Why Not National Events?
October 7, 2016
The constituent groups of the National Federation of State High School Associations are engaged in a deliberate discussion of the merits of conducting national high school sports championships. The topic has been raised and rejected by the National Federation membership multiple times over many years.
Support for such events is infrequently merit-based and more often found where political pressures have assaulted policies that have prohibited schools from participation in national tournaments by school teams and students representing schools. Opposition is based in both philosophical and practical concerns.
Proponents of national tournaments say such events will provide a platform to promote education-based athletic programs, but what we would often see – teams full of transfer students missing a lot of school – would undermine any positive promotional message. We would be saying one thing but doing another.
While more promotion of what we believe in might be nice, opponents believe national tournaments would worsen everyday problems and especially the most unsavory problems of school sports, namely undue influence and athletic-related transfers.
Opponents see national events as symptomatic of the "select the best and forget the rest" virus that is infecting much of youth sports that is neither school-sponsored nor student-centered. They see national events as causing school sports to move from ally to adversary of schools' educational mission. They see more loss of classroom instructional time, more travel, more costs and more local fundraising that saps community resources. They see the rich getting richer ... more for a few "haves" and less for most others, and nothing for the "have nots."
With each state having made its own decisions regarding when sports seasons will occur, many opponents wonder how any national tournament can serve the wide variety of seasons in place. Some sports that occur in the fall in one state are conducted in the winter or spring in other states. Even when sports occur in the same season in two states, the seasons may start and end two, three or four weeks differently. Do we really want our programs to place even more pressure on kids and coaches to specialize in a single sport year-around?
With each state having made its own decisions regarding the maximum number of contests, who is going decide what the national rule will be? Will it be the 18 games of one state or the 36 games of another? With each state having made its own decisions regarding age rules and transfer rules and out-of-season coaching rules, who is going to make and enforce these and all the other rules that must apply to all to assure the competition is fair?
And with four Michigan High School Athletic Association champions in most sports, which do we choose to represent our state? Do we really need to demean the champions of three classifications or divisions by advancing the fourth? Do we want our state finals to be the qualification for another level, or the ultimate experience for MHSAA member schools and students?
Football's Status
June 16, 2017
Football has enjoyed a status within our schools that is unmatched by any other sport.
It attracts more participants than any other interscholastic sport.
Unlike many other sports (think especially of ice hockey, lacrosse and soccer), football began in the high school setting and was not imported from community programs.
And until the past decade, football has not had to cope with out-of-season programs run by non-school groups and commercial entities that are so troublesome – think especially of basketball, ice hockey, soccer and volleyball, but really all sports except football, until recent years.
The growth of 7-on-7 passing leagues and tournaments is the most obvious concern as commercial interests move in to profit from a mostly unregulated summer environment, as began to occur in basketball 30 years ago and has spread to many other sports since.
The Olympic movement has fueled some of this as national governing bodies have engineered programs for younger athletes in efforts to increase medal counts on which the U.S. Olympic Committee bases funding.
The quixotic pursuit of college scholarships is another powerful stimulant; and while the NCAA could have banned its coaches from recruiting away from school venues, it has not done so; and non-school entities have begun to tailor their events toward convenient although costly recruiting venues.
We can expect these events to spread like an invasive species through football unless, learning from the past, the NCAA makes these events off-limits to its coaches, and/or organizations like ours across the country will not only regulate but also conduct programs during the summer.