Football A Realistic Look at Football Participation Numbers
- Thread starter MacMan92
- Start date
That is the reason why member schools need to really look at the numbers for cut offs. Increase the number for being eligible for 8 man. Teams that don't want to play 8 man can still opt up and play 11 man. All I know is that something has to be done with football in this state. Too many teams are forfeiting games due to lack of participation.
Time for member schools to realize their classification numbers are archaic. This isn’t Nebraska High School Football from the 1980s and 1990s, yet our numbers to determine our class still reflect that. Boys only enrollment was a step in the right direction 2 years ago. Now it’s time to look at raising the number. A committee probably needs to be formed to compare where we are compared to other states and what our participation rate is across the state. Until that happens though, it’s in the hands of individual schools to make tough decisions (co-ops, opting down, cancelled games/seasons, etc.).
Stu is on the right track. There's no magic answer...but something has to done about the problem.
In my opinion -- 9 man solves a lot of the problems. But that opinion is obviously not popular amongst the delegates.
As for eligibility --- schools are in a tough spot. 48 boy count makes you ineligible for the 8 man playoffs...we all know that. But what never gets discussed is the actual participation number that makes you effectively "ineligible" for the 11 man playoffs. That is the issue that nobody talks about.
For instance....let's say a school has a boy count of 50, and a participation number of 22 (which is not uncommon in 2019) That school is, in essence, ineligible for any playoffs, regardless of how they declare. Let's face it....22 football players does not equal success in C2 football for any extended amount of time.
I'd be curious to see playoff roster size for all the classes over a span of the last 10-15 years. I think you'd be shocked to see the results. Football is a game of attrition...more than any other sport....
Schools that tried to make what might have been the "popular" choice by staying put and not opting down...are now seeing the error in their ways. Stu is right -- you can't make a Varsity football team out of freshman and sophomores. You're dancing with the devil -- and it's all going to come crashing down....it's just a matter of when.
I believe there are many factors that deal with this issue . First is the realization that Nebraska is a different state then it was 20 years ago with more people moving from the west to the east and in doing so leaving shells of the towns they once lived in. Second is the unbelievable pressure put on kids at a very young age. Many of the kids simply burn out by the time they hit high school.
Finally there is the health factor. Back in the day we were unaware of the dangers of head injuries and simply played on. Today’s athlete is much more aware of these risks. I might also add that football might not be as important to today’s athletes as was back in the 80’s when I played.
Finally there is the health factor. Back in the day we were unaware of the dangers of head injuries and simply played on. Today’s athlete is much more aware of these risks. I might also add that football might not be as important to today’s athletes as was back in the 80’s when I played.
I agree with everything you said. I also wonder if part of the reason that football proposals have failed in the recent years is because of schools that are currently 8 man don't want some C-2 schools dropping down to 8 man if the number is raised. Everybody wants to be the big fish in the small pond. Nobody wants to be the little fish in the big pond. Schools that are at the top of their respective class in enrollment have a nice advantage over the schools at the bottom of their respective class in enrollment. More kids equals larger roster, larger roster equals more competition for playing time and all of that normally equals better talent.
I am asking this out of ignorance, is this just a 6 man/ 8 man problem? Runningback43 you said "too many teams are forfeiting games." And I agree that even one team having to forfeit games is too many, but are C-2 and C-1 teams forfeiting because they can't compete at 11 man levels? Or are the same teams forfeiting multiple games because of low participation numbers. I am sure if a survey is done across all classes, all participation numbers are down. But I am also sure that success leads to more success so your perennial powerhouses (or current powerhouses) have better participation than the perennial bottom dweller. Or the current "legend" head coach, has better participation numbers than the newcomer taking over the struggling program. My point is, these are complex issues and a "one size fits all" answer isn't going to happen. As smaller schools have to address these issues that are unique to there situation, maybe the better solution is to figure out a way that does not penalize a team that loses out on playing a game with someone who has to forfeit. Just my thoughts.
I think it's mostly a C-2 and D-2 problem. A lot of C-2 schools are afraid to swallow their pride and drop down to 8 man. Same can probably be said about D-2. If they raise the 8 man number, then schools at the bottom of C-2 can make the decision to drop down and be eligible for the playoffs. There is no reason why schools at the bottom of C-2 with good participation numbers couldn't opt up and stay in C-2. North Platte St. Pats is currently doing that and I know that Cambridge did it for a long time. St. Pats is very competitive at the C-2 level. I'm just tired of reading about schools forfeiting games because of injuries and not having enough kids to finish the season. Raise the number and it will become easier for schools to make the decision if they should play 11 man or 8 man.
agree and we all see it but will schools vote to change it
I highly doubt it. Seems to me that some of the 8 man schools don't want to raise the number because they don't want a bunch of C-2 schools dropping to 8 man. I might be wrong in that statement, but that is the vibe I get. Honestly I think a lot of C-2 schools would stay 11 man as long as they had good participation numbers. The problem is that everybody wants to be the big fish in the small pond. If all the schools don't get on the same page though, we're going to continue to have these problems in C-2 especially. Which leads to problems in D-1 with teams opting down and being ineligible for the playoffs.
I agree and its kinda sad for the overall state of Nebraska football
It is sad. A few years ago I had somebody from a community that had been C-1 for years tell me that they were glad their school had dropped to C-2. They thought it would be easier for their kids to compete at the C-2 level than the C-1 level. The good news is that the school I'm talking about hasn't won a state championship in any of the major sports.
Not spending $$ on changing a field to 8 man dimensions for those unable to field an 11 man team.
Thats not a very good agrument for it, because that cost less than $3000 to do Its just something new to try because the current 8-man schools will not raise enrollment
You have a pretty good idea of who is going to be coming out their freshman year. And it is probably known who the current players are. Why can't it be done with projected team numbers? You may be off a kid or two but not very often in a D1 and under sized school. It's not that difficult.
To many ways to cheat to do that, simple fact: Nebraska has one of the lowest 8-man enrollments and more and more forfeits are coming each year, its time to change to count of at least 50 or 52, or the overall state of Nebraska High school football as a whole will be hurt for a very long time Truth in 8 years those who wont vote for it will looking to coop and be crying its to low and their coop and now theyare not eligible for playoffs, So few people can see the writing on the wall or have any sight for the future, most live in the now
Cheat? You're over you better have a damn good reason. A kid or two is no big deal but if you are way over no playoffs that year. I agree about changing something, we were a recipient of a forfeit last week and it sucked. Like Stu said, may have been some cherry picking but whatever. The point is, I bet 2 years ago they knew their numbers were going to be low and should of dropped down. I feel bad for all involved when you are at the bottom as far as kids on your team and try to compete. But mainly I feel for the kids, the ones who are out keep plugging away even tho they get stomped week after week. It's not fair to them.
Schools without issues with their participation rates who will not vote to raise the number are just perpetuating the problem. The “it doesn’t effect me” attitude when it comes to raising the number then whining about having teams on their schedule forfeit is a ridiculous attempt to be self-serving without considering the consequences. For an organization like the NSAA to truly be effective it’s members must look at the big picture and not just their own self interests.
Let's say you have 33 kids on your team this year in C-2. 12 of them are seniors, so that leaves you with 21 going into next season. You have 9 8th graders playing football this year at the Jr. High level. You then project that you will have 30 kids out for football next season. Things look ok for you to stay 11 man in November of 2019. By February you have a family move, they have two sons and now you're down to 28. A couple of freshmen decide not to play next year in May and now you're down to 26. Of the 9 8th graders that you thought would come out when they were freshmen 3 of them decide in May that they don't want to play football. Now you're down to 23 on your roster. Is it possible to play 11 man with 23 on your roster, yes. The biggest problem with a roster that small is that you will not be able to play any JV games during the season which will hurt your program down the road.
Raise the number to 52 for eligibility for the playoffs. I'm willing to bet that the teams like Oakland-Craig, Yutan, Sandy Creek, Stanton, and Cedar Catholic would have opted up to stay in 11 man. Schools like Southern Valley which also came in at 52 would have at least had the option to move down to 8 man and be eligible. Just because you fall under the number doesn't mean you have to play 8 man. You can always opt up. Currently Crofton, St. Cecilia, Bergan and St. Pats all could be eligible in 8 man this year. They chose to opt up and play 11 man.
This, and get away from two year scheduling. Schools are struggling with this and deciding in November of 2019 what your 7th and 8th graders will do in 2020 and 2021 is tough as well as your current freshman class.
Were digging our own hole between the 2 year cycle, making teams declare in November, allowing opting down instead of encouraging opting up, and an 8 man limit that does not align with neighboring states.
I really think that the two year cycle problems could be fixed with moving the 8 man number up. Nut said 50 or 52, I really think we should just jump it up to 52.
Amen! The two year cycle has to go. There can be no reasonable expectation for a school to know in November of 2019 what their numbers will look like in August of 2021.
Spot on. I'd even push it to 55-57. Helps protect schools that have a big class that cycles through and pumps up their enrollment and inaccurately predicts true participation numbers. Like it or not, you're losing the kids that in the past had always felt like they "have" to play football as freshmen, and if you don't get them as freshmen, you're probably not getting them later in high school. Something needs to be done, but doubt it will come from schools voting. Schools mentioned will still opt up if they can. Too many C2 schools with rosters in the 20's, even mid to low 20's.
I believe there is a vote on 56 and 9-man for November by schools but like you said many are scared of competition
How would that work with the other football declaration dates and timelines? Would they just get rid of 8man? or would 9-man replace 11-man C2?
I did not know there was another 9 man proposal this year. If it does get voted on and is passed I'm guessing it will not take effect until the 2022 season. Declarations for 8 man, 11 man and 6 man are due sometime in November.
Therein lies another problem. Schools must declare before any proposals concerning changing the numbers are voted on. Backwards and illogical.
Here is all the school proposals for the upcoming year.
https://secure.nsaahome.org/nsaaforms/viewproposals.php
https://secure.nsaahome.org/nsaaforms/viewproposals.php
I think the two year schedule has to go away also. The NSAA can set the districts and then let the Athletic Directors do the scheduling.
i do not think anyone remembers the nightmare of finding games, do what most states do set the districts and set cross district play District one vs district two and so on, that would make is simple and then your games done, schedules done, one year classification done
How hard is it to set schedules once a year, say in March? I know there's some work involved, but really, cant be that tough.
It's a great argument. Anybody that has ever played 8 man football on a field designed for 11 man knows that it sucks....big time.
Also --- scheme. Anyone that has coached both 8 and 11 man, knows that the similarities end with the shape of the football. Scheme is completely different. Going from 11 to 9, you run your same stuff. Drop off the OT's and go play.
Why is that "The good news"? It isn't like the community had any say over what class they play in. The enrollment classifications are in place, and the school falls wherever it falls.
I guess I don't understand why you say it is "good news" that a school hasn't won a State Championship??
I never said it was a community decision. I said a person in the community told me that. I guess I think it's good news because they have rejected open enrollment kids in order to be in C-2. Of course some of that is hear say and not admissible in a court of law.
