Newspaper article The Record (Bergen County, NJ)

State Cautious on Transfer Proposal

Newspaper article The Record (Bergen County, NJ)

State Cautious on Transfer Proposal

Article excerpt

ROBBINSVILLE - A proposal to increase the penalties for athletes who transfer into non-public or choice schools hit a huge roadblock Wednesday when the NJSIAA executive committee voted not to send it to a vote of the full membership in December.

But the proposal did succeed in bringing the transfer issue back on to the front burner for the NJSIAA.

The executive committee voted 17-12, with six abstentions, against sending the proposal to the full membership. The committee did vote to send a proposal sponsored by the Big North Conference to allow athletes who played high school sports as seventh or eighth graders in another state to retain their full eight semesters of eligibility with a bona fide change of address into New Jersey.

The transfer proposal called for increasing the penalty for athletes who transfer into a non-public or choice school without a change of address from the current 30 days to 45 days with no postseason eligibility. Athletes who transfer back into their public school district of residency would be eligible immediately for the season and the postseason.

Vernon athletic director Bill Edelman and Jefferson AD John DiColo, who brought the proposal to the NJSIAA, can still get the proposal on the December ballot if they get 20 principals to sign off on it.

But whether the proposal makes the ballot or not, the transfer issue again has gotten the attention of the association.

Assistant director Larry White said Wednesday he's considering "resurrecting" the association's public/non-public committee, which recommended in 2007 that transfers without a change of address sit for one full school year. That penalty was abandoned after one year, when the association's eligibility committee was flooded with appeals for hardship waivers.

"I think the good thing is that we're getting a lot of discussion [on the issue]," White said.

"We would have to talk that over," DiColo said when asked if he and Edelman would try to get the 20 signatures. "Especially after hearing Larry say that he would revive the public/non-public committee to discuss this."

Edelman said he and DiColo will discuss the issue, but indicated he's leaning toward trying to get the proposal on the December ballot. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.