Robust Benefits

February 6, 2015

Here are some research-based opinions that track with the personal experiences of most of us who have given our careers to educational athletics. The words are those of Kevin Kniffen, who teaches leadership and management at Cornell University (from NYTimes.com [Oct. 22, 2014]):

“Research shows that people who play high school sports get better jobs, with better pay. Benefits that last a lifetime.


“Those lessons presumably help to account for the findings that people who played for a varsity high school team tend to earn relatively higher salaries later in life. Research to which I contributed, complementing previous studies, showed that people who played high school sports tend to get better jobs, with better pay, and that those benefits last a lifetime.

“Hiring managers expect former student-athletes (compared with people who participate in other popular extracurriculars) to have more self-confidence, self-respect and leadership; actual measures of behavior in a sample of people who had graduated from high school more than five decades earlier showed those expectations proved accurate.

“We also found that former student-athletes tend to donate time and money more frequently than people who weren't part of teams.

“In other words, there are clear and robust individual and societal benefits that appear to be generated through the current system of school support for participation in competitive youth athletics.

“With respect to whether youth athletics should be part of educational institutions, it’s certainly true that there’s no necessary relationship between the two; but, what would happen if schools were to drop all of their interscholastic sports programs?

“Any policymakers who took such action would effectively be privatizing – and, in turn, limiting – an important set of opportunities that schools presently provide in a significantly more democratic and open fashion than likely alternatives would. Beyond raising a basic barrier for anyone to gain the kinds of experiences that appear to be rewarded in the workplace, the privatization of competitive youth sports would also create the largest barriers – and cause the greatest long-term losses – for those whose families are not able to bear the costs of participation outside of the public school system.”

Injecting Sports Medicine

May 13, 2014

We are receiving the proper dosage of sports medicine advice in Michigan.

The Sports Medicine Advisory Committee of the National Federation of State High School Associations advises the NFHS and its member associations on medical and safety issues and conditions as they relate to interscholastic athletics. With nationwide expertise representing a broad range of sports medicine disciplines, the SMAC meets over three days, two times each year. It issues advisories and position statements and publishes a comprehensive manual which is provided without charge to each member high school in Michigan. 

The MHSAA has had direct representation on the SMAC for two separate four-year terms; and we depend on the SMAC to monitor, evaluate, filter and disseminate current sports medicine information that is of practical use at the interscholastic level.

The SMAC and the Michigan Department of Community Health are the voices the MHSAA listens to most in the often over-hyped cacophony of sports medicine opinion. What makes the SMAC even more unique than its prestigious panel of experts is that it has direct input into the rules-making process of the NFHS which dominates the publishing of high school playing rules. The MHSAA adopts those rules in every MHSAA sport for which rules are prepared by the NFHS.

The MHSAA has sometimes been criticized for not having its own sports medicine committee. However, we believe there is no need to create another committee to duplicate the work of the NFHS Sports Medicine Committee. And when we have needed extra attention to a unique in-state topic, we have found the Michigan Department of Community Health to be a willing and able partner.