Health and Safety A, B, Cs
August 18, 2015
At a recent staff meeting I asked those who had attended the annual summer meeting of the National Federation of State High School Associations to report their most prominent impression. One person said, and the others agreed, that almost every session and every topic eventually turned to health and safety.
Indeed, that is the filter through which we determine priorities, the lens through which we view every problem, and the scale on which we weigh every decision ... now more than ever.
This mindset is not the result of epidemic dangers in school sports, but because the limitless reporting of isolated incidents has created the impression that school sports is dangerous.
In fact, these are the healthiest times ever to be a high school athlete. Never have we known more and done more to improve every aspect of the experience. Give me any letter of the alphabet, and I can give you a positive progress report: A – Acclimatization policies; B – Bat standards; C – CPR requirement ... and so on.
Often our impressive progress is used against us. Make an improvement and someone is sure to spout off: “See? It isn’t safe. We need to ban it or at least remove sports from schools.”
This is why we usually pair program improvements with promotions to re-emphasize the value and values of school sports for students, schools and society, and the impressive health and safety record of school-sponsored sports.
Click “Health & Safety” for a comprehensive review of what’s going on.
Student-Centered Coaching
August 1, 2017
The November 1929 Bulletin of the Michigan High School Athletic Association includes this editorial reprinted from the Oct. 7, 1929 Grand Rapids Herald which invites discussion about what more we might do to promote leadership and sportsmanship in school-sponsored sports today.
“Football teams of Greenville and Ionia high schools Saturday introduced an innovation the nature of which challenges consideration of other Michigan schools. From the time the first whistle blew for Saturday’s game until its close the professional coaches employed by the two schools had no contact with players. Between the halves the usual harangue by the coach was dispensed with in favor of a review of play by players. * * * The result of such a policy is unsullied amateurism along the lines we often have urged. The players are on their own. They do their own thinking as well as playing. Under the system as usually followed the coach sits on the sidelines. If he sees an opportunity for a plan of play differing from that being followed he sends in a substitute who carries instructions: ‘Stick to forward passes. Bang away at their left end,’ etc. Between the halves the coach points out faults and emphasizes opportunities for the final half. In net effect the coach directs the play. The initiative of captain or quarterback is permitted only so long as the coach approves. Under the Greenville system the captain is the only recognized leader of the team. He directs substitutions, orders plays, advises players, etc. At Greenville school boys played against school boys. On other western Michigan gridirons a coach is the 12th member of every team. * * * The plan adopted at Greenville was suggested by President Angell of Yale in his annual report for 1927-28. He urged that, ‘There is a wide and well-grounded sentiment that the control of our games should be put back more fully into the hands of the players.’ Yale has not heeded Prexy Angell’s advice, but the New York State Public High School Athletic Association has adopted it as also have some Detroit high schools. It takes the sting of professionalism out of the scholastic game. The able coach still has ample opportunity to prove his worth in teaching the fundamentals of the game and in developing ‘football brains’; but when the whistle blows it is high school team against high school team. What’s the matter with trying that in Grand Rapids? What, if any, are the arguments against it?”