Logo

RESPECTING RULES

November 20, 2015

For nearly a full century, the high schools of Michigan have stood in opposition to national high school athletic championships. As they existed in the early years of school sports, and even today, such events have very often exploited students and benefited commercial sponsors most. Such events are beyond the limited resources of most local schools; and allowing one school to participate tends to require other schools to go to the same extremes to remain competitive, creating the kind of arms war in school sports that now drives college sports further and further from their academic mission.

A decade ago, Michigan school districts added the following language to permit participation in national scope tournaments by individuals and groups of young people who had no connection to or similarity with a school team on which they had participated during the school season. The full and complete rule states:

A national high school championship includes any athletic event, regardless of title, which attempts to draw to it or its qualifying rounds only the top place winner or winners from more than one state high school association championship meet or is based upon high school regular-season or postseason tournament performances. A student may participate without loss of eligibility if all of the following conditions are met:

a. The event is not called or promoted as a national high school championship;
b. Qualification is not based on performances in the high school season or MHSAA tournament results;
c. The event is open to all non-school teams or individuals who qualify directly through one or more non-school events, or the event is without qualifying standards and is open to any individual who pays the entry fee;
d. If a team event, teams are not to be made up of students from a single MHSAA member school;
e. Teams and individuals do not represent an MHSAA member school; and
f. No MHSAA member school uniforms, transportation, funds or coaches are involved.

It is important to note that included in the universe of unapproved events are those tournaments, regardless of what they are named or for which there are qualifying rounds,  which ATTEMPT to draw the best performers from the high school season. Whether or not this attempt is successful ... whether the event attracts the best performers or only the second-, third-, fourth- or worse performers ... the student-athletes of Michigan school districts may only participate if there is compliance with ALL SIX elements listed.

The intent of part "d" of the rule is to help assure that the participating teams from Michigan really and truly are NOT school teams, and to assure that no school team is masquerading as a non-school team but really extending the season beyond the limits agreed to by all school districts, thus undermining the fairness that other schools expect.

This 10-year old rule has been applied to every circumstance brought to the MHSAA's attention and to countless more where school districts knew and followed the rule without guidance from the MHSAA. It is such respect for rules that we honor and encourage, even as the organization facilitates a thorough vetting of rules prior to school districts joining the MHSAA by local board of education action each year.

Transfer Impasse

February 21, 2017

Transfers by students for athletic reasons is a chronic, nationwide, reputation-damaging nuisance for high school sports.

It’s not a new issue. The Michigan High School Athletic Association has been toughening transfer rules repeatedly for 35 years. Unfortunately, many schools do not use the tools that already exist to delay or deny athletic eligibility to students who transfer for athletic-motivated or related reasons.

It’s not unique to Michigan. Every state we contact – whether it has the same rules, tougher or weaker – cites transfer troubles. Unfortunately, some states which pushed their rules too far have lost them altogether because of pushback from lawyers and legislators and the growing school choice movement that advocates transfers any time to any place for any reason.

Statistically, total transfers are few, and student-athlete transfers are a very small percentage of those. But when the extremely few high-profile athletes in high-profile sports switch schools for sports, and those schools experience increased success, it grabs headlines, generates social media chatter and batters the brand of educational athletics, which is supposed to put school before sports and promote competitive equity between school teams.

Over the past decade, in response to concerns similar to ours, our counterpart organization in Ohio has seen its transfer rule come and go and return again. The current rule is tougher on those who have participated in school sports in 9th grade or beyond, as opposed to those students who have not; but the list of exceptions to the one year of ineligibility for past participants is now up to ten categories. The result is a rule in Ohio that differs little from our own in Michigan.

Our counterpart organization in Indiana averages about 4,200 students who transfer each year out of approximately 160,000 students who participate on interscholastic athletic teams each year. That’s just 2.6 percent. For the current school year, through Jan. 31, 2017 ...

  • 680 transfers never played school sports before and were eligible immediately;

  • 944 transfers made a bona fide change of residence and were eligible immediately;

  • 14 transfer students were ruled ineligible at any and all levels.

While the perception may be of an epidemic, the actual percentage of transferring student-athletes is a small fraction of a small fraction. Of course, that percentage may increase, and the perception get even worse, as the team-hopping, non-school sports mentality further infects school sports.

Still, reluctance remains among leadership here and in our counterpart organizations across the country toward adoption of tougher rules to govern such small percentages of students when there is at least as much clamor for more exceptions to existing rules, and significant reluctance to use the tools that current rules provide to clamp down on athletic-motivated and related transfers.