IHSAA plans to study one-time 'free' transfer after freshman year for high school athletes

[Muda69]

https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/high-school/2024/05/06/ihsaa-plans-to-study-one-time-transfer-after-freshman-year-indiana-high-school-athletes-proposal/73581831007/

Quote

How would you feel about a one-time transfer that is essentially a free opportunity to change schools after an athlete’s freshman year of high school?

That is potentially something the Indiana High School Athletic Association will consider studying further. At the end of IHSAA commissioner Paul Neidig’s six meetings with athletic directors around the state discussing this year’s proposals last month, he floated a few ideas before administrators for future consideration.

One of them is not exactly a new idea (it was proposed in 2016 and voted down unanimously by the IHSAA board of directors) but maybe times have changed enough for consideration in the next year or two. This potential proposal, which former IHSAA commissioner Bobby Cox said the board believed eight years ago could “open doors to create a ‘Wild West’ situation”, would allow an athlete to transfer after their freshman year with full eligibility without a change of address.

“You make an initial decision on what school you are going to, and it just isn’t working for you,” Neidig said at the meeting at Plainfield last month. “You may have a kid in private school and go back to public school or vice versa. There could be all kinds of different scenarios. Undue influence still matters. Past link still matters. All of those things we’ve come to know around the transfer rule would still be in place. What this would basically do is provide a single transfer prior to the fall sport season (after their freshman year).”

Personally, I think this idea has some merit. There are myriad reasons a student might want to transfer after their freshman year. Provided coaches are not actively recruiting an athlete at another school (I know, probably naïve), I don’t see many issues that aren’t already accounted for (like undue influence and past link). One athletic director brought up a good point, asking if the 365-day rule for past link and undue influence would apply if an athlete went to a different school as a freshman, then returned to the school where they previously attended. Neidig said there could be rule support created for that scenario.

The straw poll at Plainfield showed 27 of the administrators in favor of that idea and 39 opposed. But I do think it is something that could come up in the next year or two.

....

What do the GID cognoscenti feel about this?

[Bobref]

4 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/high-school/2024/05/06/ihsaa-plans-to-study-one-time-transfer-after-freshman-year-indiana-high-school-athletes-proposal/73581831007/

What do the GID cognoscenti feel about this?

The transfer portal comes to high school.

[tango]

As long as there is no undue influence, I support this. Coaches can leave for better opportunities, so why not kids? I like that it takes the IHSAA out of the process for determining whether a transfer was for athletic reasons or not. Why does it really matter? Coaches leave for better positions all the time. 

[JQWL]

I feel like the IHSAA is making this too difficult on themselves. Whoever the student is enrolled with when schools return from Dead Week, is who you are eligible to play for that school year. The only exceptions would be an actual physical move. If they wanted to put some limitations on it, maybe an athlete cannot return to a previous school without sitting out a year.

[Muda69]

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

The transfer portal comes to high school.

NIL $ can't be far behind.

 

[BDGiant93]

43 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

NIL $ can't be far behind.

 

This would be a hard case for the IHSAA or schools to win if this were to go to the courts.

[tango]

48 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

NIL $ can't be far behind.

It hasn't been reported (to my knowledge), but I understand the topic was brought up to some extent in the recent meetings. I don't have any knowledge of the finances at any school except my own, but it seems to me the big difference between NIL in college and HS is that the NCAA and colleges profit off of the athletes. To my knowledge there aren't any TV contracts, etc. that generate significant funds for HS conferences and jersey sales, etc. for individual schools. I don't see that at our school. We pay to have our football games streamed on Indiana SRN, not the other way around.

[Titan32]

I have no issue with this.  It would save the IHSAA a metric Sh!t ton of headache.

[CoachMack219]

2 hours ago, tango said:

Coaches can leave for better opportunities, so why not kids? I like that it takes the IHSAA out of the process for determining whether a transfer was for athletic reasons or not. Why does it really matter? Coaches leave for better positions all the time. 

This is a big part of my reasoning for having no issue with this should it come to fruition. Kids (and parents) should be able to make the best decision for their athletic and/ or academic futures (like coaches are allowed to do) without being handcuffed by a governing body or institution. I actually believe the 1 time transfer rule might help eliminate some of the transfer portal behavior I see going on out here presently (kids going to more than 2 high schools in 4 years).

[BTF]

This will widen the gap between the good and the bad. Might as well start the running clock after the first quarter. 

[JQWL]

How do they study this?

[Daniel_Bragg]

We're getting dangerously close to abandoning "education-based athletics".

[CoachMack219]

21 minutes ago, JQWL said:

How do they study this?

Best question yet. 

[Titan32]

This won't increase transfer numbers much...it will just expedite the process by eliminating all the back and forth and legal types getting involved.

This is a great idea.

[CoachGallogly]

4 hours ago, Muda69 said:

NIL $ can't be far behind.

 

Michigan already allows NIL

[tango]

8 minutes ago, Titan32 said:

This won't increase transfer numbers much...it will just expedite the process by eliminating all the back and forth and legal types getting involved.

This is a great idea.

Agreed.  

[BDGiant93]

3 hours ago, tango said:

It hasn't been reported (to my knowledge), but I understand the topic was brought up to some extent in the recent meetings. I don't have any knowledge of the finances at any school except my own, but it seems to me the big difference between NIL in college and HS is that the NCAA and colleges profit off of the athletes. To my knowledge there aren't any TV contracts, etc. that generate significant funds for HS conferences and jersey sales, etc. for individual schools. I don't see that at our school. We pay to have our football games streamed on Indiana SRN, not the other way around.

If a kid is 18 and makes a deal with the local pizza joint to appear in their ads, let's say. I could see that being a thing.

[jets]

Like the IHSAA does anything to regulate it anyway?? 

1 hour ago, Titan32 said:

This won't increase transfer numbers much...it will just expedite the process by eliminating all the back and forth and legal types getting involved.

This is a great idea.

 

46 minutes ago, tango said:

Agreed.  

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA - of course. 

2 hours ago, Daniel_Bragg said:

We're getting dangerously close to abandoning "education-based athletics".

Yup- let's just make them club teams and charge a $$ and be done with it

[BTF]

1 hour ago, Titan32 said:

This won't increase transfer numbers much...it will just expedite the process by eliminating all the back and forth and legal types getting involved.

This is a great idea.

So is this exclusive to athletes only? What if a random kid wants to switch schools because he thinks the overall community is a better fit? Look, the team I follow would benefit greatly from this. In fact, it could make them so dangerous they could be considered illegal. But if you look at the overall picture, I'm just not convinced that it's good for the sport as a whole. Programs that are already struggling will get robbed of their athletes. And I think that if an athlete gets a pass, then all students should get a pass. I'm open minded to others opinions on this, I just think everything needs to be laid out on the table in order to make an informed opinion. 

[Titan32]

Just now, BTF said:

So is this exclusive to athletes only? What if a random kid wants to switch schools because he thinks the overall community is a better fit? Look, the team I follow would benefit greatly from this. In fact, it could make them so dangerous they could be considered illegal. But if you look at the overall picture, I'm just not convinced that it's good for the sport as a whole. Programs that are already struggling will get robbed of their athletes. And I think that if an athlete gets a pass, then all students should get a pass. I'm open minded to others opinions on this, I just think everything needs to be laid out on the table in order to make an informed opinion. 

Yes...kids can already move schools freely in this state so long as the receiving superintendent approves.  At least this is my understanding.  

The only time they are held up is when athletics are involved and the sending AD is an A$$ H0le.

[tango]

17 minutes ago, BTF said:

So is this exclusive to athletes only? What if a random kid wants to switch schools because he thinks the overall community is a better fit? Look, the team I follow would benefit greatly from this. In fact, it could make them so dangerous they could be considered illegal. But if you look at the overall picture, I'm just not convinced that it's good for the sport as a whole. Programs that are already struggling will get robbed of their athletes. And I think that if an athlete gets a pass, then all students should get a pass. I'm open minded to others opinions on this, I just think everything needs to be laid out on the table in order to make an informed opinion. 

Any kid can change schools. But only athletes are subject to not being able to participate at the highest (varsity) level by an arbitrary set of rules. 

This change would allow a kid who maybe blossoms between freshman and sophomore year and now has potential to advance to the next level in right environment, but his family can't move or do anything some families do to circumvent the current rules. He gets 1 free transfer.

[tango]

3 hours ago, Daniel_Bragg said:

We're getting dangerously close to abandoning "education-based athletics".

I don't see it that way. How does giving every kid a 1 time free transfer diminish the importance of education? A kid who wants to transfer to a more challenging academic environment and not lose athletic eligibility now might be stuck if his family can't afford to move, hire a lawyer to fight the IHSAA, etc. Isn't every kid having that freedom a good thing as opposed to just a select group? 

1 hour ago, jets said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA - of course. 

Profound....

[Cloudy14]

Who will head the recruiting violations department?

[tango]

1 hour ago, jets said:

Like the IHSAA does anything to regulate it anyway?? 

Do you think the IHSAA doesn't regulate transfers now? Do you think having a 1 free transfer rule helps p/p schools more than public schools? I'm interested to hear your opinion.

A rural school like SR probably doesn't run into this very often, but in Evansville and the immediate area we do. Titan32 knows the situations better than I, but a couple of years ago 2 Castle kids switched to GS.  One had to fight the IHSAA all the way to the top. The other didn't. As I understand it, the only difference was 1 had some family support that allowed him to jump through the right hoops and the other kid didn't. I use that example only because it was 2 kids leaving the same school, going to the same school and at the same time. It was crazy. 

We've had a few kids transfer in or transfer out in the past couple of years. Some had to fight and some didn't This kind of rule eliminates the BS and takes the decisions from the hands of people who are sometimes not looking after the best interests of the kid (regardless of what they say). I feel very strongly that at Memorial we should NEVER block a kid from having full eligibility somewhere else, even if the reason for the transfer is purely due to athletics. Why punish a kid because he/she wants a change of scenery? 

 

 

[Titan32]

36 minutes ago, tango said:

Do you think the IHSAA doesn't regulate transfers now? Do you think having a 1 free transfer rule helps p/p schools more than public schools? I'm interested to hear your opinion.

A rural school like SR probably doesn't run into this very often, but in Evansville and the immediate area we do. Titan32 knows the situations better than I, but a couple of years ago 2 Castle kids switched to GS.  One had to fight the IHSAA all the way to the top. The other didn't. As I understand it, the only difference was 1 had some family support that allowed him to jump through the right hoops and the other kid didn't. I use that example only because it was 2 kids leaving the same school, going to the same school and at the same time. It was crazy. 

We've had a few kids transfer in or transfer out in the past couple of years. Some had to fight and some didn't This kind of rule eliminates the BS and takes the decisions from the hands of people who are sometimes not looking after the best interests of the kid (regardless of what they say). I feel very strongly that at Memorial we should NEVER block a kid from having full eligibility somewhere else, even if the reason for the transfer is purely due to athletics. Why punish a kid because he/she wants a change of scenery? 

 

 

All I know is this, a ticked-off administrator or coach from the sending school should have zero say in the matter.  A system that allows them to have a say is fundamentally broken.