Zone Read: SUSD’s & AIA’s Indiscretions

What started as a story about high school football transfers has become something much bigger: a question of whether a Scottsdale’s public school system, in a fight for its survival amidst Arizona’s Charter School movement, is using inconsistent eligibility standards, as well as relationships between district and AIA decision-makers, to influence which student-athletes are allowed to move freely — and which ones are forced to sit.  

Over the past handful of years Arizona high school football transfers have become almost commonplace. Two weeks ago I unpacked the challenges Saguaro has faced, transitioning into a new era, after a mass exodus of players eroded their program.

This discussion isn’t focusing on transfers, but on the adults attempting to uh, “govern” these rules.

For context, while in-state open enrollment dates all the way back to 1994, the milestone injunction has more recently been brought to the forefront on the topic of players changing schools. “Neighborhood teams” are almost extinct. Despite the city limits of Phoenix covering close to 250 miles in circumference, many parents and student-athletes have chosen to ignore lengthy commutes in hopes of a better football and/or academic experience for their children.

The standard has been set, and honestly, I don’t ever see it changing.

However, because in Arizona high football short-sidedness sometimes leads to personal agendas, I am writing this week, not to spotlight players or coaches (the true lifeblood of AZHS football), but Scottsdale Unified School District admin and leadership at the AIA who seem to be blurring the lines when it comes to transfer eligibility, as it pertains to when players left. 

The Double Standard

As mentioned above, the Arizona prep football scene has morphed into the Wild, Wild West when it comes to the transfer game. A recent ripple effect has exposed a couple of interesting discrepancies from the SUSD, past and present, pertaining to fall eligibility. 

Let’s connect the dots with a timeline and a couple of names to remember.

According to sources, after Jason Ronquillo’s short stint as Saguaro’s head coach ended, after less than a month on the job, in early March, SUSD Athletic Director Stephen Cervantez told families of outgoing SHS transfers they would be eligible immediately if they transferred in district. It would be applied to players who transferred between March 5th and April 7th, one day before current head coach Butch Goncharoff was officially hired.

One student-athlete transferred from Desert Mountain to Saguaro last summer, played last season, then transferred back to Desert Mountain in between Ronquillo resigning and Goncharoff coming on board. A double transfer, per AIA rules, “Requires a player to sit out one full calendar year (365 days), from the date of enrollment at the new school for any varsity sport they previously competed in.”

However, said player was granted “immediate eligibility” and will play August 28th when Desert Mountain, coincidentally, hosts Saguaro to open the season.

Cervantez, who previously served as Desert Mountain’s Athletic Director, was groomed for the position by Nathan Slater, who left SUSD (as the district athletic director) to become the AIA Associate Athletic Director.

One of Slater’s primary focuses at the AIA are hardships. So much so, his name is signed at the bottom of hardship emails.

Interesting coincidence. 

Money Talks

Like other districts throughout Arizona, the SUSD is, in many ways, struggling to tread water. Since 2010, the district has lost over 6,000 students. 

The two biggest challenges, which happen to go hand-in-hand, are declining enrollment and drained financial liquidity. 

The district’s enrollment drop is due to a number of factors, most notably the explosion of charter schools, as well as the option of private schools. Parents “in the boundary” have the ability to send their kids to Brophy/Xavier, Notre Dame Prep, Scottsdale Christian Academy, Phoenix Country Day, and several others.

As for the piggy bank being empty, the one-time $5 million nest egg used to help subsidize staff, finance, human resources and other tributaries on campuses is now gone. This all adds up to significant budget challenges.

The enrollment pressure SUSD is facing led to the district repurposing/closing Pima Elementary and Echo Canyon (kindergarten-8th grade) due to low enrollment, while its adopted annual budget for 2027, for some reason, is based on projected enrollment and staffing.

Before we dig deeper into the true numbers of SUSD kids in classrooms, let’s clarify the distinction between “revenue per student when you divide the whole district budget by enrollment” and “marginal revenue the district actually loses when one student leaves.“

The approximate recurring “cost” (what the district makes) per student in the SUSD is between $8,000-10,000. So, if the district was able to keep say, 20 of those Saguaro transfers, they would retain anywhere from $160,000-200,000 towards their floundering bottom line. Jump that number to 50, of simply players from other SUSD schools transferring in district, and the monetary number balloons to $400,000-500,000.

Was there extra incentive, in this case a guaranteed hardship, from SUSD to help sway a heavy percentage of those Saguaro transfers and their parents to stay in the district?

Considering what we’ve detailed above, I’ll let you draw your own conclusion. 

Clear Them All

Inexplicably, the SUSD has clouded the issue for the Saguaro players who opted to transfer since the conclusion of last season. 19 are eligible to play in Week 1, but at least a dozen others aren’t. 

Why?

Why are we holding back student-athletes when every single one of those players, and their families, were essentially held hostage by the incompetence of the district to hire a new coach in, I don’t know, even a somewhat timely manner? The lack of high-level leadership on campus at Saguaro, from the time Darius Kelly was fired (last November), to the time Goncharoff was hired, complicated the situation even further.

What’s the point of differentiating transfer windows with regards to fall eligibility for those Saguaro players, when the situation never got better? If anything, it got worse.

“Why is that three-week window special,” a source close to the situation asked. “Some parent who left early saw the writing on the wall, and they now get punished?

“So (expletive) dumb.” 

The AIA defines a hardship as, “An unforeseeable, unavoidable, and uncorrectable act, condition, or event which the student and their parents or guardians have no control.”

The key hardship criteria, again per the AIA, is explained even further.

Check, check, check, check.

Every single one of these bullet points “fell in the window” of the 139 days that passed from Kelly’s firing to Goncharoff’s hiring. SUSD and the AIA seemingly working in tandem to pro-rate their own agenda doesn’t seem like fair practice for those players who are now required to sit five, especially when one of them, the AIA, created the rules as the “governing board.”

(All student-athletes who transfer are protected by the federal law FERPA, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act). 

“The transfer rule needs to be fair, and right now, it feels like a moving target,” another source explained. “You can’t have a system where one school/district gets to pick and choose who sits, and who plays. Either they all play, or they all sit (five games).

“We need consistency, not selective enforcement.”

What’s the purpose of a “leadership group,” when “leaders” don’t lead? 

Level the playing field.

At the very least, play by the rules.

After all, you were the ones who created them.

The post Zone Read: SUSD’s & AIA’s Indiscretions first appeared on Sports360AZ.

Source link