Analysis: What the WIAA’s new transfer rule means for WA’s student-athletes

When the WIAA announced a major change to its statewide transfer rules for student-athletes last month, reaction was a bit mixed with more questions than answers.

Under the new rule, student-athletes may now transfer schools once in their four-year high-school athletic career during specified transfer windows — in the summer between each school year — but those who transfer in those times will be required to sit out 40% of the following season.

Before the new amendment, student-athletes could only transfer to a new school if their family fully moved into the district, or they could prove the need for a hardship exception.

The amendment was crafted by the 22-person transfer committee over 15 months of meetings and then passed by the WIAA’s Representative Assembly in April. It’s meant to give students and their families a bit more flexibility in their school choice, said Harlan Kredit, a WIAA Executive Board member and Lynden Christian’s athletic director, while also saving the WIAA money on legal costs.

“The fees get to be pretty expensive,” Kredit said. “… If you went to a court, which happened a number of times, you win the case — that’s fine. But you still have to pay for the attorney’s fees. So in one sense, you lose.”

While not exclusive to eligibility disputes, the WIAA spent a combined total of $390,713 on legal expenses over the past two years, with $204,592 of that coming in the 2024 fiscal year, according to WIAA director of communications Sean Bessette.

Another stated rationale for the amendment is to “limit the frequency of transfers, promoting stability in student participation” by allowing “one transfer without a family relocation, with a specified period of ineligibility, within a defined time frame,” as laid out in the amendment summary.

Bellevue athletics and activities director Jeff Lowell is a member of the WIAA Executive Board and co-chaired the transfer committee with Kredit.

Every season, Lowell said, students present hardships in order to find a school that’s a better fit. But he has also seen students transfer three or more times, which he sees as not in their academic best interest.

But he still believes that students deserve the chance to make a change, and this amendment gives the option to do that once, without the penalty of having to sit out a full sports season.

“What we were really trying to do is to provide this flexibility in the transfer rule,” Lowell said. “And do it in a way that really allowed families to make a good choice for their kid and then find a school that’s a good fit so that they don’t have to move again.”

Not a transfer portal

The WIAA made one thing abundantly clear in its news release the day the amendment passed.

“This is not a transfer portal and does not resemble the NCAA’s current model,” the WIAA said in the release with “not a transfer portal” bolded for added emphasis.

The transfer rule obviously impacts student-athletes, but Bessette specified that it does not allow transferring solely for athletic purposes. If a student-athlete accesses the transfer window for athletic purposes, they would be ineligible from playing at the varsity level for one calendar year.

Any potential transfer has to be due to educational opportunities and interests.

“The one-calendar-year rule applies even if a family still has a bona fide full family unit move,” Bessette said. “If there is a bona fide full family unit move for a transfer that is not for athletic purposes, that student would not be subject to the 40% rule.”

Schools are responsible for establishing a player’s eligibility, Bessette said, and will determine through conversations and other resources whether a transfer is happening for athletic reasons. Athletic directors are trained to watch out for these situations, and member schools can pass along info to the WIAA if they believe another school has broken the rules.

According to numbers from the WIAA, there were 420 district eligibility appeals through March of this school year with 288 approved, along with 92 state appeals with 30 of those approved.

Those numbers are up slightly from the past two years, as there were 385 district appeals last year with 273 approved, and 63 state appeals with 26 approved.

In the 2022-23 school year, there were 422 district appeals with 288 approved, and 72 state appeals with 21 approved.

While some coaches and administrators voiced optimism about the idea, others have questions about unintended consequences and specific situations that could arise.

What’s next?

The potential pros and cons for every proposed WIAA amendment are listed in the summary before it goes to a Representative Assembly vote.

In the cons section of the transfer rule proposal, the WIAA noted the new amendment could lead to an increase in students trying to transfer for athletics, stating, “The proposed amendment could potentially lead to students seeking to transfer for athletic reasons, which may be influenced by family finances.”

Other potential cons listed by the WIAA included that the amendment could actually lead to an increase in the amount of transfers overall, as well as lead to an imbalance in competitive equity between leagues and classifications, or cause team chemistry and roster competition problems due to a reduction in roster spots for students already enrolled at a school.

The reason to list these cons, Lowell said, is simply because the WIAA and the committee don’t know yet what all the impacts of the new rule will be.

“We don’t know,” Lowell said. “So, it’s listed there because it needs to generate conversation about what could potentially end up happening, right? That’s why the cons are listed there like that.”

The 40% rule only applies for varsity competition, and the penalties are stiff – a varsity player would be required to sit out nearly half a season. That was a consideration for the transfer committee, Kredit said, in hopes of preventing “super teams,” where top players band together to try to capture a state title by all transferring to one school.

While they are mindful of the right for students and parents to get an education in a school of their choice, Kredit said, the committee also wanted to protect the integrity of schools that would be harmed without a rule in place, and talked to school administrators all over the country about what had and hadn’t worked with their policies.

“There’s got to be guidelines. Or you have the haves and the have-nots and the haves get bigger and the have-nots get smaller,” Kredit said. “And I think that’s true all around the country, and the state of Washington is in this very same position.”

Lowell reiterated that this amendment is not the end of the road. The committee is not disbanding, and has plans to gather information and thoughts from school districts before any changes are made when they meet again, in October 2026.

“This is definitely not a one-and-done, so to speak,” Lowell said. “This is the beginning of the work, and we’re kind of excited to be able to dig into this next part of it.”