The Arizona Interscholastic Association Executive Board has passed an emergency legislation that enacts a bylaw regarding future out-of-state transfers and their eligibility.
According to AIA Executive Director Jim Dean, the bylaw will no longer allow out-of-state transfers to become eligible in their respective sport in Arizona if the season has already begun. The bylaw goes into effect immediately, according to Dean. But it is not retroactive.
“As long as students were enrolled and in class (Thursday, Sept. 18), it does not apply to them,” Dean told Arizona Varsity shortly after the bylaw was approved. When asked if simply enrolling but not attending class Sept. 19 was enough to avoid eligibility issues, Dean said, “Then the bylaw would apply.”
The move by the AIA comes after four football players transferred to Mesa High after they were ruled ineligible by the CIF after an investigation into the Bishop Montgomery program revealed a pay-for-play violation.
Nineteen Bishop Montgomery players were suspended for two years by the CIF for accepting payments from a “money man” to transfer to the Torrance, Calif., high school.
The story made national news, especially in an age where NIL deals are growing increasingly close to fully taking over the high school sports landscape.
The Arizona connection came Sept. 12 when Arizona Varsity’s Adam Beadle reported a group of Bishop Montgomery players were inquiring about making the move to Arizona high schools to salvage their season.
On Sept. 15, it was revealed four players from Bishop Montgomery were enrolled at Mesa High School and started attending classes. Those players include:
- TE Caleb Tafua
- QB Kane Anetema
- ATH Kingston Anetema
- LB Kainalu Skipps
Dean said those players will not be affected by the new bylaw. They are expected to be eligible to play for Mesa by Oct. 3, once they complete the 10-day acclimatization process.
On Thursday, Sept. 18, Arizona Varsity learned of a fifth player that had enrolled at Mesa High School. It is not clear who the player is or if he had started attending classes.
Arizona Varsity also learned of at least six others that enrolled at other East Valley schools. The names of those schools are not being revealed until the information from sources can be confirmed. It’s also unclear whether they had attended classes before Friday to avoid being affected by the bylaw and having their eligibility removed.
Dean stressed the bylaw still has some exceptions. An out-of-state transfer who moves for military reasons will remain eligible. There are also hardship opportunities available, which would include a parent or guardian moving to the area for work-related purposes.
In an Arizona Republic article published Thursday, Sept. 18, by Richard Obert, Dean said another bylaw regarding the eligibility of transfers if they had violated rules in other states would be looked at in the spring.
Dean said Friday morning the board decided to move forward with amending bylaw 15.10.12, which removes eligibility if a player was removed for disciplinary reasons. The board voted to amend the bylaw Friday morning to now include players who were ruled ineligible in other states.
“They felt it’s very important we honor that,” Dean said. “I think there is more detail coming in the spring. But the board felt it was important to include that in the decision today.”
Initial Reaction
The news of the four players transferring to Mesa earlier in the week immediately sent shockwaves through the Arizona high school football community. Reactions were somewhat mixed among parents and casual fans.
Some welcomed the new additions to Mesa. Some questioned why Mesa was the destination in the first place – though the Polynesian community at the school may very well be the reason.
Then, the media began to react.
Kevin McCabe, a longtime high school reporter and “The Dean” of Arizona high school sports, criticized the AIA for allowing the transfers to happen in the first place.
In later posts, McCabe shared that he was told by the AIA there were no specific bylaws in place to block the transfers.
“I would think ‘running from disciplinary actions’ or having received payment from a booster would be enough,” McCabe said.
Not everyone agreed with McCabe’s sentiment. An online personality applauded the transfers, welcoming one of the family members and acknowledged how “special” the season could be. When challenged on the impact to players currently on the Mesa roster, parents were met with, “Competition breeds excellence.”
This is a take many can agree on to some degree. Football isn’t a cut sport at the high school level, allowing student-athletes to join in droves. But one thing that has been forgotten about in recent years is this: There are no rules in place that tell coaches they have to play every player.
Coaches want to win games. They almost have to. Their jobs depend on it. That doesn’t mean playing every player in a close game if there is talent elsewhere. It’s the brutal truth.
Outrage among coaches
Before the AIA’s ruling on Friday, several Arizona high school football coaches were asked to share their opinions about the AIA’s stance on the transfers. Many provided responses on the condition of anonymity.
The reaction was virtually the same across the board, with a few coaches sharing they have no opinion on the matter and at least one that said they welcome the competition.
Here is a look at what some coaches said via text.
Coach 1 (6A): “Everyone b******* about it is just upset they didn’t show up to their place.”
Coach 2 (6A): “I think it’s a damn shame that local kids are denied hardships for legitimate parental and custodial life issues and then the AIA allows a group from out of state come in and compete. All who will undoubtedly leave the day after their season is over. The AIA hides behind by-laws instead of doing what is right.”
Coach 3 (6A): “If families are willing to displace their whole family and do it that way, what do you say to that? Mesa being the beneficiary of all those players you would assume it’s because of a relationship between one family and another.”
Coach 4 (6A): “How can you get to play anywhere when you get busted for receiving payment from another school, regardless of where you’re at? Morally it just isn’t right.”
Coach 5 (6A): “I think it’s absolutely insane that the AIA will allow kids who were suspended for multiple years by the CIF to come here and have zero accountability. Sends the wrong message.”
Coach 6 (6A): “I think we treat out-of-state kids better than our own kids. We make it harder for a kid to do what’s completely acceptable with Arizona open enrollment. If out-of-state transfers can come in and not have any transfer rules, I think it’s fair to get rid of transfer rules for all AZ kids … According to the AIA rules the kids from California are transferring to avoid discipline, transferring after they started the season with another school and transferring for clear athletic reasons. If we are going to allow out-of-state kids to break multiple rules, we need to end the rules for all kids. Arizona kids need to be treated better.”
Coach 7 (5A): “It’s crazy but the AIA has to look at their own rules first.”
Coach 8 (5A): “If a kid transferring from out of state to AZ for football reasons and doesn’t have to sit, why would an in-state kid who transfers to another school have to sit? I simply don’t get the logic with that.”
Coach 9 (4A): “How do we treat people outside of (Arizona) better than people here? There are kids with real hardships having to sit because we have people who are out of touch with the reality kids face making decisions. The transfer rule needs to be revamped. I’ve never been more clear about it than right now. If the AIA cares about AZ kids, let kids get at least one free transfer like they let out-of-state kids have.”
Coach 10 (4A): “I don’t think it creates that big of a competitive advantage. I’d rather have kids bought in and grinding rather than mercenaries. When chips get down, in my experience, those transfer kids will make business decisions often times when you are going to depend on them most.”
Coach 11 (3A): “Obviously there are things with this situation that happened that will never be public. But the facts are the families got in trouble for accepting benefits to play. Regardless of the governing body, they should be ineligible. As much as I am pro kids playing right away after a transfer, I understand the agenda of the AIA to have some rules in place. But letting this happen with the knowledge of these families’ poor decisions makes it hard for me to get behind the AIA’s rules.”
Future Now Uncertain
It’s unclear how many players, if any, will be affected by the new bylaw.
Dean stressed that if they had already attended classes, they would be eligible. Players who enrolled Thursday but waited until Friday or next week to begin classes, would not and won’t be eligible for a full calendar year.
This is a developing story.
Leave a Reply