![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
December 1st is a Big Deal
November 10, 2017
One of the two or three most important Michigan High School Athletic Association Representative Council meetings of the past three decades will occur Dec. 1. Here’s why this is so.
The Council must decide where MHSAA Basketball Finals will be held for girls and boys, and make related decisions regarding both regular season and tournament schedules so schools can get on with confirming game schedules and officials assignments for at least 2018-19.
The Council must decide whether the enrollment limit for the 2018 MHSAA 8-Player Football Tournament will be fixed or floating, and if fixed, at what number. Of greater consequence in the long run, the Council will launch a discussion into the MHSAA’s responsibility for determining varsity 8-player football opponents for schools during the regular season.
The Council must consider changes in the policies and procedures for administering the new pitch count in baseball, and if the new pitching limitations should continue to delay what were thought to be improvements in the MHSAA Baseball Tournament structure and schedule.
The Council will examine input regarding proposals to fundamentally change the MHSAA transfer rule and determine which components of the proposal should advance as action items for its meetings in March or May.
The Council will examine input on proposed changes at the junior high/middle school level for contest limitations for several sports, as well as liberalization of the limited team membership rule for all team sports except football. Of even greater consequence, the Council may determine how aggressively, if at all, to advance MHSAA-sponsored regional invitational events for the junior high/middle school level in selected individual and team sports, with action on such possibly occurring in March or May.
The Council will engage in a discussion of what may be fading and what may be emerging in youth and school sports over the next decade and what that may mean in terms of sports for which MHSAA services and support should be provided, including what MHSAA tournaments may be added and which dropped at the high school level.
The Council will examine input on seeding of MHSAA District Basketball Tournaments and determine what the scope of actions could be at its March or May meetings.
Typically, the December meeting of the Representative Council tees up a big topic or two for action in March or May. This year, the December meeting requires that some specific actions be taken and sets more than the usual number of big topics on a course for action before this school year ends.
![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
Correctable Error?
May 30, 2017
A decade has passed since the court-ordered change in several sports seasons for Michigan high schools. Ten years has brought resignation more than satisfaction; and yet there remains hope in some places that the new status quo is not permanent, at least for those sports seasons changes that were and are seen by many people as collateral damage in a fight over seasons for girls basketball and volleyball.
Actually, the lawsuit sought to place all girls seasons in the same seasons as boys, like college schedules. The federal court did not require simultaneous scheduling; but the court did bring the intercollegiate mindset to the case. It determined, regardless of other facts, that the intercollegiate season was the “advantageous” season for high school sports. And the principle upon which it approved the compliance plan for high school sports in Michigan was that if all the seasons were not simultaneous for boys and girls, then there should be rough equality in the number of boys and girls assigned to “disadvantageous” seasons.
So, for example, from the federal court’s perspective, fall is the advantageous season for soccer, winter for swimming & diving, and spring for tennis. As for golf, the court opined that, even though it’s not the season of the NCAA championships, maybe fall was the better season. The court began with tortured logic and ended with hypocrisy.
As a result, in the Lower Peninsula, regardless of the preferences of the people involved, girls and boys had to switch seasons in two sports to even up the number of boys seasons and girls seasons in what the court had determined were disadvantageous. Schools thought the switch of golf and tennis for the genders was less injurious than switching soccer and swimming.
In the Upper Peninsula, because swimming and golf are combined for the genders in the winter and spring, respectively, the court’s option was to switch boys and girls seasons for either soccer or tennis. The schools chose soccer as the least disruptive change.
As people count the damaging effects and think about challenging the court-ordered placements a decade later, they must understand the court was looking for balance, for having the genders share the burden of participating in disadvantageous seasons. Moving Lower Peninsula boys golf to join girls in the fall and/or switching Lower Peninsula boys and girls tennis back to what was preferred and in place before judicial interference would recreate the imbalance the federal court conjured up and sought to remedy.
Those of us involved see many advantages to conducting fall golf for both genders in the Lower Peninsula and switching Lower Peninsula tennis seasons for boys and girls, no matter when colleges schedule those sports or how impractical the court’s logic and how inconsistently it was applied. Nevertheless, correcting the court’s errors could be both contentious and costly.