A ‘free’ one-time transfer rule? Major change looms for SC high school sports
A proposed rule could shake things up while also adding more structure to a hot topic in South Carolina high school sports.
A “free” one-time sports transfer option for high school athletes will be considered and voted on at the state’s annual athletic directors conference in Charleston in March. The proposed rules penalize transferring multiple times and, in other circumstances, add “short but predictable periods of ineligibility.”
Similar transfer legislation in recent years has failed to pass, but this time there’s some momentum in its favor. The changes to the current transfer rules were recommended unanimously by the S.C. High School League’s executive committee in early January.
Proponents say the new rules are easier to understand and follow. The proposal also eliminates the need for a legitimate change of address to the new school’s attendance zone. Opponents say the changes will only enhance the against-the-rules recruiting that exists at some schools.
If the measure is approved by athletic directors in March, it will go into effect for the 2025-26 school year.
“No one wants this wild, wild West. And no one wants the (state) Legislature to come and do something,” SCHSL executive committee president and White Knoll principal Nicolas Pearson told The State. “So we needed to get something out there.”
Explaining the proposed SC transfer rule
There’s been between 3,500 and 4,000 transfers per year over the last few years, according to the S.C. High School League. That figure represents athletes transferring away from a high school. The league has 223 member schools.
According to the proposed changes to the state’s transfer rules, “This rule is designed to discourage transfers for athletic reasons, multiple transfers, and transfers after a sports season has begun, by imposing short but predictable periods of ineligibility for those transfers while providing one penalty-free transfer under certain conditions.”
Some of the highlights of the new rule include:
▪ Students can have one penalty-free transfer during the first six semesters after their initial high school enrollment — essentially their freshman, sophomore or junior years — as long as the transfer happens on or before the start of practice date of the sports season in which the transfer occurs.
▪ Students who transfer after the start of practice are ineligible for 30 calendar days or half of the total number of games in that sport, whichever is less. For football, it would be five games, 13 for basketball and 13 for baseball.
▪ Students who transfer after the official start of a season will be ineligible for the postseason, in addition to having to sit out a period of time.
▪ If a student waits until their senior year for their first transfer, they are subject to 22 calendar days of ineligibility or a third of the total number of games, whichever is less. They also are ineligible for the postseason and will have to request a hardship for full eligibility.
The league could decide to have exceptions to any senior penalties in the first year the new rule goes into effect.
▪ If you transfer more than once, a student is automatically ineligible for 30 days or half of the total number of games, whichever is less, and could be deemed ineligible for the postseason.
▪ The one-time transfer rule won’t just be limited to high school. Middle-school students also can use that one-time transfer in the eighth grade, as long as it happens before the start of the practice date of the sports season. All other parts of the rule for high school will be in play for middle school.
▪ Exceptions to the rule will be McKinney-Vento placement (if a student is experiencing homelessness), DSS court-ordered placement, verified bullying and military transfers.
According to the language of the proposed changes, “Because the periods of ineligibility set forth in this rule are among the shortest in the nation, and the purpose of the rule is designed to deter inappropriate transfers, there shall be no waivers of this rule.”
“We will be the first to admit it is not perfect,” SCHSL executive committee member Harrison Goodwin said during the group’s January meeting. “It is a starting point and one of the things we need to show action in the way we are looking at transfers.”
If a student uses the one-time transfer and their family moves for a job or other reason, they can apply for a hardship waiver.
“The spirit of it is, if the family moves from Florence to Spartanburg and we recognize that as a hardship,” Goodwin said. “... The league staff assured us they can handle the volume. This mirrors a lot of language that is being thrown around in the Legislature. I think it is better than the language that is being thrown at in the Legislature.”
Too many exceptions to current transfer rule
This isn’t the first time a one-time transfer rule has been proposed. In 2023, Gray Collegiate principal Brian Newsome proposed a similar idea that didn’t have penalties for transferring after the start of practice or a season. It also didn’t include a postseason penalty for transferring for your senior season.
That proposal wasn’t recommended by the SCHSL executive committee and was voted down in the 2023 athletic directors’ spring meeting.
The state Legislature has talked about forming two transfer windows on the calendar — one from Aug. 1-5 and then another from Jan. 5-10 — in which students can transfer schools, but Pearson said the rule the SCHSL is considering is more flexible and better defined.
The SCHSL proposal also does away with the bonafide change of address rule that’s been a key component to determine eligibility when a student transfers. Under that, a student must prove that his or her family fully made a legitimate move to the new school’s attendance zone.
That lack of a bonafide family move has to led various appeals and sanctions over the last few years. In 2022, Ridge View’s football team was banned from the playoffs because a few players didn’t meet the SCHSL’s definition of a legitimate move despite their residency information being approved by the Richland 2 school district. This year, Gray Collegiate football was banned from the playoffs after a player’s family didn’t meet the full requirements for a bonafide residence change to the Gray attendance zone.
The proposed transfer rule changes are “more defined across the board. No surprises for coaches and schools,” Pearson said. “You don’t have to determine what is a bonafide change of address and what is a legal separation (of a married couple). It keeps building administrators out of people’s personal business.”
Under the current guidelines, a student who transfers is ineligible for 365 days, but there are 16 different exceptions in the rule that have been easily exploited. This new proposal makes things a lot clearer and has specific penalties, according to SCHSL commissioner Jerome Singleton.
“If you have a rule with all those exceptions, why not create a rule to encompass all those exceptions?” Singleton told The State. “They have created a committee with superintendents, athletic directors and coaches and they all played a role in creating this one. I thought they did a great job looking at it and what other states have done.”
There are at least 12 other states that use such a rule that Pearson said were studied while researching one for South Carolina.
The S.C. transfer proposal is similar to the one used in New Jersey. That rule was passed overwhelmingly in 2023 and, according to the New Jersey High School Association, “aims to discourage transfers for athletic reasons, multiple transfers, and transfers after a sports season has begun.”
Like in New Jersey, the S.C. rule aims to eliminate a student transferring for their senior year.
Do coaches, athletic directors support change?
Pearson said 20 school officials were surveyed statewide, with 19 in favor of the proposal, saying it is easier to understand and easier on compliance.
The State also surveyed the area’s athletic directors on the proposed rule. Of those who responded, the results were nearly split.
Those in favor of the rule said it eliminates all the red tape that was required in the past and allows students to transfer without a penalty, whether they’re moving schools for academics or athletics. A smaller school might be an attractive option for a talented athlete who might not play right away or as often at a bigger school, one coach said.
“I think it is a no-brainer. It is the world we live in today,” Gray Collegiate athletic director Kevin Heise said. “I think it is a lot less headache for the High School League. There are more proponents than there were two or three years ago, especially the headaches we have to deal with now with transfers.”
Those against it said it will only enhance the “under the table” recruiting that exists at some schools. Others contend the new rule will be hard to enforce.
Others say they prefer the system the SCHSL has in place now with bonafide change of address being a key piece of eligibility. They also think the proposed rule will help charter and private schools even more.
“My issue with giving a one-time freebie transfer is that it will be transfers for athletic reasons. That is not what we are supposed to be about,” Pelion athletic director Dann Holland said. “The one-time free transfer is going to create an issue of the haves and have nots. Kids that can afford transportation to go play at X school because they run this style of offense. Or if this guy can get you better recruited, they will go there.”
This story was originally published February 3, 2025 at 8:00 AM with the headline "A ‘free’ one-time transfer rule? Major change looms for SC high school sports."
