The One Thing
June 17, 2016
“If funding were not an issue, what’s the one thing you would do at the MHSAA?”
That’s the question posed late last month by a candidate for employment at the MHSAA; and I answered without any hesitancy.
I would require and pay for both initial and continuing education of all coaches, both high school and junior high/middle school, head coaches and assistants, paid and volunteer. It would occur mostly face to face, and it would be intentional in its conveyance of the meaning of educational athletics and the definition of success in school-sponsored sports.
The coach is the front line in the delivery of the core values of educational athletics and the immediate and lifetime benefits of school sports participation. More than any other person, coaches can change students’ lives and they can create a culture in their program that changes the attitudes of parents toward youth sports and the attitudes of spectators toward officials.
The well-trained coach, the purposefully trained coach, not only gives the student a better experience, that coach also gives parents a reality check and helps give officials a more sportsmanlike atmosphere in which to work. Well-trained coaches enhance almost every aspect of the school sports experience – improving participant safety and promoting a lifetime of healthy habits; teaching and demanding good sportsmanship that evolves toward good citizenship; promoting teamwork, hard work, fair play, respect for rules and others.
Delivering with purpose and passion initial and ongoing education that is research-based, student-focused and required of all interscholastic coaches, is best for kids and for the future of school sports in Michigan. And it would contribute mightily to the quality of our schools and communities.
Over the past decade, approximately 20,000 individuals have completed one or more levels of the MHSAA Coaches Advancement Program (CAP). The goal should be 20,000 coaches through multiple levels of CAP each year. That’s the one thing the MHSAA should do.
The Fourth Option
February 27, 2018
Throughout the years, schools of this and every other state have identified problems relating to school transfers. There is recruitment of athletes and undue influence. There is school shopping by families for athletic reasons. There is jumping by students from one school to another for athletic reasons because they couldn’t get along with a coach or saw a greater opportunity to play at another school or to win a championship there. There is the bumping of students off a team or out of a starting lineup by incoming transfers, which often outrages local residents. There is the concentration of talent on one team by athletic-motivated transfers. There is friction between schools as one becomes the traditional choice for students who specialize in a particular sport. There is imbalance in competition as a result. And there is always the concern that the athletic-motivated transfer simply puts athletics above academics, which is inappropriate in educational athletics.
All states have developed rules to address the problems related to school transfers. In some states, it is called a “transfer rule” and in other states a “residency rule,” because linking school attendance to residence is one of the most effective tools for controlling eligibility of transfers. None of the state high school association rules is identical, but all have the intention of helping to prevent recruiting, school shopping, student bumping, team friction, competitive imbalance and sports overemphasis. The goal of promoting fairness in athletic competition and the perspective that students must go to school first for an education and only secondarily to participate in interscholastic athletics is paramount.
The transfer/residency rule is a legally and historically tested but still imperfect tool to control athletic-motivated transfers and other abuses. It is a net which catches some students it should not, and misses some students that should not be eligible. This is why all state high school associations have procedures to review individual cases and grant exceptions; and why all state high school associations have procedures to investigate allegations and to penalize violations where they are confirmed.
Over the years, state high school associations have considered four options to handle transfers. The first two options are the easiest courses: either (1) let schools decide themselves about transfers, as Michigan once did, but this leads to inconsistent applications and few states now subscribe to such an approach; or (2) make no exceptions at all, rendering all transfer students ineligible for a period of time, but this becomes patently unfair for some students and no state high school association subscribes to that extreme, although it would be easy to administer.
The third option – the ideal approach, perhaps – would be to investigate the motivation of every transfer and allow quicker eligibility or subvarsity eligibility to those which are not motivated by athletics, but this is very time consuming if not impossible to administer. No state high school association has sufficient staff and money to consider every detail and devious motive of every transfer.
This is why a fourth option has been most popular with most state high school associations. This is a middle ground which stipulates a basic rule, some exceptions (we have 15 exceptions in Michigan), and procedures to consider and grant waivers – a primary role of the Michigan High School Athletic Association Executive Committee.