The Other Mr. Forsythe
August 8, 2017
The modern world is quick to dismiss pioneers who paved our way, but it would be wrong to diminish the accomplishments of those who gave form and function to school-sponsored sports in Michigan.
It was a time when travel was arduous and communications were slow. A time when the fundamentals of sports we take for granted today were being determined. A time when the basic rules of competition and eligibility we have today were being developed.
No single person has done more than L. L. Forsythe to shape school sports in Michigan, and the nation. This is Lewis L. Forsythe, not Charles E. Forsythe, the first and longest-serving executive director of the Michigan High School Athletic Association.
In 1918-19 and again in 1923-24, L. L. Forsythe served as president of the MHSAA’s predecessor organization, the Michigan Interscholastic Athletic Association, which operated from 1910 to 1924. He served on its board of control from 1921 to 1924.
When the MIAA gave way to the MHSAA in 1924, L. L. Forsythe was elected president of its Representative Council, and he served unpaid in that position for 18 consecutive years (1924 to 1942).
L. L. Forsythe served on the Executive Committee of the newly forming National Federation of State High School Associations from 1922 to 1940, and was the young national organization’s vice-president for 15 of those 18 years.
During these years, the MHSAA commenced state tournaments in seven sports and the National Federation ended national high school tournaments in all sports. Playing rules moved from a local hit-and-miss process to a national system that emphasized standardization and safety. Much that we do routinely now was a matter of first impression then.
Sweating the Small Stuff - #3
June 5, 2018
I’m sure it discouraged some of our state’s high school football coaches to learn that the Representative Council of the Michigan High School Athletic Association did not approve at its May 6-7 meeting what some people refer to as the “enhanced strength of schedule proposal” for determining 256 qualifiers to the MHSAA’s 11-player football playoffs.
There was desire among some Council members to appease those who keep trying to reduce the difficulties that a football tournament causes for regular season scheduling and conference affiliations. Others noted that the proposal, as presented, could cause as much harm to some schools and conferences as it would help others, that it did not solve the scheduling problem but shifted it.
During spirited discussion, some Council members resurrected two ideas that have been rejected previously, such as (1) doubling the playoffs once again (and shortening the regular season to eight games), and (2) coupling a six- or seven-win minimum with the revised strength of schedule criteria. The pros and cons of each idea flowed freely.
And therein is the problem. If one digs down into the details of proposals, both old and new, there are both positive and negative aspects apparent, both intended and unintended consequences likely.
There can be paralysis in analysis; but when we are dealing with more than 600 high school programs and a physically demanding sport with fewer regular-season contests permitted than in any other sport, one cannot be too careful. Eliminating one of just nine regular-season games? Increasing first-round tournament mismatches? Disadvantaging larger schools locked in leagues or areas of the state where smaller schools predominate? These are not minor matters.
And until there are sensible answers, these are not trivial questions.