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.
The Usual Suspects
December 30, 2016
It is difficult to find a year when the 11-player Football Finals of the Michigan High School Athletic Association involved more teams from southeast Michigan than appeared at Ford Field in 2016. In fact, just two counties (Oakland and Wayne) produced seven finalists. But then two counties on Michigan’s west side (Kent and Muskegon) supplied four of the 16 finalists.
Four of Michigan’s 83 counties producing 11 of 16 finalists in the 11-player championship games doesn’t’ feel like a statewide event; but one team from the Upper Peninsula, another from the Leelanau Peninsula in the northwest portion of the Lower Peninsula, and a team located along the Michigan/Ohio border remind us how large and diverse our state really is.
The 2016 MHSAA 11-player Football Finals consisted of many of the “usual suspects,” including two teams pursuing their fourth straight titles and one team seeking its third consecutive championship. Four of the eight 11-player champions from 2015 returned in the attempt to defend their titles in 2016, and two of the runners-up in 2015 were back to try to reverse their fortunes from 12 months earlier.
What is being demonstrated here in Michigan high school football is the trend seen in many other states. That is, as the number of classes or divisions of tournaments expands, the more often you see the same teams in the final rounds.
The surest way to have the “usual suspects” on championship day is to put them in tournaments with fewer schools. And of all MHSAA tournaments, the football playoffs have the most divisions with the fewest schools in each. The result is predictable.
This is a cautionary tale for those who desire that the number of classifications and divisions be expanded in MHSAA tournaments for other sports.
Meanwhile, we are keeping an eye on the tournament format in a neighboring state that places schools into divisions for larger schools after they are too successful over consecutive years in the classification that fits their enrollment. Those in Michigan who have been assigned to review such policies have complained that such “success factors” penalize future students because of the achievements of previous students and/or because such factors do nothing about “chronic success” by schools in the largest classification.