Shoutouts & Callouts

Over the past several months a question has been percolating in the back of my mind. It pertains to the primary focus of my job — interscholastic sports. Some of the pondering has been based on personal observations, some of it has been based on news stories but the constant whisper has been this:

“What are we doing here and are we losing the plot as to the purpose of high school sports?”

It’s a question I’ve grappled with, internally, for some time. However, aside from the take I shared in a previous column regarding the potential of Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) benefits coming to high school sports, I really haven’t had the time or ability to express in words.

Quite frankly, I’ve struggled to find the proper answer.

However, a couple of moments over the past week or so have helped crystalize in my mind both the slippery slope that we appear to be on and the fact that there are still people involved in these endeavors who can hopefully provide enough traction to keep high school sports in its proper perspective. 

Moment No. 1 occurred as I visited my folks on Fathers Day. As readers may or may not be aware, I have a daughter who is a middle schooler in the district and, among other activities, enjoys participating in cross country, Nordic skiing and track and field. We were discussing what she’s doing to stay active during the summer months and, suddenly, the conversation took a sharp 90 as my father posed a hotly politicized question that pertains to athletics.

I won’t share the exact nature of the question, and my natural aversion to most things political will surely preclude me from discussing the topic in this forum, but the crux of the question was, “How would you feel if your daughter lost to ...?”

The question, as most political quandaries seem now-a-days, was aimed at drawing a quick, knee-jerk response to be followed by a debate likely to be riddled with talking points spewed by cable news outlets from both sides of the aisle. While my wife took the bait and discussed the topic at hand, I sat and thought, rhetorically, about the first half of the question. 

“How would you feel if your daughter lost?”

As anyone who has seen me on a golf course, or in front of the TV on a Sunday afternoon in the fall knows, I have a competitive streak that can bubble over from time to time. However, as it pertained to the topic in question, there was an underlying assumption that winning and success — as well as losing and failure — are analogous terms. Simply put, anything short of victory is not good enough.

That’s where having a daughter in individualized sports has provided some insight and led me to conclude that’s not always the case. Perhaps that’s because it’s easier to quantify improvement in these sports — be it against the clock or relatively against one’s peers. I’ve long since come to grips that my daughter likely won’t be the second coming of Nora Gremban, the recently graduated Northland Pines senior who dominated virtually every running race in the area, won multiple state track titles and will be running at UW-Madison. And that’s OK. 

So far, she’s putting in the work and her results are improving as she strives to be her best. As long as she still enjoys the sports she participates in, puts in the time and effort to maximize her own abilities and gives it her all on race day, that’s all she can control. From there, the results will be what the results will be and I’ll be proud whatever they are. 

Back to the thesis at hand — that winning and success have become interchangeable terms. I recall attending a coaching clinic several years back that equated winning to being a powerful drug. As the years have progressed I’ve come to believe if winning is the opioid most crave, the desire that one’s son or daughter be viewed as the reason for said success is the fentanyl-laced narcotic that can kill a program.

The signs are everywhere. You see it with coaches stepping down amid parental pressure. You see it with travel ball and AAU parents open enrolling their kids in a certain district to keep them together. You see it with pre-ordained all-star teams established at age 8 or 9 with little turnover, and little opportunity for those who bloom later to work into the mix. You see it with parents chiding referees from the stands, parents bickering with each other or, in extreme cases, parents going to great lengths to fight for playing time for their children. 

In fact, a lawsuit was filed in Dane County back in April where a father and son alleged that the son was cut from the Waunakee boys’ basketball team as retaliation for the father speaking out against the program’s coaches. 

“This lawsuit, should it prevail, would set a dangerous precedent allowing parents significant influence over high school athletic programs and create even tougher challenges for coaches to feel supported and wanting to stay in the profession,” the Wisconsin Basketball Coaches Association said in a statement regarding the lawsuit in early May.

Juxtaposed against all of this was an encouraging sight I witnessed at last Monday night’s school board meeting. Nine head coaches representing 10 RHS varsity sports, and a number of other assistant coaches, were on hand for the meeting. Only one of them, RHS boys’ hockey and tennis’ assistant coach Wil Losch, spoke during public comment. He issued a statement on behalf of the coaches regarding communication between coaches, parents and administration and supporting the policies set forth within the SDR Activities Handbook with regard to resolving any differences of opinion parents may have — a chain of command that begins at the coach level, then to activities director Brian Paulson, then superintendent Eric Burke and ultimately, if still not resolved, to the school board if the board wishes to take up the issue. 

    A number of Rhinelander High School head and assistant coaches gathered at the district’s board of education meeting Monday, June 17. (Jeremy Mayo/River News)
  

“The coaches that you see here tonight, and some that are not here, recently met and reviewed district policy relating to coaching and communications,” Losch said, reading from a prepared statement. “We, unanimously, believe existing policy — when followed — is sound and looks out for the interests of student-athletes, parents and coaches. If leaders wish to update policy, we would love to be part of any conversations.”

While neither Paulson nor RHS baseball coach Joe Waksmonski wished to comment on the record, multiple sources have told the River News that there has been increased scrutiny placed on the team and the coaching staff following a 1-19 campaign at the varsity level. That appeared to be corroborated through statements during public comment by former Hodag player Joe Schneider and Stefani Patrone, the wife of one of the assistant coaches on staff, both of whom spoke in support of the coaches. Again, a lack of winning appears to have been viewed — at least outwardly to some — as a lack of success.

To be sure, winning and losing is one very visible measure of performance, but while reading the SDR Activities Handbook to confirm the communication protocol the coaches referenced, I found four important paragraphs near the beginning under the heading Educational Value of Co-Curricular Activities. The passage better outlines the holistic measure of success for RHS co-curriculars and reads as follows:

“Athletic and other co-curricular activities are an important part of SDR’s curriculum. The primary goal is to provide a sound academic experience for students. Interscholastic activities are voluntary and compliment the required educational program. It is the interest of the schools and community that equitable standards for participation be established and administered.

Athletic and other co-curricular activities provide special opportunities for participants to advance their intellectual, physical, social and emotional development. They offer competitive and challenging experiences to stimulate the development of students. The activities provide students the opportunity to strive for the achievement of personal and team goals, as well as to represent SDR and the community. SDR strives to make the experience fulfilling and enjoyable for all students.

The community should realize that control of and responsibility for school activities rests with school authorities. All stakeholders should keep in mind the fact that an activity is primarily part of a school program due to its educational implications. When an activity ceases to have educational value, it should cease to be a school function.

SDR aims to promote a positive value system and create meaningful opportunities that make student participants, the student body, coaches/advisors, school personnel and community members proud to be a Hodag.”

There’s a lot in that passage to digest but, getting back to the question I posed regarding the exact purpose of high school sports, the main takeaway to me is that it is and should be much more than about winning or losing. 

High school sports should be a place where all students — regardless of preconceived talent, parental influence or socio-economic status — have the opportunity to compete to the best of their abilities. It should be an extension of the school classroom and a place to develop skills that will be essential later in life, and it should be something that instills pride in the community — win or lose — to paraphrase the late, great Todd McEldowney Sr. 

Most importantly, as Burke — a former wrestling coach himself — mentioned in his remarks in response to last Monday’s public comments, high school sports ultimately should be about providing a positive experience for the kids they serve. 

“My kids went through middle school and high school and had a great experience with athletics,” he said. “The most important part of that was having a great experience with practices and competitions and all the fun things that go with it. Winning and losing in the end, I was part of two state championship teams, but what’s most important when I look back almost 40 years ago now almost, is not the championships. It was the experience.”

That, in my mind, was partly why Monday night’s scene was encouraging — seeing that many coaches unified in support of their profession. Despite having to compete for the same pool of athletes, especially during the silly season of summer open gyms, leagues and contact days, the message they delivered was clear.

“We have a great athletic department filled with coaches who support each other,” Waksmonski told me via text following the meeting. “There are many former student/athletes who are proud of where they came from and believe in what WE do as a collective department helped shaped them into the people they are today. That means more to US as coaches than anything else.”

That should be what high school sports are about, even if that’s something that cannot be tangibly reflected in a game story or box score. It feels like fading notion, given how hyper-competitive and hyper-individualized the sports landscape is becoming, but I take at least some comfort knowing there are still those who believe it’s a notion worth fighting for. 

Jeremy Mayo may be reached at [email protected].