Proposed new MSHL transfer rule

The Latest 400 or so Topics

Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)

warmskin
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:49 am

Proposed new MSHL transfer rule

Post by warmskin » Thu Apr 27, 2017 12:54 am

Has anyone heard of the proposed new MSHL rule that would allow students to transfer to a new school (receiver) if the current school (sender) signs off on the transfer much like what happens in the NCAA transfers. The student would be eligible to play varsity sports without sitting out a year.
I have heard the proposal will be voted on at the next MSHL meeting next month.

Wet Paint
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 4:23 pm

Re: Proposed new MSHL transfer rule

Post by Wet Paint » Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:50 am

warmskin wrote:Has anyone heard of the proposed new MSHL rule that would allow students to transfer to a new school (receiver) if the current school (sender) signs off on the transfer much like what happens in the NCAA transfers. The student would be eligible to play varsity sports without sitting out a year.
I have heard the proposal will be voted on at the next MSHL meeting next month.
I have always thought that made sense. If Team A cuts the kid off of their programs and Team B needs him and he wants to go there why not let him? Good for those kids who are not top end players but who still want to play sports and good for those small teams who need kids to fill a team to be able to put one in play.

SCBlueLiner
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm

Re: Proposed new MSHL transfer rule

Post by SCBlueLiner » Thu Apr 27, 2017 1:20 pm

Wet Paint wrote:
warmskin wrote:Has anyone heard of the proposed new MSHL rule that would allow students to transfer to a new school (receiver) if the current school (sender) signs off on the transfer much like what happens in the NCAA transfers. The student would be eligible to play varsity sports without sitting out a year.
I have heard the proposal will be voted on at the next MSHL meeting next month.
I have always thought that made sense. If Team A cuts the kid off of their programs and Team B needs him and he wants to go there why not let him? Good for those kids who are not top end players but who still want to play sports and good for those small teams who need kids to fill a team to be able to put one in play.
Absolutely. No need for a player who is cut to sit out of the sport when there are schools out there struggling to field teams, much less competitive teams. The current school didn't want him/her, let them go somewhere they are wanted and needed.

MNHockeyFan
Posts: 7260
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:28 pm

Post by MNHockeyFan » Thu Apr 27, 2017 1:32 pm

If it passes I was wondering what impact it could have on cooperatives, JV's and on Junior Gold? I would think it could lead to a need for fewer co-ops, and better balance across JV teams. Meanwhile, Junior Gold participation could possibly take a hit.

Section 8 guy
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Post by Section 8 guy » Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:45 am

I guess I'm a bit skeptical. It's hard for me to see something that makes transferring for athletics easier as a positive thing. You guys are discussing one scenario. There are many other scenarios out there where this isn't a positive for the sport of hockey.

warmskin
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:49 am

athletic transfers

Post by warmskin » Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:02 am

I think the MSHL is trying to be realistic. There are thousands of transfers in MN every year for athletic reasons and many are questionable following current rules. Is it fair to let some programs potentially cheat and others play by the rules? There is no good solution for this but at least putting it out in the open is a start.

mulefarm
Posts: 1675
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:01 pm

Post by mulefarm » Fri Apr 28, 2017 6:27 am

This would be interesting. Could a kid play a fall sport at one school, winter at another and a spring sport at a 3rd? If a kid is into theater, could he transfer to be in the plays he wants? Could a band person transfer because that school is going to the Rose Bowl parade?

Jeffy95
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2015 8:45 am

Post by Jeffy95 » Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:09 am

Section 8 guy wrote:I guess I'm a bit skeptical. It's hard for me to see something that makes transferring for athletics easier as a positive thing. You guys are discussing one scenario. There are many other scenarios out there where this isn't a positive for the sport of hockey.
I think they're discussing that scenario because it's the most likely and maybe even the only. If the school has to sign off on the release, it's only going to be for kids they don't want/need. Plus, the kid has to transfer schools for a sport that he's most likely not that good at. How probable is that? If they really wanted this to work, they would have to let the kid play somewhere else without transferring schools. That would help out those teams who need players. I don't see this as having much of an impact.

formersection3Afan
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 5:28 pm

Post by formersection3Afan » Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:35 am

Why is Tommy's dad business on the new scoreboard? He doesn't even play QB here anymore. Oh that was his buyout fee to get his transfer signed.

Look the concession stand is sponsored now as well.

SCBlueLiner
Posts: 661
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:11 pm

Post by SCBlueLiner » Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:20 am

Section 8 guy wrote:I guess I'm a bit skeptical. It's hard for me to see something that makes transferring for athletics easier as a positive thing. You guys are discussing one scenario. There are many other scenarios out there where this isn't a positive for the sport of hockey.
I'd like to hear those other scenarios. Maybe a player holding a school hostage, threatening to not play, being a chronic pain in the butt, or tanking if they don't get their wish?

I do think it is funny that choosing schools for athletics is so negatively viewed but that choosing a school for academics, the arts, music, etc. is a-OK. All of those extra-curricular activities are a part of the high school experience. If a kid's primary motivation is sports, and through sports it keeps him in school, studying, and getting an education then I am all for it. The alternative is an unmotivated student who has no incentive to get good grades and graduate who will eventually become a leech on society. Whatever keeps the kid putting up the grades is alright by me.

We're molding young people to become contributing members of society. They can't all be rocket scientists. Some you have to mold through different means.

Wet Paint
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 4:23 pm

Post by Wet Paint » Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:27 am

SCBlueLiner wrote:
Section 8 guy wrote:I guess I'm a bit skeptical. It's hard for me to see something that makes transferring for athletics easier as a positive thing. You guys are discussing one scenario. There are many other scenarios out there where this isn't a positive for the sport of hockey.
I'd like to hear those other scenarios. Maybe a player holding a school hostage, threatening to not play, being a chronic pain in the butt, or tanking if they don't get their wish?

I do think it is funny that choosing schools for athletics is so negatively viewed but that choosing a school for academics, the arts, music, etc. is a-OK. All of those extra-curricular activities are a part of the high school experience. If a kid's primary motivation is sports, and through sports it keeps him in school, studying, and getting an education then I am all for it. The alternative is an unmotivated student who has no incentive to get good grades and graduate who will eventually become a leech on society. Whatever keeps the kid putting up the grades is alright by me.

We're molding young people to become contributing members of society. They can't all be rocket scientists. Some you have to mold through different means.
I am sure it could be abused somehow. People can be pretty creative. I still think it is a great idea and needs to happen.

boomerang
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:28 pm

Post by boomerang » Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:54 pm

There's a kid on my son's track team who is a senior who just transferred in. Small town school near a larger town, and he needed a smaller atmosphere. Gets to participate in meets, but he doesn't score because of the current rule. Kid doesn't care. Just likes track. His future D1 college coach doesn't care because they can still see his times and want him anyway. Team doesn't care because we stomp all over everyone in the conference in track without him and don't need his points. Based on times so far, this kid would probably be either 1 or 2 at State in his events, but again....he won't be able to because he transferred schools and doesn't qualify.

Sad, but he knew it going in and accepted it. Just couldn't hang on at the old school for that last year.

People are always going to cheat the system.

Section 8 guy
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Post by Section 8 guy » Fri Apr 28, 2017 8:42 pm

The tone of the conversation here is that the only time a transfer would take place here is if a kid is cut and the kid wants to transfer simply to be able to play the sport at all. Do you really think that's the way this would play out? Honestly? I just don't see it. I think there would be far more transfer activity among high end players than you see now which would ultimately lead to more haves and have nots and a narrower base of interest that would harm high school hockey.

I think you guys are highly under estimating the pressure that would be on a school to release a kid even if he's a kid that helps their program.

I hope I'm wrong.

warmskin
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:49 am

transfer

Post by warmskin » Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:19 pm

The MSHL could track the reason why students want to transfer athletic programs to see what the main reasons might be. I would guess the topic 2 reasons would be to get into a stronger program and/or better coaching. There are plenty of hockey coaches that don't have good reputations not to mention the churn of coaches.

Section 8 guy
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Post by Section 8 guy » Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:58 am

Yes........ But what value is there in tracking the information if it's just proving out that the negative dynamic was playing out as people said it would?

In its worst version....... This is a movement towards the concentrated Tier 1 system similar to Michigan and Massechussetts........with the only difference being that the teams are housed within public schools. Would it go that far? Probably not all the way........ But it would almost certainly go much further that way than it is now. I can't imagine it wouldn't.

Maybe I'm underestimating how many ADs would be unwilling to sign off on a kids release, which would be the only real governor here preventing a free to play whereever you want system. But I don't see that being an easy position for an AD to take.......or it being a position with very much upside. It would be a risky proposition to force a kid to stay that has indicated they'd rather be somewhere else.

mulefarm
Posts: 1675
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:01 pm

Re: transfer

Post by mulefarm » Sat Apr 29, 2017 7:51 am

warmskin wrote:The MSHL could track the reason why students want to transfer athletic programs to see what the main reasons might be. I would guess the topic 2 reasons would be to get into a stronger program and/or better coaching. There are plenty of hockey coaches that don't have good reputations not to mention the churn of coaches.
Why would the MSHL track these reason? Why only for athletics? With around 400 schools and the many activities at each school, I'm not sure who would collect the data and then process it? If coaching is tough now, with a lot of turnover, I can't imagine what it would be like if kids could transfer each day
Would they transfer after tryouts and they were cut? Would the school he transfer to, have to give him a tryout?.

MNHockeyFan
Posts: 7260
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:28 pm

Post by MNHockeyFan » Sat Apr 29, 2017 9:15 am

Section 8 guy wrote:Maybe I'm underestimating how many ADs would be unwilling to sign off on a kids release, which would be the only real governor here preventing a free to play whereever you want system.
I'm trying to recall exactly when the current transfer rules were put in place. Wasn't there a time when kids could move from school to school without penalty and forcing a parent move? If so, I don't believe it caused the Minnesota system to fall apart...

Section 8 guy
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:04 pm

Post by Section 8 guy » Sun Apr 30, 2017 5:37 pm

I don't believe it was ever wide open in terms of being able to transfer......but that could be wrong.

BP
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:31 am

Post by BP » Mon May 01, 2017 8:24 am

MNHockeyFan wrote:
Section 8 guy wrote:Maybe I'm underestimating how many ADs would be unwilling to sign off on a kids release, which would be the only real governor here preventing a free to play whereever you want system.
I'm trying to recall exactly when the current transfer rules were put in place. Wasn't there a time when kids could move from school to school without penalty and forcing a parent move? If so, I don't believe it caused the Minnesota system to fall apart...
The rule use to be 90 days that you were ineligible. So, a lot of winter sports kids would play a fall sport and eat up those 90 days, then they were eligible. Also, the AD at the old school could sign a document and the kid could be eligible after 15 school days.

Nevertoomuchhockey
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:59 pm

Re: transfer

Post by Nevertoomuchhockey » Wed May 03, 2017 6:57 am

warmskin wrote:The MSHL could track the reason why students want to transfer athletic programs to see what the main reasons might be. I would guess the topic 2 reasons would be to get into a stronger program and/or better coaching. There are plenty of hockey coaches that don't have good reputations not to mention the churn of coaches.
This will be interesting to watch.
But tbh, this comment gives the MSHSL way to much credit for not just addressing and fixing a broken system but also in even acknowledging and recognizing the problem. I'm not comfortable handing out that credit. IMHO this rule change is a half a** attempt to pacify the minority. The major majority will continue to do the right thing and the cheaters will still cheat.

MNHockeyFan
Posts: 7260
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:28 pm

Re: transfer

Post by MNHockeyFan » Wed May 03, 2017 9:55 am

Nevertoomuchhockey wrote:The major majority will continue to do the right thing and the cheaters will still cheat.
But if they change the rule so that a transfer is allowed (if the old school signs off) then it will no longer be cheating.

BP
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:31 am

Re: transfer

Post by BP » Wed May 03, 2017 4:00 pm

MNHockeyFan wrote:
Nevertoomuchhockey wrote:The major majority will continue to do the right thing and the cheaters will still cheat.
But if they change the rule so that a transfer is allowed (if the old school signs off) then it will no longer be cheating.

What's interesting about this change is the people who have gotten lawyers and tried to sue the MSHSL for not allowing the transfer - will they now try to sue the school if they don't sign off on it. This could open a whole new cans of worms.

goldy313
Posts: 3949
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2002 11:56 am

Post by goldy313 » Wed May 03, 2017 6:03 pm

From what I heard this rule will just expedite the process where hearings are needed to grant eligibility. Usually these are custodial issues or issues where the well being of the child is concerned......

I could be wrong but from what I am hearing this isn't a blank check to transfer.

MrBoDangles
Posts: 4090
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:32 pm

Post by MrBoDangles » Fri May 05, 2017 4:17 pm

I'm trying to understand this... Example- Is this so the Edina fifth line (players) can go to Bloomington Kennedy all of a sudden and be their second line? There would be pissed off people coming from all angles..


Allow kids to spread their wings in weaker programs, but clip the wings of the talented that want to improve at a better program? I thought we moved past the obama years...?

Maybe it's impossible to understand...

warmskin
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:49 am

Post by warmskin » Thu May 18, 2017 12:52 am

I have heard from a couple of AD's this has a pretty good chance of passing but not sure when the vote will be. There are all kinds of reasons players may want to transfer schools from academic to sports. I would agree with Bobby Orr that too many coaches shouldn't be coaching and many players may want to get into a more positive environment plus there are good players in the very competitive programs that may not see much ice time.
All the large hockey programs have players coming and going almost every year so movement has been happening and upsetting some people.
The speculation is private schools will be hesitant to release players for financial reasons and public schools would probably release players especially the big schools that are already bursting at the seams. Wayzata High School will have around 4000 students in a year or 2, O'Leary will not miss a player.

Post Reply