A Game Changer
July 9, 2012
In the year 2000, fewer than 300,000 books were published in the United States. In 2010, more than a million were published.
This means that electronic media didn’t kill the book publishing industry, as some experts predicted. Quite the opposite. But electronic media surely changed the industry in several major ways, including:
-
It democricized the industry – made it cheaper and easier for almost all of us to publish whatever we want, whenever we want, even if only our family and closest friends might read it.
-
It dumbed down the industry. With almost everybody able to produce almost anything, the average quality of published works has plummeted.
The importance of these book industry statistics to us is that they point to what can and does happen in other aspects of life, including school sports. They provide evidence that sometimes what we think might crush us, only changes us. Causes us to do things differently – cheaper, faster or better and, sometimes, all three at once.
Some of us in school sports may, sometimes, curse electronic media; but many of the changes they have brought us are positive. Like officials registering online, receiving game assignments online and filing reports online. Like schools rating officials online; and online rules meetings for coaches and officials. Like schools scheduling games online, and spectators submitting scores online. Like the ArbiterGame scheduling program the MHSAA is now providing all its member high schools free of charge.
Answering Seeding Questions
January 19, 2018
Seeding is a topic on the agenda of several Michigan High School Athletic Association sport committees. Last May, the Representative Council reiterated that its approach is to consider seeding on a sport-by-sport, level-by-level basis, depending on its committees and others to develop specific plans and to demonstrate wide support among schools of all sizes and types.
A recommendation by the Basketball Committee in December of 2016 to seed District and Regional basketball tournaments with one of the systems utilized by the NCAA for its men’s Division I tournament was not adopted by the Council last May, but MHSAA staff was requested to explore alternatives for seeding District level tournaments only.
Subsequently, MHSAA surveys have demonstrated significant support, especially in more populated areas, for an approach that separates on District basketball tournament brackets the top two teams of each District whose teams continue to be assigned on the basis of geography. We’ve found that historically strong programs tend to support this “simple seeding,” while middle-of-the-pack programs tend to see seeding as another obstacle to success and creating more distance between haves and have-nots.
MHSAA staff have demonstrated how similarly the results would have been if any one of the three systems had been used to perform this simple seeding of District basketball tournaments in 2017. In the vast majority of 2017 District tournaments, the team that actually won the tournament would have been the No. 1 seeded team in that District, demonstrating that simple seeding may be less about picking the winners than it is determining which two teams will play in the District championship games.
Many questions would have to be answered before any one of these systems could be adopted. However, even without answering any questions, in December 2017, the Basketball Committee recommended seeding for District tournaments as soon as possible.
At its January meeting, the MHSAA Classification Committee made a recommendation to the Representative Council that attempts to answer one of the questions. That committee agreed that if a plan is approved to separate the top two seeded teams in each geographically determined District of the Girls and Boys Basketball Tournaments, the system used should be completely controlled within the MHSAA office.
Of course, many other questions and logistical details need to be answered. Do we only use games versus member schools? What do we do with unreported scores? When is the data finalized? Should human input be added to the computer ratings? Do seeded teams automatically get a bye? How and when do we assign officials?
Answering such questions must come next.