Alignment

November 22, 2011

During a question-and-answer period following a speech in 2006 at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts spoke about communication, and he did so in terms that are important for us to hear today.  Judge Roberts said in 2006:  “People talk of him (Ronald Reagan) as ‘The Great Communicator.’ He was a great communicator . . . because he communicated great ideas with the sincerity of a deeply felt and abiding belief in those ideas.” 

It was great ideas and great belief in those ideas that generated the great communication.

The Chief Justice continued:  “It’s vitally important to examine ideas that underlie your conduct and actions, and to make sure you’re content with those and then stick with them.”

I firmly believe that the happiest among school sports leadership today, the most content and fulfilled among us, are those whose beliefs and actions are in alignment. They are those people who have examined the ideals of educational athletics, the core values of school sports, and allow them to guide their actions.

Because they believe in the ideals of school sports, they are content in their work, and are able to stick with it and survive it even in these most difficult times.  Difficult times reveal durable leaders, and durable leaders believe in what they’re doing.

Sweating the Small Stuff - #3

June 5, 2018

I’m sure it discouraged some of our state’s high school football coaches to learn that the Representative Council of the Michigan High School Athletic Association did not approve at its May 6-7 meeting what some people refer to as the “enhanced strength of schedule proposal” for determining 256 qualifiers to the MHSAA’s 11-player football playoffs.

There was desire among some Council members to appease those who keep trying to reduce the difficulties that a football tournament causes for regular season scheduling and conference affiliations. Others noted that the proposal, as presented, could cause as much harm to some schools and conferences as it would help others, that it did not solve the scheduling problem but shifted it.

During spirited discussion, some Council members resurrected two ideas that have been rejected previously, such as (1) doubling the playoffs once again (and shortening the regular season to eight games), and (2) coupling a six- or seven-win minimum with the revised strength of schedule criteria. The pros and cons of each idea flowed freely.

And therein is the problem. If one digs down into the details of proposals, both old and new, there are both positive and negative aspects apparent, both intended and unintended consequences likely.

There can be paralysis in analysis; but when we are dealing with more than 600 high school programs and a physically demanding sport with fewer regular-season contests permitted than in any other sport, one cannot be too careful. Eliminating one of just nine regular-season games? Increasing first-round tournament mismatches? Disadvantaging larger schools locked in leagues or areas of the state where smaller schools predominate? These are not minor matters.

And until there are sensible answers, these are not trivial questions.