Quantcast
Jump to content

2021 Transfer Thread


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ray Icaza said:

Here is your BARGE POLE my friend.  Osceola has lost 4 transfers this past cycle, all very good players. One QB, two RB's and an excellent DE/LB, mostly to one neighboring school where they not only will start but lift that teams chances.  If you think they left us for better coaching you are in lala land.  Outside the defensive player, they were all going to play a lesser role than what they wanted on this years team.  The DE started as a sophomore on a state finalist but really wants to show out at LB.  We have excellent players there already and felt he could help our team more at DE like he did last year.  I am not here to criticize any of them, but they all left for their own personal benefit as opposed to what was best for our team.  We have a motto; we don't beg people to be a KOWBOY!!

I’m in lala land? That’s a good one. When I was talking about Venice getting one transfer, you and others on this board were up in arms, saying that transfers were damaging the future of the sport and that Browne shouldn’t have transferred because it took up the spot of a potential future starter. But now you refuse to condemn kids who are transferring outside of Osceola, because they saw that the grass was potentially greener elsewhere?  It seems to me like it’s the same argument. And I also will also concede and say that I don’t know what your stance is on school choice, but I personally deem it to be very important myself. I believe that kids are smarter than we give them credit for, and that they should have the choice to attend whatever school they so desire. I will not discuss this point any further, because I have beaten this dead horse into the ground a thousand times already. And frankly, no productive conversations or solutions have risen from it. You have your own opinion, and I have mine. 

If you want to put a cap on transfers, say, 5 or less, than how would we determine “zones” for the transferee? In other words, would transfers be able to come from within the district without placing a cap on their enrollment, or would all transfers outside of a certain school zone go against the cap hit? Also, how would we determine punishments for schools who were not honestly reporting their numbers to the FHSAA?  I’m curious to know where you stand in this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


10 minutes ago, VeniceIndiansFootball said:

I’m in lala land? That’s a good one. When I was talking about Venice getting one transfer, you and others on this board were up in arms, saying that transfers were damaging the future of the sport and that Browne shouldn’t have transferred because it took up the spot of a potential future starter. But now you refuse to condemn kids who are transferring outside of Osceola, because they saw that the grass was potentially greener elsewhere?  It seems to me like it’s the same argument. And I also will also concede and say that I don’t know what your stance is on school choice, but I personally deem it to be very important myself. I believe that kids are smarter than we give them credit for, and that they should have the choice to attend whatever school they so desire. I will not discuss this point any further, because I have beaten this dead horse into the ground a thousand times already. And frankly, no productive conversations or solutions have risen from it. You have your own opinion, and I have mine. 

If you want to put a cap on transfers, say, 5 or less, than how would we determine “zones” for the transferee? In other words, would transfers be able to come from within the district without placing a cap on their enrollment, or would all transfers outside of a certain school zone go against the cap hit? Also, how would we determine punishments for schools who were not honestly reporting their numbers to the FHSAA?  I’m curious to know where you stand in this.

You're in lala land when you believe it is all about the coaching; that was your point wasn't it.  It might be at times but I just gave you 4 examples that had nothing to do with the coaching.  I guess you want me to believe the Yankees have been contenders for decades in baseball, the Lakers in basketball and all because of coaching.   PLEASE!!  They acquire talent with cash period.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

You're in lala land when you believe it is all about the coaching; that was your point wasn't it.  It might be at times but I just gave you 4 examples that had nothing to do with the coaching.  I guess you want me to believe the Yankees have been contenders for decades in baseball, the Lakers in basketball and all because of coaching.   PLEASE!!  They acquire talent with cash period.  

You blew right past my question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

You're in lala land when you believe it is all about the coaching; that was your point wasn't it.  It might be at times but I just gave you 4 examples that had nothing to do with the coaching.  I guess you want me to believe the Yankees have been contenders for decades in baseball, the Lakers in basketball and all because of coaching.   PLEASE!!  They acquire talent with cash period.  

Pleas answer my question instead of reading the first 2 sentences! That was two paragraphs! Goodness gracious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many of these kids would transfer if it meant sitting out one year and required them to achieve and maintain certain academic standards during that period? My guess is that would solve most of the transfer problem and that transfers would be because a kid's family actually physically moved from their existing residence and relocated to the new school zone, or if the new school had an IB or similar program that didn't exist at their previous school. In the case of the aforementioned legal change of residence, the "sit out year" would be waived and the kid could participate immediately. I seriously doubt that most Floridians believe the open transfer rule was established so kids could play on a better football team. It most likely was intended to improve a student's academics, not their football standing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VeniceIndiansFootball said:

Pleas answer my question instead of reading the first 2 sentences! That was two paragraphs! Goodness gracious. 

On this thread, I have given my opinion on transfers a couple of times already.  It should go back to the way things were prior to  2012 where anyone moving into the district zoned for that HS can play right away. No cap, no questions asked just proof of residency.  All others have to wait a year of eligibility before getting to play.  These rules cannot apply to a private school as they operate under a different standard legally as most of the enrollment population are there for academics if a family can afford it.  Therefore, privates should play in their own league or division maybe 2 classifications as they would be on equal footing.  The rules changed in 2012 to allow publics to get transfers for any reason just like the privates thinking that would level the playing field.  The result has been only to benefit a handful of publics in mostly metro areas at the detriment of the other 90% of publics outside of 1A.  History of championships won over the last decade bear this fact out.   As far as the kids that left Osceola, I am not okay with them doing it but I do understand why they did it.  The LB I spoke of previously, I sat in the stands next to his parents at almost every home game and for that reason it is clear they didn't leave for better coaching or as you put it "the grass is greener on the other side".  We are a contender for an 8A title, they are not and will not be.  Understanding why a kid would transfer and agreeing with current policy are two different things.   My disagreement with you aren't Ad Hominen attacks just simply a difference of opinion.  I think we can agree on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HornetFan said:

How many of these kids would transfer if it meant sitting out one year and required them to achieve and maintain certain academic standards during that period? My guess is that would solve most of the transfer problem and that transfers would be because a kid's family actually physically moved from their existing residence and relocated to the new school zone, or if the new school had an IB or similar program that didn't exist at their previous school. In the case of the aforementioned legal change of residence, the "sit out year" would be waived and the kid could participate immediately. I seriously doubt that most Floridians believe the open transfer rule was established so kids could play on a better football team. It most likely was intended to improve a student's academics, not their football standing. 

I'm sure that this is exactly what the lawmakers planned when they implemented this legislation to allow transfers. Previously the lawmakers had been trying to get a voucher program that would allow any student to attend any school in Florida Public, Charter, Private, or Parochial and use the voucher as payment or partial payment. Not able to accomplish that they opted to allow transfers to any school in Florida so that students could get out of badly performing schools academically to better performing schools. I'm quite sure they never intended for it to expressly include transfers from schools with badly performing football teams to schools with good performing football teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Ray Icaza said:

On this thread, I have given my opinion on transfers a couple of times already.  It should go back to the way things were prior to  2012 where anyone moving into the district zoned for that HS can play right away. No cap, no questions asked just proof of residency.  All others have to wait a year of eligibility before getting to play.  These rules cannot apply to a private school as they operate under a different standard legally as most of the enrollment population are there for academics if a family can afford it.  Therefore, privates should play in their own league or division maybe 2 classifications as they would be on equal footing.  The rules changed in 2012 to allow publics to get transfers for any reason just like the privates thinking that would level the playing field.  The result has been only to benefit a handful of publics in mostly metro areas at the detriment of the other 90% of publics outside of 1A.  History of championships won over the last decade bear this fact out.   As far as the kids that left Osceola, I am not okay with them doing it but I do understand why they did it.  The LB I spoke of previously, I sat in the stands next to his parents at almost every home game and for that reason it is clear they didn't leave for better coaching or as you put it "the grass is greener on the other side".  We are a contender for an 8A title, they are not and will not be.  Understanding why a kid would transfer and agreeing with current policy are two different things.   My disagreement with you aren't Ad Hominen attacks just simply a difference of opinion.  I think we can agree on that.

I Second the Motion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Ray Icaza said:

Here is your BARGE POLE my friend.  Osceola has lost 4 transfers this past cycle, all very good players. One QB, two RB's and an excellent DE/LB, mostly to one neighboring school where they not only will start but lift that teams chances.  If you think they left us for better coaching you are in lala land.  Outside the defensive player, they were all going to play a lesser role than what they wanted on this years team.  The DE started as a sophomore on a state finalist but really wants to show out at LB.  We have excellent players there already and felt he could help our team more at DE like he did last year.  I am not here to criticize any of them, but they all left for their own personal benefit as opposed to what was best for our team.  We have a motto; we don't beg people to be a KOWBOY!!

We can be sure those players: 1) didn't give a shit about the program they left, 2) don't give a shit about the program they transferred to, 3) represent the norm more than the exception. It's just individuals making individual decisions without any regard for teammates, coaches or fans. In other words, it's the business world...that happens to be teenagers playing a game. It's hard to really understand why anyone would care much how they do either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, skyway said:

We can be sure those players: 1) didn't give a shit about the program they left, 2) don't give a shit about the program they transferred to, 3) represent the norm more than the exception. It's just individuals making individual decisions without any regard for teammates, coaches or fans. In other words, it's the business world...that happens to be teenagers playing a game. It's hard to really understand why anyone would care much how they do either way.

The positives are that maybe some of those players, parents, and coaches will read this forum and get some perspective on how their actions affect others and high school football in general. Although, I don't really expect much of it to sink in with people that already have their self interest tunnel vision path forward already mapped out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Proseteye said:

The positives are that maybe some of those players, parents, and coaches will read this forum and get some perspective on how their actions affect others and high school football in general. Although, I don't really expect much of it to sink in with people that already have their self interest tunnel vision path forward already mapped out. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Perspective said:

 

 

Apparently, someone was able to snap a picture of the S.S. Hallandale out in the Atlantic Ocean over the summer. 

 

rats-jumping-ship.jpg?w=520&h=348

 

 

 

They must have missed the hundreds of other ships heading in the same southern direction. Or, maybe they have already sunk.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Proseteye said:

The positives are that maybe some of those players, parents, and coaches will read this forum and get some perspective on how their actions affect others and high school football in general. Although, I don't really expect much of it to sink in with people that already have their self interest tunnel vision path forward already mapped out. 

The positives are that maybe some of those players, parents, and coaches will read this forum and get some perspective on how their actions affect others and high school football in general. 

Your assumption that these kids and their parents actually care about the kids and team they left behind and will get some perspective on how their actions affect their previous teammates will never happen. Most make their decision to transfer solely based upon benefitting themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, HornetFan said:

The positives are that maybe some of those players, parents, and coaches will read this forum and get some perspective on how their actions affect others and high school football in general. 

Your assumption that these kids and their parents actually care about the kids and team they left behind and will get some perspective on how their actions affect their previous teammates will never happen. Most make their decision to transfer solely based upon benefitting themselves.

Unfortunately, and sadly, you are probably right. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/7/2021 at 12:50 PM, Nulli Secundus said:

Diversionary tactic.  We won't appeal to your ears but you can watch instead, LOL!  If you don't play an instrument or at the very least twirl a baton, stay your ass off the field! :D  That's for you @Dan in Daytona

How I got thrown into this is beyond me. Must be a small hills of "Tally" thing. Damn low crawling reptiles( Peezy/Nulli ) stick together  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/7/2021 at 8:39 PM, HornetFan said:

How many of these kids would transfer if it meant sitting out one year and required them to achieve and maintain certain academic standards during that period? My guess is that would solve most of the transfer problem and that transfers would be because a kid's family actually physically moved from their existing residence and relocated to the new school zone, or if the new school had an IB or similar program that didn't exist at their previous school. In the case of the aforementioned legal change of residence, the "sit out year" would be waived and the kid could participate immediately. I seriously doubt that most Floridians believe the open transfer rule was established so kids could play on a better football team. It most likely was intended to improve a student's academics, not their football standing. 

This is exactly how it should be. Allow students to transfer but no extracurricular activities for a year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Jags904 said:

This is exactly how it should be. Allow students to transfer but no extracurricular activities for a year. 

It's not that simple that "one size fits all" because students whose families/legal guardians establish residence in the new school zone and actually live in that new residence cannot be restricted from participating in all activities available to current students. Also, a student transferring from a private school into their zoned high school or into a private high school, should not be restricted. Private high schools should play similar schools in their own classification. It works in other states and it would work in Florida. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even during the times when the FHAA limited transfers to specific circumstances only I don't believe that those rules were enforced by either the FHAA or the school administrations themselves. Evan back then the students would simply use a relative, a friend, or even invent a guardian in the district where the school, for which they wanted to play, was located. School administrations were very lax on checking the validity of the transfer, or did not want to get into the legal aspects of checking the validity, or looked the other way as the transfers enhanced their football team. The Coaches, parents, and players themselves were certainly not policing transfers for illegitimacy. I'm not sure what the solution to this problem is or even if there is a solution. If the Coaches, Parents, and Players don't care if students transfer at will, some players suffer because of it, and the team that they are cheering on every Friday is a team filled with mercenaries, then who am I to correct the situation. IMO it is truly very sad what has become of the high school culture that I used to be part of when I was growing up. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Proseteye said:

Even during the times when the FHAA limited transfers to specific circumstances only I don't believe that those rules were enforced by either the FHAA or the school administrations themselves. Evan back then the students would simply use a relative, a friend, or even invent a guardian in the district where the school, for which they wanted to play, was located. School administrations were very lax on checking the validity of the transfer, or did not want to get into the legal aspects of checking the validity, or looked the other way as the transfers enhanced their football team. The Coaches, parents, and players themselves were certainly not policing transfers for illegitimacy. I'm not sure what the solution to this problem is or even if there is a solution. If the Coaches, Parents, and Players don't care if students transfer at will, some players suffer because of it, and the team that they are cheering on every Friday is a team filled with mercenaries, then who am I to correct the situation. IMO it is truly very sad what has become of the high school culture that I used to be part of when I was growing up. :(

Which is exactly why I continued to argue the new rules are not a bad thing 

 

Because metros were able to load up transfers while rural schools were getting screwed by teams in big metros like Jacksonville building local teams that resemble a "Westside all star team" then a community school 

 

Now the entire state is on a level playing field for transfer access, the problem is larger metros still have more of a pool to pick from

 

 

.........

 

Well for one we can not put teams on a pedestal when they start picking up loads of transfers to build their program and pretend they built with home grown talent (Lee) 

 

Those teams should be seen for what they are, ones who bend the rules and are so desperate to win that they will recruit an entire area just to get enough talent to be a second round loser 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HornetFan said:

It's not that simple that "one size fits all" because students whose families/legal guardians establish residence in the new school zone and actually live in that new residence cannot be restricted from participating in all activities available to current students. Also, a student transferring from a private school into their zoned high school or into a private high school, should not be restricted. Private high schools should play similar schools in their own classification. It works in other states and it would work in Florida. 

Obviously if you pick up and have a legal move, then it’s a different situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jags904 said:

And any public to private move should be a year without extracurriculars. That’s an easy way to stop schools from getting 40+ transfers in 3 years. 

That's why I advocate a separate league for the privates.  Much harder to police that as most do transfer to privates for academics and if privates are operating under the same rules no one should really have an advantage in that league.  Publics on the other hand were starting to police and fine those schools that were openly taking numerous transfers every year.  That's why Lakeland got fined $60000 ($10K/per player) because surrounding coaches got fed up with the tactic in 2011.  Hence, the rule change in 2012.  Heavy penalties will keep honest folks honest.  No amount of punishment will fix those that are crooked but it wouldn't take long to figure out who they are.   End result will be that 90%+ will follow the rules.  Now all publics will be on equal footing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ray Icaza said:

That's why I advocate a separate league for the privates.  Much harder to police that as most do transfer to privates for academics and if privates are operating under the same rules no one should really have an advantage in that league.  Publics on the other hand were starting to police and fine those schools that were openly taking numerous transfers every year.  That's why Lakeland got fined $60000 ($10K/per player) because surrounding coaches got fed up with the tactic in 2011.  Hence, the rule change in 2012.  Heavy penalties will keep honest folks honest.  No amount of punishment will fix those that are crooked but it wouldn't take long to figure out who they are.   End result will be that 90%+ will follow the rules.  Now all publics will be on equal footing.

That is a complete myth and @Proseteye already stated the reason it is 

 

any metro public has a huge advantage over rural schools even before the rule change because they could use someone else's address and attend any school in a large city 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...