Starting Five

December 6, 2016

The Task Force on Multi-Sport Participation which the Michigan High School Athletic Association appointed early in 2016 has identified its top five projects. They all encourage the MHSAA and its member schools to get in the game earlier.

The Task Force wants the MHSAA to:

  1. Partner with groups which are promoting diverse physical activity for youth, like the NFL’s “Play 60” and the United Dairy Industry of Michigan’s “Fuel Up” programs.

  2. Meet with groups which could influence more and better physical education in schools that would encourage more sport sampling by youth and increased literacy in basic athletic skills and movements.

  3. Prepare tools for administrators to use when interviewing coaches, conducting preseason meetings for coaches and encouraging coaches to “walk the talk” of promoting balanced, multi-sport participation by members of their school teams.

  4. Prepare for junior high/middle school and elementary school parents a “What Parents Should Know” guidebook with units created by medical personnel, high school and college athletes and coaches, educators and sports scientists.

  5. Prepare for junior high/middle school and elementary school parents a “Reality Check” video describing the costs of sports specialization and the facts about sports as a path to college tuition assistance.

Those who love and lead school sports cannot wait until kids (and their parents) reach high school before we start talking with them regarding the values of school-sponsored sports, the benefits of multi-sport participation, and the meaning of success in educational athletics.

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.