![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
A Change Narrative
October 13, 2017
Here are five points to describe the essence of possible changes being processed by the Michigan High School Athletic Association for its transfer rule.
-
We would move from a rule designed years ago for three-sport athletes to a rule that’s equally effective for regulating single-sport athletes.
-
We would be treating all sports the same, regardless of season – fall, winter, spring. No longer would the transfer rule have a greater impact on winter sport athletes than fall or spring sport athletes.
-
We would be getting out of the way of more “school of choice” parents who want to move a child from one school to another. If the student has not played a particular high school sport before, then eligibility is immediate in that sport ... at any level, and without any MHSAA Executive Committee action.
-
We would be causing students who have played a high school sport (and their parents) to pause before they transfer. They would miss the next season in that sport unless one of the 15 stated exceptions to the transfer rule applies. (There is significant sentiment that this apply only to students who have played previously at the varsity level – i.e., if the student has participated previously only at the subvarsity level in a sport, that student could transfer and remain eligible at the subvarsity level; but this would be allowed one time only.)
-
We would make it even tougher on students (and their parents) to circumvent the athletic-motivated and athletic-related transfer rules by eliminating the automatic residency exception in those special cases. (This is the most hotly debated of the changes being considered.)
The theme is “get out of the way of the benign transfers and get still tougher on the really bad ones.”
![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
Reluctant Leadership
March 15, 2016
Years ago I was asked my opinion about who should become the president of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. My response was that it should be no person who is seeking the job. It was and remains my belief that, in ministry, the person should not seek the job; the job should seek the person.
I think this should also apply to the presidency of the United States.
It’s only mid-March, and I’m already sick and tired of campaign rhetoric and the ridiculously low behavior of candidates for what’s supposed to be our nation’s highest office.
I am looking for humility; and I think, perhaps, that any person who seeks the presidency probably lacks the humility to be the person we need in that office.
I want both a freer and fairer society, led by humble servants within public and private institutions. I want servant-leaders with character more than charisma.
I want a society where individuals with drive and discipline take responsibility for making things better at home and in their neighborhoods, communities and states. And where one of these unsuspecting persons, with lots of grit but little guile, gets drafted to lead our country, and very reluctantly accepts.