Participant Celebrations
March 13, 2012
I was born and raised in Wisconsin; and I hope that I’m forgiven for cheering for our Lions in all but two games each year – when they play the Green Bay Packers. I just can’t shake that long loyalty.
I’m a lifelong Packer fan, one who was actually present when Don Chandler’s disputed field goal beat the Baltimore Colts (that’s right, Baltimore) on a day when running back Tom Matte was pressed into action as the Colts’ quarterback.
I was also present when Bart Starr followed Jerry Kramer’s block on the Cowboys’ Jethro Pugh to win the 1967 “Ice Bowl” in 17-below-zero weather in Green Bay.
For all these reasons and more, I’ve loved the “Lambeau Leap” which celebrates Packer touchdowns.
But, I don’t want such acts in high school sports.
The national high school rule makers have done a terrific job of controlling participant celebrations in high school sports.
Pick any sport: High school athletes will be the best behaved athletes on any level of the sport. It’s one of our trademarks. Our brand. And something we can be proud of.
(We do have one participant conduct problem, but that’s for next time.)
Tougher Rules for Transfers
May 31, 2013
There is an increased sense among the MHSAA’s constituents that it’s nearly impossible to advance deeply into the MHSAA’s postseason tournaments with “home grown” talent; that unless a team receives an influx of 9th-graders from other districts or transfers of 10th-, 11th- and 12th-graders from other schools, success in MHSAA tournaments is rare.
This is the predictable result of several factors, including (1) expanding schools of choice; (2) starving school districts of essential resources; (3) encircling schools with educational options; and (4) increasing dependence on nonfaculty coaches and the related increased profile of non-school youth sports programs.
In light of this, Michigan’s high school wrestling coaches and, more recently, Michigan’s high school basketball coaches, have proposed new rules and/or pled with MHSAA leadership to toughen the transfer rules for school-based programs.
On May 5, 2013, the MHSAA adopted a rule to take effect starting Aug. 1, 2014, that advocates believe is more straightforward than the athletic motivated section of the transfer regulation and is a needed next step to address increasing mobility of students between schools. It links certain described activities to a longer period of ineligibility after a transfer. It intends to catch some of the most overt and egregious of transfers for athletic reasons.
Specifically, after a student has played on a team at one high school and transfers to another where he or she is ineligible, the period of ineligibility is extended to 180 scheduled school days if, during the previous 12 months, this student . . .
-
Participated at an open gym at the high school to which the student has transferred.
-
Participated on a non-school team coached by any of the coaches at the high school to which the student has transferred.
-
Has a personal sport trainer, conditioner or instructor who is a coach at the high school to which the student has transferred.
-
Transfers to a school where his or her previous high school coach is now employed.
Unlike Section 9(E), this new Section 9(F) does not require one school to allege athletic motivation. If the MHSAA learns from any source that any one of the four athletic related links, the MHSAA shall impose ineligibility for 180 scheduled school days.
There may be a large percentage of the MHSAA’s constituents who do not believe this new Section 9(F) goes far enough; that this should be applied to all students, not merely those whose transfer does not fit one of the 15 stated exceptions which allows for immediate eligibility. That could become the MHSAA’s next step in fighting one of the most aggravating problems of school-based sports today.