Notes from NSAA meeting today

[dream_big_20]

I understand your points, and there are some really good ones in your posts.

I disagree with one thing you mentioned, and it is just personal preference. It has nothing to do with right and wrong.

I believe the goal of any system should be to get the best 8 teams to the State Tournament. Your stance on it being about getting the best regional teams together, fair point. I just don't agree.

With that said, yes there will be some travel requirements. Yes it is expensive to travel or it can be anyway. However, if all we care about is travel expense, we could go to a system where we don't have a State Tournament. We simply crown our regional champions and that's it. Yes it is a stupid idea, but it would save travel expense.

Do you believe the Elite 8 had the 8 best NCAA teams in it this year?
Should Kentucky have another chance to get in even tho they lost in the sub-district round?
Define the 8 best teams...
What is a perceived team that is one of the better ones has to travel to wildcard points from say Wahoo to Chadron and loses? Do we say oh well or was it the Chadron was better?
What is Chadron has to drive to Wahoo? Does that change the thought process?
A lot of the moves seem to favor a section of the state and that does not benefit the goal of NSAA activities!!

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

I understand your points, and there are some really good ones in your posts.

I disagree with one thing you mentioned, and it is just personal preference. It has nothing to do with right and wrong.

I believe the goal of any system should be to get the best 8 teams to the State Tournament. Your stance on it being about getting the best regional teams together, fair point. I just don't agree.

With that said, yes there will be some travel requirements. Yes it is expensive to travel or it can be anyway. However, if all we care about is travel expense, we could go to a system where we don't have a State Tournament. We simply crown our regional champions and that's it. Yes it is a stupid idea, but it would save travel expense.

That's what is was designed to do, not my personal preference. Like I said, outside of the top 2, 3, 4 maybe 5 teams, it just doesn't matter. Not ever,y team has the talent, depth, experience (maybe especially state experience) to do more than upset someone. I would point to Ft Calhoun in C1. Really nice, really well coached, but man, those lights start getting pretty bright. I would guess, and that's all it is as I haven't researched it, that very few teams in C-D win it their first trip. A person I do business with has a kid on a championship team. His 3rd trip in a row. Dad is convinced that 2020, after a lengthy drought, their 3rd place team would have beaten this bunch. So, if the best teams, the only ones with a legit shot are already in with the old method, and it doesn't change the field hardly at all, why put all of the extra burden, cost, and everything else on kids and families? So a bad team occasionally creeps in. So what? They get first round loser shirts and the team that would have replaced them doesn't? BFD. And I would argue that already happens based on your sub state draw. Or your state draw. Using a system as badly flawed as the points system and refusing to seed the teams makes any system sketchy, at best, or horrific at worst. State wrestling is the same way. Not unusual in our state to see the semi final game, match, whatever, be the real championship. You want to go to 10 subs, and 3 wild cards....fine. But the old system was so much easier and cheaper than this monstrosity, and for almost non-existent payoff...crazy only begins to describe it.

 

[ClkTwr2011]

That's what is was designed to do, not my personal preference. Like I said, outside of the top 2, 3, 4 maybe 5 teams, it just doesn't matter. Not ever,y team has the talent, depth, experience (maybe especially state experience) to do more than upset someone. I would point to Ft Calhoun in C1. Really nice, really well coached, but man, those lights start getting pretty bright. I would guess, and that's all it is as I haven't researched it, that very few teams in C-D win it their first trip. A person I do business with has a kid on a championship team. His 3rd trip in a row. Dad is convinced that 2020, after a lengthy drought, their 3rd place team would have beaten this bunch. So, if the best teams, the only ones with a legit shot are already in with the old method, and it doesn't change the field hardly at all, why put all of the extra burden, cost, and everything else on kids and families? So a bad team occasionally creeps in. So what? They get first round loser shirts and the team that would have replaced them doesn't? BFD. And I would argue that already happens based on your sub state draw. Or your state draw. Using a system as badly flawed as the points system and refusing to seed the teams makes any system sketchy, at best, or horrific at worst. State wrestling is the same way. Not unusual in our state to see the semi final game, match, whatever, be the real championship. You want to go to 10 subs, and 3 wild cards....fine. But the old system was so much easier and cheaper than this monstrosity, and for almost non-existent payoff...crazy only begins to describe it.

The team that really stands out in my mind is Sutton about 6 or 8 years ago. Sutton likely had the 2nd best team in the State behind Ravenna. The problem was (if I remember correctly) they lost to Ravenna 3 times that season, the final in Sub-Districts. All were close losses, but they were losses nonetheless. Those losses put Sutton within hundredths of a point below a Wild Card. The Sutton team found themselves attending a Class D-2 District Final in hopes that the Humphrey St Francis opponent would pull off the upset and that loss would close that hundredths of a point gap to get Sutton into Wildcard striking distance. Class C2 Sutton is needing a Class D1 (I believe that year St Francis was D1) upset to get in. Under the current system, this doesn't happen. I like that.

 

[northeastNebraska]

I couldn't disagree more. This dragging kids all over the state is insane and changes very little. The best 5-6 teams still make it to state. Period. The sub-state round is so bizarre with. When I try to explain it to family and colleagues from out of state they just laugh... And I don't disagree with them. The State Tournament was never, ever meant to be about getting the best teams to Lincoln. It was about getting the best teams from each region of the state together. If we're going to move to even less geography (Great idea considering fuel and vehicle prices...) we need, imo, to get rid of all talk of "District", "Sub-District", "Region", what not. It sounds silly.

The terminology needs changed that is for sure.

But Nebraska doesn't need representation from all corners of the state in every class. After seeing HSC boys leading Southwest 48-9 at HALFTIME in the first round of the 2017 state tournament, I was done with the old system.

I don't care if the 8 best teams are in a 3 county radius. Get the best teams there. Right now the system pretty much does that. I still am intrigued by the serpentine idea. But the system we have now is light years better than the old system.

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

If D1 was serpentine last year, D1-2 would have been Dundy County - ,tratton, Hemingford, Bertrand, Kimball, and Pender. So if the #1 hosts the whole tournament, If pender gets hot, has an 8 hour trip (361 miles, ONE WAY) to beat Kimball on Monday, then shocks the host on Tuesday, and beats the Ford on Tursday... You have all the extra expense of meals, motels, an entire week of school missed, and what about the parents and families? Maybe just have the higher seed host? Fine, the Pendragons travel 445 miles to Kimball, 361 miles to Benklemen, and 391 to Hemingford. And "just staying" involves bus rides of 445, 190, and 223 just to get TO the next site. Insane. It's stupid in A, criminally crazy in B, C, D...

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

The team that really stands out in my mind is Sutton about 6 or 8 years ago. Sutton likely had the 2nd best team in the State behind Ravenna. The problem was (if I remember correctly) they lost to Ravenna 3 times that season, the final in Sub-Districts. All were close losses, but they were losses nonetheless. Those losses put Sutton within hundredths of a point below a Wild Card. The Sutton team found themselves attending a Class D-2 District Final in hopes that the Humphrey St Francis opponent would pull off the upset and that loss would close that hundredths of a point gap to get Sutton into Wildcard striking distance. Class C2 Sutton is needing a Class D1 (I believe that year St Francis was D1) upset to get in. Under the current system, this doesn't happen. I like that.

If their schedule fell apart so badly there is nothing to say it couldn't. Was it D2 girls that had a #6 not qualify for sub state one of these years. But again, they weren't going to win it. A 24 pt loss in the District Final hardly lifts confidence even if they had played really close earlier. That was a really nice team but even then I kind of doubt if they beat any of the semi-finalists comparing their schedules. Or Ponca, Stanton, or Twin River for that matter. The only one where they'd have been a clear favorite against was Johnson-Brock. I think they would have been a 6 or 7 seed. Like today, they had their chance to play their way in, anyway, right?

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

The terminology needs changed that is for sure.

But Nebraska doesn't need representation from all corners of the state in every class. After seeing HSC boys leading Southwest 48-9 at HALFTIME in the first round of the 2017 state tournament, I was done with the old system.

I don't care if the 8 best teams are in a 3 county radius. Get the best teams there. Right now the system pretty much does that. I still am intrigued by the serpentine idea. But the system we have now is light years better than the old system.

Here we will part ways. There is nothing "better" about imposing cost, burden, etc on kids and families. I could care less where the teams come from either, but punishing everybody involved for such little effect, and it does seem to be miniscule, is crazy. To the best of my knowledge we are the ONLY state that puts little to no thought into geography. You'd have felt better if Southwest's replacement battled to a 38-17 slugfest? ;-) There was actually a worse one in D2, so I get it. But you've had 30 point wins the last two years so I don't think it's solved everything either, and again, I just think the ask is too high. But I also think we should play out all 8 places too, at least in the smaller classes.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

What I can say, is this is what the schools want in a overwhelming majority SO do you want it changed for you Because the schools voted this and like it, Do want big government to take over and do how they want or are you okay with freedom and votes still count for something ???

 

[Yossarian23]

Just to be clear, the proposal wasn't for a statewide serpentine. So some of the examples being thrown out are not representative of what "could happen". There would have been a geographic component to it.

 

[saluno22]

Just to be clear, the proposal wasn't for a statewide serpentine. So some of the examples being thrown out are not representative of what "could happen". There would have been a geographic component to it.

I was going to say the same thing. It sounds like they are just combining pairs of subdistricts and seeding accordingly into two brackets with winners of those two brackets (12 total) advancing to district finals along with 4 wild card teams.

 

[bballcoach15]

I was going to say the same thing. It sounds like they are just combining pairs of subdistricts and seeding accordingly into two brackets with winners of those two brackets (12 total) advancing to district finals along with 4 wild card teams.

 

[ClkTwr2011]

If their schedule fell apart so badly there is nothing to say it couldn't. Was it D2 girls that had a #6 not qualify for sub state one of these years. But again, they weren't going to win it. A 24 pt loss in the District Final hardly lifts confidence even if they had played really close earlier. That was a really nice team but even then I kind of doubt if they beat any of the semi-finalists comparing their schedules. Or Ponca, Stanton, or Twin River for that matter. The only one where they'd have been a clear favorite against was Johnson-Brock. I think they would have been a 6 or 7 seed. Like today, they had their chance to play their way in, anyway, right?

Logan View/Scribner Snyder a few years ago as well. Every one of their losses were to teams that qualified for the State Tournament, and (I believe) all of their losses came to teams from higher classes. The sub-district was loaded up, and they were left home. They were clearly one of the 8 best teams in the State, but it didn't matter.

The current system doesn't let that happen.

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

Logan View/Scribner Snyder a few years ago as well. Every one of their losses were to teams that qualified for the State Tournament, and (I believe) all of their losses came to teams from higher classes. The sub-district was loaded up, and they were left home. They were clearly one of the 8 best teams in the State, but it didn't matter.

The current system doesn't let that happen.

And again, why does that matter? They would get beat by those teams AT state as well. Or maybe we just need to have a mediocre team play better teams often enough that eventually they win? You will never, ever get the "8 best". It MIGHT be 8 of the 10 best, instead of 6-7. Meh. BFD. I could care less whose kid gets the first round loser shirts. You honestly think every team that wins in sub-state is better than the team they beat? Or better than all of the teams that played someone better? Using the massively flawed power points virtually guarantees 'that. And since no system will ever be perfect, I'm always going to argue behalf on what's the best thing for kids and their families. All of this extra expense, time, and everything else is completely pointless and unnecessary.

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

Just to be clear, the proposal wasn't for a statewide serpentine. So some of the examples being thrown out are not representative of what "could happen". There would have been a geographic component to it.

Thanks. I was told that it would mimic Class A. I still think even combining 2 Subs you'll run into the same problem (possibly) of stacking teams. Also the last 2 subs out west will cover a massive geographic area.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

Thanks. I was told that it would mimic Class A. I still think even combining 2 Subs you'll run into the same problem (possibly) of stacking teams. Also the last 2 subs out west will cover a massive geographic area.

agree. Like I said and to clarify I like the system that has sub districts and has 12 sub champs then 4 wildcard and reseed district finals. I believe this gives the best chance for the best teams to make it to state tournament and has only one potentially long travel date. Also takes care of stacked districts

 

[Llama57]

And again, why does that matter? They would get beat by those teams AT state as well. Or maybe we just need to have a mediocre team play better teams often enough that eventually they win? You will never, ever get the "8 best". It MIGHT be 8 of the 10 best, instead of 6-7. Meh. BFD. I could care less whose kid gets the first round loser shirts. You honestly think every team that wins in sub-state is better than the team they beat? Or better than all of the teams that played someone better? Using the massively flawed power points virtually guarantees 'that. And since no system will ever be perfect, I'm always going to argue behalf on what's the best thing for kids and their families. All of this extra expense, time, and everything else is completely pointless and unnecessary.

So making the state tournament doesn't matter, got it... I think the kids & families would rather a very good team have a shot at making state rather than some average team who's record is inflated because of the geographical footprint they play in.
If it doesn't really matter, why is there even a state tournament?

 

[liltoad_99]

The biggest difference is you could have Sacred Heart make 2/3 trips to Crawford. Or Kimball to Mead. Insane. Not political, factual. Cost of travel simply cannot be ignored. The burden on schools, and most importantly families must be eased. I don't know about you, but gas prices more than doubling has taken a huge bite out of our budget. Not to mention time lost on busses, increased exposure to danger, sickness...it just doesn't make sense. I think these crazy ideas, besides changing who's kid gets to get a first round loser T shirt, comes from people who think 45 minutes is a long road trip... How about this: We place teams in 12 sub-districts based on geography, play the closest 2 winners in a district finals, take the next 2 point card teams (A rotten system but a whole different argument) and have a state tournament? What is this "stacked" sub-district? That C2 with NC? 2 did make it. 3rd place and a one and done? You think LHNE would have done any better? Not. You are still getting the best teams. In D1 the finals would have been a District final rematch. No biggie. They both still qualify. If that's a deal where the horrible "power points" determine the matchup, Loomis stays home. Crazy. In fact in D1, the old system has exactly the same field with one exception. Ansley-Litchfield (On paper a better team) loses in the first round instead of Mead. All we did was waste Gas...

This is completely false. As the author of the proposal...

Geographic? Or Serpentine? My understanding was that it would mimic Class A. Was that not correct? If it's "geographic" any change would be merely cosmetic. First round loser shirt. It's all everyone but 2, 3, maybe 4 teams can reasonably expect. Don't even get me started on the arbitrary 180 miles bs. 178 we drive. 182 we only drive a mere 90 miles one way. That makes zero sense. Not fair to either team. Either play in between or let the higher seed host. Or have a 12 sub, 6 district with 2 wild cards to qualify. Wonder why nobody comes up with that idea. lol.

As the author of the proposal I can assure you that you don't understand. The idea was 6 districts geographically based. Then at seeding each district would be serpentined into two sub-districts based on points. In the west for example, a district could have 8 teams and then seeded into two sub-districts. In volleyball these 2 sub-districts could be played in 1 day, so make less travel.

I've also looked at the idea of 5 districts to be serpentined into two sub-districts, and two predetermined sub-districts...one from the western part of the state and the other in another part of the state.

The current system that's been in place for a few years has made things much better than it used to be. That doesn't mean we can't tweak it and improve it. In 2021/2022 we've had a lot of the top teams make it to district finals. What I believe shouldn't happen is a sub .500 team making a district final because they were top seed in sub while the neighboring sub-district has 3 teams over .750. Tough situation that I'd like to try improving but it's a million times better than when I was in school.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

This is completely false. As the author of the proposal,

As the author of the proposal I can assure you that you don't understand. The idea was 6 districts geographically based. Then at seeding each district would be serpentined into two sub-districts based on points. In the west for example, a district could have 8 teams and then seeded into two sub-districts. In volleyball these 2 sub-districts could be played in 1 day, so make less travel.

I've also looked at the idea of 5 districts to be serpentined into two sub-districts, and two predetermined sub-districts...one from the western part of the state and the other in another part of the state.

The current system that's been in place for a few years has made things much better than it used to be. That doesn't mean we can't tweak it and improve it. In 2021/2022 we've had a lot of the top teams make it to district finals. What I believe shouldn't happen is a sub .500 team making a district final because they were top seed in sub while the neighboring sub-district has 3 teams over .750. Tough situation that I'd like to try improving but it's a million times better than when I was in school.

The current system I believe guarantees the best teams at least a district final, regardless if they are in a stacked district, wouldn't you agree?

 

[liltoad_99]

Do you believe the Elite 8 had the 8 best NCAA teams in it this year?
Should Kentucky have another chance to get in even tho they lost in the sub-district round?
Define the 8 best teams...
What is a perceived team that is one of the better ones has to travel to wildcard points from say Wahoo to Chadron and loses? Do we say oh well or was it the Chadron was better?
What is Chadron has to drive to Wahoo? Does that change the thought process?
A lot of the moves seem to favor a section of the state and that does not benefit the goal of NSAA activities!!

I believe the effort was made to get the best 8 teams to the elite 8. Hence the seeding of teams across 4 regions and breaking up the 4 best teams into separate regions, and the next 4 teams...., and so on...

No one complains when it comes to driving for football playoffs, yet people complain when it comes to volleyball and basketball....

 

[liltoad_99]

The current system I believe guarantees the best teams at least a district final, regardless if they are in a stacked district, wouldn't you agree?

No it doesn't guarantee that. It's close though.

There are a number of times that two top 10 teams are placed in the same sub-district in the preseason format. The team that loses that matchup isn't always as in as you might think. Everyone is going to play tough teams at state, but the idea is that if you get to that tournament you have a chance...if you get left at home because you lost to #1 by 4 in sub-districts and were the team that didn't get to a district final because 3 sub-district winners came from blow the top 20 and didn't have a top 20 team in their sub, it's hard to stomach.

In the end, there will never be a perfect format, just as the point system isn't perfect, and just as teams way out west can't help that they have to play teams 2-3 times sometimes (no one else to play). All we can do is look at finding ways to try having the best 8 teams play at state....if that's the goal. That's my personal goal, but not the goal of everyone...I understand that.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

No it doesn't guarantee that. It's close though.

There are a number of times that two top 10 teams are placed in the same sub-district in the preseason format. The team that loses that matchup isn't always as in as you might think. Everyone is going to play tough teams at state, but the idea is that if you get to that tournament you have a chance...if you get left at home because you lost to #1 by 4 in sub-districts and were the team that didn't get to a district final because 3 sub-district winners came from blow the top 20 and didn't have a top 20 team in their sub, it's hard to stomach.

In the end, there will never be a perfect format, just as the point system isn't perfect, and just as teams way out west can't help that they have to play teams 2-3 times sometimes (no one else to play). All we can do is look at finding ways to try having the best 8 teams play at state....if that's the goal. That's my personal goal, but not the goal of everyone...I understand that.

but of the top 8 teams who didnt get to a district final, I just dont see anyone who would have been a top 8 team I understand your reasoning I just dont see enough of a problem to add travel or the seeding of large area districts to change thats all

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

This is completely false. As the author of the proposal...

As the author of the proposal I can assure you that you don't understand. The idea was 6 districts geographically based. Then at seeding each district would be serpentined into two sub-districts based on points. In the west for example, a district could have 8 teams and then seeded into two sub-districts. In volleyball these 2 sub-districts could be played in 1 day, so make less travel.

I've also looked at the idea of 5 districts to be serpentined into two sub-districts, and two predetermined sub-districts...one from the western part of the state and the other in another part of the state.

The current system that's been in place for a few years has made things much better than it used to be. That doesn't mean we can't tweak it and improve it. In 2021/2022 we've had a lot of the top teams make it to district finals. What I believe shouldn't happen is a sub .500 team making a district final because they were top seed in sub while the neighboring sub-district has 3 teams over .750. Tough situation that I'd like to try improving but it's a million times better than when I was in school.

First, I'd burn the rough draft, but that's just me. Second, someone used the word serpentine. Whether a fantasy draft or used to assign teams to brackets, pools, etc, THAT means one thing. Your proposal isn't that thing. "Better"? What? We've had a champion who wouldn't have qualified using geography? A runner-up? If I get more time, I'll see just how much "better" it is. It certainly didn't change anything of significance for D1 Boys this year. Again trading 1, maybe 2, first round losers for two others. As for your example, so what? You think Foreman and Norton wouldn't rather have been in a different era than Ali? Sham running against anyone besides Secretariat? That's life. Again, for 1 team to get a first round loser shirt while inconveniencing EVERYONE hardly seems worth it, to me anyway. Schools are already getting honked or benefiting from the power points anyway...

 

[HighPlainsCoach]

I believe the effort was made to get the best 8 teams to the elite 8. Hence the seeding of teams across 4 regions and breaking up the 4 best teams into separate regions, and the next 4 teams...., and so on...

No one complains when it comes to driving for football playoffs, yet people complain when it comes to volleyball and basketball....

Probably won't shock you, but I complain about driving in football. But also on a Friday is totally different than (possibly) multiple midweek trips, bad weather, etc. But even then, to have Roncalli travel to Scottsbluff, or Hartington to Bridgeport is crazy. No other state does that until there isn't any other option.

 

[ACICOD]

I'll be honest............I haven't read most of the posts in this thread. I don't want to be accused of misreading anything or accusing anyone of anything.

The state tournament the last few years (with our current system of qualifying) has been way better than the previous system was. It is so refreshing to watch competitive #1 vs. #8 games...........every game seems important and doesn't seem to be a foregone conclusion.

It seems to me that the teams that complain about all of the travel are those that either A) know they'll get beat before they go or B) get beat and then complain they could've lost closer to home.

As a competitor and former athlete, I would have loved the opportunity to travel to new, unknown places to play important, big games. Our postseason always felt like we were hitting repeat on a game from the regular season.....still important, yes, but this new system provides that (not always, but often).

Just my two cents. I may have missed the point of this thread, but these are my thoughts.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

I'll be honest............I haven't read most of the posts in this thread. I don't want to be accused of misreading anything or accusing anyone of anything.

The state tournament the last few years (with our current system of qualifying) has been way better than the previous system was. It is so refreshing to watch competitive #1 vs. #8 games...........every game seems important and doesn't seem to be a foregone conclusion.

It seems to me that the teams that complain about all of the travel are those that either A) know they'll get beat before they go or B) get beat and then complain they could've lost closer to home.

As a competitor and former athlete, I would have loved the opportunity to travel to new, unknown places to play important, big games. Our postseason always felt like we were hitting repeat on a game from the regular season.....still important, yes, but this new system provides that (not always, but often).

Just my two cents. I may have missed the point of this thread, but these are my thoughts.

agree 100%

 

[Llama57]

I drive activities bus for our football & boys b-ball teams. We're located in NE part of the state, and we're always excited to travel out west for playoffs or mid-way (2.5-3 hours 1 way) for a district final game knowing that the regular season has more than prepared them for the team we're playing.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

agree for football 2 hours is common on just a regular season game and 2 or 3 hours travel during playoffs at some point is very common

 

[ClkTwr2011]

And again, why does that matter? They would get beat by those teams AT state as well. Or maybe we just need to have a mediocre team play better teams often enough that eventually they win? You will never, ever get the "8 best". It MIGHT be 8 of the 10 best, instead of 6-7. Meh. BFD. I could care less whose kid gets the first round loser shirts. You honestly think every team that wins in sub-state is better than the team they beat? Or better than all of the teams that played someone better? Using the massively flawed power points virtually guarantees 'that. And since no system will ever be perfect, I'm always going to argue behalf on what's the best thing for kids and their families. All of this extra expense, time, and everything else is completely pointless and unnecessary.

I respect your opinion.

It matters because those teams AT State...all but 1 were in different classes. They wouldn't face those teams at State.

 

[ClkTwr2011]

Again, for 1 team to get a first round loser shirt while inconveniencing EVERYONE hardly seems worth it, to me anyway. Schools are already getting honked or benefiting from the power points anyway...

I understand your points, but feel it is worth pointing out how important that First Round Loser T-Shirt is to some of these kids AND to their communities. Many communities throughout the State have become accustomed to qualifying for State Tournaments on a yearly basis. They expect it, and they typically get there. They are disappointed with that First Round Loser shirt, some even embarrassed by it. However, many others (the majority) don't have that situation. While the successful programs endear their State Champions and perhaps Runner-Up teams, the rest of the world do that with their teams that are able to just get there. These communities hold those teams and athletes in high regard.

I am very interested in your suggestions for the Power Point system. You have so much experience with this, and I know you have strong input on this type of thing. However, I am going to start a thread on this. I will appreciate your opinions.