Sorting It Out
February 4, 2014
The MHSAA has a good relationship with the high school coaches associations of Michigan in spite of the fact that the MHSAA sometimes befuddles and frustrates some associations’ leaders and members. This occurs, for example, when a coaches association’s board of directors votes unanimously in support of a change in policy or procedure which fails to be adopted by the MHSAA Representative Council. Every so often over the past 25 years, I’ve had to provide reminders of why this occurs – in fact, why it must occur.
First, a coaches association is just that – an association of coaches; and coaches are but one of the many important voices to whom the MHSAA pays regular attention. The MHSAA also must hear the opinions of athletic directors, principals, superintendents, boards of education, contest officials and others. Typically, coaches desire more of everything: contests, classifications, trophies and medals. Just as predictably, most administrators seek reasonable limits on such things and can often be heard to say, “Enough is enough.”
Second, the makeup of many of our state’s high school coaches associations’ boards of directors, and even the associations’ members, do not reflect the MHSAA’s full membership. Understandably, many coaches associations’ board members are disproportionately from large schools in the southern or even southeastern part of Michigan.
And third, by their nature, coaches associations advance proposals for a single sport, which could impact other sports positively or negatively. There is no question that if one sport “gets” something, like another tournament classification or division, other sports will seek the same consideration which may or may not be practical for or beneficial to other sports.
When considering a proposal from a coaches association, MHSAA Representative Council members will almost always ask themselves: “Who’s not in the room? Who are we not hearing from? Is there another side of the issue? How does this play out among small schools, or urban schools, or northern schools? How will this affect other sports?”
We look to coaches associations for sport-specific advice; and we urge them to seek input from a constituency that is as large and diverse as possible. We look to other stakeholders to add their advice and counsel to the process; and we depend on the Representative Council to sort it out and seek the proper balance.
Counting Concussions
December 9, 2016
Member high schools of the Michigan High School Athletic Association are in the second year of required reporting of concussions that occur during practices and contests in all levels of all sports served by the MHSAA. In year one there were 4,452 confirmed concussions reported. Less than two percent of almost 300,000 participants sustained a concussion, about half of which caused the student to be withheld from activity for between five and 15 days.
Not surprisingly, approximately half of the confirmed concussions were reported by Class A schools, which typically sponsor more sports and have larger squads than smaller schools. Class B schools provided almost 30 percent of the reports; Class C schools nearly 15 percent; and Class D schools less than six percent.
As we transition from fall to winter season, we can begin to make comparisons between years one and two of the mandated reporting. At this point, schools are reporting 1.6 percent fewer concussions this year than last.
This is surprising, because sideline personnel of member high schools have become more alert to the signs and symptoms of concussions. We anticipated that this would lead to more concussions being reported.
It is possible that these early stats are a sign of real progress in reducing head injuries in school sports. And, grabbing our attention most from the early reports is that 11-player football is reporting 3.9 percent fewer concussions as of Nov. 30, 2016 compared to the same week in 2015; and boys soccer is reporting 10.9 percent fewer than on the same date last year.