Rethinking the CIF’s bottom line

Can those who govern high school athletics in Southern California

afford to vote exclusively with their conscience or have economics

become the tail that wags the legislative dog?

The answer could be revealed at the April 24 CIF Southern Section

council meeting in Long Beach, when the council, including

representatives from each of the section’s 81 leagues, decides

whether to abolish the long-debated association rule.

The rule, which prevents high school coaches from working with

athletes at their school year-round, has withstood several challenges

over the years. The rule’s proponents believe it’s limitations help

coaches -- already overworked and underpaid -- have some break from

the demands of running a program. They also believe it helps create

more multiple-sport athletes, since year-round workouts would force

most to commit to one program, or risk alienating the coaches in

their secondary sports.

The rule’s detractors believe it prevents kids from receiving top

coaching outside of their season of sport, forcing them to seek

alternatives that may not have the same values as coaches based in

the education system.

They also believe the Southern Section’s exclusive retention of

the rule puts its schools at a disadvantage (in head-to-head

competition and the competition for college scholarships) against

teams in the state’s other nine sections (as well as those in other

states), who are allowed to practice in their sport year-round.

Yet another issue is how the rule limits club coaches from

coaching high school sports teams, diluting the pool of walk-ons that

guide an increasing number of prep programs.

Montebello High Principal Jeff Schwartz and Athletic Director Tim

Murphy, who, on behalf of the Almont League presented the proposal to

the council, elected to table a scheduled vote on the issue at

Thursday’s meeting. The delay, they said, would help voters more

thoroughly consider other workings by the State Federated Council to

divest itself of any liability in future suits regarding the rule.

A challenge to the association rule brought by USA Water Polo last

year, was resolved before going to court when a compromise with the

Southern Section was reached.

But the Southern Section was left holding a $40,000 legal bill

that it was able to split with State CIF.

Murphy and Schwartz warned that organizations in other sports have

hinted at legal challenges to the association rule.

Such suits would, obviously, trigger legal fees.

With legislation expected to be passed by the State Federated

Council, the Southern Section would be on the hook for any future

legal costs defending the association rule.

Tracy Brennan, an administrator with the Anaheim Unified School

District and an at-large delegate to the Southern Section Council,

voiced concerns at the council meeting Thursday that voters were

being asked to run scared from potential legal costs, perhaps to the

detriment of their belief in what is best for their student-athletes

and coaches.

With a continual decline in funding for prep athletics, however,

can economic realities be ignored?

*

On the subject of economic reality, it appears a new gymnasium at

Newport Harbor High, on the wish list of proposed improvements to be

funded by a recent bond measure, does not hold a high enough priority

to reach fruition.

The scheduled improvements to existing structures will require the

addition of temporary classrooms at Newport Harbor that will reduce

some of the already limited field space on which athletic teams

practice.

But the current plan, revised after the initial proposal

threatened to take even more practice field space, should satisfy

Sailor coaches.