![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
Hurry Up and Wait
May 16, 2017
I work so far in advance of events that I’m the subject of some ribbing by my colleagues on staff of the Michigan High School Athletic Association.
I prepare agendas for winter meetings during the previous summer – to help us plan. I draft minutes of those meetings before they occur – a device I’ve found helps to expose gaps in preparation for those meetings. I keep an ongoing file of possible questions for future surveys. I have bulging files that will help us address important topics when interfering urgent matters get out of the way.
So, it feels odd that I write to suggest athletic directors and officials assigners delay some planning for the 2018-19 school year.
You may have read in MHSAA communications or elsewhere that changes in policies of the NCAA Division I Women’s Basketball Tournament have made MSU’s Breslin Student Events Center unavailable to host the MHSAA girls Finals in 2018 and 2020-2022 and the boys Finals in 2019, that the MHSAA will conduct the 2018 girls Finals in Van Noord Arena at Calvin College, and that we will use the upcoming summer and fall to consider alternative venues, season calendars and tournament schedules for 2018-19 and beyond.
Decisions may be made that affect the season starting and/or ending dates of girls basketball, boys basketball or both, as well as other winter sports. Decisions could affect the end of the girls volleyball season as well.
Rather than consider this as a huge disruption, we are choosing to look at this as an opportunity to review how and when we do things, both regular season and MHSAA tournaments. Possibly there are some improvements that can be made.
On the other hand, we may find it inappropriate to upset sound scheduling and many valued traditions because of changes made in a college basketball tournament, and that we should use NCAA Division I facilities less or not at all, if necessary, to continue with our current schedules.
Nevertheless, the fact of these discussions and the potential for changes might cause leagues and local schools to delay in finalizing 2018-19 schedules and officials assignments.
![](/sites/default/files/imported/DirectorSig2H.jpg)
The Fourth Option
February 27, 2018
Throughout the years, schools of this and every other state have identified problems relating to school transfers. There is recruitment of athletes and undue influence. There is school shopping by families for athletic reasons. There is jumping by students from one school to another for athletic reasons because they couldn’t get along with a coach or saw a greater opportunity to play at another school or to win a championship there. There is the bumping of students off a team or out of a starting lineup by incoming transfers, which often outrages local residents. There is the concentration of talent on one team by athletic-motivated transfers. There is friction between schools as one becomes the traditional choice for students who specialize in a particular sport. There is imbalance in competition as a result. And there is always the concern that the athletic-motivated transfer simply puts athletics above academics, which is inappropriate in educational athletics.
All states have developed rules to address the problems related to school transfers. In some states, it is called a “transfer rule” and in other states a “residency rule,” because linking school attendance to residence is one of the most effective tools for controlling eligibility of transfers. None of the state high school association rules is identical, but all have the intention of helping to prevent recruiting, school shopping, student bumping, team friction, competitive imbalance and sports overemphasis. The goal of promoting fairness in athletic competition and the perspective that students must go to school first for an education and only secondarily to participate in interscholastic athletics is paramount.
The transfer/residency rule is a legally and historically tested but still imperfect tool to control athletic-motivated transfers and other abuses. It is a net which catches some students it should not, and misses some students that should not be eligible. This is why all state high school associations have procedures to review individual cases and grant exceptions; and why all state high school associations have procedures to investigate allegations and to penalize violations where they are confirmed.
Over the years, state high school associations have considered four options to handle transfers. The first two options are the easiest courses: either (1) let schools decide themselves about transfers, as Michigan once did, but this leads to inconsistent applications and few states now subscribe to such an approach; or (2) make no exceptions at all, rendering all transfer students ineligible for a period of time, but this becomes patently unfair for some students and no state high school association subscribes to that extreme, although it would be easy to administer.
The third option – the ideal approach, perhaps – would be to investigate the motivation of every transfer and allow quicker eligibility or subvarsity eligibility to those which are not motivated by athletics, but this is very time consuming if not impossible to administer. No state high school association has sufficient staff and money to consider every detail and devious motive of every transfer.
This is why a fourth option has been most popular with most state high school associations. This is a middle ground which stipulates a basic rule, some exceptions (we have 15 exceptions in Michigan), and procedures to consider and grant waivers – a primary role of the Michigan High School Athletic Association Executive Committee.