Improving Over the Long Run
October 22, 2013
A participant in a 5K run told me recently that when she first entered races, her goal was just to finish. After those early successes, her goal in entering races was to improve her personal best time.
It was only after several years of consistent improvement that she entertained the thought of actually trying to attain a spot in the top 20. Eventually, a “Top 10” and then a “Top 5” finish became the goal. And only recently has she made it a goal to try to win one of these races.
This is a wise way to approach sports. Engage at first to improve your health and fitness. Then to enhance your speed, coordination and/or endurance. Then to test the limits of your abilities. And only then to test yourself against others.
Adults might look to this as a natural, healthy way to improve themselves in almost any endeavor. And adults who are coaching youth should look to it as a healthy way to lead young people to improve both as athletes and as human beings.
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.