I can't speak for anyone else on the topic, only for my own school and how I would handle it. We had a D-1 bound player who played academy all season. He would have made an immense difference to our team in a playoff run, but I would not have considered adding him just for the playoffs. I have coached this kid several times starting when he was 8 years old and love him dearly, but it would not have been fair to take minutes from the guys who got us there, nor would it have been the right thing to do in my mind. Was it unethical? It didn't break any rules, so I would say no from that perspective. Is it the right thing to do? For me, it is not. I think the state needs to look at this just like the NFL does every year with the Patriots pushing the envelope on any grey area they can find with subsequent rules changes made seemingly every year.
There is no easy answer, but it needs to be reviewed. A player should have to play a minimum number of league games if coming from another team would be my opinion. If a player were injured all year and came back at the end of the season, that would seem to be a different set of circumstances. So maybe the minimum game rule should only apply to athletes competing concurrently on another team.
To me, it is ironic that the number 1 thing discussed at the rules meeting was sportsmanship. I just can't help but feeling this is not the best way to exhibit sportsmanship. However, no rule was broken, so that is just a judgment call.
I would be strongly disappointed if the state did not take Coach Stafford's request for a review of the situation into consideration and at least have an open discussion with some Principals and Athletic Director's on the matter.
Congratulations to Dutch Fork as we played them during the season, and by all accounts were a respectable bunch of young men, and I enjoyed meeting and talking with their coach.
