A vote that could eliminate “athletically motivated” transfer rule gaining steam

The Orange County Register’s Steve Fryer wrote that … “The CIF-Southern Section Council on Thursday passed a proposal that aims to eliminate the wording “athletically motivated” from rules regarding athletic eligibility of transfers. The “athletically motivated” wording was incorporated at the state level in recent years to different parts of the CIF Constitution and By-Laws, the “Blue Book,” including in CIF Rule 207 regarding transfer eligibility, and in Rule 510 regarding undue influence, pre-enrollment contact and athletically motivated transfers. The L.A. times’ Eric Sondheimer wrote if the changes are implemented … There’s a good chance for some major changes taking place in CIF transfer rules that would go into effect this fall. A proposal is expected to be considered by the State Federated Council in May.

Facebook Twitter Plusone Digg Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Email
  • Answer me this

    Fred or any other knowledgeable source of info, please correct me if I am wrong, but the removal of the “athletically motivated” wording, barring any additional changes, won’t really matter or open the flood gates, right?

    My point is, you will still only have two options to transfer and become eligible immediately (or as immediately as CIF will rule on your transfer, which by their rules and regulations is 20 or 25 business days after ALL paper work and information that has been requested has been submitted, without risking having to play JV for an entire season. Those two options being as follows:

    1. VALID change of address
    2. Hardship (with documentation and everything short of a colonoscopy being required, believe me!)

    UNLESS the vote and the end result or ruling is something along the lines of “the athletically motivated language will be removed AND one can transfer for any reason at any time whatsoever or due to a valid change of address and/or hardship etc…., then the rules will actually be pretty much the same, right?

    In other words, one can’t be in one attendance district and play for the school down the street as a sophomore or junior (being mindful that 8th graders and 9th graders before they start the 9th and 10th grade, respectively, can go anywhere they want whether there is a hardship, valid change of address or an athletically motivated change of schools or not )and then just pack their bags and decide, for whatever reason, that they are going to play their Junior or Senior season, without a hardship (going from public to private for example where one would expect to have to pay something more than what one would have to pay at a public school and therefore making the hardship argument incongruous) or a valid change of address, for the school across town, across the county or wherever under the CIF rule, right?

    Lets say that a junior or senior to be wants to go from Charter Oak to South Hills or Chino Hills to Ayala or anywhere High School to Bishop Amat, St. John Bosco, Taft or vice-a-versa, but doesnt have and/or cant prove a hardship or whose parents own a home that, of course, they cant sell due to the current conditions and move, despite the removal of the athletically motivated language, the kid in this example can NOT just say adios Madre to the initial school and pop in at the rival down the street or the big bad private school across town and be eligbible immediately, can they?

    I can think of a mass exodus at one school that would take place if the parents that own homes and whose kids are dissatisfied at their current school could just request a transfer without moving or proving any kind of hard ship etc If this was possible, I think it would simultaneously create mass chaos on the one hand and a HUGE amount of flexibility for people that would love to change where their kids play, but have no option because of home ownership.