Solving the Transfer Policy Issue

Thunderbird77 · Post by **Thunderbird77** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:55 am

There is a simple way to solve the transfer policy issue. Why not put a limit (different for different sports) on the number of transfers a team may have? This puts some of the burden where it belongs - on the coaches. The incidence os recruiting would go way down or be eliminated. Once they reach their quota, they would have to be willing to cut a transfer before another could be brought on the team. This policy also puts more risk on the student who transfers. For example, assume for a minute the quota for girls hockey is 3. A girl who transfers better hope that there aren't three better players transferring in, or she's out.

It also insures that no team has a winning season solely on the backs of transfers. A coach better put some effort into their local youth program. Games are won or lost today based on the second line.

In this proposal, the definition of a transfer is someone who has already played a varsity season in the sport. in essence, this policy requires athletes who play varsity to make a commitment to the school where they choose to play.

This policy could also be easily implemented by public and private schools alike. No school boundaries are required. It would also be easy to police. You don't have to check addresses or know if guardianship has changed. A coach registers their varsity players at the end of the season. They become a transfer once they appear on any other teams roster.

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:18 am

As near as I can tell, the big issue with transfers is if team A has one or more transfers and beats team B, the parents/coach of team B are upset. The number of transfers doesn't seem to matter. Interestingly enough, the Kennedy team now has a transfer and it doesn't bother anyone.

Zamman · Post by **Zamman** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:53 am

In this proposal, the definition of a transfer is someone who has already played a varsity season in the sport.

This is something that may be a way that OE or transfers have already used. This is a little like a loophole. I never thought of this.

Thunderbird77 · Post by **Thunderbird77** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:20 am

Xk1-

From the posts I read, the transfer issue is all about the number of transfers on a team. I never heard one complaint on this message board or other places from Wayzata parents about Christina Lee playing there. Nor did any team they played complain that Wayzata won because of Christina Lee's open enrollment. The 14 other girls that got to place third in state were all just greatful for her decision to open enroll. I think this is because a team is not made by one player. Did a player like Christina Lee make a difference to Wayzata's success? The answer is yes, but the team is still top ranked without her.

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:40 am

Last year EP had 2 transfers and if you could go back and read those posts you would see a different picture. Prior to that you will find SSP was issue with multiple transfers and if you were to ask people who lost to Wayzeta when Lee was there you would find a lot of complaints. <edit> Not being a Wayzeta parent I have no idea what actually happend when Lee came, but if I do recall at least 1 or 2 Wayzeta parents complaining loudly on this forum 2 years ago.<edit>

Another issue here is it actually promotes transferring and in fact would make recruiting a must.

ice29 · Post by **ice29** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:35 am

Where are most of the transfers taking place in public or private schools. Of-course in private schools, why -They don't support a youth program. It takes alot of support from each community, both physically and financially to have a program.
* If you want to Pay to Play, lets keep the money and especially the efforts of the Athletes at Home. It takes more than 1 or 2 years to build a Hockey Team (with transfers), it takes a Hockey Program!

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:54 am

There is an interesting thought, what if privates were allowed to start youth programs. I can't think of a better recruiting tool.

I should also add that although I see issues with Thunderbirds idea, it is more thought out than what the MSHSL is proposing. It has a good definition of transfer and allows for people to move, as they have the right to do. The points I brought up are just what I believe would be the popular objections from most people.

ice29 · Post by **ice29** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 11:35 am

** Transfers in sports are for Educational Purposes aren't they! That's what the privates say. Transfers should be to the improvement of the Parents (job related or housing), not the student athlete.

Zamman · Post by **Zamman** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:49 pm

Where are most of the transfers taking place in public or private schools. Of-course in private schools, why -They don't support a youth program.

This is actually a false statement.... Look a little closer. On the boys board there are many posts about the transfer and a lot of them are happening on the public school side. Another point is the private schools do support youth programs. Arenas are adding sheets of ice to make ice-time available for the youth programs.

xwildfan · Post by **xwildfan** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 1:55 pm

Another idea (which would never be adopted) regarding the transfer issue would be to place all the privates in one section. And in another section, place all the teams with two or more OE players. Let the two winners play each other; winner goes to state. That would eliminate a lot of teams with transfers from the State; and theoretically make a lot of teams without transfers happy.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:07 pm

xk1 wrote:As near as I can tell, the big issue with transfers is if team A has one or more transfers and beats team B, the parents/coach of team B are upset. The number of transfers doesn't seem to matter.

Yes, that seems to be the big issue all right.

If somehow we could just limit school choice to non-athletes, band members or at worst marginal-poor athletes, nobody would ever bring the transfer issue up.

ice29 · Post by **ice29** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:28 pm

Yes , I agree there would be No issues on Transfers!

How about giving the Private Schools their own State Playoffs and State Tourney? Again, eliminating alot of the transfer issues. Then we could sit back and listen to all the discussions about TV coverage and which tourney really represents Minnesota hockey

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:46 pm

ice29 wrote:Yes , I agree there would be No issues on Transfers!

How about giving the Private Schools their own State Playoffs and State Tourney? Again, eliminating alot of the transfer issues. Then we could sit back and listen to all the discussions about TV coverage and which tourney really represents Minnesota hockey

Why are private schools the issue here? Which of them are loaded with transfers? (girls coming in after the start of 9th grade).

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:01 pm

Why are privates the issuse

Because team A beat team B and team A has players from 4 or 5 school districts and team B only has them from 1 so the parents/coach are upset. Of course nobody is upset with Minnehaha Academy.

Roman Legion · Post by **Roman Legion** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:02 pm

The issue centers on private schools because public schools are forced to recruit in order to keep up with the private schools. This is more evident on the boys side because they have stronger private programs. The girls are catching up fast. Some public school coaches have to go out and bring in players or they will lose their existing players. Losing existing players will ultimately result in that coach being run out of town by the parents for not winning.

Let's not forget that there are players who have gone to the private schools after the 9th grade. Not all come in at the beginning of 9th grade.

I am not sure why the privates all don't join the same conference. It would be the best conference around and players would be rushing to private schools to play in a conference against the best players from all around the metro area.

All of this will be over when the transfer rule passes the MSHSL.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:20 pm

Roman Legion wrote:The issue centers on private schools because public schools are forced to recruit in order to keep up with the private schools. This is more evident on the boys side because they have stronger private programs. The girls are catching up fast. Some public school coaches have to go out and bring in players or they will lose their existing players. Losing existing players will ultimately result in that coach being run out of town by the parents for not winning.

Don't forget that there has yet to be a private school girls hockey dynasty. Roseville had a great streak with either mostly or all home-grown players. South St. Paul had some transfers toward the end of their run, but during most of their fabulous streak the girls were mostly from their own youth program. The big public schools will always have a numbers advantage, it's just a matter of developing a winning tradition that their home-grown players will want to be a part of. As for the boys side, if you look back at the history of the state tournament, I would guess more than 90% of the time a public school has won it. There shouldn't be too much cause for alarm there either.

Roman Legion wrote:Let's not forget that there are players who have gone to the private schools after the 9th grade. Not all come in at the beginning of 9th grade.

Same could be said for public schools.

Roman Legion wrote:I am not sure why the privates all don't join the same conference. It would be the best conference around and players would be rushing to private schools to play in a conference against the best players from all around the metro area.

Actually I think this should be explored, but athletic directors don't base their decisions on girls' hockey. Football is the biggest consideration, followed by boys' basketball and hockey. But I don't know why the AD's of private schools having the better athletic programs don't consider forming their own conference. These would include Cretin Derham Hall, Holy Angels, Hill Murray, Benilde-St. Margaret's, Totino Grace, Blake, Breck, and maybe St. Thomas (although St. Thomas obviously doesn't have a girls hockey team). None of the schools are really big, and each have their traditions and excel at different sports. They could then enter sectional playoffs in their respective geographic areas.

Roman Legion wrote:All of this will be over when the transfer rule passes the MSHSL.

Some change is probably inevitable, but I'm not convinced that it's necessary. Unless some huge inequity exists, I favor maintaining individual freedom and school choice over everything else.

ice29 · Post by **ice29** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:59 am

The words transfer and recruit all seem to show up in the same sentences in these threads. Do they both mean the same - I think their meanings are quite different:

to transfer = def. - to CONVEY from one person or place to another.
to recruit = def. - to SECURE new members , such as military or work.

The key word is secure - to protect, to make certain, to OBTAIN.

Roman Legion · Post by **Roman Legion** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:25 pm

A private school conference would be smart in all sports. I understand what drives the decision making and the private schools would be smart to look into this option.

It doesn't take a dynasty to make coaches nervous about losing players to private schools or other public schools for that mattter. If the same rules continue it is only a matter of time before we see one, somewhere.

The boys state tournament results before about 1995 should not be considered. It wasn't until AHA hired Trebil that we began to see more player movement. Prior to that time private schools were not as aggressive in trying to secure players for their programs.

I guess the best example is this... A girls team made the state tournament a couple of years ago and the one comment that the head coach had was "think of what this will do for our recruiting." Instead of being able to enjoy making the state tournament instead the focus is on something else.

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:36 pm

If these forums are at all representative of the general feeling of the hockey community, I would say there is far more anti private anger than transfer anger. Why aren't all of the people upset with the current situation going after the MSHSL to get privates out rather than go after the publics and OE?

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 3:39 pm

Roman Legion wrote:A private school conference would be smart in all sports. I understand what drives the decision making and the private schools would be smart to look into this option.

It doesn't take a dynasty to make coaches nervous about losing players to private schools or other public schools for that mattter. If the same rules continue it is only a matter of time before we see one, somewhere.

The boys state tournament results before about 1995 should not be considered. It wasn't until AHA hired Trebil that we began to see more player movement. Prior to that time private schools were not as aggressive in trying to secure players for their programs.

I guess the best example is this... A girls team made the state tournament a couple of years ago and the one comment that the head coach had was "think of what this will do for our recruiting." Instead of being able to enjoy making the state tournament instead the focus is on something else.

As a young coach for an inner-city 1st year co-op my primary job was to retain talent from leaving for more developed teams even in the same city! Then I had to worry about the CDH/SPA/VIS/HM/MA/AHA's. I knew that if I could RETAIN the talent we could compete & build for the future.

As a (still somewhat) young coach for the E Bloomington Kennedy team, it was as much about RETAINING talent and building for the future. There were long-time concerns about it leaving to the Western neighbor in Jefferson as well as to privates, etc.

A little older, I found myself worried about losing to NE neighbor SSP as well as SW Eagan/Rosemount, NW WSP, and privates like CDH/Vis/HM. Again, all about retaining talent.

In each of these three cases - inner city co-op, class AA Lake Conf. team, and class A Classic Sub Conf team, it's only ever been about one thing - retaining talent. I think that it's always more about giving them something to stay for vs what they're considering going to... (in a hockey sense anyway)

In some respects the competition for players that OE/privates creates is good if it would bring up the quality of all the programs around the state as far as what they're offering. The problem is that not all welcome this competition and challenge.

For me, I'm back in the same boat I was in in St. Paul and East Bloomington. With an amazing young group of talent, can we keep them together in the community? Or are we developing them for the Privates/OE? I think we can retain the talent if we keep the hockey program something worth staying for... BUT - I lost 2 amazing 7th graders already before this season to Eagan & Vis - they too would have been part of my V this year had they stayed I assume and would have run the # of 7th & 8th graders in my program to 15 of 23...)

We have to remember though too that academics are a part of this concern/discussion. I wouldn't still be coaching where I'm at if I didn't believe in the school academically. Without the academics being sound, there's no reason to fight the OE/Private battle in my mind even if you have an awesome team, kids should seek out the best academics!

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:31 pm

Just what is the transfer policy issue?

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 5:40 pm

xk1 wrote:Just what is the transfer policy issue?

I ask myself that each time I read about this issue. I don't know if we've really truly defined some key parts of what the issue is... Until then, not sure we can address something that isn't well defined... What are the goals? What are the problems? How are the "goals" of a proposal addressing the "problems?" I have to see a direct connection here before I support changing anything from what we currently have.

hockeya1a · Post by **hockeya1a** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 6:00 pm

I guess I have a hard time seeing any Private school like Breck or any other for that matter call in Players to fill a specific roll on a team, and then pay for it with an anonymous donation.
This is so close to being paid to play that it is ridiculous.

I have much more respect for a coach that can make something out of nothing than I do for these that have talent coming in hand over fist and calling themselves a great program.

xk1 · Post by **xk1** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 6:07 pm

That has nothing to do with transferring. Here is the policy on recruiting from the MSHSL. If what you said happened it is already covered in #2 below.

1. Any verbal or written contact initiated by a representative of another school soliciting the transfer of a high school student or junior high school student to participate in a sport will be considered as asserting undue influence, for which the school may be publicly censured, removed from tournament competition, or suspended from the League. If the contact is initiated by an individual who is not a representative of a school, that individual’s name shall be recorded and a warning issued. If a further violation is reported relative to this individual, they will be considered to be a representative of the school, and the school may be subject to a suspension from League-sponsored activities.
2. Unless reliable evidence to the contrary is presented, the Board of Directors shall accept as prima facie evidence of undue influence: awarding of tuition, allowance for board and/or room, allowance for transportation, priority in assignments of jobs, cash or gifts in any form, or any other privilege or consideration accorded if not similarly available to students not participating in athletics.
3. An alleged violation will require a letter of inquiry from the League office. On the basis of the response to the member school from the letter of inquiry, the Board of Directors may choose to appoint a committee to conduct a full investigation. It shall be an obligation of any member school to cooperate with this investigating committee which shall include a full disclosure of all records, scholarships, and information pertinent to the investigation.

gopher9 · Post by **gopher9** » Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:12 pm

I think the private schools have the biggest issue with OE! As long as the state allows private schools to play in the same confrence, section and state tournament I think there should be OE. If not put them in a section all by themselves!!!!

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Solving the Transfer Policy Issue

Solving the Transfer Policy Issue

OE /Transfer