Prepping for the Long Run

May 9, 2014

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

Case studies of Middle Child Syndrome range far and wide in the world of family psychology. But at the center of most dialogue regarding those affected is a feeling of being ignored or left out.

Within the family tree of scholastic sports, however, there’s no better time to be in the middle, as the tween and early teen generation is commanding the MHSAA’s utmost attention.

While participation numbers for high school athletics continue to hold steady in Michigan, junior high/middle school membership in the MHSAA is on the decline. In just the last seven years, membership among the vital group has dropped by exactly 100 buildings, from 831 schools in 2005-06 to 731 this year. That figure represents just 36.5% of the nearly 2,000 schools in the 2013 Michigan Education Directory serving 7th- and 8th-graders.

The number of high schools comprising the MHSAA now is greater than that of the feeder schools, bewildering when considering that a large percentage of high schools draw students from at least two junior high/middle schools.

To reverse the trend, the first order of business is to identify reasons junior highs and middle schools are leaving the MHSAA, or in more numerous cases, not joining the association at the start.

Armed with data from the 2013 MHSAA Update Meeting Survey and positions advanced by the MHSAA Junior High/Middle School Committee, a task force has been formed to examine problems and recommend solutions.

“We didn’t have an overwhelming ‘Yes’ or ‘No,’ or definitive answers, through the Update Meeting Survey on the various junior high/middle school topics. There are so many models in existence throughout the state. Some have grades 5-8, some 6, 7 and 8, some K-12,” said MHSAA Representative Council member Karen Leinaar, explaining her motion at the December Council meeting that a task force be formed.

“We hope the task force can provide information and direction by putting different minds together to narrow down some action plans to encourage more junior high/middle school membership,” added Leinaar, athletic director at Bear Lake, a K-12 building.

“When you see the numbers, it makes you scratch your head and think, ‘What can we do to get that number to at least 50 percent,” said fellow Council member Jason Mellema,  superintendent at Pewamo-Westphalia Schools. “I’d like the task force to approach schools which aren’t members currently and ask, ‘Why?’ Those responses will be valuable.”

At the heart of the matter are separate but parallel discussions aimed at making junior high/middle school membership more attractive.  Implementing either of the two requires different measures of MHSAA protocol.

The first matter would require MHSAA Representative Council action. These issues pertain to lengths of contests and seasons at the middle school level. Lengthening seasons and/or contests could provide more ample playing time for schools which currently find it difficult to mete out opportunities for all students in the program.

The second consideration involves the inclusion of 6th-graders into school athletic programs. Such action would require an MHSAA Constitutional change which would be confirmed by a two-thirds favorable vote on a ballot authorized by the Representative Council.

Extending the arm of MHSAA membership to 6th-graders might enable smaller school districts to begin programs and teams where currently none exist due to low enrollments.

In communities of all sizes, 6th-grade participation could encourage students to join school teams at an earlier age, exposing them to the values and benefits of school-based sports vs. community sports in which many youngsters are already participating.

“AAU (Amateur Athletic Union) and community-based sports aren’t going away,” said MHSAA Council member Steve Newkirk, principal at Clare Middle School. “What is our rationale when we examine lengthening seasons or extending our role to include 6th-graders? If we’re jumping into this attempting to control something that we can’t control, that’s not the right reason. But, if we can increase participation in some schools which otherwise wouldn’t have programs, then we need to figure out how to do that.”

In a nutshell, the keys to increasing membership among the MHSAA’s younger students are speculative at this point.

There does seem to be growing consensus, however, that when a new model is unveiled, it will be up to local leadership to grab the keys and drive the vehicle down the right roads.

Matter of minutes

Like an older or younger sibling, “burnout” gets a lot of attention from sports study professionals as a significant reason many young people walk away from sports.

Too much, too soon. Too much specialization. Data certainly exists to support both.

Often overlooked is exclusion. Not getting enough playing time, not feeling like part of the team, practicing just as hard but only playing the meaningless “fifth quarter.”

The MHSAA sets forth season and contest limitations for both its senior high schools and junior high/middle schools.

Survey data illustrates that Michigan is more restrictive than some neighboring states, and there seems to be growing momentum among constituents to lengthen contests rather than seasons.

“It’s interesting to see what some of the other states have in place, and in many instances we allow significantly fewer contests,” said Mellema. “Maybe increasing the number of contests would be the hook for increasing our membership.”

Michigan’s restrictions on the number of contests are a bit more stringent from others surveyed. However, the mood from January’s Junior High/Middle School Committee Meeting at the MHSAA, along with the flavor from last fall’s Update Meetings, seems to signify little desire for change.

When invested personnel were asked whether they would favor increased basketball and soccer schedules at the middle school level, the answer was ‘No,’ to the tune of 60 percent regarding basketball and 68 percent when it came to soccer.

“Our coaches want practice time, and increasing the number of games would actually take away from practice time,” said Kevin Polston, who heads the athletic department at a 7th-8th-grade building in Grand Haven. “Increasing the length of contests would be favored over playing more actual games.”

Early dismissal from school, increased transportation, contest officials and game management expenses also work against the notion of upping the number of events.

“When we talk about adding games, I see dollar signs,” said Blissfield’s Steve Babbitt. “More buses, more officials, more game management.”

Adding dates to schedules might also bring unwanted consequences to the school calendar.

“If we were to add contests, particularly in the fall, then the practice start dates might become an issue to get in the proper number of days before the season begins,” said Joe Alessandrini of Livonia. “We’d have to start practice before school begins.”

One problem inherent to late summer practice at the junior high/middle school level is that, unlike high school, many coaches use the first weeks of school simply to recruit kids to try out for their teams.

Gaining far greater momentum at the recent Committee Meeting was the advocacy for longer games through the addition of a couple minutes per quarter.

That position is further bolstered by the Update Meeting Survey, which revealed respondents’ favoring an increase in basketball quarters from six to 8 minutes, and for a “fifth quarter” in football to allow more students the opportunity to compete.

Just over half of the survey takers (52 to 48 percent) were more reluctant to add minutes to football quarters, but several JH/MS Committee Members point to longer football games as a key to participation. On many occasions, it was reported, football teams have run nearly all the time out of a quarter without the other team touching the ball. And, kids who only play the “fifth quarter” aren’t fooled by their roles if they only play when the game is over and nothing counts. Incorporating them into the flow of the game is preferred.

Others in the meeting discussed ways in which coaches rotated team units during a contest, and conference guidelines which have been established to promote participation while still allowing teams to be competitive at the ends of games.

“My concern when looking at game times is that we need to be specific and put constraints on how many minutes or quarters kids can play. That becomes tricky,” said Mellema.

“I’d like to have this meeting recorded to show that our opinions are not isolated; that we all share the same views, values and issues throughout the state,” said Constantine’s Mike Messner during the January meeting.

And that’s where influence at the local level from experienced school leaders is paramount.

“Our good intentions sometimes are not carried out the way we meant for them to be,” Leinaar said. “We have to impress on our schools why these changes are taking place, if we change things like length of seasons or contests.

“If it’s about winning, adding eight or 10 minutes to each game won’t change anything. If we add games, we see it as increased opportunities for kids, but coaches might not use it that way.”

Former MHSAA Assistant Director Randy Allen, who presided over JH/MS Committee Meetings in recent years, added, “The details of this can never be carried out or achieved by the state association. We can provide a tool to help achieve the goal of increased participation, but our schools have to implement it to be effective.”

Pleading the 6th

Even altering season and contest limits won’t address participation issues if kids can’t play.

Enter the debate over welcoming 6th-graders into the scholastic sports mix, an even hotter and more divided topic than game and season duration. 

Whereas support for amending the MHSAA Constitution once lingered just below level ground, the most recent Update Meeting Survey is creating a groundswell, if not yet of seismic proportions.

In 2008, 47.5 percent of member schools indicated a desire to include 6th-graders in the MHSAA  Handbook. Last fall, that figure rose to 59.4 percent overall, and up to 61.1 percent for just those individuals responsible for 7th and 8th-grade students in their districts.

It is worth noting that in more nearly 80 percent of school districts which include MHSAA member schools, 6th-graders share the same building with 7th- and 8th-graders.

Let the opening arguments begin.

“We’re talking 60 percent who are in favor of amending the Constitution. That’s a significant number,” Mellema said. “For larger schools with good numbers and only 7th- and 8th-graders in the buildings, it’s not an issue. But some smaller schools wouldn’t have teams without 6th-graders.”

Yet, in most places, 6th-graders are playing anyway, just not wearing the school colors.

“Because there are so many outside groups that have keyed in on kids at such a young age, I think it’s time to reach out to the younger grades to maintain educational athletics,” said Leinaar. “Fewer kids are on the playgrounds. Parents have them scheduled for soccer, judo, piano, and anything else you can think of. So, we should take the opportunity to develop the team concept in an educational setting without the little league mom and dad coaches.”

There is sentiment that the work needs to be focused in-house, or in the hallways, with deference to non-school athletic opportunities.

“It’s not about competing with outside entities,” said Brian Swinehart, athletic director of Walled Lake schools. “It’s about providing the best experience for those who are in our schools; getting them more opportunity to play.”

And getting them to play with structured coaching regulations. Within the MHSAA, members are strongly encouraged to hire coaches who are employed by the school district. Non-faculty coaches are required to be listed on forms submitted to the MHSAA, and in the very near future, all MHSAA coaches will be required to complete Coaches Advancement Courses and courses in basic safety and first aid.

“I coach my son in AAU wrestling, and my eyes opened up when I found that anyone with $18 and a computer could be a coach,” Newkirk said. “Anyone under the sun can coach.

“We need to get to the root of what it is we’re trying to accomplish. Is our goal the opportunity to play school sports or is the undercurrent to impact AAU sports? Maybe there’s a way to work with the coaches who are coming into our buildings and collaborate with them to have them buy into our values and philosophies.”

Polston echoed those sentiments at the JH/MS Committee meeting.

“If adding 6th-graders is to further our competitive nature versus non-school activities, I don’t think we’re ever going to do well at that,” Polston said. “Their philosophy is to win, and ours is education and value based.”

Just as school-based athletics differ from outside organizations, there also can be marked differences in the lives of youths as they move from elementary to junior high and middle schools. Such social transition periods are also considered.

“We’re already asking kids to grow up way too fast,” said Newkirk, whose school in Clare is 5th-8th grade. “It used to be Hot Wheels, Barbie Dolls and G.I. Joes, and now it’s all cell phones and texting and dating. Adding sports to those dynamics might create just another source of stress.”

The counterpoint could spotlight the exclusion factor again.

“I’m in a 6th-8th-grade building, and there’s a void for 6th-graders,” said Alan Alsbro of Berrien Springs.

Messner reiterates concerns that 6th-grade sports might be too much, too soon at a pivotal age for students, and also mentions certain buzzwords that are like nails on a chalkboard to all levels of school sports leaders: finances and facilities.

“We’re a 6-8 building, and we’ve always felt that the 6th-grade year is a year of adjustment academically and socially, so let’s start athletics in 7th grade,” Messner said. “And, we’ve already had to budget out freshman-level sports at the high school, so how can we justify 6th-grade? We’re not going to find a pot of money.”

Cash will always be a concern for school programs, but the facilities and transportation arguments are quickly debunked by some.

“We have 5th- and 6th-grade teams that are school-based right now. We don’t pay the coaches, don’t collect participation fees or take physicals, but they do use our facilities, and we find room and time in the schedule,” Mellema said.

“Some schools treat the lower grades as intramurals, still hosting the events in their facilities, so it can be done if we expand our programs down a grade,” Leinaar said. “People say, ‘Oh that’d be a lot of work.’ Yeah. It would, but you just have to figure out a way to do it.”

The facility and finance issue could, in fact, be a moot point. A change to the Constitution would not necessarily force schools to sponsor stand- alone 6th-grade teams. In fact, the change might not mandate schools include 6th-graders at all.

A change would simply provide the opportunity for participation. The underlying feeling within the JH/MS Committee was that local boards and conferences would determine the extent of 6th-grade participation.

“I think the fear of 6th-grade stand-alone teams could deter some districts from having their middle schools join the MHSAA,” said Sean Zaborowski of St. Clair Shores. “It’s not viable to have 6th-grade-only football teams, basketball teams, etc. The question becomes whether to allow them to participate with 7th-and 8th-graders.”

For some, it might simply be a question of need, on a sport-by-sport basis.

“We have enough numbers that we don’t need 6th-graders to fill out rosters,” said Muskegon’s Todd Farmer of his 7-8 building. “Only the cross country people are asking about it. And, if we allow 6th-graders to participate, then do we allow 7th-graders to play with 8th-graders?”

That is another piece to the puzzle with which administrators are wrestling, in some cases quite literally.

Contact list

Wrestling is one of the sports most in need of 6th-grade participants, if for nothing more than filling the lightest weight classes.

The Update Meeting Survey showed nearly 42 percent in favor of 6th-graders competing with 7th- and 8th-graders in wrestling. Among “contact” sports, only basketball received slightly more support at 52 percent.

“Non-contact sports is where the focus should be,” Alsbro said. “In the non-contact sports, I think it’s a no-brainer to get students exposed to competition without getting their brains knocked out.”

The fall survey backs that sentiment with support as high as 73 percent in cross country and 67 percent in track & field. Football, ice hockey and lacrosse yield percentages of 72 or above opposed to 6th-graders playing with 7th- and 8th-graders.

Leinaar speculates that it might be time to include 6th-graders in all “non-combative” sports.

Wrestling certainly falls in the contact category, but it is individual in nature. The JH/MS Committee suggested that the MHSAA Task Force consider the merits of team vs. individual sports as the natural division as to the inclusion of 6th-graders on the same teams as their 7th- and 8th-grade classmates. 

Recent MHSAA waiver requests indicate a movement for such action to be taken. Consider the following:

  • During the 2011-12 school year, 40 school districts made requests to the MHSAA Executive Committee to waive Regulation III, Section 1, pursuant to what is now Interpretation 262 so that 6th-graders could compete with and against 7th- and 8th-graders. The Executive Committee approved 37 of those requests.


  • During the 2012-13 school year, 50 school districts made this request to allow 6th-graders on 7th- and 8th-grade teams, and 46 requests were approved.

The majority of these requests came in the sports of basketball, cross country, and track & field. On several occasions, schools were granted permission in all sports other than football, ice hockey and wrestling.

Interpretation 262 also states that requests may be submitted by the administration of “smaller member junior high/middle schools.” This might have deterred some districts from seeking 6th-grade participation and, in turn, eliminated the possibility of fielding a team in some cases.

In light of such history and language, the JH/MS Committee asked to forward the following positions to the Task Force and beyond:

  • Change the current 6th-grade waiver process to allow schools of any enrollment size to be considered for waivers on a case-by-case basis that is need-specific, not granted only to small enrollment schools.


  • Eliminate the waiver requirement for 6th-grade participation in individual sports, and maintain the waiver process and criteria for team sports.

Even with a Constitutional amendment to include 6th-graders in programs statewide, decisions would have to be made locally as to which teams they may be a part.

Outside the hallways

In addition to the primary topics of season and contest limitations and 6th-grade participation, the JH/MS Committee was asked for suggestions on how the MHSAA could retain current JH/MS members and make membership more attractive to schools not currently members. The following thoughts were expressed for consideration:

  • Make membership required for those junior high/middle schools of MHSAA senior high schools. In other words, require district-wide membership (fully recognizing the difficulty with private school members).


  • Provide MHSAA CAP courses at no charge or at a greatly reduced cost to JH/MS members.


  • Modify the Limited Team Membership Rule at grades 7-8 to allow some participation in the same sport with non-school programs during the school season. Such allowance would have restrictions, to be determined.


  • Give member schools flexibility on the start of fall football practices.


  • Allow more local league and conference decision-making within broad statewide MHSAA regulations.

This input from the JH/MS Committee will be an important voice in the deliberations of the JH/MS Task Force that will convene multiple times during 2014 to bring a breadth and depth of study unprecedented on this topic in the MHSAA’s long history.

The quest for increased membership among the state’s junior high/middle schools – and thus, increased participation within the framework of educational athletics – is of utmost importance to the health and future of high school athletics.

Quoting MHSAA Executive Director Jack Roberts from his blog Oct. 8 on MHSAA.com, “School sports needs to market itself better, and part of better is to be available earlier – much sooner in the lives of youth.”

It is an age group that can no longer be ignored, or take a back seat to its older brothers and sisters.

‘Tis (out of) the Season

April 2, 2015

By Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor

Those who live in close proximity to high schools throughout Michigan don’t even need a calendar to know what time of year it is when a new sports season begins.

Whistles piercing through the hum of their air conditioners on the first Monday morning in August mark the start of fall from nearby football facilities. The ping of aluminum as sidewalks and grass re-appear from winter’s grip signifies the start of spring.

Office supply stores could see calendar sales soar in those households – or occupants might at least do a double-take when checking smartphone calendars – in the near future if MHSAA out-of-season coaching regulations are modified. The familiar sounds of the seasons could resonate in non-traditional months as well.

A major topic of the recent MHSAA Update Meetings and AD In-Services in the fall was the possibility of revamping the regulations regarding out-of-season contact for school coaches with school teams during the school year. The Summer Dead Period would remain in place and has been largely supported by membership since it was implemented for the 2007-08 school year.

It should be noted that out-of-season revision is not a certainty, but simply in the exploratory stage at this point.

Yet, the time was ripe to initiate discussion on this topic in the fall. The growth of non-school athletic programs and demands placed upon students by such entities in recent years was one factor. The difficulty the MHSAA has enforcing – and schools have interpreting – current out-of-season coaching regulations is another factor.

“The fundamental question is how to allow more contact between coaches and students out of season without encouraging single-sport participation,” MHSAA Executive Director Jack Roberts said.

Can this be done? Can trends toward specialization and away from multi-sport participation be reversed through greater contact periods for each sport within the school year?

Proponents of this school of thought believe that time otherwise spent with non-school coaches would be best served with education-based coaches who, in theory, would be on the same page with peers at their school, all encouraging multi-sport participation.

“Part of the explosion of AAU and club involvement has been the perpetuation of the notion that without additional training and competition, students will not reach their potential nor maximize their chances of being recruited by colleges,” said Scott Robertson, athletic director at Grand Haven. “When our high school coaches have the ability to provide a similar experience, but with an education-first mindset regulated by athletic directors, the expectations of student-athletes by coaches can be tempered.”

It is a lively debate that will be picking up momentum for the remainder of this school year and into the next.

Following are some of the concepts and comments from the fall, with key points from a statewide survey to be published later this week. The MHSAA's Representative Council discussed these results at its March meeting, and action is possible during its final meeting of the school year in May.

Let's begin 

Perhaps the most criticized, misinterpreted, ignored, and/or difficult to enforce rule in the MHSAA Handbook resides in Regulation II, Section 11 (H): the three- and four-player rule for coaches out of season during the school year. (See bottom of this page.)

Debate has long spiraled in dizzying circles around definitions such as “open gyms,” “under one roof,” “conditioning,” “drills,” and other components.

“One of the problems is the MHSAA finds this specific rule difficult to enforce and interpret,” MHSAA Associate Director Tom Rashid said. “Another perceived problem is that there might be a disconnect between school coaches and students out of season, which might be driving students toward non-school programs.”

It’s simple to recognize lightning rods, but quite another to construct a device for harvesting the sparks in a productive manner. To that end, Rashid prepared an outline for discussion on the topic as he hit the trails around Michigan this fall for Update Meetings and AD In-Services.

“We felt we needed to see if we could do better,” Rashid said. “Rather than say to 600 ADs, ‘What do you think about out-of-season coaching rules?’ we asked about a new concept. We created a starting point for discussion.”

The basic premise brought forward to the masses was this: a voluntary contact period of one month to six weeks with a limit of 10 or 15 days of contact in that period – and perhaps three in any one week – between a coach and his/her athletes out of season with any number of students, grade 7-12. Due to large participation numbers in football, some consideration was given to limiting the number of players in any one out-of-season session to 11, thus not creating “spring football.”

A straw poll from the gatherings in the fall indicated nearly 70 percent of attendees in favor of “contact periods” versus the current rule, prompting a detailed survey to all member schools sent in October to further measure the climate and hone in on specifics for desired changes.

“It was a very open process with great discussion,” Rashid said. “All size schools, all demographics, and all corners of the state weighed in.”

As always, the devil is in the detail, and the October survey yielded plenty of detail.

Numbers favor no numbers

As mentioned earlier, nearly 70 percent of attendees at MHSAA fall gatherings indicated that they might prefer a rule that specified coaching contact periods outside their sport during the school year, as opposed to limiting the number of student-athletes per session.

The ensuing survey sent to member schools in late October reflects that sentiment in schools of all sizes, and in all zones of the state. On the topic of counting contact days out of season with no limit on the number of students involved, more than 72 percent of 514 responding schools favored the plan. Class A schools led the way with nearly 76 percent  in support. Class D schools chimed in at 69 percent in favor. Support was strong across the zones of the state as well, led by the Detroit metro area (Zone 3) at 76.5. The middle of the state (Zone 5) was the low, but still found close to 60 percent in favor of such a revision.

The survey revealed consistencies across the board relative to the amount of three- and four-player sessions currently utilized by schools of different sizes, and the support and opposition to questions regarding revised regulations on the topic. For instance, nearly 50 percent of Class A schools indicate that their coaches work with students under the current rule most every week during the offseason, while 40 percent of Class D schools report that most of their coaches never utilize the three- or four-player rule at all out of season. Not surprisingly then, in questions posed where three-and four-player stipulations might still exist, the larger schools favored such changes at a higher rate than the smaller schools.

Survey data also reveals a reason for such opposition at lower-enrollment schools: a simple numbers game. In Class C and D, the majority of schools report that 60-80 percent of their student-athletes participate in more than one sport. So, with more students busier year-round than at their larger school counterparts, there are fewer people to attend out-of-season sessions.

Similarly, the concept of extending the current preseason down time for all sports was supported more in Class C and D schools than Class A and B. 

“It is always a challenge for individual schools to see things from the other schools’ perspectives,” Rashid said. “It’s hard for people to say, ‘It might be different for us, but for the greater good, we might have to change our culture here.’”

But, that line of thinking is certainly understood at Chelsea High School, a Class B school of more than 800 students. Athletic director and football coach Brad Bush is an advocate of multi-sport participation, regardless of school size.

“The current three- or four-player rule benefits kids by developing skills, but does not force kids to feel pressure to be at a full practice,” Bush said. “Changing this rule could reduce the number of multiple-sport athletes. Our staff and league is united in believing that changing this rule could be a big mistake.”

Outside influence

Part of the balancing act in attempting to revise out-of-season rules is to encourage greater participation on school teams, while not promoting specialization.

Interestingly, a number of schools in the survey reported that they have policies in place limiting in-season athletes from attending sports-specific training from out-of-season coaches. The percentages ranged from 27.6 percent in Class D to 41 percent in Class B.

Most schools allow weightlifting during the season, followed in decreasing order by three- or four- player workouts, conditioning and open gyms. However, more than 40 percent of responding schools have in place a policy prohibiting non-school competition for in-season athletes. The message seems to be that if activity is taking place, the preference is for it to be under supervision, and for that supervision to come from school coaches.

“If a coach is going to hold three workouts per week out of season, a student may leave another sport to play in the offseason of their preferred  sport,” Rashid said. “As such, many ADs identified that it would be the role of each school to regulate  out-of-season coaching. Right now, the ADs have to keep a handle on out-of-season activities and if the rules change, depending on their demographic, they might need to be involved even more.”

With advance planning, an environment can be created in which all of a school’s sports can exist in harmony and encourage multi-sport membership.

“Athletic directors can guide all coaches on their staffs to work together to create 12-month calendars that focus on the needs of kids and respect the desire of many to participate in multiple sports,” Robertson said. “In doing so, coaches can work to avoid overlaps in important opportunities where kids may be put in win-lose situations. With careful planning student-athletes will be afforded more opportunities to train and develop with their classmate peers and within their own communities.”

Chris Ervin, athletic director at St. Johns High School, is one of many in the camp that believes the current system accomplishes a school’s missions when properly supervised.

“Our coaches have ample opportunities to coach in the three- or four-player setting, and our athletes have plenty of opportunities to improve their skill sets through open gyms which are not coach-directed,” Ervin said.

Others agree that any change might introduce unwanted consequences. One source, an administrator in a strong football community, speculates in that town and others like it, football programs could smother other sport programs by scheduling full workouts on top of other in-season sports. Voluntary or not, it is opined that kids would gravitate toward the out-of-season football workouts if that’s the signature sport in town.

Ervin can see the same point. “I don't see this affecting my role too much, but I do believe this could lead to even more specialization. For example, if football coaches are able to work with their players 11 at a time in the offseason, I believe athletes will feel more pressure to be part of that football workout while they are in-season with another sport.”

Under another scenario, school coaches might someday be allowed to coach non-school teams during the school year. The rationale is that if students are participating outside the school campus anyway, wouldn’t it be better that they are coached by school personnel so that the educational message is delivered appropriately?

Add to this the fact that 100 percent of surveyed schools reported conducting open gyms in basketball and 66 percent in volleyball – the two most high-profile AAU sports – would it benefit schools to have trained personnel in those non-school leadership roles?

“This would connect our coaches to school kids but also could have the unintended consequence of specialization,” Rashid said. “However, the coaches in place would be our coaches, whereas currently we don’t have a say in the AAU coaches of our students.”

Not yet. This topic on the survey was favored by roughly 60 percent overall, but an equal 20.4 percent were at opposite ends of the spectrum strongly in favor and strongly against, with the highest percentage falling just above lukewarm. 

By Class, the C and D schools were slightly more opposed to this idea than Class A and B. Why? Very often, in the smaller communities, there are no non-school opportunities; school sports are the only option.

Robertson believes that incorporating a revised out-of-season coaching plan could assist families financially in the long run.

“By having the ability to include larger numbers of kids in development activities and allowing for a limited number of competitions, there is a strong likelihood that students and their families will choose the out-of-season activities offered by their schools over the AAU/club activities that exist,” Robertson said. “In doing so, there will be no rental of outside gyms, no mandatory club fees, and reduced costs to families.”

Not all ideas have elicited opposing views. One item on the docket that schools uniformly opposed was the possibility of scrimmages within the out-of-season contact period. Most schools indicate a preference for these periods to be instructional only.

Just a tweak

Perhaps the current rule just needs a splint and not a full cast. Maybe it’s not broken after all.

The most popular proposal to emerge from the survey was simply the removal of three little words in the current regulation: “under one roof.”

More than 80 percent of schools favored removing the phrase “under one roof” from Regulation II, Section 11(H) 2. a., which means as long as only three or four students are receiving coaching, then others may be in the facility working on conditioning, or in groups on their own.

Receiving close to 70 percent support from schools is the prospect of removing the portion of Handbook Interpretation 237 which currently prohibits schools from setting up rotations. This would allow a coach to work with dozens of players, three and four at a time.

And, Robertson says, in less time than coaches are currently expending.

“Most high school coaches already commit an enormous amount of time to the offseason development of student-athletes,” he said. “By removing the limit on number of athletes they can have contact with at one time and by placing a limit on the number of dates they can actually have this direct instructional contact, the net gain will be fewer dates, but with a greater impact.”

Rashid forecasts slight modifications of current rules rather than wholesale changes, at least in the near future.

“It wouldn’t surprise me if a few changes come sooner than later,” Rashid said. “One, allow rotations in the three- or four-player rule. Two, allow more than three kids under one roof as long as only three kids are receiving coaching. These two are a broader interpretations of our current rules.”

Simpler could be the answer. Perhaps over the course of time, in trying to be everything to all schools, the rule became more difficult for schools to follow, and for the MHSAA to oversee. Outside influences that could not have been predicted a generation ago have crept into the picture as well.

“These rules are very old, and that doesn’t mean not good,” Rashid said. “They were written at a time when the majority of students played multiple sports; before students began playing in 3rd and 4th grades, and before the non-school sports explosion.”

Even with the current trends and abundance of choices for some athletes, there are strong feelings from various leaders to leave things status quo.

“Our staff and league believes there needs to be a greater emphasis on the current rules with stronger punishments,” Bush said. “The answer is to enforce to current rules that we have, and not change the rules.”

There is a certain irony to this topic in front of athletic administrators and coaches, who spend so many hours in the here and now; in-season, in practices, in games.

“Who would think that what you do out of season could be the most critical piece of school sports discussion that we’ve had?” Rashid ponders. “It’s not what happens during the season, but in the offseason, that might be at the core of encouraging and maintaining school sports participation.”


Current Out-of-Season Rule (Three- or Four-Player Rule)

From MHSAA Handbook, Regulation II, Section 11(H):

2. These limitations out of season apply to coaches:

a. Outside the school season during the school year (from Monday the week of Aug. 15 through the Sunday after Memorial Day observed), school coaches are prohibited from providing coaching at any one time under one roof, facility or campus to more than three (or four) students in grades 7-12 of the district or cooperative program for which they coach (four students if the coaching does not involve practice or competition with students or others not enrolled in that school district). This applies only to the specific sport(s) coached by the coach, but it applies to all levels, junior high/middle school and high school, and both genders, whether the coach is paid or volunteer (e.g., a volunteer JV boys soccer coach may not work with more than three girls in grades 7-12 outside the girls soccer season during the school year).