Logo

Little League Lessons

September 12, 2014

Little League Baseball turned 75 years of age this year, and the anniversary had shone a media spotlight on the organization even before a hard-throwing female pitcher stole the show at the Little League World Series last month.
Little League’s veteran CEO Steve Keener gave Street & Smith’s Sports Business Journal (Aug. 4-10) the same words we’ve said often to ourselves about school-sponsored sports. He said:  “... our mission today is the same as it was 75 years ago. We just have to find different ways to tell the story ...”
One of Little League’s responses to this challenge parallels our own. In the words of Sports Business Journal, Little League “has turned its website into a vast resource” for league administrators’ tools, for coaches education and for parents.
Like school sports, Little League has different parents today than years ago. “For them, the youth sports fields aren’t so much a destination as a path;” and they need help navigating the pressures from instructors selling lessons, travel leagues promising exposure to college recruiters and professional scouts, and coaches of other sports who threaten that without year-round specialization, the “next level” will be beyond their child’s reach.
Like school sports, Little League still preaches the benefits and encourages multi-sport participation; but Little League has succumbed to pressure and now offers a fall program in addition to its late spring and summer program. Keener explained to Sports Business Journal: “... leagues were going to offer a program in the fall with Little League or without it, so he’d prefer they be subject to the same oversight as they are in the traditional season. ‘We offer it because we can’t stop it,’ Keener said. ‘We can’t make it go away. So we have to live with it and manage it.’ ”
We have often talked about taking a similar approach to summer basketball, 7-on-7 football and other programming that is currently outside the quality control that some school administrators and coaches think is needed.

5 Questions for 8-Player Football

April 10, 2017

The 2017 8-Player Football Playoffs will be conducted over four weeks in two divisions of 16 teams each for the 60-plus teams sponsored by Michigan High School Athletic Association Class D schools.

That much was decided by the MHSAA Representative Council on March 24.

There are five questions (at least) that the Council still must answer:

  1. How should teams qualify? Since the first 8-player tournament in 2011, teams have qualified by playoff point averages – the 16 highest qualified for the tournament. Should this be changed to a system of automatic qualifiers on the basis of wins, plus additional qualifiers on the basis of playoff points to complete the field – like the 11-player tournament operates?

  2. When should divisions be determined? Should it be in late March when division breaks for other “equal divisions” tournaments are set? Or should divisions be determined nearer the start of the season – say, September 1 – so all late additions, deletions, and cooperative program changes can be factored in before the two divisions, based on enrollment, are determined?

  3. Where will the championship games be played? Should the Council designate a doubleheader at the Superior Dome in Marquette so the MHSAA can focus all its resources on one climate-controlled facility? Or should two sites be designated now (perhaps the Superior Dome in Marquette and Legacy Field in Greenville), and the specific games and times assigned as the playoffs progress in an attempt to reduce travel times for teams and spectators?

  4. Should the maximum enrollment for the 8-player tournament be the moving target of the Class D maximum (203 in 2017) or a fixed number – for example, 215, the Class D maximum in 2011 when the 8-player tournament began? This decision could be deferred to the Council’s meeting in December.

  5. Should there be a “grace period” for schools that are eligible for the 8-player tournament one year but have enrollments that exceed the 8-player limit the next year – for example, eligible only the following year and only if the enrollment does not exceed the 8-player enrollment limit by more than 12 students? This decision could also be delayed to the December meeting of the Council.

As our excitement builds for the expanded 8-player tournament, so do the questions.