IHSAA One-Time Transfer Rule Bill To Be Filed At Indiana Legislative Session

[US31]

24 minutes ago, Plymouthfan91 said:

Why are they even wasting their time with this?  If a family moves the kids should get instant eligibility.  If they go to another school outside of residence then they get instant eligibility.  If they decide to transfer a second time no matter the reasons than they should have to sit a year.  It is four years of a kid's life but they need stability.  More than 2 High Schools in their life means athletics is the last thing they should be worried about.  

Also why do we not have NIL in Indiana High Schools?

 

Moslty agree, except with how I read the part in bold....

Johnny's parents live in Greenwood.  Summer before his sophomore year, Dad loses his job and gets a new one in Avon...family moves to Avon.

Johnny's mom is an IU Health nurse, she had been working downtown at Methodist.  At the end of his junior year, IU Health tells her she is now working two different offices in Fishers and Carmel....instead of her driving between Fishers & Avon half the time....family wants to split the distance for the parent commute and move to Carmel/Zville area.

Should Johnny have to sit?  In all instances they are changing legal residence.  

Edited January 29, 2025 by US31

[tango]

The IHSAA is pretty good at running the post-season tournaments, so why don't we limit their role to that and leave the decisions about what is best for any given student-athlete to that kid's parent(s)? 

Edited January 29, 2025 by tango

[Sparty]

45 minutes ago, Plymouthfan91 said:

Why are they even wasting their time with this?  If a family moves the kids should get instant eligibility.  If they go to another school outside of residence then they get instant eligibility.  If they decide to transfer a second time no matter the reasons than they should have to sit a year.  It is four years of a kid's life but they need stability.  More than 2 High Schools in their life means athletics is the last thing they should be worried about.  

Also why do we not have NIL in Indiana High Schools?

 

You know the reason. It’s because turds trying to scheme the system have ruined it for honest folks.  

[tango]

13 minutes ago, Sparty said:

You know the reason. It’s because turds trying to scheme the system have ruined it for honest folks.  

Curious, who are the "turds" and who are the "honest folks" in your opinion? 

[Sparty]

14 minutes ago, tango said:

Curious, who are the "turds" and who are the "honest folks" in your opinion? 

Recruited.  Moved for honest reasons.  

[Plymouthfan91]

51 minutes ago, US31 said:

Should Johnny have to sit?  In all instances they are changing legal residence.  

In a 4 year span for that to happen and have your kid change to three schools over that time than maybe the family should just wait until Johnny finishes high school before moving.  Being on your 3rd high school in three years would be a negative learning experience for Johnny anyway.  Athletics should not be the number one issue and if it is then the family would stay in Avon so he could play.  

[tango]

16 minutes ago, Sparty said:

Recruited.  Moved for honest reasons.  

Q - How do you know if the turd was recruited? Is that a box that gets checked?

Q2 - If the sending and receiving school both sign off that the move wasn't athletically motivated, but the IHSAA still imposes limited eligibility, is that kid a turd? 

[tango]

15 minutes ago, Plymouthfan91 said:

In a 4 year span for that to happen and have your kid change to three schools over that time than maybe the family should just wait until Johnny finishes high school before moving.  Being on your 3rd high school in three years would be a negative learning experience for Johnny anyway.  Athletics should not be the number one issue and if it is then the family would stay in Avon so he could play.  

Your judgment about what is best for that kid is not better than his/her parent(s) judgment. That is the problem with the IHSAA sticking its nose into eligibility. 

[slicer28]

3 hours ago, slicer28 said:

HB1064 originally started as a bill requiring cash to be accepted at school athletic events was amended to include the removal of "language prohibiting certain students from enrolling into a school corporation primarily for athletic reasons".  This bill was originally read and this amendment was voted on in the Education committee last week on 1/22.  It will be in front of the Education committee again today (very soon) where it appears it will be voted on again for advancement to the full house.

I don't believe there was any action taken today in committee.  The committee ran out of time and deferred a couple bills to next week (I believe 1064 was one of them).

[Rocket3118]

There is no way that this will fall through 

[US31]

43 minutes ago, Plymouthfan91 said:

In a 4 year span for that to happen and have your kid change to three schools over that time than maybe the family should just wait until Johnny finishes high school before moving.  Being on your 3rd high school in three years would be a negative learning experience for Johnny anyway.  Athletics should not be the number one issue and if it is then the family would stay in Avon so he could play.  

Wouldn't that decision be better left to the parents?  

BTW...its not a hypothetical, I know that family and thats exactly what they went through.  "Johnny" also has 2 younger siblings that figured into that calculus.  So it wasn't just about him, it was mainly about both parents being able to be around for all 3 kids, and not have one of them in the car or at work most of their waking hours.

Some families are ok with one parent having a long commute and not being available for transporting to kids to activities or attending events.  Good for them if that works!

This familty wanted something different.  And Good for them too!

You don't want your kid to have to be at three schools in 4 years.  Good for you!

But the IHSAA or DOE having the ability to limit a kid to having to sit "regardless of the situation" is not something I'm on board with.  And keep in mind, I'm talking about an entire family making an actual adress change each time.

[Sparty]

1 hour ago, tango said:

Q - How do you know if the turd was recruited? Is that a box that gets checked?

Q2 - If the sending and receiving school both sign off that the move wasn't athletically motivated, but the IHSAA still imposes limited eligibility, is that kid a turd? 

Just these types of “what if” scenarios are the exact reason why this new rule/law is needed. Thank you for making my point.  

1 hour ago, tango said:

Your judgment about what is best for that kid is not better than his/her parent(s) judgment. That is the problem with the IHSAA sticking its nose into eligibility. 

100% agreed. Parents always should do the right thing and what is best for their child.  

[CoachMack219]

Coach the kids you have. If those kids want to leave, LET THEM. I'll never understand bitter coaches, AD's, and administrators who try to force a kid to stay and play for them. Do you REALLY think that kid will WANT to give it their all for you and your program because you make them stay? Can't wait for Sparty to say, "I'll bench him," if that's the case, why'd you, the AD, and admin make the kid stay? Power? Control? That's disgusting. In addition, if you "get" some kids to come into your school, GOOD FOR YOU. If people move, no matter how many times, they should be eligible since I don't know/ have never met any 14-17 year old's that make housing/ relocation decisions. This really isn't a hard topic, we just make it one because... Pride and/ or Ego and/ or Power/Control. What's best for one isn't best for the rest.

@US31 I appreciated your scenarios and understand the complexity of each situation as the law currently stands. So many cases to sort through, in my opinion isn't good for anybody. Don't let adult decisions impact the kid's opportunity for success either academically, athletically, or in both realms. At some point, adults need to start leading and coming up with solutions instead of hating, whining, and harming kids futures. 

[Sparty]

1 hour ago, CoachMack219 said:

Coach the kids you have. If those kids want to leave, LET THEM. I'll never understand bitter coaches, AD's, and administrators who try to force a kid to stay and play for them. Do you REALLY think that kid will WANT to give it their all for you and your program because you make them stay? Can't wait for Sparty to say, "I'll bench him," if that's the case, why'd you, the AD, and admin make the kid stay? Power? Control? That's disgusting. In addition, if you "get" some kids to come into your school, GOOD FOR YOU. If people move, no matter how many times, they should be eligible since I don't know/ have never met any 14-17 year old's that make housing/ relocation decisions. This really isn't a hard topic, we just make it one because... Pride and/ or Ego and/ or Power/Control. What's best for one isn't best for the rest.

@US31 I appreciated your scenarios and understand the complexity of each situation as the law currently stands. So many cases to sort through, in my opinion isn't good for anybody. Don't let adult decisions impact the kid's opportunity for success either academically, athletically, or in both realms. At some point, adults need to start leading and coming up with solutions instead of hating, whining, and harming kids futures. 

Why would I want a kid who doesn’t want to be around?   Don’t let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya.”

Nice try

[tango]

2 hours ago, Sparty said:

Just these types of “what if” scenarios are the exact reason why this new rule/law is needed. Thank you for making my point.  

100% agreed. Parents always should do the right thing and what is best for their child.  

I'm all for this bill. I'd support a bill that stripped the IHSAA of all power except to run tournaments.   

[Sparty]

1 hour ago, CoachMack219 said:

Coach the kids you have. If those kids want to leave, LET THEM. I'll never understand bitter coaches, AD's, and administrators who try to force a kid to stay and play for them. Do you REALLY think that kid will WANT to give it their all for you and your program because you make them stay? Can't wait for Sparty to say, "I'll bench him," if that's the case, why'd you, the AD, and admin make the kid stay? Power? Control? That's disgusting. In addition, if you "get" some kids to come into your school, GOOD FOR YOU. If people move, no matter how many times, they should be eligible since I don't know/ have never met any 14-17 year old's that make housing/ relocation decisions. This really isn't a hard topic, we just make it one because... Pride and/ or Ego and/ or Power/Control. What's best for one isn't best for the rest.

@US31 I appreciated your scenarios and understand the complexity of each situation as the law currently stands. So many cases to sort through, in my opinion isn't good for anybody. Don't let adult decisions impact the kid's opportunity for success either academically, athletically, or in both realms. At some point, adults need to start leading and coming up with solutions instead of hating, whining, and harming kids futures. 

1st paragraph is easy to say when you have open enrollment, say like Hammond Public Schools. 

[CoachMack219]

16 hours ago, Sparty said:

1st paragraph is easy to say when you have open enrollment, say like Hammond Public Schools. 

From experience coaching in Hammond, Michigan City, Hobart, St. John, and Highland throughout the last decade+, it doesn't matter which of those places I've been at my mindset doesn't change on this topic. The scenario I played out even happened to myself and the staff at one of the above listed places that does not, and has not/ will not ever, have open enrollment. It's "easy" for me to say this regardless of where I coach, live, etc. because I care about the kids I coach and those relationships more than my win/loss record. 

[slicer28]

Just to be clear.  This bill does not demand IHSAA do anything.  It simply removes the language that prohibits transfers for athletic reasons.  Nothing in this bill changes IHSAA rules on "recruiting", sets limits on number of transfers, nor does it specify whether or not there can be athletic eligibility restrictions for transfers.  All it does is remove the restriction that students cannot transfer to another school for "primarily athletic reasons".

Essentially, my take is that this removes a legal barrier to athletic transfers.  For everyone who has complained about how IHSAA has treated athletic transfers over the years, understand that this has been state law.  Not some obscure IHSAA regulation.  However, the IHSAA has been made the de facto enforcement agency of this provision in state law.  This bill will remove that provision and then the IHSAA will need to determine how they will handle athletic eligibility for transfers.

Oh yeah.  It also says that schools must take cash for certain athletic events...

[jets]

19 hours ago, CoachMack219 said:

Coach the kids you have. If those kids want to leave, LET THEM. I'll never understand bitter coaches, AD's, and administrators who try to force a kid to stay and play for them. Do you REALLY think that kid will WANT to give it their all for you and your program because you make them stay? Can't wait for Sparty to say, "I'll bench him," if that's the case, why'd you, the AD, and admin make the kid stay? Power? Control? That's disgusting. In addition, if you "get" some kids to come into your school, GOOD FOR YOU. If people move, no matter how many times, they should be eligible since I don't know/ have never met any 14-17 year old's that make housing/ relocation decisions. This really isn't a hard topic, we just make it one because... Pride and/ or Ego and/ or Power/Control. What's best for one isn't best for the rest.

@US31 I appreciated your scenarios and understand the complexity of each situation as the law currently stands. So many cases to sort through, in my opinion isn't good for anybody. Don't let adult decisions impact the kid's opportunity for success either academically, athletically, or in both realms. At some point, adults need to start leading and coming up with solutions instead of hating, whining, and harming kids futures. 

Ya - why would we want to teach children/student-athletes lessons like overcoming adversity, sticking through tough times, becoming mentally tougher. 

Instead, let's let them jump ship anytime they don't get their way or heaven forbid, some coaches actually challenges them or worse yet, even yell at them. OH NO, GET OUT AS SOON AS YOU CAN. 

Obviously, no one wants a kid to be miserable - but we've gone too far the other way. You see it in NCAA as well. 

Whatever - just the reason we'll lose WW3 when it happens...we're bringing up a soft generation. 

[Shoot_The_Hands]

13 minutes ago, jets said:

Ya - why would we want to teach children/student-athletes lessons like overcoming adversity, sticking through tough times, becoming mentally tougher. 

Instead, let's let them jump ship anytime they don't get their way or heaven forbid, some coaches actually challenges them or worse yet, even yell at them. OH NO, GET OUT AS SOON AS YOU CAN. 

Obviously, no one wants a kid to be miserable - but we've gone too far the other way. You see it in NCAA as well. 

Whatever - just the reason we'll lose WW3 when it happens...we're bringing up a soft generation. 

Easy their grandpa, I don't think it has anything to do with the generation we are bringing up. The NCAA is not a good comparison in this case. I think in most cases when it comes to high school, the parents have a decent enough mind to understand when a transfer is reasonable. The IHSAA still has to sign off on the transfer an I personally think that they still make mistakes on the sign off process. I coached at a high school where we had a student-athlete transferring because his sister was going to be a freshman at our school rather than the school he was at due to the talk of it closing in two years, which is a very good reason to transfer so you can have both kids at one school together. Instead, the IHSAA didn't sign off and denied the appeal stating it was for athletic reasons. 

 

Whether this passes or not I still don't think it will matter, as both schools and state need to agree on the transfer. I think this whole thing is getting blown way out of proportion and it isn't going to be the wild west like we see in college football. 

[Donnie Baker]

17 hours ago, tango said:

I'm all for this bill. I'd support a bill that stripped the IHSAA of all power except to run tournaments.   

I’d rather see state government worry about food and gas prices and legal weed 🍀. I swear to God I would 

[Coach Nowlin]

I am sure it will go similar to how it went after the tragic Corey Stringer dealth in Minnesota

An institute did a study on Heat related football injuries, ranked states, Indiana got an F, Suits in statehouse, UH OH, suits and IHSAA talk, Suits say, you better do something or we do.......IHSAA creates the new model for Heat Illness and practice 

(WHICH I FULLY SUPPORT BY THE WAY) 

So, if Suits are talking in session right now, my guess, again just from my previous years of watching how things unfold, the Suits will tell the IHSAA, you create something or we will........

Time will tell 

 

[tango]

59 minutes ago, jets said:

Ya - why would we want to teach children/student-athletes lessons like overcoming adversity, sticking through tough times, becoming mentally tougher. 

Instead, let's let them jump ship anytime they don't get their way or heaven forbid, some coaches actually challenges them or worse yet, even yell at them. OH NO, GET OUT AS SOON AS YOU CAN. 

Obviously, no one wants a kid to be miserable - but we've gone too far the other way. You see it in NCAA as well. 

Whatever - just the reason we'll lose WW3 when it happens...we're bringing up a soft generation. 

Most of the kids (athletes and non-athletes alike) who transfer into our school are generally looking for more discipline, accountability, academic rigor, etc. than what they experienced in their former school. And most of the kids who leave are generally looking for less of the same things.  

Edited January 30, 2025 by tango

[Sparty]

1 hour ago, jets said:

Ya - why would we want to teach children/student-athletes lessons like overcoming adversity, sticking through tough times, becoming mentally tougher. 

Instead, let's let them jump ship anytime they don't get their way or heaven forbid, some coaches actually challenges them or worse yet, even yell at them. OH NO, GET OUT AS SOON AS YOU CAN. 

Obviously, no one wants a kid to be miserable - but we've gone too far the other way. You see it in NCAA as well. 

Whatever - just the reason we'll lose WW3 when it happens...we're bringing up a soft generation. 

Don’t forget loyalty.  God forbid kids learn that.  

1 hour ago, jets said:

Ya - why would we want to teach children/student-athletes lessons like overcoming adversity, sticking through tough times, becoming mentally tougher. 

Instead, let's let them jump ship anytime they don't get their way or heaven forbid, some coaches actually challenges them or worse yet, even yell at them. OH NO, GET OUT AS SOON AS YOU CAN. 

Obviously, no one wants a kid to be miserable - but we've gone too far the other way. You see it in NCAA as well. 

Whatever - just the reason we'll lose WW3 when it happens...we're bringing up a soft generation. 

100%

[CoachMack219]

2 hours ago, jets said:

Ya - why would we want to teach children/student-athletes lessons like overcoming adversity, sticking through tough times, becoming mentally tougher. 

Instead, let's let them jump ship anytime they don't get their way or heaven forbid, some coaches actually challenges them or worse yet, even yell at them. OH NO, GET OUT AS SOON AS YOU CAN. 

Obviously, no one wants a kid to be miserable - but we've gone too far the other way. You see it in NCAA as well. 

Whatever - just the reason we'll lose WW3 when it happens...we're bringing up a soft generation. 

1. Not EVERY SINGLE TRANSFER has to do with a kid not wanting to deal with adversity/ becoming "tougher" (mentally or physically or because they were "challenged by a coach". You'll see a common theme here, IF THEY'RE LEAVING IT AIN'T YOUR BUSINESS WHY. Sign off and move on. 

2. How have we gone to far the other way? By allowing young adults (more often than not their parents who are *checks notes* adults) to make the same choice that the adults who coach them can make whenever they want? A better choice for themselves/ families and we all say, "NOPE not around these parts!" Again, IF THEY'RE LEAVING IT AIN'T YOUR BUSINESS WHY. Sign off and move on. 

3. I'll hammer the USA to win WW3 at -1000 odds if we ever unfortunately see that day.