Coaching Advancement

March 21, 2014

Over the past nine months we have marched down the field in our effort to enhance the health and safety preparation of those who coach school sports. There have been two big plays during this offensive drive.

Last May, the Representative Council adopted the requirement beginning in 2014-15 that all assistant and subvarsity high school coaches must complete the same rules/risk management session as high school varsity head coaches, or, in the alternative, complete one of several free, online health and safety programs posted for this purpose on MHSAA.com.

Last December, the Council adopted the requirement beginning in 2015-16 that all high school varsity head coaches must have current certification in CPR. 

It’s my hope that we will not fumble now that we’re in the red zone, that we won’t drop the ball before crossing the goal line on this current health and safety drive focusing on enhanced preparation of coaches.

The next play the Representative Council is considering is to require that all persons hired for the first time at any MHSAA member high school as a varsity level head coach must have completed the Coaches Advancement Program Level 1 or 2. 

More than 10,000 people already have done so; and other people who want to be high school varsity head coaches have more than two years to complete this requirement.

Finishing this drive won’t put Michigan’s high school coaching standards at the head of the class; but it will keep us in the classroom of best practices for coaches education. The standard of care is advancing nationwide and on all levels of sports.

The First Time

April 3, 2018

I remember as clearly as if it were yesterday the first time I had to determine a student was not eligible under rules of the Michigan High School Athletic Association.

At that singular moment, it did not matter that I had been able to advise a dozen previous callers that the students they were inquiring about were eligible under the rules. All I could see in my mind’s eye was this one student who would not be able to participate as a full-fledged member of a team in a sport he enjoyed.

I assumed, as I have in almost every case since, that this was a “good kid,” and one who needed sports more than sports needed him.

But the facts made him ineligible and there were no compelling reasons to look beyond the facts. I knew it would be hard on the student to miss a season, but I also knew this was not in any sense an “undue hardship.” I could see that if the rule was not enforced in this case, I would be undermining its enforcement in other cases, and effectively changing the rule.

And I recognized that I did not have the authority to change a rule which the MHSAA Representative Council and each member school’s board of education had adopted to bring consistency and control to competitive athletics.

Many years have passed, and I’ve had to consider the eligibility of countless students to represent their schools on athletic teams. But I still see each situation as an individual student, balancing his or her individual needs and desires against the need to protect the integrity of the rules and the desire to promote competitive equity within the program.