Political Fallout
April 22, 2016
It has been my long-held belief that there is a link between the quality of sportsmanship in our schools and the quality of citizenship in our society ... that if we made our games more respectful, society would tend to be more civil.
I’ve held this belief even though I’ve watched deteriorating standards of behavior in almost all aspects of society drag down the standards we’ve raised up for school sports. And frankly, I’ve admired that the standards of school sports have declined so little in comparison to the standards of society that have plummeted so far.
But now I read that the lack of decorum in this year’s presidential campaign has infected conduct at school sports events in at least three states, two of which border Michigan.
Student spectators would not shout chants about building walls to keep immigrants out of America if politicians had not created such slogans and campaigned on such themes.
Shallow, spiteful politics is doing deep damage to America, even to school sports. Of course, our coaches and administrators will attempt to use these ugly incidents as teachable moments.
But why should they have to? Why can’t those who claim they should lead the nation act like leaders? Why can’t they try to lead us to a higher level of humanity instead of inviting us to such hurtful or even hateful behavior?
Boring Impartiality
January 6, 2017
Some people – like our U.S. President-Elect and, apparently, like the NCAA Division I Football Playoff Selection Committee – seem to believe that all publicity, no matter how negative, is good publicity. If it draws attention to your candidacy or championships series, no matter how embarrassing, it’s okay – even good.
That’s not the belief of the Michigan High School Athletic Association. As an organization that must too often do unpopular things, like enforce rules that others don’t and impose penalties that others won’t, the MHSAA prefers to avoid creating controversy where there are options to do so.
The structure of MHSAA tournaments provides some options.
Tournaments which exclude no teams or individuals provoke less controversy than those with a limited field. Tournaments which favor no teams through a seeding scheme cause fewer arguments.
If our only purpose were to increase revenues, there is much we could do to gerrymander MHSAA tournaments in order to shorten, smooth out and straighten the tournament trail for the teams with the best records and biggest crowds during the regular season, like the NCAA women’s and NIT men’s basketball tournaments do.
But if fairness – blind, boring impartiality – is more important to us, then we will not force the teams with the poorest regular season records to face off in bracket rat-tails and we will not provide the teams with the best regular season records a tournament trail that avoids similar teams for as long as possible.
This approach opens us to criticism that we are dumb to be different and stupid to reject the revenue-generating practices of major college and professional sports organizations. But no one can claim we are unfair.
It’s not unfair to treat all schools the same. The unfairness begins – and real controversy follows – when an organization tries to favor some teams over others.