Get on Your Feet for Our Great Games

January 27, 2017

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

Somewhere along the winding road in the long history of interscholastic athletics, gradual change has brought our product to a crossroads.

We, in this business of developing the minds, character and bodies of student-athletes, still understand the far-reaching benefits of school-based sports, and the mission of our programs. We understand their importance to community, the incomparable entertainment value for spectators, the bonds built between teacher and student that an hour a day in the classroom usually can’t match, and the memories and lessons that last a lifetime.

Somewhere along the way, however, some of the allure seems to have faded in the eyes and minds of others.

• Perhaps it’s the many options available to today’s young people, both in and out of athletics. Where once school sports and a letter jacket were THE thing, now it’s just another thing, with travel programs, virtual reality games, nonstop cable sports coverage and social media competing to fill free time.

• Maybe it’s parents, chasing the misguided dream of athletic scholarships for their children and in the process doting on the promises of untrained coaches intent on building their pocket books and reputations over building fundamentals and teamwork in kids.

• It could be that sensational stories from professional and collegiate levels warning of long-range effects of concussions and other sports injuries are causing fear in many parents who are making athletic participation decisions for their children.

• It’s possible that those once relied upon to spread the good word of our good work – our friends in the media – are far fewer. Administrators and coaches alike were once on a first-name basis with sportswriters in every community across Michigan. When a feel-good story took place, we knew whom to call to trumpet the news, and when the big game took place, they were sure to be there. The collapse and contraction of newspapers and the rise of faceless bloggers has delivered a blow.

• And, what of respect for authority? We are losing the keepers of our games – the contest officials – in bunches each year. People see the assaults, both verbal and physical, on these special men and women who give far more of their time than they are compensated for and figure it can’t be worth it to become an official, or to continue.

Ultimately, how we got here no longer matters. It’s what we do next. The focus for the 2016-17 school year is to define and defend educational athletics. We know that educational athletics is the best option. We are certain specialization is becoming a real health and safety issue, as real as concussions. We emphasize safety and risk management through our rules and regulations. We will utilize current media to tell our story. In doing so, maybe we can increase our pool of officials as well.

The following reveals the plan.

Teaching the Teachers

The 2016-17 school year is featuring a multi-faceted plan to Define and Defend Educational Athletics across Michigan, and one of the most critical strides aims at insuring that all varsity coaches – the educators of our programs – receive the proper instruction to pass along the mission of school-based sports to all involved, from students to parents to administrators.

For the first time each first-time varsity head coach of an MHSAA tournament sport needs to have completed Level 1 or 2 of the MHSAA’s comprehensive Coaches Advancement Program, the acclaimed continuing education program for school coaches.

Arming those most closely involved with student-athletes with proper perspective will go a long way in securing the future of interscholastic athletics.

“The role of a secondary school coach is so much more complex than it first appears, and it reaches beyond the responsibility of teaching skills to athletes,” said MHSAA assistant director Kathy Vruggink Westdorp, who oversees the CAP program. “The coach is first and foremost a teacher – that educational leader in an athletic setting – and it is often this coach’s responsibility to reinforce the connection between sports and academics. This defines the MHSAA brand of athletics.”

The connection between sports and academics cannot be overstated, and those sharing the hallways on a daily basis observe positive effects when students see that coaches show concern for their well-being beyond the playing surfaces.

Dan Hutcheson is in his first year as an assistant director at the MHSAA following a decade as athletic director at Howell High School. Prior to that, he served as the Highlanders’ wrestling coach. He knows first-hand the importance of the coach-student relationship.

“As a coach who’s in the building on staff, I know that I’m going to be in contact with my kids every day in class or in the hallways,” Hutcheson said. “When kids see that you care about them beyond the classrooms and fields or gyms, it can equate to improved academics. That is something other sports organizations don’t have.”

During the last three years alone, more than 1,800 individuals each year have attended CAP courses ranging from Levels 1-8, receiving instruction on topics such as “The Coach as Teacher,” to “Psychology of Coaching,” to “Effectively Working with Parents.”  These are just three of the 18 courses making a difference in coaches statewide, and those attendance numbers will rise with this year’s requirement.

While some might see the word “requirement” as an added helping onto the already full plates of those who dedicate so much free time, such regulations add value and help define school programs.

“I believe we have a better sense of the bigger picture.  Sure, our coaches want to win. But compared to travel sports, it is more educationally sound,” said Tim Ritsema, athletic director at Zeeland East High School, who serves as one of the MHSAA’s CAP instructors. “For those coaches who complete CAP, it gives their profession more credibility – it tells athletes, parents and the community that they take this seriously and want to be knowledgeable in the best practices. In travel ball, there are no regulations on coaches, it costs a lot more, and there can be selfish agendas. Our coaches are ‘All In.’ They recognize the long-lasting impact that they have on our student-athletes.”

Fellow CAP instructor Mike Garvey, athletic director at Kalamazoo Hackett Catholic Prep, sees the same enthusiasm during his experiences in front of the diverse groups of coaches.

“I see buy-in. Coaches of all ages, with a tremendous range of experience, have shared that they learned, that they have gained insight into the profession,” Garvey said. “I had a coach contact me about a couple of theories presented and indicated that it helped her team in two categories: they had more fun and they performed better. It also drew praise for her from the parents.”

Proven results from the methods employed are a big factor in gaining repeat attendees and spreading the word to coaches who have yet to attend CAP. Nothing increases credibility like positive results and peer recommendation.

A couple other factors contribute to the success, including willingness to participate and the widespread availability of courses throughout the state.

“The best sessions are when the majority of the coaching staff is actively participating, and it doesn't always need to be positive; that seems to add to the program,” notes CAP instructor Karen Leinaar, athletic director at Bear Lake HS. “Sometimes this is the first time all the coaches have actively talked about their philosophy, and sharing just makes it more ‘real.’ Hearing from others that they are doing it right is a big affirmation. Making the program available within a reasonable distance also assists in participation.”

CAP also plays a pivotal role in indoctrinating those outside the school setting to the purpose of school-based sports. Non-faculty coaches might have different roots than faculty coaches, but receive the same messages to take with them.

“There really is not a big difference between faculty and non-faculty coaches in the appreciation for coaches education,” Westdorp said. “We have seen 40-year veterans and first-year protégés indicate similar impact regarding the message of educational athletics.

“However, the non-faculty coaches are definitely better linked to their school and the culture of their school after taking CAP. Each module contains the Ten Basic Beliefs of Michigan Interscholastic Athletics. The very first module in CAP 1 is entitled ‘Coaches Make the Difference,’ and works toward the development of a coaching philosophy, core beliefs, understanding your personal reasons for coaching, promoting high expectations and creating team culture. It includes exercises in making difficult decisions, why there are rules and creating team culture.”

Some of the residual effect might be that today’s coaches will become tomorrow’s administrators, a movement which some sense has stalled in recent years.

The National Federation of State High School Associations recently enlisted global communications marketing firm, Edelman, to assist in rolling out a national campaign this fall to elevate awareness of the NFHS and educational athletics.

“In many cases, we need to re-educate our own people,” NFHS Executive Director Bob Gardner said. “We don’t see coaches moving to principal and athletic director jobs much as we once did.”

In Michigan, CAP is assisting in that way.

“We have several athletic administrators, principals and superintendents who recognize the value of their coaches within the building,” Westdorp said. “Many of these administrators have been in CAP sessions and are utilizing the materials. They want trained coaches who know how to deal with student-athletes in regards to safety, sportsmanship and skill development.”

Communication is key to CAP’s success, not only from instructors to the coaches in attendance, but in turn from coach back to other coaches, students, parents and administration moving forward. That’s how the mission of school sports persists.

“I stress that communication is one of the most important things coaches need to do,” Ritsema said. “Being a poor communicator allows for many things to go bad.”

Zeeland East and Bear Lake are classes apart in enrollment, but the rule of communication is universal.

“I am lucky being in a small school; we have very few questions to our rules,” Leinaar said. “I know others that have huge issues, but many have caused their own because they lacked the art of communication. Share with everyone. Make Grandma understand. You’ll not necessarily get 100 percent support, but at least there will be a shared understanding and expectation.”

Ultimately, the component of school sports which ranks above all else is the participants.

“We emphasize working with young people and teaching. Working with young people and leading,” Garvey said, “and keeping young people as the reason for the activity.”

Well-Rounded Task

The MHSAA organized a multi-sport participation task force during 2015-16 to identify the main sources of sports specialization and to generate methods to encourage greater participation in a variety of activities.

During the first meeting last April, Dr. Tony Moreno of Eastern Michigan University and Dr. Brooke Lemmen of the Michigan State University Sports Medicine Clinic each cited research which is inconclusive if specialization is the path to the elite level of sports, but is conclusive that specialization is the path to chronic, long-term negative effects.

The mission ahead for the task force is to change the culture in and around their schools.

“There’s a misconception that, ‘I have to only participate in that one sport to get to that next level,’” Hutcheson said. “But, when you hear college coaches talk, they want the kids who are athletes, who participated in more than one thing.

“I’d hear kids say, ‘I just want to lift weights out-of-season.’ Well, what do you do when you’re tired of lifting weights? You put them on the ground and rest. If you want to be a competitor, you need to compete. Playing another sport provides the opportunity to continue competing and growing as a competitor.”

While the committee discussed potential plans for such items as online resources, printed material and social media discussion to generate heightened awareness, those avenues have already been traveled to various lengths. In fact, the mission has changed little over the years.

“The most remarkable thing is that when I reviewed a couple of old videos we produced on the value of multi-sport participation about 10 years ago, our message really hasn't changed,” said MHSAA Communications Director John Johnson. “We now need to emphasize the injury factor – which is now so much more well-documented – and the fact that an increasing number of recognizable faces at higher levels are now endorsing the playing of multiple sports at youth levels.”

The trick is to develop the most effective delivery system and target those who most need exposure to the topic: coaches and parents.

“The task force sees educating parents as a priority, informing them of the dangers of early specialization in terms of burnout and injuries, as well as the financial burden families take on to advance their child towards a possible scholarship,” said long-time Traverse City Area Public Schools administrator and task force member Patti Tibaldi. “Parents need to understand that only one percent of high school athletes will receive athletic scholarships. Educational athletics should address the needs of the other 99 percent, don't you think?”

In many communities around Michigan, multi-sport athletes are not simply an added benefit; they are a must for programs to exist.

“I’m from a small school,” said Bronson athletic director and task force member Jean LaClair. “For our teams to be successful across the board, we need our student-athletes participating in multiple sports. We had a volleyball and softball team both make the state championship games, and seven kids were on both rosters! And, playing in a championship game, with the small-town support, is something you will never emulate in a club sport.”

It takes support from parents and coaches to build successful school sports programs, and administrators play a pivotal role in steering the ship.

“The biggest thing we discuss is the multi-sport athlete in our high school,” Ritsema said. “Luckily, our coaches are on the same page, and we deliver that message unified to our athletes and parents.”

Those involved with the task force understand the importance of the issues. It’s time for the choir to do the preaching, and project the chords beyond their buildings.

“Multi-sport participation within the school-based system teaches students the valuable lessons athletics should provide: how to work with different groups of people, the discipline of practice, how to respond from failure, how to understand and accept different roles within each sport, recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of each coach and teammate,” said Tibaldi. “School-based sports have a fundamental belief system that, while every sport has its individual differences, all sports need to comply with the philosophy of educational athletics adopted by the school district.”

As Johnson points out, the sooner that message reaches its target, the better.

“We need to literally reach the bottom of the food chain: elementary school kids who play sports, and their parents,” he said.

To that end, the MHSAA is focusing efforts in two ways during 2016-17: increased communication with its junior high/middle school membership, and the formation of regional strike teams.

Going Back to the Future

As the MHSAA moves forward with several initiatives this school year to help in defining and defending educational athletics, some staff members will be working their way backward – in age, that is.

Various findings in recent years through committees, task forces and personal experiences reveal that often times students are reaching secondary schools without positive prior experiences in school sports. That is about to change.

During the 2016-17 school year, the MHSAA is conducting two Junior High/Middle School Committee meetings rather than one, with an emphasis on the MHSAA more closely aligning itself with various JH/MS events through sponsorship efforts.

“The multi-sport task force has been a great discussion tool,” said MHSAA Assistant Director Cody Inglis, who oversees the JH/MS Committee. “You see that no matter the size of the school, everyone has the same problem; it’s become a true health and safety problem. Kids are specializing too soon and too often.”

One of the steps to help combat the trend is to reach children, parents and coaches before they hit the high school hallways.

“The task force recognizes that parents want to do what is best for their children,” Tibaldi said. “Our recommendations include finding ways for schools to offer earlier and better programming, stressing the development of overall physical skills versus the constant competition at an early age which is leading to an exodus from athletics by the age of 13.”

More than 700 junior high/middle schools across Michigan were members of the MHSAA in 2015-16. But just how many participants and parents – or even coaches at that level – are aware of the benefits afforded by that membership? The answer is likely a stark minority. It is the MHSAA’s charge to be more visible in the coming years.

“We’ll discuss becoming a presenting sponsor at some pre-existing league meets at the junior high/middle school level, whether it be track, basketball, cross country or any sport,” Inglis said. “We want to get into those existing leagues and conferences to have a presence.

“We could help financially, to offset the cost of officials and medals, for instance. And, we can brand those events from an educational athletic standpoint, versus the youth sport model which most kids that age have experienced. The goal is to give them a perspective they’ve yet to have in school-based sports. We want to make sure putting on a school uniform is a positive experience.”

Of course, biggest proponents of school sports are those who have dedicated hours, years and careers to the product. Those people, the ones the MHSAA leans on and appreciates the most, will be called upon again to deliver a huge assist at youth levels via forthcoming “Regional Strike Teams.”

“These local teams could be veteran or retired ADs in various areas who understand educational athletics and are familiar with junior high/middle schools in their communities,” Inglis said. “They can emphasize sportsmanship and multi-sport involvement so we can get in on the ground floor.”

The formation of these liaisons between the MHSAA and its youngest members will be discussed at length during the 2016-17 school year.

The junior high/middle school gyms and fields are not only stocked with future high school students, but they also offer a valuable forum for officials recruitment, training and retention, another critical piece to the welfare of school sports.

“With our Regional Strike Teams of people connected to schools and local officials associations, we can increase the connections made at the local, personal level to attract more people into officiating,” said MHSAA Assistant Director Mark Uyl, who oversees the MHSAA’s services to registered officials. “The members of the Strike Teams will know what events are going in an area of the state which could be conducive to officials recruitment events. The best way to recruit is at the local level between people with shared interests, and the Regional Strike folks can make these local connections.”

‘Tis (out of) the Season

April 2, 2015

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

Those who live in close proximity to high schools throughout Michigan don’t even need a calendar to know what time of year it is when a new sports season begins.

Whistles piercing through the hum of their air conditioners on the first Monday morning in August mark the start of fall from nearby football facilities. The ping of aluminum as sidewalks and grass re-appear from winter’s grip signifies the start of spring.

Office supply stores could see calendar sales soar in those households – or occupants might at least do a double-take when checking smartphone calendars – in the near future if MHSAA out-of-season coaching regulations are modified. The familiar sounds of the seasons could resonate in non-traditional months as well.

A major topic of the recent MHSAA Update Meetings and AD In-Services in the fall was the possibility of revamping the regulations regarding out-of-season contact for school coaches with school teams during the school year. The Summer Dead Period would remain in place and has been largely supported by membership since it was implemented for the 2007-08 school year.

It should be noted that out-of-season revision is not a certainty, but simply in the exploratory stage at this point.

Yet, the time was ripe to initiate discussion on this topic in the fall. The growth of non-school athletic programs and demands placed upon students by such entities in recent years was one factor. The difficulty the MHSAA has enforcing – and schools have interpreting – current out-of-season coaching regulations is another factor.

“The fundamental question is how to allow more contact between coaches and students out of season without encouraging single-sport participation,” MHSAA Executive Director Jack Roberts said.

Can this be done? Can trends toward specialization and away from multi-sport participation be reversed through greater contact periods for each sport within the school year?

Proponents of this school of thought believe that time otherwise spent with non-school coaches would be best served with education-based coaches who, in theory, would be on the same page with peers at their school, all encouraging multi-sport participation.

“Part of the explosion of AAU and club involvement has been the perpetuation of the notion that without additional training and competition, students will not reach their potential nor maximize their chances of being recruited by colleges,” said Scott Robertson, athletic director at Grand Haven. “When our high school coaches have the ability to provide a similar experience, but with an education-first mindset regulated by athletic directors, the expectations of student-athletes by coaches can be tempered.”

It is a lively debate that will be picking up momentum for the remainder of this school year and into the next.

Following are some of the concepts and comments from the fall, with key points from a statewide survey to be published later this week. The MHSAA's Representative Council discussed these results at its March meeting, and action is possible during its final meeting of the school year in May.

Let's begin 

Perhaps the most criticized, misinterpreted, ignored, and/or difficult to enforce rule in the MHSAA Handbook resides in Regulation II, Section 11 (H): the three- and four-player rule for coaches out of season during the school year. (See bottom of this page.)

Debate has long spiraled in dizzying circles around definitions such as “open gyms,” “under one roof,” “conditioning,” “drills,” and other components.

“One of the problems is the MHSAA finds this specific rule difficult to enforce and interpret,” MHSAA Associate Director Tom Rashid said. “Another perceived problem is that there might be a disconnect between school coaches and students out of season, which might be driving students toward non-school programs.”

It’s simple to recognize lightning rods, but quite another to construct a device for harvesting the sparks in a productive manner. To that end, Rashid prepared an outline for discussion on the topic as he hit the trails around Michigan this fall for Update Meetings and AD In-Services.

“We felt we needed to see if we could do better,” Rashid said. “Rather than say to 600 ADs, ‘What do you think about out-of-season coaching rules?’ we asked about a new concept. We created a starting point for discussion.”

The basic premise brought forward to the masses was this: a voluntary contact period of one month to six weeks with a limit of 10 or 15 days of contact in that period – and perhaps three in any one week – between a coach and his/her athletes out of season with any number of students, grade 7-12. Due to large participation numbers in football, some consideration was given to limiting the number of players in any one out-of-season session to 11, thus not creating “spring football.”

A straw poll from the gatherings in the fall indicated nearly 70 percent of attendees in favor of “contact periods” versus the current rule, prompting a detailed survey to all member schools sent in October to further measure the climate and hone in on specifics for desired changes.

“It was a very open process with great discussion,” Rashid said. “All size schools, all demographics, and all corners of the state weighed in.”

As always, the devil is in the detail, and the October survey yielded plenty of detail.

Numbers favor no numbers

As mentioned earlier, nearly 70 percent of attendees at MHSAA fall gatherings indicated that they might prefer a rule that specified coaching contact periods outside their sport during the school year, as opposed to limiting the number of student-athletes per session.

The ensuing survey sent to member schools in late October reflects that sentiment in schools of all sizes, and in all zones of the state. On the topic of counting contact days out of season with no limit on the number of students involved, more than 72 percent of 514 responding schools favored the plan. Class A schools led the way with nearly 76 percent  in support. Class D schools chimed in at 69 percent in favor. Support was strong across the zones of the state as well, led by the Detroit metro area (Zone 3) at 76.5. The middle of the state (Zone 5) was the low, but still found close to 60 percent in favor of such a revision.

The survey revealed consistencies across the board relative to the amount of three- and four-player sessions currently utilized by schools of different sizes, and the support and opposition to questions regarding revised regulations on the topic. For instance, nearly 50 percent of Class A schools indicate that their coaches work with students under the current rule most every week during the offseason, while 40 percent of Class D schools report that most of their coaches never utilize the three- or four-player rule at all out of season. Not surprisingly then, in questions posed where three-and four-player stipulations might still exist, the larger schools favored such changes at a higher rate than the smaller schools.

Survey data also reveals a reason for such opposition at lower-enrollment schools: a simple numbers game. In Class C and D, the majority of schools report that 60-80 percent of their student-athletes participate in more than one sport. So, with more students busier year-round than at their larger school counterparts, there are fewer people to attend out-of-season sessions.

Similarly, the concept of extending the current preseason down time for all sports was supported more in Class C and D schools than Class A and B. 

“It is always a challenge for individual schools to see things from the other schools’ perspectives,” Rashid said. “It’s hard for people to say, ‘It might be different for us, but for the greater good, we might have to change our culture here.’”

But, that line of thinking is certainly understood at Chelsea High School, a Class B school of more than 800 students. Athletic director and football coach Brad Bush is an advocate of multi-sport participation, regardless of school size.

“The current three- or four-player rule benefits kids by developing skills, but does not force kids to feel pressure to be at a full practice,” Bush said. “Changing this rule could reduce the number of multiple-sport athletes. Our staff and league is united in believing that changing this rule could be a big mistake.”

Outside influence

Part of the balancing act in attempting to revise out-of-season rules is to encourage greater participation on school teams, while not promoting specialization.

Interestingly, a number of schools in the survey reported that they have policies in place limiting in-season athletes from attending sports-specific training from out-of-season coaches. The percentages ranged from 27.6 percent in Class D to 41 percent in Class B.

Most schools allow weightlifting during the season, followed in decreasing order by three- or four- player workouts, conditioning and open gyms. However, more than 40 percent of responding schools have in place a policy prohibiting non-school competition for in-season athletes. The message seems to be that if activity is taking place, the preference is for it to be under supervision, and for that supervision to come from school coaches.

“If a coach is going to hold three workouts per week out of season, a student may leave another sport to play in the offseason of their preferred  sport,” Rashid said. “As such, many ADs identified that it would be the role of each school to regulate  out-of-season coaching. Right now, the ADs have to keep a handle on out-of-season activities and if the rules change, depending on their demographic, they might need to be involved even more.”

With advance planning, an environment can be created in which all of a school’s sports can exist in harmony and encourage multi-sport membership.

“Athletic directors can guide all coaches on their staffs to work together to create 12-month calendars that focus on the needs of kids and respect the desire of many to participate in multiple sports,” Robertson said. “In doing so, coaches can work to avoid overlaps in important opportunities where kids may be put in win-lose situations. With careful planning student-athletes will be afforded more opportunities to train and develop with their classmate peers and within their own communities.”

Chris Ervin, athletic director at St. Johns High School, is one of many in the camp that believes the current system accomplishes a school’s missions when properly supervised.

“Our coaches have ample opportunities to coach in the three- or four-player setting, and our athletes have plenty of opportunities to improve their skill sets through open gyms which are not coach-directed,” Ervin said.

Others agree that any change might introduce unwanted consequences. One source, an administrator in a strong football community, speculates in that town and others like it, football programs could smother other sport programs by scheduling full workouts on top of other in-season sports. Voluntary or not, it is opined that kids would gravitate toward the out-of-season football workouts if that’s the signature sport in town.

Ervin can see the same point. “I don't see this affecting my role too much, but I do believe this could lead to even more specialization. For example, if football coaches are able to work with their players 11 at a time in the offseason, I believe athletes will feel more pressure to be part of that football workout while they are in-season with another sport.”

Under another scenario, school coaches might someday be allowed to coach non-school teams during the school year. The rationale is that if students are participating outside the school campus anyway, wouldn’t it be better that they are coached by school personnel so that the educational message is delivered appropriately?

Add to this the fact that 100 percent of surveyed schools reported conducting open gyms in basketball and 66 percent in volleyball – the two most high-profile AAU sports – would it benefit schools to have trained personnel in those non-school leadership roles?

“This would connect our coaches to school kids but also could have the unintended consequence of specialization,” Rashid said. “However, the coaches in place would be our coaches, whereas currently we don’t have a say in the AAU coaches of our students.”

Not yet. This topic on the survey was favored by roughly 60 percent overall, but an equal 20.4 percent were at opposite ends of the spectrum strongly in favor and strongly against, with the highest percentage falling just above lukewarm. 

By Class, the C and D schools were slightly more opposed to this idea than Class A and B. Why? Very often, in the smaller communities, there are no non-school opportunities; school sports are the only option.

Robertson believes that incorporating a revised out-of-season coaching plan could assist families financially in the long run.

“By having the ability to include larger numbers of kids in development activities and allowing for a limited number of competitions, there is a strong likelihood that students and their families will choose the out-of-season activities offered by their schools over the AAU/club activities that exist,” Robertson said. “In doing so, there will be no rental of outside gyms, no mandatory club fees, and reduced costs to families.”

Not all ideas have elicited opposing views. One item on the docket that schools uniformly opposed was the possibility of scrimmages within the out-of-season contact period. Most schools indicate a preference for these periods to be instructional only.

Just a tweak

Perhaps the current rule just needs a splint and not a full cast. Maybe it’s not broken after all.

The most popular proposal to emerge from the survey was simply the removal of three little words in the current regulation: “under one roof.”

More than 80 percent of schools favored removing the phrase “under one roof” from Regulation II, Section 11(H) 2. a., which means as long as only three or four students are receiving coaching, then others may be in the facility working on conditioning, or in groups on their own.

Receiving close to 70 percent support from schools is the prospect of removing the portion of Handbook Interpretation 237 which currently prohibits schools from setting up rotations. This would allow a coach to work with dozens of players, three and four at a time.

And, Robertson says, in less time than coaches are currently expending.

“Most high school coaches already commit an enormous amount of time to the offseason development of student-athletes,” he said. “By removing the limit on number of athletes they can have contact with at one time and by placing a limit on the number of dates they can actually have this direct instructional contact, the net gain will be fewer dates, but with a greater impact.”

Rashid forecasts slight modifications of current rules rather than wholesale changes, at least in the near future.

“It wouldn’t surprise me if a few changes come sooner than later,” Rashid said. “One, allow rotations in the three- or four-player rule. Two, allow more than three kids under one roof as long as only three kids are receiving coaching. These two are a broader interpretations of our current rules.”

Simpler could be the answer. Perhaps over the course of time, in trying to be everything to all schools, the rule became more difficult for schools to follow, and for the MHSAA to oversee. Outside influences that could not have been predicted a generation ago have crept into the picture as well.

“These rules are very old, and that doesn’t mean not good,” Rashid said. “They were written at a time when the majority of students played multiple sports; before students began playing in 3rd and 4th grades, and before the non-school sports explosion.”

Even with the current trends and abundance of choices for some athletes, there are strong feelings from various leaders to leave things status quo.

“Our staff and league believes there needs to be a greater emphasis on the current rules with stronger punishments,” Bush said. “The answer is to enforce to current rules that we have, and not change the rules.”

There is a certain irony to this topic in front of athletic administrators and coaches, who spend so many hours in the here and now; in-season, in practices, in games.

“Who would think that what you do out of season could be the most critical piece of school sports discussion that we’ve had?” Rashid ponders. “It’s not what happens during the season, but in the offseason, that might be at the core of encouraging and maintaining school sports participation.”


Current Out-of-Season Rule (Three- or Four-Player Rule)

From MHSAA Handbook, Regulation II, Section 11(H):

2. These limitations out of season apply to coaches:

a. Outside the school season during the school year (from Monday the week of Aug. 15 through the Sunday after Memorial Day observed), school coaches are prohibited from providing coaching at any one time under one roof, facility or campus to more than three (or four) students in grades 7-12 of the district or cooperative program for which they coach (four students if the coaching does not involve practice or competition with students or others not enrolled in that school district). This applies only to the specific sport(s) coached by the coach, but it applies to all levels, junior high/middle school and high school, and both genders, whether the coach is paid or volunteer (e.g., a volunteer JV boys soccer coach may not work with more than three girls in grades 7-12 outside the girls soccer season during the school year).