Better Late Than Never
November 8, 2013
In a matter of minutes online or a matter of an hour in a bookstore, we can locate dozens of magazine articles and full-length books that describe either the blessings or burdens of all the technology that is now at our fingertips at home, at work and in play.
Every problem we have (and many we had no idea we have) seems to have a technology solution. And, it seems every solution creates new problems: from invasions of personal privacies to compromised security of children, companies and countries. And sometimes the technology breaks down altogether.
The latest and largest failure is the government’s inability to deliver on its promised online health care marketplace. Before that, we’ve seen “glitches” close down Wall Street’s NASDAQ exchange. Technology troubles recently crippled the reservation systems of 11 airlines simultaneously. Even Internet “expert” Facebook mishandled the technology for its own initial public offering.
So it has surprised few of us that the launch of ArbiterGame to solve the scheduling issues of MHSAA member schools has had many of its own issues. But we are certain of this: ArbiterGame will be successful in providing member schools the safest, most efficient and reliable electronic athletic department management system that is available, and the least expensive, anywhere.
As we began this journey in the second half of 2011 in response to a crescendo of complaints from administrators about the then-available scheduling software, we anticipated the effort to complete the project could take twice as long and cost twice as much as projected and, even if that pessimistic prediction would turn out to be true, the result would still be worth it. It is taking twice as long, and it will be worth the work and wait.
The value will be in the low cost and high convenience for school administrators, and a platform – MHSAA.com – that presents the data in an environment that promotes the highest ideals of school sports.
The Fourth Option
February 27, 2018
Throughout the years, schools of this and every other state have identified problems relating to school transfers. There is recruitment of athletes and undue influence. There is school shopping by families for athletic reasons. There is jumping by students from one school to another for athletic reasons because they couldn’t get along with a coach or saw a greater opportunity to play at another school or to win a championship there. There is the bumping of students off a team or out of a starting lineup by incoming transfers, which often outrages local residents. There is the concentration of talent on one team by athletic-motivated transfers. There is friction between schools as one becomes the traditional choice for students who specialize in a particular sport. There is imbalance in competition as a result. And there is always the concern that the athletic-motivated transfer simply puts athletics above academics, which is inappropriate in educational athletics.
All states have developed rules to address the problems related to school transfers. In some states, it is called a “transfer rule” and in other states a “residency rule,” because linking school attendance to residence is one of the most effective tools for controlling eligibility of transfers. None of the state high school association rules is identical, but all have the intention of helping to prevent recruiting, school shopping, student bumping, team friction, competitive imbalance and sports overemphasis. The goal of promoting fairness in athletic competition and the perspective that students must go to school first for an education and only secondarily to participate in interscholastic athletics is paramount.
The transfer/residency rule is a legally and historically tested but still imperfect tool to control athletic-motivated transfers and other abuses. It is a net which catches some students it should not, and misses some students that should not be eligible. This is why all state high school associations have procedures to review individual cases and grant exceptions; and why all state high school associations have procedures to investigate allegations and to penalize violations where they are confirmed.
Over the years, state high school associations have considered four options to handle transfers. The first two options are the easiest courses: either (1) let schools decide themselves about transfers, as Michigan once did, but this leads to inconsistent applications and few states now subscribe to such an approach; or (2) make no exceptions at all, rendering all transfer students ineligible for a period of time, but this becomes patently unfair for some students and no state high school association subscribes to that extreme, although it would be easy to administer.
The third option – the ideal approach, perhaps – would be to investigate the motivation of every transfer and allow quicker eligibility or subvarsity eligibility to those which are not motivated by athletics, but this is very time consuming if not impossible to administer. No state high school association has sufficient staff and money to consider every detail and devious motive of every transfer.
This is why a fourth option has been most popular with most state high school associations. This is a middle ground which stipulates a basic rule, some exceptions (we have 15 exceptions in Michigan), and procedures to consider and grant waivers – a primary role of the Michigan High School Athletic Association Executive Committee.