Was Paris Ford's transfer to Steel Valley legal?

... The PIAA's transfer rules are a joke 

Steel Valley High School captured the first state football championship in its history over the past weekend. It should be congratulated for accomplishing that goal.

However, the transfer of one player, who is ranked as a four-star college recruit and is headed to Pitt, looms over this accomplishment. In short, Paris Ford, who is going to Pitt in the fall to compete for Coach Pat Narduzzi's Panthers, played in three different high schools in his four years of high school. That included his freshman season at Central Catholic High School and his sophomore and junior seasons at Seton-LaSalle High School. Both of those are private schools.

Last January, Ford withdrew from Seton-LaSalle and enrolled at Steel Valley, a public school.

At the time, the Seton-Lasalle principal signed the transfer papers indicating that she did not believe that the transfer was made with athletic intent. That is the major step for any transfer since there must be a "principal-to-principal agreement" for it to fit within the rules of the Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association (PIAA).

According to PIAA rules, a player cannot make such a move if it is done for "athletic intent." Those words are at the heart of what is really now inequity.

The reality for any athletic competition is fundamental fairness. When we compete, we want to think that we have the same rights as the other competitor does.

The PIAA believes that transfers should be made for academic reasons, not for athletic reasons, according to their constitution. In a court case, an appeals court wrote "… the PIAA maintains that because the focus of educational institutions is academics, students that transfer schools for athletic reasons subordinate academics to athletics, and alter the dynamics of interscholastic athletics. As such, the PIAA has adopted an approach that is intended to strongly discourage and deter students from transferring for athletic purposes. PIAA Constitution and By-Laws, Art VI. This approach has led to the authority of Regional Panels and District Committees to change eligibility status within their respective jurisdictions to meet PIAA objectives."

If an athlete makes a move that is designed to help him or her athletically, then the move is illegal. That was not always the case with the PIAA rule.

My case in 1963-64

When I transferred from a private school to a public one in 1963, the rule was different. Unless a family moved into the public school district, the student-athlete had to sit out 90 school days before becoming eligible to play. That was tough, particularly if the move was not made with "athletic intent." For me, that meant that I missed all of the football season and most of the basketball season, and athletics had nothing to do with that transfer.

However, the rule was equitable in the sense that everyone had to follow it. No exceptions -- unless you took a case to Judge Joseph O'Kicki. He could always destroy equity. [He allowed a transfer of a basketball player from Richland to Johnstown that was clearly illegal under the law at the time.] 

Since that was the rule, I accepted it, even if I did not like it. Forty-five days would have been more equitable, one season. But, you had to accept it unless courts intervened to change matters.

21st Century

Today, the rules are different. In one case, an athlete from Central Dauphin High School transferred to Harrisburg High School during the 2016 football season and became eligible immediately even though it was clear that athletics were the major consideration with the move. That case is a little more complicated, and I discuss it below.

The WPIAL's battle with the PIAA over "athletic intent"

The eligibility issues that are set down by the PIAA are among the most difficult that the organization has to confront. It sets academic and age rules along with a rule for how long an athlete can compete after he or she first enters high school. The academic rules are basically left to the discretion of the local school districts, but the transfer rules are the most controversial.

The organization that has battled the PIAA the most over the past decade or so is the Western Pa. Interscholastic Athletic Association (WPIAL). It is arguably the best conference in the state and includes most Pittsburgh-area schools, District 7, excluding those in the city.

The PIAA rules allow local districts to enforce the eligibility rules. In our area, that is District 6 or District 5. These groups make the determination, but if the athlete or his family does not like the verdict, it can appeal to the PIAA.

WPIAL

Post-Gazette high school reporter Mike White wrote an excellent analysis of the transfer problem and the difficulties between the PIAA and the WPIAL in a blog post in 2012 [URL below].

"Time after time in recent years, the WPIAL has ruled a student-athlete ineligible, claiming a transfer was, at least partly, for athletic reasons. Such a transfer is against WPIAL and PIAA rules. But most times, the WPIAL's ruling is appealed and the PIAA cuts the legs out from the WPIAL, overturning the WPIAL ruling and making the student-athlete eligible.

"In the past four years, 38 student-athletes have appealed their cases to the PIAA after being ruled ineligible by the WPIAL for transferring for athletic intent. The PIAA has overturned the WPIAL 30 times, including six already this school year."

The WPIAL this year accepted Ford's transfer request as being made without athletic intent.

PIAA impotent

In short, the PIAA is now a toothless, inconsistent organization. Two factors have influenced this: The eastern part of the state seems to be wobbly on athletic intent, and the addition of Philadelphia schools has exacerbated the situation. Second, Executive Director Bob Lombardi appears to be wobblier on this than previous E.D. Brad Cashman was.

Lombardi has attempted to change the meaning of "athletic intent" while not changing the verbiage. His lawyer said, "From a legal perspective, the transfer rule is the toughest thing we have. Our goal is to make it as uniform as possible. The new standard, ‘materially motivated,' is a but/for test.”

That sounds like "it depends what the meaning of is, is."

Paris Ford case

The Paris Ford situation is a little complicated, but it shows how easy it is for a star athlete to move from school to another at his own whim.

When he announced his intent to leave Seton-LaSalle in January, the athletic director and football coach said this: “There was a change in their family situation, there might have been a little bit of a financial issue with our school and I think the grading scale at our school was of some concern about him being eligible in the future,” Damon Rosol said of the transfer rationale.

The Tribune-Review was more blunt, saying that Ford left "citing family issues and concerns about the school's grading system as it relates to NCAA eligibility."

That last part, the grading system and his NCAA eligibility, means that indeed, this was made for athletic intent, even if it was not to improve Steel Valley. He left Seton-LaSalle because he was worried that he would not be able to project high enough grades to be eligible to play at Pitt, or anywhere else, in his first season.

Ford statement to newspaper

Here is what is a little more disconcerting about Ford. An article on a website wrote this about his move: "Ford transferred from Seton LaSalle to Steel Valley to team with star running back DeWayne Murray. The dynamic duo should make the school one of the teams to beat in Class AA," pittsburghsportsnow.com wrote.

It quoted Ford as saying this, “I’m real excited because I’ve played with most of these guys in my 7th and 8th grade year. It will be fun to be playing with them again. We all have the same mindset of winning a state championship. We just have to build that bond and continuity.”

That sounds like the move was made for athletic intent.

However, one of his parents lives in the Steel Valley district, so that makes the transfer at least somewhat palatable under PIAA rules, which is likely why the WPIAL approved it.

Micah Parsons' transfer to Harrisburg

Another more complicated case illustrates just how impotent the PIAA is. Micah Parsons is a football player who has committed to playing at Penn State though just a junior in high school. He is rated as a five-star [highest rank] recruit by ESPN.

Parsons was a student at Central Dauphin High School during the season when some white students made a racist post on social media. Parsons, who is black, tweeted this, "Lmao this is the school I rep ... I gotta transfer."

He was hammered on Twitter and other social media for that comment, but if the story ended there, with his wanting to get out of a hostile racial environment, then the transfer would be more acceptable and could be justified. It does not.

Inciting a riot

Instead, Parsons went into the CD cafeteria and shouted something that school officials said was an attempt to start a riot, and the high school principal, who was there, escorted him out of the cafeteria and to his office. He then suspended him from school for three days for the action, causing him to miss the next football game, which was -- ironically -- against Harrisburg. [CD won that game, 13-11]

Parsons' father, Terrence, told the Harrisburg Patriot-News, "They gave him three days [suspension], and the punishment doesn't fit the crime," he said.

Police were standing by Parsons when he yelled and heard what was said.

So, Parsons' transfer to Harrisburg was made not for racial reasons, but so he could complete the football season with the Harrisburg squad, which conveniently finished the season as a state runner-up.

Mother "recently" moved to Harrisburg

Another fishy part of the Parsons story was what the father, who lived in the CD district, said about justifying his son's playing immediately. "Micah would be eligible to play for Harrisburg because he moved out of CD's district after he was suspended and moved in with his mother, who recently moved into Harrisburg's district," the father told the Patriot- News.

"Recently" moved into the district? How recently? After the CD racial incident? That is why the local PIAA district should have investigated, or why the PIAA itself should have become involved. It has made them look like Donald Trump's CIA.

Conclusion

Should the PIAA remove the words "athletic intent" from their rules? No, they should just enforce them equitably. This will not happen under Bob Lombardi, so they really need new leadership, someone perhaps from the outside who can come in and provide some new direction for the organization.

Right now, the PIAA is a joke, and the transfer rules are a major reason for that.

You could make a case that the Paris Ford transfer was legal since a parent resided in the district. The Micah Parsons move was blatantly athletic in intent, and the PIAA sat still because of the racial implications.

Mike White story WPIAL vs. PIAA

http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/high-school-basketball/2012/09/14/Varsity-Xtra-PIAA-foils-WPIAL-transfer-rulings/stories/201209140154