Logo

Bowl Games Are Bad

October 6, 2014

The idea to conduct one or more high school football bowl games in Florida in late December is a bad idea on every possible level of consideration. The idea will triumph only if greed trumps good sense.

A misguided marketing firm is trying again, this time attempting to bribe schools and state high school associations to bend or break their rules. A national media chain is trumpeting the plan to give some legs to its foolish national rankings. So there is some buzz about the plan, but no brains.

At a time when concerns rage for excessive head contact and concussions in football, no responsible party would for a single second think seriously about adding more football practices or games for school-age players.

Well before late December, high school football has ended, and winter sports are well underway with practices and competition that are far more important than several more weeks of practice and another game of football.

How could we ever allow one team to have an extra month more of football practice than all others? How is that fair to all the other football teams?

The answer is that it’s not fair to the football programs of other schools; it’s not fair to the other sports at the school involved; and it’s not healthy for the football players involved.

A Change Narrative

October 13, 2017

Here are five points to describe the essence of possible changes being processed by the Michigan High School Athletic Association for its transfer rule.

  1. We would move from a rule designed years ago for three-sport athletes to a rule that’s equally effective for regulating single-sport athletes.

  2. We would be treating all sports the same, regardless of season – fall, winter, spring. No longer would the transfer rule have a greater impact on winter sport athletes than fall or spring sport athletes.

  3. We would be getting out of the way of more “school of choice” parents who want to move a child from one school to another. If the student has not played a particular high school sport before, then eligibility is immediate in that sport ... at any level, and without any MHSAA Executive Committee action.

  4. We would be causing students who have played a high school sport (and their parents) to pause before they transfer. They would miss the next season in that sport unless one of the 15 stated exceptions to the transfer rule applies. (There is significant sentiment that this apply only to students who have played previously at the varsity level – i.e., if the student has participated previously only at the subvarsity level in a sport, that student could transfer and remain eligible at the subvarsity level; but this would be allowed one time only.)

  5. We would make it even tougher on students (and their parents) to circumvent the athletic-motivated and athletic-related transfer rules by eliminating the automatic residency exception in those special cases. (This is the most hotly debated of the changes being considered.)

The theme is “get out of the way of the benign transfers and get still tougher on the really bad ones.”