Seaholm Athletic Director Aaron Frank’s proposal to change the current travel limitations policy for Michigan high school sports teams was denied by the Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA) during their spring meeting, May 2 and 3.
“[The reaction of the board was] pretty much the way most of the membership feels about the rule,” MHSAA Communications Director John Johnson said. “And that is in declining the proposal- turning it down.”
Frank, who submitted his proposal on April 26, hoped to spark some interest in this issue before the association’s Representative Council, whose representatives are from member schools, met for their big spring meeting.
Currently, Regulation II, Section 6 of the MHSAA Handbook states, “No member school shall compete in any interstate meet, contest or scrimmage which involves travel of more than 600 highway miles round-trip for any participating team.”
However, schools may compete in the border states (Indiana, Ohio, Ontario [Can], and Wisconsin), regardless of travel distance.
While Frank did not submit a proposal containing new wording for the policy, he did ask the association to look into surveying members school’s interests in changing the current policy at the spring meeting.
Frank’s goal was to get the MHSAA to study the concept of changing the current travel rule.
Frank is not the only Athletic Director who is interested in a possible rule change.
While Andover High School doesn’t send any teams out-of-state for “spring practices”, Andover’s Athletic Coordinator R.J. Guizzetti would not be against relaxed travel limitations.
“I am not opposed to increasing the allowable travel distance for high school teams,” said Guizzetti. “It would not impact us at this time, but I have no problem with other schools going out of state to practice.”
One of the reasons the current rule is in place is to prevent high school sports teams from playing in national championships, or from exploitation by major companies such as Nike and Under Armour.
“That's why these rules were created- because participation in this kind of event [Army East vs. West football game] doesn't do the kid as much good as it does for Nike or Under-Armour in furthering its goals,” Johnson said.
This is not the issue that concerns Frank.
“I fully understand and support the association’s need to prevent actual or de facto national or regional championships,” Frank wrote in his proposal. “However that issue is very different from the concept of team travel.”
In his proposal Frank, mentions that other groups, such as forensics, band, and service clubs travel to “incredible distances.”
“These groups travel because it is a positive learning experience for chaperoned students with educators, coaches and teachers,” Frank said. “It is time to add our student-athletes to the list of those who can benefit.” The Representative Council disagrees.
“Travel is not seen as one of the good things that can help- well, it’s not seen as one of the things that really is good for school sports in general, which is supposed to be a local product,” Johnson said. “That’s the essence of high school sports; it’s local natured.”
In an economy where sports programs are getting cut or condensed and school faculty cutbacks are commonplace, the Council does not believe the current economic status warrants such a change in policy; doing so would only benefit the wealthy.
“Some would perceive it as the rich get richer by being able to engage in this kind of competition,” Johnson said. “And it puts pressure on everybody else to feel that they need to do the same thing if they want to be competitive.”
While Guizzetti would not be opposed to increased travel allowances, he does not believe sending a team out-of-state trumps the need for new jerseys.
“I would have a hard time telling another coach that we couldn’t buy his team new uniforms or send them to another tournament, then have that coach see me spend money to send a team to another state for ‘spring practice’,” said Guizzetti.
In a blog post after the Representative Council’s spring meeting, MHSAA Executive Director, John E. “Jack” Roberts, backed up Johnson.
“First, of course, our challenge is to remove every possible Handbook rule and tournament policy that increases expenses for schools without direct, positive effect on fundamental fairness and participant safety. Now is not the time
for new tournaments, additional classifications or relaxed travel limitations.”
The Representative Council’s rulings, and reasoning, certainly disappointed Frank who believes there are many schools interested in a rule change that have just not spoken up yet.
“I’m disappointed because I think if they surveyed the member schools and they talked to other people they would find that there is a high level of interest in exploring a change to that rule,” Frank said.
This Representative Council is one way the MHSAA maintains its government system. A system where, instead of determining rules for member schools to follow, member schools suggest rules for all of the schools to follow.
“The schools agree to a set of rules and principles that we want everybody to follow,” Frank said.
Where the MHSAA helps the most is in the communication department. They help to set the guidelines for schools to follow, as well as playing the role of the policing body.
“Start dates, and tournament dates, and what’s required for eligibility, and all those types of things,” according to Frank, are how the Association helps member schools.
Imagine travelling to Florida for spring practice, playing games against other teams, and returning home only to be reprimanded from the MHSAA.
Seaholm’s baseball and women’s lacrosse teams are just one of many Freshman golfer Ruffino teams in Michigan that have to keep this in mind as they plan team trips.
During spring break this past April, both the baseball and girl’s lacrosse teams traveled to Florida to tally up practice time and that’s all they got: practice.
“When we take our Spring Break trip to Florida, it’s obviously helpful that we’re outside playing baseball,” senior Bill Getschman said. “But when we play our own team for a week we know each others tendencies.”
Getschman is not the only one who believes teams are harmed by the policy. Frank believes training over spring is an essential component of a successful spring team. Losing ten days to spring break, especially with the senior spring break tradition of today, can be a major setback for a team.
“If you want to have a very successful program compete at the highest level, you can’t lose that spring break period of time,” Frank said.
Due to Michigan’s unpredictable weather, Frank fears many families are afraid to commit to staying in town over spring break, when they can guarantee themselves better weather elsewhere.
This is why Frank believes having a team oriented spring break trip is critical. He expects these trips to not only improve the skill and technique of the players, but also aid in building team chemistry and team character.
“Travelling as a team is a great experience,” Frank said. “It builds lifelong memories. It helps the team come together and succeed.
Getschman reiterates this fact. He believes that under the current policy team chemistry is the main benefactor of the spring training.
“We are all in the same rooms together but if we were to be able to play other teams, I think we’d be a better baseball team too,” Getschman said.
I line with the thoughts of Getschman, it was with hopes of increasing team chemistry and competitiveness that Frank submitted his proposal. But his attempt to change the rule ultimately proved to be fruitless.
If he were to bring up the proposal at a later date, Frank believes having more backing his proposal may be the extra push needed to pass the proposal.
Regardless, while disappointed with the decision to turn down his proposal, Frank is not discouraged, as this decision does not necessarily mean the policy will stay the same forever.
“It can always come back to the table,” said Johnson. “Any school, league, or conference is able to put forth a proposal that would be presented to the MHSAA representative council in a rule change.”
