Logo

Anytime, Anywhere

July 28, 2014

The MHSAA’s Coaches Advancement Program (CAP) is like no other high school level coaches education program in the US.
In an online world, including many other ways here at the MHSAA, CAP still trades purposefully in face-to-face learning; and the MHSAA Is committed to delivering sessions “anytime, anywhere” – any time a school, district, league or coaches association will sign up 20 coaches, the MHSAA will deliver one or more of the six CAP levels the group requests.
About 60 percent of those who complete CAP Levels 1 through 5 do so as a part of their course work at one of seven colleges or universities in Michigan (Central Michigan University, Kalamazoo Valley Community College, Lake Michigan Community College, Muskegon Community College, Northern Michigan University, Oakland County Community College and Western Michigan University).
The other 40 percent of those who complete CAP – and this will be a growing percentage – do so through sessions facilitated by a group of people who have committed many evenings and weekends to CAP’s “anytime, anywhere” approach to ongoing, adult education. During 2013-14, Jerry Haggerty, athletic director at Hamilton High School, led all presenters, teaching 25 sessions. Among other of the busiest presenters were Tony Moreno of Eastern Michigan University; retired athletic administrator Jim Feldkamp; Ken Mohney, athletic director at Mattawan; and Hally Yonko, athletic director at Ann Arbor-Gabriel Richard High School.
The leader of boundless energy and enthusiasm for CAP is MHSAA Assistant Director Kathy Vruggink Westdorp. In 2016-17, CAP Level 1 or 2 becomes a requirement for all persons hired for the first time at any MHSAA member school after July 31, 2016 as a high school varsity head coach. Kathy and a growing cadre of presenters are eagerly awaiting that challenge.
The team closed the 2013-14 school year by presenting eight levels of CAP at six different sites over six days, June 9-14, and then conducted CAP Levels 1, 2 and 3 on three consecutive days, June 19-21, at Clinton High School.

The Usual Suspects

December 30, 2016

It is difficult to find a year when the 11-player Football Finals of the Michigan High School Athletic Association involved more teams from southeast Michigan than appeared at Ford Field in 2016. In fact, just two counties (Oakland and Wayne) produced seven finalists. But then two counties on Michigan’s west side (Kent and Muskegon) supplied four of the 16 finalists.

Four of Michigan’s 83 counties producing 11 of 16 finalists in the 11-player championship games doesn’t’ feel like a statewide event; but one team from the Upper Peninsula, another from the Leelanau Peninsula in the northwest portion of the Lower Peninsula, and a team located along the Michigan/Ohio border remind us how large and diverse our state really is.

The 2016 MHSAA 11-player Football Finals consisted of many of the “usual suspects,” including two teams pursuing their fourth straight titles and one team seeking its third consecutive championship. Four of the eight 11-player champions from 2015 returned in the attempt to defend their titles in 2016, and two of the runners-up in 2015 were back to try to reverse their fortunes from 12 months earlier.

What is being demonstrated here in Michigan high school football is the trend seen in many other states. That is, as the number of classes or divisions of tournaments expands, the more often you see the same teams in the final rounds.

The surest way to have the “usual suspects” on championship day is to put them in tournaments with fewer schools. And of all MHSAA tournaments, the football playoffs have the most divisions with the fewest schools in each. The result is predictable.

This is a cautionary tale for those who desire that the number of classifications and divisions be expanded in MHSAA tournaments for other sports.

Meanwhile, we are keeping an eye on the tournament format in a neighboring state that places schools into divisions for larger schools after they are too successful over consecutive years in the classification that fits their enrollment. Those in Michigan who have been assigned to review such policies have complained that such “success factors” penalize future students because of the achievements of previous students and/or because such factors do nothing about “chronic success” by schools in the largest classification.