Status of proposed transfer rules
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
Residency
according to all the experts the residency rule needs to be put in place to prevent transfers. Well guess what for a public school the residency is limited to the boundries of the city, unless you look at school district. ISD 197 consists of many cities and schools, does that mean that someone can move freely between the schools. Or in the case of Mpls and St Paul, for example where there are many schools. Can the kids move back and forth between them. For private schools, mainly catholic, their boundries are limited to the Archiocese of Mpls and St Paul. Touch decisions.....
so then you go through the false address thing, how do you determine where a kid lives? do the live at there grandma's house in the didstrict of a superpower? or do they live at there aunts in another superpower or do they live in podunk with an less than steller program? how deep are we willing to investigate these kids to decide where they really live? we drive 35 miles to school everyday,and have for 9 years, we have no ties to our home district other than my house happens to be there? is someone going to tell me that my daughter dosn't belong at hill because she lives to far away?
Here is the link to the WI rule...
http://www.wiaawi.org/handbook/transferrules.pdf
One big differnce sems to be that the rule doesn't punish you if you transfer within the first 4 semesters. (if I read it right)
http://www.wiaawi.org/handbook/transferrules.pdf
One big differnce sems to be that the rule doesn't punish you if you transfer within the first 4 semesters. (if I read it right)
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
I still have one simple question. What is it that we're really trying to address/accomplish with a rule change? What is the goal?
A) Addressing Privates school domination?
B) Addressing OE heavy teams dominating?
C) Addressing percieved "Abuse" of OE in the interpretation that it can't be even somewhat athletic based?
D) Addressing recruitment?
E) All of the above?
F) &/or Something else? And if so what?
A) Addressing Privates school domination?
B) Addressing OE heavy teams dominating?
C) Addressing percieved "Abuse" of OE in the interpretation that it can't be even somewhat athletic based?
D) Addressing recruitment?
E) All of the above?
F) &/or Something else? And if so what?
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
If you look at the WI stuff you find this statement...
"It has reached a point where the bad feelings between member schools, the anger and frustration heard by both the displaced
student at the new school and the abandoned coach and team mates at the former school - all to advance a self-interest - have resulted in the strong show of support by
the members for this rule change."
I think this is consistent with what I have heard over the last few years here in MN. So I guess the reason for the change is to reduce bad feelings.
"It has reached a point where the bad feelings between member schools, the anger and frustration heard by both the displaced
student at the new school and the abandoned coach and team mates at the former school - all to advance a self-interest - have resulted in the strong show of support by
the members for this rule change."
I think this is consistent with what I have heard over the last few years here in MN. So I guess the reason for the change is to reduce bad feelings.
policy behind transfer rules
More so than fostering community-based athletic competition, as opposed to a club or AAA-based competition, I believe the rules are intended to prevent abuses by public and private schools in recruiting (which is hard to police), in financial aid, etc.
I'm not suggesting that this happens in girls hockey, or has even reached problem levels in MN (because I have no clue), but other states are grappling with this issue. An editorial from Florida outlines some of the alleged problems that are encountered because no transfer rules are in place - some of which are alleged on these hockey message boards from time-to-time.
Rescinding proposed amendment a bad ideaBy JOSEPH GOODMAN
jgoodman@MiamiHerald.com
Florida politicians say it's OK to cheat. These are bitter words, laced with venom and anger. I'm mad today.
About a year ago, the FHSAA proposed an amendment to its bylaws aimed at curbing the recruitment of high school athletes. That proposal is dead. Because of special interest groups and a Florida congressional subcommittee, the FHSAA plans to rescind its proposed amendment. This is good news for cheaters.
In case you weren't aware, this state is the Wild West when it comes to high school athletics. Student-athletes can change schools with no repercussions. Apologists say this isn't cheating. They have a point, of course. Rules cannot be broken if there are no rules. But, make no mistake, what goes on in this state is unethical.
Sure, there's an FHSAA by-law that makes it illegal for coaches to recruit. But the FHSAA can't enforce this rule. In most cases, it's impossible to prove that a coach or school recruited an athlete.
The FHSAA employs one recruiting watchdog to govern the entire state. Sonny Hester is the FHSAA commissioner for compliance and eligibility. Poor Sonny Hester.
Left unchecked, single-minded coaches can pick and choose an area's best athletes. Students blessed with athletic ability become mercenaries for hire. This happens in every county in Florida. Broward is no exception. If you can score a touchdown, shoot a jumper, run fast, swim longer, then chances are there's a private school just waiting to shell out financial aid.
Of course, it's illegal for a Florida high school to give athletic scholarships. You would blush if I told you how many times student-athletes have referred to their financial aid package as a scholarship.
And Broward private schools aren't the only institutions operating in the gray. Broward public schools are just as shady. Sometimes I think magnet programs are only a front for coaches to launder in star point guards and running backs.
With so many loopholes, families of incoming-freshmen student-athletes might actually shop their promising children around the county.
I'm actually not opposed to student-athletes attending a school for athletics.
If ''financial aid'' or a magnet program or a lottery system is going to lead to the positive development of a student-athlete, then that is a good thing.
Do you realize how many student-athletes earn collegiate scholarships? One football program in Broward alone has helped more than 500 kids earn money for higher education through athletics. This is a good thing. This benefits society.
But, while some benefit, others suffer. No solution is perfect but a compromise needs to be made. This is what the FHSAA had hoped for with its proposed amendment, which would have forced a transfer to compete at the junior varsity level for one season (this speed bump is nothing compared to the eligibility rules of other states, by the way).
Instead, the rich folks around the state lobbied Florida's legislature, which in turn set up a Recruiting Task Force Committee designed to scuttle the proposed amendment. It worked. The system is still broken. The decline of high school athletics continues.
Cheat on.
I'm not suggesting that this happens in girls hockey, or has even reached problem levels in MN (because I have no clue), but other states are grappling with this issue. An editorial from Florida outlines some of the alleged problems that are encountered because no transfer rules are in place - some of which are alleged on these hockey message boards from time-to-time.
Rescinding proposed amendment a bad ideaBy JOSEPH GOODMAN
jgoodman@MiamiHerald.com
Florida politicians say it's OK to cheat. These are bitter words, laced with venom and anger. I'm mad today.
About a year ago, the FHSAA proposed an amendment to its bylaws aimed at curbing the recruitment of high school athletes. That proposal is dead. Because of special interest groups and a Florida congressional subcommittee, the FHSAA plans to rescind its proposed amendment. This is good news for cheaters.
In case you weren't aware, this state is the Wild West when it comes to high school athletics. Student-athletes can change schools with no repercussions. Apologists say this isn't cheating. They have a point, of course. Rules cannot be broken if there are no rules. But, make no mistake, what goes on in this state is unethical.
Sure, there's an FHSAA by-law that makes it illegal for coaches to recruit. But the FHSAA can't enforce this rule. In most cases, it's impossible to prove that a coach or school recruited an athlete.
The FHSAA employs one recruiting watchdog to govern the entire state. Sonny Hester is the FHSAA commissioner for compliance and eligibility. Poor Sonny Hester.
Left unchecked, single-minded coaches can pick and choose an area's best athletes. Students blessed with athletic ability become mercenaries for hire. This happens in every county in Florida. Broward is no exception. If you can score a touchdown, shoot a jumper, run fast, swim longer, then chances are there's a private school just waiting to shell out financial aid.
Of course, it's illegal for a Florida high school to give athletic scholarships. You would blush if I told you how many times student-athletes have referred to their financial aid package as a scholarship.
And Broward private schools aren't the only institutions operating in the gray. Broward public schools are just as shady. Sometimes I think magnet programs are only a front for coaches to launder in star point guards and running backs.
With so many loopholes, families of incoming-freshmen student-athletes might actually shop their promising children around the county.
I'm actually not opposed to student-athletes attending a school for athletics.
If ''financial aid'' or a magnet program or a lottery system is going to lead to the positive development of a student-athlete, then that is a good thing.
Do you realize how many student-athletes earn collegiate scholarships? One football program in Broward alone has helped more than 500 kids earn money for higher education through athletics. This is a good thing. This benefits society.
But, while some benefit, others suffer. No solution is perfect but a compromise needs to be made. This is what the FHSAA had hoped for with its proposed amendment, which would have forced a transfer to compete at the junior varsity level for one season (this speed bump is nothing compared to the eligibility rules of other states, by the way).
Instead, the rich folks around the state lobbied Florida's legislature, which in turn set up a Recruiting Task Force Committee designed to scuttle the proposed amendment. It worked. The system is still broken. The decline of high school athletics continues.
Cheat on.
-
keepitreal
- Posts: 457
- Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 2:35 pm
So let me back to what I said a few pages ago, does this answer the question, what is the pupose of the proposed transfer rules?
"To prevent teams from gaining an unfair advantage over other teams through the use of non-resident students."
The second issue is privates, would it be reasonable for the MSHSL to recognize some boudary, other than the city limits, for private schools in order to establish a residency area for them?
<edit>
I also like some of the WI provisions like the allowance of 4 semesters to decide that your original HS choice may be poor as well as a free transfer back to your resident school. They also have a waiver option to handle special cases. The waiver needing to be signed by both schools.
"To prevent teams from gaining an unfair advantage over other teams through the use of non-resident students."
The second issue is privates, would it be reasonable for the MSHSL to recognize some boudary, other than the city limits, for private schools in order to establish a residency area for them?
<edit>
I also like some of the WI provisions like the allowance of 4 semesters to decide that your original HS choice may be poor as well as a free transfer back to your resident school. They also have a waiver option to handle special cases. The waiver needing to be signed by both schools.
I realize this discussion concerns what the MSHSL 'should' do as opposed to what it 'can' do. But there's no way it can be legal for a quasi-public entity like the HS League to determine who can and can't go to which private school and play sports for that school. They can dictate to the publics who's eligible, but as soon as you include the privates, the plan breaks down--which is probably why even the preliminary recommendation from the 'committee' is fuzzy.
transfer rules
Let's say I've got a kid going into tenth grade. Things haven't gone too well at the 'ol public school. It doesn't matter what the problems are. I decide that the best thing for the kid and her future is to enroll her in a private school.
The private school that best meets our needs is a town, or two, away. I've decided to spend the money, even though it will hurt, and now they're telling meet she can't play, or debate, or dance, or whatever, for a year?
I really don't know how they could ever expect to make that stick. Most every town has a public school, but not every town has a private. How do you treat two totally different situations with one rule?
The private school that best meets our needs is a town, or two, away. I've decided to spend the money, even though it will hurt, and now they're telling meet she can't play, or debate, or dance, or whatever, for a year?
I really don't know how they could ever expect to make that stick. Most every town has a public school, but not every town has a private. How do you treat two totally different situations with one rule?
Here is some more info on the MSHSL and it's relationship to the State.
Minnesota Statutes 2006
Chapter 128C. High School League
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/ ... ction=128C
Minnesota Statutes 2006
Chapter 128C. High School League
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/ ... ction=128C
-
ghshockeyfan
- Posts: 6132
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 2:33 pm
- Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN
- Contact:
I still am not clear on what the goals are, but I will say this. IMHO it would be more fair to have a xfer/OE kid sit out sections/state ONLY vs. a whole season of HS. This way, the kid isn't punished a whole season, but is missing a huge experience in sections/state. Some would argue that this is more fair for the opponents too as the team that received that xfer/OE wouldn't have them for playoffs that 1st year.
I also have some issues with the notion that a kid that attends a HS the first few weeks, or even first year, and finds it to be horrible can't change w/o penalty. If something wasn't working for my kid, I wouldn't want to force them to stay if it couldn't be worked out. Also, what if HS starts in 10th vs. 9th? There is an exemption for entering 9th, but not 10th currently I believe?
Lastly, without clarification as to what the goals are, I don't see how the true issues can be addressed.
If we have issues with private domination, put them in their own section in certain sports as much as possible. No need to make tougher rules though that discriminate against these kids.
If we have issues with private domination to the point where we don't want them participating in MSHSL tourneys, give them their own tourney at year end but let them still compete against MSHSL teams in season.
NOTE - I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH PRIVATE SCHOOLS. I'm only trying to figure out what others are saying and the intentions of all of this...
If we have issues with OE, maybe we need to consider how to address this independent from privates.
Maybe a start would be to GIVE OE'S THE OPTION of playing at their home attendance area HS while attending the OE school? Maybe this could be an option even if they don't have a penalty to sit at OE school. Maybe this could be extended to private school kids too? Attend private school but play your sports IF YOU WANT at your home area HS? We forget that some may WANT to do this (play with their friends). This may be a good intermediate step, even if just for a year instead of sitting out at OE/private school for the year. This would be an option that I would like to see extended if the MSHSL would ever go the route of moving privates out of MSHSL tourney competition again.
I don't think any of what I just mentioned will ever happen, but it would be interesting to see what would happen if the option would be given.
I don't think that we could ever go to the extreme where all OE/private kids HAD to play at their home area HS for MSHSL play. The reason I say that that will never happen is that some believe that the "complete package" of private/OE HS experience includes athletics, etc. Many xfer/OE with all these items in mind, and not just academics.
There is one last issue that is related, but not discussed. In the case of G HS Hockey MSHSL tourneys, they should evaluate if the classes are really accomplishing what is supposed to be the spirit of two tourneys (A and AA). My understanding is that AA is the "real" tourney that is for all the best teams, whereas the "A" tourney is the tourney that is supposed to showcase non-traditional small-school teams that may otherwise never compete in a state tourney with established bigger foes. Tiers, based on ranking/record, would best accomplish the goal of two tourneys. The current two-"Class" system is still flawed in that there are some teams that should opt up. In their defense, the "opt-up" rule is BAD in that it is a 4-year commitment, and no program can usually project out that far. If we had a 2-"tier"-tourney based on ranking/record instead of a 4-year opt-up along with enrollment, we'd have a far better setup and be much closer to accomplishing the intended purpose of a 2-class tourney. I think it should be quite obvious to all that the Class A tourney is not meant to be the same as the AA.
I also have some issues with the notion that a kid that attends a HS the first few weeks, or even first year, and finds it to be horrible can't change w/o penalty. If something wasn't working for my kid, I wouldn't want to force them to stay if it couldn't be worked out. Also, what if HS starts in 10th vs. 9th? There is an exemption for entering 9th, but not 10th currently I believe?
Lastly, without clarification as to what the goals are, I don't see how the true issues can be addressed.
If we have issues with private domination, put them in their own section in certain sports as much as possible. No need to make tougher rules though that discriminate against these kids.
If we have issues with private domination to the point where we don't want them participating in MSHSL tourneys, give them their own tourney at year end but let them still compete against MSHSL teams in season.
NOTE - I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH PRIVATE SCHOOLS. I'm only trying to figure out what others are saying and the intentions of all of this...
If we have issues with OE, maybe we need to consider how to address this independent from privates.
Maybe a start would be to GIVE OE'S THE OPTION of playing at their home attendance area HS while attending the OE school? Maybe this could be an option even if they don't have a penalty to sit at OE school. Maybe this could be extended to private school kids too? Attend private school but play your sports IF YOU WANT at your home area HS? We forget that some may WANT to do this (play with their friends). This may be a good intermediate step, even if just for a year instead of sitting out at OE/private school for the year. This would be an option that I would like to see extended if the MSHSL would ever go the route of moving privates out of MSHSL tourney competition again.
I don't think any of what I just mentioned will ever happen, but it would be interesting to see what would happen if the option would be given.
I don't think that we could ever go to the extreme where all OE/private kids HAD to play at their home area HS for MSHSL play. The reason I say that that will never happen is that some believe that the "complete package" of private/OE HS experience includes athletics, etc. Many xfer/OE with all these items in mind, and not just academics.
There is one last issue that is related, but not discussed. In the case of G HS Hockey MSHSL tourneys, they should evaluate if the classes are really accomplishing what is supposed to be the spirit of two tourneys (A and AA). My understanding is that AA is the "real" tourney that is for all the best teams, whereas the "A" tourney is the tourney that is supposed to showcase non-traditional small-school teams that may otherwise never compete in a state tourney with established bigger foes. Tiers, based on ranking/record, would best accomplish the goal of two tourneys. The current two-"Class" system is still flawed in that there are some teams that should opt up. In their defense, the "opt-up" rule is BAD in that it is a 4-year commitment, and no program can usually project out that far. If we had a 2-"tier"-tourney based on ranking/record instead of a 4-year opt-up along with enrollment, we'd have a far better setup and be much closer to accomplishing the intended purpose of a 2-class tourney. I think it should be quite obvious to all that the Class A tourney is not meant to be the same as the AA.
Open Enrollment
The whole discussion is getting more and more ridiculous. Although the present system results in private school domination and students moving around some, who cares, it is high school athletics. I think we are going to punish the student who needs to transfer for a combination of reasons academics and/or athletics (one may be factors relating to athletics- i.e. coaching, team dynamics, etc.)- is it really that big of a deal!
If parents want to spend $10K a year to be one of 13 goalies trying out for Holy Angels- have at it- many would consider this a ridiculous waste of money.
If parents want to spend $10K a year to be one of 13 goalies trying out for Holy Angels- have at it- many would consider this a ridiculous waste of money.
I feel the exact same way, going to a private school thinking that your superstar status will easily transfer is very unrealalistic, when you spend the money to go to a private school you should be doing it for the whole package (which can be benificial for the kids). because when high school is all over, most people have to make a living somehow and most kids are not going to do it playing hockey.
-
Charliedog
- Posts: 241
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 12:55 pm
Let's put the shoe on the other foot for a moment and think "nice" thoughts about the private school kids. As you all know, through OE and other means, public schools are losing top players to the privates. However, the kids who are getting screwed are the ones at the private schools who are losing "their" (not that anyone owns a spot) varsity spots to the kids tranferring in. At least, though while losing kids, the public schools are able to offer a spot to someone else who previously did not have a chance.
All I am asking is that any frustration you feel toward the private schools should be directed at the coaching staff and the admistrators not at the kids who are already in attendance. These kids also want to play for their high school and I am willing to be that most private school athletes would prefer that the number of allowed transfers were limited.
Just my opinion!
All I am asking is that any frustration you feel toward the private schools should be directed at the coaching staff and the admistrators not at the kids who are already in attendance. These kids also want to play for their high school and I am willing to be that most private school athletes would prefer that the number of allowed transfers were limited.
Just my opinion!
If coaches are recruiting out there they are the ones that should be severely punished, with some schools the program recruits for itself because kids naturally want to be associated with winners. but your right, with the very good teams comes huge competition for the available spots and so now there are kids wandering the halls of schools that they transfered to and there not playing hockey because they wern't quite as good as they thought they were....the big winner is the kids that make there local teams now because the super star transfered out