Logo

Eight-Player Options

March 10, 2017

Put this in the category of “No good deed goes unpunished.”

In 2011, the MHSAA provided an additional playoff for Class D schools sponsoring 8-player football. This helped save football in some schools and helped return the game of football to other schools. But now that the number of 8-player programs has expanded from two dozen in 2011 to more than 60, there are complaints:

  • Some complaints come out of a sense of entitlement that all final games in both the 8-player and 11-player tournament deserve to be played at Ford Field.

  • Some complaints come from Class C schools whose enrollments are too large for the 8-player tournament. Class C schools which sponsor the 8-player game have no tournament at all in which to play, regardless of where the finals might be held.

  • Some complaints come from Class D schools which protest any suggestion that Class C schools – even the smallest – be allowed to play in the 8-player tournament.

There are now three scenarios emerging as the most likely future for 8-player football:

  • The original plan ... A five-week, 32-team tournament for Class D schools only, with the finals at a site to be determined, but probably not Ford Field.

  • Alternative #1 ... Reduce the 11-player tournament to seven divisions and make Division 8 the 8-player tournament with 32 Class D teams in a five-week tournament, ending at Ford Field.

  • Alternative #2 ... Conduct the 8-player tournament in two divisions of 16 Class D teams, competing in a four-week playoff ending in a double-header at the Superior Dome on the Saturday before Thanksgiving.

The pros and cons of these options are being widely discussed. Sometimes the discussions have a tone that is critical of the MHSAA, which comes from those who forget that it was the MHSAA itself which moved in 2011 to protect and promote football by adding the 8-player playoff tournament option for its smallest member schools. That Class D schools now feel entitled to the Ford Field opportunity and Class C schools want access to an 8-player tournament is not unexpected; but criticism of the MHSAA’s efforts is not deserved.

Going on Offense

March 3, 2015

I was a defensive back on my college football team, but I refuse to be put on the defensive about the game of football.

The game is good for students, their schools and our communities. High school football is character-building for students, spirit-building for schools and community-building for cities and towns. Local school football programs ought to be part of the development plans and place-making strategies of all communities of Michigan.

The school-sponsored game has never been safer to play. The equipment has never been more protective, coaches have never had more safety training, the rules have never been more safety-oriented, and game officials have never had more encouragement to enforce those rules. The result is fewer injuries of all kinds – from nicks and bruises to ankles, knees and necks.

When the game of football has faults, we find and fix them. To continue doing so requires that we be honest with ourselves about where the game has weaknesses and be constantly alert to effective ways to improve the game.

Defensiveness gets in the way of discovering ways to go on offense. It blocks innovation and sacks aspirations before they can be launched.

I want our public to know that school-sponsored football is a great game. I also want the public to know that we aspire to keep improving the game and to exceed legal mandates. We will continue to do more than what is required and, in fact, we intend to do what’s unexpected to assure football remains a positive influence on students, schools and communities.