The Top Task
April 17, 2018
I’ve said and written many times before that the task of an athletic administrator is not merely event management, it is also – and more importantly – message management. It is defining and defending educational athletics. Doing so every day, in every way. Forcing our constituents, from top to bottom and both young and old, to ask and answer ...
“What is educational athletics?”
and
“What is the meaning of success in school sports?”
and
“How do we deliver the message every day?”
This is why I’ve blogged twice a week for nine years. Eighty percent of those postings have been intended to help define and defend educational athletics.
This is why the MHSAA publishes benchmarks – the only issues-focused high school association magazine in the US.
This is why we have a Student Advisory Council, a Scholar-Athlete Award, a Battle of the Fans, Captains Clinics and Sportsmanship Summits.
This is why we take our coaches education – the Coaches Advancement Program – face to face, week after week, to every corner of our state.
This is why we have a Task Force on Multi-Sport Participation.
This is why we have a radio network and waive fees for local stations which use our great public service announcements that define and defend educational athletics ... many of which conclude with the phrase, “Promoting the value and values of educational athletics.”
All of this, and much more, is about defining and defending educational athletics ... the top task of athletic administrators from top to bottom of our exciting enterprise.
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.