Photo taken by Tom Tran.
Fair competition is supposed to be the foundation of high school athletics. Athletes commit countless hours to practices, games and training with the expectation that they are competing on a level playing field. However, the current classification system used by the Nebraska School Activities Association (NSAA)— which is based primarily on school enrollment—often fails to reflect the realities teams face. While enrollment may be easy to measure, it does not accurately represent participation, depth, or opportunity, ultimately creating competitive imbalances across all sports.
Most high school sports are classified solely based on total student enrollment, meaning every student—regardless of whether they participate in athletics—is counted equally when placing a school into a competitive class. On paper, this approach is intended to create fairness by grouping similarly sized schools together. In reality, enrollment numbers do not reflect the actual number of athletes available for a given sport, the size of a team’s roster, or the depth of a program. Schools with large enrollments but low participation are often required to compete against programs with similar enrollment but far greater athlete turnout, resources, and depth. Because classification decisions rely on enrollment alone, multi-sport overlap, and program sustainability are overlooked, resulting in matchups that may appear balanced statistically but are uneven in practice.
One of the most significant issues with enrollment-based classifications is that they ignore how many students actually participate in a given sport. Two schools with similar enrollments can have drastically different turnout numbers, resulting in teams with vastly different roster sizes competing in the same class. For example, Hastings High Girls Basketball has 22 players to work with for their whole roster, while Bennington High School, another school in the same class, has a little more than 40. Depth plays a crucial role in high school sports, affecting substitutions, injury recovery, and overall performance throughout a season. A team with a limited roster may struggle to maintain intensity or consistency, while a team with a deeper bench benefits from flexibility and internal competition. When classifications are based solely on enrollment, they prioritize school size over the reality of who is actually playing.
Enrollment-based classifications also negatively affect program development and sustainability. Schools working to rebuild or grow a program are often locked into competing at a higher classification despite having limited numbers or experience. This can discourage participation, as repeated lopsided losses lower morale and reduce student interest. Instead of allowing programs to develop naturally, the system can trap them in cycles of underperformance that are difficult to escape. A classification model that accounts for participation would better support long term growth and competitive balance.
Supporters of the current system often argue that enrollment-based classifications are simpler and more consistent. Enrollment numbers are stable, easy to track, and change less frequently than participation totals. However, simplicity should not outweigh fairness. Participation data is already collected through rosters and eligibility submissions, making it a realistic metric to use. While participation may fluctuate year to year, classifications could be reviewed on a regular cycle to reflect meaningful trends without constant restructuring.
High school sports are not just about winning championships. They are about opportunity, development, and fair competition for student-athletes—both boys and girls. When teams are classified in ways that ignore participation disparities, those opportunities are diminished.
If the NSAA’s goal is fairness and opportunity, then it must look beyond enrollment numbers. In classifications based on actual participation, while accounting for differences between boys’ and girls’ programs, would create a system that is not only more accurate, but more just.
