People Serving People
September 14, 2012
It is at this time each year, especially, that I’m made more aware of the harm and heartache that exists in our students’ homes, if they are lucky enough to have a home.
Every day our staff receives dozens of calls about the terrible circumstances children are in because of dysfunctional home life, medical issues or myriad other upsetting situations; and every day MHSAA Associate Director Tom Rashid is preparing for Executive Committee consideration more requests from schools to waive eligibility rules for their students whose circumstances do not fit a transfer exception or are not compliant with other regulations.
During the 2011-12 school year there were 506 requests for waiver submitted to the Executive Committee, compared to 462 the year before. The record is 524 in 2007-08.
By far, there are more requests to waive the transfer regulation than any other: 352 in 2011-12 compared to 320 the year before. The record is 372 in 2007-08.
There are so many requests for waiver today that the Executive Committee exceeds the MHSAA Constitution that requires a minimum of three meetings each year. The Executive Committee has scheduled 12 meetings during each year for the past half dozen years.
And the Executive Committee front loads the calendar, this year with three meetings over five weeks at the start of the school year (Aug. 8, Aug. 28 and Sept. 11) so that the large number of situations that arise at the beginning of the new school year can be addressed before too much of fall season competition has occurred.
Last school year the MHSAA Executive Committee approved 352 of the 506 requests for waiver, including 265 of the 352 requests to waive the transfer regulation. The five-member committee of school administrators serves without monetary compensation, but with a commitment to treat schools and students as fairly and consistently as humanly possible. They are compassionate, caring people making difficult decisions.
The Usual Suspects
December 30, 2016
It is difficult to find a year when the 11-player Football Finals of the Michigan High School Athletic Association involved more teams from southeast Michigan than appeared at Ford Field in 2016. In fact, just two counties (Oakland and Wayne) produced seven finalists. But then two counties on Michigan’s west side (Kent and Muskegon) supplied four of the 16 finalists.
Four of Michigan’s 83 counties producing 11 of 16 finalists in the 11-player championship games doesn’t’ feel like a statewide event; but one team from the Upper Peninsula, another from the Leelanau Peninsula in the northwest portion of the Lower Peninsula, and a team located along the Michigan/Ohio border remind us how large and diverse our state really is.
The 2016 MHSAA 11-player Football Finals consisted of many of the “usual suspects,” including two teams pursuing their fourth straight titles and one team seeking its third consecutive championship. Four of the eight 11-player champions from 2015 returned in the attempt to defend their titles in 2016, and two of the runners-up in 2015 were back to try to reverse their fortunes from 12 months earlier.
What is being demonstrated here in Michigan high school football is the trend seen in many other states. That is, as the number of classes or divisions of tournaments expands, the more often you see the same teams in the final rounds.
The surest way to have the “usual suspects” on championship day is to put them in tournaments with fewer schools. And of all MHSAA tournaments, the football playoffs have the most divisions with the fewest schools in each. The result is predictable.
This is a cautionary tale for those who desire that the number of classifications and divisions be expanded in MHSAA tournaments for other sports.
Meanwhile, we are keeping an eye on the tournament format in a neighboring state that places schools into divisions for larger schools after they are too successful over consecutive years in the classification that fits their enrollment. Those in Michigan who have been assigned to review such policies have complained that such “success factors” penalize future students because of the achievements of previous students and/or because such factors do nothing about “chronic success” by schools in the largest classification.