Coach Klein said:

Talking to a Giltner school board member sounds like they were all on board and ready to go. Left the ball in Harvards court

Click to expand...

That’s so wild, on paper they are in better shape to even if it’s only marginally….im not sure what future numbers look like but for now they would of even qualified for 8 man playoffs still(I do realize that’s the mid cycle number) ive followed Nebraska high school sports for 20 years and cant say I’ve ever heard of the Harvard school district before seeing them in this thread

Updated after final results of the girls state tournament

hailvictors2 said:

Consolidation is absolutely a bad thing. Closing a school closes a town. The shift in population to the eastern part of the state is irrelevant. Smaller class sizes are better. I think everyone in the education profession would agree with that.

I also think if you asked Ewing or Shelby or Friend or any of the communities involved in the cooperatives you mentioned above if they would prefer to survive on their own or be dependent on a cooperative they would all say they would prefer to survive on their own. Fact is they need each other right now, so the cooperative works. Maybe that changes down the road and numbers warrant the cooperative dissolves.

Click to expand...

I know in Giltner's situation they are 60+ percent option students right now. As I agree with you in some situations "you close the school you close the town" it would not be that in all of the places.

Subdistrict Championship games (unless noted)

CLASS C1

C1-1 at Lincoln Christian
Lincoln Christian vs. Syracuse

C1-2 at Raymond Central
Raymond Central vs. Wahoo

C1-3 at Fort Calhoun
Fort Calhoun vs. Omaha Concordia

C1-4 at Columbus Scotus
Columbus Scotus vs. Battle Creek

C1-5 at Arlington
Arlington vs. Pierce

C1-6 at North Bend
North Bend vs. West Point-Beemer

C1-7 at Minden
Minden vs. Holdrege

C1-8 at Milford
Cozad vs. Milford
Grand Island Central Catholic vs. Broken Bow
Final: Friday

C1-9 at Gothenburg
Gothenburg vs. Central City

C1-10 at Bridgeport
Bridgeport vs. Hershey
Chase County vs. Ogallala
Final: Friday

=============================

CLASS C2

C2-1 at Johnson-Brock
Johnson-Brock vs. Elmwood-Murdock

C2-2 at Oakland-Craig
Oakland-Craig vs. Wahoo Neumann

C2-3 at Guardian Angels Central Catholic
Guardian Angels Central Catholic vs. Yutan

C2-4 at Crofton
Crofton vs. Ord

C2-5 at Elkhorn Valley
Elkhorn Valley vs. Niobrara/Verdigre

C2-6 at Homer
Homer vs. Humphrey/Lindsay Academy

C2-7 at Cross County
Cross County vs. Sandy Creek

C2-8 at Maywood/Hayes Center
Centura vs. Hastings St. Cecilia

C2-9 at Thayer Central
Thayer Central vs. Twin River
Centennial vs. Southern
Final: Saturday

C2-10 at Gordon-Rushville
Perkins County vs. Bayard

=============================

CLASS D1

D1-1 at Diller-Odell
Diller-Odell vs. Tri County

D1-2 at Pender
Pender vs. Howells-Dodge

D1-3 at Hartington Cedar Catholic
Hartington Cedar Catholic vs. Bloomfield

D1-4 at North Central
North Central vs. Neligh-Oakdale

D1-5 at High Plains
High Plains vs. McCool Junction

D1-6 at Nebraska Christian
Nebraska Christian vs. Newman Grove/St. Edward
Riverside vs. Fullerton
Final: Friday

D1-7 at Superior
Superior vs. Red Cloud

D1-8 at Pleasanton
Pleasanton vs. Ansley/Litchfield
Twin Loup vs. Burwell

D1-9 at Elm Creek
Elm Creek vs. Alma

D1-10 at Southwest
Southwest vs. Arapahoe

D1-11 at Brady
Brady vs. South Platte

D1-12 at Morrill
Morrill vs. Kimball

=============================

CLASS D2

D2-1 at Falls City Sacred Heart
Falls City Sacred Heart vs. Humboldt-Table Rock-Steinauer

D2-2 at Dorchester
Dorchester vs. Omaha Christian

D2-3 at Archangels Catholic
Archangels Catholic vs. Bancroft-Rosalie

D2-4 at Shelton
Shelton vs. Nebraska Lutheran

D2-5 at Silver Lake
Silver Lake vs. Lawrence-Nelson

D2-6 at Wilcox-Hildreth
Wilcox-Hildreth vs. Amherst

D2-7 at Anselmo-Merna
Anselmo-Merna vs. Central Valley

D2-8 at O'Neill St. Mary's
O'Neill St. Mary's vs. Santee

D2-9 at Dundy County-Stratton
Dundy County-Stratton vs. Medicine Valley
Wallace vs. Hitchcock County

D2-10 at Mullen
Mullen vs. Paxton

D2-11 at Leyton
Creek Valley vs. Leyton
Garden County 1, Banner County 0 (forfeit)
Final: Friday (Garden County vs. TBD)

D2-12 at Crawford
Crawford vs. Cody-Kilgore
Hyannis vs. Hay Springs
Final: Friday

Consolidation is absolutely a bad thing. Closing a school closes a town. The shift in population to the eastern part of the state is irrelevant. Smaller class sizes are better. I think everyone in the education profession would agree with that.

I also think if you asked Ewing or Shelby or Friend or any of the communities involved in the cooperatives you mentioned above if they would prefer to survive on their own or be dependent on a cooperative they would all say they would prefer to survive on their own. Fact is they need each other right now, so the cooperative works. Maybe that changes down the road and numbers warrant the cooperative dissolves.

GIRLS

SUBDISTRICTS
C1-1
Lincoln Christian 82, Ashland-Greenwood 18
Syracuse 45, Douglas County West 41

C1-2
Raymond Central 64, Louisville 29
Wahoo 61, Palmyra 35

C1-3
Fort Calhoun 53, Omaha Roncalli 40
Omaha Concordia 62, Malcolm 51

C1-7
Holdrege 46, David City 37
Minden 64, Fairbury 33

C1-8
Cozad 48, St. Paul 38

C1-9
Central City 56, Kearney Catholic 38
Gothenburg 55, Adams Central 49

C1-10
Hershey 50, Chadron 37
Chase County 57, Mitchell 26

=========================

C2-1
Elmwood-Murdock 39, Freeman 25
Johnson-Brock 44, Southern 24

C2-4
Crofton 43, Norfolk Catholic 29
Ord 60, Atkinson West Holt 58

C2-5
Elkhorn Valley 57, Wisner-Pilger 44
Niobrara/Verdigre 56, Elgin/Elgin Pope John 44

C2-8
Centura 53, Maywood/Hayes Center 46
Hastings St. Cecilia 45, Arcadia/Loup City 28

C2-9
Centennial 37, Doniphan-Trumbull 35
Twin River 40, Ravenna 39

C2-10
Perkins County 64, Gordon-Rushville 40
Valentine 56, Bayard 28

=========================

D1-1
Diller-Odell 55, Nebraska City Lourdes 51
Tri County 49, Weeping Water 33

D1-2
Howells-Dodge 54, Lyons-Decatur Northeast 25
Pender 74, Walthill 31

D1-7
Red Cloud 49, Blue Hill 33
Superior 55, Deshler 33

D1-10
Arapahoe 53, Cambridge 38
Southwest 62, Wauneta-Palisade 31

D1-11
Brady 51, Sandhills Valley 26
South Platte 38, Sutherland 27

D1-12
Kimball 61, Hemingford 30
Morrill 62, Potter-Dix 24

=========================

D2-5
Lawrence-Nelson 55, Meridian 36
Silver Lake 55, Harvard 13

D2-10
Mullen 53, Arthur County 24
Paxton 45, Sandhills/Thedford 39

Back to the original post

Arcadia-Loup City
Blair - Will Lansman
Blue Hill- Matt Carroll
Cozad
Crete- Josh Littrell
Crofton
Deshler- Hayden Delano
Fairbury
Grand Island
Heartland Lutheran
Kenesaw- Parker Trumble
Lourdes Central Catholic
Medicine Valley- Scott Trimble
Norris
North Central
Omaha Bryan- Matt Storm
Papio LaVista- Sean McLaughlin
Ponca
Southern Valley- Coy Gideon
St Paul
Wausa
West Holt
York- Matt Brackan
Wayne

hailvictors2 said:

***I think the most important thing to remember about cooperatives is that they are NOT meant to be long-term, though they can be if both schools are happy in the arrangement. They are meant to help each school build their numbers within the program back up to a point they can live on their own again. Cooperatives are not supposed to be a step towards consolidation. They are meant to be the opposite, and they can easily act that way if you do the cooperative right. If people go into it thinking its the first step towards consolidation then they might as well skip the cooperative and go right to consolidating. Consolidation should be the LAST resort.

Click to expand...

Was it meant to be long term for EMF? or Summerland? or Shelby-Rising City? Because they are thriving together and I bet 95% of the kids in those districts are happier that they are together than if they were alone. We are not seeing schools start a co-op, leave the co-op after 5-6 years and be successful.

It CAN be a step towards consolidation because if numbers are small in the elementary, the co-op can lead to to more buy-in from the families and build towards consolidation. Consolidation isn't a bad thing, especially with the current shift of population to the the far eastern part of the state.

EndzoneView said:

So giltner voted it down too?

Click to expand...

Talking to a Giltner school board member sounds like they were all on board and ready to go. Left the ball in Harvards court

Alum-Ni said:

I thought the intent of Standing Bear and LNW was to always keep those schools at Class B level?

Click to expand...

They built small to get the bond through, but once the demand is there, the buildings can expand to Class A size. Lincoln Northwest is already at 1,050, which is 50 students over the 1,000 capacity.

Here is the numbers per grade for each school

Northwest
9 - 238
10 - 328
11 - 261
12 - 190
Total - 1,017

Standing Bear
9 - 258
10 - 266
11 - 107
12 - 0
Total - 631

In a way, cooperatives are a business. Some business deals are easy, some are not. There are multiple different types of cooperatives. Probably the easiest type is when school A has a program and school B does not. School A agrees to accept students from school B on their teams and they continue to practice at school A, play under school A's name, and wear school A's uniforms. School A is responsible for travel arrangements to and from games, entrance fees, referee bills, etc... Its easy. They were going to pay that stuff anyway, having school B along for the ride doesn't change that.

Its also super easy when both schools have a program and one is sound and the other is not. The school that has the sound program doesn't need the other program to survive... so they can make demands. If school B doesn't like they can go find someone else.

Where it gets a lot harder is when school A and school B have existing programs AND both programs are struggling in one way or another....participation numbers, success, finances, etc. The reality is they need each other for long term sustainability, but usually one of the partners wants to be the alpha. The logical thing to do is keep everything proportionate. If one school contributes 65% of the players then that school should be responsible for 65% of the costs, 65% of the travel, 65% of the spectator supervision....in return they should host 65% of practices, 65% of games, and keep 65% of profits. Where I think schools get hung up is when they both want to keep some form of an identity. I've never understood the need for a new name and new uniforms. Just keep the names and wear existing uniforms. In this case, maybe you wear Hampton uniforms when you play in Hampton and Heartland uniforms when you play in Henderson. Split it 50/50 on the road. Save on cost. Make sure the cooperative is going to work before you go spending $3,000-$5,000 on new uniforms for 1 sport.

***I think the most important thing to remember about cooperatives is that they are NOT meant to be long-term, though they can be if both schools are happy in the arrangement. They are meant to help each school build their numbers within the program back up to a point they can live on their own again. Cooperatives are not supposed to be a step towards consolidation. They are meant to be the opposite, and they can easily act that way if you do the cooperative right. If people go into it thinking its the first step towards consolidation then they might as well skip the cooperative and go right to consolidating. Consolidation should be the LAST resort.

This was maybe 5-6 years ago. I remember Emerson-Hubbard and Pender had been cooping track for a few years. I believe they were the Raptors. Pender approached Emerson-Hubbard only a few weeks before the deadline and asked to do a football coop when they realized there numbers were low and were going to have a difficulttime fielding a team in the next cycle. Emerson-Hubbard turned it down. Then two montgs later Emerson-Hubbard realized they would be short on numbers for girls sports the next school year and approached Pender about cooping all sports, including boys. Pender turned it down. Some of these schools have no foresight.

Coach Klein said:

It sounds like both boards couldn't get on the same page for mascot, jerseys, practices, games etc, But they will visit it again for the 26-27 season. That might be a little too late sounds like some kids and parents are going to jump ship before then.

Click to expand...

So giltner voted it down too?

nenebskers said:

It amazes me how school boards and administration wait so long to address problems that are so obvious to the outside. Many lack foresight or are unrealistic with reality.

Click to expand...

It’s too bad for the kids but the districts get what they deserve. Smart families will bounce

Coach Klein said:

It sounds like both boards couldn't get on the same page for mascot, jerseys, practices, games etc, But they will visit it again for the 26-27 season. That might be a little too late sounds like some kids and parents are going to jump ship before then.

Click to expand...

It amazes me how school boards and administration wait so long to address problems that are so obvious to the outside. Many lack foresight or are unrealistic with reality.

EndzoneView said:

Hopefully it’s just a matter of working out the details and not Harvard actually feeling like staying on their own is what’s best for the kids?

Click to expand...

It sounds like both boards couldn't get on the same page for mascot, jerseys, practices, games etc, But they will visit it again for the 26-27 season. That might be a little too late sounds like some kids and parents are going to jump ship before then.

EndzoneView said:

Hopefully it’s just a matter of working out the details and not Harvard actually feeling like staying on their own is what’s best for the kids?

Click to expand...

Details can be worked out later. Some schools get so fixated on one thing. You don't have the numbers to field a teams, there aren't any other options.

I feel for the current juniors who actually want to play sports their senior year. That environment can't be fun for kids. Glad there is a May 1 list for situations like this.

Hopefully it’s just a matter of working out the details and not Harvard actually feeling like staying on their own is what’s best for the kids?

nenebskers said:

Yep. Mount Michael, DC West, Ashland-Greenwood, and Omaha Concordia are the next likely to grow to B. Maybe someday Lakeview, Adam's Central, or Wahoo. It's just so hard for any non metro school to have sustained growth. Of course always have the Aurora, Gross, Roncalli, types that teeter back and forth. Also years away but maybe Louisville, Fort Calhoun, or Lincoln Christian at some point too.

Click to expand...

Mount Michael is opting down to C1 I believe. They are already big enough for Class B

nenebskers said:

Very well maybe their goal. The cutoff is 425. For 25/26 Lincoln Northwest is at 431. Lincoln Standing Bear is at 339. Certainly looks like Northwest will be above the 425.

Click to expand...

I hope for both Standing Bear and Lincoln Northwest they are able to stay in class B for another cycle while they continue working to get their program off the ground and running. Class A has some winnable games at the bottom end, but always difficult to compete when you are one of the smaller programs in a class.

highschoolfootballnut said:

Harvard voted NO That is amazing
Girls BB record of 1-20
Boys BB 0-21
Volleyball 1-24
6-man Football 0-8
total record of 2 wins and 73 loses
It cant really get worse WTH

Click to expand...

If I was a parent I’d send my kids elsewhere.

Coach Klein said:

Sounds like Harvard voted no for the Co-op for 25-26 year. Talks will continue for 26-27 season. Kind of a bummer that nothing is happening this year both schools will have low numbers in athletics next year.

Click to expand...

Harvard voted NO That is amazing
Girls BB record of 1-20
Boys BB 0-21
Volleyball 1-24
6-man Football 0-8
total record of 2 wins and 73 loses
It cant really get worse WTH

Sounds like Harvard voted no for the Co-op for 25-26 year. Talks will continue for 26-27 season. Kind of a bummer that nothing is happening this year both schools will have low numbers in athletics next year.