![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
Five Fewer Volleyball Days?
December 12, 2017
When 90 percent of one of our key constituent groups has the same opinion, it’s worth talking about – even if the topic is a sacred cow.
This fall, 89.6 percent of 580 survey respondents told the Michigan High School Athletic Association they favor a week earlier end to the girls volleyball season.
Even more – 91.7 percent – favor starting practice two days earlier in August, the same day practice starts for football.
More than 98 percent of those respondents were local athletic directors, and each class (A, B, C and D) was almost equally represented.
If girls volleyball ended a week earlier, it would always conclude before the start of firearm deer hunting season and have a weekend largely to itself, in contrast to the current calendar that sees the Girls Volleyball Finals competing with the Girls Swimming & Diving Finals, the 8-Player Football Finals and 16 Semifinal games in the 11-Player Football Tournament. It’s a weekend of 100 audio and video broadcast hours, among the MHSAA’s very busiest weekends of the entire school year.
The MHSAA’s Girls Volleyball Tournament is the latest finishing high school association Girls Volleyball Tournament in the country, sharing that distinction with nine other states. Compared to our neighbors, the tournament in Michigan ends a week later than the Girls Volleyball Tournament ends in Illinois and Ohio, and two weeks later than the same tournament ends in Indiana and Wisconsin. Michigan’s girls volleyball season is currently one day shorter than in Ohio but four days longer than in Indiana, eight days longer than in Illinois, and 12 days longer than in Wisconsin.
Whether or not girls or boys basketball seasons eventually move up or back or flip-flop, the start and end of girls volleyball season are ripe for review, according to a large portion of local-level administrators. The opposite position is taken by the Michigan Interscholastic Volleyball Coaches Association, which has countered the online survey with a position paper that points out how much the girls volleyball season was shortened after girls volleyball moved from the winter season to the fall.
The Representative Council’s recent decision to switch the starting dates for girls and boys basketball seasons in the 2018-19 school year diminishes the urgency to decide between these different points of view.
![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
Tracking the Transfer Rule
September 19, 2017
We are not the first generation of school leaders to be concerned about athletic transfers in secondary school sports.
Lewis L. Forsythe, in his 1950 book Athletics in Michigan High Schools, described his era and earlier this way: “... there were enough who transferred for advantage, as they thought, in athletic opportunities to give wide currency to the term ‘tramp athletes.’ These were usually students who became ineligible in schools in which they had first enrolled, or became otherwise disaffected in their home situation and went elsewhere to continue school. It was possible, for example, for a boy to play football at Ann Arbor one season, drop out of school until the next March first, and then enter Jackson High school. Here he could make himself eligible for baseball and track by merely ‘passing’ in ten hours (later twelve hours) of work from time to time according to the reporting methods of the school, and then leave without taking final examinations. The next semester he might enroll in Detroit High School, and, by satisfying eligibility requirements for the current semester, play football in that school. With no age limit and no required check-up on eligibility in another school, this could go on for at least five years.”
Mr. Forsythe, writing in 1950, cited concerns as early as 1901, which led the state athletic committee to adopt the first transfer rule for school sports in Michigan. It required a student going from one secondary school to another to present a certificate from administrators of the school left that the student was eligible under the athletic rules of the time. The issue of the time was that students who were performing poorly in the classroom of one school would attempt to escape ineligibility due to academic deficiencies by transferring to another school
Two years later, a rule was adopted to address undue influence (recruiting) that required all schools to sever all relationships with a school that attempts to influence any athlete to change schools.
A year later (1904), this proposal was debated: “A student who has played on a football team, or on a baseball team, or who has taken part in any track events, going from one school to another, shall be ineligible to enter any secondary athletic contest for one year, unless the parents of such student move from one school district to another ...”
It took 20 years for a rule change to actually be made in this direction: “No student who has been enrolled as a high school student in any high school shall be permitted to participate in any interscholastic contest as a member of any other high school until he has been enrolled in such school for one full semester, unless the parents of such student actually change their residence to the second school district. In the latter case, the student will be as eligible as he was in the school from which he withdrew.”
There, in the first code of rules promulgated by the Michigan High School Athletic Association in 1924, is the core of our 2017 rule ... ineligible for one semester, with the exception for an actual change of residence.
Today we debate that the period of ineligibility is too short and the residency exception is too lenient.
As for the period of ineligibility, across the U.S., one year is more common than one semester. As for the residency exception, it exists everywhere. In fact, in some places the “transfer” rule is referred to as the “residency” rule.