Health Histories
September 4, 2012
Eighteen months ago we completed two new preparticipation physical examination forms: (1) a two-sided card delivered without charge to schools in whatever quantity they need; and (2) a four-page form that is downloadable at MHSAA.com.
Both are improved from the previous card in that they ask more about family and student health history which, more than any cursory exam, helps identify potential health risks before participation. Both were developed with the cooperation and consensus of a diverse panel of medical experts assembled by the Michigan Department of Community Health.
At schools’ requests, the MHSAA has distributed more copies of the two-sided card than there are students enrolled in MHSAA member schools; so we know the form has widespread use. But still, this particular form is not required, which allows schools with a special local resource to utilize something they like better, and this also allows families with special needs to use the documents that best meet their child’s circumstances.
The take-away on this topic is that today’s standard of care is a comprehensive physical with detailed family history prior to first participation in school sports and, thereafter, more cursory annual exams, except when the student has had an injury or illness that requires more review.
Not Right for Us
March 7, 2017
The proposal to utilize KPI Rankings to seed the District and Regional rounds of the MHSAA Boys and Girls Basketball Tournaments should not be adopted by the Michigan High School Athletic Association.
This is no criticism of KPI Rankings per se, or of its creator who is assistant athletic director at Michigan State University; but it’s not the right thing to do for our statewide high school basketball tournaments.
The KPI rankings is one of a half-dozen means used by the NCAA to seed its Division I Men’s Basketball Tournament. But the proposal before us is that KPI rankings become the one and only system for seeding the MHSAA’s tournaments. There would be no other criteria and no human judgment.
The result would be seeding that misses important details, like which teams are hot and which are not at season end, and which teams have recently lost players to injuries or ineligibilities and which have had players return.
KPI ranks teams on a game-by-game basis by assigning a value to every game played. A loss to an opponent with a poor record is considered a “bad loss” and has a negative point value. A win over an opponent with a good record is considered a “good win” and earns a positive point value. Margin of victory is a factor.
This is a nice tool for the NCAA to use, along with a variety of other tools and considerations that its billion-dollar budget can accommodate, but none of which is proposed for seeding the MHSAA tournaments. KPI Rankings is not sufficient as the one-and-only seeding criterion for MHSAA tournaments.
Moreover, dependence on a seeding system owned by a single individual, who is outside the MHSAA office, and who has the potential to move from MSU to anywhere across the USA, is a poor business strategy.
If there is to be seeding, there are more appropriate ways to do it for the high school level. But first there needs to be clearer consensus that seeding is a good thing to do, philosophically and practically. In the MHSAA we do this sport by sport, and level by level. And the jury is still out for seeding in Michigan high school basketball.