Name of the Game: Player Mobility

Proposed bill amendment would sanction high school transfers and again calls attention to misalignment between IHSA and state legislature

Watching the NCAA tournament this spring, we were treated to great basketball.

With the entertainment comes a new normal: player mobility is here to stay.

Three Florida Gators men’s basketball national title team starters were transfers. One starter for runner-up Houston, L.J. Cryer, came from Baylor, winners of the 2021 national title. Winning at all levels of college sports is now less about developing high school recruits and more about retooling rosters with older, more experienced grown men and women. And having a well-financed payroll to boot.

This perpetual state of motion is a reality colleges have entered grudgingly. It’s the courts moving things along, unilaterally ruling in favor of athlete movement and pay-to-play. We’re now seeing the player choice movement extend down to the high school ranks, with one major difference—state legislatures are taking action before the courts get involved.

Today, an executive committee meets on the floor of the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield. The committee will discuss bill HB0473. An amendment to the proposed legislation would allow all Illinois students two transfers over their high school athletic careers. Illinois’ General Assembly is scheduled to be in session through May. If passed, the bill would trample over Illinois High School Association rules that restrict player mobility.

Currently, athletes moving from private to public must sit out for 30 days. Athletes going from public to private are ineligible for an entire year. HB0473, sponsored by Rep. Camille Y. Lilly (D-Oak Park) would override IHSA mandates and award freedom of movement for all athletes, regardless of sport or classification.

Word to state high school associations: the train is leaving the tracks. When the politicians get involved, y’all better get on board or be left behind.

Illinois is by no means ahead of the game when it comes to prep transfers. Shortly after the NCAA agreed to one-time transfers without penalty, West Virginia passed a similar law in 2023. Momentum has moved through several states across the country, picking up steam in the calendar year of 2025. In February, neighboring state Indiana pushed through a law allowing athletes a one-time transfer over their first three years of eligibility (a fourth-year transfer requires more scrutiny). Just in the past month, South Carolina and Tennessee have approved new transfer rules.

With so many states moving forward with transfer sanctions, patterns are emerging.

The states in favor of athlete mobility are school choice advocates. Lawmakers are catching on to the misalignment between school choice and being ineligible to play sports. Football, basketball, or volleyball are often the drivers of why a family changes from the public school down the street to the private school 30 miles away. Having access to state money or vouchers, parents want their son or daughter to be able to practice the day they arrive on campus. Lawmakers know this about their constituents and new legislation reflects what tax-paying voters want in 2025.

Rarely do I say this about Illinois lawmakers: a push toward a transfer-friendly climate is an example of state reps giving their citizens what they want. They are listening and acting accordingly. Yet there is an aspect to this issue, at least at the moment, where Illinois diverges from other states.

The IHSA is pulling a Hall and Oates routine. They are telling assemblymen in Springfield, “I can’t go for that.”

In an email sent before spring break, IHSA Executive Director Craig Anderson petitioned member schools to lobby against the proposed legislation.

Anderson wrote:

We recognize that there may be some within the membership who may support a bill like this as student mobility is at an all-time high and several states have recently updated their laws to allow for one free transfer. However, the IHSA has been a self-governed Association for over 100 years and it is imperative that we be allowed to make changes through our annual by-law amendment process, decided upon by a majority vote of our member schools.

I have the utmost respect for our state lawmakers, and recognize that they have a difficult and thankless job. I also have no doubt that Representative Lilly believes she is helping students with this bill, but I also know that such a bill has the potential to create a myriad of issues within your buildings, as well as conflicts with other IHSA by-laws. I believe it is imperative moving forward that lawmakers be willing to bring the concerns of their constituents to member schools and the IHSA, so that we can work to address them and use our by-law amendment process when necessary.

And here’s a money quote from Anderson to close his appeal. From the same email:

Government involvement in a private, not-for-profit organization is a slippery slope, as is the politicization of high school sports and activities.

He ended the communication with an all-for-one, one-for-all request for members to contact their local congressmen to voice opposition to the pro-transfer amendment. He even included a link with contact information. What a team player!

Do we really need to address Anderson pleading against the “politicization of high school sports and activities?” I wrote about this last week, about the false posturing. If I were a private school coach or administrator, I’d ignore the email. What incentive do they have to help boundary “member schools” poach their players? They are the ones on the short end of the current rule. Public school leaders may have a reason to fuss as athletes are now disincentivized to transfer out. Either way, I wouldn’t expect too many congressional leaders to be opposed to no-penalty transfers. Moms and dads want it, and they are the ones who vote.

And much like the “Right to Play” legislation, we have incongruity amongst those in charge.

Illinois is a pro-union, anti-student choice state. Lawmakers consistently have voted against any educational options outside of public schools. Yet we have HB0473, with 19 co-sponsors added Monday, that would give freedom of choice to students. And unlike other state associations that are changing their bylaws ahead of state law to grant athletes the right to swap schools, the IHSA is lobbying against such action. For an organization that likes to claim guiltless sovereignty, it has willingly entered an old-fashioned political rumble.

The dysfunction in Illinois amongst the ruling class never ceases to entertain.

---

Have a suggestion for The Kerr Report? Send email to jonjkerr@gmail.com.