A Triple Play for Coaches

May 28, 2013

The following resolution was adopted by the Delegate Assembly of the Michigan Association of School Boards last November:

“The Michigan Association of School Boards urges all local school boards to:

“(a) Employ qualified persons as coaches of interscholastic teams.

“(b) Provide in-service training for all coaches, including training in first aid, current CPR certification, proper athletic conditioning, recognition of athletic injuries, recognition of the use of performance enhancing drugs, and the proper way to deal with hazing within the athletic programs of a school.  Much of this training is available through MHSAA’s Coaches Advancement Program (CAP).

“(c) Require supervision and evaluation of coaches.

“(d) Make coaches aware of pertinent school policies, rules and regulations and require compliance.

“(e) Encourage coaches to follow the athletic code for coaches in the MHSAA Handbook and include information regarding NCAA eligibility guidelines and requirements.”

During the 2013-14 school year, the MHSAA Representative Council will vote on two proposals that are consistent with this resolution:

  • In December, the Council will consider this enhancement to coaches preparation:

By 2015-16, MHSAA member high schools will be required to certify by the designated deadlines that all of their varsity head coaches of high school have a valid (current) CPR certification.  Inclusion of AED training is a recommended part of the CPR certification process.

  • In March, the Council will consider this enhancement to coaches preparation:

By 2016-17, all individuals hired for the first time as a varsity head coach of a high school team, to begin those coaching duties on or after July 1, 2016, must have completed Level 1 or Level 2 of CAP.

These two measures join the following that the Council approved on May 5:

By 2014-15, high schools must attest prior to established deadlines that all assistant and subvarsity coaches at the high school level have completed annually the same MHSAA rules meeting required of all varsity head coaches or, in the alternative, one of the free online sports safety courses posted on or linked from MHSAA.com and designated to fulfill this requirement. 

Scheduling Controversy

November 14, 2017

A dozen years ago, I asked our counterpart organizations in other states if they scheduled their schools’ regular-season varsity football games. Very few did so.

More recently, I’ve realized that I didn’t ask enough questions. It turns out that few statewide high school associations tell schools who they play each week of the regular season. However, many more give schools the group of opponents they may schedule. They place schools in leagues and/or districts and/or regions and instruct schools to schedule from among those schools only or predominantly.

I have been waiting for the tipping point where a sufficient number of high schools in Michigan are sufficiently stressed over scheduling football games that they would turn to the MHSAA to solve the problem.

I’m anticipating this might occur first among schools playing 8-player football, and that success there will lead to our assistance for 11-player schools.

One approach – the simpler solution – would work like this:

  • All 8-player schools within the enrollment limit for the 8-player tournament would be placed in two divisions on the basis of enrollment in early March. About 32 schools in each, based on current participation.

  • At the same time, each division would be divided into four regions of about eight schools.

  • In April, the schools of each region would convene to schedule seven regular season games for each school.

  • Based on current numbers, schools would still have two open weeks to fill, if they wish, for games with schools in other regions or of the other division or in neighboring states.

A second option – the date-specific solution – would provide every school its weekly schedule for all nine dates, or weeks 1 through 8, or weeks 2 through 8, depending on local preferences. This would not be difficult in concept once there is agreement on what criteria would be used and what value each criterion would have.

For example, one important criterion would be similarity of enrollment; another of great value would be proximity. Perhaps league affiliation would be a factor with some value. Perhaps historic rivalries would be another factor with a value. Then the computer spits out schedules for each school for every week for two years, home and away.

I don’t campaign for this task because, frankly, it will produce complaints and controversy. But if this organization exists to serve, then this is a service that today’s chronic complaints tell us we should begin to provide soon.

I suggest we do this for 8-player football for the 2019 and 2020 seasons (with a paper trial run for 2018). If it proves successful, we could expand the service to 11-player schools as soon after as they are satisfied with our efforts for 8-player schools.