Status of proposed transfer rules

[ghshockeyfan]

GHS
Here is one...
Coop: 161
Carlton High School
Cloquet High School
Esko High School

Coop: 1025
Grand Rapids High School
Greenway High School
Nashwauk-Keewatin High School

OK, the entire section is a co-op

How about
Coop: 1017
Blaine High School
Meadow Creek Christian School

OK - but tell me realistically... Are these teams pulling some of the best players from as many as 10 different communities to create a team that plays against even these "co-ops." The "co-ops" listed above aren't using a base of tens of thousands of kids to find the best 15 players...

[ghshockeyfan]

I'm pretty sure they have to sit out for 1/2 season in all sports.

Does anybody know this for sure? My understanding was that you only had to miss a half season of one (the first) sport you participated in.

I'm quite certain xk1 is right and that it's each sport 1/2 season, although I've been wrong before...

[xk1]

I think this covers the half-year question

TRANSFER STUDENTS
A student of any grade level (7-12) who discontinues enrollment and attendance in a high school and attends another high school; and who does not meet one of the conditions, A-D of the transfer rule as listed in the MSHSL Official Handbook. Shall be ineligible to compete in any A-squad (varsity) sport for 50% of the regularly scheduled varsity games in each sport in which the student participates for one calendar year.

[xk1]

OK - but tell me realistically... Are these teams pulling some of the best players from as many as 10 different communities to create a team that plays against even these "co-ops." The "co-ops" listed above aren't using a base of tens of thousands of kids to find the best 15 players...

Hey, I was just pointing out a few to you, I think you were probably referring to the Metro co-ops in your statement.

[ghshockeyfan]

OK - but tell me realistically... Are these teams pulling some of the best players from as many as 10 different communities to create a team that plays against even these "co-ops." The "co-ops" listed above aren't using a base of tens of thousands of kids to find the best 15 players...

Hey, I was just pointing out a few to you, I think you were probably referring to the Metro co-ops in your statement.

Good point. I guess I should clairify, I think we keep this as is, else we need to really get to the heart of why we are making changes. To me, that means outlining what is trying to be accomplished and also being open to discussing new approaches entirely vs. just adapting what may be an outdated approach that wasn't meant to accomodate or address the issues that we have currently.

What are the goals? But keep in mind what's best for the kids. Recognize the current system structure as is may not be able to be adapted to accomplish these goals and do what's best for the kids even with added rules.

[hockeygod]

i think the sitting out half a season is good enough for transfers, when it comes right down to it the transfers that make real differences on teams in hockey amout to about 20 kids a year, unless you have a coach that is trying to put togeather super teams I don't see it as a problem. if coaches strt recruiting then the coaches should be dealt with until i see this happening on wide spread bases it's not a real problem in hockey

[xk1]

What are the goals? But keep in mind what's best for the kids. Recognize the current system structure as is may not be able to be adapted to accomplish these goals and do what's best for the kids even with added rules.

I agree, the scary part is the worst collection of people I can think of to come up with these goals seem to reside at the MSHSL. It could get really amusing if the legislature gets involved. I also am wondering why the local print media has provided such a one sided view of the transfer issue.

[Slicker]

Are you kidding me, statewide recruiting is quite common. The current loss of players, especially in the Metro area to other programs is devastating. Up north it is happening! The transfer rule needs to be strick! One year ineligibilty if family/guardians to not move and reside within school district, or you will continue to have teams that have rostered players with no ties to the community, and no ties to the developmental youth programs within the community!

[xk1]

you will continue to have teams that have rostered players with no ties to the community, and no ties to the developmental youth programs within the community!

How are you tied to the developmental youth program if you transfer in in 9th grade? This is allowed under the proposal but seems to violate one of your chief concerns. Why would the MSHSL even care about ties to the youth program?

[trilogy]

Here is the link to the Star Tribune article:

http://www.startribune.com/526/story/861827.html


David Stead says they want to hear from everyone. Well, here are all the phone numbers and email addresses of the directors. Take a minute and let them know how you feel.

Minnesota State High School League
2100 Freeway Boulevard
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-1735

763-560-2262
763-569-0499 FAX

Office Hours: 7:30 am - 4:00 pm
Switchboard Hours: 8:00 am - 4:00 pm

League Personnel E-Mail Address Extension
Executive Director David Stead dstead@mshsl.org 480
Associate Director Jody Redman jredman@mshsl.org 481
Associate Director Craig Perry * cperry@mshsl.org 482
Associate Director Lisa Lissimore llissimore@mshsl.org 483
Associate Director Kevin Merkle kmerkle@mshsl.org 484


I'm just stunned at the attitude of the MSHSL here. A kid gets up in the morning, rides a bus maybe, attends school for several hours a day, eats lunch, makes friends - I don't care whether they are public, private, whatever, if they attend to that school it is natural for them to want to play for their school. It is a huge adjustment for a kid that switches schools for whatever reason and I believe it is rarely taken lightly. How is the kid to understand that they can hang out with, be friends with, go to dances - but NO YOU CAN'T play for the basketball team, or run track here for a year?

If MSHSL wants to even the playing field, it should be done with one free transfer for everyone, at any grade. Then a family can freely search out the education they want for their child as they come up through elementary, middle and HS and decide what is best for their child, and move without penalty once. I can tell you that with our children we did not learn what we needed to know about the middle schools and high schools until our oldest kids were IN them. You can't just take a 3rd grader and select the high school education that will be best for them. The needs of each child are very individual and personal. Unfortunately, the best option isn't always the local school. Also unfortunately, the best option sometimes changes along the way. Life happens

Off my soapbox now

[ghshockeyfan]

Well said trilogy - and let me add that my thoughts were that you would actually be giving those private kids more options through either private/elite participation OR home HS participation. But you'd also be addressing the "private school" concerns. One issue missing from this option is that OE's wouldn't have the option to play sports at their OE school, which I don't agree with personally, but that's the "hot topic" issue right now in reality so it should be brought to the front and openly discussed and not clouded by private school & other concerns. In the end, I don't see any difference between EP/SSP/etc.-like OE's & AHA/BSM/etc. privates. They both are only seeking out the best opportunties and I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

I would guess that there would be as many kids that would want to play their sports with their friends in their home community they've had their entire life WHILE getting a different/better education via OE/Private. If this isn't the case, then the OE LAW needs to be rewritten to reflect "complete package" considerations in OE, and not just "education" although I would guess that many could argue that "education" goes beyond just the classroom and extends into all facets of the "complete package" of a different school (sports, etc., etc.)...

I could be wrong though.

[xk1]

I believe the OE law is OK the way it is. There is no restriction to academic only reasons here that I can find and in fact they call out that their might be 'other" reasons.


Subd. 3. Pupil application procedures. In order that
a pupil may attend a school or program in a nonresident
district, the pupil's parent or guardian must submit an
application to the nonresident district. Before submitting an
application, the pupil and the pupil's parent or guardian must
explore with a school guidance counselor, or other appropriate
staff member employed by the district the pupil is currently
attending, the pupil's academic or other reason for applying to
enroll in a nonresident district. The pupil's application must
identify the reason for enrolling in the nonresident district.
The parent or guardian of a pupil must submit an application by
January 15 for initial enrollment beginning the following school
year. The application must be on a form provided by the
Department of Education. A particular school or program may be
requested by the parent. Once enrolled in a nonresident
district, the pupil may remain enrolled and is not required to
submit annual or periodic applications. To return to the
resident district or to transfer to a different nonresident
district, the parent or guardian of the pupil must provide
notice to the resident district or apply to a different
nonresident district by January 15 for enrollment beginning the
following school year.

Subd. 6. Basis for decisions. The board must adopt,
by resolution, specific standards for acceptance and rejection
of applications. Standards may include the capacity of a
program, class, or school building. The school board may not
reject applications for enrollment in a particular grade level
if the nonresident enrollment at that grade level does not
exceed the limit set by the board under subdivision 2.
Standards may not include previous academic achievement,
athletic or other extracurricular ability, disabling conditions,
proficiency in the English language, previous disciplinary
proceedings, or the student's district of residence.

full text can be found here http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/data ... 4D/03.html

[hockeygod]

that is as close to the complete package as I have seen, there is no perfect answer, but we have to get away from punishing the student athelete because the system is supposed to be for them. I think something that could help some of the weaker programs is giving them a couple more games the week before the state tournament allowing them work with the players a little more can only help make there programs stronger and maybe they could keep a kid or two from jumping to another school

[ghshockeyfan]

xk1 - you're right that I suppose the wording is fine. I don't know then why the athletic based xfers/OE's are so much of an issue other than that people despise the athletic impact in some cases.

hockeygod - I think that we need to be creative about solving the "problems" that the MSHSL is trying to address. I'm open to any ideas, and they may be too?

In general, I'm just suprised that no one has "shot the messenger" here relative to this discussion and what has been posted. I'm just trying to see a good discussion about the "issues" and truly I have little problem with things as they are right now... but that isn't the case for all obviously...

[hockeygod]

maybe they should limit the number open enrolment kids on each team, I see the real problem is in basketbal where when they anounce the kids name at the state tournament they should also anounce there hometowns

[hockeyrube7]

maybe they should limit the number open enrolment kids on each team, I see the real problem is in basketbal where when they anounce the kids name at the state tournament they should also anounce there hometowns

This might be one of the best ideas yet! The problem is not with a few kids moving in, but more so with a whole starting line up, this happens more in basketball or course, but is pretty evident in EP and SSP. I don't understand punishing a kid and their family, for trying to find a better situation. I'm not for or against OE really. Yet I'd like to know where the priorities are with this. Kids can get caught drinking and smoking and get only a 3 week suspension, and that is only if they decide to turn them in, and we want to take away 1 whole year from a teenage kid, for making a choice?

[hockeygod]

it's strange coming from a private school setting, seeing everyone so upset about open enrollment and recruiting. The privates are always accused of recruiting but at Hill I haven't seen any of it outside of friends that grew up togeather wanting to play on the same team and usally thats where one freind is good and the other is marginal....one of things i do see that is attractive to atheletes at hill is that with the exception of boys hockey, if your a reasonable athelete every sport offers you an opportunitty to play because they need the numbers, thats why alot of kids transfer into the privates because the opportunity for there kids to play. with so many awesome boys hockey players maybe hill should field an elete team and then field a standard team, maybe thats the answer for open enrollment kids let some schools field elete teams

[hockeyrube7]

Isn't that what GHS has been saying all along, a Tier I and Tier II idea?

[hockeygod]

the only good solution is to figure out how to let the kids play, it's for the kids and we can't go around punishing the ones we are trying to help...there is no good answer there also arn't any bad suggestions but to ban an a player for a year becuase they needed a change in there life is not the answer becuase it will just force the elete players to the TB's or SSM and more teams like that will pop up

[ghshockeyfan]

Isn't that what GHS has been saying all along, a Tier I and Tier II idea?

One option would be to go to tiers where the top 64 teams make the "Big" tourney based on rank or record (I'd prefer a rank as that factors in SOS and not just Win %). Then you have a 2nd "participation" based tourney of the remaining teams in teh state so that those communities get to experience a tourney and hopefully that exposure helps continues growth. I have a hard time believing that tourneys by class were created for small schools that recruit or are private to win again & again. The goal of multi-class tourneys is quite clear as why did the boys go to the tiers first? Becuase that was their goal (as explained above).

Regardless of all of the tiers, I still think that in some respects people would like to see private schools put in one section for sections/regions. I don't care to be honest. I guess if you kick privates out of MSHSL tourney altogether then they just become prep schools like SSM with sports still that I think can still play against MSHSL teams just not play for sections/state. Those private teams would have their own state tourney that may likely be better than the MSHSL one I suppose... But, again, I don't support this - just something that I know people talk about and this was the way it was years ago I hear? ALthough then I don't know if private schools sports were as good as they are now? I'm just to young to know the facts/history on this.

The question for me becomes what are we trying to solve? Private school movement? Public school OE? Both? I agree that a standard rule set is best for simplicity, but these are two very different issues yet similar in many ways. The botom line though is that if you're trying to address one and not the other why should both suffer? But maybe both are indeed the target???

[xwildfan]

Re: transfers, OE, etc. Hypothetical question. What if we could turn back the clock and decide that the best thing for girls hockey would be to have the older players play at the U16 and U19 levels; and not have Girls HS hockey? Would the situation be better for girls hockey?

The transfer, OE issue would go away; assuming that the MN/USA Hockey rules that mandate playing in one's home community applies.

The issue of HS coaches taking younger players (U12, U14) away from their youth teams would go away.

The controversy of where to play the State Tournament would go away.

I think there would be many more girls playing hockey if the U16 and U19 system was in place; since there would most likely be B teams as well as A teams.

I'm not sure how teams like the T-Breds or AAA teams would fit into the above scenario.

Obviously, girls HS hockey is not going away. But I am not totally convinced that what we have now is better than the alternative U16 and U19 levels. I have heard many players and parents comment that their most enjoyable times in hockey were at the youth (U12 and U14) levels.

[ghshockeyfan]

Agreed, but one issue - funding.

I think the reason most like youth is that it's non-reality in some respects. You don't have the life-lessons on the same level as the competition of the HS level and HS issues bring on.

Also, I still think coaches would take the best kids up and if a system didn't allow for this it would be a great development problem for those select few kids that are ready physically & emotionally for the next level ahead of their peers.

[xk1]

I don't think it would work. When pondering this it reminded me that the real community in HS sports is not the city you live in but the collection of people you go to school with. This is why limiting HS teams to players in the city limits is the wrong way to go, the team should be made up of the kids that go to school together, no matter where they went last year.

[ghshockeyfan]

There has been a shift away from community including more than just ones HS with the OE situation I guess. Kids moved around years ago I'm sure, but not to this level that OE has opened up I assume.

[MNHockeyFan]

Isn't that what GHS has been saying all along, a Tier I and Tier II idea?

Those private teams would have their own state tourney that may likely be better than the MSHSL one I suppose... But, again, I don't support this - just something that I know people talk about and this was the way it was years ago I hear? ALthough then I don't know if private schools sports were as good as they are now? I'm just to young to know the facts/history on this.

I am older and actually played for a private (Duluth Cathedral - now Duluth Marshall) in what used to be the separate state championship for Independent Schools. We beat Hill High School in the championship game by one goal, and the top independent teams including ourselves were very competitive with the best public schools at the time. I thought it was too bad we couldn't play the public school winner so there would be one true champion, and was glad when they finally merged everyone together.

The question for me becomes what are we trying to solve?

This is the question I would like to see answered. I think there are a lot of hidden agendas at work here.