Every Coach, Every Year
April 20, 2018
Fourteen years ago, the Michigan High School Athletic Association retooled its coaches education program and launched the Coaches Advancement Program. We charged MHSAA Assistant Director Kathy Westdorp to take CAP “anywhere, any time” ... to deliver this face-to-face coaches education anywhere and any time school districts or leagues or coaches associations gathered a sufficient number of coaches to attend. Kathy delivered. Kathy and a committed cadre of trained instructors/facilitators who give up many evenings and weekends to deliver in-person education.
We launched CAP with the slogan, “anywhere, any time.” But it’s time now for a second slogan ... “every coach, every year.”
It doesn’t have to be CAP, but it does have to be every year for every coach. A coaches education program that is organized and documented, research-based and relevant. Student-centered coaches education that goes well beyond Xs and Os.
We cannot define and defend educational athletics – we cannot deliver educational athletics – without this commitment to such education, every year for every coach.
In the wake of tragic events in Michigan that have received nationwide attention, it is not surprising or unmerited that our State and Federal lawmakers are busy with bills. Legislation is on the way, and much of it will focus on coaches ... including coaches among those who are mandated to report suspected sexual abuse and requiring specific training for coaches.
All of this screams for the need for coaches education ... for every coach, every year ... no matter how experienced or revered. In business, politics, entertainment and sports, it has often been the most experienced and respected persons who have acted the worst.
The need is for every coach, every year.
Sweating the Small Stuff - #3
June 5, 2018
I’m sure it discouraged some of our state’s high school football coaches to learn that the Representative Council of the Michigan High School Athletic Association did not approve at its May 6-7 meeting what some people refer to as the “enhanced strength of schedule proposal” for determining 256 qualifiers to the MHSAA’s 11-player football playoffs.
There was desire among some Council members to appease those who keep trying to reduce the difficulties that a football tournament causes for regular season scheduling and conference affiliations. Others noted that the proposal, as presented, could cause as much harm to some schools and conferences as it would help others, that it did not solve the scheduling problem but shifted it.
During spirited discussion, some Council members resurrected two ideas that have been rejected previously, such as (1) doubling the playoffs once again (and shortening the regular season to eight games), and (2) coupling a six- or seven-win minimum with the revised strength of schedule criteria. The pros and cons of each idea flowed freely.
And therein is the problem. If one digs down into the details of proposals, both old and new, there are both positive and negative aspects apparent, both intended and unintended consequences likely.
There can be paralysis in analysis; but when we are dealing with more than 600 high school programs and a physically demanding sport with fewer regular-season contests permitted than in any other sport, one cannot be too careful. Eliminating one of just nine regular-season games? Increasing first-round tournament mismatches? Disadvantaging larger schools locked in leagues or areas of the state where smaller schools predominate? These are not minor matters.
And until there are sensible answers, these are not trivial questions.