Defining the Problem with Data

Posted on by

First, you must understand a very IMPORTANT NUMBER. According to the MHSAA, 14% of member schools are private schools. However, those schools win 32% of all the state titles. That proves that private schools have an advantage that must be equalized with a competitive balance plan like a separate playoff system or an enrollment multiplier. All of our neighboring states already have a competitive balance system in place. If you think the MHSAA should change the playoff structure get your school board to pass the Fair Playoffs Resolution.

All Sports (Data updated through the Spring of 2026)

  • Since 2000, 32% of all state titles were won by private schools. That is more than twice as many titles as they should have won statistically, since private schools represent only 14% of MHSAA schools.
  • Since 2000, 45% of state titles in the bottom half of divisions (based on enrollment) were won by private schools. That is three times more titles than they should have won statistically.
  • In 2025, private schools won 42%, of all championships. This is the highest on record since 2000, the first year of our data. The lowest was 2002 when private schools won 20% of championships. The last 3 years have been record years for private school championships.
  • The School of Choice law we operate under now was implemented in 199. Private schools win 13% more titles now than they did at that time. School of Choice law has not been an equalizer. Besides, private schools are 100% school of choice.
  • These numbers indicate that private schools have some sort of advantage that public schools don’t have, and therefore the MHSAA needs to consider more than enrollment in pairing up schools for the playoffs.

Fall Sports

Boy’s Cross Country (Lower Peninsula)

  • Since 2000, 18% of state titles were won by private schools.  Private schools represent 14% of all schools fielding cross country teams.
  • Private schools have won the last 2 Division 3 state titles and the last 3 Division 2 state titles.

Girl’s Cross Country (Lower Peninsula)

  • Since 2000, 27% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 13% of schools that field a girl’s cross country team.
  • A private school has won the last 4 Division 3 championships.

Football

  • Since 2000, 40% of state titles have been won by private schools which represent only 9% of all schools that field football teams!
  •  Of teams with 5 or more state titles since 2000, 8 of the 13 are private schools.  Those 8 teams have 55 state titles between them.
  •  Lopsided contests between private and public schools are not uncommon.  Two of the biggest blowouts in state finals history have been private schools thrashing public schools. In the 2001 D5 title game, Jackson Lumen Christi beat an undefeated Livonia Clarenceville team 49-0. In the 2011 D7 title game, Saginaw Nouvel led an undefeated Pewamo-Westphalia team 56-12 at half time!  In 2014 Warren DeLaSalle beat Muskegon Mona Shores 44-8.
  • Private schools can still be successful playing against larger schools. In 2003, the private school Detroit DePorres won the Division 8 State Championship.  They had an enrollment of 248 students.  During the regular season they beat the eventual Division 1 State Champion Detroit Catholic Central 33-27.  Detroit Catholic Central had an enrollment of 1,996 students.

Girl’s Golf ( Lower Peninsula)

  • Since 2000, 34% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools make up 11% of schools that field a girl’s golf team.
  • Private schools have won the last 10 D3 state championships.

Boy’s Soccer

  • Since 2000, 56% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools only represent 15% of all schools that field a soccer team.
  • Private schools have won the 135 of the last 17 state titles in Division 3.
  • Private schools have won 24 of the last 27 state titles in Division 4.  In fact, only one neighborhood public school, and one public charter school, have even appeared in the finals during that time.
  • Private schools have won the last 5 D2 state titles.

Girl’s Swimming & Diving (Lower Peninsula)

  • Since 2000, 28% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 8% of schools that field a girl’s swimming and diving team.
  • Private schools have won the last 3 D2 state titles.

Boy’s Tennis

  • Since 2000, 41% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 15% of schools that field a boy’s tennis team.
  • Private schools have won the last 19 Division 3 titles.
  • Private schools have won the last at least a share of the last 19 Division 4 titles.

Girl’s Volleyball

  • Since 2000, 47% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 13% of schools that field a girl’s volleyball team.
  • Private schools have won 19 of the last 23 Division 4 Championships

Winter Sports

Boy’s Basketball

  • Since 2000, 30% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 13% of schools that field a boy’s basketball team.
  • Private schools have won 15 of the last 18 Division 4 (or Class D) titles.

Girl’s Basketball

  • Since 2000, 36% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 12% of schools that field a girl’s basketball team.

Boy’s Bowling

  • Since 2000, 9% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 14% of schools that field a boy’s bowling team.

Girl’s Bowling

  • Since 2000, 5% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 9% of schools that field a boy’s bowling team. In only 2 of 287 sports did the private schools win less than the number of state titles than they should have statistically.

Competitive Cheer

  • Since 2000, 8% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 5% of schools that field a competitive cheer program.

Hockey

  • Since 2000, 59% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools only represent 17% of all schools that field a hockey team.
  • A private school, Detroit Catholic Central, has won the last 7 titles in D1. A private school has won 3 of the last 4 in D2.
  • In the smallest division, division 3, private schools have won 19 of the last 25 state titles.

Boy’s Skiing

  • Since 2000, 6% of state titles were won by private schools.  Private schools represent 19% of schools that field a boy’s skiing team. In only 2 of 27 sports did the private schools win less than the number of state titles than they should have statistically.

Girl’s Skiing

  • Since 2000, 20% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 18 % of schools that field a girl’s skiing team.
  • Private schools have won 8 of the last 8 Division 2 titles.

Boy’s Swimming & Diving (Lower Peninsula)

  • Since 2000, 24% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 8% of schools that field a boy’s swimming and diving team.

Wrestling

  • Since 2000, 11% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 6% of schools that field a boy’s wrestling team.
  • The only private school to have won a wrestling title since 2000, is Detroit Catholic Central who has won 12 titles and had 3 runner up finishes. They have won the last 4 D1 titles. In 2018, they beat Brighton 57 to -1.

Spring Sports

Baseball

  • Since 2000, 401% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 11% of schools that field a boy’s baseball team.

Boy’s Golf (Lower Peninsula) 

  • Since 2000, 54% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 15% of schools that field a boy’s golf team.
  • Private schools have won the last 3 Division 1 titles.
  • Private schools have won the last 6 Division 2 titles.
  • Private schools have won the last 7 Division 3 titles.
  • Private schools have won 9 of the last 10 Division 4 titles.

Girl’s Golf (Lower Peninsula) 

  • Since 2000, 34% of state titles were won by private schools.
  • Private schools have won the last 4 Division 2 titles.
  • Private schools have won the last 8 Division 3 titles.
  • Private schools have won the last 3 Division 4 titles.

Boy’s Lacrosse

  • Since 2005, 67% of state titles were won by private schools, the highest percentage for any sport. Private schools only represent 19% of schools fielding lacrosse teams.
  • A private school has won 21 of 22 titles in Division 1.

Girl’s Lacrosse

  • Since 2005, 23% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 18% of schools that field a girl’s lacrosse team.
  • Private schools have won the last 4 Division 2 titles.

Girl’s Soccer

  • Since 2000, 55% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools only represent 15% of all schools that field girl’s soccer teams.
  • Private schools have won the last 23 of 24 Division 3 state titles.
  • Private schools have won 21 of the last 24 Division 4 state titles.

Softball

  • Since 2000, 19% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 9% of schools that field a girl’s softball team.

Girl’s Tennis

  • Since 2000, 44% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 18% of schools that field a girl’s tennis team.
  • Private schools have won the last 16 Division 3 titles.
  • Private schools have won 11 Division 4 titles

Boy’s Track & Field

  • Since 2000, 21% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 12% of schools that field a boy’s track and field team.
  • Private schools won 4 of the last 5 division 4 titles.

Girl’s Track & Field

  • Since 2000, 16% of state titles were won by private schools. Private schools represent 12% of schools that field a girl’s track and field team.

Sports not included due to a limited number of years of data at this time or a limited number of teams that participate. Girl’s Wrestling, Boys Volleyball, Gymnastics, Girl’s Field Hockey. UP only divisions were not included as well.

Sources: The MHSAA

Double check my math on the Raw Data page.

How States Institute Competitive Balance.

Posted on by

States With High School Athletic Competitive-Balance Policies

State Competitive-Balance Approach Important Details
Alabama Public/private split Separate postseason divisions beginning 2026–27; former multiplier eliminated
Arizona Multiplier / competitive placement 2025 study records a multiplier; classification also involves performance-based placement
Arkansas Multiplier 2025 study records a multiplier for designated schools
California Competitive performance CIF sections use competitive divisions and performance-based placement in selected sports
Colorado Classification adjustments Special placement and reclassification provisions; sport-specific details matter
Connecticut Tournament success Success-based tournament placement and adjustments in certain sports
Georgia Public/private split Separate postseason brackets; attendance-zone rules also affect classification
Illinois 1.65 multiplier / success Non-boundary schools; waivers and performance provisions
Indiana Tournament success Teams can move up based on postseason success over a classification cycle
Iowa Socioeconomic / success Football uses FRL-adjusted enrollment; 5A scheduling uses historical success
Louisiana Select/non-select split Separate playoff structures for designated select and non-select schools
Maine Tournament structure Public/private postseason distinctions reported, but sport coverage requires confirmation
Minnesota Socioeconomic Enrollment adjustments based on free/reduced lunch eligibility
Missouri Multiplier / success Private/non-boundary enrollment treatment and competitive-balance provisions
New Jersey Public/non-public split Separate championships in many sports
New Mexico 1.30 multiplier Private-school adjustment in sports other than football; football has separate reclassification provisions
New York Success / nonpublic reclassification Nonpublic-school reclassification may reflect championship results and winning percentages
Ohio Competitive-balance enrollment Adjustments tied to student origin and school-system history
Oklahoma Socioeconomic / other factors Classification and reclassification provisions beyond enrollment
Oregon Socioeconomic Uses adjusted enrollment reflecting economically disadvantaged students
Pennsylvania Tournament success Success-based movement and transfer-related classification rules
Rhode Island Competitive results Sport-specific competitive placement and reclassification
South Dakota Socioeconomic School-lunch eligibility factors in classification
Tennessee Public/private split Division I and Division II system with exceptions
Texas Separate associations UIL for public schools and other associations primarily serving private schools
Utah Socioeconomic appeals FRL eligibility can support a request to move down
Virginia Separate associations VHSL public-school system and separate private-school championship associations
Washington Socioeconomic Direct-certification adjustment to enrollment
West Virginia Multivariable classification Enrollment, location, and economics
Wisconsin Performance factor / appeals Tournament success and additional classification criteria

Research note: This working inventory includes 30 states with identified non-enrollment approaches or special classification provisions. Rules vary by sport and school year. Some entries require additional verification against current state association handbooks. Separate athletic associations are included in the broader definition.

More School of Choice Leads to Less Public School Championships

Posted on by

Proponents of maintaining status quo for the MHSAA playoff system, where private schools represent just 14% of all schools but win 32% of the state championships, often cite Michigan’s School of Choice law as a reason they believe the current playoff system is fair.  However, a comprehensive look at the data debunks that assumption.

In 1996, Governor Engler signed the first School of Choice law in Michigan. The law allowed students to move within their intermediate school district. In 1999, that law was expanded to allow students to move to districts outside their intermediate school district.  In the year 2000, our baseline year for the Fair Playoffs initiative, 26,025 students were School of Choice students.  In 2009, the number of School of Choice kids at neighborhood public schools or charter schools was over 240,000, by 2015 that number ballooned to over 275,000 students, 23% of all public school kids.  The number continues to increase. However, as School of Choice has increased, private schools, who are 100% School of Choice, have begun winning a greater share of state championships.  The lowest rate of championships won by private schools was 19% in 2002, while the highest rate is 42%, in 2025.

While we cannot be sure about why private schools are winning more than double the number of titles they should be winning statistically, and while we don’t know why that number is accelerating, we do know that the current system is outdated.  We have access to more information than ever.  We are capable of using multiple variables to solve complex problems.  Yet, the MHSAA continues to use just one variable, enrollment, to determine playoff groupings.  School of Choice could be a variable, but it is clear it isn’t one that will solve the inequities that exist in this playoff system.

 

Why we Shouldn’t Get Caught Up in the “Why.”

Posted on by

Too often when we discuss why private schools are winning 2 to 3 times as many state titles as they should statistically, the debate becomes personal and people chime in with their anecdotal evidence.  The most common complaint I hear from supporters of playoff fairness is that private schools recruit, and private school parents can afford pricey summer camps and private lessons.  The most common defense I hear from those who want to keep things status quo, often people association with private schools, is that this is just “sour grapes” and that teams that don’t win titles need to get better coaches and get their players to work harder.  Those statements are often insulting depending on whose ears they fall on.  In reality, there are a lot of reasons that this imbalance  occurs.

The “why” is disputable, the fact that an imbalance is occurring is not. Therefore, the “why” distracts us from the “what.”  What are we going to do about this?  Those of us that support a fair system need to spend our energy lobbying the MHSAA, member schools, informing the public, and encouraging the coaches association and other entities to join us on this journey.  If you want to help, please approach your school board and ask them to sign the Fair Playoffs Resolution.