Open Enrollment/Transfers

[hotdog]

Perhaps a compromise might be half year rather than full year. Full just seems to harsh to me.

In the end someone will challenge the rules and some lawyers pockets will be lined with silver. There will always be something to complain about. The cycle always continues! What next?

[MNHockeyFan]

Perhaps a compromise might be half year rather than full year. Full just seems to harsh to me.

That would just make it that much harder on the kids who are demoted half-way through the season. I would rather support delaying the one year transfer penalty to take effect at the start of one's sophmore season.

Also, I strongly oppose any attempt to define each private school by geographic area - kids come from all over to attend the private school of their choice, and this isn't just the athletes.

[taz91]

I think parents are putting way to much pressure on kids to play at the top level now. How many of these boys or girls will continue on to play in college? I will concede that this is a no win battle because there are too many parents that think their 9 year old daughter will save them $5000 a year on her college hockey scholarship because she plays at SSP/NSP/EP/AHA instead of Woodbury/Tartan/St Paul/Minneapolis. Hopefully she doesn't get burned out before she is a senior. I guess I should've transferred to Stillwater when I played high school football instead of staying at Tartan before they got successful. Maybe I could've played college football instead of just being a student.

[taz91]

Perhaps a compromise might be half year rather than full year. Full just seems to harsh to me.

In the end someone will challenge the rules and some lawyers pockets will be lined with silver. There will always be something to complain about. The cycle always continues! What next?

Isn't that the truth. I've been sitting on this comment for a long time. It's kinda like moving the girls' state tournament from Ridder to Xcel. The lawyers got money, the MSHSL lost money and the girls play in near silence. I guess it just proves that high school players are more important than a 2-time national champion college team.

[keepitreal]

I've said it before, let the kids play. Forget the idea of one year inelligibility, just make the transfer inelligble for post-season/playoffs for the first season. Players get to play, develop and help their team during the regular season, but programs hoping to grab the brass ring with rent-a-players won't benefit from their abilities when the playoffs start.

Simple solution. Discourages transfers to the school du jour only for championship aspirations. Will stem MANY transfers and hobble a team that attracts kids for the wrong reason. Won't too severely penalize a kid who is compelled to transfer for need or the right reasons. Will at least hinder the revolving door at the public schools and make transfers think twice about leaving if a championship is the overiding reason for doing so.

Notable exception: private school students transfering to the public school district in which they reside. As long as private schools cost money and the parents also support the public school with their taxes (no private school vouchers), they should have 100% right to attend that school and participate fully without penalty if the family finds it necessary to leave the private school for personal or financial reasons.

[hshockeyfan91]

First of all I have three kids that have all played or do play in a hometown school - and it's not one of the "sports elite" ones, for sure!! I have no interest in having my kids transfer, for sports or otherwise. So, I don't think I have bias in favor of open enrollment.

However, what exactly are we trying to solve and does the proposal work to solve the real problem(s) without introducing serious side effects? What exactly is the problem? Is it that some schools win too much? Is it that some "hometown" kids get left out? Is it that the "old hometown" team suffers when kids leave? And, even most important, do the proposed changes really solve the problem? I would suggest that they don't really solve anything, but rather just introduce new issues.

I am not against trying to moderate open enrollment, but I do think it's humorous when "any change" vs. an "effective change" is seen as being a step forward. I don't believe the proposal as reported in the paper is effective.

[Wildwillwinthecup]

I don't have a problem with someone transferring to other schools. However, it shouldn't be just about sports. If the school is equal to or better academically, then what the heck?! A lot of these decisions are made either because a player's home team is not competitive, they don't like the coaching style, or just want the opportunity to play with and meet new friends.

I may be naive, but our community loses kids to Hill, TG, and Cretin, not to mention Mahtomedi, for the opportunity to play. And if that is important to the children, then let them.

High school sports is not only for winning but to give kids options for their future. It would have been great to have kept our U12, U14 teams together after winning, but ultimately the schools are kept competitive, and close games are much more interesting to watch than blowouts.

[Jethrotull]

The problem is-------- EP has 3 players that transferred from Kennedy to play Hockey at EP. They transferred together as a group. To most off us this is a seriously twisted situation and should be stopped. It is obvious that they did not transfer for any other reason then Hockey. What's next - should the entire Kennedy team this summer transfer to New Prague.

[hockeywild7]

I think these new transfer rules play right into the hands of the private schools. We are going backwards. The public schools are the ones that will suffer and the private schools will just gain more transfers now. If you daughter decides to transfer she wont go to a public school to sit out a year. She will now go to a private school where she will not have to sit out a year. All the privates will just be "recruiting" heavily within the school districts they encompass.

[ghshockeyfan]

Re: EP 3 from BK: 1 xferd in spring of 2005. 1 in late summer of 2005. 1 in the spring of 2006. They weren't a package deal. They didn't consult one-another to make the decision based on each other, but they did make everyone aware of their intentions once they had made their decisions (which is respectible under the circumstances I believe). They all made this decision on their own and for different reasons/considerations. I know that perception & reality differ sometimes, and this is one of those cases where it may seem so obvious but it isn't. Were there some factors that were in common in each of their decisions? Yes, I'm sure. Did they all do this "together" or for all the same reasons? No. This would be obvious if you knew the families & kids the way I feel I do, and while they are all awesome families/kids & people, they aren't ones to do what someone else did just to follow the crowd. Each of these 3 BK kids is unique and had subsequently different considerations in their decisions. The fact that they may be the best hockey trio out of one community since the SSP 3 doesn't mean that they move as a group as they did to MSU for college etc.

I have a hard time with people criticizing other people's decisions when they're not them and may not entirely understand their rationale. Ideally, I would have loved to have seen these 3 stay at BK as the conf. & sections champs could have been BK this & maybe even last year - next year too??? You just never know what might have been... But, these kids and their families made some decisions based on situational considerations for what they feel is in the best interests of their kids. No parent/player should fault another for making such considerations. I would be concerned if a parent/player DID NOT make such considerations.

BK is rebuilding its program and has a wonderful core group of kids there right now, along with one of the best coaching staffs in the state. I expect some great things of this program over the next 3-5 years. The program is on the way up with a lot of nice young talent and a youth program that much time was spent building these past few years.

[anderc14]

The ruling is way too harsh. I hope it gets struck down. The case in which parents can no longer afford a private school to loss of income is a real situation in which a kid should not be unduly penalized.

What about a situation where the numbers for a sport get so low that the district can't field a team- does the player have to give up their sport then because of a situation in which they had no control. Kids and parents do not have crystal balls and cannot see circumstances 4 years down the road.

Why should a kid get stuck in a terrible program with a lousy coach with no reasonable recourse. It is not easy to transfer but sometimes it is warranted for all kinds of issues.

A flatout terrible ruling designed to appease a few parents and coaches who play politics and do not have the guts to just choose the best players regardless of where they live.

[ghshockeyfan]

My guess is this passes, gets challenged by someone with the $$$ to do so in a private school and then it gets changed to allow privates differently but not OE. Then, we'll see more privates vs. OE movement again. I really don't care what they do, but I do want to see a state tourney based on power of teams vs. size of schools.

[Jethrotull]

All kids have the right to go get an education wherever they want. This will not change. If a ruling is made to stop it, it will be challenged quickly and rightly so. All kids do not have the right to play sports wherever they want. Lets face it, an education is the one of the most important things in life. Sports are not and should not be elevated to any high level of importance in our educational system. Bring on select teams and AAA. The MHSL has better things to do with their time then cater to this subject on a daily basis.

[ghshockeyfan]

All kids have the right to go get an education wherever they want. This will not change. If a ruling is made to stop it, it will be challenged quickly and rightly so. All kids do not have the right to play sports wherever they want. Lets face it, an education is the one of the most important things in life. Sports are not and should not be elevated to any high level of importance in our educational system. Bring on select teams and AAA. The MHSL has better things to do with their time then cater to this subject on a daily basis.

I agree, but in the instance where sports are critical in keeping a kid's life "on track" I don't know that I would be so quick to say that they shouldn't have some impact on decisions made.

The real problem is that "free-agency" seems glorified by how it's the norm in many pro-sports, etc.

Consider this though too - years ago, I heard one very prominent private school connected hockey coach comment to a top young prospect that "if you leave your home HS and come to private the college coaches will recognize that you're a better prospect for your willingness to do whatever it takes to elevate your development/game/etc." I was stunned, but I'm sure many have this thought in mind (no matter if it's true or not) when they consider OE, etc. too.

Bottom line, some kids may consider the possibility of getting aschoarship to be connected to who they surround themselves with athletically. The extra media attention that comes with playing for a State Tourney team, etc. is seen as a help, and the stats too that come easier with strong teammates around you help as well.

I think the visibility helps, but I also believe that any good recruiter should be able to look at Strength of Schedule of team played for to interpret stats in addition to "supporting cast" considerations.

[ghshockeyfan]

___

[hockeywild7]

I think its funny of some people to drop little suggestions or ideas on here that have no merit or basis of fact. Instead why dont you contact the area high schools administration, athletic directors or school board and find out the facts for yourself. Its just my opinion but I dont think its fair to the teams or players to not first get some information to back up your statements.

[hotdog]

I think its funny of some people to drop little suggestions or ideas on here that have no merit or basis of fact. Instead why dont you contact the area high schools administration, athletic directors or school board and find out the facts for yourself. Its just my opinion but I dont think its fair to the teams or players to not first get some information to back up your statements.

The only facts I know are... This goalie wasn't able to tryout with the USA Hockey Minnkota District... Her address was not legit... It happens... The state high school league has bigger fish to fry... Minnesota Hockey and USA Hockey do a better job of checking records than the MSHSL does.

Fact... a few years ago Stillwater put an add in Let's Play Hockey, the add said something like this. Looking for a house? Does you daughter play goalie? Stillwater has a talented group of skaters looking for a goalie! Please consider this!
Those are not the exact words, but it this was the message sent.

[xk1]

Residence is not an issue here as far as the MSHSL goes. If Stillwater HS is allowing her to attend school, she is eligible. Since she is considered a residnet by the HS this is not a case of OE either. Further, once she started going to school in Stillwater I believe she has the option of staying in school as long as she chooses.

[xwildfan]

The ad for the goalie was placed by a parent in Stillwater; not by the school or AD or coach.

[ghshockeyfan]

___

[xk1]

I believe the Ad appeared a few years before the person in question showed up.

I don't think OE applies to people residing outside of MN. When people transfer schools without residence, I believe the redidence schoold district has to transfer funds recieved from MN to the destination school district. Although possible, I can't see WI sending money to MN. However if you have a student added to your school with "MN residence" you get some more state aid.

[ghshockeyfan]

___

[xk1]

So did the younger goalie move in to Stillwater or has she resided there for as many years as you homegrown guys require to earn the label?

[ghshockeyfan]

___

[brookyone]

This was a contentious subject last season if I recall. Perhaps the season before as well...I imagine it will continue to pop up from time to time throughout her HS career. If I recall, and as I've heard a few times, moved into Lake Elmo, which IS in the Stillwater school district (apologies to the Pony haters...you know who you are) and the move was made because the family wanted to live there and not based on a decision, or plan solely for the purposes of playing hockey. I consider the sources reliable and informed but I'm relatively sure someone will tell me I'm full of it. Lake Elmo is a nice town to live in...I speak from 30 some years first hand experience.

Will some start advocating that NO MOVING is allowed to promote their own hardline anti OE agenda?