Logo

The Specialty of School Sports

July 24, 2018

(This blog first appeared on MHSAA.com on November 18, 2016.)


There is much finger pointing when it comes to sports injuries, and I’d like to point in a direction that is often missed.

Some people blame equipment – it’s either inadequate, or it’s so good that it encourages athletes to use their bodies in unsafe ways.

Some people say the rules are inadequate, or inadequately enforced by contest officials.

Some people say the pool of coaches is inadequate, or they are inadequately trained.

But let’s not miss the fact that risk of injury is inherent in athletic activities, and at least part of the reason injuries occur is because the participants are developmentally deficient. In fact, this may be the fastest growing contributing cause to injuries in youth sports. It’s not the sport; it’s the lack of development, the lack of physical preparation.

When rushed into early and intense specialization in a single sport, youth may not be ready for the rigors of that sport. Lindsay J. DiStefano, PhD, ATC, of the University of Connecticut, has researched the topic among youth basketball and soccer players and linked higher injury rates to lower sports sampling, and vice versa. Exposure to multiple sports during early childhood positively influences neuromuscular control and reduces injuries.

Do we encourage youth to sample several sports and help them learn basic athletic movements and skills? Do we offer opportunities to train and condition and focus special attention on strengthening knees and necks? Do we provide more time and attention on practice than on competition and assure safe technique is taught and learned?

Early and intense specialization, with excessive attention to competition, invites injury. There is a much healthier way for most youth – and that’s balanced, multi-sport participation – the specialty of junior high/middle school and high school sports.

A Can-Do Response

January 5, 2015

Michigan has a tradition of some of the nation’s most lenient out-of-season coaching rules, especially in the summer; and yet, the few rules we have are sometimes blamed for driving students to non-school programs.
Nevertheless, there is some validity to the criticism. It is observably true that non-school programs seem to fill every void in the interscholastic calendar. The day after high school seasons end, many non-school programs begin. The day a school coach can no longer work with more than three or four students, a non-school coach begins to do so.
The challenge is to balance the negative effects of an “arms war” in high school sports against driving students toward non-school programs. It’s the balance of too few vs. too many rules out of season.
The out-of-the-box compromise for this dilemma could be to not regulate the off season as much as to conduct school-sponsored off-season programs in a healthier way than they normally occur, i.e., to move schools back in control of and in the center of the non-school season. To not merely regulate what schools and coaches can’t do, but actually run the programs they can do and want to do.
Of course, this would require more of what schools have less of – resources. School administrators who may be in agreement that schools should operate off-season programs to keep kids attached to in-season programs still balk because they lack resources. At a time when resources are being cut for basic support of in-season programs, how could they justify spending more for out-of-season outreach?
Ultimately, in discovering the sweet spot for out-of-season interaction between school coaches with student-athletes, we need to give at least as much attention to providing more opportunity for what they can do together as for what they can’t do.