Logo

Mounting Evidence

October 10, 2014

On three occasions over the last three months alone, I’ve posted opinions and statistics about the downsides of sports specialization, often citing the work and words of others because, frankly, I’m expected to oppose sports specialization – it’s in my DNA and job description – and anyway, the experts always come from some other place.
  • On July 15 (“Misspent Money”), the Chicago Tribune’s William Hageman was the reporter and Utah State University provided the research. The message was that sports specialization is a serious waste of family resources.

  • On July 18 (“Specialization Risks”), the renowned David Epstein was the writer and Loyola University of Chicago provided the work. The message was that serious health risks make specialization counterproductive to successful sports careers.

  • On Sept. 5 (“More Than a Myth”), I reported that the Lansing State Journal picked a three-sport male and four-sport female as its 2013-14 high school athletes of the year – practical proof that the reports of the death of the multi-sport athlete are greatly exaggerated.

Last month, Athletic Business recalled its August 2013 interview with the often quoted Dr. James Andrews, the orthopedic surgeon and injury consultant and author of “Any Given Monday: Sports Injuries and How to Prevent Them for Athletes, Parents and Coaches – Based on My Life in Sports Medicine.” In this interview, Dr. Andrews reiterated his earlier statements (some quoted in earlier postings here) that there is a “dramatic increase in overuse injuries ... due in large part to kids participating in one sport all year ...”

Athletic Business editor-in-chief Dennis Van Milligen added in his September 2014 editorial:

“Parents are ‘investing’ outrageous amounts of money into their children’s athletic development, because the fear is that they will not reach the level they need to without specialization, a notion constantly disproved.”

For multiple reasons, the multiple-sport experience is best. We must strive continually to make that experience possible for most of our student-athletes.

Injecting Sports Medicine

May 13, 2014

We are receiving the proper dosage of sports medicine advice in Michigan.
The Sports Medicine Advisory Committee of the National Federation of State High School Associations advises the NFHS and its member associations on medical and safety issues and conditions as they relate to interscholastic athletics. With nationwide expertise representing a broad range of sports medicine disciplines, the SMAC meets over three days, two times each year. It issues advisories and position statements and publishes a comprehensive manual which is provided without charge to each member high school in Michigan. 
The MHSAA has had direct representation on the SMAC for two separate four-year terms; and we depend on the SMAC to monitor, evaluate, filter and disseminate current sports medicine information that is of practical use at the interscholastic level.
The SMAC and the Michigan Department of Community Health are the voices the MHSAA listens to most in the often over-hyped cacophony of sports medicine opinion. What makes the SMAC even more unique than its prestigious panel of experts is that it has direct input into the rules-making process of the NFHS which dominates the publishing of high school playing rules. The MHSAA adopts those rules in every MHSAA sport for which rules are prepared by the NFHS.
The MHSAA has sometimes been criticized for not having its own sports medicine committee. However, we believe there is no need to create another committee to duplicate the work of the NFHS Sports Medicine Committee. And when we have needed extra attention to a unique in-state topic, we have found the Michigan Department of Community Health to be a willing and able partner.