HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Hearing conflicting stories...

Can a student go back to his hometown to play hockey if he is currently playing for a private school with NO penalty?

CDH back to Highland Park vs CDH back to Woodbury

Here is what I have heard...
If you live in the Highland Park School District, you can leave CDH and go back to Highland Park HS with NO penalty. (because CDH and Highland Park are in the same school district.)
But...
If you hometown is Woodbury, then there would be a 1 year penalty (because CDH is in a different school district then Woodbury)

Answers have ranged from....

A) No Penalty - If a youth wants to go back to his hometown school then he does NOT have to sit out? - (Does not matter what there school district is in)

B) No Penalty - As long as you hometown is in the same school district as the Private School

C) 1 year out of sports - no ifs. ands, or buts...

Well, it's supposed to be "C". But it probably depends on who the kid is, and how good is he.. (ducking for cover on that one...)

CrashDaNET wrote:Hearing conflicting stories...

Can a student go back to his hometown to play hockey if he is currently playing for a private school with NO penalty?

CDH back to Highland Park vs CDH back to Woodbury

Here is what I have heard...
If you live in the Highland Park School District, you can leave CDH and go back to Highland Park HS with NO penalty. (because CDH and Highland Park are in the same school district.)
But...
If you hometown is Woodbury, then there would be a 1 year penalty (because CDH is in a different school district then Woodbury)

Answers have ranged from....

A) No Penalty - If a youth wants to go back to his hometown school then he does NOT have to sit out? - (Does not matter what there school district is in)

B) No Penalty - As long as you hometown is in the same school district as the Private School

C) 1 year out of sports - no ifs. ands, or buts...

Actually, the privates (Cretin included) aren't even in school districts.

C is the answer unless they change residence.

As I understand the new rule, transfers are permitted as long as the kid is living in the community of the new school. Example, an Eden Prarie kid wants to transfer to Holy Angels. His family would have to live in Richfield. This is how I remember it coming down last spring.

Let me throw this one out: Say there is a kid that is currently in 10th grade that lives in Michigan and would like to come and play hockey in Minnesota @ the school his Dad attended as a youth. If Mom and Dad stay in MI to work and live and the kid plans on living with an uncle in said community he wants to play for, is there any issues, as far as the High School League is concerned, with this kid playing hockey next year? Only folks with definite answers and not suppositions need reply.

AY

AngusYoung wrote:Let me throw this one out: Say there is a kid that is currently in 10th grade that lives in Michigan and would like to come and play hockey in Minnesota @ the school his Dad attended as a youth. If Mom and Dad stay in MI to work and live and the kid plans on living with an uncle in said community he wants to play for, is there any issues, as far as the High School League is concerned, with this kid playing hockey next year? Only folks with definite answers and not suppositions need reply.

AY

If the Uncle is now the legal guardian of the child, and it is the childs primary residency, no problem.

[quote="ya-man"]As I understand the new rule, transfers are permitted as long as the kid is living in the community of the new school. Example, an Eden Prarie kid wants to transfer to Holy Angels. His family would have to live in Richfield. This is how I remember it coming down last spring.[/quote]
In this scenario, would it not then be the case--
An Eden Prairie kid lives in E.P. goes to Holy Angels as a ninth grader, but decides he wants to return to E.P. as a tenth grader?
Without penalty???

Can't Never Tried wrote:

AngusYoung wrote:Let me throw this one out: Say there is a kid that is currently in 10th grade that lives in Michigan and would like to come and play hockey in Minnesota @ the school his Dad attended as a youth. If Mom and Dad stay in MI to work and live and the kid plans on living with an uncle in said community he wants to play for, is there any issues, as far as the High School League is concerned, with this kid playing hockey next year? Only folks with definite answers and not suppositions need reply.

AY

If the Uncle is now the legal guardian of the child, and it is the childs primary residency, no problem.

I'll add this below:

from this link:
http://www.mesabieast.k12.mn.us/ATHLETI ... bility.pdf
It's the exact copy from the MSHSL
6. Enrollment Options Program: a student who utilizes Minnesota
Statute 124D.03 Enrollment Options Programs, and transfers without a
corresponding change of residence by the student's parents shall elect one
of the following:
a. retain full eligibility for varsity competition for one (1) calendar
year at the school where the student was enrolled prior to the transfer
after which time the student shall become fully eligible at the school to
which the student has open enrolled; or
b. be eligible only at the non-varsity level in the school to which
the student has open enrolled for one (1) calendar year.
C. If none of the provisions in Section 2 (above) are met, the student is
ineligible for varsity competition for a period of one (1) calendar year
beginning with the first day of attendance in the new school.

Can't Never Tried wrote:

Can't Never Tried wrote:

AngusYoung wrote:Let me throw this one out: Say there is a kid that is currently in 10th grade that lives in Michigan and would like to come and play hockey in Minnesota @ the school his Dad attended as a youth. If Mom and Dad stay in MI to work and live and the kid plans on living with an uncle in said community he wants to play for, is there any issues, as far as the High School League is concerned, with this kid playing hockey next year? Only folks with definite answers and not suppositions need reply.

AY

If the Uncle is now the legal guardian of the child, and it is the childs primary residency, no problem.

I'll add this below:

from this link:
http://www.mesabieast.k12.mn.us/ATHLETI ... bility.pdf
It's the exact copy from the MSHSL
6. Enrollment Options Program: a student who utilizes Minnesota
Statute 124D.03 Enrollment Options Programs, and transfers without a
corresponding change of residence by the student's parents shall elect one
of the following:
a. retain full eligibility for varsity competition for one (1) calendar
year at the school where the student was enrolled prior to the transfer
after which time the student shall become fully eligible at the school to
which the student has open enrolled; or
b. be eligible only at the non-varsity level in the school to which
the student has open enrolled for one (1) calendar year.
C. If none of the provisions in Section 2 (above) are met, the student is
ineligible for varsity competition for a period of one (1) calendar year
beginning with the first day of attendance in the new school.

However, in the case of Joe Rubbelke, he will be eligible for all varsity sports at North St. Paul next school year since he is already attending North.

Currently, Rubbelke plays football and baseball at Harding and hockey for Johnson (because Harding doesn't have a hockey program) while attending North St. Paul.

its C, i transfered private to public back to my hometown and i can only play jv this year..anyone who thinks it not this is wrong..i am a victim

thetender30 wrote:its C, i transfered private to public back to my hometown and i can only play jv this year..anyone who thinks it not this is wrong..i am a victim

I just knew that this rule would be a good one.

thetender30 wrote:its C, i transfered private to public back to my hometown and i can only play jv this year..anyone who thinks it not this is wrong..i am a victim

Victim? You had choices. You could have filed your paperwork by last March 15th and incurred no penalty. You could still play varsity for the private school you left. There is an appeal process for special circumstances (if there were any) which you could have used. Or you can play JV at your new school. You made your choice.

I like this rule.

This new rule is horrible. My son was going to a private school and decided to opt back to his public school a few miles away to be with his friends the last two years of high school. We did move him just prior to this ruling so he is now making a difference at his public school - but I don't think that kids should be able to go back and forth.

I have another question.
Lets say a student attends a private school for a year and then there is a change in the financial capabilities of the family ( job loss, health care costs, ect) and they can no longer afford to attend the private school.
Would this player have to sit out a full year or is there some kind of board that would hear a situation like this?

The reality is that no matter what rule you make, there are going to be people who don't like it. Everyone seems to want it so that it benefits their special interests the best. I say let's give the new rule a chance and see how it washes out.

pioneers wrote:Everyone seems to want it so that it benefits their special interests the best.

Ya think?

54fighting wrote:I have another question.
Lets say a student attends a private school for a year and then there is a change in the financial capabilities of the family ( job loss, health care costs, ect) and they can no longer afford to attend the private school.
Would this player have to sit out a full year or is there some kind of board that would hear a situation like this?

There is a appeal process, but I have no idea how it works.

The situation you mentioned was discussed at length, and a provision for this exception was in the original draft. It stipulated that you could go between public and private in the same public school district. The privates fought (and won) against having any school district "assigned" to the private schools.

Neutron 14 wrote:

pioneers wrote:Everyone seems to want it so that it benefits their special interests the best.

Ya think?

Some of us actually want rules that make sense regardless of who they may favor.

This rule favors no one and punishes children for changing schools in a state where the people have legislated open enrollment. It also sends a message that sports is more important than academics.

It a butt stupid rule no matter who it might favor in any given circunstance(s).

packerboy wrote:This rule favors no one and punishes children for changing schools in a state where the people have legislated open enrollment. It also sends a message that sports is more important than academics.

How so? It's not as if the kids aren't allowed to go to class if they transfer. Since they have to sit on the sidelines for a year, that should give them plenty of opportunity to hit the books in the interim - and that's what's most important, right?!

Just like you say, it favors no one, but clearly nobody is being punished either. It's just more opportunity to crank out more highly educated private schoolers with more time to spend in the library.

Govs93 wrote:

packerboy wrote:This rule favors no one and punishes children for changing schools in a state where the people have legislated open enrollment. It also sends a message that sports is more important than academics.

How so? It's not as if the kids aren't allowed to go to class if they transfer. Since they have to sit on the sidelines for a year, that should give them plenty of opportunity to hit the books in the interim - and that's what's most important, right?!

Just like you say, it favors no one, but clearly nobody is being punished either. It's just more opportunity to crank out more highly educated private schoolers with more time to spend in the library.

Denying a child the oportunity to play Varsity sports is not punishment. What a novel thought. So, when the kids get caught drinking and kicked off the team, its a reward.

I would have never thought of that.

packerboy wrote:

Govs93 wrote:

packerboy wrote:This rule favors no one and punishes children for changing schools in a state where the people have legislated open enrollment. It also sends a message that sports is more important than academics.

How so? It's not as if the kids aren't allowed to go to class if they transfer. Since they have to sit on the sidelines for a year, that should give them plenty of opportunity to hit the books in the interim - and that's what's most important, right?!

Just like you say, it favors no one, but clearly nobody is being punished either. It's just more opportunity to crank out more highly educated private schoolers with more time to spend in the library.

Denying a child the oportunity to play Varsity sports is not punishment. What a novel thought. So, when the kids get caught drinking and kicked off the team, its a reward.

I would have never thought of that.

I'm not sure how you're equating the two.

And the child has every opportunity play varsity sports at the high school level... at the school the child was originally attending. If academics were the true reason for the child transferring, in all likelihood that would have occurred prior to the child enrolling in high school during the 8th grade.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a public school frosh or sophomore who has enough talent to play hockey at a private school, transerring to that school as a sophmore or junior for "academic reasons". Gimme a break.

Let's face it.. the rules came down because a few players/schools abused the practice. If memory serves, the straw that broke the camel's back was a group of girl basketball players in the metro area. Hockey groups complained about the practice, but someone finally went too far.

Blue&Gold wrote:Let's face it.. the rules came down because a few players/schools abused the practice. If memory serves, the straw that broke the camel's back was a group of girl basketball players in the metro area. Hockey groups complained about the practice, but someone finally went too far.

I thought St. Paul Central was ruling girls' basketball... who the hell is transferring there?!

Govs93 wrote:
I thought St. Paul Central was ruling girls' basketball... who the hell is transferring there?!

A lot of very good basketball players.