Risk Minimization Reaches More
May 9, 2014
Every season – fall, winter and spring – the MHSAA launches a series of sport-specific rules/risk management meetings, completion of which has been a requirement for high school varsity head coaches and MHSAA registered officials who want to coach or officiate in the MHSAA tournament for that sport. Two significant changes will occur for the 2014-15 school year.
For the first time in 2014-15, all assistant and subvarsity high school coaches must complete the same meeting requirement as the high school varsity head coach or, in the alternative, they must complete one of seven free online health and safety courses that are posted on MHSAA.com and designated to fulfill this requirement. High school athletic directors must certify each season, three times a year, that all their assistant and subvarsity coaches for that season have completed that requirement.
Also, for the first time in 2014-15, the MHSAA will be posting content for officials that differs from the content for coaches. While coaches are being given a review of select Handbook regulations, for example, officials will be reminded of key elements of effective officiating, regardless of the sport or level of competition.
These new policies are intended to bring more relevant content to a greater number of those who work with student-athletes and to further emphasize risk minimization in educational athletics.
In 2013-14, slightly more than 20,000 coaches and officials completed the MHSAA rules/risk management meeting requirement. The number will greatly exceed 100,000 in 2014-15.
Answering Seeding Questions
January 19, 2018
Seeding is a topic on the agenda of several Michigan High School Athletic Association sport committees. Last May, the Representative Council reiterated that its approach is to consider seeding on a sport-by-sport, level-by-level basis, depending on its committees and others to develop specific plans and to demonstrate wide support among schools of all sizes and types.
A recommendation by the Basketball Committee in December of 2016 to seed District and Regional basketball tournaments with one of the systems utilized by the NCAA for its men’s Division I tournament was not adopted by the Council last May, but MHSAA staff was requested to explore alternatives for seeding District level tournaments only.
Subsequently, MHSAA surveys have demonstrated significant support, especially in more populated areas, for an approach that separates on District basketball tournament brackets the top two teams of each District whose teams continue to be assigned on the basis of geography. We’ve found that historically strong programs tend to support this “simple seeding,” while middle-of-the-pack programs tend to see seeding as another obstacle to success and creating more distance between haves and have-nots.
MHSAA staff have demonstrated how similarly the results would have been if any one of the three systems had been used to perform this simple seeding of District basketball tournaments in 2017. In the vast majority of 2017 District tournaments, the team that actually won the tournament would have been the No. 1 seeded team in that District, demonstrating that simple seeding may be less about picking the winners than it is determining which two teams will play in the District championship games.
Many questions would have to be answered before any one of these systems could be adopted. However, even without answering any questions, in December 2017, the Basketball Committee recommended seeding for District tournaments as soon as possible.
At its January meeting, the MHSAA Classification Committee made a recommendation to the Representative Council that attempts to answer one of the questions. That committee agreed that if a plan is approved to separate the top two seeded teams in each geographically determined District of the Girls and Boys Basketball Tournaments, the system used should be completely controlled within the MHSAA office.
Of course, many other questions and logistical details need to be answered. Do we only use games versus member schools? What do we do with unreported scores? When is the data finalized? Should human input be added to the computer ratings? Do seeded teams automatically get a bye? How and when do we assign officials?
Answering such questions must come next.