‘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).
Taking a Healthy Approach to Sports
By
Rob Kaminski
MHSAA benchmarks editor
November 8, 2013
During election years, it’s a familiar rallying cry: “Four more years! Four more years!”
It’s become commonplace following the third quarter of football games around the country for members of the leading team to march down the gridiron with four fingers raised on one outstretched hand as teams switch ends of the field to signify, “Fourth quarter is ours; finish the job.”
The number four also is significant in education with school terms identified as freshman, sophomore, junior and senior years.
To that end, the MHSAA is imploring everyone involved in educational athletics to go back to school in 2013-14 with a four-year mission in mind: “Four Thrusts for Four Years.”
The goal is to attain and maintain advanced degrees in sports safety, positioning Michigan schools in the center of best practices for ensuring the health of our product and students, today and beyond.
“Just a brief look around all levels of today’s athletic landscape reveals heightened awareness of health and safety issues,” said MHSAA Executive Director Jack Roberts. “Interscholastic sports as a whole – and particularly school sports in Michigan – has long led the charge to employ the safest contest rules and provide the healthiest environments for our games and participants.
“But, to put it in athletic terms, we can’t sit on the lead,” Roberts added. “We can, and must, improve our games in order to guarantee their existence for future generations. That is our goal, our thrust in the coming years.”
Following are the focal points for this four-year plan:
- Implement heat and humidity management policies at all schools for all sports.
- Require more initial and ongoing sports safety training for more coaches.
- Revise practice policies generally, but especially for early in the fall season.
- Modify game rules to reduce the frequency of the most dangerous play situations, and to reduce head trauma.
The directive actually kicked off last March, when the Representative Council approved a heat management policy for MHSAA tournaments and a detailed model policy for schools. While not setting requirements for member schools during the regular season, it suggests actions based on heat index – the degree of felt discomfort derived by combining temperature and humidity measurements – that are designed to minimize the risk of heat-related illness during interscholastic participation.
The policy is mandatory for all MHSAA tournaments beginning this school year, and the MHSAA plans to monitor schools’ adoption of the plan throughout the year to determine best policies moving forward.
Laminated cards containing the policy and heat index chart were printed and mailed to schools in June and continue to be disseminated at statewide meetings this fall. Two publications, Heat Ways and Safety Blitz, were published, mailed and posted to MHSAA.com, heightening awareness of healthy practice regimens, and schools have been offered discounted psychrometer prices through the MHSAA to assist in their efforts to properly monitor weather conditions.
“This action was significant; but it’s just the next step in a continuous series of actions being taken to make school sports as healthy as possible for students,” said Roberts.
The MHSAA’s proactive movements toward a safer tomorrow are taking place concurrently, rather than sequentially. While the heat and humidity plan is the most developed of the four “thrusts,” other initiatives are underway. Today’s climate prompts such action.
From the NCAA’s new “targeting fouls” to the NFL’s “crown” rule, and of course Major League Baseball’s Biogenesis/PED debacle, the headlines off the field in August centered on protecting the games rather than simply playing them. Like it or not, it’s the type of news fans need to get used to as their favorite sports audible to option plays in order to steer clear of the endangered species list.
The situation can’t be overstated. Athletics at all levels has been approaching a crossroads for years, and the time to heed the signals has come.
“Let’s make one thing abundantly clear: The people in charge of football at all levels are wise to craft rules that make the game safer, even if those rules will be controversial,” wrote Andy Staples for SI.com College Football on July 23.
The story continued: “As more information arrives about the long-term dangers of the headshots football players absorb at the high school, college and pro levels, something has to change. The next few years will be messy. The game needs saving, because if it continues as it has, it will get decimated by lawsuits and by parents of young children who decide the potential adverse effects aren't worth the risk.”
When kids stop playing, numbers at the high school level and beyond are bound to diminish as well. To trumpet the vast benefits of interscholastic football while easing parents’ minds on safety concerns, the MHSAA formed a Football Task Force in the spring of 2013. The task force is the first of several to be convened during the next four school years, and the objectives of each are to promote the sports involved as safe, low-risk, competitive athletics through the development of better practice policies and modification of playing rules.
“These task forces will be central to the overarching mission of preserving sports for years to come,” said Roberts. “We believe the MHSAA Football Task Force has set a foundation on which to build. Our discussions involving revised practice policies have reached the draft stage, and we intend to have formal proposals ready to present to the Representative Council in March 2014.”
The work of the 13-member task force – made up of football coaches and school administrators from around the state – will be reviewed by the Michigan High School Football Coaches Association, the MHSAA Football Committee and at the MHSAA League Leadership meeting for fine-tuning prior to reaching the Council.
“It is important that we provide opportunities for children to participate in interscholastic athletics and crucial that we do all we can to ensure they will be safe when they do,” said Football Task Force member Tammy Jackson, principal at East Jordan High School, who has a sports medicine background. “The MHSAA has taken an active role in promoting safety by convening the Task Force to examine current rules and consider modifications to further protect children.”
With so much publicity concerning football safety, the football group was a natural to become the first of several task forces to be assembled.
“We must educate the public on the benefits of all school sports,” said task force member Bill Chilman, superintendent of Beal City Schools. “In the case of football, it must be impressed upon people that it is statistically a very safe game when taught and played properly. The Football Task Force being proactive rather than reactive to this safety movement is key to promoting the lifelong values of football and all school sports.”
And within that public is a group which has the most vested concerns: the parents.
“There is more information available to the general public regarding sport and sport injuries, and unfortunately parents and kids all too often hear about the negative side of sport,” suggests Mike Bakker, athletic director at Fenton High School, and another member of the MHSAA Football Task Force. “It is imperative for the integrity of the sport of football to have coaches and administrators provide information about the safety of the game and the steps we take to keep kids safe. We must educate parents about the proper way to play the game and the signs to look for if problems arise.”
Without getting into the minutia of the new NCAA and NFL playing rules regarding use of the helmet, suffice it to say this will be an interesting fall during which to monitor penalties and their effects on injury numbers, particularly when it comes to concussions.
The rules changes have been reported and debated at the national level ad nauseam, and the mood seems to inexplicably tilt toward skepticism and criticism from the very group that would stage a revolt of epic proportions if football ever became extinct: the fans.
Case in point: six targeting fouls were called in 75 games during the opening weekend of college football over Labor Day Weekend (one ejection was overturned by replay), and the outcry began. Analysts and fans are afforded frame-by-frame replays which onfield officials do not have the luxury of seeing before throwing the flag.
Like it or not, the rules are in place. And, they have been implemented to protect the future of the game. The impetus now falls to the caretakers of the game – the officials – who no doubt will bear the brunt of disapproving masses in the stadiums. Yet, football is their livelihood too; both players and officials are expected to make adjustments.
At Officiate Michigan Day and the ensuing National Association of Sports Officials Summit this past July in Grand Rapids, the theme was clear: “The game has changed, and the officiating has to change with it.”
From NFL Referee Jeff Triplette to SEC Coordinator of Officials Scott Shaw to Big Ten Referee Alex Kemp and Fox Sports NFL Rules Analyst Mike Pereira – people who have been around the block – the message delivered was that the changes are necessary for the health and growth of football.
“We’re talking about taking out a specific type of play that, quite honestly, you didn’t see that much of before about 10 years ago,” Triplette said during a player safety panel at the NASO Summit. “They still played defense, there were still great hits. But somehow, these violent types of tackles began to get notoriety – whether it was all the ESPN highlights, YouTube, and maybe a combination of all of that stuff – and players started to celebrate those hits, and that became the goal.”
Not only can the game become safer; it might even become better by going retro. In recent comments on The Sports XChange, NFL analyst and former coach John Madden said, “You are always concerned how any change will impact the game. In this case, players are not going for the head shot, that big hit. They are keeping their heads up. Better tackling has become the unintended consequence. That's a good thing. Good for football. Good for kids watching. Players are tackling the way they are supposed to, with their shoulders and wrapping up. The big hit, the big replay had become so popular that tackling suffered.”
In high school, the most notable rule change involving helmets involves penalties for players who lose their helmets during a play. However, illegal helmet contact continues to be a point of emphasis and carries a minimum of a 15-yeard penalty as it has for many years. In the NCAA the mantra on helmet-to-helmet blows is, “When in doubt throw them out,” as the foul now carries with it a player ejection.
That is not the high school rule—yet—but officials at all levels need to be on the lookout. Kemp was quick to warn a roomful of prep football officials during Officiate Michigan Day, “We’ve been told to err on the side of safety, and these plays will result in ejection,” while also adding that such plays will be reviewed by replay officials. “That portion of the rule isn’t there in high school yet, but be ready for it; it’s coming, so when it happens in your games take notice and determine the severity.”
Which brings us to contest rules for safer play. During the next few years, various sport groups will be assembled to follow the MHSAA football task force’s lead in scrutinizing rules and developing proposals for revisions or additions to be submitted to the National Federation of State High School Associations. Initial football discussions receiving some traction involve changing the enforcement spot on post-interception penalties and limiting the number of yards teams can run up on free kicks. Before any submissions are made to the NFHS Football Committee, the task force will conduct research and present findings to Michigan committees.
“We can make changes ourselves – through MHSAA sport committees – for the subvarsity level, but our committees can only make recommendations to national rules committees for varsity level play,” explained Roberts. “Over the next four years, we will be asking our sport committees to give more time to the most dangerous plays in their sport – identifying what they are and proposing how to reduce that danger.”
While the football task force here at home is finalizing practice policy proposals targeted for implementation in the fall of 2014, Texas and Illinois are two states which launched restrictions with the opening of football this season. Spokespersons from both states indicate that coaches and school administrators have been pleased with the new formats.
Coaches no doubt will need to adjust practice itineraries and budget time wisely. Administrators need to remind staffs that the new era is dawning in the name of player safety, which is paramount to all parties.
“In game situations, coaches want our officials to throw the flag on late hits, low hits and other illegal contact,” Roberts said. “These are incidents that they have no control over. They do have control over practice time and teaching fundamentals; so let’s encourage safety measures that we can control, and employ those tactics to help the game prosper.”
Education will key the efforts to align coaches of all sports – and all levels – in the movement toward a healthy future. School will be in session during the next four years as the MHSAA implements effective and practical means for raising coaches’ preparedness. Three avenues are on the map:
First, the Representative Council mandated that beginning with the 2014-15 school year, all assistant and subvarsity coaches at the high school level must complete the same MHSAA rules meetings currently only required of varsity head coaches or, alternatively, one of the free online sports safety courses posted on or linked from the MHSAA Website that is designated as fulfilling this requirement.
Second, it is proposed that by 2015-16, MHSAA member high schools will be required to certify that all of their varsity head coaches have a valid CPR certification.
Third, it is proposed that by 2016-17, any person who is hired for the first time to be the varsity head coach of a high school team, to begin after July 31, 2016, must have completed either Level 1 or Level 2 of the MHSAA Coaches Advancement Program. The MHSAA is preparing to subsidize some of the course cost for every coach who completes Level 1 or 2.
Together, these changes will move Michigan from one of the states of fewest coaching requirements to a position consistent with the “best practices” for minimizing risk in school sports and providing students a healthy experience.
At stake in these four thrusts – whether for an administrator, coach, official, student-athlete, parent or fan – are the environments that offer so many lessons and the games for which we root.