Stacking

December 19, 2014

Many in the interscholastic tennis community of this state have complained for years about the unethical practices of a small number of coaches who “stack” their lineups so that their better players compete in lower flights to increase their chances of success in advancing and earning points for their teams.
The current meet scoring system, which fails to reward teams for placing players at the highest levels, invites the problem. Appealing to personal integrity works with most coaches, but not all; so the issue of stacking festers, and it frustrates many coaches.
Hearing this pain, in 2009 the MHSAA convened a group of tennis coaches to discuss stacking. We utilized a paid professional facilitator. One obvious outcome was very little support to solve the problem by restructuring the tennis meet scoring system to disincentivize stacking.
The simple solution – to modify the meet scoring system to provide more team points for Number 1 singles than Number 2, and for Number 2 more than Number 3, etc. – was a double fault with the clear majority of the coaches assembled in 2009.
Of course, simple solutions rarely are so simple. And with this scoring system solution comes the likelihood that stronger teams move even further out of reach of their challengers. Other critics are uncomfortable with giving one student-athlete a higher potential team point value than another.
If those and other objections are the prevailing sentiment, then a new scoring system won’t be in our future. And stacking still will be.

Reluctant Leadership

March 15, 2016

Years ago I was asked my opinion about who should become the president of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. My response was that it should be no person who is seeking the job. It was and remains my belief that, in ministry, the person should not seek the job; the job should seek the person.

I think this should also apply to the presidency of the United States.

It’s only mid-March, and I’m already sick and tired of campaign rhetoric and the ridiculously low behavior of candidates for what’s supposed to be our nation’s highest office.

I am looking for humility; and I think, perhaps, that any person who seeks the presidency probably lacks the humility to be the person we need in that office.

I want both a freer and fairer society, led by humble servants within public and private institutions. I want servant-leaders with character more than charisma.

I want a society where individuals with drive and discipline take responsibility for making things better at home and in their neighborhoods, communities and states. And where one of these unsuspecting persons, with lots of grit but little guile, gets drafted to lead our country, and very reluctantly accepts.