The 4A and 5A state tournaments in Oklahoma only have eight participants. Oklahoma allows their wrestlers to freely change weight classes as do most states. None of this silly "half of your weigh-ins" crap. Every state surrounding Kansas does a better job of managing wrestling and hosting a state tournament. (Insert your why don't you move comments now...) We need to talk to these guys and figure it out.

Warren Welcome to the forums, it is great to see the Big Apple here.

BigApple,I think the NAIA system would be a very good one for Kansas high school wrestling. If we were doing two extra over the weight classes that would mean a team could take 16 instead of 14 to regionals and no team would have to fill every weight class. This would help a lot of teams that are loaded in the middle but might be struggling to find wrestlers at the lightest or heaviest weight classes. This would mean a team could take 2 each from any weight class such as 119, 125, 130, 135, 140, 145, 152, and 160 if that was the best combination for them. It would have also meant that Wichita Northwest could have taken both Heithaus and Page this year, and Olathe North could have taken Vincent and Venegas. There would not be as much pressure on coaches to fill weight classes where they are not getting a lot of kids out for wrestling and give more opportunity for weight classes that they do have a lot of kids competing for spots at. It would be less pressure for wrestling out of your best weight so it should result in less excessive weight cutting. Even if you only allowed each team 14 wrestlers like today, I think it would be an improvement to allow up to two at each weight class so you could do 7 weight classes of 2 instead of being to restricted to 1 wrestler for all 14 weight classes. I would think high school coaches would like this option.

Husker Fan,

Looks like you're putting a profile on me. I'm just a former Kansas wrestler who has migrated out of state. But I do like keep up to date on the home state wrestling, especially at the exciting time of the year of the state tournament and follow my old high school.

Topics like this catch my interest as I've lived in a few midwestern states and have been involved in the College high school and club levels. I didn't mean to get personal on your comments, but was trying to make some objective counter points.

I do appreciate the success that the St Thomas Aquinas team has had when your son was on it, as it is rare for Kanas City teams
to win state. Take a look at the State Champion post and I think there has been about 7 or 8 state championships won by Kansas city area teams in the history of the state with STA winning 2 of those.

Anyway, not hiding behind anonymity, but my name is Steve Mathis and am a former Leavenworth high school grad in the 80s.
Also did some NAIA wrestling in the Husker state.

To respond to your comment: Good example on the Johnson county tournament being similar to a regional if 6A and 5a combined.
If you placed 12 there, you probably would have put 12 to state in a 16 team regional because most of those teams would have been in your regional. But what about you're 10 placers at state. From only a statistical perspective, if you go from 32 to 64 teams at state, you're state placers would follow this ratio and go from 10 to 5 and much less likely the JV kids would have placed. I know if wrestled out, you might have had more or less.

My point is if you minimize the classes ( go to 2 or 3), a state qualifer in Kansas would mean something. From an out of state perspective and college coach point of view, the Kansas state tournament system is laughed at. This also goes for some surrounding states (OK, NE, CO and MO) which all have four classes. I worked out with a former Indiana state champion and asst D1 college wrestling coach tonight. In Indiana, he had to win a state series with 320 schools. It's brutal in Indiana. He couldn't believe a Kansas class only had 32 schools.

Also to support my opinion, see an article on Flowrestling that
debates how many classes a state should have. Interestly, Kansas gets referenced as the state with too many classes. I'll qualify the article noting the author was from Missouri. See address below for the article.

www.flowrestling.org/topics/view/94-state-tournaments-how-many-classes-should-there-be

fan of the sport,

Your input on this forum is appreciated and you share many of the views of others on this forum on some specific changes.

As far as your Aquinas example of agreeing that Aquinas would probably had about 12 wrestlers qualify in 2007 since they did so well at the 20 team Johnson County Classic, but that they would reduce to only 5 or 6 placers in the proposed combined 5A & 6A class of 64 teams, I have to disagree with you on that too I believe about 8 would have placed in such a class that year. I say that because I know how many placers we had at the Bobcat and how some of our placers in 5A did that year against champions and higher placers in some weight classes in 6A. And when you call our second team guys JV wrestlers I guess I wince at that a little because I know that wrestling skill wise that many of them that year would have definitely been varsity wrestlers at 75% of the schools in Johnson and Wyandotte County some of them were former state qualifiers in previous years. I am pretty sure that at least one of our second team wrestlers could have placed at a combined 5A & 6A state. We were pretty loaded talent wise for about a three to four year period.


I actually saw that article that you sited from flow wrestling. Your example of the Indiana tournament is good. It doesn't mean though that their wrestlers are better than our state placers just because we have more classes. Actually my son beat an Indiana finalist in the USAW Pre-Season Nationals this Fall 9-5. The best my son has placed is 3rd in 5A.

Here is another former wrestler's view of how many classes are best for a state. This is from Jeremy Hart a former Penn State University wrestler who wrestled both in Indiana (one class) and Pennsylvania (multiple class system). You can find the entire interview with Jeremy Hart in the below site. You will need to scroll down to the bottom half of page to read it.

http://www.indianamat.com/category/where-are-they-now/

Views on Class Wrestling (A big debate within the State of Indiana, I just want to get your perspective since you were a part of both sides):

I think this debate must be analyzed according to the purposes of high school wrestling. At the end of the day, the purpose of high school wrestling is to develop character, hard work, and discipline in the boys who participate. The existence of a class structure has no bearing on the accomplishment of this aim. However, a secondary purpose of high school wrestling is to give the largest number of young men the opportunity to wrestle at a collegiate level, possibly with financial assistance for the fruits of their labor on the mat. This objective cuts toward a class system. The placement of a wrestler at the state tournament is a quality indicator for college coaches. It’s not the only quality indicator, but it is an important one nonetheless. A state with a single class is doing an incredibly inefficient job at exposing the spectrum of quality of its wrestlers because, by definition, only eight wrestlers can place. Thus, a wrestler who may have placed in a smaller school division, or in a bigger school division, but failed to place in a single class structure may be denied exposure to college coaches which he would have had if he had competed in a class system. If the high schools in a state really wish to maximize the opportunities for their athlete’s to compete at the collegiate level, they will ensure them maximum exposure. Sure, a single class system results in one state champion. That may give that individual something to brag about, but it does little for the overall good of wrestling in the state. When more wrestlers are exposed to colleges due to placement in the state tournament, more wrestlers wrestle in college. When more wrestlers wrestle in college, more college wrestlers populate the state from which they came. These wrestlers then become the coaches of the youth clubs and high schools sowing the knowledge gleaned from collegiate wrestling into younger wresters, and thus the entire level of wrestling in the state is raised. In short, classes are a good thing. Instead of eight placers per weight, you now have 16 or 24 depending on the number of classes. More exposure means more college wrestlers, more college wrestlers means better wrestling in the state.

I’ve gotten somewhat long-winded above, but that argument doesn’t even take into account the non-wrestling benefits of class wrestling: increased revenue potential from the state tournaments, increased educational opportunities for those wrestlers who do get financial assistance to go to college, etc…

For the record I think some consideration should be given to reducing Kansas from four to three classes in the manner that Contrarian has proposed previously on this topic.

Excellent extract of the comments of a wrestler ineffect defending multiple classes for wrestling.

I recently propsed and outlined a 3 class system for Kansas of Big, Middle and Small Class. To briefly review this proposal: combine 4,5, and 6A classes and then create a 48 school Big class, a 48 school middle class and the current smaller 32 4a schools move down to the Small class. Levels the playing field and does not reduce the number of wrestlers who go to state. In the Big and Middle Classses the 48 schools would each split into four 12 school regionals. To fill the 4 open positions in each 16 man weight bracket, a system similar Montana would allow schools to enter additional wrestlers above the normal 14. These additional wrestlers will cause some seeding problems--how do you select and then seed JV wreslers into a varsity tournament without a cat fight among coaches.

To further my proposal, and to agree with the Jeremy article,and to identify more state palcers for college wrestling recruiters, perhaps Kansas should to an eight (8) placer system. How many more matches it will take for an 8 place system will have to be worked out by someone else, but it should no be very many (I would think not more than 3 matches---the consolation quarter final losers)

A 3 classs system also supports the fan desire for a one site State tournament with all 3 clases.

As for a dual or a grand champion format, that's p-----g in wind. Be real, that's not going to happen because those formats are counter to the current purpose of the Kansas State Tournaments, as best stated by Jermy Hart in HuskerFan's (Mr. Novak) post.

Renewed this post to bring it to the top.

Contrarian,

I agree with you the three class system and even could live a 48 team class for the two larger classes even though I would rather see the top two at 64. A 3 class state tournament at one site would be a real plus for the wrestling community.

One logistic obstacle with the 48 school class would be the current KSHSAA class structure. KSHSAA would have to change its structure and combine parts of classes as your plan detailed. I've never seen them do anything like that and they don't seem to make exceptions much. At least the 64 class plan would still fit into their stucture.

I used to live and Ohio, and their state association allowed each sport to divide up there classes. Football had 6, Wrestling 3, Tennis 2 and 4 for baseball. It was nice to see flexibility allowed for the better of the sport.

A comment on the Indiana system. I've move to Indiana about a year ago. I've gotten some opionions. Their one class tournament was in Conseco field house 2 weekends ago. Nice venue. One thing I've found out on Indy is that they try to minimize their wrestling. Of course the one class thing. Also, in the state series, they do not have wrestle backs or in other words they don't wrestle for a true third. If you lose in the first round at State or even semi-state, you're done. If you lose in the second round, the best you get is 5th. If you make the semi's the worse you could do is 4th. That really sucks. You make it that far, and you get the state champ in the first round your done. Why? The answer I got was that the school administrators didn't want the kids to miss a full day of school.
So they start at State on Friday night then finish on Saturday.

Maybe the Kansas system isn't all bad.

All these proposals are great in that some people feel the current system is inadequate, however the truth of the matter is your opinions really don't matter when it comes to things like that. The only people's opinion who matters is the high school coaches and their respective athletic directors. Case in point for Contrarian's proposal. Any proposal that would remove 3A State from Hays IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN... PERIOD. While I personally don't think that Hays is all that great, I think you will find that better than 90% of the 3A head coaches either like or love Hays as a tournament venue. Rick Bowden has said himself that as long as Hays wants to continue hosting the tournament, they will as they are the only Division II wrestling school in the State.

So for those of you who read this forum on a frequent basis, you might as well forget about 3A because they simply are not going to be moving, and their coaches won't vote for any move either.

Understand and agree with what you said. If asked, I would have said that the loudest nays would have come from the 321A schools. They have their own little world out their---especially the far westerners. The further east you come there are probably some 321A schools would agree to a one site, all class state tournament

Additionally, 5 and 6A schools will never agree to a big combined 64 school bracket. It would reduce the number of kids going to the State Tournament, it may increase travel costs to regionals, huma-huma-huma. It just would not be efficient. You have to agree the current 32 - 32- 64 6A5A4A syastem is administratively efficient.

As a side note, Missouri went to a 4 class system for wrestling I think last year. Western Mo coaches and fans were the hardest pushers for the 4 class system, for several reasons: the 3 class system was not fair, lots of high quality wrestlers were eliminated in the qualifying tournaments, not enough kids were getting to go to state, etc. Some of the same arguements you hear in Kansas to go to a fewer class system.

This recently appeared on the MissouriWrestling.com wrestling forum in other topics. It was posted by a person going by the name Head and Arm. The following is his list of states with their number of wrestling classes and populations. If we went to three we would be similar in number and population to Iowa.

Alabama - 3 Classes (1-4, 5, 6), population - 4,627,851
Alaska - 2 Classes (1-3, 4), population - 683,478
Arizona - 4 classes (1-2,3,4,5), population - 6,338,755
Arkansas - 2 classes (1-5,6-7), population - 2,834,797
California - 1 class, population - 36,553,215
Colorado - 4 classes (2,3,4,5), population - 4,861,515
Connecticut - Part of New England Wrestling Tournament, population - 3,502,309
Delaware - 1 class, population - 864,764
Florida - 3 classes, population - 18,251,243
Georgia - 5 classes, population - 9,544,750
Hawaii - 1 class (girls are separate), population - 1,283,388
Idaho - 4 classes (1-2,3,4,5) population - 1,499,402
Illinois - 3 classes, population - 12,852,548
Indiana - 1 class, population - 6,345,289
Iowa - 3 classes, population - 2,988,046
Kansas - 4 classes (1-3,4,5,6) population - 2,775,997
Kentucky - 1 class, population - 4,241,474
Louisiana - 3 classes, population - 4,293,204
Maine - New England Wrestling Tournament, population - 1,317,207
Maryland - 2 classes (1-2,3-4), population - 5,618,344
Massachusetts - New England Tournament, population - 6,449,755
Michigan - 4 classes, population - 10,071,822
Minnesota - 3 classes, population - 5,197,621
Mississippi - It has just been sanctioned this past fall, I couldn't find any other info
Missouri - 4 classes, population - 5,878,415
Montana - 3 classes, population - 957,861
Nebraska - 4 classes, population - 1,774,571
Nevada - 3 classes (1-2,3,4), population - 2,565,382
New Hampshire - New England Wrestling Tournament, population - 1,315,828
New Jersey - 1 class, population - 8,685,920
New Mexico - 3 classes (1-3,4,5) population - 1,969,915
New York - 2 Classes, population - 19,297,729
North Carolina - 4 classes for dual team, 3 for individual, population - 9,061,032
North Dakota - 2 classes, population - 639,715
Ohio - 3 classes, population - 11,466,917
Oklahoma - 4 classes (1-3,4,5,6) population - 3,617,316
Oregon - 5 Classes (1-2,3,4,5,6) population - 3,747,455
Pennsylvania - 2 classes, population - 12,432,792
Rhode Island - 1 class, population - 1,057,832
South Carolina - 4 classes, population - 4,407,709
South Dakota - 2 classes, population - 796,214
Tennessee - 2 classes for duals, 1 class for individual, population - 6,156,719
Texas - 1 class (girls are separate), population - 23,904,380
Utah - 5 classes, population - 2,645,330
Vermont - part of New England Tournament, population - 621,254
Virgina - 3 classes, population - 7,712,091
Washington - 4 classes, population - 6,468,424
West Virgina - 3 classes, population - 1,812,035
Wisconsin - 3 classes, population - 5,601,640
Wyoming - 3 classes (1-2,3,4) population - 522,830