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.

Student-Centered Coaching

August 1, 2017

The November 1929 Bulletin of the Michigan High School Athletic Association includes this editorial reprinted from the Oct. 7, 1929 Grand Rapids Herald which invites discussion about what more we might do to promote leadership and sportsmanship in school-sponsored sports today.

“Football teams of Greenville and Ionia high schools Saturday introduced an innovation the nature of which challenges consideration of other Michigan schools. From the time the first whistle blew for Saturday’s game until its close the professional coaches employed by the two schools had no contact with players. Between the halves the usual harangue by the coach was dispensed with in favor of a review of play by players. * * * The result of such a policy is unsullied amateurism along the lines we often have urged. The players are on their own. They do their own thinking as well as playing. Under the system as usually followed the coach sits on the sidelines. If he sees an opportunity for a plan of play differing from that being followed he sends in a substitute who carries instructions: ‘Stick to forward passes. Bang away at their left end,’ etc. Between the halves the coach points out faults and emphasizes opportunities for the final half. In net effect the coach directs the play. The initiative of captain or quarterback is permitted only so long as the coach approves. Under the Greenville system the captain is the only recognized leader of the team. He directs substitutions, orders plays, advises players, etc. At Greenville school boys played against school boys. On other western Michigan gridirons a coach is the 12th member of every team. * * * The plan adopted at Greenville was suggested by President Angell of Yale in his annual report for 1927-28. He urged that, ‘There is a wide and well-grounded sentiment that the control of our games should be put back more fully into the hands of the players.’ Yale has not heeded Prexy Angell’s advice, but the New York State Public High School Athletic Association has adopted it as also have some Detroit high schools. It takes the sting of professionalism out of the scholastic game. The able coach still has ample opportunity to prove his worth in teaching the fundamentals of the game and in developing ‘football brains’; but when the whistle blows it is high school team against high school team. What’s the matter with trying that in Grand Rapids? What, if any, are the arguments against it?”