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.
Making Matters Worse
March 17, 2017
For many years there have been complaints that the MHSAA Football Playoffs make it difficult for some teams to schedule regular season football games. Teams that are too good are avoided because opponents fear losses, and teams that are too small are avoided by larger schools because they do not generate enough playoff point value for wins.
Recently the MHSAA has learned, only indirectly, that some among the state’s football coaches association are recycling an old plan that would make matters worse. It’s called the “Enhanced Strength of Schedule Playoff System.”
Among its features is doubling the number of different point value classifications from four (80 for Class A down to 32 for Class D) to eight (88 for Division 1 down to 32 for Division 8).
What this does is make the art of scheduling regular season games even more difficult; for the greater variety of values you assign to schools, the more difficult it is to align with like-sized schools.
The “Enhanced Strength of Schedule Playoff System” makes matters even worse by creating eight different multipliers depending on the size of opposing schools. Imagine having to consider all this when building a regular season football schedule.
When this proposal was discussed previously statewide in 2012, it was revealed that it would have caused 15 teams with six regular season wins to miss the playoffs that year, while two teams with losing records would have qualified. How do you explain that to people? It was also demonstrated in 2012 that larger schools in more isolated areas would have to travel far and wide across the state, week after week, to build a schedule with potential point value to match similar sized schools located in more heavily populated parts of our state and have many scheduling options nearby. How is that fair?
The proposal is seriously flawed, and by circumventing the MHSAA Football Committee, its proponents assure it is fatally flawed.