Prevention Progression
June 28, 2015
The starting point for concussion care is prevention; and when we talk about prevention of concussions we must include education, equipment and enforcement.
Education is a shared responsibility of all who conduct and coach athletic programs; and the vital information about prevention, recognition, after-care and recovery needs to reach every player, their parents and all coaches.
Equipment is mainly the responsibility of those who make the protective gear and of those who make the rules specifications for that gear, but there are important responsibilities at more local levels. For example, to make sure what schools purchase and provide to players meets rules requirements, gets reconditioned as needed and fits properly. In football, for example, the fit of the helmet is much more important than its price ... fit at the start of the season and checked throughout the season.
As with education and equipment, enforcement is also a shared responsibility. In football it includes local enforcement of the 2014 football practice rules that have reduced collision practices; and in contests it means contest officials’ enforcement of the strongest set of safety rules in the game’s history.
In all sports, officials are to err on the side of safety; and when they do, the MHSAA will have their backs. Local school administrators and coaches should too.
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.