ADVERTISEMENT

NSAA Classification vote

Nov 20, 2015
52
19
8
Stu Pospisil just tweeted out that the NSAA board goes 8-0 on approving new enrollment cutoffs for football.

Class A 425 boys and above
Class B 160-424
Class C1 70-159
Class C2 69 and below
Class D1/D2 splits up eligible schools


He indicated in Class A it is 425 "BOYS". Are they going forward with splitting up classifications on boy/girl counts or am I reading this wrong?

I couldn't find anything on NSAA on this yet.
 
I'm curious where female football players fit into this. Under this proposal it is possible that a football team could have more players than its enrollment number. It is not uncommon in smaller schools to have every boy in the school out for football. Say that happens and then 2 girls play...?
 
OMG did you just say that, this freaking liberal politically correct crap has to stop. YES they get two more players if they have two girls out and it doesnt count on there classification enrollment Holy crap
 
  • Like
Reactions: nenebskers
I'll ask. So how is this better? C1 becomes the old B as far as enrollment goes. If it started today, with old numbers mind you. York & Aurora would be in with say North Bend, Chase County, & David City (not aquinas).
 
I'll ask. So how is this better? C1 becomes the old B as far as enrollment goes. If it started today, with old numbers mind you. York & Aurora would be in with say North Bend, Chase County, & David City (not aquinas).
Talking with people from Aurora, they are coming to C1 in the next few years regardless, but I think you will find only a hand full of schools will change classes. The top two or three B schools will move up to A and the bottom two or three school will move down to C-1 Same for C2 : The bottom 2 or 3 school in C1 will move down to C2 and the bottom 3 to 5 schools in C2 will move into 8-man D1
 
I'm not quite sure what to think. We'll know more in a couple of years. The 8 man cut, IMO, is too low. 63 boys in high school, what is the point of having a 25-30 man roster and playing 8 man football? Whatever. I do REALLY LIKe splitting the boys and girls count. Will these numbers also apply to hoops? If not, why not?
 
So using last years classifications numbers how would the classes look differently?

http://nsaahome.org/textfile/fbl/fbclass.pdf
It is really hard to tell, because to guess is making the assumption that these schools are split 50/50 boys and girls, I think you could guess but if you have 10 more boys or 10 less boys in high school tan girls that could move you up or down a class
 
Stu Pospisil just tweeted out that the NSAA board goes 8-0 on approving new enrollment cutoffs for football.

Class A 425 boys and above
Class B 160-424
Class C1 70-159
Class C2 69 and below
Class D1/D2 splits up eligible schools


He indicated in Class A it is 425 "BOYS". Are they going forward with splitting up classifications on boy/girl counts or am I reading this wrong?

I couldn't find anything on NSAA on this yet.
If you use a 50/50 split of boys and girls and convert these number this is what you have
850 and above class A
849 to 320 B
319 to 140 C1
139 below C2
and 8-man has raised to 94 to be eligible for playoffs
it will just depend on your schools boys numbers
One thing I noticed is we will not have to discuss a separate league for private schools, that will just be called C2, 80% of the states privates schools will be in C2, this is also assuming a perfect 50/50 boy girl split, which I am betting some of theses private schools maybe boy heavy
 
Last edited:
DC West is also Boy heavy. Most public schools would welcome this, but the numbers are misleading.

Omaha AAA Hockey club and DC West have formed a relationship that provides an avenue for a majority of out of state, out of area, boys to attend DC West while playing AAA hockey in Omaha.

So.. what this does is add about 50 to 60 boys to their enrollment.

http://omahaaaahockeyclub.com/school-information/
 
It'll be interesting to see what traditional schools move up or down a class.

I still would like to see C2 or D1 be 9 man football. South Dakota has it and it seems to work.
 
If you use a 50/50 split of boys and girls and convert these number this is what you have
850 and above class A
849 to 320 B
319 to 140 C1
139 below C2
and 8-man has raised to 94 to be eligible for playoffs
it will just depend on your schools boys numbers
One thing I noticed is we will not have to discuss a separate league for private schools, that will just be called C2, 80% of the states privates schools will be in C2, this is also assuming a perfect 50/50 boy girl split, which I am betting some of theses private schools maybe boy heavy

Neumann 106 girls 107 boys
Norfolk Catholic 87 girls 95 boys
Aquinas 87 girls 86 boys
Scotus 118 girls 129 boys
 
In todays world, some freaking liberal will make this boy girl think an issue, saying some how we are labelling kids PUKE

Could be an issue with gender identification. How are they going to determine the counts? Birth certificates? NSAA already rejected that.
 
Northeast...ask the people from C2 schools in the area you are from if they want to play 9 man? 9 man isn't a bad idea, but most C2 schools want to be playing 11 man. May be a great thing for D1 schools. Would Oakland-Craig, Logan View, Ponca, BRLD, ect. want to play 9 man....maybe, but I'm guessing most would not from the conversations I've had about "what if your enrollment dictates 8 man".

It'll be interesting to see what traditional schools move up or down a class.

I still would like to see C2 or D1 be 9 man football. South Dakota has it and it seems to work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImN
didn't even think of this.. Looks like an inviting loophole/lawsuit.

It would be interesting to see the verbiage.
I was being mostly serious. Think about this. Let's say Pleasantvale HS is 9 under on the girls side, 7 over on boys. Or maybe more realistically, 4 under and two over. It doesn't even have to be adult driven. You don't think the right bunch of kids couldn't figure this out. And, mostly, boys would think it was a hoot. 3 decide to "identify" then either "identify back" or simply decide to go out for football and wrestling. You simply can't question. Who are YOU to judge. Maybe if we identify as judgemental? :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: hazard05
I was being mostly serious. Think about this. Let's say Pleasantvale HS is 9 under on the girls side, 7 over on boys. Or maybe more realistically, 4 under and two over. It doesn't even have to be adult driven. You don't think the right bunch of kids couldn't figure this out. And, mostly, boys would think it was a hoot. 3 decide to "identify" then either "identify back" or simply decide to go out for football and wrestling. You simply can't question. Who are YOU to judge. Maybe if we identify as judgemental? :)
Very judgemental, I am, You can call your self what ever you want but whats on your birth certificate you are and will be forever
 
  • Like
Reactions: huskerfan1414
When you say small schools are you referring to 8 man & 6 man schools or C1/C2 schools?
I was saying there are years where the smallest schools in C2 have every boy, or nearly every boy, out for football. I am not as familiar with D1/D2, but I imagine it is more common in those classes.
 
Girls shouldn't be playing football. Period. I was hoping that this boy/girl enrollment thing would put an end to that. All they need to do is say if a girl plays the school has to absorb the full girl enrollment for classification.
EX: Boy enrollment 62 and Girl Enrollment 65. If the football team consists of only boys the school stays C2. If 1 girl (or boy that "identifies as a girl" goes out they have to absorb the 65 and it bumps them up a class from C2 to C1. No school in their right mind would let that happen, which is perfect. It eliminates girls in football, which should have been done long ago anyway.
 
Girls shouldn't be playing football. Period. I was hoping that this boy/girl enrollment thing would put an end to that. All they need to do is say if a girl plays the school has to absorb the full girl enrollment for classification.
EX: Boy enrollment 62 and Girl Enrollment 65. If the football team consists of only boys the school stays C2. If 1 girl (or boy that "identifies as a girl" goes out they have to absorb the 65 and it bumps them up a class from C2 to C1. No school in their right mind would let that happen, which is perfect. It eliminates girls in football, which should have been done long ago anyway.
what bothers me about all of this transgender discussion is we have to change all of these rules for .06% of the population, yes everyone has rights but those rights should not infringe on the rights of others. Second we are having an entire discussion on a football board about what if a girl plays, if one plays or 10 plays doesnt matter they dont count towards your boys enrollment, again why should we change a rule for less than .05% of the players playing football in the united states.
 
Girls shouldn't be playing football. Period. I was hoping that this boy/girl enrollment thing would put an end to that. All they need to do is say if a girl plays the school has to absorb the full girl enrollment for classification.
EX: Boy enrollment 62 and Girl Enrollment 65. If the football team consists of only boys the school stays C2. If 1 girl (or boy that "identifies as a girl" goes out they have to absorb the 65 and it bumps them up a class from C2 to C1. No school in their right mind would let that happen, which is perfect. It eliminates girls in football, which should have been done long ago anyway.
People that coach at a much higher level than you seem to think differently. I certainly hope there isn't a girl at your high school that wants to play. http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nca...at-d-ii-level-or-higher/ar-BBzNx9j?li=BBnb7Kz
 
People that coach at a much higher level than you seem to think differently. I certainly hope there isn't a girl at your high school that wants to play. http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nca...at-d-ii-level-or-higher/ar-BBzNx9j?li=BBnb7Kz
I stand by my comments. Women have no place in football. A kicker doesn't change that. We have a domestic violence problem in our country, specifically with men beating on women. Mixing females into violent sports against men does nothing but add to the issue. Women shouldn't be wrestling men and women shouldn't be playing football against men. Start a female only football league or a female only wrestling league. Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HighPlainsCoach
People that coach at a much higher level than you seem to think differently. I certainly hope there isn't a girl at your high school that wants to play. http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nca...at-d-ii-level-or-higher/ar-BBzNx9j?li=BBnb7Kz
I'm not at all sure that referring to a publicity stunt helps your cause. This reeks of the Katie Hnida debacle. IIRC it might have even cost New Mexico a bowl game. I do know they trotted her out there and the stunt ended in embarrassing fashion. This kind of reverse sexism simply cost some better player with a much stronger leg an opportunity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hailvictors2
I'm not at all sure that referring to a publicity stunt helps your cause. This reeks of the Katie Hnida debacle. IIRC it might have even cost New Mexico a bowl game. I do know they trotted her out there and the stunt ended in embarrassing fashion. This kind of reverse sexism simply cost some better player with a much stronger leg an opportunity.
My point here is that as coaches in Nebraska you shouldn't be saying such sexist things. Either you or Hail. It most likely does not represent your schools.
 
My point here is that as coaches in Nebraska you shouldn't be saying such sexist things. Either you or Hail. It most likely does not represent your schools.
Its his opinion and free speech, they can take that stance if they want. I don't agree but respect the stance completely, You got proven wrong and now your throwing daggers at their backs.
 
My point here is that as coaches in Nebraska you shouldn't be saying such sexist things. Either you or Hail. It most likely does not represent your schools.
The truth is now "sexist"? IF a female could play BETTER than a male, fine. Just being good "for a female" isn't anywhere near enough. That's totally stupid. Watch the the HS film of this girl. I'd estimate there are 75-100 HS kickers in NE that are better. Probably 20-25 below class B. Sheer publicity stunt. I hope it costs this team a game at some point. Just rewards for awful decisions. So, you can take your PC crap and do whatever it is you do, but don't expect me to lie right along with you.
 
Its his opinion and free speech, they can take that stance if they want. I don't agree but respect the stance completely, You got proven wrong and now your throwing daggers at their backs.
Not even close. I am saying if you are in a coaching position in this state, which both of these guys are, you shouldn't be saying things like that. And I am far from PC and a proud Trump voter. You guys just sound like idiots for saying things as above.
 
ADVERTISEMENT