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.
Big Ten TV
November 11, 2016
The Big Ten Conference likes to say it "appreciates" high school football within its footprint; but the evidence is otherwise.
First, in 2010 the Big Ten adopted a "bye week" to stretch its scheduling that pushed the final game of the Big Ten regular season – with its great rivalries, including Michigan v. Ohio State – to the day on which the high school Football Finals have been scheduled in Michigan for more than three decades. A periodic problem became an every-year plague.
Now the Big Ten has announced it will play and televise games on Friday nights; and in its first year of this new deal, Michigan State will play at Northwestern in a televised game on Friday night, Oct. 27 – the first night of the MHSAA Football Playoffs all across our state.
So, in 2017 we can thank the Big Ten for damaging the first as well as the last weekend of our high school Football Playoffs.
The Big Ten's reaction? "We are only playing six games on Friday nights. It could have been much worse."
I expect it will get worse. The greed of college sports knows no limits.