2018-19 Football Changes

[northeastNebraska]

This was considered before the co-op with Milford, but was shot down for some reason. These small towns are always unwilling to merge with their "rivals". It's childish really, the kids have no problems with it it's the parents

It's just dumb. Guarantee if the kids got to vote on it 85% would be for the merger. Kids today talk to everyone and with social media follow everyone and become friends with other kids.

Schools east of Grand Island need to realize how easy they have it. Consolidate and co-op now. Don't put a band aid on a compound fracture. Get ahead of it or be left out.

 

[Artfour3]

This was considered before the co-op with Milford, but was shot down for some reason. These small towns are always unwilling to merge with their "rivals". It's childish really, the kids have no problems with it it's the parents

Are Dorchester and Milford rivals?

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

NSAA still needs to address the advantage private schools have over public schools either by implementing a success factor points system or an enrollment multiplier. Having NC or Aquinas drop to C2 is not good for small schools who don't recruit. Most of their games will be running clock after half with teams just hoping to get the game over without losing players to injury.

Absolutely not. You want to punish anybody, nail the PUBLIC Class C's and D's that are within 20 miles of a Class A/B sized city. That is who really, REALLY benefits from recruiting.

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

BigRedThoughts you are wrong they are right only about 97.5% of the time not 100. just ask them

Really? Ouch... So much for my omnop...uh...omnipres...er...being right.

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

As long as participation numbers are a concern for teams in C1/C2, they should always be allowed to opt down to 8 man, otherwise they end up forfeiting games and seasons. Is it ideal? No. Is it fair for the 8 man teams to have to play C2 size schools that have opted down? No. But....I think you can make it fair by giving those true D1 or D2 teams the "play up a class" bonus points for playing teams that opt down.

This is 6 one way, half a dozen the other. On one hand you have people crying about too many forfeits. On the other hand you have people crying about teams opting down to avoid forfeit. I guess I'm unaware, but has there every been a D1 or D2 team that had their season compromised because they had to play C1/C2 teams that opted down? Has it ever cost a team a playoff birth? Has it ever caused a situation where the C1/C2 team was so much bigger/faster/stronger and deeper that a kid in D1/D2 got seriously injured? If so, please cite a specific example of one of the scenarios above with teams, years, injuries, etc...

Or just not offer the sport. Again, if they play each other, I have zero problems with it. It's when they play much, much smaller schools that I have a problem. Especially since they are allowed to affect the playoff picture.

 

[Suhisabeast]

Are Dorchester and Milford rivals?

Dorchester and Friend are

 

[Big Red Thoughts]

So you are saying the problem is only in Nebraska and some how the other states dont allow this because they dont have this problem, or is the problem of a few schools and now everyones problem by allowing them to opt. and the lesson those schools are learning is that if you are not good enough its okay they will allow you to go down until you can beat someone that is playing in the class they are suppose to be in, how is that fair to those schools. Look at 6-man Harvard is a school with 45 to 50 boys in high school and playing schools and crushing them that only have 25 or less boys and have to play 6-man. Or D1 schools with a boy- girl enrollment of 63 playing school opting down in the 90s or more, If the team in that class loses that game or gets even one kid injured in those games HOW is that fair to the school that is playing in the class the are suppose to be in. The problem of a few schools can negatively effect another school in any way HOW is that fair

Same answer again!!! and guess what?? HighPlainsCoach likes it!! Schools have the ability to opt down and they will make the decision if they feel it is in best interest of kids.

 

[hdendzonecam]

I think going to 9 man is the answer as stated above. A and B are tiny classes, most of the state is C-2 and below. The reality is that we have to cater to smaller schools who are just trying to give their kids opportunities to play football. Play 9 man on a big field and roll with it. A,B,C play 11 man, have D1 (small C-2 and some D1) be 9 man and D2 can be six man. It just takes some courage to embrace the change and move on. I think the transition for teams from 11 man to 9 man would be so much smoother, just drop the tackles and play ball.

Also, when are we going to talk about the problem with the points system rewarding soft schedules? Why does basketball have a different playoff point structure? Unlike basketball, football does not reward tougher schedules when losing to a Division 1 opponent is 36 pts and beating a Division 4 team is 41. Just play an easy schedule and you lock up a playoff spot.

 

[Norman Einstein]

In basketball the school can set their schedule, not so in football.

 

[nenebskers]

I think going to 9 man is the answer as stated above. A and B are tiny classes, most of the state is C-2 and below. The reality is that we have to cater to smaller schools who are just trying to give their kids opportunities to play football. Play 9 man on a big field and roll with it. A,B,C play 11 man, have D1 (small C-2 and some D1) be 9 man and D2 can be six man. It just takes some courage to embrace the change and move on. I think the transition for teams from 11 man to 9 man would be so much smoother, just drop the tackles and play ball.

Also, when are we going to talk about the problem with the points system rewarding soft schedules? Why does basketball have a different playoff point structure? Unlike basketball, football does not reward tougher schedules when losing to a Division 1 opponent is 36 pts and beating a Division 4 team is 41. Just play an easy schedule and you lock up a playoff spot.[/QUOTE

I think going to 9 man is the answer as stated above. A and B are tiny classes, most of the state is C-2 and below. The reality is that we have to cater to smaller schools who are just trying to give their kids opportunities to play football. Play 9 man on a big field and roll with it. A,B,C play 11 man, have D1 (small C-2 and some D1) be 9 man and D2 can be six man. It just takes some courage to embrace the change and move on. I think the transition for teams from 11 man to 9 man would be so much smoother, just drop the tackles and play ball.

Also, when are we going to talk about the problem with the points system rewarding soft schedules? Why does basketball have a different playoff point structure? Unlike basketball, football does not reward tougher schedules when losing to a Division 1 opponent is 36 pts and beating a Division 4 team is 41. Just play an easy schedule and you lock up a playoff spot.

Spot on with that first paragraph! People don't like change but times are different and trending even more.

 

[SPbObRT]

you guys who think we are going to go to 9 man football are probably the same guys thinking Trev was going to take the AD job. sorry people aint going to happen, have chatted with a nsaa rep and he has said the same.

 

[nenebskers]

you guys who think we are going to go to 9 man football are probably the same guys thinking Trev was going to take the AD job. sorry people aint going to happen, have chatted with a nsaa rep and he has said the same.

I don't think anyone, at least me, believe it would ever happen. Most all say that in our posts.

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

Same answer again!!! and guess what?? HighPlainsCoach likes it!! Schools have the ability to opt down and they will make the decision if they feel it is in best interest of kids.

I would just ask that if it's such a no-brainer, why are some so defensive about it? Yeah, roughing up schools that actually belong in the class and affecting playoffs they aren't eligible is GREAT...for THEIR kids. What's wrong with playing the other big schools who can't or won't field 11 man teams? Why not let Bryan opt to C1? Can wrestling coaches start opting down a really bad wrestler to lower weight classes? I could make a much better safety argument for that, when looking at some of the upper weight matches I've seen. To me, it's a lot more about adult's egos than anything educational. I'm just saying that the ability to opt down to find someone to bully needs to be removed. Especially in light of the increased enrollment allowances.

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

you guys who think we are going to go to 9 man football are probably the same guys thinking Trev was going to take the AD job. sorry people aint going to happen, have chatted with a nsaa rep and he has said the same.

You're correct, but that's a bad analogy. Trev was the odds-on favorite for the job, so to think that most rational people didn't think he would, at least, be offered the job, isn't quite right. What is the objection to 9 man? I'm not for it, nor do I think it's a cure-all, but what was the NSAA's reasoning? And if their answer was "the "schools", why are the schools against it?

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

I think going to 9 man is the answer as stated above. A and B are tiny classes, most of the state is C-2 and below. The reality is that we have to cater to smaller schools who are just trying to give their kids opportunities to play football. Play 9 man on a big field and roll with it. A,B,C play 11 man, have D1 (small C-2 and some D1) be 9 man and D2 can be six man. It just takes some courage to embrace the change and move on. I think the transition for teams from 11 man to 9 man would be so much smoother, just drop the tackles and play ball.

Also, when are we going to talk about the problem with the points system rewarding soft schedules? Why does basketball have a different playoff point structure? Unlike basketball, football does not reward tougher schedules when losing to a Division 1 opponent is 36 pts and beating a Division 4 team is 41. Just play an easy schedule and you lock up a playoff spot.

I don't know anything about 9 man, but what you say looks ok. I do totally agree about the playoff points. I'd make it 40 for losing to a D1, and 40 for beating a D3. Especially considering the lack of parity, or growing disparity, or whatever between good and bad. I'd even put a collapsing punishment for bad losses. 20 point margin costs you a point, 35+ costs 2. No reward for running it up, but an easy way to seperate a 12-7 loss from a 70-12.

 

[UnionStreet77]

I don't know anything about 9 man, but what you say looks ok. I do totally agree about the playoff points. I'd make it 40 for losing to a D1, and 40 for beating a D3. Especially considering the lack of parity, or growing disparity, or whatever between good and bad. I'd even put a collapsing punishment for bad losses. 20 point margin costs you a point, 35+ costs 2. No reward for running it up, but an easy way to seperate a 12-7 loss from a 70-12.

Oversimplification here but 9 man is essentially 11 man with the tackles dropped. Same size field and different rules are mostly just what you would expect with 2 less on the line (i.e. 5 on the line at snap instead of 7). I've thought for a while it would be a better solution instead of declaring 8 man for those teams in the borderlands of 8 vs 11 because the only real commitment is playing with 9 instead of 11 on the field. Of course the drawback is whether there would be enough competition nearby like some schools that debate 6 vs 8 have now. It would work great in northern Nebraska where crossing into South Dakota is an option for a team to fill a gap in their schedule. Other places I don't think it would be attractive. Which is probably why it wouldn't happen.

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

Oversimplification here but 9 man is essentially 11 man with the tackles dropped. Same size field and different rules are mostly just what you would expect with 2 less on the line (i.e. 5 on the line at snap instead of 7). I've thought for a while it would be a better solution instead of declaring 8 man for those teams in the borderlands of 8 vs 11 because the only real commitment is playing with 9 instead of 11 on the field. Of course the drawback is whether there would be enough competition nearby like some schools that debate 6 vs 8 have now. It would work great in northern Nebraska where crossing into South Dakota is an option for a team to fill a gap in their schedule. Other places I don't think it would be attractive. Which is probably why it wouldn't happen.

Thanks. So, a big hassle would be converting 8 man fields and facilities?

 

[UnionStreet77]

Thanks. So, a big hassle would be converting 8 man fields and facilities?

Yes.