BOTF
March 14, 2014
When MHSAA staff asked our Student Advisory Council, “How do we have a sportsmanship program that isn’t boring?,” the answer that emerged was the MHSAA’s Battle of the Fans.
On Feb. 21 we announced the winner of the 3rd Battle of the Fans - Beaverton High School (see related story). But all five finalists, and dozens of applicants, demonstrated that attendance at high school sporting events can become THE thing to do, and it can be done with both great spirit and high standards of sportsmanship.
On Feb. 16 the Student Advisory Council reviewed the finalists’ videos and the reports of site visits by SAC members and MHSAA staff; and I listened to the discussion. Here’s what I discovered they were looking for . . .
- Authenticity and consistency – not just a one-night thing; but spirited, sportsmanlike support all season long, for multiple sports.
- Not only the absence of poor behaviors, but great originality in demonstrating good behaviors.
- Inclusiveness – conducted in ways that invite all kinds of students to be involved, encourage middle school students to learn good sportsmanship and is welcoming to adults as well.
- Change. Which school and community was most changed since getting involved with the BOTF this year or over the past two or three years?
I have said often that we want the BOTF to be great fun. But it’s also intended to make a great positive difference in school sports in Michigan. And it is. Crowds are both much larger and much better behaved where the BOTF has become important. And the positive change in one school/community is helping to change neighboring districts and entire leagues.
Answering Seeding Questions
January 19, 2018
Seeding is a topic on the agenda of several Michigan High School Athletic Association sport committees. Last May, the Representative Council reiterated that its approach is to consider seeding on a sport-by-sport, level-by-level basis, depending on its committees and others to develop specific plans and to demonstrate wide support among schools of all sizes and types.
A recommendation by the Basketball Committee in December of 2016 to seed District and Regional basketball tournaments with one of the systems utilized by the NCAA for its men’s Division I tournament was not adopted by the Council last May, but MHSAA staff was requested to explore alternatives for seeding District level tournaments only.
Subsequently, MHSAA surveys have demonstrated significant support, especially in more populated areas, for an approach that separates on District basketball tournament brackets the top two teams of each District whose teams continue to be assigned on the basis of geography. We’ve found that historically strong programs tend to support this “simple seeding,” while middle-of-the-pack programs tend to see seeding as another obstacle to success and creating more distance between haves and have-nots.
MHSAA staff have demonstrated how similarly the results would have been if any one of the three systems had been used to perform this simple seeding of District basketball tournaments in 2017. In the vast majority of 2017 District tournaments, the team that actually won the tournament would have been the No. 1 seeded team in that District, demonstrating that simple seeding may be less about picking the winners than it is determining which two teams will play in the District championship games.
Many questions would have to be answered before any one of these systems could be adopted. However, even without answering any questions, in December 2017, the Basketball Committee recommended seeding for District tournaments as soon as possible.
At its January meeting, the MHSAA Classification Committee made a recommendation to the Representative Council that attempts to answer one of the questions. That committee agreed that if a plan is approved to separate the top two seeded teams in each geographically determined District of the Girls and Boys Basketball Tournaments, the system used should be completely controlled within the MHSAA office.
Of course, many other questions and logistical details need to be answered. Do we only use games versus member schools? What do we do with unreported scores? When is the data finalized? Should human input be added to the computer ratings? Do seeded teams automatically get a bye? How and when do we assign officials?
Answering such questions must come next.