"Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

SK80
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 8:14 am

"Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby SK80 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:22 am

This was just released from yours truly, one of the leading "mouths" on the subject. Either way its a huge statement and the CIF will have to address. What I want to know whom is the other 29.5% --:-- I will assume the private schools make up most or maybe some of this percent... :eh?:

Transfer debate picks up steam: 71.5% of Southern Section schools agree rules need to be adjusted
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-high-school-sports-updates-transfer-debate-picks-up-steam-71-5-of-1536596194-htmlstory.html

"A survey sent to 570 Southern Section schools asking whether transfer rules need to be adjusted saw 71.5% of the 544 schools that responded answering yes.

That’s a powerful message Southern Section commissioner Rob Wigod can take to Sacramento this week when the state CIF’s 10 section commissioners gather for an annual meeting."

OK, let the :slapfight: commence!



SK80
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 8:14 am

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby SK80 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:24 am

Here is a LINK to the CIF survey report https://cifss.org/news/survey-said/

Bick
Posts: 4481
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby Bick » Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:40 am

Better answer here is to move schools into a different playoff bracket that exceed a given # of transfers. After 5, you play in the "Open" Division. Freedom of movement for kids, freedom of choice for schools, no need for policing by CIF.

User avatar
watchersince68
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:56 am

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby watchersince68 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:45 am

NO senior transfers no matter what the circumstances, if a family moves tough luck. If everyone knows the consequences there would be very few affected.

SK80
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 8:14 am

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby SK80 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:48 am

@Bick, I liked the idea but some others made some good points against it such as Orange did last year... are the guys at that division level with that divisional level of transfer really good enough to be in the "OPEN" division. I guess you could take the angle that if you do TOUGH F(N) LUCK!

User avatar
watchersince68
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:56 am

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby watchersince68 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:09 am

In reading those "suggestions" just who is going to police the move or hardship waiver? If you have someone making arbitrary decisions you will end up with another "liked" Bob Johnson getting the transfers approved and a Trinity school getting disapproved. We have been there and done that.

Bick
Posts: 4481
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby Bick » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:18 am

watchersince68 wrote:Source of the post NO senior transfers no matter what the circumstances, if a family moves tough luck. If everyone knows the consequences there would be very few affected.


Families really do move into / out of the area for jobs. Would be wrong to penalize the kid. We had a kid move from New Hampshire. You'd tell him sorry...no sports for you?

Bick
Posts: 4481
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby Bick » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:21 am

SK80 wrote:Source of the post @Bick, I liked the idea but some others made some good points against it such as Orange did last year... are the guys at that division level with that divisional level of transfer really good enough to be in the "OPEN" division. I guess you could take the angle that if you do TOUGH F(N) LUCK!


Yes. The admin / coaching staff would know that the 5th xfer puts them into the Open division. They would have the choice to say "no vacancy" this year.

Should a D5 team be able to load it up with xfers, and dominate their division when others don't?

User avatar
watchersince68
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:56 am

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby watchersince68 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:31 am

Bick
Yeah I would but I am heartless, I hear stories daily in my business. I have dead people rise from the grave and out of state people show up in ten minutes. Not to mention just how many people are in the hospital and can't show. Geez the hospitals must be overcrowded. So the very few who don't get to play, I am sorry. Way too many people and way too many schools will abuse the rules, period.

User avatar
thefrog
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 1:30 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby thefrog » Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:41 am

Bick wrote:Families really do move into / out of the area for jobs. Would be wrong to penalize the kid. We had a kid move from New Hampshire. You'd tell him sorry...no sports for you?


Special circumstances to counter this. Moved out of necessity? Parents should have to submit documentation that shows why the move was necessary (i.e., new job).

Bottom line is that the CIF is incredibly selective in their enforcement of transfer rules. I have no doubt that this sudden wave of forfeits are to curb the public's view of CIF enforcement.

Coming from someone with intimate knowledge, put the slightest amount of pressure on their counsel and they backoff.

Bick
Posts: 4481
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby Bick » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:31 am

I think anytime you require a subjective decision, you open yourself up to influence by those best able to apply it. Need to have some flexibility though. A xfer cap handles this.

User avatar
thefrog
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 1:30 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby thefrog » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:37 am

I agree.

User avatar
FilthyPelican
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 12:13 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby FilthyPelican » Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:41 am

I don't know what the best fix would be, however, there does need to be change. I also think there should be change with the proliferation of so many "Double Hold Backs". That is just as big a problem as the transfers yet easier to prove.
"The Wolf is never concerned about the opinions of the Sheep"

Bick
Posts: 4481
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:06 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby Bick » Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:58 pm

Good thing is that it's being brought up for discussion by CIF. The member schools make the rules for CIF to enforce, and will likely consider some alternative to the status quo.

User avatar
jb914
Posts: 324
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 10:57 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby jb914 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 2:53 pm

FilthyPelican wrote:I don't know what the best fix would be, however, there does need to be change. I also think there should be change with the proliferation of so many "Double Hold Backs". That is just as big a problem as the transfers yet easier to prove.


If the kid is still eligible base on birthdate, what difference does it make if he/she was held back? --:--

User avatar
jb914
Posts: 324
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 10:57 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby jb914 » Mon Sep 10, 2018 2:56 pm

Bick wrote:Better answer here is to move schools into a different playoff bracket that exceed a given # of transfers. After 5, you play in the "Open" Division. Freedom of movement for kids, freedom of choice for schools, no need for policing by CIF.


Bick, wouldn't this drive kids to Trinity schools? the "Open" division would just be the same schools dominating the current D1 bracket.

BigBosco
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 9:48 am

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby BigBosco » Mon Sep 10, 2018 3:09 pm

The reality is any substantive restriction to transfers will translate to lawsuits against schools and/or CIF. And this will result in loosening of the rule set. Even in the case where the CIF/Schools have a justified legal position. They won't want to bear the legal cost of defending themselves.

Isn't this the real reason why relaxed enforcement or loosening of the transfer rules occurred to begin with?

MDDad
Posts: 11373
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:24 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby MDDad » Mon Sep 10, 2018 3:20 pm

The three proposed solutions in Rob Wigod's letter do nothing to solve the problem. In all three cases, a temporary change of residence still provides immediate and full eligibility. The new rules would merely increase the number of families who move into a temporary apartment until their sons complete their final seasons at their new schools.

Bick, if every school with five transfers on its varsity roster were moved into an Open Division, the division would probably have two hundred schools. (This is probably the point when Professor Fate will chime in and tell us no, no, no. You can't just count the number of transfers, you have to count the number of stars and college offers each one has.)

Look, this is an era when the best players want to play with the other best players, in the best program, and against the best competition. If they all want to attend Bosco and Mater Dei to achieve that, they and their families will find ways to do so.

User avatar
Omar Bongo
Posts: 6416
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 11:59 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby Omar Bongo » Mon Sep 10, 2018 3:33 pm

FilthyPelican wrote:Source of the post I also think there should be change with the proliferation of so many "Double Hold Backs". That is just as big a problem as the transfers yet easier to prove.

Why is that a problem? What's wrong with the current age limit of 19 for seniors?
"Trump is what he is, a floundering, inarticulate jumble of gnawing insecurities and not-at-all compensating vanities, which is pathetic."
George Will

"How stupid is our country?"
Donald Trump

insidetrinity
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 11:36 pm

Re: "Transfers" SS Survey Says, "71.5% Want Rules Adjusted"

Postby insidetrinity » Mon Sep 10, 2018 4:24 pm

I think another state does this but one idea is to have transfers who do have to sit out the five games be allowed to play the first five but none after that. Right now missing the first five doesn’t really harm a team a ton. If a player transferred without moving they would basically be useless to their team.

Return to “High School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: crayegg, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], GrapeshotCrawler, ocfootball, Proximic [Bot] and 10 guests