The Other Mr. Forsythe
August 8, 2017
The modern world is quick to dismiss pioneers who paved our way, but it would be wrong to diminish the accomplishments of those who gave form and function to school-sponsored sports in Michigan.
It was a time when travel was arduous and communications were slow. A time when the fundamentals of sports we take for granted today were being determined. A time when the basic rules of competition and eligibility we have today were being developed.
No single person has done more than L. L. Forsythe to shape school sports in Michigan, and the nation. This is Lewis L. Forsythe, not Charles E. Forsythe, the first and longest-serving executive director of the Michigan High School Athletic Association.
In 1918-19 and again in 1923-24, L. L. Forsythe served as president of the MHSAA’s predecessor organization, the Michigan Interscholastic Athletic Association, which operated from 1910 to 1924. He served on its board of control from 1921 to 1924.
When the MIAA gave way to the MHSAA in 1924, L. L. Forsythe was elected president of its Representative Council, and he served unpaid in that position for 18 consecutive years (1924 to 1942).
L. L. Forsythe served on the Executive Committee of the newly forming National Federation of State High School Associations from 1922 to 1940, and was the young national organization’s vice-president for 15 of those 18 years.
During these years, the MHSAA commenced state tournaments in seven sports and the National Federation ended national high school tournaments in all sports. Playing rules moved from a local hit-and-miss process to a national system that emphasized standardization and safety. Much that we do routinely now was a matter of first impression then.
Sold Out
December 13, 2016
We are sometimes criticized for limiting the scope of school sports – for restricting long-distance travel and prohibiting national tournaments; but there is no question that we are doing the correct thing by protecting school sports from the excesses and abuses that characterize major college sports.
Across the spectrum of intercollegiate athletics, but especially in Division I football and basketball, there exists an insatiable “keep-up-with-the-Joneses” appetite.
Universities are building increasingly extravagant facilities. They are sending their “students” into increasingly expansive scheduling. But it’s never enough.
There is always another university somewhere building a bigger stadium, a fancier press box or more palatial dressing rooms, practice facilities and coaches quarters.
So-called “students” are sent across the US and beyond to play on any day at any time in order to generate revenue to keep feeding the beast.
The Big Ten knows it’s wrong, admits it, but schedules football games on Friday nights to attract larger rights fees from television.
Feeling used or abused, some of the athletes of Northwestern and then at the University of Wisconsin, talk of creating a union to protect themselves from the obvious, rampant exploitation.
And then occasionally, some college coaches dare to suggest that high schools are wrong to have regulations that reject the road that colleges have traveled, a road that has distanced athletics very far from academics in intercollegiate sports.
The intercollegiate model is not and must not be the interscholastic model. We who are sold out for educational athletics have nothing good to learn from those who have sold out for broadcast revenue.