Logo

Transfer Trends

January 23, 2015

One of the responsibilities that schools have asked our organizations like the MHSAA to execute is the management of transfer student eligibility. Historically, many associations have linked eligibility to residence ... thus, for some the regulation has been called the "Residency Rule" or "Transfer/Residency Rule," not merely the "Transfer Rule."

Over the years, as society became more mobile and families less stable, these rules became more and more complicated; and now, for most state high school associations, this is the regulation that consumes the most (or second) most pages of their Handbooks. Over the years, this has also been the regulation most frequently challenged in court.

Over the years, some states have relaxed their transfer rule and others have refined their transfer rule. In either case, the transfer rule remains an imperfect rule, an imperfect net. Sometimes this net snags students who should not be made ineligible, and for those situations all associations have arranged some kind of waiver or appeal process. 

And sometimes, and much less easily solved, the net fails to catch the situations it really should ... the transfers that are not hardship related or the result of some very compelling educational need, but those that are obviously for athletic reasons. It is those that we have been most focused on in Michigan.

Our first effort to get at the most problematic transfers was the adoption for the 1997-98 school year of what we called the "Athletic MOTIVATED Transfer Rule" ... Regulation I, Section 9(E). Examples of an athletic motivated transfer are included in the rule. The rule only applies to transfer students who do NOT meet any of the stated exceptions for immediate eligibility and are ineligible for one semester under our basic transfer rule. They become ineligible for 180 scheduled school days if there is a finding that the transfer was more for athletics than any other compelling reason.

This effort has not been successful enough because it requires a school that loses a student to another school to promptly allege to the MHSAA office, with supporting documentation, that the transfer was more for athletic reasons than any other compelling reason. The receiving school then must respond to those allegations. Then the executive director makes the decision. The unfortunate result of applying this rule is that it usually causes hard feelings between the schools, and hard feelings toward the executive director by the school decided against. In 17 years, schools have invoked this rule only 41 times.

Our more recent effort to address the most egregious athletic transfers resulted from requests from the coaches associations for wrestling and basketball which were watching too many students change schools for athletic reasons, usually related to an out-of-season coaching relationship. The new rule – the "Athletic RELATED Transfer Rule" -- is Regulation I, Section 9(F). The difference between Section 9(E) and the newer Section 9(F) is that in 9(F) one school does not have to make and document allegations before staff can act. If MHSAA staff discover or are informed of any of the circumstances listed in 9(F), we can act. Again, the rule only applies to those transfer students whose circumstances do NOT meet one of the automatic exceptions. It applies only to students who are ineligible for a semester under the basic transfer rule. If there is a finding that one of the athletic related "links" exists (usually an out-of-season coaching relationship), then this transfer student who would be ineligible for one semester is made ineligible for 180 scheduled school days.

So far, it appears that 9(F) may be a better deterrent than 9(E). It has been referenced when students are rumored to be transferring, and it has stopped many of those transfers before they occur. 

We have said that if this latest effort does not succeed in slowing athletic transfers, then the next step is 180 days of ineligibility for all transfer students who do not qualify for an exception that permits immediate play. I fear that would catch far too many students who should not be withheld so long from competition and could lead to a period like the early 1980s when the MHSAA, at the request of the state principals association, adopted the core of the transfer rule we have today and which resulted in a period of busiest litigation for the MHSAA when, at one time, the association had more than a dozen cases in court simultaneously on transfer matters. We’ve got to make the current rules work.

Members of the Same Team

April 2, 2013

The Basketball Coaches Association of Michigan (BCAM) is a leader among our state’s high school coaches associations, as well as of its counterpart organizations for the sport of basketball across the US.

The MHSAA has partnered with BCAM in numerous ways, including the “Reaching Higher” program to help prepare high school student-athletes for the college experience and in the “Top Shooters” and clinic aspects of the “March Magic Hoopfest” which will return in 2014 after taking a year off due to facility conflicts at Michigan State University.

One of the longest MHSAA-BCAM partnerships has been the Basketball Officials and Coaches Communications Committee (BOCCC).  One of the committee members, Mitch Hubbard of Reading High School, offered these candid and insightful comments in BCAM’s March 2013 Monthly Report:

Look Through Someone Else’s Window

Look through someone else’s window was the name of our Sunday school lesson.  The entire lesson was about how we should stop and try to see things the way others do.

I sat through the class nodding my head in agreement.  I kept thinking of situations where if people would do this, many conflicts could be avoided.  If only people would look at both sides of things, then the world would be a better place.

I then thought about the relationships that I have had with officials for the last 27 years.  I have never stopped to think about what the official was thinking or what they might be going through.  I have never even cared much about their feelings or their life happenings.  It has always been about me, my team, and my situation.  I usually think that the “refs” are against me and my team.  How could they call that?  What are they looking at?  What have I ever done to him?  These are the thoughts that led to my usual obnoxious comments or statements.

This season I took on the position of athletic director.  Part of the job is to greet the officials and escort them back and forth to the locker room.  For the first time in my career, I have had good, honest, open conversations with guys that I have known for years.  I found out that these guys have families, careers, injuries, honors, and all kinds of day-to-day happenings.  Some live close by and some travel long distances to referee.  I was amazed as to just how much these guys were like me!

If only I had stopped and taken the time to have a normal conversation with these guys years before, my perception may have been different.  If I would “look through someone else’s window” and realize that officials are normal people, maybe some uncomfortable situations could have been avoided.  I suppose the same goes for officials.  If they would try to see things through the window of the coach, they might see more than a screaming madman.

Officials and coaches want the same thing.  They both love the sport and want to protect it.  We need to work together to improve and enhance the game.  Communication and relationships between officials and coaches is critical.  We need to stop and take the time to “look through someone else’s window” and appreciate them.