 |
| Foxboro starts a fast break against Bishop Feehan in the Franklin summer league. |
As I've come to expect from practically all of the local coaches I've known over the years, Heather McPherson and Lisa Downs care deeply about their athletes.
Not only do they play an integral and all-encompassing role in their basketball players' lives for the four-plus months of their seasons every winter, the head coaches of the Mansfield High and Foxboro High girls' basketball teams respectively track their athletes' progress in their other sports as well as in many aspects of their academic and personal lives throughout the year -- or at least as much as the rules allow.
It should come as no surprise, then, that these two coaches (among many others) have spent a lot of time at Franklin High School this summer, watching their teams compete in the annual Nick Strong Foundation summer league that has one more evening to run before the basketballs go back on the shelves until November.
They're not on the sidelines, however. They can't be.
The Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association has two rules in its handbook that address whether coaches can coach their own teams out of season -- Rules 40 and 41. In a nutshell, it's prohibited. There are several paragraphs to each rule that explain this prohibition, and as is usually the case, they say in a lot of words what could be said in a lot fewer. Fortunately, there is a paragraph within the explanation of what is allowed and what isn't that succinctly sums it up.
"Coaches may not have direct or indirect influence over out-of-season teams, competition, activities and decisions made by student-athletes and their families," the corollary to Rule 40 states. There are a few exceptions; for instance, high school coaches can coach AAU teams as long as no more than 50 percent of the athletes on those rosters would be prospects to play for their own high school teams in the winter. But otherwise, the rules are very specific about coaching by head coaches or their assistants.
Both aforementioned local coaches adhere to the rules. They must, because any action that might be taken against them by the MIAA carries a one-year suspension as a penalty.
It's not easy. Invested as these coaches are in their athletes, it takes great resolve and restraint not to do what comes so naturally to them during their Hockomock League seasons. I often sit with or near the coaches that I know, and it's sometimes worth a chuckle to see them squirm, gesture or nervously vocalize their reactions in hushed tones to what is transpiring on the courts. It's all very measured and restrained.
There was a time, not very long ago, when the coaches couldn't even attend summer league games without risking sanctions. That was amended out of common sense, but in my conversations with male and female basketball coaches alike, the general consensus is that Massachusetts' hard-and-fast restriction against out-of-season coaching is unfair, archaic and detrimental to the sport and its participants.
And from what little research I was able to do prior to writing this missive, it's not the norm for high school sports in America.
The National Federation of High Schools has a page on its website that offers links to all of the state associations that govern school sports. But finding a direct answer to a specific question -- Does your state prohibit high school coaches from coaching their players on out-of-season teams? -- proved problematic.
That search query, or similar wording in condensed form, usually directed me to that state's handbook of rules and regulations. Most were available for public viewing. Most were also extensive to excess, making a search for specific situations almost impossible to complete in a short amount of time. I once thought the MIAA Handbook was difficult to navigate, but Pennsylvania's handbook reminded me of my days of trying to find relevant information within the thousands of volumes of state and federal law books within the Northwestern University law library.
From my hasty research (which definitely would not have gotten me a passing grade in one of my journalism law classes at NU back in the '70s), I think I determined that Massachusetts is the only New England state with a firm restriction against out-of-season coaching. New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont do not appear to keep their coaches from running summer programs; Maine has a specific period of time (two weeks before the fall season begins) in which coaches can't contact their players, and Connecticut recently loosened restrictions that were very close in severity to the Bay State's.
Outside New England, I immediately found three states (Alaska, Georgia and Wisconsin) whose rules mirrored ours. Several other states, including New York, California, Ohio, Illinois, Michigan and Arizona, either had no restrictions or established specific periods in the summer (usually July) in which coaches could have out-of-season contact.
This was driven home to me recently. More than 130 boys' and girls' teams from the six New England states participated two weekends ago in the 14th annual Wally Seaver Invitational tournament conducted at Mass. Premier Courts in Foxboro and the Dana Barros Center in Stoughton. The tournament benefits fundraising efforts in the quest to find a cure for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), better known as Lou Gehrig's Disease, and it's dedicated to the memory of Paul "Wally" Seaver, who coached varsity basketball for many years at Milford High and Franklin High and devoted his life to the sport before his passing from ALS in 2013.
 |
| Foxboro's Adrianna Porazzo starts a possession at Franklin. |
Bedford is a very talented team, don't get me wrong. They had skills, they had size and they had a sense of purpose, and at least the latter may have been attributable to the fact that head coach Kevin Gibbs was on the sidelines, as it was his right to be. New Hampshire does not prevent its high school coaches from coaching in the summer, while Foxboro coach Lisa Downs had to be content with her perch in the stands.
Throughout the tournament, the Foxboro girls didn't run any plays from their in-season playbook. Their substitution patterns and game management had no resemblance at all to what could be expected this coming winter. More than anything else, their muscle memory and program pedigree carried them through the two-day gauntlet. But when it came time to face a team that was operating with the same organizational sense as it does in December, the result was predictable -- Bedford broke open the game midway through the first half and won 54-28.
That loss will probably serve as a character-building event for the Warriors, who will have to replace 3,057 graduated career points (Kailey Sullivan, Ava Hill, Addie Ruter) before entering the 2025-26 season. And they'll get another chance to gauge their progress when Bedford visits Foxboro for a preseason scrimmage in early December.
The MIAA offers several rationales for its restrictions against out-of-season coaching. The association claims that it can lead to too much specialization for the athletes, and possibly lead to heightened participation expectations and burnout. The MIAA encourages young athletes to partake in more than just one sport; while a noble goal, it does come into conflict with a growing trend in which parents put athletes on what they think is a fast track toward college scholarships. The kids may forgo playing a second high school sport to play their chosen preference in the AAU ranks nine months of the year, and then add another two by participating in AAU ball and summer leagues.
But at the same time, it can also be suggested that the bond between coaches and athletes can be strengthened without the restrictions upon when they can interact. It would also afford coaches to keep closer tabs on their athletes and enhance their status as role models and mentors. Coaches that earn the trust of their athletes can be vital in the effort to keep them out of trouble as they advance through their often-tumultuous high school years.
I also see it as an opportunity for younger coaches to work their way up the ladder. Let's just say that a veteran head coach that already devotes a lot of time to his or her team would like a break in the summertime, but doesn't want to surrender the supervisory opportunity over his or her program. What a great chance this would be to allow a trusted young assistant to take the reins for a summer league program, to guide it along the head coach's established guidelines but also get great experience managing a team in the top position.
Right now, the rule prohibits anyone associated with the coaching staff from performing those duties out-of-season. As silly as it is to restrict head coaches, this almost seems excessively punitive to take coaching opportunities and learning experiences away from younger assistants.
I believe that would work -- as long as everyone involved adhered to the letter and spirit of the law. Unfortunately, not everyone always does. There are always a few outliers that would find ways around the wording to create some sort of advantage for themselves in later competition -- just as they do now when it comes to sanctioned practices and recruiting. I'm not pointing any fingers here, but we all know it happens, and that's probably why the MIAA is so reluctant to make changes in its out-of-season restrictions.
So the coaches continue to sit and watch, lending support but restrained from contributing in a more significant fashion to the supervisory welfare of their athletes because of an archaic rule against out-of-season contact.
It doesn't seem fair. It doesn't seem right that in an age in which it's a lot tougher to find good coaches that have the best interests of their athletes at heart, the ones that are willing to give their time and effort selflessly are told to keep their distance or risk punitive measures.
It's time for a change.
MARK FARINELLA, former sportswriter and forever an advocate for women's rights in athletics, can be reached at theownersbox2020@gmail.com.
