Contrarian: Lots of posts on this issue under different titles. I am opening this to try to get posts consolidated.

The Montana System. Sounds great--works for Montana. Sounds to me, because they have so few schools that wrestle (AA=14 A=23 BC=53), they have to let the schools enter multiple wrestlers per weight class in their "quaqlifying" tournaments (assume that is their regional) in order to flesh out the brackets. As I try to understand this sysytem by reading the MHSA Wrestling Handbook on line, appears AA can enter 2 wrestlers per wt class, A can enter 23 wrestlers, and BC schools 18 wrestlers. Note: with 14 AA schools each entering in effect 2 teams, that is only 28 wrestlers to fill a 32 position bracket---4 byes per every wt class---more if each school does not enter 2 teams. May have some aspects that may work fo Kansas, not sure what would have to be wickered.

Ohio and Missouri system. Not same conditions as Kansas. Both states have more people and more schools. Again, May have some aspects that may work fo Kansas.

Sure wish this page had a spell checker!!!

Kansas. 32-6A schools, 32-5A, 64-4A schools(60 that wrestle), don't know how man 321A or how many wrestle. The problem to adopting any new system will be getting KSHSAA, schools, coaches, wrestlers, fans, communities, newspapers and other concerned citizens to agree on anything.

Possibly the best leveling solution would be to reduce the number of KSHSAA clasifications for wrestling down to 3 classes: Big, Middle, and Small. How do that? May be several ways but would appear it will always come back that the current 4A class is going to have to be split--exact split numbers up to discussion. For example take the biggest 32 4A schols and combined them 6A/5A classes---you now have 96 relative big schools. Divide by 2 and you get a 48 school Big class, a 48 school Middle class. The smaller/remaining 32 4A schools roll into a Small school class with the current 321A schools. What are the effects of this change: the 16 biggest current 5A schools merge with the 6A schools (this year the cut would have been at an enrollment of 708--Salina Centrals (++ Emp, G/E, Hutch, Turner, Wyandotte, Liberal, STA, Salina S, Shawnee Heights, Seaman, Carrol Newton, W West, KC Harmon, and Mill valley). Some one else can list out the remaining Middle and Small lists of schools. However, realize that the Small class will increase by 32 schools---what would that mean---a class of about 110 small schools that wrestle---relative to the 48 schools in each of the Big and Middle classes. We may be cutting off our face to save our noses.

Now, if you have anothe Idea, lets hear it in detail---Numbers and schools. No crying towels, no alibis, no grousing. Believe me, that will come later!!

Something like this would work to have a one site/3 class State Tournament---but that is another issue.

Contrarian. For info I went ahead and listed the largest 32 4A schools who could be candidates to join move into a Middle Class. That would be schools with an enrollment from 503 down to 301 (Eudora). Schools to be reclassified: Abilene, Altamot, Andale, Andover, Atchison, Augusta, Baldwin, B/Linwood, Buhler, Chanute, Clearwater, Coffeville F/K, Desoto, ElDorado, Eudora, Ft Scott, Independence, Iola, Lenexa ST James, Louisburg, Parsons, Piper, KC Sunmer, Mulvane, Ottawa, Paola, Rose Hill, Spring Hill, Tonganoxie, Topeka Hayden, Towanda Circle, Wellington. Schools with an enrollment below 300 move down to Small Class. Might have missed one--or included one by error.

I'll bety this makes everybody happy!!

Contrarian,

Quick correction on your understanding of the Montana system.....they only use 16 man brackets at the state tournament. That goes for AA, A, and B/C. All 3 rankings have a "regional type event". I can't speak to the details of how the A and B/C work but I can for the AA.

There are 14 AA schools in MT. They are broken into 2 divisions (east and west) of 7 teams each. A week or two before state each division has a regional like meet. Each high school can bring 2 full teams to the regional. The top 8 in each weight class qualify for state.

Therefore, at the state tournament, every bracket is a full 16 man bracket. I have explained in earlier posts as to what I see the advantages to this type of system.

I am not sure if or how a system like this could be implemented in KS.

By the way, who are you? We can talk in detail about the MT system if you are interested. I'm sure I see you at practice or the meets.

Shawn Budke

Below our some of the advantages of the Montana system for big schools that Shawn Budke posted in a previous post. I have abbreviated the quote so more could be seen in the quote box without scrolling down.

OK.

But what other sport allows 2 teams or 2 entries by class from the same school. The intent of the end of season tournaments to let the cream of the crop rise to the top. If a coach has 2 studs at the same weight, what happened to one of them going up or down in weight, or to win the wrestle off.

Best team/program winner. Not necessarily so, just means schools who enter 28 wrestlers may have more but not always the better wrestlers. I still believe they have a system that fits their State's needs--and some of those needs are due to their low number of schools and they need double entries to even have a divisional tournament. 14 AA schools split into 2 divisions results in 2 division (ie regional) tournaments of 7 schools. Even with double entries they still are uneven to fill a 16 man bracket. And, of from those short brackets, they take 8 placersto state in order to again fill up a 16 man bracket. Now if Kansasns want more wrestlers at region and state, make them V/JV tournaments--thats basically what MT has done.

I propsed a Kansas system of 2 48 school claffications, with each classification split into 4 regionals of 12 schools. Kansas could adopt some of the Mt system to flesh out the 4 of 16 open positions in all weight classes.

Other sports that allow more than 2 entries in a sport: Track & field, cross country, golf, and I believe tennis, swimming & diving, gymnastics too name a few. Mostly other sports with individual competition.

At some weights for instance two 250 plus pounders that don't have five pound weight differentials around their weights, it is almost impossible to move your weight enough to go to another weight class. And we need to get away from excessive weight cutting which kills wrestling's image with the public and can have adverse health consequences. I have seen a number of quality kids not wrestle varsity in recent years due to this lack of opportunity. Should two shot putters from the same team who can both throw 60 ft not have the opportunity to compete at State?

I am not opposed to your idea about maybe reducing to three classes instead of four in the method you are proposing.

I would guess that all of those sports except T&F have far fewer athletes to deal with when compared to wrestling.

Contrarian,

You are correct about why MT adopted the 2 team system for their AA schools. When I was there (many moons ago) we didn't have a divisional tournament, we had 16 teams and every school took their varsity only team to state.

Having said that, they do have full 16 man brackets. With 7 schools at the divisional tournament, that equals 14 teams. 1 Varsity and 1 JV per school. The top 8 of each weight class qualify for state. Therefore, with 2 divisional tournaments, qualifying 8 kids per weight.....when they get to state, every bracket is a full 16 man bracket.

Shawn Budke

Good point but there are probably more competitors per team that Track and Field has to deal with and they make it work. However, if cost is an issue maybe the Montana syatem would need to be modified in Kansas to limit the total amount of wrestlers that one team could bring to regionals. For example instead of the 28 that Montana allows for their large class teams maybe Kansas might only be able to allow 18 to 20 per team so only 4 to 6 extra wrestlers per team over our current rules. Even an allowance of four to six extra wrestlers per team would be a major improvement and offer more opportunities for wrestlers to compete at the varsity level in Kansas high schools.

Yes, there are going to be times when a good athlete does not make varsity, or reach the state tournament. There will be times in life when a good, qualified employee gets passed over for a job, example, more examples, etc... They are all a part of life. Wrestling has 14 variable positions for varsity. Once they are filled they are filled, should be as simple as that. It's seems to me that wrestling is already one of the fairest sports when affording an athlete to obtain varsity status. If you want to consider "unfair", what about basketball and football. Vince I think I've asked you before since you have a passion for football: are you in favor of mandating in the rules that every football team has to have at least 2 players on the field at all times that weighs no more than 125Lbs? And Basketball: lets mandate that EVERY team must have a player no taller than 5'5" on the court at all times. I'm sure there are lots of players that fit these two examples that never make varsity. Awfully "unfair" am I not correct?
Beleive me, I sypothize with a quality wrestler that sits behind a stud, but that is simply the way it is, and in the case you are so passionate about, it is more of the exception and not the rule. When you start taking basically everyone on the team as "varsity", I think you diminish the Passion and the Pride of the accomplishment of being a varsity wrestler. It would create an exactly similar circumstance as to qualifying for state in 6A with predominately losing records. It simply doesnt mean as much.

lets just have a state open. let all the highschool kids pay 15.00 to enter and forget about what class they are in. 1-6a combined and settle the best of the best and make some money. isnt that like the kids state.

Level the playing field? Lets make it fair? Are you serious? Scott makes a good point. Either quit crying about the system we have now or go to 1 class(just varsity). The grass is always greener, and the other classes are always easier. Wait...lets keep it like it is, because I can just hear the whining and crying. You think that good kids are getting left out now? What do you think would happen if we put them all in the same pond? Your 6A wrestlers with losing records would no longer be going to state. Neither would some of your good 321A, 4A,and 5A kids. The only way to even the playing field, and make it fair is to go to one class. Then only 16 kids would make it to state instead of 64. 75% of kids wrestling tomorrow would not be, in a fair world. Do you really want to make it fair? Probably not.

beeson makes a very good point. everyone needs to think about this real hard. then quit worrying about some one being left out.
75% less kids wrestling? do you really want to kill the sport? if you don't think that changing the system would cause kids to lose interest you are absolutely wrong. i know it's hard for a kid to have a good record, be maybe top 6 in his "classification", and be at home. think for a second, if you combined everyone, all those losing record kids would quit, but so would the rest of the kids who weren't in the upper echelon. look at the rosters of teams now, many can't feild a full team. you take away any chance of going to state from 75% of them, and this sport is done. one last thing, look real hard at the brackets 321a through 6a and add up the top 16. would the kids who got left out, make it state when the "playing feild is level"? the answer is no. the system now gives alot of kids something to wrestle for, without it they will probably go to the parking lot and hang with the ropers and the dopers.

Tim:

First of all congratulations to Taylor and your family on his state title. He is a very impressive wrestler who in my opinion is going to one of our star Division I performers someday.

I participated in two sports in high school both football and track & field. In football there was plenty of opportunity for players on all sizes to excel and participate on the varsity level. There are 22 starting spots on the team and the second team guys get to come in and play quite a bit to give the first team players a break even in the state championship games. In track & field when I threw the discus and shot put we were allowed 3 athletes per team per event as I recall. Again another sport that allows plenty of opportunity for athletes to participate against other schools at the varsity level. Coming from this personal high school athletic background it was hard to understand or accept the varsity opportunity limitations that I see in high school wrestling.

I am just having a very difficult time understanding why the wrestling community would want potential state placers not able to compete at the state tournament just because they happen to go to the same school that maybe the state champion or potentially higher state placer attends. It makes no sense to me how anyone thinks that allowing both of these potential high state placers from the same high school to compete at state would lessen the quality of competition at the state tournament. In my opinion, it would definitely improve the quality of the competition. I believe that in 2007 if we had a modified Montana system in place that allowed a team to take say 18 wrestlers to regionals (four over the current 14) that Aquinas would have probably qualified all 18 instead of the 14 that we did qualify that year and I know that you would have had four qualifiers that would have definitely added to the level of competition at state. These extra four wrestlers were wrestlers who would have probably had winning varsity records in at least 75% of their matches and I believe could have placed at state that year. It would not surprise me if teams like Lansing, Emporia, and Colby to name a few could have done the same this year. It could be said very year about a number of teams.

From my experience I see this as a limitation in high school wrestling that potentially holds back participation in high school wrestling. I also do not think it is fair for a potential high school state placer to not get the opportunity to compete just because he is at the school that has the state champion at his weight when he could potentially be the state runner up if he was allowed to also compete if he attended another school. I think a modified Montana system that allowed a school to bring four to six extra wrestlers would give extra opportunities for many wrestlers. Besides Montana, NAIA Wrestling also now has a similar system in place where it allows a team to take more than one wrestler per weight class to their national tournament I believe up to twelve (two over the ten college weight classes) and I believe they can still take that twelve even if they do not fill all the ten weight classes, so if they wanted and it was best for them competitively they could take 2 at 125, 133, 141, 149, 157 and 165.

[quote] I am just having a very difficult time understanding why the wrestling community would want potential state placers not able to compete at the state tournament just because they happen to go to the same school that maybe the state champion or potentially higher state placer attends. It makes no sense to me how anyone thinks that allowing both of these potential high state placers from the same high school to compete at state would lessen the quality of competition at the state tournament. In my opinion, it would definitely improve the quality of the competition. I believe that in 2007 if we had a modified Montana system in place that allowed a team to take say 18 wrestlers to regionals (four over the current 14) that Aquinas would have probably qualified all 18 instead of the 14 that we did qualify that year and I know that you would have had four qualifiers that would have definitely added to the level of competition at state. These extra four wrestlers were wrestlers who would have probably had winning varsity records in at least 75% of their matches and I believe could have placed at state that year. It would not surprise me if teams like Lansing, Emporia, and Colby to name a few could have done the same this year. It could be said very year about a number of teams.
[quote]

In my experience, if you can't beat a guy at a weight you move up or down a weight. Theres 14 spots to try out for, why give a team the bonus to add more kids. I can see the modified system working in Montana due to the extreme watered down competition of 14 schools in a class. But even in watered down Kansas with 32, I would be rare for JV kids would be placing in state. I don't remeber that really good Aquinas state champ team having 14 state placers. So how are the JV kids going to better than the varsity kids. Yea, the JV kid have qualified for state, but that doesn't mean much when getting to state is so easy.

Hypothetically, say the big class in Kansas was the top 64 schools or 6A and 5a combined. I bet you only half of the Aquinas kids would have gone to state from that good team. A state qualifer also would actually mean you have some real wrestling skill. It means you earned something.

Also on the NAIA going to allowing 2 kids per class. I think this in response to the small amount of NAIA schools remaining with wrestling. The NAIA level of competion has dropped so many programs over the years due to all the schools dropping wrestling or going to D2. Not a bad idea becuase there's less than 30 schools that wrestle now so this does raise the level of wrestling. Again the Montana system is not bad when you have a small number schools.

fan of the sport

I never said Aquinas had 14 state placers in 2007 our state team championship year two years ago. I said we had 14 state qualifiers. We actually had 10 state placers that year. Aquinas had some JV wrestlers that year that had qualified for state in previous years (two were seniors). Most of them had go up in weight and were behind wrestlers who ended up taking second or third at State that year. My son was a sophomore that year and he had spent his freshman season 2006 as the second team 189 wrestler. He also wrestled JV the first two meets of his sophomore year that 2007 season because he lost his first wrestle off to the senior state qualifier from the previous year. He won the second wrestle off the week of the third meet the Johnson County Classic. That week in his first varsity meet as the Aquinas first team heavyweight he won the Johnson County Classic a tournament with all twenty of the Johnson County teams which are both 5A and 6A. There have been some high state placers who have not won the Johnson County Classic. This is a personal example to you of how a JV wrestler on a top team can do very well in a varsity tournament. My son went on that year to a 33-4 record with second place finishes at the Bobcat and at the Blue Valley Northwest Husky. He also placed fifth at state. Aquinas had other JV wrestlers win varsity tournaments that year.

My simple answer to you is that our JV guy may not have done as well as RJ Nill who placed 2nd at 171 that year but he may have still placed and most certainly would have qualified.

Not that this matters to the discussion this much but I would also dispute your statement that only half of the Aquinas fourteen state qualifiers would have qualified in a combined 5A and 6A state group. Yeah I would taken that bet and I know I would have picked up some easy money. Here is why. None of our ten state placers ended up winning 5A individual state championships that year but a couple of them defeated 6A state champions that year. 5A was very strong that year and had great depth with Aquinas and Bishop Carroll being two of the top ranked teams in the country that year. I believe all ten of our state placers that year would have most certainly qualified for state in a combined 6A and 5A regional. I think at least twelve of our 14 would have qualified in a combined 5A/6A class. Actually the Johnson County Classic would be pretty close to that type of regional and in that combined 6A and 5A 20 team tournament we had six champions, three second placers, and one third so that is ten right there. Proof enough for you? Okay not enough proof how about the Bobcat classic a few weeks later. I have often heard that if you can place at that 30 plus team tournament of tough 4A, 5A and 6A schools that you have a great chance of placing at state. In the 2007 Aquinas placed 12 of our 14 wrestlers that year with two firsts and two seconds.

fan of the sport,

I have looked into some of your previous posts over the two years that you have been a member. I can see you and I had some back and forth two years ago. I have to say that your posts and causes are really beginning to remind me of someone.

You only have 13 post now, 11 of which came in a short two month flurry two years ago when you first appeared talking about losing records qualifying for state, watered down 6A and 5A with only 32 teams, the need for one state tournament location, I think I even saw mention of the Beast of the East and the Ironman tournaments in your posts of two years ago. Who does this all sound like and why are you suddenly using this fan of the sport secret identity again?

Hey, don't go there! It isn't me!

Okay Will I thought maybe you were having some fun with me. I wonder why fan of the sport is suddenly showing up again after a two year absence. Perhaps fan of the sport will share that with us.

By the way, Will, congratulations to Ryne on winning his second state championship. And I also did notice that St. James was in about tenth place in 4A with both Ryne and Taylor taking first. I am sure Chief noticed it too. That was a good team finish so congratulations to the St. James team on that.

I've read the arugments pro and con. How about implementing the NAIA system. A team can qualify 12 wrestlers for 10 weight classes, but in no case can they send more than 2 wrestlers per weight class.

Oklahoma City University doesn't have a 125-pounder on the men's team, so it has used Mikali Hutchionson recently. However, they do have two good 113-pounders, two good 157-pounders, and two good 285-pounders. 11 wrestlers from the team have qualified for the NAIA nationals next weekend.

In Oklahoma this past weekend Dallas Bailey from Catoosa wrestled at 171 so a 160-pounder from his school could be in the lineup. Bailey won his 4th state title in an overtime match against Zach White (John Smith's nephew) from Woodward. Bailey's teammate won the 4A state title at 160

Jared Patterson from Cushing won his 4th state title at 130 pounds after wrestling at 125 most of the season. His teammate Garrett Evans won the 125-pound 4A state championship.

I don't know what those coaches would have done if they could have entered two wrestlers at a single weight class, but it would have been interesting.

I think the idea has merit, especially with the scrutiny that weight cutting receives.

It was my first visit to the Kansas High School State Championships since 1978. I served as a volunteer at KMC from 75-78 then moved to AZ. I saw the 5A/6A friday competition at the Kansas Coliseum. The overall quality of the athletes was far superior to what I saw at the 2A/3A and 4/5A state tournaments in AZ the past two weekends. Still not as good of wrestling as I saw at the Oklahoma High School championsips in terms of technical skills, but not that far behind.