And the MHSAA Survey Says ...

April 2, 2015

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

A survey of MHSAA member schools was conducted in the fall of 2014 aimed to determine opinions for and against a myriad of out-of-season coaching/contact period topics within the school year.

Below are some of the summaries drawn from that survey, plus a map of zones referred to in a number of points.

Survey Summary and Highlights

The larger the school, the higher the percentage of students who are involved in organized non-school sports.

The Detroit metro area (Zone 3) has the highest percentage of respondents in each of two groups in which the highest percentage of students are involved in organized non-school sports ... the 60 to 80% and 40 to 60% groups. The Grand Rapids area (Zone 6) ranks second.

The northern Lower Peninsula (Zone 7) and the Upper Peninsula (Zone 8) have the highest percentage of respondents in the group in which the lowest percentage of students are involved in organized non-school sports . . . the 0 to 20% group. This is also true of Zones 1, 2 and 5, although less dramatically.

In the majority of schools, coaches work with students out of season under the three- or four-player rule for a few weeks just before the season. This is generally true regardless of school classification or geographic zone.

In nearly 80% of schools, the frequency of coaches working with students out of season under the three- or four-player rule is one or two days a week.

100% of schools that sponsor basketball hold open gyms for basketball. Two-thirds of volleyball schools hold volleyball open gyms. Half of lacrosse schools hold lacrosse open gyms. Open gyms in baseball, softball and soccer occur in 40 to 45% of responding schools. Open gyms are less common for other sports.

More than half of all schools conduct open gyms for only a few weeks, just before the season begins.

In 85% of schools, the frequency of open gyms is one or two days a week.

The multi-sport athlete is common in schools of every classification, but more common in Class C and D schools than in Class A and B.

The multi-sport athlete is common in schools of every geographical zone, but more common in Zones 1, 2, 4, 7 and 8 than in Zones 3, 5 and 6.

Two-thirds of schools do not ban athletes from out-of-season workouts while in-season in a different school sport. Permitting weightlifting is most common (84%), then three- or four-player workouts (70%), then conditioning (66%) and open gyms (65%), and finally non-school competitions (57%).

Single-sport coaches are more common in smaller schools than larger (perhaps because fewer sports are sponsored in smaller schools).

For one question, schools were asked to rate ideas from 1 (I like the concept) to 6 (I do not like the concept). Average would be 3.5.

More than 60% of schools favor a no-contact period for all out-of-season sports at the start of every other sport’s season. (Support ranges from 55% for Class A schools to 65% for Class D schools and from 56% for Zones 1 and 3 to 71% for Zone 7.)

More than 72% of schools favor (in conjunction with a no-contact period) a defined contact period out of season. Support ranges from 69% for Class B schools to 76% for Class D schools and from 64% in Zone 6 to 88% in Zone 1.

Two-thirds of schools favor setting a limit on the number of contact days for out-of-season coaching. Support ranges from 63% for Class A schools to 72% for Class C schools and from 50% for Zone 2 to 73% for Zone 1.

More than 68% of schools favor setting a limit on the number of contact days in a week. There’s almost no difference based on school class. Support ranges from 58% in Zone 6 to 76% in Zone 5.

Counting days more than players – that is, allowing practice with any number of students for a defined number of days over a period of time – is favored by more than 72% of schools. Support ranges from 69% for Class D to 76% for Class A and from 59% for Zone 5 to 76.5% for Zone 3.

The least support of any idea surveyed was for allowing scrimmage competition (allowing the coach to coach any number of students from that coach’s school in competition against individuals not enrolled in that school).

More than 62% of schools favor a rule that would allow a school coach to coach a non-school team within a defined contact period; that is, a team with students from the coach’s school (and possibly other schools too), but not supported with school funds, administration, insurance, uniforms, etc. Support ranged from 58% for Class C schools to 68% for Class B schools. Support ranged from 54% for Zone 2 to 69% for Zone 6.

This is the most popular proposal (doesn’t preclude others being approved too): 84% of schools favor removing the phrase “under one roof” from Regulation II, Section 11(H) 2 a (see Tuesday's report). Support ranged from 80% for Class D schools to 86% for Class C schools and from 78% in Zone 2 to 89% for Zone 5.

Removing the portion of Interpretation 237 which prohibits setting up rotations that would allow a coach to work with dozens of players who rotate to his/her direct attention in groups of three or four is favored by 69% of schools, but with a distinct large school vs. small school difference of opinion: Class A (80.5% favorable), Class B (72.9%), Class C (61.3%) and Class D (61.7%).

A League of Their Own in Illinois

May 20, 2014

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

Imagine the scene: thousands of spectators roaring their approval as hundreds of cross country runners hit the finish line. A couple thousand others cascade applause on the wrestling mats as referees raise the hands of 19 champions. 

Now, here’s the kicker, imagine this is taking place during postseason play for junior high/middle school student-athletes.

Again, that’s postseason, and junior high/middle school.

“I guess when you see a kid cross the finish line in first place and 5,000 people are cheering, or watch a student run a race, throw the shot, or pole vault in front of that many at our track & field series, the proof is in the pudding,” said Steve Endsley, executive director of the Illinois Elementary School Association. 

“The environment, the feedback we get; it’s the greatest thing in the world to some who experience our tournaments. But, I temper that in saying this is not the Olympics, the pros, or even high school. Success at our level doesn’t guarantee future success. We want you to do your best, we want to prepare you to do your best, but understand this is junior high.”

If understanding that is difficult for some athletes and parents involved in IESA athletics, it’s also a foreign language to state high school associations across the country. The IESA is the only organization in America which exclusively governs interscholastic activities for grade levels 7-8.

Most states include junior high/middle schools in their rules and regulations, but few, if any, conduct tournaments.

“We’ve been doing it for so long, it’s accepted. Schools know that at the end of the regular season, they enter Regional play. The payoff is we have state series, a culminating activity, and it’s a good thing that’s going on,” Endsley said.

From the organization’s first postseason event in 1930 during which boys basketball tournaments took place in a lightweight (boys less than 100 pounds) and a heavyweight division, the IESA has grown to sponsoring more than 20 boys and girls activities. 

Measures have been taken in recent years to alleviate travel concerns at the end of the season. The IESA has added classifications in some sports, while keeping the number of teams which advance to the Finals the same. So, for instance, where 16 teams might have gone to two different sites in the past, now four different sites host eight schools.

Admittedly, Endsley adds that the tournament series might add to some competitiveness, but since all schools enter the tournament, there might be less emphasis on winning during the regular season, and thus, heightened participation for those of all skill levels.

“If you don’t want the win-at-all-cost mentality, then step up to the plate at your member school and handle it that way,” Endsley said.

The refrain from association leaders around the country is that success in conveying the values and ideals of school sports is totally dependent on those in charge at the local level. Beginning with the 2012-13 school year, the IESA put more of that load squarely on the individual schools by making it a local decision as to whether students could participate with the school team and a club team in the same sport during the same season.

“From an association standpoint, it seemed like only people we were penalizing when had the limitations were the honest schools which self-reported,” Endsley said. “It was difficult to penalize those schools while everyone else knew the school down the street didn’t report. 

“In a perfect world, the participation rule would be in place. But, it’s not a perfect world. Club sports schedule in accordance with high school seasons, but disregard our level when it comes to non-school activity. It’s year-round. So it’s practically impossible to equitably enforce it from a state level.”

There are more than 800 member schools in the IESA, which is an affiliate member of the National Federation of State High School Associations, but a separate entity from the Illinois High School Association.

Endsley estimates the IESA comprises 50-60 percent of eligible schools in Illinois, bolstered by unique membership options which differ from the IHSA and many state associations.

“We offer a la carte membership. A school can offer activities and maybe not participate in our state series. It’s only in those activities in which schools participate in the IESA state series that they must abide by our rules and regulations. Schools want some control. I think a la carte way is the way to go.

“If they join the IESA for one sport, they receive all mailings and information, so maybe one sport gets them in, but they may later add activities. If they are not a member, they don’t know about us.”

Yet, while separate bodies, the IESA and IHSA work hand-in-hand in many respects since nearly 100 percent of the IESA’s students will matriculate into IHSA schools. 

“We attend the IHSA activity advisory meetings so we can keep a finger on the pulse of topics they are discussing and items they are considering. From the student standpoint, we will take our champions and introduce them in ceremonies at the IHSA Finals when our calendars line up,” Endsley said. “They get tickets, halftime introductions, pictures in the program, and it’s well-received recognition.”

Such activities are possible because the IESA seasons are different than the IHSA’s in some sports, or end sooner. For instance, the IESA plays baseball and softball in the fall, so its champions are recognized at the IHSA Finals in the spring. 

“These activities create exposure and help build interests and aspirations for our schools,” Endsley said. “It’s nice P.R. for both associations.”

Whether different seasons or same seasons, the multitude of events throughout Illinois provides ample opportunity for the state’s contest officials as well. That’s another area in which the IESA and IHSA work together. 

“We don’t license officials in the IESA, but we require our schools to use IHSA officials,” Endsley said. “We get great cooperation from the IHSA, it’s a good situation for our schools, and it’s a really good thing for officials. There are always plenty of games, and new officials gain valuable experience.”

Now in the midst of its ninth decade, the IESA continues to expand, adding boys and girls bowling and golf to its roster of activities in 2011. 

The Association sponsors athletics for 7th- and 8th-graders, but 5th- and 6th-graders enrolled in a member school may participate with 7th-and 8th-grade teams within that building without a waiver. If such students are in an elementary school which feeds a member school, waivers are necessary.