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.
Boring Impartiality
January 6, 2017
Some people – like our U.S. President-Elect and, apparently, like the NCAA Division I Football Playoff Selection Committee – seem to believe that all publicity, no matter how negative, is good publicity. If it draws attention to your candidacy or championships series, no matter how embarrassing, it’s okay – even good.
That’s not the belief of the Michigan High School Athletic Association. As an organization that must too often do unpopular things, like enforce rules that others don’t and impose penalties that others won’t, the MHSAA prefers to avoid creating controversy where there are options to do so.
The structure of MHSAA tournaments provides some options.
Tournaments which exclude no teams or individuals provoke less controversy than those with a limited field. Tournaments which favor no teams through a seeding scheme cause fewer arguments.
If our only purpose were to increase revenues, there is much we could do to gerrymander MHSAA tournaments in order to shorten, smooth out and straighten the tournament trail for the teams with the best records and biggest crowds during the regular season, like the NCAA women’s and NIT men’s basketball tournaments do.
But if fairness – blind, boring impartiality – is more important to us, then we will not force the teams with the poorest regular season records to face off in bracket rat-tails and we will not provide the teams with the best regular season records a tournament trail that avoids similar teams for as long as possible.
This approach opens us to criticism that we are dumb to be different and stupid to reject the revenue-generating practices of major college and professional sports organizations. But no one can claim we are unfair.
It’s not unfair to treat all schools the same. The unfairness begins – and real controversy follows – when an organization tries to favor some teams over others.