AURORA — Lock the back door, latch the windows and be certain the chimney flue is sealed.
The no-transfer mob, previously believed to be detained at the main entrance to our state’s schools of choice, is on the loose again and due to make an appearance today, when the Colorado High School Activities Association board of control meets for the first of two annual rulings meetings.
As usual, the gathering will contain the important (football realignment) as well as the why-is-this- important? (tournament gate procedures for band and cheerleaders are to be qualified), but will also fire additional shots at limiting movement by student-athletes.
If school officials can’t handcuff one way, why not another? With all of this wheel-spinning, bet you didn’t know NASCAR had come to Colorado, did you?
Call them somewhat creative proposals. One would make a transfer ineligible for varsity for a year if his or her club coach heads the sport at the new school. The other, which forces me to believe administrators have turned into the Amazing Kreskin, would force a one-year sit-out if the move is motivated by athletics.
Needless and, well, arrogant, respectively, these are attempts at a 1-2 combination and, if thrown, may result in additional KOs in court for the state organization, which must be punch-drunk from its numerous legal beat- downs.
Let me guess: The attack on club coaches and players is at least partly directed at prep girls basketball, which may have implemented more team-changing than in the free-agency periods of baseball’s major leagues. Since its inception in 1975, no other sport has approached its long list of transfers, targets visible from space.
However, I question if this is a fight schools really should get into, a free-for-all that easily could get out of hand and turn nasty with no winners.
For one thing, a scuffle with club sports and forcing choice isn’t necessary. High schools hold significant leads in appeal, availability, participation and following. For another, putting restrictions on coaches, a fair amount of whom double in club, eventually will take away from an already limited pool available for high schools.
Save for certain sports such as gymnastics, in which there has been open encouragement to avoid prep competition and stick to club as if we’re in Europe as opposed to Colorado — while in search of the all-important college scholarship — the current balance requires no additional stacking or lines drawn . . . at least, not yet. Why interrupt the crossover?
As for determining if a transfer is motivated by athletics, either Steve McGarrett from “Hawaii Five-0” is now a state employee or our officials are blinded by a look-at-what- we’re-doing approach. I thought it was odd that top-flight football recruit Chris Martin, who also is a considerable student, was among those “investigated” after transferring from out of state to Grandview in Aurora. I guess I know why.
Here’s how to get around that one.
Q: Are you transferring for athletics?
A: No.
Issue solved.
The rationale behind the proposal is weak. Officials admit to attaining virtually zero proof, but want it out there anyway.
Clearly, all we have are more questions. Are high schoolers under the same scrutiny for academics, debate, music and student council? Would sports scrubs who transfer attract as much attention as stars?
Should we give every kid a transfer to play with during their careers? And how many would actually use them? Sitting out half a season without a bona fide move hasn’t stopped transfers, has it?
Does this remain an issue simply because officials and coaches don’t want to lose any talent? Or is it truly contrary to educational backing?
And why, oh, why are we insisting what student-athletes can’t do when we should be promoting what they can do?
Neil H. Devlin: 303-954-1714 or ndevlin@denverpost.com
