Logo

Membership Renewal

May 23, 2017

Unlike classroom courses of our schools, the interscholastic athletic program requires opponents; and to help promote a level playing field for competition, the interscholastic athletic program requires some organization to provide a forum to assist in developing competitive standards and to help assure they are maintained. For many years, many schools have worked through the Michigan High School Athletic Association to establish a common set of rules, for the orderly administration of an interscholastic athletic program, which promotes academic integrity and competitive equity. 

According to Michigan Attorney General Opinion #4795 of 1977, any local board of education that desires to do so may voluntarily join the MHSAA by adopting the rules of the association and agreeing to enforce those rules with respect to its schools. Institutional control remains the key to this organization.

MHSAA membership is free of charge, and there is no entry fee to participate in MHSAA tournaments. But while MHSAA membership is free of costs, it’s not free of responsibilities. The expectations of member schools include:

  • Educating student-athletes, staff and other involved personnel about MHSAA rules and procedures.

  • Monitoring compliance year-around.

  • Investigating possible violations and reporting findings.

  • Administering penalties.      

Each school district that agrees to these responsibilities must say so by means of an annual board of education resolution. The resolutions have just been mailed to all superintendents for the 2017-18 school year.

Each school district that wishes one or more schools to participate in MHSAA tournaments and benefit from MHSAA services must schedule on its board of education agenda the adoption of the MHSAA Membership Resolution. The Resolution should be signed in sufficient time to prevent a lapse in membership (before August 1). A lapse in membership, even though for only a week, can create unnecessary problems should there be claims under the $1,000,000 accident medical insurance plan or the concussion care gap insurance or if eligibility rulings are to be made during that period.

The Seeding Disease

May 1, 2018

I have yet to hear one satisfactory reason to advocate for seeding an all-comers, 740-team high school basketball tournament. But this I do know: Advocates of seeding are never satisfied.

Seeding high school basketball tournaments has become the rage since the NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Tournament, still just a 68-team affair, became a billion dollar media business. Many people assume that what is used for this limited invitational college tournament is needed and appropriate for a high school tournament that involves 11 times as many teams.

The NCAA pours millions of dollars into the process of selecting and seeding its 68-team tournament, combining a variety of data-based measurements with the judgments and biases of human beings.

One of this year’s questionable selections to make the 68-team field was Syracuse ... which sent our more highly touted and seeded Michigan State Spartans back home early in the tournament.

Meanwhile, low-seeded Loyola-Chicago upset four teams on its way to the Final Four, and became the favorite of fans nationwide. Which argues for upsets. Which argues for randomness.

Which argues against seeding. Why pick the No. 1 seeds of four regions and have all four glide to the Final Four? What fun would that be?

A local sports columnist who is an outspoken advocate for seeding our state’s high school basketball tournament actually wrote a published column advocating for “more Loyolas” in the NCAA tournament, and he explained how to make that happen. Which, of course, seeding is designed to not make happen, but instead, to grease the skids for top-seeded teams.

When the NCAA Final Four brackets for San Antonio resulted in two No. 1 seeds on one side, playing in one semifinal game (Kansas and Villanova), while the other side of the bracket had a semifinal with a No. 3 seed (Michigan) and a No. 11 seed (Loyola), there was a call for more finagling ... for reseeding the semifinals so that the two No. 1 seeds wouldn’t have to play until the final game.

It was poetic justice to watch one No. 1 seed clobber the other No. 1 seed in a terrible semifinal mismatch.

The point is this: Seeding is flawed, and advocates of seeding are never satisfied. If we take a small step, they will want more steps. If we seed the top two teams of Districts, they will lobby for seeding all teams of the Districts. If we seed all teams of Districts, they will ask for seeding Regionals. And, if we seed the start of the tournament, they will want a do-over if it doesn’t work out right for the Finals.

Seeding is a distraction, and an addiction.