Working Through Transfer Trends

December 2, 2015

By Jack Roberts
MHSAA Executive Director

One of the responsibilities that schools have asked 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 45 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 expect 9(F) to be an even better deterrent in 2015-16 because the rule has been broadened to apply to administrators and parents (not just coaches) and to address directing and coordinating athletic activities (not just coaching).

We have said that if this latest effort does not succeed in slowing athletic transfers, then the next step is 180 days of ineligibility – at least in any sport the student played in high school previously – 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 – with tweaks, perhaps; but not with radical revision.

Father & Son Set to Meet for 1st Time Coaching from Opposing Benches

By Doug Donnelly
Special for MHSAA.com

December 10, 2025

The bantering back and forth is almost complete.

Mid-MichiganOn Thursday, Mike and Zachary Zyla will finally coach against each other in a varsity girls basketball game.

It’s a game that both coaches circled months ago when Zachary, 26, got his first head coaching job at Britton Deerfield.

“It’s going to be intense,” Zachary said. “I’m sure he will want to win just as badly as I will. Me and our girls have been talking about the game a lot because it’s a game we think we can win. We want to beat Sand Creek.”

Mike Zyla coaches Sand Creek and is Zachary’s dad. He is a longtime coach in cross country and track and added varsity basketball to his resume three years ago. Zachary, who played at Sand Creek, was hired this past offseason to coach the Patriots.

Both schools are in the Tri-County Conference.

“It’s going to be fun,” Mike said. “We’ve been going back and forth about it for a couple of weeks. We’ll see how it goes.”

Basketball is special in the Zyla household.

Zachary’s other brother, Ryan, coaches at a junior college in Minnesota. His sister, Chelsi, played two years of college basketball after graduating from Sand Creek. Their mom, Kirsten, keeps the scorebook for Mike’s games. She is a special education teacher at Britton Deerfield.

“When basketball season rolls around, that’s all we talk about,” Zachary said.

“I guess it’s a little bit in the bloodlines,” Mike said.

After graduating from Sand Creek in 2018, Zachary served in the Navy. He returned home two years ago and served two seasons as his dad’s assistant.

“I just love the game of basketball,” he said. “I’ve been playing since I was probably 2 years old. It’s the thing I’m passionate about. I watch almost every night. If it’s not a live basketball game, I watch clips of old games. I’m just a junkie for basketball.”

Mike said he misses having his son on his bench.

“I miss having him on staff,” Mike said. “He’s really sharp, picking stuff up on the fly. It was nice having him on the sidelines with me. It’s a good opportunity for him, though.”

Zachary accepted the job in time to have a summer program with BD.

“I’ve always been a big fan of basketball,” he said. “It’s in my blood. I started coaching the Sand Creek hoopsters when I was 16 years old. I knew that’s what I wanted to do. I would say coaching at the varsity level was a goal of mine. It’s always been a dream of mine. I didn’t expect to get a head coaching job so soon. I’d like to get to the next level someday.”

He said he has a few new things for his team to run against his dad.

“He taught me a lot, but our coaching strategies are different,” Zachary said. “I think I’m going to have some things he hasn’t seen yet.”

Sand Creek and BD both lost their season openers Tuesday. Since BD’s game started at 4:30 p.m., Zachary was able to get to Sand Creek to see his dad’s game against Pittsford.

“He was able to scout us,” Mike said.

It’s all in good fun.

“We have a great relationship,” Zachary said. “We bounce ideas off each other all of the time. Even for our first game of the season, we were talking about what we should do, the offenses and defenses. We talk pretty much every day.”

As rare as it is for a father and son to coach against each other, it’s the second time it’s happened in Lenawee County in recent years. Hudson varsity boys basketball coach Jeff Webster coached against his son, Jamison Webster, when Hudson played Tecumseh two seasons ago.

Jamison said it was a great experience, one the Zylas will never forget.

“Coaching and competing against my dad’s teams at Hudson over the last few years has been a great experience,” he said. “We both want to win, being the competitors we are. That being said, the lifelong memories we have made being able to share a sport we both love is what makes it special.”

Zachary said he knows it will be a little different than normal.

“The game’s intensity will be higher than most nights,” he said.

Mike agreed. He doesn’t relish the idea of beating his son, but doesn’t plan on backing down. Since they are both in the TCC, they’ll face off again later this winter.

“We’re both pretty competitive,” he said. “Competitive genes are in the family. I don’t think either one of us will be very happy if we are on the losing side Thursday night.”

Doug DonnellyDoug Donnelly has served as a news and sports reporter at the Adrian Daily Telegram and the Monroe News for 30 years, including 10 years as city editor in Monroe. He's written a book on high school basketball in Monroe County and compiles record books for various schools in southeast Michigan. He is now publisher and editor of The Blissfield Advance, a weekly newspaper. E-mail him at [email protected] with story ideas for Jackson, Washtenaw, Hillsdale, Lenawee and Monroe counties.

PHOTO Britton Deerfield varsity girls basketball coach Zachary Zyla poses for a photo with his father Mike Zyla, right, the varsity girls basketball coach at Sand Creek. (Photo provided by the Zyla family.)