New guidelines fuel controversy over student-athlete transfers
By Bill Paterson - Bee Staff Writer
Last Updated 6:56 am PST Friday, January 19, 2007
Story appeared in SPORTS section, Page C1
A new rule governing the transfer of student-athletes from one Sac-Joaquin Section school to another continues to receive mixed reviews, absorbing outside criticism even as the section commissioner defends the guideline.
Commissioner Pete Saco disagrees with people who call the section's 30-day transfer rule a "more liberal policy" that opens the door to free agency, or those who still consider it too harsh.
The Sac-Joaquin Section is part of the California Interscholastic Federation, an organization that lacks a uniform rule for those who transfer without changing residence, leaving the regulating to the state's 10 individual sections.
Transfer issues are many.
Robert Virgil Sr., whose son Robert Jr. transferred from Elk Grove High School to Capital Christian last fall, described as punitive the new Sac-Joaquin Section rule that requires students who move to another school without changing residences to sit out athletic competition for 30 days, regardless of the reason.
Donna Pane is a Sacramento lobbyist whose daughter plays tennis. She unsuccessfully pushed for passage of a state law to allow athletes one unlimited transfer in their high school careers. Pane says the CIF's varied transfer rules and enforcement policies "hurts kids."
But Dennis Foster, Natomas High School's athletic director and boys basketball coach, said he sees growing chaos caused by kids going from school to school that could eliminate fairness in high school sports if left unchecked.
"I get five to seven calls a month from parents shopping their kids," Foster said. "Those are calls I don't even return. Some parents are passing their kids around like a piece of meat."
Two sides have emerged, one with people touting parental rights, the other dominated by those concerned about schools' abilities to maintain fairness amid the comings and goings of talented transfer players.
Many state associations have stiffened regulations to control transfers. USA Today reported that in the last three years, nearly half of the nation's 51 high school athletic associations have modified or are modifying rules to close loopholes in their transfer rules.
In California, the absence of statewide enforcement complicates the issue. The fact that the rules differ is a key reason the CIF is considering implementing a statewide rule for the 2007-08 school year, although section commissioners would retain some power to deny transfers if they are for athletic reasons.
Impetus for change was last year's introduction of two bills in the state Legislature that would have allowed athletes to transfer one time for any reason other than recruiting. The bills, killed in committee, stemmed from parental complaints that CIF section policies were inconsistent and unfair.
One bill, SB 1411 by former state Sen. Deborah Ortiz, D-Sacramento, was spearheaded by Pane after Saco ruled that her daughter, Ashley Pane, had to sit out her junior season of tennis when she transferred from St. Francis to Christian Brothers in 2005 because she failed to meet the section's hardship rule.
"It's almost gotten like the court system," Saco said. "In a lot of these cases, I have become a mediator. I probably approved more hardships than I should have last year, and I've probably gotten more and more flexible in following the rule, otherwise our office would come to a standstill."
The Sac-Joaquin Section's 30-day rule was designed to eliminate most of the perceived inequities in the interpretation of the CIF's hardship rule. Under the old rule, those who failed to win a hardship waiver had to sit out an entire year.
"Now, nobody is having their hand cut off," Saco said.
Concerns that it would lead to a dramatic increase in transfers appear unfounded.
"We thought that (the new rule) might open the floodgates," said Mark Nill, Laguna Creek athletic director and football coach. "At our school, there has been less movement in and out this year."
Mesa Verde athletic director Ron Barney said he believes the rule discourages transfers.
"It may not have stopped (school-shopping) completely, but I think it's slowed things down," he said.
Barney said he had only one player transfer from Mesa Verde to another school under the rule.
"I think it's more fair to the athlete," Barney said. "In the past, if you had a good athlete who was unhappy with the team or the coach, they would do what they needed to make the move look legal. I think it's eliminating some of the dishonesty."
Although concerned about the proliferation of transfers, Natomas' Foster said the new rule is good because it moves largely beyond the confusion of what constitutes a legitimate hardship.
"It's tough to have to guess about some kid's life, especially when 50 percent may be lying and 50 percent are telling the truth about why they need to go to another school," Foster said.
Foster, like many of his colleagues, said he wants to see athletes stay at their neighborhood schools.
"I've got five seniors I've been able to hold on to for four years, and that's hard to do in today's climate," Foster said.
"Sometimes you discipline a kid, and they are ready to transfer. You make him sit, and he is ready to transfer. Parents moving their kids for athletic reasons really are destroying them because education is not linear from one district to another."
But education was one of the reasons Virgil Sr. decided to have his son leave Division I Elk Grove, where he was expected to contribute to the Thundering Herd's standout football team, to attend Division VI Capital Christian, which hasn't been to the playoffs in years.
Under the 30-day rule, Virgil Jr. missed the first five games of the football season and also sat the first month of basketball season, two sports he played on the junior varsity level last year at Elk Grove.
"I understand the reason they have the rule," Virgil Sr. said. "You want to keep schools from building powerhouses. You don't want athletes to be able to go wherever they want to play. But I think this rule punishes kids."
Virgil Sr. said Capital Christian, which his son had attended through sixth grade, was a better fit after his first two years of high school at Elk Grove.
"There was peer pressure and outside influences in which we felt we were kind of losing Robert as a person," Virgil Sr. said.
Virgil Sr. said they originally left Capital Christian because Elk Grove offered a higher-profile athletic opportunity and more of a "real-world" atmosphere.
But he said that even if the section still followed the old transfer rules, under which his son likely would have had to sit out his entire junior year of athletics, they would still have moved.
He said the section and CIF should allow a one-time free move, something that Capital Christian athletic director Scott Sorgea supports.
Sorgea points to the Northern Section and the Central Coast Section in the Bay Area that allow high school athletes to move one time, with some restrictions.
"When (Capital Christian) was in the Northern Section, we never had issues this section has," Sorgea said. "To me, the one-time transfer rule is so much cleaner."
Pane agrees wholeheartedly, which is why she remains dismayed that the bill she touted was defeated while facing a wave of opposition from coaches, athletes and school officials at the hearing last spring.
"Our final bill made perfect sense," Pane said. "You allow a student to transfer one time if both principals sign off on it."
She said the bill included provisions prohibiting an athlete from transferring to another school to play the same sport during the season and requiring one-year suspensions for coaches or athletic directors caught recruiting.
"We feel kids don't transfer willy-nilly," Pane said. "If you weren't recruited, you should be able to go and play. It's high school sports, not the pros. It seems ridiculous to send up all these roadblocks."
Foster disagrees.
"Allowing one-time (unregulated) transfer would be disastrous," he said. "You really will be having people jumping up and leaving schools."
School officials point to the Los Angeles City Section, which abandoned its one-time move policy in 2003 because of skyrocketing transfers.
But Saco said he sees potential problems if the statewide standard under consideration by the CIF State Federated Council is implemented. He said the latest proposal would allow a one-time unrestricted transfer but only during or just after an athlete's freshman season.
For others, there would be defined guidelines for determining a valid change of address and ground rules for hardship waivers, otherwise the athlete would have to sit out a year of competition.
The 30-day rule would no longer apply.
"I think if we go back and be real hard-nosed, it's going to be a nightmare for parents and students and a huge headache for the CIF," Saco said.
Transfer rules at a glance
The Sac-Joaquin Section's 30-day rule governs school-to-school student transfers outside of those granted for hardship.
HARDSHIP
According to the current CIF bylaw, it is "an unforeseeable, unavoidable, and uncorrectable act, condition, or event, which causes the imposition of a severe and non-athletic burden upon the student or his/her family." The Sac-Joaquin Section is granting hardships only for divorce or foster-care issues.
30-DAY RULE
Approved by the Sac-Joaquin Section Board of Managers in April:
Students who transfer and want to play a varsity sport without having changed residences must sit out the first 30 days of the season of any varsity sport in which they participated in the previous 12 months at their previous schools. Players can practice with their teams, but become eligible to play in games after the 30-day period.
Transfer totals
The number of hardship transfer requests received by the Sac-Joaquin Section under the section's new 30-day transfer rule are similar to last year's figures, but the new rule has eliminated time-consuming and contentious appeals.
2006-07 fall and winter Transfer requests: 510 Hardship requests: 380 (includes 130 JV restricted eligibility requests. Transfer athletes are immediately eligible to play JV sports, but must sit 30 days if they move to varsity) Hardships granted: 55 Appeals: None
2005-06 fall and winter Transfer requests: 470 Hardship requests: 356 Hardships granted: 11 Appeals: 26
Original Post