Proposal Season has Begun

[ACICOD]

First proposal of the year is on the NSAA page..............

Nebraska School Activities Association

secure.nsaahome.org

It would move 8-man to 3 classes. 8-man number would go to 51 boys. Playoffs in all classes would be 16 teams with 9 regular season games for everyone.

Thoughts?

 

[Hardwoodbeaver]

Get 9 man in there !!!

 

[Power_I_82]

I can't stand it when schools use their lack of ability to get kids out as an excuse for "moving the goal posts" on this stuff. If you are playoff ineligible you need to take a good hard look at why you don't get the kids out to play 11 man. Maybe you need to rework your youth program (that is where it all starts), get serious about why the kids in your school don't go out (socio-economic, bad youth experience, losing culture and tradition, lazy kids pulling others along with them). Work on fixing that stuff and building a team and culture kids can be proud of and want to be a part of and it will fix itself. Constantly wanting to change the rules to accommodate mediocrity kind of goes against what we want our kids to get from playing sports right? Its taking the easy way out. To me the whole goal of sports is to teach hard work, discipline, teamwork, pushing yourself beyond your limit, etc. I definitely get you want the kids to have a great HS experience but the adults in this conversation need to pick up some of the slack and accept that they may be part of the problem.

 

[HuskDaddy]

Get 9 man in there !!!

We do not need to be having 4 different types of football being played in the state. Stop it with this.

 

[Power_I_82]

We do not need to be having 4 different types of football being played in the state. Stop it with this.

One class of 9 man would be a scheduling nightmare for the NSAA

 

[Rolling Hills Rebel]

3-11 man classes, 1-9 man class, 1-8 man class, and 1-6 man class is the way to go.

The 9 man class would solve a lot of co-op issues if you made it enrollment numbers of 60ish - 40ish.

Get rid of opting down all together, but allow schools to opt up if they want.

That would get you around 55 teams in class C, 55 teams in 9 man, and 70 teams in 8 man. Some 8 man teams would come together to co-op to increase your 9 man numbers and decrease your 8 man numbers.

 

[ACICOD]

I can't stand it when schools use their lack of ability to get kids out as an excuse for "moving the goal posts" on this stuff. If you are playoff ineligible you need to take a good hard look at why you don't get the kids out to play 11 man. Maybe you need to rework your youth program (that is where it all starts), get serious about why the kids in your school don't go out (socio-economic, bad youth experience, losing culture and tradition, lazy kids pulling others along with them). Work on fixing that stuff and building a team and culture kids can be proud of and want to be a part of and it will fix itself. Constantly wanting to change the rules to accommodate mediocrity kind of goes against what we want our kids to get from playing sports right? Its taking the easy way out. To me the whole goal of sports is to teach hard work, discipline, teamwork, pushing yourself beyond your limit, etc. I definitely get you want the kids to have a great HS experience but the adults in this conversation need to pick up some of the slack and accept that they may be part of the problem.

Understand this line of thinking completely.

I think one of the positives I see with this proposal is with moving the number is the co-op aspect of this. We have a lot of people on this site that talk about "get into a co-op so you don't have to forfeit." However, the number where it is doesn't really allow for that without pushing teams into 11-man..........and let's face it, that's not the best move for those who need to co-op.

Osmond's number is 26 (forfeited the season)...............if they went with Wausa (27), they'd be over the number to play 8-man. Wausa isn't going to take them on, just to play 11-man. Now, Osmond is an exception in the sense that they could have played 6-man, so maybe not the best choice of an example.

If you look at neighboring states, Nebraska's 8-man number is remarkably low. Moving the number wouldn't bother me if it lined up with what the states around us already do.

 

[Hardwoodbeaver]

3-11 man classes, 1-9 man class, 1-8 man class, and 1-6 man class is the way to go.

The 9 man class would solve a lot of co-op issues if you made it enrollment numbers of 60ish - 40ish.

Get rid of opting down all together, but allow schools to opt up if they want.

That would get you around 55 teams in class C, 55 teams in 9 man, and 70 teams in 8 man. Some 8 man teams would come together to co-op to increase your 9 man numbers and decrease your 8 man numbers.

Spot on!
I personally can’t stand watching 8 man because it’s nothing like the real game of football. Might as well put flags on!!

 

[jonh142881_anon]

Get rid of 8 man, Go 9 and 6. Nothing wrong with A, B, C1, C2 although C2 will probably shrink with 9man. 9 man can be played on a full sized field, same rules, drop the tackles. More schools are sub-11man than play 11 man football in Nebraska. Facts we need to acknowledge, coops don't fix that.

 

[nenebskers]

I like the proposal but don't go with 51 as the cutoff. 51 hardly moves the needle off of 47. Go with 60 or so. We need to come to grips that participation numbers are what they are and get closer in line to where other states are at. So many C2 and lower schools hardly play much more than a small handful, if any, JV games a year. The Norfolk Catholics of the state can always opt up if they fall into the 8 man ranks and want to play 11 man.

 

[Power_I_82]

Understand this line of thinking completely.

I think one of the positives I see with this proposal is with moving the number is the co-op aspect of this. We have a lot of people on this site that talk about "get into a co-op so you don't have to forfeit." However, the number where it is doesn't really allow for that without pushing teams into 11-man..........and let's face it, that's not the best move for those who need to co-op.

Osmond's number is 26 (forfeited the season)...............if they went with Wausa (27), they'd be over the number to play 8-man. Wausa isn't going to take them on, just to play 11-man. Now, Osmond is an exception in the sense that they could have played 6-man, so maybe not the best choice of an example.

If you look at neighboring states, Nebraska's 8-man number is remarkably low. Moving the number wouldn't bother me if it lined up with what the states around us already do.

I understand this thought as well and not arguing one bit. I realize changing a culture isn't a one year process. I guess my main thought is in a lot of these instances I feel like maybe the adults in the room could do a little more work getting kids out instead of just changing the rules to accommodate the situation. It's a tough deal. It wouldn't be fair to Wasua kids to co-op with Osmond and be ineligible but if say Wasua co-oping was the only way they were able to field a team then they need to do it. At the end of the day its about the experience. Lots of kids don't get to go to the playoffs at the end of the year but they still get to play football, be part of the team and build the character the game instills.

 

[LooseCannon]

I appreciate the efforts put into proposals. It's not easy to to do so.

That said, Nebraska doesn't need three classes of 8 man football. Opting down needs to stop. If your enrollment falls in the 8 man numbers, you play 8 man. If they are in 6 man numbers, you play 6 man.

Enrollment 60-31: 8 man
Enrollment 30 and below: 6 man

I would be in favor of 9 man, I believe it would solve a lot of issues.

 

[footballguy61]

Will the proposal struggle to pass simply because it adjusts both the number to 51 and also adds another class of 8 man? Maybe I am wrong, but it seems this should maybe be two separate proposals.

 

[ACICOD]

Proposals to move the number to 51 and 55 have been proposed the last two or three years. They don't pass because the smallest 8-man schools aren't going to vote to allow even bigger schools to come down. This moves the number, but also gives the smallest schools their own class to compete in.

I think it's a good compromise.

 

[CoachBDub]

I appreciate the efforts put into proposals. It's not easy to to do so.

That said, Nebraska doesn't need three classes of 8 man football. Opting down needs to stop. If your enrollment falls in the 8 man numbers, you play 8 man. If they are in 6 man numbers, you play 6 man.

Enrollment 60-31: 8 man
Enrollment 30 and below: 6 man

I would be in favor of 9 man, I believe it would solve a lot of issues.

I love the idea of 9 man. I think it eliminates the stigma some 11 man schools have towards 8 man, or at least some of the push back that communities tend to have toward the 8 man game. I also think if some C2 schools would be willing you could just create one 9 man class, one 8 man class, and one 6 man class, and still allow opt up/downs due to participation numbers.

 

[LooseCannon]

I love the idea of 9 man. I think it eliminates the stigma some 11 man schools have towards 8 man, or at least some of the push back that communities tend to have toward the 8 man game. I also think if some C2 schools would be willing you could just create one 9 man class, one 8 man class, and one 6 man class, and still allow opt up/downs due to participation numbers.

This would be ideal. In reality we have 32 teams playing six man, when we should have 52 teams playing 6 man.

 

[Rolling Hills Rebel]

This would be ideal. In reality we have 32 teams playing six man, when we should have 52 teams playing 6 man.

There’s a bunch of communities that don’t need too, don’t want too, and shouldn’t be forced to play 6 man football.

 

[GoSkers3]

I can't stand it when schools use their lack of ability to get kids out as an excuse for "moving the goal posts" on this stuff. If you are playoff ineligible you need to take a good hard look at why you don't get the kids out to play 11 man. Maybe you need to rework your youth program (that is where it all starts), get serious about why the kids in your school don't go out (socio-economic, bad youth experience, losing culture and tradition, lazy kids pulling others along with them). Work on fixing that stuff and building a team and culture kids can be proud of and want to be a part of and it will fix itself. Constantly wanting to change the rules to accommodate mediocrity kind of goes against what we want our kids to get from playing sports right? Its taking the easy way out. To me the whole goal of sports is to teach hard work, discipline, teamwork, pushing yourself beyond your limit, etc. I definitely get you want the kids to have a great HS experience but the adults in this conversation need to pick up some of the slack and accept that they may be part of the problem.

I am curious as to what adults in this room you are referring too? Parents or coaches? I am a head coach of a varsity sport and have had anywhere from 17-35 kids out for the sport I coach. I'll be honest - that number doesn't change because of what I do or how I run my program. It has everything to do with the amount of kids that truly enjoy playing that sport. What most people don't know who are not in the education field - is that things are NOT the way they used to be "back in the day." That can be said not only for athletics but also in the classroom.

 

[LooseCannon]

There’s a bunch of communities that don’t need too, don’t want too, and shouldn’t be forced to play 6 man football.

Why would they not want to? Because 6 man football is beneath them? What if they are forfeiting their season?

Just my opinion, for safety reasons, if a school has 20 kids on their roster or less, they should be playing 6 man.

 

[cschurm]

Why would they not want to? Because 6 man football is beneath them? What if they are forfeiting their season?

Just my opinion, for safety reasons, if a school has 20 kids on their roster or less, they should be playing 6 man.

I felt the same way until we actually went 6 man...we are successful and more kids actually go out due to that fact.

 

[Antone13]

In my opinion: Class A first 28 teams, Class B 28 teams, Class C1 48 teams, Class C2 48 teams, Class D1 48 teams 9 man, Class D2 48 teams 9 man, Class D3 48 teams 8 man, D4 the rest of the teams and play 8 man. This would create the most parity in the classes and between all the classes. It would scheduling easier on the NSAA. All teams play a 9 game schedule take 16 teams to playoffs. Allow 9man and 8 man schools to play each other and the defense plays with same number as the offense.

 

[Big G20]

In my opinion: Class A first 28 teams, Class B 28 teams, Class C1 48 teams, Class C2 48 teams, Class D1 48 teams 9 man, Class D2 48 teams 9 man, Class D3 48 teams 8 man, D4 the rest of the teams and play 8 man. This would create the most parity in the classes and between all the classes. It would scheduling easier on the NSAA. All teams play a 9 game schedule take 16 teams to playoffs. Allow 9man and 8 man schools to play each other and the defense plays with same number as the offense.

That puts you at 296 teams before any in 6 man. There are only 280 teams playing right now, and only 72 between C1 and C2. Maybe only need 1 11 man class after B if you are going to add 9 man?

 

[Anon1671592748]

A(11) - 24 Teams ***
B(11) - 32 Teams
C1(11) - 32 Teams
C2(11) - 32 Teams
D1(9) - 40 Teams
D2(9) - 40 Teams
D3(8) - 40 Teams
D4(6) - 40 Teams

16 team playoff. Ability to opt up. Only can opt down if team has less than two wins in previous two year cycle. In case of opt down in A or B. Top B or C1 school in two year cycle goes up a class.

***12 man playoff, four districts of six teams. District winners get 1st round bye.

8 man can have cross-state games with Iowa, Kansas and Colorado, 9 man can have cross state games with South Dakota and Wyoming. 6 man can play Kansas, Colorado, and Wyoming. (Only if needed).

C1-D4 numbers can change up and down if this model disbands or creates co-ops. So on and so forth.

 

[4xAllConference]

A- 11 man
B- 11 man
C1- 11 man
C2- 9 man
D1- 8 man
D2- 6 man
I don’t have the numbers off the top of my head for each class. Raise both the 8 man and 6 man cut off. 9 man will take care of small C2 teams struggling with numbers and put the bigger D1 teams in competition that they belong. Yes C2-D2 will be big classes but they’re already significantly bigger than other classes the way it is now. All classes play 9 game season and take 16 to playoffs.
Some schools have great participation numbers whereas most schools do not. I think this would help and schools will be able to stay eligible without forfeiting any games or the whole season.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

Understand this line of thinking completely.

I think one of the positives I see with this proposal is with moving the number is the co-op aspect of this. We have a lot of people on this site that talk about "get into a co-op so you don't have to forfeit." However, the number where it is doesn't really allow for that without pushing teams into 11-man..........and let's face it, that's not the best move for those who need to co-op.

Osmond's number is 26 (forfeited the season)...............if they went with Wausa (27), they'd be over the number to play 8-man. Wausa isn't going to take them on, just to play 11-man. Now, Osmond is an exception in the sense that they could have played 6-man, so maybe not the best choice of an example.

If you look at neighboring states, Nebraska's 8-man number is remarkably low. Moving the number wouldn't bother me if it lined up with what the states around us already do.

agree

 

[clktwr]

There’s a bunch of communities that don’t need too, don’t want too, and shouldn’t be forced to play 6 man football.

They can opt up.

 

[clktwr]

I am curious as to what adults in this room you are referring too? Parents or coaches? I am a head coach of a varsity sport and have had anywhere from 17-35 kids out for the sport I coach. I'll be honest - that number doesn't change because of what I do or how I run my program. It has everything to do with the amount of kids that truly enjoy playing that sport. What most people don't know who are not in the education field - is that things are NOT the way they used to be "back in the day." That can be said not only for athletics but also in the classroom.

There are only a select few communities where is has remained the way it was "back in the day". All of the rest are struggling.

I understand that this is not about Legion Baseball, but it does provide support for your points. It now takes 3-4-5 base schools to field a Legion program. Each one of those base schools used to have their own team. The student count isn't that much different, kids just don't enjoy it anymore.

Thank you for being a coach. Thank you for battling through your 17 kid seasons. I know it is a lot of pressure, and you take a lot of heat some seasons.

 

[LooseCannon]

A- 11 man
B- 11 man
C1- 11 man
C2- 9 man
D1- 8 man
D2- 6 man
I don’t have the numbers off the top of my head for each class. Raise both the 8 man and 6 man cut off. 9 man will take care of small C2 teams struggling with numbers and put the bigger D1 teams in competition that they belong. Yes C2-D2 will be big classes but they’re already significantly bigger than other classes the way it is now. All classes play 9 game season and take 16 to playoffs.
Some schools have great participation numbers whereas most schools do not. I think this would help and schools will be able to stay eligible without forfeiting any games or the whole season.

I like this a lot. I really think 9 man can help schools who are on that line. Or if it can be a place to play for two years for a larger grade to come up to bump back to 11 man and schools wouldn't have to modify their fields.

Class A: Top 24 teams per enrollment. Using the current classification numbers that would be 593 and above. Four districts of 6 teams. 16 team playoff

Class B: 32 teams (enrollment of 592 to 184) Four districts of 8 teams. 16 team playoff

Class C1: 48 teams (enrollment of 170-78) 8 districts of 6 teams. 16 team playoff.

Class C2 (9 man): 48 teams (enrollment of 75-45) 8 districts of 6 teams. 16 team playoff.

Class D1 (8 man): 65 teams (enrollments of 44-33)

Class D2: 6 man. 65 teams (33 and below)

Teams can opt up if they wish, but can't opt down.

 

[Alum-Ni]

Some interesting proposals:

- 2 hour organized practice 10 weeks prior to the start of a season

- Adding Class B for Girls Wrestling

- Implement Fall evaluation period for Baseball

- Allow use of student managers to practice in basketball

- Adopt 35-second shot clock for Class C1 and C2 beginning in 2024-25

- Allow junior high athletes to compete on high school varsity teams

- Allow Class C and D athletes to participate in more than one sport during a sport season (i.e. football and cross country; track and golf)

-

 

[LooseCannon]

Some interesting proposals:

- 2 hour organized practice 10 weeks prior to the start of a season

- Adding Class B for Girls Wrestling

- Implement Fall evaluation period for Baseball

- Allow use of student managers to practice in basketball

- Adopt 35-second shot clock for Class C1 and C2 beginning in 2024-25

- Allow junior high athletes to compete on high school varsity teams

- Allow Class C and D athletes to participate in more than one sport during a sport season (i.e. football and cross country; track and golf)

-

If baseball is going to keep creeping into Class C and D schools, kids should be able to play baseball and run track. But that's the track guy in me.

 

[Alum-Ni]

Some interesting proposals:

- 2 hour organized practice 10 weeks prior to the start of a season

- Adding Class B for Girls Wrestling

- Implement Fall evaluation period for Baseball

- Allow use of student managers to practice in basketball

- Adopt 35-second shot clock for Class C1 and C2 beginning in 2024-25

- Allow junior high athletes to compete on high school varsity teams

- Allow Class C and D athletes to participate in more than one sport during a sport season (i.e. football and cross country; track and golf)

-

Stu Pospisil has some thoughts on some of these proposals:

https://omaha.com/sports/high-schoo...cle_66922fd0-5b20-11ee-80a3-bb046b44fcd7.html

Some of the topics for Wednesday’s NSAA classification committee meeting would be radical steps in this state.
Should seventh- and eighth-graders play on high school teams? Should students be able to play two high school sports in the same season?

Should there be a nine-man classification in football? Should more teams be in Class B?

My answers: Yes. Yes. No. Yes.

Times are a-changin' in high school sports, especially in regard to enrollments and student participation. Outside the Omaha and Lincoln areas and the towns near them, the growth areas can be counted on one hand. Getting kids out for sports isn’t the same, regardless of school size.

Middle School Participation: South Dakota long has allowed seventh- and eighth-graders on high school teams in all sports, including football. Not sure that allowance in football would, or should, fly here. But for volleyball, basketball, cross country and track, Olympic sports, why not?

Dual-Sport Participation: It's allowed in all classes in all states that border Nebraska except Missouri. It was brought up a few years ago for Class D only, but that limitation didn't help its advancement.

Already, Elm Creek has submitted a legislative proposal for Classes C and D only. Why not all classes?

Wyoming allows only one sport at a time per season. But when that season is over, the student can finish the season in a second sport.

Nine-Man Football: As for nine-man football, it's been proposed before and is rooted in some eight-man schools exceeding the enrollment cutoff for playoff eligibility at 47 boys.

There will be legislative proposals to raise the eligibility cutoff to 51 or 55 boys while creating a third class of eight-man ball. Which would mean eight classes, counting six-man, for 280 teams. That could mean a third day of state football finals at Memorial Stadium.

Would NU agree to that? Would the NSAA pay for that extra day of use?

On Class B expansion: "We've never adjusted for the five new schools," Classification Committee Chairman Jon Cerny said at the last NSAA board meeting.

The superintendent at Bancroft-Rosalie was referring to Gretna East, Lincoln Northwest, Lincoln Standing Bear, Omaha Buena Vista and Omaha Westview.

In volleyball and basketball, the 60 largest schools are either Class A or B. Class C1 starts with No. 61. If C1 started with No. 66, Aurora, Omaha Gross, Sidney, Columbus Lakeview and Platteview would be Class B in volleyball and girls basketball. Omaha Roncalli, Alliance, Omaha Gross, Douglas County West and Wahoo would be there in boys basketball.

Douglas County West is the only one of those schools that hasn't been in Class B lately, and the way the Valley community is growing the Falcons could get there in a few years. So it wouldn't be a drastic shift. And it would eliminate the three-team subdistricts in those three sports.

On the proposal deadline: Since Oct. 1 is the deadline for schools to submit legislative proposals, which is now change occurs in the NSAA, here's a suggestion that's long overdue.

A 180-school-day / 12-month sit-out rule for students transferring without a change in domicile.

Four of the six neighboring states have one. Iowa, by state law, has a 90-day rule that matches Nebraska's length. South Dakota has a 45-day sit-out. Odd.

Some provisions from the full-year states:

Colorado: "If a student transfers to a school where his/her/their previous coach is a coach of the current school team, that move will be deemed motivated by athletic consideration. Under provision of this rule, the coach may be a former school coach or a non-school coach."

Wyoming: "Only that legal guardianship which has been established at least 12 months prior to the student's moving is recognized by the WHSAA."

Missouri: "You and your entire family must move to the new residence at the same time prior to attending classes. School discipline follows a student to a new school. Being expelled, or being forced to withdraw, from a school also causes 365 days of ineligibility for a student. You shall become ineligible for 365 days if you transfer to another school for athletic reasons."

If Nebraska's schools consider a longer sit-out period, all those clauses should be incorporated into the rule.

 

[Alum-Ni]

If baseball is going to keep creeping into Class C and D schools, kids should be able to play baseball and run track. But that's the track guy in me.

I like the theory of letting these small school kids dual participate......but I'm not sure how realistic it is. Kids will be overwhelmed with double the practices and the nightmare of trying to schedule two events at the same time.

My kids all did this in JH (XC, Football & XC/VB) and it is tough enough at that level.

 

[LooseCannon]

I like the theory of letting these small school kids dual participate......but I'm not sure how realistic it is. Kids will be overwhelmed with double the practices and the nightmare of trying to schedule two events at the same time.

My kids all did this in JH (XC, Football & XC/VB) and it is tough enough at that level.

Agreed, and missing school would be a huge factor too.

That is why baseball should stay out of the spring and leave it in the summer. But we all know that isn't going to happen.

 

[MacMan92]

I don't know what baseball schedules are like but if you have students running track and playing golf they will be at school a maximum of three days a week from the 1st of April until the end of the year. Let's also remember the students that are most likely to try and do more than one sport are also the same ones that are also in FFA, FCCLA, Music and any other number of activities with big spring time commitments. At some point the benefits of participating in the activity are negated by the amount of time a student is out of the classroom.