved in any of this, it is simply what the clubs vote. The 16U have a chance to go to state every year with their respective schools, the 6U don't.
Posted By: Cokeley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 01:52 PM
Mom160,

You should look around at the other states and gather some facts. As SF02 stated, no one is against 16U. The consideration is supported by the numbers. Look how few 16's wrestle vs. 6's. If anything, the funds paid during the year by the 6's should give them the "right" to have a real state tournament. Back in the 70's and 80's there wasn't a 16U division. Given the constraints on funds and space the prudent decision would be to have a seperate tournament or no tournament for them. They wouldn't even have to have a qualifier if they were independent. You could use 32 man brackets and have a one day event. Just an idea. I support ALL wrestling but I feel there is room for some improvement for the kids not yet in high school.
Posted By: jeffroberts Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 02:36 PM
My son is in the 8 and under and we won't ever have a six and under wrestler in our family. Our daughter doesn't have an interest in the sport. I won't live through either of them as I was not a wrestler. My interests are finding a way to help them with their interests, not mine. I don't have any ulterior motives for wanting 6 and unders at the State Tournament other than seeing those little guys/gals try to win in that atmosphere.

They pay their money for a card and membership just like everyone else. Do these 6 and under kids pay anything during the year that is used for the State Tournament? I really know very little about the financial aspect of Kansas Kids Wrestling. I am sure someone can fill me in right after my post. How is the state tourney funded?

Why exclude them based on age? Some of them won't be mature enough to handle state at any age, some will be at 6, let the parents decide. Sure they will cry when they lose, a lot of them do this every weekend if they lose, this isn't just 6 and unders.

From a common sense standpoint why would any organization exclude 1654 members/participants for any reason from attempting to show the skills they have learned in front of the big crowd? I really enjoy watching the six and unders try.

I hadn't thought about it till I reviewed my post but many girls might have a better chance of winning at the six and under age now also. Don't know if this is sexist or not but many don't participate past age 10 when there seems to be a change in strength between the sexes.

Everything that is done to encourage any wrestler breeds more insight/interest about my son's sport, that only encourages more to join. We only get better as the competition gets better. Wrestling in Kansas appears hampered by the regulations from KSHAA about participation in tournaments during the athletes athletic season.(I know that is a whole other issue) Is eliminating 6 and unders at state in their own age bracket another method of hampering? I know my son would be discouraged this year if I told him he had to bump up to 10 and under to make it to state.

How would it affect the interest if we told our 16 year olds we had decided to allow 18 year olds and they would have to bump up also or wrestle in a combined 16 and 18 year old bracket?

I really don't know what will happen, I would vote for 6 and under wrestlers and 16 and under at our State in Topeka or anyplace it had to be to accomodate all of them.

I have rambled on long enough. Hope everyone has a successful end of the year. My son/family has really enjoyed learning the little we do about wrestling. Discussion only breeds new ideas.
Posted By: Nedly Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 06:03 PM
In the past 6 months the Kids Board has requested a study of all weight groups. I am in the process of getting and studying the seeding imformation from all subs this year and I will add to the past five years of Kids State imformation. I am also looking at other states.

I beleive the results will surprise a lot people.

My thoughts are this process could and should change many things we currently do as a state, and it will take some time.

1. Remember that ALL age groups are important to Kansas wrestling.
2. Freestlye and Greco are very important to all wrestlers that want to suceed at the national level and we need to find a way to make it more sucessful in Kansas.
3. As the State tournament goes out for bid next year this would be the time to take a hard look at State Tournament and look at tweeking the format a little. This is easier said that done, but I am willing to look at it as well.

All of the above ideas are good ones, keep them coming.

Ned
Posted By: sportsfan02 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 06:16 PM
Ned,

Will your study tell us how many 6U kids are wrestling up in the 8U division at qualifiers and what weights that might include?
Posted By: Cokeley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 07:10 PM
Ned,

Can you answer why we use a different age cutoff date than USA Wrestling?

Will
Posted By: Mike Juby Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 07:32 PM
Will,

We used to use the same calendar year cutoff as USA Wrestling. Several years ago, it was changed to August 31. The primary argument that was made, as I remember it, was that it was more appropriate to use a school year cutoff (keeping the same 24-month range).
Posted By: golden dad Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 07:50 PM
Mike what would it take to get the 6 and under in the state tournement next year
Posted By: Nigel Isom Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 08:24 PM
I would like to point out that our summer freestyle programs are very unorganized compared to other states, many of our high school kids have no interest in summer wrestling. They would much rather play baseball and do other things than wrestle all year. Having been to many freestyle tournaments myself they are very laid back, lots of fun for sure, but the intensity and will to win at these non national tournaments is not the same as folkstyle here in kansas. That being said it is a major reason I still support the 16 and U age group.

As far as mat space is concerned I tend to have a different opinion than Mr. Cokeley does. As long as I have been around kids wrestling I have never seen anything that amounts to a serious injury to competitiors from the participants of two seperate mats running into each other. Its been 15 years now and I've yet to see it happpen, not to say that it has never happened or couldn't, its just not a common thing. As far as going out of bounds in concerned, it doens't matter how big of a mat you give kids they are going to go out of bounds. Heck Salina had one of the bigggest mats I've ever seen down on mat 14 and kids were still going out. Coaches are still teaching kids to use the edge of the mat. The way to stop kids from going out is make them stay in the center and call stalling for those wrestlers who don't circle to the center, push kids out of bounds when they stand up, or run out of bounds when they stand up. I use this on 1/2 mats and the wrestling stays in bounds most of the match.

I'm not against using full mats, in fact I much prefer them, but I am against taking out age groups, and disallowing another simply for the purpose of accomodating the other 4. Perhaps there can be a way to make room for every age class.
Posted By: Mike Juby Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 08:49 PM
Adding a 6 & Under division to the state tournament would take a vote of the clubs voting at the state body meeting.

This is taken directly from Section I Article IX of the Kansas Kids constitution :
Quote:
1. These By-Laws may be altered, amended or repealed and a set of new By-Laws may be adopted at any annual State Body meeting, or at any special State Body meeting when the proposed amendment has been sent out in the notice of such meeting, on a two-thirds vote of the voting members, provided that at least fifty-five percent (55%) of all voting representatives of the state are present.

2. All proposed amendments of these By-Laws must be presented to the Executive Director, in writing, by certified mail post dated no later than July 31. The Executive Director must send a copy of the proposed amendment to each member of the Executive Council post dated no later than August 31. The Executive Council will review the proposed amendment and make recommendation to the State Body at the next annual meeting.
This is the procedure that would need to be followed. I should inform you that many votes on this issue have been held in the past, and the clubs have consistently voted overwhelmingly against adding a 6 & Under division to the state tournament.
Posted By: kanwrman Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 08:58 PM
Some great discussion fellas. I think Nigel makes a couple of good points when it comes to freestyle. I think we lose kids interests and their parents as well by having too long of a season. Here are a couple wild ideas

End the kids folkstyle season near the high school state time. Cut off the ages similar to Missouri, no one above eighth grade.

Transition in to freestyle now, (march) get your national teams set early, have a state freestyle tourney in late April or early May.
Posted By: zack'sdad Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 09:07 PM
Mike,

Adding 6-unders to the State Tourney as the weights are now would be pretty much impossible. Adding 6's with the modified weights would be no problem. You would have less total brackets as long as the weights were modified to represent USAW's recognized weights.

I hope Club Directors who attend the State Body Meeting recognize that fact.

I dont want anyone getting confused.

I would like to see 16's at State as well as 6's, modified weight classes would allow that!
Posted By: Nedly Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 09:30 PM
Sportsfan02

Some of the subs are sending that imformation, some are not. I will try and get that imfo.

Ned
Posted By: bystander Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/14/05 09:50 PM
GOD! I LOVE THIS SPORT!
Posted By: smokeycabin Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/15/05 11:38 AM
I enjoy watching the older boys (14 & 16)with maybe 8 to 10 years experience. This is their Grand State. Some these guys may qualify for high school state and never even make it to Kids State. That is a pretty high caliber of wrestling.
I do enjoy watching the 6 & 8's but they still have another 8 to 10 years for their grand state.
I have never heard any talk about the total number of matches a kid can wrestle in a year like they do with high school. I worry about the toll on these young bodies. In baseball they do not want them throwing a curve ball to early because of their physical development. I kind of feel the same way with a kids 4-13 years wrestling over 25 matches in a year. In high school they have a point system limiting the number of matches. I know that should be the responsibility of the parents monitoring the kids number of matches. I have heard some parents at tournaments say their 6 or 8 year old is 50-4 this year. That is a lot of matches nearly 2 years worth.
Posted By: Gibby Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/15/05 12:09 PM
Things to consider...

First, Mike is right in regards to the voting of adding 6 and under. Time and time again, when brought to the floor at the state body, the state as a whole has voted it down.

Numbers can be deceiving. On the surface, it would appear that overwhelmingly 6 and under dominates our practice rooms, but we know this is not the case. In clubs I have coached, the younger kids come in early in the year and by the end of January, are tired of wrestling. Instead of burning their son/daughter out, the parents opt to end the season early.

A better indication of adding 6 and under would be the tourney in Ottawa. How many kids are at that tourney each year? Is it as high as those with cards? Just a question to ponder.

As for 16 and under, they have joined the ranks with the sole purpose of trying for a state title - sort of. With the addition of the national tourney in Nebraska, our elite are skipping the state tourney and heading to the Nebraska. Makes sense for them and I agree.

Second, Kanwrman makes a valid point, if all was perfect in the wrestling community. Why not add wrestling freestyle in March for the 16 and unders and get the national teams set early? Two problems - 1. I'm guessing he/she is referring to the dual teams, which are selected (sore sport with me) and are not wrestled off for. As for qualifying for Fargo, those tourneys are held in March/April/May in regards to regional qualifiers for Juniors. I won't touch on Cadets because their regional qualifier is in June. 2. In the metros, there is little problem in finding a club that has a freestyle technician/coach. It is difficult to find in Western Kansas. The intent by such modification would be to prepare Kansas Kids for the national level for such an age group. Because KSHSAA in their infinite wisdom see folk/free/greco as one in the same, our kids are left to practice with someone other than their high school coach. Remember, the Olympic styles has really gotten "hot" in Kansas in the past 10 years. Most coaches have not either wrestled or competed in these styles and they are at a loss. This is not a slam on them, but an admission that our kids coaches are ill prepared for the Olympic styles.

I would agree with Ned on the issue. The state tourney will be up for bid again and I would suggest to anyone that is working on bringing the tourney to somewhere other than Topeka to build two formats - one the same as we've always done and the second with the modifications sought by the 6 and under contengency.

When I was in federation, 16 and under was the hot commodity. This was our chance to see a sort of grand state if you will. That was long ago and with the Nebraska tourney, that illustriousness as diminished. I would suggest to all involved in putting together a proposal to not take out the 16 and unders, but modify it to the high school weight classes, the same ones that are used in Fargo by the way. This would drastically shrink the number of weights and would at the same time free up some time/space for the 6 and unders.
Posted By: KCWrestlersMom Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/15/05 02:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Gibby:
Things to consider...

With the addition of the national tourney in Nebraska, our elite are skipping the state tourney and heading to the Nebraska. Makes sense for them and I agree.

Gibby, just to expand on that, many 16 & Unders who plan to wrestle in Nebraska are also wrestling kids to keep in shape until then, see other 16&Us from different high school classes, etc. Looking at the sub-district results, you will see quite a few names that you will also see in Lincoln.
Posted By: Nedly Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/16/05 02:09 AM
Richard I need some help.

If we vote on weight changes at the next State meeting will they take effect that year (05-06) or the next,(06-07).

Ned
Posted By: Packerholic4 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/16/05 02:26 AM
Cokely,

They had 16 under in the 80's , because I wrestled in them. Actually, I didn't make it to state in high school. I wrestled a kid in Districts who won a high school state championship and I beat him. Then I didn't even place at kids state.
Posted By: Cokeley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/16/05 02:50 PM
They didn't have them in 1980, which would have been the last year I would have been able to wrestle 16 and under. In the 70's when Kids state was held in Wichita and Hays they did not have 16 and under.
Posted By: Cokeley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/16/05 02:52 PM
I didn't follow kids wrestling in Kansas in the 80's very much. I do recall it still being held in Hays in the late 80's, is that correct?
Posted By: Packerholic4 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/16/05 05:49 PM
State was in Salina. Nice short drive from Abilene.
Posted By: Cokeley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/17/05 03:09 AM
We were talking at practice tonight and thought it would be really cool if they had 16 & under state the weekend after high school state. Open invitation, high school weights only, maybe add one lower than 103. Wrestlers could maintain their weight for one more weekend. I think it would be an awesome event with lots of 32 man brackets completely full. It would truly be like a mini grand state. Comments...
Posted By: smokeycabin Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 03/17/05 05:40 PM
I think there would be a good turn out. It would take a few years to build it up. Would it be a USA sanctioned tournament? I sure like Salina as a location.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 02:12 AM
Ned,

Have you heard any more talk regarding this?

Jeff
Posted By: slap2414 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 04:08 AM
I think the issue of amount of kids is not a valid reason to try to justify one age group over the other. The reason the numbers go down the older the kids get is because the compition level increases, and the wrestlers start to "weed" themselves out. The wrestlers who have the most sucess stay out and the kids who don't drop out. If you watch the older kids take state for instance look how close the matches get. I also think there is to much pressure that would be applied by some parents on 5-6 year old kids it can be to much even for the 7-8 year olds. The parents that are at the state meeting every year pushing to add 6&U and take out 16&U are some of the parents I'm talking about. Example earlier this year some parents were asking for advice on moving their 6 year old up for subs, and the response of so many parents was yes I'm doing it to my kid. I responded on this issue it needed to be the kids decision and so many said they were moving their kid up without really asking their kid for their opinion. I have been around the wrestling scene for over 20 years, and the amount of parent driving their kids is growing at an alarming rate, and I think some parents need to remember this is for the kids to have fun. The whole topic on 6&U is the parents want their kids at the state tournemant why not wrestle the six and unders in exhibition hall where the kids way in, and I think it should be a tournemant open to all 6&U kids without having to wrestle through to rounds of the playoffs. This would take all the pressure off of the kids and give all the parents the bracket they want at state and all would be happy without removing kids from the 16&U who have wrestled for many years in the Kansas Wrestling Club. I thank you for your time, and we will see you in Iowa at nationals.
Posted By: slap2414 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 04:13 AM
I heard through the grapevine high school is talking about removing 103 and adding a class between 215 and 275 has anyone else heard this?
Posted By: RichardDSalyer Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 09:09 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by slap2414:
I heard through the grapevine high school is talking about removing 103 and adding a class between 215 and 275 has anyone else heard this?
NFSHA Has No Plans To Reduce Number of Weight Classes!

Weight a Minute: NFSHA Has No Plans To Reduce Number of Weight Classes

3/15/2005 3:07:00 PM

Many rumors have circulated across the country that the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFSHA) was going to reduce the number of weight classes in high school wrestling from 14 to 12 starting next year.

But that couldn’t be further from the truth, says Jerry Diehl, editor of the NFSHA rules book and a member of the wrestling rules committee.

“There are not going to be any changes, if any, for at least two years,” Diehl told The Wrestling Mall Tuesday.

Much of the speculation that this was going to take place next season stemmed from a survey the NFSHA sent to the state coaches associations. One of the questions in the survey brought up the topic of what coaches thought about reducing the number of weight classes.

“Those who believed that it will happen next year, that was just an assumption on their part,” said Diehl. “There has never been anything discussed formally by our committee that would indicate we would do that next year.”

Diehl added that the wrestling rules committee will meet to discuss the pluses and minuses of reducing weight classes, or keeping them the same, in April. From that point though, Diehl said it will still be two more years before any changes are made, if any.

“We’re just starting to look at the feedback,” he said. “There’s nothing more to it.”

- Matt Krumrie
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 11:53 AM
Richard,

Did you have an answer to Neds question?

"Richard I need some help.

If we vote on weight changes at the next State meeting will they take effect that year (05-06) or the next,(06-07).

Ned"


Jeff
Posted By: Mike Juby Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 11:56 AM
A vote to change weights would take effect for the current year (05-06).
Posted By: jeffroberts Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 01:27 PM
Mike Juby

Could a motion to change to USAW weights and age cuttoff happen for next year? What is the process for this to happen. I understand this will probably be bad for my son but it really needs to happen to let those 6 and unders wrestle at State.

this was the example on an earlier post and one that probably needs to happen
6-U 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, HWT. ( modify to add 35)
8-U 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 87, 95, 103, 112, 120, HWT. ( modify to add 40, 45 )
10-U 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 105, 112, 120, 130, 140, HWT. ( modify to add 50, 55 )
12-U 70, 75, 80, 85, 90, 95, 100, 105, 110, 115, 120, 125, 130, 145, 165, 185, 205, 225, HWT. ( modify to add 60, 65 )
14-U 84, 91, 98, 105, 112, 119, 125, 130, 135, 140, 145, 152, 160, 171, 189, 215, HWT. ( modify to add 70, 77 )
16-U 98, 105, 112, 119, 125, 130, 135, 140, 145, 152, 160, 171, 189, 215, HWT. ( modify to add 245 )
Posted By: Mike Juby Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 01:34 PM
All proposed changes to the rules must be given to Greg Grater, in writing, by certified mail post dated no later than July 31.

The only rules changes which do not take effect immediately are those which directly impact the actions of the mat official during competition. Since age & weight changes do not fall in this category, any changes would become effective as soon as passed by a two-thirds vote at the state body meeting, provided that at least fifty-five percent (55%) of all clubs are present at the meeting.
Posted By: sportsfan02 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 01:42 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by jeffroberts:
[QB] Mike Juby

"Could a motion to change to USAW weights and age cuttoff happen for next year? What is the process for this to happen. I understand this will probably be bad for my son but it really needs to happen to let those 6 and unders wrestle at State."

What does the age cutoff have to do with 6U at state?
Posted By: jeffroberts Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 02:35 PM
We probably should go with the USAW (weights and ages) and have the least amount of differences. Then our kids would be the same, no age or weight differences when they went to wrestle nationally. This will be pretty detrimental to my son as he places because he is one of the light weights and isn't that athletic. But my opinion is we should try to match up with the rest of the USAW.
Posted By: jeffroberts Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 03:15 PM
What is the address for Mr. Grater? Do these proposals need to be in a particular form or motion?
Posted By: Mike Juby Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 04:02 PM
Greg Grater
Executive State Director
2318 Utah Rd.
Green KS 67447

There is no standard form required for proposed rules changes, it just need to clearly state what changes are being requested.
Posted By: Mark Stanley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 05:57 PM
I would recommend that any motion(s) for changing age and weight classifications be presented separately. Some may not be opposed to one change but still vote no because they feel strongly about the other change. Just my thoughts....
Posted By: Mark Stanley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 06:33 PM
I personally like aligning the age groups by the school class. I feel the national committee is behind the times on this one…maybe there should be a petition to change their age classifications. Right now in Kansas the age division, in a sense, is separated by the wrestlers “grade” in school:

2nd & 3rd
4th & 5th
6th & 7th
8th & 9th
10th & 11th

At a National tournament, a 4th grader with a late September birthday, can be lumped in with 5th as well as 6th grade kids. In Kansas a 17 year old junior, with a late September birthday, can participate in the 16 year old class and prepare for his senior season. If we switch to the National age divisions, this same kid would not be eligible. If a change of age classification is pushed forward, I would agree that a better division of class would be:

1st & 2nd
3rd & 4th
5th & 6th
7th & 8th
9th, 10th, and 11th

This would bring in some of our older 6U kids into the State format and group our middle school/high school kids together. Keeping our high school kids grouped together would add some additional meaning and bragging rights in crowning a “Grand State” champion (minus the senior classman).
Posted By: jeffroberts Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 08:11 PM
Mark

If you could convince the national people to change I would agree with you. I propose we go with what the national level uses if we want our kids to someday compete on that level. When they change we should change also.
Posted By: SEKcoach Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 09:45 PM
Slap2414 wrote:
"The whole topic on 6&U is the parents want their kids at the state tournemant why not wrestle the six and unders in exhibition hall where the kids way in, and I think it should be a tournemant open to all 6&U kids without having to wrestle through to rounds of the playoffs. This would take all the pressure off of the kids and give all the parents the bracket they want at state and all would be happy without removing kids from the 16&U who have wrestled for many years in the Kansas Wrestling Club."

Do you have any idea how many 6&u kids show up for the Ottawa 6&u State Championship? These kids would not even come close to fitting in that area! We have been to this tournament for the last 3 years. There have been 2-3 64 man brackets and 5-6 32 man brackets each year. As opposed to the 16 man brackets at big kids state.
I don't want to see the 16 &u get moved out but I think the 6&u deserve to be there too.
Posted By: shudog Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/01/05 10:25 PM
Do you realize that if the weight brackets are changed to the USAW weights without adding the modifications, we would loose 400 kids( 25 brackets x 16) at the state tournament. And the modifications added are at the low end of each of the brackets. Most of the lower brackets aren't full at the state tournament the way it is. Keep in mind that if this change is made to add 144 6U, you will keep 400 kids at the other age brackets from participating at state. I would like to see 6U at the tournament but not at the expense of 400 other deserving wrestlers. As far as the age cutoff, the present date seems to follow the kids and the grade they are in.(ex; 4th and 5th graders overall at the 10U). We are going to a national tournament in Iowa in a couple of weeks and the age requirements are the same as Kansas and the weight brackets are almost the same.
Posted By: jeffroberts Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 01:43 AM
I believe many of those brackets would be filled out by the USAW weight change,no more byes in the 52 lb ten and under that my son will probably wrestle in next year, instead all of them will be in the 55lb bracket. All those kids wouldn't be missing from state because they would be filling out the brackets at other weights. It would make many things more competitive, it would allow our kids/coaches a more complete assessement of how they are doing before they tackle a national tourney with a weight/age change from their state requirements.
I really think we need to go with the age requirement also, we need to mirror national requirements if we want our kids to understand what competing at that level is like. When the USAW makes a change we should try to follow them if the goal for the best is to wrestle at that level.
Posted By: slap2414 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 02:25 AM
To SEK Coach the exibition hall is no smaller than the cattle barn Wichita is held in, and almost all the brackets are 32 man brackets and is is all ran in one day. I don't buy your point!
Posted By: Mom160 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 02:45 AM
The number of kids who participated in Ottawa would not be the same number that would participate at state - correct? Only the top 16 in each weight bracket would participate. The remainder would not be eligible to compete. Would the Ottawa tournament become the consolation tournament for those who didn't qualify for state?
Posted By: shudog Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 03:39 AM
How many of these kids go on to compete at a national level? I don't think but a very small percentage consistently participate in any national event. Bottom line, there would be less kids having the opprotunity to experience the State Tournament. It seems to me the way the tournament has gone the last few years, why change it. It has been a great tournament and run very well. If 6U can be added without losing the older kids, it would be great, but I don't think you are helping wrestling by taking 400 8u, 10u, 12u, 14u and 16u kids from the great state tournament to add 144 6u.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 04:11 AM
Shudog,

It is this short-sighted thinking that hurts this sport. You are complaining about the possibility of losing 400 wrestlers scattered between the 8, 10, 12, 14, & 16's. They at least have the opportunity to compete against kids their age to qualify for this tournament.

What about the nearly 1700 6 year olds that would like to compete on a level playing field.

What if we made the weight classes every 2 pounds. How many more 8, 10, 12, 14, & 16's could we squeeze into the Expocentre?

Then we could see ALL the kids compete at the State Tourney!

That is not what this tournament or this post is about.

I would like to see us abide by the recognized weights of our parent organization "USA Wrestling" (with slight modifications to resemble our lighter starting weights and a couple toward the heavier end).

For those who are worried about our kids cutting weight. (Which is becoming more and more of a problem).

If you were to use USAW's weights, there would be less chance for a kid to cut to the next lower class due to the weight classes being further apart.
Posted By: sportsfan02 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 08:33 AM
I hate to throw cold water on this thread but I believe our executive board voted last year to NEVER consider 6U being allowed at state again. I would defer to Mr. Salyer regarding the constitutionality of such a vote but I believe it was almost unamimous. For the record I do support 6U at state BUT believe the above proposed age and weight adjustments are the wrong way to go about it.
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 10:37 AM
Sportfan02: Are you referring to the Executive Board meeting on 9/19/04 that our Kids Divison section has an agenda that can be accessed? I did not see any minutes for that meeting but I did see that 6 & Under at Qualifying tournaments was going to be discussed. So if it was voted by the executive council to never to consider 6U at State again and not reported in any minutes, this is the first any of us heard of such a vote. Even if they voted this way, I would say this is just wishful thinking on their part. This topic is very popular with some and unpopular with others, but it is always discussed very year and I don't believe it is going away. I would think that they could erase such a vote just as quickly as they made it and could they really avoid it at a State Body meeting if the majority wanted to discuss it? It is not going away just because they made this vote.

I am not in favor of 6U at State. I am in favor of the 7U (2 grade & U), 9U (3rd & 4th), 11U (5th & 6th), 14U (7th & 8th) with no high school (9th grade & up) participation in this class. 14U instead of 13U for the last grade school class to give an opportunity to those 8th graders who started school late or were held back one year. This is similar to the one Mark Stanley described above with the exception that I believe he is proposing that his 9th,10th & 11th grade division still be held at the same time and place as the elementary Kids State tournament.

I would like to see a separate post season high school tournament sponspored by our Kids USA State organization and held at maybe at Salina that would be open to all high school classes freshmen thru Seniors. I don't think you would need qualifying tournaments for this high school tournament. If logistically possible, maybe you could include a JV divison at this post season high school tournament to reach those high schoolers who are new to wrestling or not yet competitive with the elite high school wrestlers. As an alternative this JV division could maybe be held with the Kids division tournament in Topeka but I would advocate as the KWCA did in 2002 for the Kids tourament to be held before the regular season high school tournament.

This was reported in the USAW Kansas Kids Wrestling State Body Minutes 11/03/02: "The KWCA had approached Mike and said that they would like to see the Kids wrestling season end earlier. They would like to see it end before High School State, take a couple of weeks break, and then start the summer freestyle-Greco-roman season. They honestly feel we are going too long!! A brief discussion followed, but it was decided to leave as is."
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 11:22 AM
Some other thoughts on what has been discussed so far:

1. Exhibition hall for an age group: Whoever you put there in my opinion is eventually going to feel that they are not getting treated equal with the groups wrestling in the more attractive main arena setting, so if you are wanting to add younger wrestlers you are probably going to have to either add another day to the tournament or eliminate an age group.

2. I too think the age as of August 31st birthday is good because it keeps the majority of kids wrestling every year with the kids in their own grade school class. I agree that the majority do not wrestle in national tournaments so you should not adjust this cutoff date to try to just serve the minority that do. I am not sure I accept your argument about that either, Jeff Roberts. It seems to me if you are trying to make a wrestler more competitive that Kansas kids who are born before August 31 would be better served by wrestling in Kansas in a higher age group thru the year. Wouldn't a wrestler who turns 13 in August be better prepared wrestling Kansas wrestlers 14 & U than the younger 12 & U kids during the year?

3. Jeff Broadbent, I really do agree with you that we should change the weight brackets to fill out better some of these weight brackets at Subs, Districts and State. But Jeff that would have to be extremely abnormal to find a 4th grader in 8&U. They would have had to start a year early. It is still that they have to be 8 on 8/31 no matter what grade they are in. I also have to disagree with your other point about weight cutting being less likely with a larger weight bracket differential. I think the opposite is true. For instance in my son's 14&U 165 that would be eliminated, I think a 165 pounder is more likely to cut to 160 than wrestle at 171, but I do agree we should make this change. We only had one 160 pound wrestler at District 1 Subs South and only 4 at Districts. Or perhaps a better example would be what my own situation would have been at Nationals this year. I am a 1950 birth year so I would be in Veterans Division D (Born in 1951 and Before). I weigh about 225 facing the options of weight classes 214 or 215-287. This unreasonable large weight differential of up to 287 pounds that I would encounter would tempt me to shed 11 pounds of muscle to compete at 214. Truthfully, Jeff you have met me. Do you think that would be wise for me to lose 11 pounds?
Posted By: VanFam7 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 04:23 PM
To Slap2414- The other point I was trying to make (and apparently not very effectively) was I do not think it is fair to compare the Ottawa 6 & u championship to the Big kids state. These 6 & u kids are required to wrestle these 64 and 32 man brackets in ONE day! Most of the kids in the middle weights will have wrestled any where from 6-8 matches if they make it to the finals! I know this to be a fact because my son did it 2 years ago. Is this really what want for Kansas USA wrestling?
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 04:30 PM
Vince,

While it may be rare for a 9 year old 4th grader, it does still seem very unfair to have a preschool child compete against a 3rd grader or 2nd grader. Perhaps I should have said a 5 year old competing against a 9 year old.

That is a whole different topic that I dont want to address on this thread so we dont confuse people. The two subjects arent tied together. You can change weights without affecting the age groups.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 04:33 PM
VanFam7,

Are you aware, according to H.S. rules, it is illegal for a competitor to wrestle more than 5 matches in one day.
Posted By: VanFam7 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 04:36 PM
Yes, I am.
Posted By: VanFam7 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 04:38 PM
Do you know how many matches it takes to wrestle to completion a 64 man bracket?
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 04:50 PM
Jeff:

I was trying to kid around with you a little. I do agree it is not fair to have a 9 year old against a 5 year old. Personally though I would not be thinking of putting a 5 year old in the State tournament environment. My personal belief is that the majority of 5 year olds and probably even their parents are not ready for it. I know there are exceptions both for kids and their parents. I am sure that your family could definitely do it. I don't think I personally would have been ready when my son was five and he didn't even start until he was 7 which I think was soon enough for him.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 08:09 PM
VanFam7,

125 matches if wrestling to top 6 - per bracket

63 front side & 62 back side
Posted By: Nigel Isom Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/02/05 11:07 PM
I guess I should just interject right here and say that I doubt any weight changes whatsoever are going to happen, and quite honestly thats the way it should be. I think most clubs in this state are satisfied with the weights and ages the way they are, I know I certainly am. Don't be too terribly surprised if the vote (if one even happens) doesn't go in your favor.
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/03/05 11:11 AM
Nigel, you like to bring people clamoring for change back down to reality. You seem to love to tell us -- Don't waste too much of your time folks it just is not going to happen!!! As you know Nigel I am about 30 years older than you and I have seen a lot of change in my 54 years that I thought would never happen. Just the fact that you, myself and everyone else on this forum are able to be typing away on our own personal computers and communicating with each other that anyone in the world can have access to is an amazing change that I have seen in my lifetime that most people when I was a kid would have said, "Yeah right go back to reading your comics".

I could go on and give you an extensive list of things that have changed in my lifetime that people would have never thought would happen. In many of these changes that have happen in the world of science, business, politics, religion, the media, even television itself, etc., I am sure there were people telling the people who initiated the change to, "Stop wasting your time it just not going to happen". Those people who made these changes happen, just did not listen and stubbornly made these things happen. One thing you will learn Nigel as you get older is that change does happen. Sometimes it is good and sometimes it is not so good. But the one thing consistent in life is change and most people and organizations need it to grow and survive. A lot of times change comes slow and the people struggling to make it happen will encounter many failures along the way, but if you really believe in something you don't give up and you keep trying to find a way to make it happen. I am glad that some of these people who made some of these positive changes in my lifetime did not give up and listen to those who were discouraging them.

So you say you are satisfied with the weights and ages that we now have and you also think most people are. That may be true certainly about your thoughts on it. I don't know about most people. It sure seems there are a lot of people who believe that six and under should be included at State. I also believe there are some people out there questioning whether 16 and under needs to be included at State. I believe that there are also quite a few who are questioning the weight brackets in all age groups but especially 14U & 16U. You say you are not one of them so I guess you think it is okay that we are seeing more and more of weights like 14U 160 (not the extreme end of 14U weights) where in District 1 we only had four participants at District and only one at the South Subdistrict. We did not end up with 16 wrestlers at State in 14U 165. During the season my son who was at 165 wrestled kids from about 150 to 185. Do you think they might want to consider the need to have 150,155,160,165,and 175 and might consider going to 152,160,171,189 like in high school?

I know one thing Ned Price our Kids State Competition Director is considering weight changes. If you haven't read his post from March 14 1:03 PM in this thread, read it and you will see that may be the people suggesting change with the weights are not just wasting their time. I also would suggest you read the minutes from the recent State Body meeting (you can find those by clicking on the Kids Division link on this website) you will find this in the minutes:

"State Competition Director: Ned Price said the Folkstyle Camp, for the fourth year in a row, had declining numbers. It seems that more clubs are doing camps at the local level. In looking at the summer schedule, Ned stated there were 22 other camps held in Kansas so they felt this was a major reason for in the decline in participation. The executive council has decided not to host a camp and focus our funds in other ways to promote folkstyle wrestling. Richard Sayler asked if anyone had actually looked at why the numbers were down. Ned said that the Sunflower Tournament had changed dates / state baseball tournament / freestyle & Greco tournament in Fargo seems to be contributing." (My comment to you Nigel is that the executive council is willing to make a change when they recognize a need to do so).

A little further in the minutes you will find this paragraph:


"Ned is also going to do a study on weight classes. He will be looking at the number of participants from the past 4-5 years and will be making a proposal to the executive council about eliminating weights where there are only a few wrestlers."

So in conclusion, Nigel, maybe this time people are not just wasting their time and my prediction is that you are going to witness many changes in Kansas Kids wrestling in the coming years. Who knows you may even someday see 6&U at State and a separate post season high school tournament. Many of these future changes will occur because the powers to be will be listening to people on this forum and will react to their input. And you know what in the few years that I have been on this forum, I think there has been one or two changes that have already happened like that.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/03/05 01:28 PM
Vince,

Well Stated!

By the way Nigel, it seems as though you were totally against the idea of split format tournaments as well.

For the record, we did do a split format tourney this year and had many people come up to specifically say "thank you" for running it as split format.

I think you know how we will run it again next year --- Split Format!

We have seen the benefits of getting people in and out and not having to keep them there the entire day.
Posted By: Nigel Isom Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/03/05 10:59 PM
Mr. Nowak,

It is difficult to believe that you think that just because a small number of people here in Kansas are dissatisfied with the current system we have, that some major changes are going to happen. So let me say this.

Regarding the elimination of extreme upper and lower weight classes from applicable age groups is a good idea in my opinion and I would not be oppossed to that. There is no reason to have weight groups when they aren't consistantly filled up. However regarding AGE groups that you will not see changed anytime soon. I have been in this sport for going on 15 years now, and the age groups now are the same age groups back then with the exception of 6&U which I am not sure about. You and a few of your cohorts seek to change a system that works perfectly fine as it is now without good reason. You talked about how you think their is some wide gap between ages which at this point is no more than 3 years excluding the 6&U wrestling up.

You also seek to eliminate an age group (16&U) for other reasons unknown, I mean heck have you ever stopped to consider the feelings of the kids in this age group? These are kids that grew up through the other age categories, and you want to just cut them off, because quote "They have high school state" Well did you ever stop to consider that manybe some of these kids in the 16&U category aren't all state qualifiers. But you propose a seperate tournament just for them. Why stop there? Why don't we just have a seperate tournament for each of the age groups, and then there will be plenty of mat space for everybody, and you Mr. Nowak and every other selfish person who thinks the same way only have to be there to see the certain age groups you came to watch.

You want to end the season earlier for everybody because you think kids get burnt out and so on and so forth. Well I can tell you most of the kids still wrestling into March WANT to still be wrestling, and those that don't aren't under any obligation to do so, just as you as a spectator/coach/anything aren't required to be there. My attitude towards you, and others who think like you do, is if you don't like it get away from the sport. And I say that with the utmost of respect towards you. This sport owes you or I nothing, we owe it. I'm out on the wrestling mat 2-3 days a week for 5 months because I love the sport. But I see things like this where people are trying to change things to satisfy their own agendas and it upsets me greatly. I've been through the Kansas Kids wrestling system, and I loved every minute of it, I wrestled through the weight classes until I was no longer young enough to compete, and even after being a multi time state placer in high school I STILL looked forward to being able to compete in the 16&U category in Kids wrestling, and I gladly paid the $30 to wrestle 3 more weekends.

Perhaps now you understand my objection to you and Mr. Broadbents relentless compaign, to sum up everything that I've said, its an old addage that goes "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" And I think many people would agree WE (Kansas Wrestling) are not broke. We can use a little tune up in terms of excess weight classes, but that is it.

Quite note on the split format thing. Perhaps you've already forgot about just how well your beautiful split format worked at the District I tourney? I've been to 3 splits this year and NONE of them ran any more smoothly than traditional, and the only ones who even noticed were the parents because they got to go home a whole 2 hours early.

Respectfully,

Nigel
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/03/05 11:44 PM
Nigel,

To quote you.


" We can use a little tune up in terms of excess weight classes, but that is it."

See there, even those who are just fine with the current system, readily admit there are too many weight classes.

That has been my point with this complete thread. There are too many weight classes and if we did adhere to USAW weights (with slight modifications if needed) we would be better off.

Didnt think I would ever hear you admit it though. :-)

Jeff
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 12:22 PM
Nigel:

Suggesting that we consider having a separate open post season high school tournament for all the high school classes and a JV division possibly at the same tournament is not the same thing as suggesting the elimination of an age class. It is just suggesting that we have their tournament at a different venue much the same as we are doing to 6&U now by having them have their season finale at Ottawa. I will admit that a few years ago that I did not think it was needed. But several people on this forum (yourself included) have convinced me since then that it is a good thing for a lot of the high school wrestlers to get some more folkstyle competition after their season is over.

The idea of having the Kids season end early did not originally come from me. It came from the KWCA (I made the assumption there are some pretty knowledgable wrestling people in the KWCA). I read about it our the Kids State Body meeting minutes back in 2002 I believe. I quoted those minutes in this thread or the other topic I introduced recently. I think their proposal makes sense both for the high school kids and the grade school kids. The point Nigel is not that they would not be wrestling in March but that they would take a few weeks off and then come back refreshed to do freestyle both high schoolers and grade schoolers.

Jeff Broadbent, thank you for your comment about my post and I really thank you about you offering a split tournament in our KCKS area. By the way Nigel the only aspect of the District 1 split that I thought needed a little tweaking is that I agree with the poster who said they needed to make a definite time for the start of the 2nd session. If they had said it would start no sooner than 1PM or 1:30PM they would have avoided a lot of the congestion that was created at the tournament in the parking lot and in the gyms around 10:30 to 12:30. My son was in the 2nd session (I believe you were the ref at one of his matches) and once the session started I thought it moved very well. Again you underestimate the benefit of the split in saving time to the participants. I am sure it was more than what you stated for most people and the other value is that wrestlers do not have to wait forever between matches. Most of them do not like to wait a long time between matches.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 06:00 PM
Nigel,

Your comment regarding the District 1 tournament is an absolute joke.

First lets increase the number of cars parked in the parking lot, or out of the parking lot where they could find room to park. Also lets just imagine both of those gyms, with the lack of seating to begin with. Now imagine them with twice the number of wrestlers and twice the number of spectators. You would have had several parents and the siblings of the wrestlers on the mat with you while refereeing, as there would have been no room to sit in the bleachers that were already full. Do you not remember how crowded it was around the mat in the H.S.

District 1, thank you for using split format. Although it did need to have some improvements (like held in the same building). It would have been far worse if it had been run as a conventional tourney.
Posted By: Cokeley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 06:07 PM
Since nobody else will write but everyone really wants to say it: Nigel, you are truly an idiot. You would argue if God told you the sky was blue. Loren Anthony, is there a way we can petition to have Nigel's stripes removed because anyone who is a decent official shouldn't have to proclaim themselves as such by posting as much as he does. If I wasn't so entertained by the absolute absurdity I would start a petition to have his rights to post removed.
Posted By: smokeycabin Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 06:53 PM
Weight class changes are tough because it is a moving target from year to year. Although, we should have enough data from past years to make some adjustments and changes. You could have two - one day tournaments. Some kids may wrestle more than 5 matches in a day - but I do not know if the rule (5 matches in a day) applies to kids. It would create a need for more volunteers at weigh-ins, table workers, seperate grand march, etc. The big thing in these larger tournaments is set up, mats, clocks, clean up at the end of the tournament. Maybe younger kids first day, older kids second day. Who knows for sure what the best format should be? Once we find that person then we'll have the answer. I was trying to call the phone number in the post above and the answering machine picked up.

Coach McCarthy
Posted By: slap2414 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 07:16 PM
I would like to say to start with there does need to be changes to the weights because we have kids winning state that never even wrestle. There are so many classes when you get the team books which show every bracket you will notice every year there are multiple brackets with only one kid in the bracket, and I don't think this is fair to all the other kids like my son who have to bust their hump to place at state. I don't agree with removing an age group to add another we need to find a way to incorperate all the kids. I don't know what the answer is on how to do this, but I think it's wrong to lead a movement to remove kids who have been putting in their time through out the years in the Kansas Kids Clubs. One more thing the idea of wrestling by grade is a joke they do it in Nebraska and it is a serious joke. Nebraska goes by their own rules because multiple people wanted a new system which made the parents of the state all happy like what is being sugested on this page, but remember to make everyone happy cost the kids in Nebraska at tournemants across the country. Their kids have to change they way they have wrestled all year, and I know this first hand because I live on the line by Nebraska.
Posted By: Nigel Isom Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 07:44 PM
Mr. Cokeley you have no power whatsoever to petition to have anyone's right to post removed, as a matter of fact you don't have any power to do anything except whine and complain. Stripes removed! Ha even I got a laugh out of that. You take personal insults to a whole new level, Will Cokely, and then have to audacity to go spouting off who should and shouldn't be officials. If you have nothing better to do than sit around calling me names you need to get a better hobby. Right now I compare your level of maturity to that of an elementary school playground bully.

Now Mr. Broadbent regarding District I. As I stated earlier in another thread, I thought Baldwin did as best of a job that they could do considering the space they had. God forbid if people have to walk a little extra ways because parking is limited (ever been to a Wal-Mart Supercenter?). Honestly it is you as club members who have a voice in determining where the Sub and District tournaments are held each year. If one particular town doesn't have the facilities to host a tournament then perhaps it would be better to find a facility that does have the space, such as having it at the Washburn Campus in Topeka where they had their tournament earlier this year. But rather than find a suitable facility for any of the qualifier tournaments or even State itself, you would rather just eliminate the original "cause" of the problem, which of course is the sheer number of wrestlers we have. And you would do so by eliminating weight classes and even age groups is the process.

Mr. Broadbent and Mr. Nowak, I accept your opinion of the things you think are wrong with USAW Kansas, although I don't really agree with them. I do so on the basis that, what we have now, has survived and worked the last decade, as the number of children participating grows here in Kansas the solutions to the problems that are presenting themselves is not to just eliminate weight classes, which won't change the number of competitors. And it’s most certainly not to disregard entire age groups and alienate the very people for whom you wish to accommodate.

I'm sure you have both read the high school forum where people have suggested that Kansas wrestling is taking a back seat to other states. While this is certainly not true as indicated by the success of Kansas wrestlers at High School nationals, we as a state only get better with the inclusion of all of age groups we now have.

Yes we do have some space issues at SOME of the bigger tournaments of the year. Yes we do have SOME parents and coaches who are not as willing to put in the extra time that the others are. All of this I accept. However I think you will find that the more you try to change, the more other issues will pop up. The split tournament works well for those that truly believe they need to get home as soon as possible, and for that I applaud it. What you all need to understand is we will always have problems of some kind at every tournament. If you spend all your time trying to find problems, its going to be fairly easy. Sometimes you just have to “bite the bullet” and realize that life isn’t as bad as you would perceive it to be. What we are doing now isn’t do any long term damage to our kids, otherwise we wouldn’t have half of the numbers we have now, or had in the past. You say that some kids, parents, coaches are getting away from the sport because it is taking up too much of their time. I say let them go because these are going to be the same kids who probably aren’t going to find much success in our sport anyway. There is a strong correlation between the state champions we have year in and year out, and the sheer amount of time they put into the sport. I wasn’t the successful wrestler that I became because we had 1 hour practices , and I got done with tournaments at 12:00 pm. I also wasn’t at risk for quitting the sport just because I was there a little longer, or because I couldn’t find a parking space. The greats in our sport i.e the Bo Maynes’, the Zach Roberson’s, and pretty much every other champions we have didn’t get where they are by thinking up ways to get home and find some more elbow space. These are tiny things, that aren’t really going to matter to the people that make our sport here in Kansas great. How would you feel if Greg and Leanna Grater only put in half of the time they did now? Or anyone on our state board for that matter? Do you think the state of our program here in Kansas would be what it is without the work these people put in?

In any case, I can see that you two are as passionate about what you believe in as I am, and I respect that. I would encourage either or both of you to contact me personally by phone to discuss these issues, because posting on this forum is impersonal and does convey how a person truly is.
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 08:45 PM
Nigel:

Again I am not suggesting to eliminate an entire age group. I am just suggesting that it might be better for both groups to have a separate grade school tournament and a separate post season JV/high school tournament. I would just like to see you be open to that possibility. Maybe it would be best for both groups and we would still be able to accomodate all the kids.

You state:

"I'm sure you have both read the high school forum where people have suggested that Kansas wrestling is taking a back seat to other states. While this is certainly not true as indicated by the success of Kansas wrestlers at High School nationals, we as a state only get better with the inclusion of all of age groups we now have"

Yes, I have read that and I actually saw what the Mo side kids did to the East Ks Kids two years ago. They were beating us on our feet badly. Your theory is that those Kansas seniors would have been better if they had been involved in the post season Kansas Kids State wrestling championships as high schoolers. First of all I think that some of the Kansas wrestlers did do the Kids State during their high school careers. Secondly I think many such as the KWCA people and Randy Hindletter would disagree and say that the Kansas Kids would have been more competitive with the Missouri Kids with more freestyle time instead of more folkstyle wrestling in the Kansas Kids State wrestling tournament.

I do like your suggestion about the Washburn Campus for District 1's tournament as a location. I don't know if that has ever been looked into, but maybe the fact that they do State the following week in Topeka would make it difficult for finding volunteers to run both. I think that might be a pretty good facility though. Does anyone know if it has ever been considered?

Nigel, I should have introduced myself at the District 1 tournament. Someone pointed you out to me when you were busy working a match as referee. Maybe we will meet sometime. Don't hesitate to meet me. I don't mind that we disagree on things. I hope you don't. I have had some good conversations with Mr. Tischhauser before. I doubt he remembers me since he meets so many people.
Posted By: Mark Stanley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 09:02 PM
All school districts set a date for eligibility of a child to start school. Across Kansas and I would interpolate that to include most of the United States in general, a common date of eligibility is August 31st. If you walk into any elementary class, there are noticeable maturity gaps (both mental and physical) between that class and the next grade level. I don’t think it is too far of a stretch to say that from K-6th grade the maturity leap would best be fit to an exponentially increasing curve. When you jump two grade levels the maturity level is not only notable it is glaringly noticeable. You might have an advanced fourth grade child who fits into the average 5th grade classroom, but try and place him in a 6th grade class and more often than not he would be a fish out of water. Try and enroll a child into Kindergarten with a September 24th birthday a year early and you will be told the age restrictions are in place for a reason; “no exceptions” will be made. I know this from personal experience. I am actually glad there was a “no exceptions” rule in my district. While my son would have fit in with the class ahead of his, I now am fully aware of the advantages he will have being one of the older kids in his class.

The school cutoff date was the main reasoning for tying our age divisions to the August 31st date as opposed to the January 1st date used at the National level. As I said in an earlier post and many may disagree, I believe that the USAW leadership at the National level is behind the times in this area. To sum up my thoughts the downside of a January 1st cutoff are:
1. Bracketing 4th grade kids with 6th grade kids. Or for even more of a mismatch, a 6th grade kid with an 8th grader. Both scenerios are possible at the national level.
2. Eliminating the eligibility of a large number of junior classman.

Everyone has a different personal agenda. But while I think it is important to embrace change which will have a positive impact on our sport, these changes need to be evaluated and measured to see what the best fit for our sport is today and in the future. I do not think that we should just rubber stamp the National classifications without serious thought and modifications as deemed necessary; especially in regards to the age cutoffs. I am in favor of tweaking our classifications to better serve our currant membership, however I am not convinced that the January 1st cutoff is the way to go. At this time, I would consider any motion that included language to that effect a step into the past and could not support it.
Posted By: Mark Stanley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 09:11 PM
I would also note that I have a younger son with a March 27th birthday that would benefit by a January 1st cut off. No matter which side of January 1st you are on you need to think about what is right for our sport as a whole. I think that keeping the kids grouped by the August 31st date is the fairest option for all.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 09:18 PM
Nigel,

You are off on another tangent!

Its getting ridiculous. My original post was to request thoughts regarding the situation concerning excess weight classes in USAW-Kansas, as opposed to our parent organization USAW!

That is all I wanted to see concerning this matter, which would affect the possibility of adding 6 year olds to the State Tourney, and not eliminating an entire age group.
Posted By: Nigel Isom Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/04/05 09:24 PM
Well let me finish by saying, To a degree a agree with you, we do have a small number of excess weight classes which can probably be dismissed. I would love to see 6&U's added to the State tourny, although I doubt very much if that will ever happen. But I would not be willing to make any changes regarding the 16&U age group in terms of their participation, nor would I like to see changes to reflect grade levels. The way it is now, you spend a year wrestling kids who are usually tougher than you, then the next year you are the one who is tough in your age group, I think this serves a purpose, which is you have to wrestle kids better than you to get better.
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/05/05 10:38 AM
Jeff Broadbent, I know you probably got a little frustrated that this discussion on possibly not including 16&U at the Topeka Kids State and having the high school kids have a separate post season tournament got included in this topic. I apologize to you that I brought that proposal in your topic but not too many people wanted to discuss that in the other topic I introduced and I think a lot of people see a connection between adding 6&U and how can you do that without dropping an age group. I think Nigel has touched upon it in his last post. He fears that if you add 6&U it would come at the expense of 16&U at State and he is very opposed to that thought.

I know your theory is basically that we currently have 104 weight brackets and you are suggesting going away from our current weights to a modified verison of the national USAW weight system of 88 which you have modified to 98. The modification you have suggested would be under our current 104 (I am trusting your number of 104 to be correct), but I guess I am still have doubts that it would solve one of the main problems that I see which is not having full mats at State for most of the age brackets especially the 12&U group. Have you thought it out for the logistics of mat space? Would your system be able to allow for more mat space for more age groups? Could 12&U have full mats in your new system?

I would suggest fewer modifications to the USAW system. I agree with your 6U addition, I would only go with one addition in 8&U 43, one in 10&U 53, only one in 12&U 65, no additions in 14&U, I would go to the high school weights for 16&U but I would add 240 for no net change on your 16&U suggestion because 98 would be dropped. 14&U this year at the State tournament only had 2 at 70 and 3 at 75. 16&U only had 2 at 95 and 3 at 100. My modifications to yours would reduce it 5 more to only 93 weights.

Still, Jeff, will more age groups have more mat space? Can it be done without using Exhibition Hall?
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/05/05 10:58 AM
Vince,

Now we are headed down the right track.

The modification area is where I was looking for input as I dont have all the numbers from tournaments gone by. Ned Price, I believe, is puttting those numbers together to see where we had a need for modifications to our current weight groups.

While there are some of the points that are in this thread that I may agree with, I think the most glaring need at this point is to FIX the weight classifications, as I do believe they need it. The second step is to get those 6 year olds to the State Tourney.

As I said before these are my thoughts.


Jeff
Posted By: Packerholic4 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/05/05 11:01 PM
Then we'll have all these parents with these little stud 3 and 4 year olds wanting to go to state in the 6U but not wanting to wrestle a 7 year old if they make it. Hey, lets add 4u state and move the 14u out. When is it going to stop?? I think the weight changes would be promoting weight cutting. Not a good thing in our younger kids if we want to try and get kids involved in the sport of wrestling and for our sport to grow.
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/06/05 10:27 AM
Packerholic4,

Jeff's suggestion does not include moving 16&U out. I would hope that you would be wrong about the 4&U comment, but you never know.

I believe you are correct about the potential for some kids to be tempted to do more weight cutting.
I am not sure how severe that problem would be with this new system. My gut feeling is that at the grade school level it would not be too bad because I don't believe that most parents would let their grade schools kids do anything that severe for a Kids Grade School State Wrestling. I do believe there is more danger for that at the high school level but that is something that the high schoolers would be carrying over from their high school season.

The problem with weight brackets especially in the older age brackets in 12,14 & 16 is that we have several every year that we are not able to field a full 16 bracket at State and in some we only get 1-3 wrestlers in the entire State. I just looked at the lighter weights this year but I noticed 12U 60 only had 3 at State, 14&U had 2 at 70 and 3 at 75, 16U had 2 at 95 and only 3 at 100. At subs and districts the problem is even worse. Actually I think if you eliminate some of these lowest weights at an age bracket that it would promote less weight cutting because no one would be trying to get down to those lower weights anymore since they would be eliminated. When you eliminate weights in the middle or high end you could have some potential for unhealthy weight loss.

I have never been in favor of 6U at State for two reasons. First I am concerned about kids and parents being ready for it and it might actually cause families to drop from the sport early. I worry that the pressure to succeed at State might be too great on the kids and families. I believe it would have been for my family. My second reason is that I believe that our current system at State could not handle another age bracket due to facility limitations.

Smokeycabin is probably going to be disappointed with me but I am starting to change my opinion on 6&U being at State someday. I know that they have been wrestling 6&U at Salina, Wichita-Park City, Liberty Nationals and now the 6&U finale at Ottawa for several years now along with all the other in-season open tournaments across the State. I think as a State we can see that this group is building a good track record of competing at some bigger tournaments. If they can handle Wichita, Salina and other big tournaments, maybe they can handle State.

As far as my other concern about the facility limitations at Topeka to handle another age group, I believe Jeff Broadbent has proposed a potential way to address that problem. I still would like to see bigger mats for the younger age groups at State and I believe that 12&U especially needs full mats. I am still not sure you could accomplish that with just Jeff's proposed changes. I think you would need some new tournament format like split tournament, a third day of competition or a longer wrestling day in a two day format to accomplish a goal of bigger mats for the younger kids too.
Posted By: Noblet Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/06/05 06:28 PM
I have watched this topic since it started. I was amazed to see Ned in our district instead of with the Manhatten crew out of district 3. Good to have you with us Ned and Thanks. I was able to talk with Ned about this at District and breifly at State. I wanted to see how the season ended up going into summer wrestling before I weighed in on the subject. We need to increase the numbers in summer wrestling but I don't know how. I've personally made phone calls and talked to these kids that are really going to try it this year, every year. They see improvments and gains made through summer wrestling, the proverbial "Summer wrestlers make winter champions" and they are really going to do it, but don't show up. We can't drag them out but WE need to get them out somehow. Ned shared with me the dollars spent on the olympic styles VS. Folksyle and it is amazing.
My oppinion has not changed over the years. Six and under are not mature enough to handle the entire season and then what could be two brutal days at a state tournament. More so most parents are not mature enough and need some more seasoning. I think that's where the real kicker is. The kids just want and need to be kids. The parents are the ones wanting to push these extremly young kids into more and more wrestling. They would just as soon sleep in and watch cartoons. They've just started major changes in their lives and starting to spend more time away from home. When do they have time to be children ? I would be curious as to an average of how many trips it takes to the state tournament to actually place ?The numbers of kids that start at 6U wrestling through to High School compared to the number of those starting around 8U wrestling through to High School? Is there a large differance in burn out? It was also mentioned the physical toll put on some of these young bodies. I almost found it humerous that next it would be how unfair it is for a four year old to have to wrestle in the 6U division but it is serious. That's the complaint now 6U against 8U. Sorry, forgot they could be almost nine.
In my oppinion, perhaps only mine, an eight year old State Champion just isn't that impressive. Even 10 year old Champs. Some of these had wicked head & arms that didn't advance or learn anymore. They didn't have the capicity and burnt out. 12U have learned to wrestle a bit and a 14U State Champ, I beleive the toughest step in Wrestling, speaks volumes to me over an 8U State Champ. I could list several from district one that didn't even wrestle High School. What exactly is a 6U State Champ supposed to mean. He matured way to early or wasn't allowed to be a kid. Sorry folks but that's where I see it.
It doesn't seem there is a large number of people wanting to drop 16U and I'm strongly against that. Modifying weight classes is a good sugestion but I still wouldn't do it to make room for 6U. Do it so the competitors now would get a full mat. Especially the 12U that move lightening quick. To suggest 16U had their state and need to move on does not wash with me. How many good wrestlers can not make varsity because they can't beat a senior or because of inner politics aren't even allowed to challenge a junior or senior. How many of the upcomming wrestlers, parents/coaches watched any of the 16U at State? That's some good wrestling. To me it is appalling to see a six year old struggeling, just burnt out tired. Can't quit crying or get his head off the mat and a parent yelling at him hanging off the top rail. They want the kid to quit crying and acting like a baby. I'm sorry but they almost are. Some of them want the six year olds to grow up and act like a man. Give them a chance! Whom is it that wants to place there, the parent or the child? I do understand the parents and coaches just want their child to do well but a lot of these kids don't understand why everybodies so mad at them. Yelling at them. I've personally grown (some) through wrestling. You think I'm wrong on this I suggest you have someone tape you through a match instead of the six year old and re-evaluate. If you are the exception your child will be just fine and grow into a fine competitor.
We were fortunate to attend the Brute Nationals. With this event following our State Tourn. this year I watched a lot of kids that didn't get a lot of mat time since HS State and I watched a lot of our Freshman that competed through subs, district and State. That Freshman class looked really good. I didn't watch a lot of the So. & Junior Class and know I missed some good wrestling. There is a topic on the forum about the Freshman class. How many of those Freshman wrestled on through Kids State? Somebody run these numbers. I hate seeing wrestlers using injury time because their out of shape and just trying to suck in some air. From what I witnessed a lot of these boys were from States, MO. to name one, that don't allow kids wrestling, states that don't have kids programs or the kids that were above the 16U age group. To repeat myself these kids were idle or didn't get much practice since HS State. Is it on them, or us for not providing them the oppurtunities for more mat time? This is National exposure. Don't we want more Ks. kids in college wrestling. How many posts are there on that topic?
I'm not bashing on 6U, they have time. The parent's have time. How many parents burn out before they get their kids into High School? How many would admit they got tired of hauling their kid around and taking all Saturday every Saturday for how many months. Are they the same ones hollering for the split formats. Lets only spend half of our Sat. at tournaments. Speaking of which. How crowded was it Sat. morning at Baldwin?
That split format needed some fine tunning for sure. Coaches bands meaning absolutely nothing at either one of our qualifiers. Sorry another topic.
Positively we need to keep our 16U on the mats as long as we can. Look at how our seniors did this past weekend and think how our seniors could do in a couple of years. Thanks for the time, I could be wrong on a lot of this. Dan
Posted By: Noblet Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/06/05 07:08 PM
Sorry I got off on a Tangent. Maybe I was bashing 6U or more so the parents/coaches. My appolagies!
My comments are based of personal oppinion I would suppose rather than any facts but that's how I feel on both 6U & 16U. Our Freshman placed 1st @ the Brute Nationals and I would be curious to the numbers of those who continued on through Kids wrestling up to that National Tournament.
A lot has been said about facility limitations in Topeka. Comments in the past have been to move the tournament to Wichita. To me it's always been something special to wrestle the State Tournament at the State Capital. Wichita has passed and will begin building a new arena. Perhaps Richard would know of the floor space/mat space at this new arena and changes could be made in a couple of years. I beleive even then I would be apposed to 6U at the State Competition. Let them be kids. Why take the chance of burning them out before they could do big things for Kansas Wrestling. Dan
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/06/05 10:32 PM
Dan:

I share many of your same reservations about six and under participation at State. I know of kids who either won State or were very high placers at 8&U and they are no longer wrestling. I think there is a strong possibility that the expectations after that early success proved to be too much for those families and it contributed later to them leaving the sport.

It seems though that now we have so many six and under open tournaments in comparison to 8 years ago when my son started wrestling as a 6&U wrestler. In fact I am not even sure they had open 6&U tournaments when my son started 8 years ago. I think 6&U might have been all novice tournaments then. Maybe I am mistaken it was our family's first year in wrestling. The thing is though this 6&U group's participation in Open tournaments is growing. They are at all the big meets Salina, Wichita, Liberty Nationals and now their own Ottawa State-like tournament. Maybe the Board or Ned Price needs to talk to the organizers of some of these big tournaments and see how they think the 6&U kids and parents are doing at their tournaments. I don't know if the momentum for 6&U at State can ever be stopped at this point. I guess I am beginning to feel that even though it may not be that good for the majority of the young kids that we need to let the individual families make that decision to participate or not for themselves.

I would also like to address the other point you brought up about kids not participating in Summer wrestling and how we need more participation. I hate to quote this again but here goes. This was reported in the USAW Kansas Kids Wrestling State Body Minutes 11/03/02: "The KWCA had approached Mike and said that they would like to see the Kids wrestling season end earlier. They would like to see it end before High School State, take a couple of weeks break, and then start the summer freestyle-Greco-roman season. They honestly feel we are going too long!! A brief discussion followed, but it was decided to leave as is."

My question to you, Dan is this: Do you think that the KWCA has a point and that maybe the reason we do not see that much Summer freestyle competition for both grade school and high school kids is that our Folkstyle competition is too long and that if it were shorter for both groups as the KWCA suggested to us back in 2002 that maybe we might have more participation of freestyle at both the grade school and high school level? I think it is true of my son who last year practiced freestyle for two months but felt too burned out to wrestle the meets. He is planning on just doing the same this year and just practice freestyle two nights a week but not wrestle any freestyle meets. The decision not to wrestle the freestyle meets the last two years is his decision not mine.
Posted By: Noblet Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/07/05 01:47 AM
I do think it's something to look at but a problem with the summer wrestling and the way the rules are towards the coaches they are restricted from working with their kids until after flag day. I do beleive we have some great coaches helping the kids with folkstyle but are very limited themselves with knowledge and their ability to coach summer styles of wrestling. I'm at loss myself. I have wondered if folkstyle wasn't available after HS State more would move into summer wrestling if that was all that was offered. But I still yet wonder what coaches would be available to help them. Our kids club has a tremdous technition in Mark Slyter. Mark and Russ complement each other in teaching the summer styles of wrestling and my feelings they are a couple of the better technicians around. That's why we transferred Matt to Paola. Again although Russ's part-time job of coaching is done after HS State there seem to be many that don't think he should be working with the kids until the school season is over, after memorial weekend.
I think we might get a couple more wrestlers if the season ended for Highschoolers after State.
If the season ended early as their suggesting what shape does that leave us for the Brute Nationals, the Mid American Classic is the next big folkstyle tourament just around the corner drawing National Competition. What kind of shape would any be to particpate in that tournament if the folkstyle season ended. before High School State.
One last thought again on the Brute Nationals. Ks. wrestlers competed extremely well at this tournament. If memory serves me right and stumbling around the CRS syndrom. Our Kansas wrestlers placed or were ranked the best of all classes combined. Juniors were ranked first, Sophmores ranked second and Freshman were also ranked 1st in their class. I don't feel we did this or could do this if the folkstyle season was done before or shortly after HS State. Clubs will be scrambling now to get started in FS/GR. I feel we can do this and compete well with what 3 1/2 months of wrestling before we hit the National tournaments. I have never worked in promotion but I think thats what we need. More promotion, more incentives to build up our summer numbers. Realistically people don't accept change well. I think for many they are understanding the folkstyle system and that CHANGE to summer wrestling in holding more than just a few back. We will be competing with Baseball and summer vacations, especially those who feel they are on summer vacation and aren't going to do anything. Some of these kids are looking at slacking the summer away. These are the ones I worry about getting on a wrong road altogether and not being able to get off of it. To much freedom to try things they have no business trying until their in their thirties or something. I truley don't have the answers and can only speculate. How much differance does it make Southern Plains is in Carlsbad,New Mexico. Even though they can still compete and qualify in Junction City @ the FS/Gr State Tournament. I could only suggest we continue to do what we can to support & promote summer wrestling and then try to do a little more.
We need to keep competing in the National Tournaments drawing attention to our Ks wrestlers. Pushing for more college programs in Ks. That to needs promotion and incentives.
I've got to get thanks for asking Vince. Feels like I'm kind of rambling and getting a little sidtracked. I do think these topics will help with open comunications. Surely can't hurt anything with many sharing their experiance, strength and hope. But about all keeping an open mind. Thanks again for allowing me to take some time. Hope to see you all around the mats soon.
Posted By: Nedly Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/07/05 03:20 AM
I have really enjoyed reading this topic. So many wonderful suggestions.

I am still looking at weight changes, but over the past couple of weeks my thoughts shifted to think about all of the other issues weight changes could bring to Kansas kids.

Dan and Vince I think you are both right on target. We need to look at how our sport has changed through out the counrty as well as in our own state.

We face competition from many other sports that were not there 10 years ago. We need to make our season fan and wrestler friendly.

Lets introduce the sport to kids a young age and do everything we can to keep them in it till they reach high school. This means no pressure, just have fun and keep wrestling. The pressure will come soon enough.

Lets welcome kids you come out in JR/SR High for the first with the same enthusiasm as we do the younger kids, but lets give them a chance to suceed.

Our families have so many choices to make when comes to finding good competition. Some can afford the time and money to travel to out of state tournaments, while others can not. Lets find away to increase the quality of our tournaments.

What will weight changes do to our Subs and District tournaments?

How do we increase the partcipation in the summer program? It's not easy when baseball starts practice in Febuary, or soccer starts in March. Our kids have been on the mat for 3 months by then, who can blame them for wanting to go outside and play.

I beleive that weights changes are only the begining to many new and wonderful things with Kansas Wrestling.

It's time for Kansas Wrestling to start thinking outside the box and once agian become a leader for other states to follow. We already know we run the best tournaments in the country.

Keep the conversation going, it wonderful!
Ned
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/07/05 10:39 AM
Dan:

I am sure you are right that the continued folkstyle wrestling was helpful to the Kansas wrestlers at the Brute nationals. It was probably also helpful in the sense that it kept our wrestlers involved and more likely to participate in the tournament whereas maybe in a few of the other States their high school wrestlers either moved on to other Spring sports like Ned suggested or maybe to full time preparation for Freestyle/greco like the KWCA was suggesting a couple of years ago to Mike. That does not seem like a productive rule about not letting high school wrestling coaches involved to Flag Day and it really does not seem to serve any purpose to me. What is the reason for the restriction?

I don't know what would be better for the high schoolers after their season completes. Is it better for them to go into full time freestyle/greco practice and preparation or to extend their current folkstyle season like most do now. Maybe a combination would be best. I think Kevin Klemm use to have them practice both until Kids State was done. I wish Kevin could see this discussion and weigh in with his thoughts on it. My guess is that some could use more folkstyle especially the freshman and JV wrestlers and possibly varsity wrestlers who are not going to wrestle in college. For those with college potential it might be better to go either full time into freestyle/greco or at least a combination. We do need more participating in the freestyle season. My son tried freestyle at one meet last year and he was outmatched in size and age due to the lack of competitors.

Ned I agree that this is a great conversation about the direction of Kansas wrestling. I think we are very lucky that you are our State competition director and I am excited about our future direction. I think it is tremendous that you are encouraging outside the box thinking on making wrestling thrive in Kansas. I think our State tournament has made some great strides in the last couple of years, but there is always the potential to improve things and we should be open to change that could possibly contribute to the growth of our sport in Kansas. Keep up the good work.

Ned do you see any possibility of a 3 day State tournament Friday thru Sunday to help us include another age group 6&U and maybe have bigger mats for most if not all of the age groups? Are would the cost/benefit of an extra day at the Expocentre be prohibitive?

Edited: With a 3 day tournament, I am not thinking you would have all age groups wrestling all three days but that maybe you could have one age group like 16&U wrestle out fully on one day like Smokeycabin suggested. If you did something like this I think 16&U would be a natural for Friday. It might cause some of them to miss the parade on Saturday but I think for most of them by that age it would not be that big of a deal to miss the parade and they could still participate in it if they wanted to.
Posted By: Nedly Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/07/05 10:13 PM
Vince:

Maybe we should introduce freestyle/greco during the season to all of our wrestlers. This could get them excited about it before seasons end.

There are many ways to change the State Tournament. But I think we need to wait and see what changes happen over the summer.

1. What weights changes are going to happen.
2. If we want full mats for 12 & under what impact will that have on the tournament.
3. If we add 6 & under.

I am working on plans if any or all three of the above happen. Cost are always a concern. The three day tournament is my last choice cause of added expense to families, and a extra day of work for volunteers. For the tournament committee that makes alomst a full week of work and for some that is taking a week of vacation off from work.

The 16/u on fridays did catch my attention. Could be a nice lead in to East/West Classic.

Keep the good ideas coming!

Ned
Posted By: Husker Fan Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 04/07/05 11:56 PM
Ned:

I also thought it could be a good lead in for the 16&U to go from their tournament to watch some of their teammates and former opponents in the East/West Classic on Friday night.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 08/21/05 04:54 AM
Sorry if the graph doesnt show up properly.

Just want to point out the number of brackets that are not full at the Kansas State Tournament over the last 8 years.

I would think the number of brackets should be nowhere near this high, considering the fact that we have 2 qualifying tournaments to get here!

8-Under
Weight 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

40 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
43 16 16 16 16 15 16 16 16
46 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
49 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
52 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
55 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
58 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
61 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
64 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
67 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
70 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
73 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
76 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
80 16 16 14 16 16 16 16 16
88 0 0 16 16 16 16 16 16
95 16 16 14 16 15 16 15 15
110 13 13 11 14 16 15 13 15
125 14 8 3 8 9 6 10 13

8 - Under




10-Under
Weight 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

52 12 8 11 13 6 9 4 9
55 14 14 14 14 14 12 10 11
58 16 16 15 16 16 16 16 16
61 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
64 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
67 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
70 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
73 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
76 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
79 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
82 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
85 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
90 16 15 16 16 16 16 16 16
95 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
100 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
110 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
120 16 14 16 15 16 15 16 16
130 13 16 14 12 12 14 15 16
150 15 11 10 11 12 13 11 14
170 6 7 7 6 4 10 7 4

10 - Under

12-Under
Weight 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

60 7 7 5 2 9 7 2 3
64 12 9 12 8 13 12 8 12
68 14 16 16 15 15 11 16 12
72 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
76 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
80 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
84 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
88 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
92 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
96 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
100 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
105 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
110 16 16 16 16 15 16 16 16
115 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
120 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
130 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
140 16 16 16 16 14 16 16 15
150 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 15
165 16 16 15 15 16 13 14 16
190 8 13 11 14 12 14 15 13
215 6 6 6 9 5 2 7 9
240 0 1 4 5 3 1 0 2

12 - Under





14-Under
Weight 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

70 0 2 5 3 1 0 3 2
75 6 5 8 6 5 4 4 3
80 11 8 12 9 13 12 11 9
85 15 15 15 15 16 13 14 12
90 14 16 16 15 15 16 16 13
95 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
100 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
105 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
110 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
115 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
120 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
125 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
130 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
135 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
140 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
145 16 16 16 16 16 15 15 16
150 16 16 16 16 16 15 15 16
155 16 15 16 14 16 16 13 16
160 13 16 16 16 16 16 14 14
165 16 14 16 16 14 16 15 13
175 16 16 16 16 16 16 15 14
205 16 15 16 16 16 13 15 16
235 12 13 14 15 14 14 13 14
265 5 8 11 11 8 11 14 7

14 - Under

16-Under
Weight 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

95 5 4 0 5 5 3 3 2
100 6 8 5 2 2 5 6 3
105 12 10 9 10 5 8 8 8
110 11 14 14 10 12 6 13 13
115 15 15 16 13 13 14 13 12
120 16 14 16 16 15 16 12 15
125 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 15
130 16 16 15 16 15 16 14 15
135 16 16 14 16 15 16 16 16
140 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
145 16 14 16 16 16 16 16 16
150 16 16 16 15 16 16 16 16
155 15 16 15 16 15 16 16 13
160 15 16 11 16 16 13 15 15
165 14 14 16 16 15 14 15 16
175 16 16 16 15 16 15 16 16
185 16 15 16 16 14 16 15 16
215 16 16 16 16 16 15 16 16
245 12 12 11 12 16 10 15 16
275 13 13 11 9 11 9 7 12

16 - Under

bracket not full


# Brackets Not Full!
Age Group 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

8-under 2* 2* 4 2 3 2 3 3
10-under 6 6 6 6 5 6 5 4
12-under 6 5 6 7 8 7 6 8
14-under 8 9 6 8 7 9 13 10
16-under 10 11 10 9 12 11 13 11

# available

8-under 16 16 18 18 18 18 18 18
10-under 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
12-under 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
14-under 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24
16-under 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Posted By: sportsfan02 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 08/21/05 06:01 AM
Thank you Jeff for that information. Actually they look better than I suspected they might. I'm not sure a full bracket at every weight should be the goal as much as enough competitors so that nobody can walk into a placement.
It should be noted that the bottom two weights in 8U, particularly 40#, are most likely made up of 6U wrestlers.
Posted By: sportsfan02 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 08/21/05 01:47 PM
It would be almost as important to know how many entries were in each age/weight division at districts. I suspect some of those 14U and 16U weights while full at state had about 4 entries in each district tournament.
Posted By: wrestlingparents Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 08/24/05 03:17 PM
I am still for adding a weight in the heavier side for 12U and 14U. 30# differences is a big difference. I know everyone says there is not enough to fill the brackets in the Heavyweights so why add another one, because 30# is alot of difference. If you have a 14U wrestler that weighs 210 and can't get down to 205, he is wrestling kids that could be 25 pounds heavier. Not to mention at local tournaments when they combine the bracket and they though the 265 kids in too.
Posted By: klint deere Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 08/24/05 05:20 PM
I have been a proponent of cutting off the kids state tournament at 14 and under with 8th grade being the limit. It is by no means meaning to stop the older boys and girls from wrestling during that time at all. It is meant to try to get the best of the best to be part of the national teams.

You could even tweak the format if you want the older kids and eliminate the qualifying rounds, have an open state tourney at the same time as kids and divide it like the Brute Nationals by grade. This could even be done in the weeks prior to state--perhaps the Wichita Classic could evolve in to this format and put one of the NATIONAL tags on their tournament by opening it up.

I just think we lose a lot of good potential freestyle wrestlers for our cadet and junior national teams.

We could start our freestyle/greco season after kids state and if we had our state freestyle/greco tourney in May as opposed to June you could get your national teams set earlier. Have a series of weekend clinics/camps at various parts of the state that lead up to the national events.

Just an idea is all, i have seen similar formats work in other states. I think the key difference in those states are that folkstyle was basically a high school thing and freestyle/greco was the offseason emphasis.


Klint
Posted By: usawks1 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 08/25/05 02:28 PM
I support Klint's idea of getting our kids into Freestyle and Greco earlier in the Spring!

I recall however, the KWCA recommendation to end the folkstyle season earlier, was not supported by Kansas Kids.
Posted By: Jeff Broadbent Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 02/28/08 04:06 AM
Randy,

Is there any thought now that some think the season is lasting far too long?! Is this something that is put to a vote at the State Body Meeting?

Sorry guys, had to dig out some old stuff. :-)

Jeff Broadbent -
Mill Valley Wrestling Club
Posted By: sum876 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 02/28/08 12:02 PM
nonononononono
Posted By: Cokeley Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 02/28/08 12:17 PM
I support shortening the season. I also support shortening the qualifying series to help shorten the season. This might happen when the districts are restructured. Districts might be bigger tournaments and subs might go away. The Kids season, 14U and below, needs to end the weekend before High School districts. KSHSAA needs to back off of regulating Jr. High?MS wrestling so that all of these kids would be eligible to participate. State could be rotated every year from Hays to Wichita, to Topeka. Kids could then wrestle open tournaments or go to the HS events before hitting the national events and team dual events. If kids want to get ready for the FS/GR season then they could focus on those styles. The season is WAY too long right now.
Posted By: Matthew Treaster Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 02/28/08 02:56 PM
Just an idea. What about an earlier state tournament for 6U, 8U, 10U, and 12U (not yet in middle school) and then a later state tournament, after High School State, for a Middle School Division, and one or two High School Divisions? There should be plenty of room at a site for both and you shorten the season for the younger kids, plus you've now added the 6U.
Posted By: pittdogg Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 02/28/08 03:20 PM
how many kids can qualify for state at each weight
Posted By: schroedermom Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 02/28/08 05:25 PM
16
Posted By: sportsfan02 Re: Kansas Weight Class Thoughts - 02/28/08 05:41 PM
 Originally Posted By: pittdog
how many kids can qualify for state at each weight



 Originally Posted By: schroedermom
16

A few more if District 1 brings 5 per weight again in the future.
© Wrestling Talk Forums