Play-where-you-want bill debated


Return To Article
  • MeyMey
    Feb. 23, 2008 8:50 p.m.

    As a coach of a pretty successful program who does it with kids that only live in the boundaries, I take pride as does our school with the accomplishment. We are one of only two schools who has closed boundaries where you have to live to play. (enforced by our district) Sure I get a kid that moves in once in a while for, but it's like one kid out of my entire squad, and their family picked up and moved in. If it went open I don't think I would coach anymore. The coaches that do it for the kids and the love of the game would get out. What would be the fun in having supper teams you know that will win it every year. When we win championships doing it with our own kids it's the best because we did it through training and hard work.

  • anonymousIII
    Feb. 22, 2008 12:46 p.m.

    exactly,as where is the reward for good behavior if a known athlete is allowed to misbehave and is rewarded..for felonous behavior. I pulled my kid so quick as the administration condoned it , then tried to insult the intelligence of the rest of the community. The UHSAA should have been contacted immediatly ...but no the so called righteous let this and other actions slip by..all the while the students and athletes knew the score and time of day in each and every incidence. What a plastic world and message sent to both parents and participants.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 22, 2008 10:20 a.m.

    It use to be that if a kid transfered, they would have to sit out year. Now it's like you can transfer one day and be elgible the next.
    Their is a kid at Davis that played baseball at Viewmont High School and was dismissed from the team for being a problem. Next thing you know he and his dad move into the Davis bounderies and he is elgible. It is sad that a kid that causes those kind've problems on his or her team is rewarded with elgibility at a new school. The kid at Lone Peak is another example.

  • to donaldson too
    Feb. 22, 2008 9:55 a.m.

    The only difference is ...... I have a brain.

    You should let ME tell you about the problems of a principal that hates sports and could care less who coaches. A principal that sees sports as a bother and would prefer terrible teams because then less people will go to the game and it means less work for her/him.

    Kids can fund raise to ANYthing ANYwhere. How many of us always by tickets to a Scout Jamboree that we have ZERO intention of going to? Or overpay for Cookies because they're for the Girls Scouts?

    AS FAR AS "coach feels sorry for the transfer kid" .... either the coach is an idiot or your kid lost his position to someone out of area.

    Hmmm, which one would YOU guess?

  • to donaldson
    Feb. 21, 2008 10:15 p.m.

    you should let me list all the problems with kids transfering. you should also include the stuff i send in. Those kids that transfer cant do fund raising because there neighbors dont want to support a team across town. The local kid goes to everyone in his neighborhood to ask for support. Then his money and efforts are used to support the kid who runs from the challenges at his own school. The coach feels sorry for the transfer kid and gives him opportunitys before the local kid. The rule needs to be that the students stay at there local school. If the coaches are no good then the parents should go to the administration and register a complaint. There are a lot of good people out there willing to work with young people.

  • another coach
    Feb. 21, 2008 9:53 p.m.

    the coach's that are worried about kids leaving their program must be doing something wrong in that program. i don't think most kids would leave their area and the neighbors they have grown up with. i would love to see kids go where they want, for athletics or anything else for that matter. anytime someone wants to better themselves, they should be able to. this is america. i am a coach that most wouldn't want to play for but that is fine with me. being known as a good coach comes from playing the hand that is dealt, not going after a kid to come to my school. the bottom line with me is being able to look in the mirror at night. let's be honest here, recruiting and kids moving has been going on for awhile in utah anyway. letting kids go where they want would make schools and coach's get better and improve so kids wouldn't leave. anyone that wants to leave my program can go. teamwork and getting on the same page is more important than talent.

  • Gretzky
    Feb. 21, 2008 9:27 p.m.

    Unfortunately this is a HUGE problem as coaches recruit talented players and create the Skyline's of the past. the best solution is for our taxpayer dollars to STOP funding athletics altogether and model american athletics after the Europeans and have club teams rather than school district sponsored teams.

  • yes
    Feb. 21, 2008 8:59 p.m.

    Parents should be able to choose what school is best for their child without any "sports" consequence. This would require High School coaches to become more involved in their communities and to develop positive relationships with parents. Coaches would need to recruit the athletes in their boundry. Great coaches, like Quincy Lewis do this. The no transfer rule accually supports strong sports programs. At Lone Peak there were at least 5-7 boys basketball players cut from the team that could start at other high schools. If allowed to transfer these athletes would be competing against LP. (Like the player who left LP his senior year and played for PG two yrs ago.) If participation and an even playing field is the goal of the UHSAA, why not let them transfer and participate?

  • Unfair
    Feb. 21, 2008 7:54 p.m.

    The only thing unfair is school sthat are labelled "open enrollment." Either make them all open enrollment or make them all closed enrollment. If a parent wants their kid to go to a certain school they can move into those boudaries. If you look at schools with open enrollment they have on average an unfair advantage-- look at Skyline and Timpview for starters.

    If the school has problems with enrollment at these schools change the boundaries but make the process fair for participation.

  • Craig Hammer
    Feb. 21, 2008 7:01 p.m.

    I have served on the UHSAA Executive Committee for the past 10+ years and I've also been part of numerous hearings of which 95% have been denied. The UHSAA has a FOUR person staff! The Board of Trustees is made up of your elected school board members (one from each region) and the Executive Committee is made up of one principal from each region. The schools run the UHSAA. They do not have the staff or funds to investigate each complaint, we rely on principals to investigate and report abuses. It's sad that these comments are based on lack of information. Mr. Van Wagner has been counsel for the UHSAA for 25+ years and continues to do all he can to support the policies of the association. I doubt this bill has any chance of passing but it is amazing that some legislators think they can govern high school sports. I to would be happy to talk to anyone about the perceptions of the association. As Mr. Van Wagner offered, give your number to Amy Donaldson and I'll call. I support high school sports and will continue to do so.

  • Why can't the Utah
    Feb. 21, 2008 6:17 p.m.

    legislature butt out of things? This is not a problem for the legislature to be working on. How about healthcare, crime, gangs, mortgage and bankruptcy problems. Instead of focusing on things that matter they worry about a high school athlete not being able to play where he wants? Rediculous. The circus is always in town, and they leave nothing more important than droppings.

  • anonymous plays for
    Feb. 21, 2008 5:33 p.m.

    1A couldn't make it in the bigger pond ..we know, we know!

  • Even More Irate
    Feb. 21, 2008 5:33 p.m.

    This is a very enlightening forum. Clearly Stephenson and Buttars (together with their accomplices) are still upset over the voucher defeat that took money from their personal vaults. Their attack on public education is simply thinly veiled revenge - including their pending legislation to decrease UEA funding. Since when did retribution and mean spiritedness become the guiding principles of our legislators? Where are a few good people when so desperately needed?

  • Former State Senator
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:56 p.m.

    To Integrity: Your comments regarding Howard Stephenson simply scratch the surface of a rather large iceberg. The evil axis of Stephenson, Buttars, Gayle Ruzicka, Paul Mero and LaVar Christensen effectively controls the agenda of the legislature. I have never been treated with such outright intimidation and condescension as these people demonstrate. They are truly an example of unrighteous dominion and the citizens of Utah give them a free pass. It is discouraging to attempt to serve the public in this poisoned environment; and is the primary reason I voluntarily left after one term. You might also be interested to know that Senator Stephenson is a registered lobbyist for the Utah Taxpayers Association and is in the fortunate position to "give" himself free tickets to Jazz games. Nobody takes advantage of more freebies that Senator Stephenson, and I guarantee he feels like he is bulletproof.

  • LGU
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:59 p.m.

    When is the legislature going to wake up and grow up. You guys need to work on fixing your biased agenda. Anything that is good for you is good for the state, right? Not so! The fairest thing you people on the hill could do is realize that your job is not to rule over everything and cause change to benefit you or your special interest friends. And by the way, Who is dumb enough to listen to anything that Howard Stevenson says. He has worked for years to destroy public education and now he is working on high school activities. The best thing we could do for schools and school activities is get rid of every legislator and replace them with honest people who don't double-speak or work to line their own pockets or the pockets of their friends.

  • sportsdad
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:47 p.m.

    Obviously, we have a very emotional issue here. The problem with the current system is that it is not open enrollment for athletes. It should be play where you live or true open enrollment. As one poster said, all coaches are not operating above board. This is one reason why kids and parents should have more power as this legislator is suggesting.

  • Imbeciles
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:42 p.m.

    The legislator that votes for this is a fool. When are these goofballs going to be sent away? DON'T VOTE FOR ANY INCUMBENTS!!!

  • To "senate who" @ 1:13 pm
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:43 p.m.

    I think you missed the point of the Havili example. The article wasn't saying that Cottonwood has a Havili at every position. It was saying "what if they did?" Similar to what the guy from Florida was saying, what if there was one school in each region or district that was the "all star" team for that area - who would want to play them?
    Personally, while I don't think the UHSAA gets it right every time, I do think there has to be an oversight group like UHSAA, or we will end up with the high school coaches recruiting at the junior highs, and then the junior highs will start recruiting at the elementaries.
    I'd personally favor a "play where you live" option, so that if you wanted to play for "x" school, you have to move to that community. But even still, that could cause problems such as the issue with USC High (buying a house or promising free tuition for the kids who go there).

  • Yes!!
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:31 p.m.

    Now I get to take my son out of this dump! You stiff necked losers of coaches ...forget the rah-rah bs. so llllllllooooongggggggg! It's on to some real opportunities. can't wait to see the town in my rear view mirror!

  • Murray student
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:33 p.m.

    I had to choice to go to Murray or Alta because of sports. I decided Murray because I grew up there, and that is where ALL my friends were. In general most athletes grow up around one high school and learn to love it, and they don't want to leave no matter how bad their teams are. At least 5 of my team mates I have know since 3rd grade because we all grew up in Murray, and we had great success this year. Lots of people just have pride of where they come from. I mean come one, look at Murray football....

  • Dean of Ed.
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:27 p.m.

    No need for this to pass--it already exists. Look at Timpview football this year, they had 22 out of area transfers on their team.

  • Integrity
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:25 p.m.

    Interesting that Senator Stephenson conveniently forgot to disclose his financial interest in Draper's so called American Leadership Academy. One of the reasons he was such a voucher supporter.

  • Big Al
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:25 p.m.

    This bill would provide HS sports the same pattern as the NCAA. Pretty soon, HS booster clubs and high rolling parents would be offering all kinds of incentives to attract star athletes to transfer to a certain school. Parents, coaches, and administrators will stop at nothing to gain the advantage. If you open this door, don't be shocked by who comes strolling through.

    Feb. 21, 2008 4:18 p.m.

    Is the UHSAA perfect, No. But if you think they aren't effective you don't understand the process. If an athlete wants to transfer they must get their current principle or coach to sign a document allowing them to participate in athletics at their new school. If the current school does not sign they have to sit out one year before they can participate. A lot of times the school will sign off and let the kid participate. The athlete can appeal to the UHSAA if they don't get approval. I can tell you that the vast majority of appeals are denied. The ones that aren't, like the kid from LP who transfered to AF, are because the UHSAA realized base on current law that they would lose argument in court. The UHSAA has to try and enforce the rules within the law, fair or not fair. And no, I do not work for the UHSAA. By the way the UHSAA is run by a board consisting of school principals voted on by all participating schools.

  • t_stuke
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:12 p.m.

    Play where you live. Enough said.

  • Think again
    Feb. 21, 2008 4:00 p.m.

    Utah is already a very difficult place to be a High School coach. A high profile former pro athlete who grew up out of state but has raised his family here recently told me parents in Utah are the most difficult to deal with in the country. If you don't believe me try coaching or referring. This bill would make it unbearable. Imagine being a coach who put a lot of time and effort developing a kid for your program only to have him transfer for greener pastures. I've talked to a lot of good coaches that would get out of coaching if this bill passes. Coaches get paid a ridiculously low amount for the time and effort involved.

  • Mark Van Wagoner
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:53 p.m.

    Whoever has posted as To:UHSAA, I would be happy to respond to you. Please give your real name and telephone number to Amy and I will call you. Otherwise, I won't waste time responding to someone unwilling to stand behind unsupportable comments.

  • Disgusted
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:54 p.m.

    Of course the legislators want to end "horror stories" like the ones at ALA. Check into who operates these "public schools"! Once again it's our crooked legislature going with what their constituents want. NOT!!! If you want to play for another school that bad, and it's the difference in a scholarship or not, then MOVE INTO THAT SCHOOL'S BOUNDARIES!!! Wake up Senator Stephenson!! Come on Utah, please lets vote these clowns out next time.

  • Re: Why pass a bill?
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:45 p.m.

    Yes, we can learn from Wasatch, Highland, Olympus, West, Cottonwood, Skyline, etc. They all know about "special" transfers. Look at their football and basketball rosters. If you looked at the addresses of their athletes, it would read like a Salt Lake Valley phone book or zip code directory.

  • Sports = Art, Drama, Music
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:41 p.m.

    Kids should be able to transfer for athletics if they are allowed to do so for drama, art, music, and AP classes.

    Athletics is a talent like art, drama, music that allows students to grow and achieve academic success that they otherwise wouldn't be able to. It opens up doors for scholarships and acceptance to universities that would otherwise be closed.

    Might as well let athletes choose the best school that would give them the best opportunity of developing and being seen. And for those that state that where you go to school doesn't matter, yes, if you are Terrelle Pryor you will be seen wherever, but going to a top program does increase the likelihood of being noticed for a substantial number of kids that aren't prodigies.

  • Re: Anonymous
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:37 p.m.

    Do you think we don't know that? Transfers for athletic reasons are rampant. You are one of many who learned how to manipulate the system, your parents, coaches, administrators, the UHSAA . . . Congratulations! Hope this works for your in the real world!

  • Scoobie
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:31 p.m.

    Oh great! Now we've got a legislator who wants to put H.S. athletic sports up to the highest bidders and allow H.S. Coaches to go out and recruit for state Championships. Please tell me that this fruitcake is from California or Texas....he can't possibly be home grown.
    Mr. Madsen, you must certainly have a hard time occupying your time out there on the West Desert. Are you sure those are Eagles out there or are they Fu Birds? .....I'll just say this when this Fu bird idea of yours deficates all over you, be prepared to grin and wear it.

  • Why pass a bill?
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:31 p.m.

    Kids have been moving for sports for years!! You don't need to pass any bill just ask Wasatch wrestling hoow it's done.....it's that easy!!

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:24 p.m.

    haha i transfered for athletics and got away with it not even trying to hide it. Its not hard and i could name you 20+ other guys i know that have done it. Get a grip.

  • Shelby
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:15 p.m.

    This year's top college football recruit, Terrell Pryor, is coming out of a relatively small (though talented) high school program. And several NFL draft boards predict Leodis McKlevin from Troy State going in the top ten. It's not where you play, it's how you play. This bill, like so many others, is about parents feeling overly entitled to push their kids into what they perceive as their elitist due.

  • Sports
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:14 p.m.

    People who want to get rid of extra-curricular activities were not cool or popular in high school...

    Extra-curricular activities are what keep half the kids going to school...

  • Re: Very Stupid Idea
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:11 p.m.

    You are so right on!! Can I nomiate you for the UHSAA's board?

  • Hunter
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:04 p.m.

    I could not agree more with "Coach" - if this were to go through it would be the death of high school sports. Isn't the thing that makes sports so compelling the unknown - the possibility that anyone can beat anyone on any given day? That's when sports are interesting. If this bill went through that's out the window and we'd be left with blowouts every game. Now, wouldn't that be fun?

  • High School Spores
    Feb. 21, 2008 3:06 p.m.

    Look, the big schools always do well anyway. If a kid can't be loyal to his neighborhood school, then let him be a sellout. So Brighton or Alta or Skyline might win ten straight state titles. Big whoop. There are starving kids in Africa.

  • To: UHSAA
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:59 p.m.

    I laughed myself sick when I read this article. Mark Van Wagoner, who are you kidding? I really do hope you read these posts and you can respond. How many special transfers has the UHSAA denied in the last five years? How many "special" transfer sessions have been held? The UHSAA IS THE PROBLEM! I challenge anyone who is reading this post to go and look at the UHSAA's website. The rules are there in black and white. No student can transfer for athletic reasons and coaches cannot recruit. And yet, student athletes are allowed to transfer (with permission from the UHSAA) for "social" reasons, "academic" reasons, etc. Here's what we heard in our school. "This 6'10" basketball player is transferring for "academic" reasons (so he can take AP calculus - RIGHT!) or (now, this is a good one) this student athlete got a special UHSAA transfer because there is no one from her ethnic group that will ask her to the prom (RIGHT!!). I have wondered over the years if the UHSAA is dumb or just extremely frightened of litigation. I've come to the conclusion - the are BOTH!!!

  • 2 cents worth
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:50 p.m.

    Ok fine. Don't let a kid transfer for athletics, but don't let him transfer for band, or choir, or anything else either. It makes me mad when I see a student from another school in our school musical... but other students are denied that same opportunity.

  • Very Stupid Idea
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:49 p.m.

    You only need one rule. Go to school where you live. Case closed. Not just for sports, for everything. If you don't think you school is good enough, make it better. You live there, so something is good enough or you should move. But where ever you live when the first sport starts for the next year is the only school you can play at that year. Even if you move during the year you can not play at another school, or the school you moved away from. High School sports should be about the community, not just the sport. All of you who don't like this idea to bad, make you school better. And get over it.

  • bob
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:46 p.m.

    High school fan. I agree, we need to eleminate high school sports and spend the money on the classrooms. Students don't need extra curricular activities. If the kids want to play a sport they can play city leagues. What would we loose?

    Feb. 21, 2008 2:45 p.m.

    Cheating and recruiting already happen with rules in place. The rules keep the honest people honest.
    Many state house reps are board members and involved with charter schools. They profit from the school and want to build sports teams by recruiting. I have never seen so many cousins living with other cousins in my life. I think if a kid has attended a school before a new school is built that they should be able to choose which school they stay at.

    Feb. 21, 2008 2:42 p.m.

    Who are we kidding? Student athletes play where they want to NOW!!!! Look at the rosters of all the schools in Salt Lake City. After a student athlete and their parents decide where they want to play, they simply go before the UHSAA in a "special" transfer hearing, and their request is granted. The UHSAA does not have the courage or the attorney to enforce their own rules. The rules are there . . . no transfers for athletic reasons and no recruiting. Does the UHSAA enforce their own rules? NO!!! These sessions are behind closed doors, and they do not deny "special" transfers, even if the reasons for the transfer are totally transparent. It is wrong and will ruin Utah high school sports, but it happens now. The current, un-written rule is this PLAY WHEREVER YOU WANT and everyone who has been around high sports KNOWS IT!!

  • Double wow
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:41 p.m.

    I knew this was coming. If allowed to pass, this bill will be the death of high school athletics. Superpower schools winning the same championship every year is absolutely ridiculous. Consider colleges with no scholarship limitations or pro teams with no draft. The legislature seems to be focused on gaining total authority over all aspects of our lives even athletics. SAD sooo SAD.

  • Jake
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:39 p.m.

    Yes, students should be able to transfer to other schools, even for athletics reasons. Parents (and students) who pay taxes deserve to attend the school of their choice, so long as they can transport themselves to and from the school. Although in my opinion, I think students would be better served if we were to get rid of extra-curricular activities entirely and channel more of our resources into academic achievement and core education such as science, English, math, and literacy. Leave extra-curricular activities to the private market.

  • chatter schools
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:27 p.m.

    They should not even be allowed to have sports if you dont think it is a blind for all star teams you are crazy.let them play each other then i dont have a problem with it.and the same go's for privet schools

  • Recruiting
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:28 p.m.


    You would eventually have coaches going below high school to scout out middle school kids and influence them to come where the best opportunities await them. We would hold a state-wide letter-of-intent day each year where top middle school football/basketball players commit to the high school of their choice. Coaches could be promoted or fired based on their ability or inability to recruit the best of the 11-13 year old crowd. We could rank the annual recruiting class of each high school.

    What imbecile came up with this idea?

  • We need to wake up!
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:20 p.m.

    We need to wake up and start to think about our children. Why would we want to teach them that if they don't get to play as much as they want then just transfer somewhere else. Nice thing to teach them. In a few years when their boss doesn't like their work then just move on to another job instead of improve yourself and make yourself better. It is time that we teach our kids commitment and fair play. Someone needs to take control of High School athletics (not the legislature). UHSAA needs to step up and do its job. If they even inforced the current rules that would be a start. If a kid says they want to go to a certian High School and starts there as a freshman then fine but if they decide they want to transfer it should only be allowed if their family is moving to a new school boundry. Or maybe we could say athletic transfers are allowed but they must wait one year to play any athletics. Bottom line is that we need to teach our children to keep their commitments it will do wonders for them in more than just sports.

  • tooto many
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:12 p.m.

    first their are to many classacations cal only has 4 lets go back to 4 classafactions and have a true state champ.as for trancfers it semms to depend who you are and who big of school you go to the smaller schools seams to not matter at all big schools seams to be a big deal class up uhsaa and make a stand on this.you guys have created this monster

  • Bob
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:11 p.m.

    How about this? Let's drop high school athletics once and for all. If a kid wants to play sports, have him do it in intramurals (less involved) or club sports (parents pay). Use high school fields for hosting the club games in their area. Use the schools themselves for teaching Academics, Fine Arts, etc. High school athletics are broken and they need to be revamped.

  • Mongo
    Feb. 21, 2008 2:04 p.m.

    ANYTHING which the likes of Howard Stephenson, Paul Mero, Chris Buttars or the Eagle Forum supports is immediately suspect--They always have some kind of hidden agenda. Through this BABY out!

  • 2A fan
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:57 p.m.

    This is the stupidest idea that has ever been thought up!! Really!!! This would destroy High school sports

  • T-Rex
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:50 p.m.

    Play where you live. That should be the rule. If you want to transfer for academic reasons then I applaud you; but you should still have to play where you live.

  • Utah Dem
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:30 p.m.

    To High School Fan - so tell me, do you want our Legislators running high school sports?

  • navyvet
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:24 p.m.

    Remember UCLA without scholarship limitations? This bill would create a very few "superpowers" in each sport and kill the others.

  • HAHA
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:22 p.m.

    What a joke this is really REDICULOUS!!!

  • paul mouritsen
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:18 p.m.

    Interesting. I live in Brevard County, Florida. Years ago they went to open enrollment and one high school actively recruited the top football players. Within three years they had a USA Today top 25 team. Easy to do with a county wide all star team. The school embarked on an expensive travel program to play similar teams and left the other schools in the District behind. Other schools were penalized by losing their best players. It benefited a few (who got scholarships) but hurt the entire concept of what high school sports is about, namely a part of the overall high school experience. The District here changed the policy to the benefit of the entire District.

  • also a coach
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:15 p.m.

    90% of my peers want play where you live, play in your schools boundaries. end this non-sense of academic transfers when is it just paper work to justify an uphappy athlete.

  • senate who?
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:13 p.m.

    who is this guy that thinks c-wood has a stanley havili at every position? timpview smoked them and everyone else and they will the next 4 years. However, c-wood does have some big boys. who would want to play for jon doe who never played football-just teaches at the school? so what if a rich guy gets nice equipment for players-h.s. football is getting bigger and better every year-well at least 5A- 4A has C-wood and timpview

  • Wow
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:11 p.m.

    I'm a little surprised something so radical is even being talked about. I guess it's time for the UHSAA to wake up and realize that if they don't manage this transfer issue more successfully, then the powers that be will do something about it. There is no way I could be in favor for a midseason transfer, but the rest of this bill is at least interesting.

  • coach
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:10 p.m.

    This would make a bad problem much worse. It would destroy high school athletics. Any parity that exists now would be gone. You would have elite high school athletic programs where the same
    team(s) winning every single year. The good players would then transfer to those schools leaving the majority of high schools (90% of them) high and dry.

    Like it or not sports is a huge part of the high school experience. I have heard many parents trasfer to give their kids a better "educational" experience, which is a lie 90% of the time. This policy would destroy the sense of community and "team" because you would never know when your players were going to transfer. They could transfer for any reason. It would be like having an athlete leave early for the draft. What is wrong with a kid committing to a group of his friends to stay. If he does not like the coach, or the situation, deal with it and try to make things better yourself. In today's atmosphere rather than working through your problems, we are teaching kids to run away from their problems by allowing them to transfer.

  • Swarley
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:05 p.m.

    Kids should not be allowed to transfer for athletic reasons. Many coaches are already shady characters and I can't imagine them penetrating the different High School Systems to "recruit" star players to their school. Next you'll hear about booster scandals and gifts given to Freshmen to get them to transfer. If you are good enough to get a scholarship it doesn't matter where you play. You can score 35 points a game for a team that's not that good, or hit a bunch of homeruns and still get scholarships.

  • Current coach
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:03 p.m.

    Sounds like it is becoming a bigger circus out there, what a sad day.

  • High School Fan
    Feb. 21, 2008 1:03 p.m.

    So, tell me......
    What would we really lose if the UHSAA didn't exist?
    They're obstructionist and punitive. They add nothing to the process other than negativity.

    Let's try this for a few years without them.