NSAA Legislative Proposals

[Alum-Ni]

The deadline for schools to offer proposals for changes to NSAA legislation was October 1. Some of the proposals are listed below

DISTRICT 1 PROPOSALS
1. Cross Country Classification Alignment for Class B and C
Author: Jay Staehr, Aurora
Set classification limits for Classes B and C in cross country similar to numbers used for Class A for years. Schools with enrollments of 850 and above would be Class A; enrollments of 320 to 849 would be Class B; enrollments of 125 to 319 would be Class C and the remaining schools registered for cross country would be Class D.

Rationale: Setting total enrollment for each class will eliminate the high discrepancy from smallest to largest schools for Cross Country. This rationale has been used in Football for years and has worked well for classes A and B. This proposal would help to eliminate the schools that are outliers in the classification and do not naturally match up well with the rest of their prospective class, making classifications less spread out from top to bottom, leveling the playing field for all schools. When a school only needs 4 runners to score it is important that schools are not put at a disadvantage due to their size in comparison to the other schools within their class. Cross Country is not like any other sport. What works best for other sports is not necessarily what works best for Cross Country. Evening out the discrepancy from smallest to largest schools eliminating outlier sized schools in a class. As schools are built in our state and rural schools continue to get smaller and urban schools continue to grow the way that we classify our sport will need to continue to change as well. Our traditional Class B and Class C communities are changing and this can be a way to help level the playing field for many schools.

----------------------

2. Eliminate Legislative Commission and Representative Assembly
Author: Zach Limbach, Lincoln East
This proposal is to eliminate the NSAA Legislative Commission and Representative Assembly Requirements of the NSAA Constitution 1.5 Legislative Procedure and Authority.

Proposals for change(s) in the Constitution and Bylaws passing three or more districts at the second district meetings shall be forwarded to each member school for a referendum vote. In order to become a valid part of the Constitution and Bylaws, the following must occur: 1) The proposal must be ratified by a simple majority of the member schools taking part in the referendum vote; and 2) Thirty-five percent of the total membership of the Association must take part in the referendum vote.

Rationale:
--NSAA Constitution & Bylaw proposal changes, which are the fundamental foundations of the NSAA,would now require a majority vote of the membership.
--Allows each member school the ability to evaluate proposals and cast a vote based on what is best fortheir students (one school, one vote).
--With the efficiency of electronic voting, all NSAA member schools can participate in the final step of thelegislative process.
--Would produce a cost-savings of $30,000 which could be distributed to each of the six district managing committees to offset NSAA District Music expenses and/or to help fund other student-based programs.
--A con would be the elimination of the ability to amend a proposal or to bring a new proposal forward from the floor at Representative Assembly.

------------------------

3. Open Gym/School Facilities Skill Development During the School Year, Out of Season Period
Author: Zach Limbach, Lincoln East
This proposal would remove restrictions on coaches during open gym/facility time during the school year, out-of-season period. This will allow coaches to work on skill development with an unlimited number of students at one time. This could allow coaches and students to continue developing their team and skills within an education-based environment, focused on the well-being of the student.

------------------------

4. Permit "Dual Participation"
Author: Dan Masters, Lincoln Lutheran

To permit students to participate in more than one sport per season. Rationale: Many states across the U.S. allow students to participate in more than one sport per season. This proposal would not be required...individual schools can be more restrictive and say "no".

--------------------------

5. 180-Day Transfer Rule
Author: Matthew Uher, Lincoln Northeast

This proposal is to address the current hemorrhage we have with parents/athletes abusing the purpose of the transfer eligibility guideline. The initial intent of the 90-day VARSITY ineligibility guideline was to encourage athletes/families to truly consider/weigh options of transferring to another school, and promote or maintain home domicile. However, 90 days is not phasing or even a worry for students and families moving from school to school after they have exhausted their May 1 transfer. The 90-day rule does not currently apply/impact the spring season. Implementing a 180-day ineligibility guideline may assist schools from losing students and families to the "open enrollment" policies of school districts. The idea of this proposal is to make the non-May 1 transfers or second/third transfers truly consider the purpose of the transfer and not make the move about athletics/activities. This 180-day proposal wold bring back the original intent of the 90-day rule where families had to truly consider the true purpose of the transfer. The purpose of a transfer should not be to move to a school for athletic/activity gains. Parents would have to "prove" a domicile change to void the 180-day ineligibility rule for VARSITY athletics/activities.

---------------------------

6. Class A & Bowling: Serpentine District Competition
Author: Matthew Uher, Lincoln Northeast
This proposal is to address the current situation with how Bowling Districts are set geographically. This initial method of setting Bowling Districts was relevant when Bowling was starting due to the number of teams competing initially. Now, there are 30 teams competing in Class A and assigning districts using the geographical method fails to balance the districts properly. If we can implement the Serpentine method for determining Bowling Districts, we will be able to balance the teams and provide a better opportunity for the best 8 teams to qualify for the State Competition.

-----------------------------

7. District Meeting: Addition of a 3rd Meeting Prior to Representative Assembly
Author: Matthew Uher, Lincoln Northeast

This proposal would allow for better discussion and understanding of proposed Bylaw or Activity Manual changes. The insertion of another meeting would allow ADs who have submitted a proposal to discuss and debate potential proposals prior to the six districts voting to move proposal to the Delegate Assembly. This would also allow for ALL Districts to analyze potential changes since the prior January Meeting does not allow for any kind of amendments or changes to proposals introduced in November.

-------------------------------

8. Eliminate From the Floor Proposals (All Proposals Must Be Submitted by the October Date)
Author: Matthew Uher, Lincoln Northeast

Removal of the from the floor proposals will eliminate the misinformation and proposals being submitted without proper discussion and evaluation. The from the floor proposals also fail to have ALL member schools being informed of the potential new legislation and undermines the true legitimacy of the process.

--------------------------------

9. Hardship Eligibility Criteria
Author: Lincoln Southeast

This proposal removes language about causing physical harm and adds language about mental health, prioritizing the need to address the students' mental health prior to a request for a hardship waiver. The proposal also removes the need for the determination to be delivered via Certified Mail.

--------------------------------

10. Updated Due Process Procedure Bylaw 1.10
Author: Lincoln Southeast

This proposal streamlines the due process procedures for member school violations by eliminating a hearing officer and clarifies who can file a complaint against a member school. It eliminates the ability of an anonymous person from triggering an investigation of a member school.

---------------------------------

11. Class A District Cross Country Assignments Based on Four Fastest Times
Author: Andrew Sherman, Lincoln Southwest

This proposal would change the district seeding criteria. Instead of the two current fastest times, we propose using the average of a team's four fastest times. By using four races to determine districts, we are more likely to balance them out. This would put more emphasis on the entirety of the season and minimize the benefits to teams that race on extremely flat, fast courses.

---------------------------------

12. Expand Unified Track to Three Divisions
Author: Andrew Sherman, Lincoln Southwest

Expand Unified Track and Field into three divisions: boys, girls, and co-ed. There will be separate qualifiers and awards for each division. Girls are rarely (if ever) able to place or qualify in meets or state. Providing three divisions would help ensure students receive fair and equal opportunities.

 

[Alum-Ni]

13. Unified Exhibition Category at State Journalism
Author: Andrew Sherman, Lincoln Southwest

With the expansion of unified sports and activities and the recent implementation of a unified exhibition category for speech, other activities (Journalism) should also consider adding an exhibition category.

--------------------------------

14. Elimination of Conflict of Interest
Author: Dallas Sweet, Malcolm

Eliminate an unintended bias should a sitting board member be interested in applying for the position of executive director when the position is open.

-----------------------------------

15. Student Managers at Volleyball Practice (Class C)
Author: Dallas Sweet, Malcolm

Make volleyball similar to basketball, and allow managers to have a more effective role in practice and warmups. Many schools are likely currently having managers do things that are technically a violation of the rules. Taken from last years proposal for class D volleyball, which passed: Allowing a junior high student manager to fill this role will allow full scrimmages and effective drills as part of a practice.

------------------------------------

16. Student Managers at Boys and Girls Wrestling (Class C)
Author: Dallas Sweet, Malcolm

Similar to the class D reasoning last year, which is listed below, many smaller roster class C schools could benefit and have safe practices if managers are allowed to be training partners.

Due to decreasing participation numbers in some schools, many teams have limited numbers of players out for sports which make it difficult to have enough high school participants to practice. Allowing 7th and 8th grade managers to participate in practice may allow teams to have adequate numbers of students to have effective practice sessions, drills and scrimmages. Especially in wrestling where there may be a large difference in size of members of the high school team, schools may allow junior high managers who are closer in size to the high school participants to participate in practice which would result in safer practice partners.

--------------------------------------

17. 7th & 8th Grade Students Allowed to Compete on JV Teams Without Sacrificing H.S. Eligibility (Class D)
Author: Matt Asche, Meridian

Low enrollment numbers (Class D1 and D2) combined with low participation numbers, leads to the inability to offer consistent developmental opportunities in competition (JV) for both the schools with low participation numbers and the competing schools. This proposal also would decrease the likelihood of a school offering JV tournaments to fill last minute openings due to cancellations resulting from low participation numbers. This proposal does not add any additional travel or costs to the NSAA or member schools.

-------------------------------------

18. No other competitions on the Thursday of District Music Contests
Author: Jason Weber, Milford

Reserve Thursday of NSAA calendar Week 42 for District Music competition only. Do not allow other NSAA competitions (regular season) to be scheduled on this day. District Music is the largest NSAA event based on the number of participants. Most students started in band or music in Elementary school. By having scheduled contests during District Music does not allow all of these students to participate.

----------------------------------------

19. Adjustment of 8-Man Classification Number for Fall of 2026
Author: Caleb Armstrong, Tri County (co-author: Lee Schneider, Clarkson)

By raising the cutoff for 8-man classification number from 47 to 55, it is a proactive measure to help offset the growing issue that is low participation across the state. The enrollment number of a school is not an accurate measurement of the number of football participants a school potentially has. It also helps to keep the incentive of a school to be eligible for their respective class playoff system. With the enrollment of non-metro or non-Lincoln area schools consistently shrinking, it has started to put more pressure on schools to determine if they should stay 11-man or go to 8-man. Also, by raising the number, it helps to protect schools so they are not forced to play an 11-man schedule with an 8-man roster because they want to stay eligible.

------------------------------------------

20. School Balance Redistricting
Author: Waverly

As the population of Nebraska continues to shift eastward, this proposal more evenly distributes member schools into the six legislative districts. Equal distribution based on student population presents many challenges based on the geography of Nebraska. While this proposal does not bring an exact balance, it creates a more equal distribution of both schools and students, while continuing to account for geography.

Currently, the makeup of the 6 NSAA legislative districts are as follows:
District 1 - 53 schools and 17,031 students
District 2 - 91 schools and 41,868 students
District 3 - 55 schools and 6,170 students
District 4 - 59 schools and 10,400 students
District 5 - 24 schools and 2,055 students
District 6 - 27 schools and 3,354 students

In order to balance the number of schools and the number of students in each of the 6 NSAA legislative districts, this proposal would redistribute the number of schools and the number of students as follows:
District 1 - 50 schools and 23,116 students
District 2 - 48 schools and 29,703 students
District 3 - 57 schools and 6,361 students
District 4 - 49 schools and 6,149 students
District 5 - 52 schools and 9,106 students
District 6 - 53 schools and 6,260 students

 

[Alum-Ni]

DISTRICT 2 PROPOSALS
1. Allow Baseball Teams to Play a Jamboree Game
Author: Dustin Deterding, Ashland-Greenwood

Currently the only opportunity for players to face live hitting or live pitching is if they face their own teammates in the 2 and a half weeks leading up to the official start of the season. This proposal would allow for a competition against an outside school. The benefits of competing against another school are far greater than competing in a scrimmage situation.

---------------------------

2. Basketball Contest Limitations (Class B, C)
Author: Jason Palmer, Auburn

This proposal would allow for more flexibility in scheduling, without adding any more total contests than what is already allowed. Teams that do not have two reliable tournaments each year will able to add single contests or even play in shootouts where you could potentially play more than one game with no real bracket in place. Currently, if you do not play in the two tournaments you do not have much flexibility in finding replacement games. Shootouts are more common in other states and making a change would allow schools to find additional games to supplement their schedule without the need for something with a bracket.

Additionally, many of our surrounding states do not limit contests with tournaments as a part of their rules for contest limitations. Iowa allows 21 total contests with the possibility of 22 contests if the school is adding the 22nd game to assist another school in filling that school's schedule. Iowa does not allow games between Christmas and New Years. Missouri allows for 26 total contests. Kansas currently allows for 20 total contests with the possibility of 21 if a school participates in a tournament where they have to play four games. Kansas is said to be expanding to 23 total games beginning next school year.

In summary, this proposal allows schools to fill their schedule with any combination of games, tournaments, etc... so long as you don't exceed 24 games (exception of play-in game).

------------------------------

3. Proposed Update of NSAA Bylaw 7.7.2 Part F and 7.7.10 - Music
Author: Jon Mauro, Bellevue West

Accompanists and directors have come to rely on the ease and practicality of iPad use in the classroom, on the stage, and at District Music Contest. Music on the iPad is copied music. District Music Contest authorities have permitted the use of iPads.

Our proposal does two things:

1) Makes digital copying and Ipad use legal for District Music Contest
2) Equates digital copying with hard copying (for use in ring binders). Accompanists may then use either format as they choose.

------------------------------

4. Use of Student-Managers at Wrestling Practice
Author: Erich Warner and Tyler Siecke, Blair

New girls wrestling programs, small schools, and light athletes in larger schools have a difficult time finding partners to practice with. Allowing 7th and 8th grade managers to participate in practice may allow teams to have adequate numbers of students to have effective practice sessions, drills and scrimmages. States such as South Dakota and Minnesota currently allow 7th and 8th graders to participate on high school wrestling teams with no increase in injuries to their athletes compared to states that only allow high school students to participate. Where there may be a large difference in size of members of the high school team, schools may allow junior high managers who are closer in size to the high school participants to participate in practice which would result in safer practice partners.

---------------------------------

5. Wrestling Specific Workouts
Author: Tyler Siecke, Blair

Beginning in the 2025-26 school year, boys and girls wrestling coaches are permitted to increase the number of offseason practice participants from 4 to 8 (57%) wrestlers for sport specific training (drilling, situations, live). This increase would bring the boys and girls wrestling teams closer to the current percentages allowed for other sports.

The goal is to keep to keep the emphasis in wrestling on the school program as much as possible by allowing more opportunities for our coaches to work with student-athletes. We feel that the limit of 4 participants is an arbitrary number assigned to wrestling and does not reflect the same percentage of a team as it does for other sports.

---------------------------------

6. 8-Man Football Eligibility (55) and Creation of D1, D2 and D3 Classifications
Author: Lee Schneider, Clarkson & Isaac Frecks, Alma (District 5)

This proposal has two major components that would affect the classification and playoff structure of 8-man football. First, this proposal would move the eligibility number for 8-man football to 55 boys in the three-grade count. Currently, that number sits at 47. Second, this proposal would change the 8-man classification structure from a two-class division to a three-class division. 8-man teams would be classified in one of three classes (D1, D2, or D3). *Would use the largest 32 schools for class D1 and separate the remaining schools equally between classes D2 and D3. Every attempt would be made to make sure a D3 school is not scheduled against a D1 school due to the overall school size, thus protecting D3 schools and not causing a group of ineligible schools to participate in D6.

-----------------------------------

7. Adjustment of 8-Man Classification Number for Fall 2026
Author: Lee Schneider, Clarkson

By raising the cutoff for 8-man classification number from 47 to 55, it is a proactive measure to help offset the growing issue that is low participation across the state. The enrollment number of a school is not an accurate measurement of the number of football participants a school potentially has. It also helps to keep the incentive of a school to be eligible for their respective class playoff system. With the enrollment of non-metro or non-Lincoln area schools consistently shrinking, it has started to put more pressure on schools to determine if they should stay 11-man or go to 8-man. Also, by raising the number, it helps to protect schools so they are not forced to play an 11-man schedule with an 8-man roster because they want to stay eligible.

----------------------------------

8. Waiver Period Renewed After Gaining Second Year Cycle Eligibility
Author: Lee Schneider, Clarkson & Isaac Frecks, Alma (District 5)

We are making this proposal because the mobility rate of a school district can fluctuate considerably from year to year. Currently a school that is playing 8-man football and was under the cutoff number in the previous classification period is granted a one-classification waiver period to still be eligible for playoffs. However, if a school is over the cutoff number after their waiver they become ineligible for playoffs the following classification period. The ineligible school is able to become eligible for playoffs in the second year of the classification period if they are below the cutoff number in year two.

This proposal would allow a school that becomes eligible in their second year of the classification period to regain their one-classification waiver to still be eligible for the playoffs. If we grant a school a waiver if they are under the cutoff number in year one of a classification period we should also grant a waiver to a school that becomes eligible for playoffs in the second year of the classification period.

-----------------------------------

9. Hardship Eligibility Criteria
Author: Fort Calhoun

This proposal removes language about causing physical harm and adds language about mental health, prioritizing the need to address the students' mental health prior to a request for a hardship waiver. The proposal also removes the need for the determination to be delivered via Certified Mail.

------------------------------------

10. Update Due Process Bylaw 1.10
Author: Fort Calhoun

This proposal streamlines the due process procedures for member school violations by eliminating a hearing officer and clarifies who can file a complaint against a member school. It eliminates the ability of an anonymous person from triggering an investigation of a member school.

--------------------------------------

 

[Alum-Ni]

11. Class A Football Scheduling Proposal
Author: Scott Anderson, Fremont

Class A is divided into two districts (A1 & A2) for scheduling purposes. District A1 is the top half of Class A schools based off of their final end of regular season wildcard points from the previous two years averaged together. If there is an odd number of teams in Class A, the total number will be divided by two and then rounded up to the next even number to ensure an even number of teams are in District A-1.
District A2 is the remaining Class A schools based off of their final end of season wildcard points from the previous two years averaged together. Schools that were not in Class A previously will still use the average of their wildcard points from the previous two years in the class that they played in. If a school only has one year of football, they will use the wildcard points from that year as their number.

24 schools will qualify for the playoffs every year. All of the schools in A-1 will qualify every year and the remaining spots in the Class A playoffs will be filled by schools from District A-2 based upon that year's final wildcard point standings. The remaining teams that did not qualify for the Class A playoffs are then matched up to play a bowl game with schools being matched up to play in order of wildcard points finish. Team 25 will play team 26 and so on until all schools have been assigned a bowl game.

----------------------------------------

12. Golf Cart Availability for Coaches at District and State Golf (Class A)
Author: Keith Maly, Millard North

All head and assistant coaches in Class A boys and girls golf would be allowed to use a golf cart at district and state if they so choose. Currently coaches have the option to use a cart at every tournament except for districts and state. This proposal would give the coach the option to use a cart if they so choose during district and state competition. The ability to use a cart would allow coaches to be able to contact and coach their athletes in a much more timely manner. Currently on foot, it is impossible to get to an athlete that is 1/4 or 1/2 mile away in less than 10 minutes. This proposal would also allow coaches to get water or other items to their players that they need in a timely fashion.

--------------------------------------

13. Outside Participation for Boys & Girls Bowling
Author: Keith Maly, Millard North

Include a new bylaw to allow bowling athletes to outside participate in a similar manner that swimming and diving athletes do, but only in USBC certified bowling leagues and USBC certified singles and doubles tournaments. Bowling athletes may not participate in outside team-based tournaments.

Bowling Outside Participation. During the school sport season of bowling, a student may, after fulfilling all requirements, practices, and competitions of the school bowling team, practice and/or compete as an individual participant in an organized USBC youth certified bowling league, USBC youth certified singles or doubles tournament, and bowling-related skill clinics under the conditions listed below.

A) Priority shall be given to all school team practices and competitions. Should a non-school practice/competition be in direct conflict with the school scheduled practice/competition, the school practice/competition shall take priority. Prior approval by the school administrator may grant an exception to a student to participate in the non-school bowling league if in direct conflict with the school program.

B) No school time shall be missed to compete, practice, or travel to the site of such non-school bowling competition unless the absence is approved in advance by the school administrator.

C) A school shall not replace its bowling program with any non-school bowling program.
With the increasing cost of lane rental for school practices, many teams have had to reduce the number of practices that they have each week. There are students who are currently choosing to not bowl in NSAA High School Varsity Bowling due to the fact that they would have to give up league and tournament participation. This limits their potential to earn scholarship points for college and visibility to collegiate coaches.

------------------------------------

14. Class Caucus Criteria
Author: Millard Public Schools

Replace approved ruling 1.5.4.2.1 (b) with the following: Class Caucus proposals affecting member school and NSAA finances, must include a plan to account for such costs. If the Class overwhelming supports the proposal, recognizes and accounts for the increased cost, then the proposal will be allowed to be submitted through the class caucus legislative process.

------------------------------------

15. Eliminate Legislative Commission and Representative Assembly
Author: Chad Zimmerman, Millard Public Schools

This proposal is to eliminate the NSAA Legislative Commission and Representative Assembly Requirements of the NSAA Constitution 1.5 Legislative Procedure and Authority.

Proposals for change(s) in the Constitution and Bylaws passing three or more districts at the second district meetings shall be forwarded to each member school for a referendum vote. In order to become a valid part of the Constitution and Bylaws, the following must occur: 1) The proposal must be ratified by a simple majority of the member schools taking part in the referendum vote; and 2) Thirty-five percent of the total membership of the Association must take part in the referendum vote.

Rationale:
--NSAA Constitution & Bylaw proposal changes, which are the fundamental foundations of the NSAA,would now require a majority vote of the membership.
--Allows each member school the ability to evaluate proposals and cast a vote based on what is best fortheir students (one school, one vote).
--With the efficiency of electronic voting, all NSAA member schools can participate in the final step of thelegislative process.
--Would produce a cost-savings of $30,000 which could be distributed to each of the six district managing committees to offset NSAA District Music expenses and/or to help fund other student-based programs.
--A con would be the elimination of the ability to amend a proposal or to bring a new proposal forward from the floor at Representative Assembly.

--------------------------------

16. Class A Football Scheduling
Author: Rob Locken, Omaha Central

Using the two-year power point averages, class A schools will be placed into four districts using the serpentine method. The district champion of each of the four districts would automatically qualify for the play offs and receive a district champion plaque. The top 12 power point teams at the end of the regular season will advance to the playoffs. Each of the 12 qualifying schools will receive a plaque for qualifying for the playoffs. No change is being sought for Class A classification for football. Schools with male enrollment over 425 will be impacted by this proposal, unless they decide to opt-down. Teams would receive 7 assigned contests through the proposed 4 district serpentine method. The final two games would be assigned using a two-game priority list submitted by each Class A school. The priority list would give schools an opportunity to ensure rivalry games, in-district games, out of state games and like competition.

----------------------------------

17. Scoring Monitors at Class A District and State Golf
Author: Rochelle Rohlfs, Omaha Marian

Remove Score Monitors for Class A Boys and Girls Golf Districts and State. Scoring monitors are difficult to find for both Districts and State tournaments. They actually add a level of confusion for the golfers who have done the partner-check system all season long. The scoring monitor golf carts could be used for coaches instead (this is another proposal).

----------------------------------------

18. School Balance Redistricting
Author: Omaha Westview

As the population of Nebraska continues to shift eastward, this proposal more evenly distributes member schools into the six legislative districts. Equal distribution based on student population presents many challenges based on the geography of Nebraska. While this proposal does not bring an exact balance, it creates a more equal distribution of both schools and students, while continuing to account for geography.

Currently, the makeup of the 6 NSAA legislative districts are as follows:
District 1 - 53 schools and 17,031 students
District 2 - 91 schools and 41,868 students
District 3 - 55 schools and 6,170 students
District 4 - 59 schools and 10,400 students
District 5 - 24 schools and 2,055 students
District 6 - 27 schools and 3,354 students

In order to balance the number of schools and the number of students in each of the 6 NSAA legislative districts, this proposal would redistribute the number of schools and the number of students as follows:
District 1 - 50 schools and 23,116 students
District 2 - 48 schools and 29,703 students
District 3 - 57 schools and 6,361 students
District 4 - 49 schools and 6,149 students
District 5 - 52 schools and 9,106 students
District 6 - 53 schools and 6,260 students

--------------------------------------------

19. Open Gym/School Facilities Skill Development During the School Year, Out of Season
Author: Jeremy VanAckeren, Papillion-LaVista South

This proposal would remove restrictions on coaches during open gym/facility time during the school year, out-of-season period. This will allow coaches to work on skill development with an unlimited number of students at one time. This could allow coaches and students to continue developing their team and skills within an education-based environment, focused on the well-being of the student.

 

[Alum-Ni]

DISTRICT 3 PROPOSALS
1. Hardship Eligibility Criteria
Author: Bancroft-Rosalie

(see same proposal above)

---------------------------------

2. Simultaneous Participation in Two Sports During a Season
Author: Rod Peters, Bancroft-Rosalie

No school shall register more than one varsity team per sport (delete "and no student shall participate simultaneously in more than one sport per season").Eliminate the language restricting students from simultaneously participating in two sports during a sports season.

Simultaneous participation is allowed under the rules of the National Federation of State High Schools (NFHS), which sets rules and regulations for high school sports. Missouri is the only surrounding state that restricts simultaneous participation. Allows local school board to set athletic participation policy for their schools.

----------------------------------

3. Updated Due Process Procedure Bylaw 1.10
Author: Bancroft-Rosalie

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

4. School Balance Redistricting
Author: Elgin

(see similar proposal above)

------------------------------------

5. 8-Man Football Eligibility 55 and Creation of D1, D2 and D3 Classifications
Author: Corey Uldrich, Hartington-Newcastle (Lee Schneider, Clarkson & Isaac Frecks, Alma)

(see similar proposal above)

-------------------------------------

6. Adjustment of 8-Man Classification Number for Fall of 2026
Author: Corey Uldrich, Hartington-Newcastle

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

7. Adjustment of 8-Man Classification Number for Fall of 2026
Author: Hartington-Newcastle

Same as similar proposal above but sets the eligibility number for 8-man football at 50 boys.

----------------------------------

8. Class D1/D2 Football Playoff Host Sites
Author: Corey Uldrich, Hartington-Newcastle (Casey Loomis, Pleasanton)

Fort he first, second, quarterfinal and semifinal games, the higher seed will host. This proposal would mirror what is happening in Classes A through C2. Teams are rewarded for having a successful season and earning the right to host playoff games on their home field.

------------------------------------

9. Junior High Golf Participants at High School Practice
Author: Corey Uldrich, Hartington-Newcastle

A school may permit 7th and 8th grade students to practice with high school teams, allowing for the sharing of practice times, locations and coaches. This would give schools who struggle to find additional golf coaches for their students the ability to use the same coaches for students in both the junior high and high school. Because of the non-contact nature of golf, having students in grades 7 and 8 would not put them in any kind of physical harm. This would fall in line with the 2023-2024 legislative change that track and field made.

------------------------------------

10. Volleyball Competition Points
Author: Corey Uldrich, Hartington-Newcastle

This proposal would change the competition point values for "TWO OR THREE DAY TOURNAMENTS". It would split "TWO OR THREE DAY TOURNAMENTS" into two smaller subsets.

"TWO OR THREE DAY TOURNAMENTS (3 or less matches)" would have a point value of 3 for scheduling purposes.
"TWO OR THREE DAY TOURNAMENTS (4 or more matches)" would have a point value of 4 for scheduling purposes.

In an 8-team conference tournament, schools could be scheduled to play one match a day for 3 days of their tournament. They are required to count those 3 matches as 4 scheduling points simply because they are played over multiple days. If they played those same 3 matches over 3 different days outside of a "tournament" format, their scheduling points would be counted as 3 points.
Schools are not gaining any advantage playing in a 2/3 day tournament that plays 3 matches or less (and only using 3 of their competition points). Some 2/3 days tournaments play 5+ matches, but one that plays just 3 matches should not be counted in the same bucket of competition points.

-----------------------------------

11. Waiver Period Renewed After Gaining Second Year Cycle Eligibility
Author: Corey Uldrich, Hartington-Newcastle (Lee Schneider, Clarkson & Isaac Franks, Alma)

(see similar proposal above)

----------------------------------

12. Adjustment of 8-Man Classification Number for Fall 2026
Author: Amp Ferg, Pender (Lee Schneider, Clarkson)

Increase 8-man eligibility number from 47 to 55.

-------------------------------------

13. Football Classifications
Author: Kyle Schmidt, Plainview

Raise eligibility number for 8-man football to 60.

32 teams in A
32 team sin B
Remaining teams with boys enrollment above 60 will be Class C (51 teams)
Teams eligible for 8-man (119) divided into three classes of 40

A, B, C would be 11 man classes
D1, D2, D3 would be 8 man classes
D6 will be any schools enrollment 27 and below
D1,D2,D3 would move to a 9 game season with 16 teams going to the playoffs
Championship Monday D1, D2, D3
Championship Tuesday A, B, C

There are currently 13 schools ineligible for the playoffs, 7 of those playing 8-man. There are currently 17 teams that are in their exempt period in 8-man football. With trends continuing the number of ineligible schools is going to grow. With the proposed changes there would be 120 teams eligible for 11 man and 119 teams eligible for 8-man, and 37 eligible teams for 6-man. That would allow there to be 40 teams evenly distributed to each class. There are more 8-man and 6-man teams in Nebraska than 11-man teams. Classes should be distributed equally amongst those levels and with the system we have now there are more classes of 11-man so the number of ineligible teams is higher.

-------------------------------------------

14. NSAA District Wrestling Realignment (Class D)
Author: Kyle Schmidt, Plainview

After 64 teams are assigned to class C, the remaining schools will be class D. The western-most schools, making up 25% of all class D will be in the D4 district with the addition of the geographic next closest 6 schools to the west. The remaining schools would be placed in districts by using a serpentine method with returning state points as the main means of assignment. If teams have the same number of returning state points, the school with the most returning state qualifiers will be placed next. If teams have returning qualifiers but no returning points, the team with the greater number of qualifiers would be placed next. If teams are still tied, a draw will be used to determine the team placed next. If team(s) have no returning points and no qualifiers, they will be drawn into the remaining spots to fill the teams in a district. Once the state championship is concluded, no further circumstances will be considered. The school with the most returning state points is placed in district D1, the next most in district D2, the next most in district D3, the next most back in district D3, The next most in district D2, etc., until all teams are assigned.

Another benefit of balancing out the numbers in each district would make it more likely for districts to be hosted in one day.

---------------------------------------

15. State Cross Country Individual Qualifiers
Author: Jason Polk, Wisner-Pilger

This proposal states that at the district cross country meets, if the number of top-15 individuals who are NOT on state-qualifying teams is less than 10, the next fastest individuals would qualify for the state meet until reaching 10 individuals not already on a state-qualifying team. If there are instances where 4 or more (3 or more in class D) individuals from a non-qualifying team qualify, they would run as individuals at state and would not score as a team. Only the top 3 teams from each district would be eligible to score as a team, as is done currently.

 

[Alum-Ni]

DISTRICT FOUR PROPOSALS

1. Hardship Eligibility Criteria
Author: Broken Bow

(see similar proposal above)

--------------------------------

2. Updated Due Process Procedure Bylaw 1.10
Author: Broken Bow

(see similar proposal above)

-------------------------------

3. Eliminate Legislative Commission & Representative Assembly
Author: Ryan Hogue, Kearney

(see similar proposal above)

------------------------------

4. Elimination of Conflict of Interest
Author: Dean Tickle, Loup City

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------

5. Proposed Change in Class C and D Cross Country District Assignments
Author: Brad Braithwait, North Platte St. Patrick's

The goal with a proposed change in Districts for class D is to create an opportunity for the most qualified student athletes and teams to run at State. One method to facilitate this is to incorporate what is being used in class B cross country and a few other sports using seed times and a serpentine method. This, combined with regions, will still be considerate of geographical distance for small schools but perhaps create a better representation of the most qualified schools and athletes. The proposal aims to improve representation of top teams and athletes at State, simplify district assignments, and allow for earlier site announcements, though it may result in slightly increased travel time and expenses. In some cases it could also decrease the travel time and expense.

Schools will be assigned to three geographical (regions) in the State. (outline how the geographic regions are figured). Each geographical region will host two district races. Geographical regions named as East (Districts D1 and D2), Central (Districts D3 and D4) and West (Districts D5 and D6). Districts will be seeded by using teams serpentined on their two fastest times from the season. Total times will only be accepted from varsity races at meets with at least five teams. Schools without full teams will be placed according to the class D cross country survey to balance the number of athletes in each District race in the geographic region.

All times must be submitted. The course must be at least 5,000 meters. Coaches submitting team times from Nebraska high school hosted meets and non-Nebraska high schools for the seeding process may only submit times from courses that have been measured to be at least 5,000m utilizing the shortest possible route standard as defined by USATF certification standards. Courses need only be measured once per year prior to any meet being hosted at the site unless route changes have been made to a course, then an additional measurement shall be required along the new route used

The NSAA website will provide a link on the NSAA Cross Country website showing how to correctly measure a course using the shortest possible route standards of USATF.Saturday of NSAA Week 13 is the last day of competition that times may be accepted. Class D coaches must submit their times by Monday before midnight CST of NSAA Week 14. Teams missing this deadline will be seeded by the NSAA at their discretion. Class D schools will need to submit a request to host to the NSAA. The NSAA will select one site in each region to host two districts. Districts will be assigned the Tuesday of Week 14.

----------------------------------

6. NSAA Boundary Committee
Author: Ogallala

(see similar proposal above)

----------------------------------

7. Class D District Final Host in Basketball
Author: Brian Fleischman, Overton

The sixteen (16) teams qualifying for the district final will be matched up using a serpentine method and placed on a 16-team bracket based on wild-card point averages through sub-districts. The higher seeded team will host the district final game. The boys and girls teams winning the district final will advance to the State Championship.

This proposal mirrors what is happening in all other classes. Teams are rewarded for having a successful season and earning the right to host a district final on their home court on a Saturday in front of their home fans and community. This would eliminate the need to find neutral host sites on a Saturday and also find help when hosting neutral site matches.

------------------------------------

8. Class D District Final Host in Volleyball
Author: Brian Fleischman, Overton

In Classes D1 & D2, the 12 sub-district winners qualify for the district final in addition to the four non-sub district winners with the highest wildcard point averages. Those 16 teams will be placed on a 16-team bracket and seeded on wildcard point averages through sub-districts. The higher seeded team will host the district final match. The winner of the district final match will advance to the state championships

This proposal mirrors what is happening in all other classes. Teams are rewarded for having a successful season and earning the right to host a district final on their home court on a Saturday in front of their home fans and community. This would eliminate the need to find neutral host sites on a Saturday and also find help when hosting neutral site matches.

---------------------------------------

9. Dual Sport Participation (Class D)
Author: Cathy Blauhorn, Palmer

How: Students would pick a primary sport and a secondary sport. The student's coaches would come upwith an athlete share plan with the student practicing primarily in their primary area. In order to complywith practice regulations, that student would have a modified make-up practice in the secondary sport.Practices on the day of events would be waived. In the event of a day with two sporting competitions, thedual sport athlete would automatically attend the activity of their primary sport OR in the event of aconference, district, or state activity would attend the most important event. A school could use their owndiscretion and opt out of allowing dual sport participation if desired.

Why: There is often a shortage of participants in small school organizations. There are also students who want to participate in more than one activity per season, who also have the ability to develop more skills by being allowed to participate in more than one sport simultaneously. Many students are already participating in more than one activity per season. Some within schools and some out. (For example, several students already play volleyball and participate in cheer or dance. Some do their in-season sport as well as a traveling team. Others are also participating in rodeo or trapshooting in addition to their NSAA sanctioned sport without any adverse issues in their studies).

All of our bordering states including South Dakota, Colorado, Kansas, and Missouri actively support dual sport participation.

------------------------------------

10. 8-Man Football Playoff Eligibility (55) and Creation of D1, D2 and D3 Classifications
Author: Scott Jorgensen, Paxton

(see similar proposal above)

------------------------------------

11. Waiver Period Renewed After Gaining Second-Year Cycle Eligibility
Author: Scott Jorgensen, Paxton

(see similar proposal above)

------------------------------------

12. Class D1/D2 Football Playoff Host Sites
Author: Casey Loomis, Pleasanton

(see similar proposal above)

 

[Alum-Ni]

DISTRICT FIVE PROPOSALS
1. 8-Man Football Eligibility (55) and Creation of D1, D2 and D3 Classifications
Author: Isaac Frecks, Alma

(see similar proposal above)

-------------------------------

2. Adjustment of 8-Man Classification Number for Fall of 2026
Author: Isaac Frecks, Alma (Lee Schneider, Clarkson)

(see similar proposal above)

---------------------------------

3. Waiver Period Renewed After Gaining Second Year Cycle Eligibility
Author: Isaac Frecks, Alma

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

4. Hardship Eligibility Criteria
Author: Arapahoe

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

5. School Balance Redistricting
Author: Arapahoe

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

6. Updated Due Process Procedure Bylaw 1.10
Author: Arapahoe

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

7. District Dual Championships (Class A, B)
Author: Darin Nichols, McCook

Change the team match limitation to say:
No (BOYS) team representing a member school may participate in more than ten tournament dates, seven duals for class A & B, and eight duals for class C & D in addition to the district and state tournaments.

Add to the Dual State qualifying procedures for class A and B:
The wild card points will be calculated the same as currently in the Wrestling Activities Manual with the exception that the results of all duals up to two weeks prior to the NSAA Dual State Championship shall be used for class A and B.

The sixteen teams with the highest wild card point averages will qualify for the district final. The sixteen teams qualifying for the district final will be placed on a 16-team bracket based on wildcard point averages through districts. The higher seeded team will host the district final dual. The teams winning the district final will advance to the Dual State Championship.

Any class A or B school that qualifies for the District Championship through the wildcard point system and do not wish to compete or is ineligible because of not meeting the minimum number of duals competed in, must notify the NSAA no later than 9:00 A.M. on the Monday of Week 30 of the NSAA calendar (the Monday two weeks prior to the Dual Championships). If a school does not wish to compete, each team in the wildcard point system will move up one spot and the next team would be invited to replace them.

Rationale: This proposal will create a fairer system for teams to qualify for the Dual State Championship. Since we are eliminating one dual during the season and replacing it with the District Championship dual it has little or no affect on cost to the school or NSAA and little or no impact on coach’s and student instruction time.

The reason for this change is that teams may be different at the end of the season than in the beginning. Because of individual weight management plans teams with schools playing football deep into the playoffs are at a disadvantage because of the individuals not beginning their weight decent during the football playoffs. This will help kids cut their weight in a safer and more healthy way. Otherwise, they may resort to drastic weigh cutting measures to make their wrestling weight in a short amount of time after their last playoff game.

Another reason is some teams have adjusted their schedule to have a better chance of qualifying to state. They have gotten out of tougher duals or dual tournaments and scheduled lower-level competitions to take a lesser risk of loss but still earn the same wild card points especially in class B. For example, this past season there was a team in class B that beat the class B Dual State Champions, and they received as many wild card points as anther class B team that beat a class C team that went 0-2 with blow out loses of 63-18 and 53-22 in the class C Dual State Tournament.

The differences in scheduling of dual also create a possibility disparity between earning wild card points. Some teams only schedule 8-10 duals while others schedule 25+ duals (because of dual tournaments).

Injuries and illnesses can also have an impact on teams, and we are trying to get the best teams at the end of the season.

--------------------------------------

8. Awards at State - Trophies
Author: Les Roggenkamp, Southwest

This proposal would increase the team trophies awarded in Girls Golf, Boys Golf, Girls Track, Boys Track, Girls Cross Country and Boys Cross Country to four team trophies at the state championships from the current two trophies awarded.

Currently, we award only two team trophies for state competition in Golf, Cross Country, and Track. In Class C and D Volleyball and basketball we award 4 trophies for their respective sports but yet only honor two at the state level for Golf, Cross County, and Track. The number of teams that compete per class in these three sports is greater than those per classification in Volleyball and Basketball. Allowing up to four trophies recognizes more teams for their great accomplishment and allows more schools to take home and display a source of school pride and accomplishment.

----------------------------------------

9. District Final Host Basketball (Class D)
Author: Les Roggenkamp, Southwest

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------------

10.
District Final Host Volleyball (Class D)
Author: Les Roggenkamp, Southwest

(see similar proposal above)

 

[Alum-Ni]

DISTRICT SIX PROPOSALS
1. Hardship Eligibility Criteria
Author: Alliance

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

2. Updated Due Process Procedure Bylaw 1.10
Author: Alliance

(see similar proposal above)

---------------------------------

3. Add Class D to Softball
Author: Zachary Nesbitt & Steven Posey, Bayard

We propose to add a class to softball by maintaining Class A with 32 teams, adjusting Class B and C to 27 teams each and adding a new Class D with 28 teams. This change will not require an additional day for the state tournament with a shift in the current schedule but will allow more schools and students to compete at the highest level. It will improve the overall experience for participants and generate additional revenue for the state-host school through increased attendance and participation in postseason play.
The increase in the number of teams and players that can participate in the state tournament has several key benefits, both for the individual players, the teams, and the overall sport in the state of Nebraska.

The landscape of high school softball in Nebraska is thriving, with strong participation and a growing level of competition across the state. However, as it stands, the current classification system with Classes A, B, and C creates disparities in competitive balance due to the wide range of school sizes within certain classes. By aligning softball classifications with the structure used in high school baseball, we can create a more equitable playing field, allowing student-athletes to compete against schools of more similar size and talent.

---------------------------------

4. School Balance Redistricting
Author: Mitchell

(see similar proposal above)

---------------------------------

5. 8-Man Eligibility (55) and Creation of D1, D2 and D3 Classifications
Author: Lance Howitt, Potter-Dix

(see similar proposal above)

----------------------------------

6. Waiver Period Renewed After Gaining 2nd Year Cycle Eligibility
Author: Lance Howitt, Potter-Dix

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

7. Class Caucus Criteria
Author: Dave Hoxworth, Scottsbluff

(see similar proposal above)

-----------------------------------

8. Basketball Contest Limitations
Author: Austin Lewis, Sidney

(see similar proposal above)

----------------------------------

9. Adding Eligibility for 8th Graders to Varsity Levels in Class D Schools
Author: Barry Swisher, Sioux County

This proposal would allow class D schools with boy or girl enrollment numbers of 20 or less to use 8th graders on the varsity level in basketball, football and volleyball. This would be similar to NDE Rule 10 which allows 6th grade students to participate in middle school activities if the enrollement for boys or girls in 7th and 8th is 12 or below. Similar to South Dakota, the 8th grade students would be allowed to participate at both middle school and high school levels. This would help increase numbers so games are not being cancelled and more JV games can be scheduled.

We have extremely low numbers which has led to the cancellation of team seasons. If we had 8th graders we would be able to fulfill our schedules and compete at the high school level. It would also let our students who don't have enough for middle school teams to participate as an 8th grader. Schools would have more players so they could compete in JV games which is a problem for small schools as far as playing time and scheduling.

--------------------------------------

10. Additional Tournament Dates for Schools Opting Out of State Duals
Author: Nick Brost, South Platte

Allow teams that are unable to fill 8 weight classes (class D) or 10 weight classes (Classes A, B, C) to schedule additional tournaments and opt out of qualifying for state duals.

ADD: "No team opting out of state duals or girls team representing a member school may participate in more than 18 events" on 3.11.12.3, 3.11.12.4.

Schools that are unable to field a team that would qualify for the state dual meet are handicapped by not scheduling duals. For example, a school that has 4 wrestlers on their team, may choose to not schedule dual meets. Currently, teams with few wrestlers are required to add duals to maximize their schedules, but the teams are not able to be competitive in dual format events.

-------------------------------------

11. Awards at State - Trophies
Author: Nick Brost, South Platte

(see similar proposal above)

-------------------------------------

12. Bonus Points for Playing Teams That have Opted Down in Classification (Class C and D Football)
Author: Nick Brost, South Platte

Add the following to Wild Card Point Criteria:

Add #6. If a Class C1 or C2 team plays a school which has more than 159 boy enrollment, the Class C1 team will receive 2 bonus points for playing a team one classification higher. A Class C2 team in this situation will receive 3 bonus points for playing a team 2 classifications higher.

Change #6 to: 7. If a Class D1 or Class D2 team plays a school which has more than 47 boy enrollment, the Class D1 team will receive 2 bonus points for playing a team one classification higher. A Class D2 team in this situation will receive 3 bonus points for playing a team 2 classifications higher.

Change #7 to: 8. If a Class D6 team plays a school which has more than 27 enrollment, the class D6 team will receive 2 bonus points for playing a team one classification higher.

Schools that are ineligible for playoffs or 2 year exempt in their class should be considered in the class above and teams playing them shall receive the bonus points for playing teams one or 2 classifications above. The number of teams that are ineligible or 2 Year exempt in 2024 are: C1 - 4 (ineligible), D1 - 8 (ineligible), 17 (exempt), D6 - 2 (ineligible), 5 (exempt).

-------------------------------------------

13. Use of Student Managers at Wrestling Practice
Author: Nick Brost, South Platte

During the wrestling season, the only persons allowed to participate in any practice session, drill or scrimmage, are the team members and designated team student managers. A manager is defined as a 7th or 8th grade student in good academic standing who carries out duties for their high school team on a daily basis. These individuals will need to have an Athletic Physical and NSAA Consent Form on file with the school. Any other adult, college student, or alumni may not participate in any practice session, drill, scrimmage, game, or contest in which a school team or an individual who is a member of a school team is involved.

Due to decreasing participation numbers in some schools, many teams have limited numbers of players out for sports which make it difficult to have enough high school participants to practice. Allowing 7th and 8th grade managers to participate in practice may allow teams to have adequate numbers of students to have effective practice sessions, drills and scrimmages. Especially in wrestling where there may be a large difference in size of members of the high school team, schools may allow junior high managers who are closer in size to the high school participants to participate in practice which would result in safer practice partners.

 

[TC53]

Wow. Can't say there isn't a bunch of outside-the-box thinking in those. I see it as a bunch of school people trying to make activities work for their kids. Interested in how some of these will be received.

 

[Alum-Ni]

Pospisil: Could a new scheduling pool proposal solve Class A football's blowout problem?

Housed in Blowout City, Class A needs a new way of scheduling, writes Stu Pospisil. Fremont athletic director Scott Anderson may have an answer with a proposal that would split

omaha.com

Spoiler: Article

Could a new scheduling pool proposal solve Class A football's blowout problem?
by Stu Pospisil, Omaha World-Herald

Housed in Blowout City, Class A needs a new way of scheduling.

Fremont's athletic director may have the first steps toward an answer.

Scott Anderson has a plan, a legislative proposal that the Omaha-area District 2 will consider next month, that would split the class for the state's largest schools into two scheduling pools.

He calls the pools District A1 and A2.

A1 is the top half of Class A schools based on wild-card points from the previous two-year scheduling cycle. A2 is the remainder. A1 would have an even number of schools.

All Class A teams play eight games. The playoffs, expanded in Class A to 24 teams, begin in Week 9.

All A1 teams are in the playoffs. They fill the highest seeds. The remaining playoff teams are the highest in the A2 point standings. The top eight seeds receive a first-round bye (a format the NSAA used in 2020 during the pandemic when all teams qualified in Class A).

A2 teams not qualifying for the playoffs are paired up for Week 9 "bowl games." The two highest-not qualifiers get paired, the next two paired, etc. Allowances would be made for an odd-number of teams or if a game would pair recent opponents.

"I started working on this a year ago after meeting with a group of Class A athletic directors in Lincoln to brainstorm ideas for how we could make changes to the scheduling process to create more competitive matchups throughout the regular season," Anderson said. "This is one of those things that came to me on the drive home."

"I've had some time to solicit feedback from a number of different people and tried to mesh everything together where the top teams don't have to play a meat grinder of a schedule and the lower teams get some relief by not having to play as many games where they go into the game knowing it will be a running clock as soon as halftime is over."

Anderson's plan would form a Class A scheduling committee that would include the NSAA's director of football (Nate Neuhaus), two representatives from the Metro Conference, two from the Heartland Athletic Conference and one for schools not in either league.

If this were approved and implemented for the next cycle, that fifth representative could be for South Sioux City, already in A, probable move-ups Bennington and Elkhorn North and possible move-ups Gretna East, Lincoln Standing Bear and Lincoln Northwest.

Anderson's plan would allow schools to request no more than two rivalry or out-of-state games that have mutual agreement between the schools. Crossover games between A1 and A2, and out-of-state games, would be considered only if it would not leave teams with open dates. If A2 has an odd number of teams, that opens up games against Class B schools.

For each subsequent scheduling cycle,. the plan calls for switching out an undetermined number of low finishers in A1 for high finishers from A2.

I like the essence of Anderson's proposal.

It acknowledges the reality of a widening gap between the top and bottom of Class A. A gap that can't begin to reverse until the NSAA membership is willing to address its transfer rules concurrently with Omaha, Lincoln and Bellevue school districts dealing with their internal competitive inequities.

It does so without changing the classification structure, which would further stigmatize the struggling schools.

We basically know what teams would be in A1, the perennial state qualifiers.

Since statewide scheduling began in 2011, the top teams, based on their percentage of years in the playoffs, are Omaha Creighton Prep, Elkhorn South, Bellevue West, Omaha Westside, Kearney, Millard West, Grand Island, Millard North, Millard South, Omaha North, Lincoln Southwest, Lincoln Southeast, Omaha Burke, Papillion-LaVista, Lincoln East and Norfolk.

All but Southwest, Burke and Norfolk qualified last year. Grand Island, at 0-6, will be hard-pressed to make it this year.

While the NSAA has done well with statewide scheduling, a drawback in Class A is that some natural matchups, in part because of district assignments, don't get played, increasing travel costs and reducing gate receipts.

Lincoln has six schools in Class A. Lincoln High, Northeast, and North Star have eight games outside the city. East has seven, Southeast six and Southwest five.

OPS has nine schools. Bryan has six games outside the Metro. Benson, North, Northwest, South, and Buena Vista have four, Westview three, Burke two and Central one.

Anderson's plan does beg a question.

Although they are assured of being in the playoffs, would the A1 teams nearest to the cutoff with A2 be accepting of losing records? Instead of those teams being 5-5 after the playoffs, a smaller, higher-quality pool of opponents could take those records to 3-7 or 2-8.

"Completely agree with your point on how teams in the middle that qualify for A1 could view this as a negative," Anderson said. "My hope is that they will also take into consideration that the next two years they would have an easier schedule in A2, where they will more than likely be able to even out their overall record."

 

[Mr. Irrelevent]

Pospisil: Could a new scheduling pool proposal solve Class A football's blowout problem?

Housed in Blowout City, Class A needs a new way of scheduling, writes Stu Pospisil. Fremont athletic director Scott Anderson may have an answer with a proposal that would split

omaha.com

Spoiler: Article

Could a new scheduling pool proposal solve Class A football's blowout problem?
by Stu Pospisil, Omaha World-Herald

Housed in Blowout City, Class A needs a new way of scheduling.

Fremont's athletic director may have the first steps toward an answer.

Scott Anderson has a plan, a legislative proposal that the Omaha-area District 2 will consider next month, that would split the class for the state's largest schools into two scheduling pools.

He calls the pools District A1 and A2.

A1 is the top half of Class A schools based on wild-card points from the previous two-year scheduling cycle. A2 is the remainder. A1 would have an even number of schools.

All Class A teams play eight games. The playoffs, expanded in Class A to 24 teams, begin in Week 9.

All A1 teams are in the playoffs. They fill the highest seeds. The remaining playoff teams are the highest in the A2 point standings. The top eight seeds receive a first-round bye (a format the NSAA used in 2020 during the pandemic when all teams qualified in Class A).

A2 teams not qualifying for the playoffs are paired up for Week 9 "bowl games." The two highest-not qualifiers get paired, the next two paired, etc. Allowances would be made for an odd-number of teams or if a game would pair recent opponents.

"I started working on this a year ago after meeting with a group of Class A athletic directors in Lincoln to brainstorm ideas for how we could make changes to the scheduling process to create more competitive matchups throughout the regular season," Anderson said. "This is one of those things that came to me on the drive home."

"I've had some time to solicit feedback from a number of different people and tried to mesh everything together where the top teams don't have to play a meat grinder of a schedule and the lower teams get some relief by not having to play as many games where they go into the game knowing it will be a running clock as soon as halftime is over."

Anderson's plan would form a Class A scheduling committee that would include the NSAA's director of football (Nate Neuhaus), two representatives from the Metro Conference, two from the Heartland Athletic Conference and one for schools not in either league.

If this were approved and implemented for the next cycle, that fifth representative could be for South Sioux City, already in A, probable move-ups Bennington and Elkhorn North and possible move-ups Gretna East, Lincoln Standing Bear and Lincoln Northwest.

Anderson's plan would allow schools to request no more than two rivalry or out-of-state games that have mutual agreement between the schools. Crossover games between A1 and A2, and out-of-state games, would be considered only if it would not leave teams with open dates. If A2 has an odd number of teams, that opens up games against Class B schools.

For each subsequent scheduling cycle,. the plan calls for switching out an undetermined number of low finishers in A1 for high finishers from A2.

I like the essence of Anderson's proposal.

It acknowledges the reality of a widening gap between the top and bottom of Class A. A gap that can't begin to reverse until the NSAA membership is willing to address its transfer rules concurrently with Omaha, Lincoln and Bellevue school districts dealing with their internal competitive inequities.

It does so without changing the classification structure, which would further stigmatize the struggling schools.

We basically know what teams would be in A1, the perennial state qualifiers.

Since statewide scheduling began in 2011, the top teams, based on their percentage of years in the playoffs, are Omaha Creighton Prep, Elkhorn South, Bellevue West, Omaha Westside, Kearney, Millard West, Grand Island, Millard North, Millard South, Omaha North, Lincoln Southwest, Lincoln Southeast, Omaha Burke, Papillion-LaVista, Lincoln East and Norfolk.

All but Southwest, Burke and Norfolk qualified last year. Grand Island, at 0-6, will be hard-pressed to make it this year.

While the NSAA has done well with statewide scheduling, a drawback in Class A is that some natural matchups, in part because of district assignments, don't get played, increasing travel costs and reducing gate receipts.

Lincoln has six schools in Class A. Lincoln High, Northeast, and North Star have eight games outside the city. East has seven, Southeast six and Southwest five.

OPS has nine schools. Bryan has six games outside the Metro. Benson, North, Northwest, South, and Buena Vista have four, Westview three, Burke two and Central one.

Anderson's plan does beg a question.

Although they are assured of being in the playoffs, would the A1 teams nearest to the cutoff with A2 be accepting of losing records? Instead of those teams being 5-5 after the playoffs, a smaller, higher-quality pool of opponents could take those records to 3-7 or 2-8.

"Completely agree with your point on how teams in the middle that qualify for A1 could view this as a negative," Anderson said. "My hope is that they will also take into consideration that the next two years they would have an easier schedule in A2, where they will more than likely be able to even out their overall record."

There are some interesting ones in there. Seems like they’ve been trying to figure out a good 8 man football number forever with no luck of getting a change through.

 

[Alum-Ni]

There are some interesting ones in there. Seems like they’ve been trying to figure out a good 8 man football number forever with no luck of getting a change through.

IIRC.....don't they always have an issue with some of the larger 11-man schools always voting the 8-man changes down for whateve reason?

 

[Mr. Irrelevent]

IIRC.....don't they always have an issue with some of the larger 11-man schools always voting the 8-man changes down for whateve reason?

I don’t believe so. I believe some 8 man schools don’t feel 11 man schools should be eligible for 8 man….the idea they’ll just win big. Sounds like many are starting to understand the number has to change for the betterment and preservation of the game. Football numbers are down from what I’ve been told.

 

[Alum-Ni]

I don’t believe so. I believe some 8 man schools don’t feel 11 man schools should be eligible for 8 man….the idea they’ll just win big. Sounds like many are starting to understand the number has to change for the betterment and preservation of the game. Football numbers are down from what I’ve been told.

Okay....I thought I had read somewhere that the 11-man schools were always voting down the changes to the 8-man game....but I could be entirely mistaken.

 

[Power_I_82]

I think what we see is the teams at the bottom of class D (D2) are apprehensive about upping the number of eligible teams into 8 man. What you would see in the two class system we have now is 6-8 (maybe, not familiar with numbers so maybe its more or less) of the teams at the bottom of D1 get pushed into D2. As a D2 team there really is no reason to support this. Also, if a D1 is in the bottom 1/3rd of the class enrollment wise, they will get pushed to the bottom of D1 with bigger schools coming in on the top, theoretically making it harder to compete. I think to some, this proposal only helps those schools at the bottom of C2 or top of D1. I do however think there is some momentum behind the 3 class D system and evenly split them. 9 games/16 to the playoffs. This will still not get around the low numbers/participation issue schools are facing. The teams that have forfeited this year were middle of the pack enrollment wise. In the 3 class system, they are probably lower D1 or D2.
Maybe helping schools get into a more competitive class will help get more kids out? Who knows. I tend to think if a kid won't go out because he doesn't want to lose, he's gonna be the first to quit you when times get tough anyway. As a coach, its tough to trust those kids to be there when you need them. A few of these proposals have been on there the last few years. I'd guess they eventually get passed.

 

[huskerfan1414]

I think what we see is the teams at the bottom of class D (D2) are apprehensive about upping the number of eligible teams into 8 man. What you would see in the two class system we have now is 6-8 (maybe, not familiar with numbers so maybe its more or less) of the teams at the bottom of D1 get pushed into D2. As a D2 team there really is no reason to support this. Also, if a D1 is in the bottom 1/3rd of the class enrollment wise, they will get pushed to the bottom of D1 with bigger schools coming in on the top, theoretically making it harder to compete. I think to some, this proposal only helps those schools at the bottom of C2 or top of D1. I do however think there is some momentum behind the 3 class D system and evenly split them. 9 games/16 to the playoffs. This will still not get around the low numbers/participation issue schools are facing. The teams that have forfeited this year were middle of the pack enrollment wise. In the 3 class system, they are probably lower D1 or D2.
Maybe helping schools get into a more competitive class will help get more kids out? Who knows. I tend to think if a kid won't go out because he doesn't want to lose, he's gonna be the first to quit you when times get tough anyway. As a coach, its tough to trust those kids to be there when you need them. A few of these proposals have been on there the last few years. I'd guess they eventually get passed.

this isn't about being "competitive". If it was about being competitive they would all be fine with the current opt-down but don't make the playoffs system. This is about trying to win a championship. One of the schools proposing this has 50 kids on their roster.

 

[huskerfan1414]

There are some interesting ones in there. Seems like they’ve been trying to figure out a good 8 man football number forever with no luck of getting a change through.

Because we have a good number. I don't understand why people think the number needs to go up, just because there are schools who wish they could make 8 man playoffs? Why are we wanting to punish the real 8 man schools?

 

[northeastNebraska]

IMO Nebraska does not need three classes of 8 man football.

 

[Mr. Irrelevent]

Okay....I thought I had read somewhere that the 11-man schools were always voting down the changes to the 8-man game....but I could be entirely mistaken.

Because we have a good number. I don't understand why people think the number needs to go up, just because there are schools who wish they could make 8 man playoffs? Why are we wanting to punish the real 8 man schools?

I don’t believe it’s at all about winning a championship. The first school to put this proposal in was a D2 school and through discussions others also put it in. I believe it’s about schools feeling they can safely compete. Different people have different philosophies on what number it takes out to keep kids safe.

Howells-Dodge had no problem going up to 11 man a while back. Good teams are good regardless of how many guys are on the field.

Have been told many times HAC will play 11 man so long as they have 30 guys out. I find that very honorable.

Neumann has close to 75 out I believe. Turned on their game a couple times and their sideline is packed. Seems they don’t have many 2 way players either.

We are the lowest number of any state with 8 man football. Agree with northeast, we don’t need another class. They’ve tried that and it fails misserably.

What school doesn’t want to go up to 11 man but has 50 out so they want the number changed? Curious… Also, have they already used their exemption?

 

[huskerfan1414]

I don’t believe it’s at all about winning a championship. The first school to put this proposal in was a D2 school and through discussions others also put it in. I believe it’s about schools feeling they can safely compete. Different people have different philosophies on what number it takes out to keep kids safe.

Howells-Dodge had no problem going up to 11 man a while back. Good teams are good regardless of how many guys are on the field.

Have been told many times HAC will play 11 man so long as they have 30 guys out. I find that very honorable.

Neumann has close to 75 out I believe. Turned on their game a couple times and their sideline is packed. Seems they don’t have many 2 way players either.

We are the lowest number of any state with 8 man football. Agree with northeast, we don’t need another class. They’ve tried that and it fails misserably.

What school doesn’t want to go up to 11 man but has 50 out so they want the number changed? Curious… Also, have they already used their exemption?

“Keep kids safe”. They can keep kids safe. They can opt down and be ineligible for the playoffs. If they are that low and want to be “competitive” they have that option. But this isnt about that. Its about wanting to win and make a run in the playoffs. Who gets to define “competitive”?
This is at the detriment of schools with legitimate 8 man enrollment numbers who dont have the boys in school to play 11 man. It isnt their fault if no one wants to go out in some other district. What about their kids being safe?
Nebraska isnt like other states. We are our own state with unique school enrollment populations. I think the 8 man number is perfect.

To your question, according to the information above, Pender. They are in exemption this cycle. I exaggerated with 50 so not sure exactly, but it is definitely above 40. Great program, good people and they can initiate what they want so I mean no disrespect, just disagreement. Disagreement is part of these discussions. To be fair, I have no idea what their enrollment will be next cycle, so maybe they would be above even the 55 they proposed, and they'll play 11 man anyway? Or maybe they are dropping back down below 48? But if they want it changed so they can continue playing 8 man and be eligible for playoffs with higher enrollment, dont tell me its for player safety with those numbers.
I see Plainview also sponsored a proposal and they are in exemption this cycle. No idea what their enrollment will be next cycle either so maybe it has nothing to do with that, but they are not hurting for players either.
I do think there is a smart proposal there regarding the ineligible teams. If your enrollment number in your 2nd year of being ineligible for the playoffs is below the cutoff number, you can be eligible. That makes sense.
I know about Howells dodge, big fan and they are the best football program in the state.

 

[Mr. Irrelevent]

“Keep kids safe”. They can keep kids safe. They can opt down and be ineligible for the playoffs. If they are that low and want to be “competitive” they have that option. But this isnt about that. Its about wanting to win and make a run in the playoffs. Who gets to define “competitive”?
This is at the detriment of schools with legitimate 8 man enrollment numbers who dont have the boys in school to play 11 man. It isnt their fault if no one wants to go out in some other district. What about their kids being safe?
Nebraska isnt like other states. We are our own state with unique school enrollment populations. I think the 8 man number is perfect.

To your question, according to the information above, Pender. They are in exemption this cycle. I exaggerated with 50 so not sure exactly, but it is definitely above 40. Great program, good people and they can initiate what they want so I mean no disrespect, just disagreement. Disagreement is part of these discussions. To be fair, I have no idea what their enrollment will be next cycle, so maybe they would be above even the 55 they proposed, and they'll play 11 man anyway? Or maybe they are dropping back down below 48? But if they want it changed so they can continue playing 8 man and be eligible for playoffs with higher enrollment, dont tell me its for player safety with those numbers.
I see Plainview also sponsored a proposal and they are in exemption this cycle. No idea what their enrollment will be next cycle either so maybe it has nothing to do with that, but they are not hurting for players either.
I do think there is a smart proposal there regarding the ineligible teams. If your enrollment number in your 2nd year of being ineligible for the playoffs is below the cutoff number, you can be eligible. That makes sense.
I know about Howells dodge, big fan and they are the best football program in the state.

I get your argument. I just know it's been an issue brought up for many years. To give you an idea. Clarkson-Leigh spearheaded the proposal for the 55 number from what I was told. Sounds like their AD spoke to the 8 man coaches association about what most coaches believed the number should be. I don't know that anyone believes the add a class proposal will pass, and I bet that actually hurts the proposal for the number at 55.

As far as Pender submitting the proposal, I'm sure it's because C-L reached out to their AD...being in the same conference. Most of the time when ADs put a proposal in, they want it in several districts so that it doesn't come as a surprise to people in other districts if it advances to the 2nd meeting.

 

[huskerfan1414]

I get your argument. I just know it's been an issue brought up for many years. To give you an idea. Clarkson-Leigh spearheaded the proposal for the 55 number from what I was told. Sounds like their AD spoke to the 8 man coaches association about what most coaches believed the number should be. I don't know that anyone believes the add a class proposal will pass, and I bet that actually hurts the proposal for the number at 55.T

As far as Pender submitting the proposal, I'm sure it's because C-L reached out to their AD...being in the same conference. Most of the time when ADs put a proposal in, they want it in several districts so that it doesn't come as a surprise to people in other districts if it advances to the 2nd meeting.

This is probably true, I have no idea what everyone's reasoning is, I just know the "player safety" and "be competitive" arguments are vastly overblown. Let's all just be honest and call it what it is.

And what if we do go to 55? How long until teams want to go to 60? Why not 70?

 

[Mr. Irrelevent]

This is probably true, I have no idea what everyone's reasoning is, I just know the "player safety" and "be competitive" arguments are vastly overblown. Let's all just be honest and call it what it is.

And what if we do go to 55? How long until teams want to go to 60? Why not 70?

Because in discussion, a majority of the coaches said 55....

I don't know what else to tell you, but I know how the whole process works and how ADs talk. Have several good friends in the job.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

Because in discussion, a majority of the coaches said 55....

I don't know what else to tell you, but I know how the whole process works and how ADs talk. Have several good friends in the job.

They have tried 55 three times, this will be the fourth, you would think one person would try 50 first Seems like they just keep riding a dead horse, why not try 50

 

[northeastNebraska]

They have tried 55 three times, this will be the fourth, you would think one person would try 50 first Seems like they just keep riding a dead horse, why not try 50

IMO because 50 isn't a large enough bump to make a difference.

 

[highschoolfootballnut]

IMO because 50 isn't a large enough bump to make a difference.

undertstand that but 6 years ago 50 would have passed and now you would be at 55 or 53 or just keep trying 55 again and again If it fails this time its the definition of insanity

 

[northeastNebraska]

Nobody wants to hear this, but I really wish this state could get behind a 9 man proposal. With Nebraska having so many schools playing football, it makes this difficult. I don't feel like Nebraska needs another class of football, but 9 man would be ideal and you have one 9 man and one 8 man class. Personally I'd rather see three classes of 11 man, a class of 9 and a class of 6 man.

Rational being;
1. The schools that really struggle with fielding an 8 man squad, which is a large number IMO, frankly should be in 6 man.
2. The schools that can healthily field an 8 man team could probably handle 9 man.
3. There are many 11 man teams that fit 9 man. Basically the bottom half of C2 if not more.
4. Possible coops. So many schools don't co-op because they are afraid they will fall apart or they will be moving up a class or moving into 11 man. Would we see more schools willing to coop if the moved up into 9 man instead of 11 man? Assuming here that the coop number would put them into 9 man in most cases.
5. Facilities: Keep the field the same as 11 man. Schools won't have a big cost to adjust their field.

Using the enrollment numbers this cycle...

-Top 24 teams in enrollment are Class A (1,103 to 588)
-Next 32 teams are in Class B (549-170, which we would be the current Class B minus Platteview, but adding Omaha Benson, Bellevue East, Elkhorn South, Omaha Northwest, Norfolk, Columbus, North Platte and South Sioux).
-Next 48 teams are in Class C1 (170-70) would be Platteview, plus all of C1 and the top 12 teams in current C2 enrollment. C2 teams included would be Arlington, Conestoga, St. Paul, Kearney Catholic, WPB, Raymond Central, Palmyra, Battle Creek, Bishop Neumann, Lincoln Lutheran and Mitchell).
-Next 48 teams are in 9 man Class C2 (70-48). This would be Malcolm through the rest of C2, included the ineligible 8 man teams like David City and JCC through Plainview.
-Next 64 teams are in 8 man (enrollment of 47-31).
-Remaining teams (enrollment 30 and below) are in 6 man.

 

[ACICOD]

I can tell you that trying to fix this issue has been an ongoing process. There were proposals for 51 being the number 12-15 years ago, and it didn't go anywhere. This isn't new.

My understanding of the three-class proposal and 55 is that it's a compromise to try and get as many people on board as possible. Without the addition of a third class, none of the smallest 8-man schools is voting to raise the number; they would have no reason to let bigger schools come down. With the added class, knowing that the bigger schools would be confined to their own space, the smaller schools actually shrink the disparity in D2 a little bit, and are protected from the largest 8-man teams.

I don't think anyone who is proposing the three-class system believes the answer is a third class. The third class seems to be a bargaining chip to get the smallest schools on board with moving the number.

That's the way I see and hear this issue at the current time.

......................and nut; there is a stand alone proposal to move the number to 50 in this year's batch.

 

[Hardwoodbeaver]

easy and most logical solution is to consolidate

 

[EndzoneView]

easy and most logical solution is to consolidate

Yup if your over 47 consolidate with your neighbor And play 11 man 😀

There might be upwards of 15 8 man ineligible teams next cycle so it will be interesting to see what happens. Of those 15 it feels like only Stanton and crofton are real powerhouse teams yearly too.

 

[Mr. Irrelevent]

Yup if your over 47 consolidate with your neighbor And play 11 man 😀

There might be upwards of 15 8 man ineligible teams next cycle so it will be interesting to see what happens. Of those 15 it feels like only Stanton and crofton are real powerhouse teams yearly too.

And in reality Stanton has become a powerhouse the last 3-4 years due to good coaching and families that buy in. Stanton was good, but never great the last 15 or so years. Also, having a D1 prospect makes you really good at any level! Crofton has been solid for a very long time...that damn Offense in a phone booth that they run...

I'll use Summerland as an example... I believe they are in their waiver period, and from talking to someone from up there...the 55 number won't matter, as they'll be around 62 next cycle.

 

[ACICOD]

And in reality Stanton has become a powerhouse the last 3-4 years due to good coaching and families that buy in. Stanton was good, but never great the last 15 or so years. Also, having a D1 prospect makes you really good at any level! Crofton has been solid for a very long time...that damn Offense in a phone booth that they run...

I'll use Summerland as an example... I believe they are in their waiver period, and from talking to someone from up there...the 55 number won't matter, as they'll be around 62 next cycle.

From everything I hear, Crofton will play 11-man again in the next cycle.

 

[northeastNebraska]

easy and most logical solution is to consolidate

It would make things a lot easier that is for sure. Some of these towns and schools need to think 10 years down the road and pool resources together and not worry about right now. We need more Summerland's in this state.

I'd love to see Highway 91 High School (Howells-Dodge, Clarkson/Leigh) in C2 (total boy count would be 80). Overton-Elm Creek, Loomis-Bertrand, etc.

If Osceola and Cross County co-opted in football, they'd still be C2 using the numbers this year.

 

[fbnut999]

easy and most logical solution is to consolidate

Logical, yes. Easy? nope!

 

[Hardwoodbeaver]

Logical, yes. Easy? nope!

It can be easy as well. Other states have implemented it years ago with great success. The model is there to follow. Pooling resources are the future!!

 

[fbnut999]

It can be easy as well. Other states have implemented it years ago with great success. The model is there to follow. Pooling resources are the future!!

You are not taking into account the parents and grandparents who will have to be drug—kicking and screaming—into coops and consolidation. Sometimes I think these people would rather be 1-8 with “our team” versus being more competitive by co-oping with the town next door.

 

[northeastNebraska]

You are not taking into account the parents and grandparents who will have to be drug—kicking and screaming—into coops and consolidation. Sometimes I think these people would rather be 1-8 with “our team” versus being more competitive by co-oping with the town next door.

Which is so asinine.

 

[newsie101]

Anyone have the numbers from, say 1975 to 1990, when there were only 4 classes and about 100 more schools? I know the population shift to metro areas is huge, but how was the state able to handle 4 classes with more schools just a generation or so ago? What I'm wondering is, what were the number cutoffs between classes? Was class D, 55 and below? I'm sure the difference between the smallest class C school and the biggest C was huge. What about B? My high school was class B and one of the smallest, yet won some state championships. Just curious in the breakdown of enrollment and number of schools in each class.

 

[Eagle3898]

It would make things a lot easier that is for sure. Some of these towns and schools need to think 10 years down the road and pool resources together and not worry about right now. We need more Summerland's in this state.

I'd love to see Highway 91 High School (Howells-Dodge, Clarkson/Leigh) in C2 (total boy count would be 80). Overton-Elm Creek, Loomis-Bertrand, etc.

If Osceola and Cross County co-opted in football, they'd still be C2 using the numbers this year.

Why would Clarkson/leigh and Howells-dodge go together? They are not struggling to field teams and are doing pretty well in athletics. Their student numbers are decent. Makes no sense to me why they would consolidate or even coop anything.

 

[Llama57]

Why would Clarkson/leigh and Howells-dodge go together? They are not struggling to field teams and are doing pretty well in athletics. Their student numbers are decent. Makes no sense to me why they would consolidate or even coop anything.

Well, they already coop softball🤷