The Off-Season
August 20, 2013
“If you take the summer off, you might have some muscle memory left, but you’re not going to be in the same shape.” That’s what Pam Allyn, director of LitWorld, a nonprofit organization promoting literacy, told Associated Press writer Philip Elliott for a recent story focusing on innovative ways to avoid the “brain drain” during summer vacations.
This gets to the heart of two points the MHSAA has been making.
First, the State of Michigan should stop penalizing public schools that want to begin academic classes prior to the Tuesday after Labor Day. Whether it’s a week, a month or longer, there should be incentives, not penalties, for doing more of what’s needed – providing more time on task.
Second, even for extracurricular sports, where programs begin before classes start in the fall and often extend beyond the end of classes in the spring, there is a need to rethink the summer months. Students need to stay active in a variety of activities during the summer to stay more fit, to help to enhance their acclimatization during early season practices in August and prevent injuries throughout the season.
From a sports perspective, the best summertime investments are to focus on strength and conditioning more than travel teams and tournaments, on variety more than specialization, and on engagement with friends who make the time fun. These are the elements of the “Prep Rally” promotion you can read about here.
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.