It is getting to the point where the WPIAL has to wonder why it even tries to enforce the PIAA's rule concerning student transfers for athletic intent. Just about every time the WPIAL takes a stand and tries to enforce the rule, the PIAA knocks the legs out from the WPIAL.
The PIAA has overturned WPIAL rulings on student-athlete transfers numerous times in the past. And it happened again today - FIVE TIMES!!!!!
During the course of the summer, the WPIAL had ruled five athletes ineligible to play sports because the WPIAL thought they had transferred, at least partly, for athletic intent. And that breaks PIAA rules.
All five athletes appealed the ruling to the PIAA, and the PIAA had hearings with the athletes today. And the PIAA overturned the WPIAL in every case. That's right, the WPIAL was 0 for 5 today.
One of the rulings made Ricky Rogers eligible at Gateway after transferring from Keystone Oaks. Rogers is a junior receiver who is being recruited by Division I college for football. He also is a talented basketball player. Gateway already is pretty good this year in football and Rogers could easily make the Gators even better.
The PIAA overturned the WPIAL in four other cases and made these athletes eligible.
* David DeMarco, a football player who went from Riverside to Central Valley.
* Matt Cullen, a basketball player who went from Greensburg Central Catholic to Latrobe.
* Jacob Thieret, a soccer player who went from Serra to South Allegheny.
* Zach Cree, a football player who went from Greensburg Central Catholic to Connellsville.
WPIAL executive director Tim O'Malley said tonight that the WPIAL Board of Control members are extremely frustrated because the league doesn't believe the PIAA is enforcing its OWN RULE. The WPIAL, you see, goes by PIAA rules.
Some have said the WPIAL is inconsistent at times in its eligiblity rulings on transfers. That's a debatable subject. But if you go by the PIAA, the WPIAL is "wrong" in eligibility rulings in case after case after case. It should be known that almost all student athletes are ruled eligible after transferring. You only hear of the handful that are ruled ineligible.
I don't know the particulars in these cases today and all of the reasons for the transfers. Just about all parties involved in transfer cases want to have their hearings closed to the media at the WPIAL level. So we don't get to hear any evidence.
But there are a few things to think about in these cases. Under PIAA rules, part of the procedures in a student-athlete transfer is for the student to get a "principal to principal signoff." But if the school principal feels athletic intent is involved, the principal does not sign off and the case is brought to the WPIAL for a hearing. In the five cases heard by the PIAA today, none of the five principals from the sending school signed off on the transfers because they thought the transfers were athletically motivated.
If the PIAA doesn't pay attention to their own school principals in these cases, why is the "principal to principal signoff" even part of the transfer rule? If the PIAA is going to rule just about everyone eligible, why even have a transfer rule?
Sources told me the WPIAL felt there was compelling evidence in a few of these cases that proved athletic intent. For example, the WPIAL had emails from a parent that were sent to the school, wanting a coach to be fired.
As for the Rogers case, he and his family did buy a place of residence in the Gateway district. Rogers will not attend Gateway High School. He will be a student in Gateay's cyber school. Was there a relationship between Rogers and Gateway before the transfer? Well, I don't know what this says and I don't know if it proves anything, but Rogers watched a Gateway game from the sideline last year while he was at Keystone Oaks.