Logo

If Not Now, When?

October 2, 2012

The greatest disappointments I experience in the administration of educational athletics are when I observe the program miss the opportunity to educate students in ways that will instill positive character traits.  It happens in little ways every day; and sometimes it happens in really big ways when we fail to require people to accept the consequences of their actions.

During and immediately following a Regional Tennis match several years ago, a student displayed the kind of sportsmanship that offended everyone’s sense of appropriate behavior.  There was no question he behaved badly, although the student and parents had many excuses for the behavior.

While the player was not disqualified at the time, his coach, athletic director and principal agreed the player should be withheld from the Final tournament, consistent with suspensions applied to other students in other sports at other times.  The parents appealed the decision and the central office overturned the building level decision because “missing the Final tournament was too severe a penalty.”  If it had been a regular-season contest, not the MHSAA Finals, the student would have been suspended.

So, what’s the lesson here?  There are consequences for inappropriate behavior so long as it’s not an important event for the student and school.  What kind of lesson is that?

And what a problem!  For this lesson teaches that exceptions will be made for better players and bigger events, that standards of acceptable behavior are related to the persistence of the parents and the prestige of the competition.

The problem is that if people are not held accountable for their behavior in high school athletics, whenever will they?  The problem is that if people are not held accountable for their acts – i.e., fail to develop character – a world going bad is going to get there faster.

Transfer Rule Rationale

March 6, 2018

It is certain that the Michigan High School Athletic Association transfer rule is imperfect. However, whatever imperfections exist are effectively remedied through a process by which member school administrators may make application to the MHSAA Executive Committee to waive the rule if, in the committee’s opinion, the rule fails to serve any purpose for which it is intended or, in its sole discretion, the Executive Committee determines that application of the rule creates an undue hardship on the student. 

In a typical year, the Executive Committee will receive approximately 290 requests to waive the transfer regulation, approving approximately 60 percent of those requests.

The committee brings to its considerations the following rationale, most recently reviewed and reaffirmed on Aug. 2, 2017:

  1. The rule tends to insure equality of competition in that each school plays students who have been in that school and established their eligibility in that school.

  2. The rule tends to prevent students from "jumping" from one school to another.

  3. The rule prevents the "bumping" of students who have previously gained eligibility in a school system by persons coming from outside the school system.

  4. The rule tends to prevent interscholastic athletic recruiting.

  5. The rule tends to prevent or discourage dominance of one sport at one school with a successful program, i.e., the concentration of excellent baseball players at one school to the detriment of surrounding schools through transfers and to the detriment of the natural school population and ability mix.

  6. The rule tends to create and maintain stability in that age group, i.e., it promotes team stability and teamwork expectation fulfillment.

  7. The rule is designed to discourage parents from "school shopping" for athletic purposes.

  8. The rule is consistent with educational philosophy of going to school for academics first and athletics second.

  9. It eliminates family financial status from becoming a factor on eligibility, thus making a uniform rule for all students across the state of Michigan (i.e., tuition and millage considerations).

  10. It tends to encourage competition between nonpublic and public schools, rather than discourage that competition.

  11. It tends to reduce friction or threat of students changing schools because of problems they may have created or because of their misconduct, etc.