Wrestling Talk Forums supported
USA Wrestling Kansas KWCA
Wrestling Talk Forums supported & maintained by USA Wrestling-Kansas
USAW USA Wrestling Kansas
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#12975 10/03/02 01:13 PM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 454
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 454
District 1 had 2,774 wrestlers
District 2 had 1,727 wrestlers
District 3 had 1,517 wrestlers
District 4 had 1,605 wrestlers

District 1 has trouble finding facilities for their subs, have long lasting subs, and they are also crowded.
I just wanted to get your opinion on whether we should consider moving a few teams around?

#12976 10/03/02 04:08 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 63
Member
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 63
Most definately. As a coach, I have a hard time accepting the fact that the weekend of sub district, I have the possibility of being in a building till 8:00 to 10:00 at night with athletes as young as six or seven. That's a long day for everyone, especially a young kid.

We're trying to promote a sport, not run kids and parents off because of the unbearable day.

Some would respond, it's only one weekend. But if you look at the numbers, it's to the point that if something doesn't change, we will have to make the tourney two days long. As a coach, that's two days away from my wife (no kids yet, I do this because I love the sport). Other coaches from District 1 feel the same way.

Coach Gibson

#12977 10/04/02 01:23 AM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,595
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,595
It is a tough issue to say the least! District 1 is already, geographically the smallest yet they have the largest numbers!

While I won't make the blanket statement for all coaches in District 1, I will say that they are concerned. But are they ready to change?

Tournaments lasting into the evening are not what we want. But driving to Wichita, Mulvane, Derby, Clay Center, Emporia, (all fine locations) for a sub-district and district tourney, may not be what "District One" wants either!

I do appreciate all the work Coach JT put in to his re-alignment proposal. But if it stays as is, Coach Gibby and the rest of Shawnee County, will likely be facing a drive on at least Sub or District weekend, as they are slotted to go West.

I say this with a bit of reservation but most clubs of District One are absolutely spoiled by their short drives and thus their short days. I am sure District Four would gladly make a trade.

I do feel that District One is destined to get even smaller in area yet continue to grow in numbers. Currently, we have about 62 active clubs and are adding at least 4, this season.

I don't know what the answer is but I feel certain that this will be a Hot Topic for this wrestling season!

Randy Hinderliter
District 1 Director


Are you making a POSITIVE difference in the life of kids?

Randy Hinderliter
USAW Kansas
KWCA Rep/Coaches Liaison
Ottawa University Volunteer Assistant
#12978 10/04/02 03:32 PM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 38
K
Member
Member
K Offline
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 38
I believe the numbers speak for themselves. Being the smallest district, maybe we should look into splitting into a north and south district or even putting the KC and Topeka clubs in to a Metro District. With that number of wrestlers, I don't believe the competition will change and it may even make new clubs and new club members feel like they have a chance to make it. It is already to schedule a tourney in District 1 and not have to share a weekend with 2 or 3 other clubs. I really think this is a topic that needs to be addressed soon.

#12979 10/05/02 04:46 PM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 33
W
Member
Member
W Offline
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 33
ok

#12980 10/05/02 05:31 PM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 59
Z
Member
Member
Z Offline
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 59
The Pittsburg Mini-Wrestling Club hosted our sub-district last year at the Pittsburg State University gymnasium. We were not there any later than many of the tournaments we attend throughout the year, and all of the wrestling was done on either a full mat or at least a half mat. There was plenty of seating, as well as plenty of officials and the tournament was extremely organized. I had no complaints. Personally I would enjoy having it there every year. Maybe districts as well.

#12981 10/07/02 07:35 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459
H
Member
Member
H Offline
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459
It sounds like there is some plan already on the drawing board. What does an initial plan look like? I am assuming we still have to be talking about just four districts.


Vince Nowak
Kansas College Wrestling Fund Supporter
Please join the fight with your contributions

#12982 10/14/02 03:48 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 142
N
Member
Member
N Offline
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 142
Randy's post kept getting my attention. We are really spoiled in district I. On any given weekend we can go to a tournament, take an hour to drive there and be out by three. We have the internet to choose which tournament probably has the best competition but those tournaments won't be out by three. Other districts, some other States don't have any choice. If they want to attend any tournament they make a drive. I would much rather be in a gym around the action than be behind the wheel. If your "Sweating with the Best" in Topeka and your in the finals your going to get out late. That's wrestling! How does that effect dist.I if that tournament ends up in dist.III? Does it matter? We already drive to Salina, Manhatten,the Classic, Tulsa, MacPhearson?
If your in the finals, Your there late!
Dist.I sends four kids to State, some very talented wrestlers don't make the trip. If we redistrict will that be a benifit to some dist.I wrestlers. I would voice my oppinions towards what is best for the kids rather than districts or coaches.

#12983 10/17/02 12:21 AM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 275
T
Member
Member
T Offline
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 275
Let’s not be too shallow. Let’s look at the REAL situation. According to posted information obtained from the website membership for the four geographically aligned districts are:

District 1....2,774....36%
District 2.....1,727.....23%
District 3.....1,517.....20%
District 4.....1,605.....21%

If this information is right District 1 is largely disproportionate. District 1 is on average 15% larger and contains at least 1,050 more wrestlers then the next closest district. This amount is enough to form a very competitive 5th District (Not that I’m suggesting that).

District alignment has to true meaning this it's time for the State Tournament Series. Now considering that everyone’s goal is to make it to the state tournament, which is a collection of the BEST wrestlers from each of the four districts, each district will send about 416 wrestlers to state (4 from each age/weight). District 1 will send home about 2,300 kids who fail to qualify for the State Tournament. This means that 85% of District will not make the State Tournament. District 2, the next closest district in population, will only send home 1,300. The numbers are not even close.

One of the major objectives of sports is to provide “fair competition.” It is our job to maintain a fair playing field. I have personally seen sub district brackets in District 1 stacked with potential state placers but the numbers tell us that only four can make it where the same weight in another district maybe a round robin.

Updating the geographically alignment of the districts may be the BEST solution for this problem. District need to be aligned so that the best meet the best at state. Even though coming into the state tournament all district are represented by even numbers district 1 has been bring home by far the most state medals. There are far many other wrestlers in District 1 wrestlers who have that same potential who are eliminated at the district level due STRICTLY TO LARGE NUMBERS.

Forget about money, forget about time, and forget about the extra work. I love wrestling, my coaches love wrestling, and my wrestlers LOVE wrestling. We do this for them, to give each and everyone of them the chance to compete in fair on a level playing field. I’ll drive the extra hour to give this opportunity to my kids.


Its not over yet...
#12984 10/17/02 08:29 PM
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 384
L
Member
Member
L Offline
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 384
The numbers that were used for redistricting were done by
the number of membership cards sold, if I am correct. As
we all know, not everyone purchasing a card participates at
the qualifying tournaments. There are 6-year old who choose
not to compete, as well as 16+ year olds that only wrestle
during the summer.

I would be interested in knowing the "exact" number of wrestlers
EACH CLUB had at sub-district. If any of the sub-district sites from
2002 have those numbers, would you please email to us at
gratergr@kansas.net

Leanna Grater

#12985 10/18/02 03:32 AM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,153
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,153
John Terrell has done quite a bit of work in reviewing the possible alternative district alignments, and he provided me with a summary of the two best options he could come up with. As Leanna said, these options were based on cards sold. I have created sample maps based on his work, which you can see by clicking here .

There have been some very good points raised in this forum, and I expect we'll hear some more at the state body meeting. I will make one correction to Travius' post, which made some solid arguments, but also included one factual error, in his statement that:
Quote:
Even though coming into the state tournament all district are represented by even numbers district 1 has been bring home by far the most state medals.
In fact, the total medal count in the last state tournament was as follows:
District 1 - 167 (1055 pts, 30 champions)
District 2 - 174 (1247 pts, 36 champions)
District 3 - 132 ( 937 pts, 29 champions)
District 4 - 132 ( 660 pts, 9 champions)

Therefore, although District 1 did have a very strong showing at the state tournament, it did not take home the most medals. Prior years have not been substantially different than these results.

#12986 10/18/02 10:34 AM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 275
T
Member
Member
T Offline
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 275
I stand corrected :-)


Its not over yet...
#12987 10/18/02 11:52 AM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,595
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,595
District 1 has approximately 1,300 wrestlers that compete in the two sub-districts and this number has been fairly consistent for the past few years.

Randy


Are you making a POSITIVE difference in the life of kids?

Randy Hinderliter
USAW Kansas
KWCA Rep/Coaches Liaison
Ottawa University Volunteer Assistant
#12988 10/18/02 12:29 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459
H
Member
Member
H Offline
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459
Mr. Juby, Thank you for including a couple of the proposed re-alignments.

If we had a vote I would vote for the third alignment. My reason would be that just looking at the map that the one county that is in the very southeast portion of the state seems to be closer to the majority of the 2nd district than the majority of the first district(the county is in the second southern most row in the middle of those six counties on the very southeast corner-I would name it but I am unable to make it out on my screen). That is my only reason for liking the third proposal over the second. I think they are both better than the current alignment.


Vince Nowak
Kansas College Wrestling Fund Supporter
Please join the fight with your contributions

#12989 10/18/02 01:04 PM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,153
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,153
Here is some additional information about how the two alternative alignments would affect total membership in each district. I don't have the actual numbers of wrestlers from each county that competed in their subdistrict tournament, so these numbers are based on total cards sold:

Option #2
District 1 - 1956
District 2 - 1903
District 3 - 1874
District 4 - 1890

Option #3
District 1 - 1870
District 2 - 1915
District 3 - 1924
District 4 - 1914

#12990 10/18/02 01:43 PM
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459
H
Member
Member
H Offline
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459
Mr. Juby, Thank you again for the additional information on the numbers. Projecting forward I still believe the 3rd proposal would be better because even though District 1 would have the smallest numbers initially, I believe that situation would not last long. There is some very fast growth taking place in the Kansas City area going South from Overland Park towards Miami County and west from Shawnee towards DeSoto and Lawrence. I believe much of it is being fueled from the Kansas City Missouri area, so it is not just District 1 families relocating. I believe even with the third proposal that District 1 would still have the largest numbers in a short period of time.


Vince Nowak
Kansas College Wrestling Fund Supporter
Please join the fight with your contributions

#12991 10/19/02 02:19 AM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,595
Member
Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 8,595
Hey Mike, Just wondering ... do you have the map PRIOR to the current alignment?


Are you making a POSITIVE difference in the life of kids?

Randy Hinderliter
USAW Kansas
KWCA Rep/Coaches Liaison
Ottawa University Volunteer Assistant
#12992 10/21/02 05:43 AM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 275
T
Member
Member
T Offline
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 275
What an irrational statement. I would love to find the people who pointed the finger at you. I was at the district one meeting and may have been the main one talking I don’t remember anyone saying that this is a club problem. (This isn’t baseball… the last thing we need is contraction.) OK, OK maybe I’m not the person to speak. My club is relatively new to the whole scene and in a lot of ways I think that last season we were just being accepted. (The first two years were not positive by any stretch of the imagination.) I just invite you to un-personalize it, to look at the picture from an outsider point of view. This is what it would look like.


If u didn’t have any relationship with any wrestling club; if you were just someone walking on the street and someone show you the chart you see above you would say “Man, the building on the far left is a lot taller than the rest.” Not only is District 1’s population tremendously larger and is by far the most disproportionate to the other three districts.
Now ASSUME that half of the wrestlers in each district participate in the state tournament series. Then that number was divided evenly between the two subs. The sub-district breakdown may go somewhat like this.


Ultimately about 250 wrestlers are eliminated from each of the two District one sub-districts. District 1 loses 500 wrestlers through the elimination rounds.
Statistically speaking only about 30-60 kids are eliminated from the two District 2 sub-districts.
District 3 and 4 has nearly a no elimination factor. That means they go to sub just to get seated for district. That mean a kid in a district one sub may have to go and wrestle 5 or 6 time through a 16 man bracket at subs while in another district a wrestler can actually go weigh in, make weight, and go home knowing that he/she have already secured a spot at district.
There are 104 weights in the state tournament series. Multiply that by 4 (the number of places) and you get a potential for 416 medalist advancing. Most of these sub won't even have 416 athletes in attendance.

I ready don’t want to hear the excuses and there are some good ones. Time, travel, relationships, and district ties are all reasonable justification for just leaving the districts the way they are. But then who are we servicing you and your club feelings or the kids who bust their butts all season long for one goal and that goal has two different finish lines. District one is running 2 miles when the rest of the state only have a mile to finish this race. I know a lot of people who can run one mile and pass out before they ever hit mile two. EXAMPLE- I have a kid who wrestled at state. His hardest tournaments were subdistrict, then district, then state. In the first round of state he pinned a guy in about 15 seconds. I can think of many of the wrestlers at the District one sub who put up more resistance.

Wrestling is different from other sports. I talk in great detail about the intangibles of wrestling. The character that it develops and the leaders that our kids become. Our kids have a fond love of the sport. Wrestling is about integrity. I am 21 years old. I started coaching at the age of 18. I have been head wrestling coach at Coronado Middle School in Kansas City for three years. Two years ago I had 6 athletes. This year I have 60 kids signed up which is actually twice as many as the football team. A lot of my wrestlers go to this school and there excitement and energy have spread through out the whole school. I have even had about 15-20 girls ask to sign up in a school with a population of 440. Wrestling is a tradition. A is tradition that is pasted every year. The tradition must change in order for the excitement to remain. The primary theme that I liked about wrestling was that it was fair. Noone was gonna start over be because the coach felt they were better. We have to keep passing the tradition along and except the change that is inevitable. I talk a lot about “fair competition” are we really practicing what we preach?
WYCO WRESTLING

Travius Stokes travius@wycowrestling.com


Its not over yet...
#12993 10/21/02 11:10 AM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,933
S
Member
Member
S Offline
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,933
Can someone bring me up to speed as to what deeoh is talking about? Does this person favor redistricting or not?


#12994 10/21/02 01:23 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 63
Member
Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 63
Some interesting points were brought up and I'd lke to ask a few questions.

One, of all the sub-districts, what time did each end?

Two, considering the time that the tourney ended, what time did the prospective last wrestler get home? Pretend that the last wrestler was in the farthest corner of your district.

I'm interested in the geographical argument. Taking the distances traveled in other districts as opposed to District 1. Are we as a District just whining about time?

Third point. If we are aligning districts to population (card) numbers, let's keep the political not my club to travel out of it.

I can remember working with Coach Knox while down in Wichita. After the high school season, I would help out wherever he needed me. The sub-district tourney in Augusta traditionally ended around 5 or 6 and I would be home in time to take my wife out. Of course some would say that you have made the decision to coach. And in my instance you are absolutely correct.

However, one thing we need in the coaching profession is young blood. Often coaches are also fathers. And one thing us old guys relish is a young buck in the room to show technique and get on the mat with the kids. And often, the young bucks are childless. As a pure marketing and recruitment issue, the young coaches love the sport, but remember the long days and nights. Often, this is not a pleasant memory and I feel could keep them away from coaching. Since there are no kids involved, there is no vested interest in the sport once they are too old. Right now, this is not a problem for me. But I'm not think of the here and now, but the future. How are we making this a sport in which we are bringing in quality athletes that can make quality coaches with the right guidance. Right now, our recruiting tool is a child.

We need to start thinking differently. Is the current district alignment killing the sport? Not at this point in time (future could be a different). Is the fear of long days keeping kids away, maybe. Should we redistrict to ensure equality for all, yes.

I think I rambled a little off topic, but it's how I feel.

coach gibson

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 4 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Super Admin, bvswwrestling, CoachFitzOS, Dluce, Shawn Russell
12,303 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums11
Topics36,091
Posts250,722
Members12,303
Most Online1,305
Mar 13th, 2025
Top Posters
usawks1 8,595
smokeycabin 6,248
Aaron Sweazy 5,262
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 8.0.0
(Release build 20240826)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 8.3.23 Page Time: 0.033s Queries: 54 (0.021s) Memory: 3.1368 MB (Peak: 3.5914 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2025-08-01 04:10:30 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS