The Kansas Kids Executive Council has awarded the State Championships form 2010 - 2012 to Topeka.

Yesterday the council met and listen to three wonderful presentations from Wichita, Hays, and Topeka. All three cities can feel very proud of there presentation teams as they represented each city in a very proud way and made our decision a very diffcult one to make.

There was a lot of debate on the length of time to award the bid and the choice was three.

Everyone on the council recognize's the need for us to make changes in our sport, and we felt that three years gives us the time to study all the issues, make plans to take to the memebership to be discuss and then we can all agree on how to proceed forward.

Please keep in mind that Wrestling in Kansas is on solid ground right now. Memeberships continue to grow, in are current season we are up 300 wrestlers from past years. Nation wide we continue to hold the number four spot in memebership behind California, Illinois & Indaina. Our membership is active both in state but on a national scale as well. Plus our State Tournament conitunes to the priemer event in our state and we is recongized on a natiional level as being one of the best and we want to keep that going.

So as we move forward please become part of the process when ask to volunteer to sit on a committee give up some time, when ask your opinion please feel free to share, let's keep working together to make wrestling and our state championships the best in the country.

Please join me in thanking Wichita and Hays for wonderful bids and congratulations to Topeka for being awarded the State Championships for the next three years.

Ned Price
Executive State Director
Kansas Kids

Ned,
I thought that the last time it was voted on was the time to: "Everyone on the council recognize's the need for us to make changes in our sport, and we felt that three years gives us the time to study all the issues, make plans to take to the membership to be discuss and then we can all agree on how to proceed forward."

The only proceeding I see is driving east.

Just one more reason to MOVE east!

Once again, no change!!!!!!!!!

Wow. Once again our fearless leaders continue to amaze at the level of arrogance they project. Like you can come to our little meeting but you have to sit in the corner and be quiet because we have big people things to do. I would think that they would start listening to the people they represent or at least look into things that should be a priority for the safety of our kids like background checks for officials so that we don't have people with felonies officiating (this would be felonies with violent acts and involving hard drugs like meth). I would like to know a couple of things. 1. Who voted for what city. 2. When do we vote for the positions that these people hold.

Having to deal with the tounament in the Expocenter AGAIN is a great example of the executive board lending a def ear to the "State body"-again. Or is the Expocenter planning to expand their facility and make it more user friendly?
They are learning by example from the U.S. government no doubt.
I am glad my kid will be in H.S. next year. We won't have to go back again.

Wow what a surprise it stay's in Topeka... Yeah, when do people get to vote for people making these kind of choices. You would of thought that 20+ years would have given you all enough time to study all the issues. Either you all want to keep it in Topeka or just don't care about the people in the western part of the state...

sorry to disagree with you 2coach but it has nothing to do with the western part of the state. They don't care about ANYBODY in any other part of the state.

After reviewing the bids it was clear the board had to vote for Topeka. It was a unanimous vote.

In my position as an ex officio member of the Executive Council, I attend all of their meetings but do not participate in any votes. Hopefully, therefore, I can comment here without appearing to be simply defending the vote by the Council.

Your representatives took their obligations very seriously in last Sunday's meeting. Significant discussion took place concerning both the length of the contract and the location of the tournament. Although there were heated discussions on several aspects of the proposals, the ultimate vote on the location was unanimous. Several members expressed their regret on casting their vote for Topeka, since (for various reasons) they had strongly supported one of the other bids. However, the total package provided by Topeka for the benefit of USAW-Kansas Kids carried the day.

Finally, I would strongly recommend anyone who is dissatisfied with the votes by the Executive Council to consider becoming involved in your district's management. Most of the voting members of the Executive Council are elected by their district and work primarily for that district. These are good people - if you have concerns about the direction the state is moving in, let them know. If you want to become active in setting this direction, run for a district or state office. We always need enthusiastic, energetic people!

Mike,
when are the current terms for the members up. It's time for a change. Let's get away from the good ole boy system.

We (the general body) do not even know what the proposals were! How can "we" condemn our leaders when we don't know this info!!

I have to believe, based on what Mike has said, and knowing the position of D2 leaders and others throughout the season, that Topeka must have presented a better package.

I love some of the passion in some members of our body but I have to think ... their passion is clouding their brain. Going in ... I believe if Wichita or Hays would have been, even close, they would have got the bid!

Personally, I wish someone other than Topeka would have received the bid! But I have full confidence that our leadership is voting what they think is best for Kansas Wrestling!

Democracy would work a lot better ... if WE voted the way I feel!!

J. Dale why disagree with me at all, you have your reasons and I have mine...

2coach read it again. try to read the sarcasm into it. i agree with you but to a greater level.

Forget the location, it SHOULD have been a one year deal. The three year deal is an attempt, I believe, by some members to stonewall change. You can talk change all you want but if you don't act on it then that makes you a hypocrite.

Randy, I know it was complicated but it shouldn't have been. In today's world the proposals SHOULD have been made available on the internet for EVERYONE to review. The "behind the doors" secrecy and elitist stance that some members of the executive board try to protect has to be eliminated. If it cannot be said to everyone then it shouldn't be said. If you cannot open the meeting then I don't trust you and I believe no one else can either.

A unanimous vote for change followed up by a vote for three more years of status quo is a joke. Poor Ned, he had support for a one year deal and then everyone ran scared. I realize that the financial aspect is important but how important is it when you give away $3,000 to a camp that should be able to stand on its own? That is $3,000 more that could be saved to make the financial decision easier to deal with.

Wichita did not put forth a favorable effort. I for the life of me do not understand why Bryan Hargrove and his cronies didn't just give away the farm at the Kansas Coliseum for a one year deal? Get away from Topeka for a year and give the District 4 people a break on drive time for Pete's sake!

As I told Ned last night. It isn't okay. Three more years of no spring break. Three more years of no NCAA tournament. Three more years of fighting for a hotel room and a good rate in Topeka. Three more years of potential growth lost. You can make more money, find more tournaments, you can do about anything but make more time!

There are options and you can bet I will be brainstorming to figure them out but the board voted to change and then shot change in the head for three more years basically putting change on life support.

It is 2009 and you don't need three years to study the options for change. It is time for new leadership. We need parents who were wrestlers, parents who have kids wrestling now, successful business people and people who are passionate about growth and change. They are out there. They are in District 4, District 3, District 2 and District 1. We need leaders who vote for what is best for the whole state not just their area or city they live in. I have heard every nearly every reason that the vote was made and all of them are just excuses. We all know that excuses are just an explanation to avoid change.

I apologize for the rambling but this has been a hard decision to understand.

Well, since I was the only non-board member to show up at the meeting let me say this. Topeka was the only sensible bid, and I REALLY don't like saying that. The members had no choice but to accept Topeka's bid. I looked at all three. Hays just wasn't big enough. Wichita didn't seem to really want it. Topeka was the only sensible choice.

Even though the topics were not discussed. I did hear talk of adding 6U, shortening the season, adding an 18U for a grand state. In my opinion the majority of the board is looking towards change...just not immediate gratification. I spoke and asked the committee to only accept a 1 year bid. I understand why they chose 3 and can live with that. If change is not made in 3 years, then all the ranting on this forum will be justified.

I do know that the board is meeting this summer, which is something that has never happened before. Hopefully we will all be pleasently surprised by the topics that will be voted on at the state meeting in November.

There are many board members if not all who were aware that this decision would not be acceppted my a very vocal few. The fact of the matter is any rule changes that are not on the mat rules will take at least 2yrs to implement(they have to go thru the rules committee and brought back to the body to be voted on for the following year). The board had strong feelings about all the bids on the table. The Cadillac, the Wrestling Program, and the No-Brainer is what I would call them. The board is very concerned about what the body wants and takes comments and ideas not only from this forum but from real people on the trail. We were very fortunate to have 3 excellent bids, and this being my first time to be part of the bid process thought there was great discussion that put the best interest of Kansas wrestling first. You are right that the board is elected and is representitive of the body. I applaud the efforts of the board and know first hand they are looking out for the best interests of our states youth.

I would like to echo Mike Juby's call to those who would like to roll up their sleeves and donate their time to sit down at the table and make decisions that are representive of our state and sport. It takes more than just great ideas, it takes compromise, and putting aside personal views that cloud rational judgement.

Get involved at the district level and make a difference!!

Chad, I appreciate your opinion!

Again, the Executive Board, has my full confidence and I think, are doing what they think is best for the entire wrestling family!

As Will, as Ned, as a few others may be finding out, there is a difference between having one's support ... and having one's vote! Our elected officials need to vote what they feel is the best option for us all.

The silent-majority will not rant and rave. I feel they acknowledge that changes are needed but have confidence that ... the sky is not falling. I really appreciate the opinion of Beeson once again, "the board is looking towards change...just not immediate gratification."

I feel, we will see change ... just not at the pace some would like.

There is a whole lot more that is right with Kansas wrestling!!

The district offices are voted on at each of the October district meetings. Most of the state offices are voted on at the state body meeting.

Chad,
Do you think that the lack of attendance from non board members had anything to do the fact that 2 days before the meeting the announced the limited list of things that they were going to be talking about (and what they wouldn't talk about) and the fact that NO ONE could address the meeting without petitioning them PRIOR to the meeting?

I for one think that if they wanted our input they would have announced this AT LEAST a few weeks in advance. I would also think that they would of post the bids prior to the meeting for everyone to look over and gather thoughts on (along with the rules of addressing) then maybe there would have been a better turn out.
It is kind of hard to get excited to jump in a car to go 2 hours each way to sit there and not have a say.
It kind of makes one wonder if the late notice was intentional?

I would like for someone to post the bids on here and then maybe we could ask our elected officials from our districts why the voted a specific way. Maybe then we could understand the logic before everyone starts to yell "get a rope"!

I would like to hear your point of view!

Mike,
Could you please explain this cooment?

Oop's sorry J. Dale I was on the go when I read it the first time..