Not Right for Us

March 7, 2017

The proposal to utilize KPI Rankings to seed the District and Regional rounds of the MHSAA Boys and Girls Basketball Tournaments should not be adopted by the Michigan High School Athletic Association.

This is no criticism of KPI Rankings per se, or of its creator who is assistant athletic director at Michigan State University; but it’s not the right thing to do for our statewide high school basketball tournaments.

The KPI rankings is one of a half-dozen means used by the NCAA to seed its Division I Men’s Basketball Tournament. But the proposal before us is that KPI rankings become the one and only system for seeding the MHSAA’s tournaments. There would be no other criteria and no human judgment.

The result would be seeding that misses important details, like which teams are hot and which are not at season end, and which teams have recently lost players to injuries or ineligibilities and which have had players return.

KPI ranks teams on a game-by-game basis by assigning a value to every game played. A loss to an opponent with a poor record is considered a “bad loss” and has a negative point value. A win over an opponent with a good record is considered a “good win” and earns a positive point value. Margin of victory is a factor.

This is a nice tool for the NCAA to use, along with a variety of other tools and considerations that its billion-dollar budget can accommodate, but none of which is proposed for seeding the MHSAA tournaments. KPI Rankings is not sufficient as the one-and-only seeding criterion for MHSAA tournaments.

Moreover, dependence on a seeding system owned by a single individual, who is outside the MHSAA office, and who has the potential to move from MSU to anywhere across the USA, is a poor business strategy.

If there is to be seeding, there are more appropriate ways to do it for the high school level. But first there needs to be clearer consensus that seeding is a good thing to do, philosophically and practically. In the MHSAA we do this sport by sport, and level by level. And the jury is still out for seeding in Michigan high school basketball.

Best Practices

April 10, 2012

For decades, football has had the greatest participation among high school sports.  In recent years it’s become the greatest spectator sport as well. Today, MHSAA Football Playoff revenue exceeds that of Boys and Girls Basketball Tournaments combined. And if I ever want to generate comments to a blog, all I have to do is mention football.

I can write either the most inspired or inane words about most topics, and not generate a comment.  But mention “football,” and opinions come fast and usually furious.

So it was with my eyes wide open that I challenged some “sacred cows” in my posting of March 20, questioned some of the standard operating procedures of high school football practice, and predicted that we will soon be making some changes in the sport I played through four years of college and coached in high school and to which I owe more of my character development than any other sport.  I knew some readers would call me out of date and out of touch, knowing nothing of my past or my passion.

I knew some readers would challenge any comparison made with college and professional players, asserting that older players need fewer practices with less contact because they already have the skills and techniques of blocking and tackling.  However, they miss the fact that it is the younger and still growing body that needs more care and caution, not less.  Less hitting, not more.  More heat and humidity acclimatization, not less.

I knew some readers would complain about diminishing time to develop young players, overlooking the proliferation of camps, clinics, combines, 7-on-7 leagues and the like which have improved skills and conditioning for many athletes prior to the official start of practice.  If that were not true or if we would dial down the out-of-season demands, then I might not join the amassing advocates for reduced in-season practice demands.  But sadly, it is true; coaches already have these kids year-round.
 
On the same day that I posted predictions of changes for football practice policies in Michigan, including more days before pads and fewer days with double sessions, the Georgia High School Association adopted policies that did just that, requiring five days of practice before the first with full pads and prohibiting two-a-day practices on consecutive days.

Such changes reflect the growing body of evidence regarding “best practices” for high school football, including the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Federation of State High School Associations.  This train has left the station; and Michigan should be an early stop, an early adopter of practice policies modifications.  We put our players, coaches and selves in peril if we ignore the evidence.

I’m embarrassed to say that for too long I avoided this topic because I knew it would bring ridicule.  Then recently, a young but experienced head football coach told me that these are the kinds of changes that football needs.  Needs to keep the game attractive to kids; and needs to keep the game safe for kids.