I don't believe that.

 

My guess is that the vast majority of transfers of students, athletes or not, has to do parents moving, change in family structure, etc.

 

Let me restate my opinion.

 

Most students that are also athletes that transfer within a 20 mile radius transfer for athletic reasons.

 

In NKY, I'd bet its 75%.

 

I'm including non-varsity athletes as well.

His Dad is simply protecting his son at this point. His Dad is simply trying to do what he feels is best for his son and unless you know the entire story behind all of this I wouldn't blame or point the finger at his Dad.

 

The only person who is openly blaming someone is the elder Dunn who is taking shots at Coach Harp in the paper. I would assume that the elder Dunn knew that his son was coming to live with him and would thus be transfering. If were my son, I would have every possible eligibility scenario covered before putting him in this situation!

The vast majority of high school athletes that transfer do so for athletic reasons. The real question is how to prove it.

 

I would agree with you Mr. Clyde.. so we go to the KHSAA for judgement.

The only person who is openly blaming someone is the elder Dunn who is taking shots at Coach Harp in the paper. I would assume that the elder Dunn knew that his son was coming to live with him and would thus be transfering. If were my son, I would have every possible eligibility scenario covered before putting him in this situation!

 

I hear you. All I can say is that I have heard a lot about how all of this went down. Because I can't find out the truth 100% I can only go by what I know about all of the people involved. That being said all I choose to say publicly is that I completely agree with the stance his Father has chosen to take. I don't blame Wilber for anything that has taken place and I stand behind him and his son 100%. I really don't want to get into the rumors and innuendo in a public forum as my beliefs could be wrong since there is only so much I can validate.

If an athlete has not played varsity, he can transfer without sitting out. From what is posted above, it sounds like the other two athletes mentioned did not get varsity action. If that is true, it has nothing to do with a protest. This was covered earlier in the thread but it has been a while so I will post it again. A varsity athlete who transfers is automatically ineligible. To be eligible the athlete has to get a waiver from the KHSAA. Here is the link to the bylaw:

 

http://www.khsaa.org/handbook/bylaws/bylaw6.pdf

 

A protest has nothing to do with ineligibility. Dunn was ineligible the second he transferred. To get eligible, he needs to get a waiver from the KHSAA. To get the waiver, he has to fall under one of the exceptions listed and prove it to the KHSAA.

If an athlete has not played varsity, he can transfer without sitting out. From what is posted above, it sounds like the other two athletes mentioned did not get varsity action. If that is true, it has nothing to do with a protest. This was covered earlier in the thread but it has been a while so I will post it again. A varsity athlete who transfers is automatically ineligible. To be eligible the athlete has to get a waiver from the KHSAA. Here is the link to the bylaw:

 

http://www.khsaa.org/handbook/bylaws/bylaw6.pdf

 

A protest has nothing to do with ineligibility. Dunn was ineligible the second he transferred. To get eligible, he needs to get a waiver from the KHSAA. To get the waiver, he has to fall under one of the exceptions listed and prove it to the KHSAA.

 

 

Okay. Thanks. I appreciate it. It was unclear to me the role the protest played.

 

The other two did play varsity. Just not much at all. Playing time was a factor in their transfers. Spencer Perrin played one season with Boyle County and I think ended up being 12th region player of the year and is currently playing for Eastern Kentucky. Why he didn't get much playing time at Danville is mind boggling.

Wouldn't this move qualify as a change in family structure?:walk:

 

Quite possibly, however that is one fact. It all depends what other facts the KHSAA made their decision based upon. I don't want to sound like I am on the side of the KHSAA, I just don't know what went into deciding this case. What I do know is that it isn't as simple as saying he moved from mom to dad or it is identical to another case of a student moving from x to y.

 

I hope the kid gets to play.

Let me restate my opinion.

 

Most students that are also athletes that transfer within a 20 mile radius transfer for athletic reasons.

 

In NKY, I'd bet its 75%.

 

I'm including non-varsity athletes as well.

 

Maybe, but that would still seem high.

Maybe, but that would still seem high.

 

You may be right and Clyde may be right. It's pure speculation either way. I'll agree that there are many factors other than athletics that come into play, such as dissatisfaction with a school's academics in general; dissatisfaction with a particular offering of courses; a desire for a more challenging academic program; a desire for a less challenging academic program; a desire for a better "fit" (school too large, school too small); "social" issues; etc. Heck, within the "athletics" reason there are sub reasons: some noble (disapproval of the coach's cursing or "Bob Knight mentality for example), and some not so noble ( playing time, not enough "stardom" coming the kid's way). But who really knows what percentage of transfers are based on athletics.

 

Either way, unless there is actual evidence of athletic intent, a kid should be given the benefit of the doubt and allowed to play. If there is evidence of athletic intent a kid should not be allowed to play unless and until the rule is changed, which should be the subject of another thread.

You may be right and Clyde may be right. It's pure speculation either way. I'll agree that there are many factors other than athletics that come into play, such as dissatisfaction with a school's academics in general; dissatisfaction with a particular offering of courses; a desire for a more challenging academic program; a desire for a less challenging academic program; a desire for a better "fit" (school too large, school too small); "social" issues; etc. Heck, within the "athletics" reason there are sub reasons: some noble (disapproval of the coach's cursing or "Bob Knight mentality for example), and some not so noble ( playing time, not enough "stardom" coming the kid's way). But who really knows what percentage of transfers are based on athletics.

 

Either way, unless there is actual evidence of athletic intent, a kid should be given the benefit of the doubt and allowed to play. If there is evidence of athletic intent a kid should not be allowed to play unless and until the rule is changed, which should be the subject of another thread.

 

Well said. I think there is a little bit of everything in this case. Hopefully they can do a better job of proving it on the next appeal. I'd love to know all of the evdence that went in with this case. Are these cases open to the public? Can the newspaper file an open record request to gain access to the paperwork from the trial?

I think that the KHSAA should allow each kid one transfer to any school. Why shouldn't a kid be allowed to decide where they want to play sports/ attend school.

 

I say do open enrollment state wide.

I think that the KHSAA should allow each kid one transfer to any school. Why shouldn't a kid be allowed to decide where they want to play sports/ attend school.

 

I say do open enrollment state wide.

 

Agreed! The KHSAA wants to have control, but when push comes to shove they don't have the legal teeth they would like to.

I think that the KHSAA should allow each kid one transfer to any school. Why shouldn't a kid be allowed to decide where they want to play sports/ attend school.

 

I say do open enrollment state wide.

 

They can, just have to decide prior to their freshman year. Open enrollment would be a nightmare, and cause numerous problems.

They can, just have to decide prior to their freshman year. Open enrollment would be a nightmare, and cause numerous problems.

 

Like what? Right now too many high profile cases that are litigated. There are too many loopholes in the current system. As I have said many times before-either have tight rules and enforce them, or go to open enrollment.

The problem is the fact that adults recruiting, paying kids, and corruption would commercialize high school athletes. Parity would suffer, good will and decency between programs would detiriorate and the true spirit of High School sports would fall even further. I really think you have to look at the big picture on these types of issues, while it sounds great for one "little Johnny" to have his way, its better to promote a good environment for sports in the entire state and a revovling door and kids shopping around will not really teach them anything and sports ultimately is for education.