Junior Player Transfer Rule

[MNHockeyFan]

I am an advocate of scrapping the rule completely. Yes, some teams will "load up" (but aren't they doing that already today?), but as you point out, academics and athletics should not be tied to each other.

SWPrez, I agree with you. The rules, as now written, are for the most part unenforceable. You can lie, you can cheat, or you can threaten to sue...is this how we want to be governed?

And I don't see any compelling reasons why the transfer rules should over-ride individual freedoms when it comes to which schools students (or student/athletes) want to attend, whether they be public or private. Let each individual decide what's best for him or her, and the greatest good (in the aggregate) will be attained for all.

[almostashappy]

Just curious if this transfer/jv thing applies to all extra curricular activities.

If a kid is a good drummer, actor, dance line member, debater; do they have drop down to a "lesser " activity level for a year if they didn't move and open enroll at a new school?

MSHSL eligibility is determined using both "General Rules" that apply to all MSHSL-sanctioned interscholastic activities, and "Athletic Rules" that apply only to members of athletic teams. The transfer rules are in the second group.

http://www.mshsl.org/mshsl/publications ... igInfo.pdf

So Johnny Drummer and Suzie Debater are free agents who can open enroll without penalty. Dance line members, though, would theoretically have to sit for a year alongside the hockey and basketball players.

And before anyone starts to whine about considering dance line a varsity sport, take care to realize that doing so helps keep MSHSL clean on Title IX issues. At least until they sanction varsity girls wrestling.

[wingman]

Great discussion. I really think the common thread here is let them go, individual freedom. One comment needing some discussion is what about the kid that gets cut at school B, when player from school A goes to B to play? Don't have an asnwer yet it happens all the time when a team 'loads' up recruits and cuts the junior in favor of the 9th grader. I see that as the same thing maybe some of you don't. Isn't the answer individual freedom?(for the right reasons).

I will mention two points of interest, as one of the comments stated, and it is fact....the rule is inconsistently enforced....i.e WBL formner ad (also the football coach) admitted 3 boys to transfer for football and they all played immediately---which again I'm fine with....then that same year disallow a boy to transfer for hockey from out state. Here is how it works...if the incoming AD wants you he sponsers you and the MSHSL approves (or rarely gets involved)...if he doesn't sponser he defers to the MSHSL, and they deny. Then it looks like the MSHSL (the authority) denied the kid..not the AD. Regardless it is a flawed system as one commenter stated...if you are rich you can walk around this rule all day long...if you are poor...you better hope the AD will sponser you (and sometimes they do) or wants you or you will be denied...it is sadly a bi-product of the current MSHSL rule....SO Change it!!!! MSHSL are you listening? It simply has a flaw...it is a fact.....what a time to re-examine...i mean even the NCAA is re-examining transfer rules....and one last observation to the commenter on its really not money...the coach just wants to win to save his job....it is still tied to gate reciepts eventually you lose no money...fan apathy..etc...you win fan and school spirit thrives and so does the pocket book. Seriously the money over 26 games 13 at home could easily hit $100,000 plus that goes a long way for many school programs not just hockey....it's possible that building a successful program is like a double edged sword winning & the money roll in together.

[almostashappy]

Great discussion. I really think the common thread here is let them go, individual freedom. One comment needing some discussion is what about the kid that gets cut at school B, when player from school A goes to B to play? Don't have an asnwer yet it happens all the time when a team 'loads' up recruits and cuts the junior in favor of the 9th grader. I see that as the same thing maybe some of you don't. Isn't the answer individual freedom?(for the right reasons).

The cost/benefit of cutting seniors in favor of freshman/sophomores is a popular topic in this forum, and has been discussed over the years on many separate threads. On one level, the transaction is the same...a kid who had been part of the high school program as a sophomore/junior is cut to make room for somebody that is new to the program. But on a deeper level, there are differences to be found (at least in eyes of the player and their parents) between losing their spot to a younger kid who has always been part of the local system, and losing it to a "free agent" that transfers into the system after playing in a different program (or different country, for that matter). That distinction is magnified by orders of magnitude if there are suspicions that the new kid was recruited, or that promises were made by the coach before the new kid moves in. Even more so if it looks like the new kid is skirting around the transfer rules.

Why does it matter? Because the free agents (and their parents) appear to be coming in and instantly gaining the benefits of playing for the new team without having put in the years of work that went into building that program. And I'm extending this back into the youth programs because they are inexorably liked to the high school teams so long as Minnesota Hockey uses high school collection boundaries to set up the borders for community hockey programs.

....and one last observation to the commenter on its really not money...the coach just wants to win to save his job....it is still tied to gate reciepts eventually you lose no money...fan apathy..etc...you win fan and school spirit thrives and so does the pocket book. Seriously the money over 26 games 13 at home could easily hit $100,000 plus that goes a long way for many school programs not just hockey....it's possible that building a successful program is like a double edged sword winning & the money roll in together.

Winning does help at the gate, and bolsters school spirit, but I can't see coaches thinking that winning is a means to an end. Winning is an end all to itself. If it wasn't, then why would volunteer youth hockey coaches shorten benches during a regular season Bantam C game?