Give medals to all the wrestlers and build a giant podium to fit them all. Brackets to the top 6.

why only the top six?

But I reiterate, at what expense do these programs exist? Would they serve to kill competing nearby programs? The other winter sport does not have to worry about someone killing it due to lack of competitiveness. Fans of our sport have to be on a constant vigil against those who would like to see it abolished. Currently it would appear we are in a period of growth here in this state as it seems every year we hear of a new high school program being added. I can't remember the last time I heard of a program being killed, but it can happen. Just this past weekend I heard of one of the most historic programs in this state and people within that school who are chomping at the bit to get rid of it. If these super programs succeed which they likely would, and it causes other nearby programs to fail, who would they wrestle locally? Do we really want a couple dozen programs in the entire state? I want every high school large enough to have a wrestling program to have one and that is what I constantly work towards. Every time we take a wrestler or team out of our state to compete it is likely at the expense of some other Kansas team or tournament. Does that mean we shouldn't travel at all? No. But as I said, let them come to us if possible, and it seems many already want to do. If you want to really want to judge the impact of opening up this KSHSAA rule, just think about the expense of sending your marching bands all over the country year after year.


Without a doubt we have become a country of me's instead of we's.


I see this as no different than speed limit laws. Are they sometimes a nusiance? Yes. Do they sometimes become outdated and unnecessary? Yes. But, were they put there for good reason and with much thought in the first place? Yes. Do we still need them? Yes!


You can't improve if eventually there is nobody else around to wrestle. It likely won't happen in my lifetime and maybe not yours but it can happen.


I agree with that BUT there is a need for state and federal government.

Not from my point of view.


If that is our goal, then why not do away with the rules regarding recruitment of athletes? That would make it much easier for schools to build programs.

Sportsfan,

The article about the basketball team seems to present facts counter to your point.....

"But I reiterate, at what expense do these programs exist? Would they serve to kill competing nearby programs? The other winter sport does not have to worry about someone killing it due to lack of competitiveness. Fans of our sport have to be on a constant vigil against those who would like to see it abolished. Currently it would appear we are in a period of growth here in this state as it seems every year we hear of a new high school program being added. I can't remember the last time I heard of a program being killed, but it can happen. Just this past weekend I heard of one of the most historic programs in this state and people within that school who are chomping at the bit to get rid of it. If these super programs succeed which they likely would, and it causes other nearby programs to fail, who would they wrestle locally? Do we really want a couple dozen programs in the entire state? I want every high school large enough to have a wrestling program to have one and that is what I constantly work towards. Every time we take a wrestler or team out of our state to compete it is likely at the expense of some other Kansas team or tournament. Does that mean we shouldn't travel at all? No. But as I said, let them come to us if possible, and it seems many already want to do. If you want to really want to judge the impact of opening up this KSHSAA rule, just think about the expense of sending your marching bands all over the country year after year."

The main reasons that sports programs are dropped is because of funding restraints and lack of participation. Now if you have a team that brings in enough money to fund the entire athletic department (meaning all of the other sports)it seems to me that you decrease the number of reasons for dropping a sport.

I think we are straying a little because the real issue isn't about "super teams". The real issue is about school districts making the decision at a local level on where to send their teams and how far. It should not be a blanket policy.

As far as your speed limit rule......I don't think it is a valid comparison.....

1. I'm from Montana so my initial gut reaction is that we shouldn't have speed limits...however, the logical side of me says I understand the law and the need for it.

2. You can't use it as a comparison because you are talking about saving and losing lives with established speed limits (lots of research to validate that). We are not talking about people living or dying when we want to have more freedom to choose where we compete.

I understand and agree with you wholeheartedly on the need to grow the sport. We absolutely must do that. I don't think your assumption that if we travel where we want to compete or create super teams will kill other programs is totally valid. There are a lot of other factors to consider. I know one way to defintely cause a slow death to programs is to not offer kids an opportunity to set goals for their future after high school. The kids that want to compete at the college level should have the opportunity to compete in the best tournaments in the nation as high schoolers. You can achieve both of these efforts without killing any programs and hurting kids by allowing school districts at the lower level to choose how far to let their teams travel.

I also agree that we should try and host tournaments with teams from outside the state. That is a good thing. With the rules as they are now, we could have a hard time reciprocating. How can we expect to draw top teams from around the country if we can't go to their big tournaments?

Shawn Budke

The Speed limit is not a good analogy. A better would be if you have worked hard and saved and bought a Corvette or BMW and I only had enough for a yugo so I should be able to keep you from having a BMW and we all drive toyota's

I appreicate Shawn's tact and desire.

more freedom at the lower levels increases the opportunities for more people.

likewise as a western kansas native speed limits are an oddity that i live with. In Chicago a necessity

Stop the match anytime someone gets on their back and restart. wouldn't want a unfair advantage.

24/7

Like I said, if that is your attitude then why have any rules or regulation restricting our athletes and schools? The idea is to provide a equal enviroment in which all schools may succeed. Much like the NCAA does for universities and federal interstate commerce laws and regulations do for business. I know many people see wrestling as an individual sport and thus it attracts individualistic type people, but some of us see the team aspect of the sport first and foremost, and individual accomplishments second.

"You say the idea is to provide an equal environment in which all schools may succeed." As long as you stay within these nonesensical limits.

Take Colby for instance. They invite two teams that have been tough in the past from Colorado. and beat them. If the coach/administraion want to compete at an even higher level, and raise the funds to go to California- too bad. So who is getting hurt? The rest of the teams that would wrestle against Colby in the state of Kansas.

How is the limit rule hurting athletes?


I am a team man! Lets have a dual state tournament.

I feel bad about the Sabetha tournament- Must have been good to engender so much conversation. Lets take it to another topic

Go back and read some of my earlier posts. While the effects might not be felt immediately they likely would by your or my grandkids. Some of the other state high school associations have over the years chosen to eliminate certain rules when pressured by fans or parents. Most of these appear to have centered around transfer rules. They have since found out the messes they have created and are paying a price by constant turmoil. While we often don't see the need or reason for some laws or regulations that doesn't mean they aren't necessary. My bottomline is, I trust the people we employ at every level to be looking out for the best interests of our programs and athletes. Does that mean we shouldn't be observant and make recommendations to our local coaches and administrators? No, we should. I just don't think this is one of those things that needs addressed and to date nobody has provided me with any proof that it needs changing.

sportsfan02-you seem educated in your viewpoint and I respect that, but you have also provided no proof in your statements it will hurt "our grandkids". How has it hurt MO, PA, FL, CA other the many other states that have no travel restriction? I don't believe it has....

24/7

Sportsfan,

I agree with you on your perspective of individual vice team sport. I personally think we do a great disservice to the sport by focusing on so many tournaments vice duals.....that is a topic for another day. I bring it up just so you know where I am coming from.

I'm not sure I get your response to the example from "Back in the Day". The example he gives is basically a socialistic, economic approach using automobiles. In your response you go from one extreme to another. I have not seen anybody on here make a case or even suggest doing away with all the rules and regulations. I think we all agree that there are needs for rules, regulations, etc.

The issue is not an "all the rules or none of the rules" debate. The issue is a matter of degree.....how much regulation, which regulations, and enforced at which level.

I also don't think that you will get a lot of disagreement on the idea of trying to provide an environment in which all schools have an equal opportunity to succeed. (Notice the change of words. We can never achieve an equal environment because there are entirely too many different factors when one tries to define environment, however, we can strive to provide an equal opportunity. (By the way, I'm not sure I would use the NCAA as a good example, have you seen the BCS lately??? Their rules and regs have helped out there)

There are two challenges here. One is determining what equal opportunity really means. What is the minimum standard acceptable so everyone has a common baseline opportunity? That leads to the second challenge which is determining what are the minimal regulations, rules, etc. that are required by a state or national governing body. In my opinion the more we let state and national governing bodies regulate specific details then the more freedom we lose. If we establish a common baseline of opportunity with minimal restrictive rules and regulations then everyone can succeed. Those that chose to excel above the minimum standard still have the opportunity and are not restricted whereas those that can only afford the minimum standard still have a chance.

Doing this will allow the team aspect and the individual aspect of the sport to flourish. My fondest memory of high school wrestling was my sophomore year when we placed 2nd at state as a team. That happened to be the same year I won my only state championship as an individual. I'm sharing this just to illustrate how strongly I agree with you on the team aspect of the sport.

BLUF: This is a good debate and one our forefathers have been struggling with since the inception of our country.....Federal regulations virsus States rights versus individual freedoms. I tend to fall on the side of more individual (high school team) freedoms.

Shawn

There are parts of this country that do not have access to high speed internet; because this obviously puts the have-nots at a disadvantage, maybe we should limit all our schools to dial-up service. There are schools that make the decision not to offer Spanish as part of their curriculum, so on behalf of the fairness-doctrine maybe we shouldn’t teach it in any school…

LIFE IS NOT FAIR and I don’t want it to be; I would rather be a people of FREE will. Free to succeed and free to fail by my own choosing and consequence. I don’t need a bail out and I don’t need others held back for my benefit.

Well obviously any proof to it hurting our grandkids will be forthcoming. But to your point, nobody has provided us any proof that it is hurting us now. In fact quite the contrary, our wrestling by any measure appears to be improving. I would guess that just as many states DO have some kind of travel restrictions as those that have none.

My question is this:

Why can a school band travel to California or Florida and athletic teams cannot? I am sure many smaller, less wealthy schools can't fundraise enough to send their band's to play in the Rose Parade. If equity is the reason they limit travel, then why is there no equity between extra-curricular activities? Just because one is a class (not a core one) and the other is a sport is not enough of a reason to me.
Matt Jones
ONW

Raven Coach--Good question; Marching Band is not a KSHSAA Activity and therefore not subject to any KSHSAA rules. Concert Band is a sanctioned activity as a result of the KSHSAA music festival series held during the second semester.

Free will is always a good thing if one is on the right side of it.!!!

Mann
Norton

Then lets quit having tournaments, we can just practice instead. It is quite obvious I am arguing with an idiot here, so I won't waste any more breath.