The Multi-Sport Difference
July 26, 2016
If there was ever a poster child for what it means to be a high school athlete, recent Williamston High School graduate Renee Sturm might be the person to feature. She has said and done exactly what we would hope.
In an era when increasing numbers of high school athletes are graduating midway through their senior year in order to get an early start with the college teams that have recruited them, Renee is a breath of fresh air.
After four years of volleyball and basketball at Williamston High School, Renee just hadn’t had enough of the high school sports experience. So she joined the school’s girls soccer team this past spring.
Now bound for Ferris State University where she is scheduled to play only basketball, Renee had this to say to the Lansing State Journal about why she decided to play soccer to conclude her high school sports career: “I wanted to do something different because playing different sports helps me grow ... I was just hoping to come in and play some.”
She didn’t seek to star, but to play ... to be a part of a different sport and team and group of teammates who would help her develop as an athlete and person.
The richest school sports experience is found in multi-sport participation, both starring and subbing, both losing and winning. That’s what best prepares young people for life.
I suspect this young lady is ready.
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.