By Derik Williams | iBall Radio
On January 23, 2026, much of the conversation around Alabama high school athletics centered on the AHSAA public–private split. But while that structural change grabbed headlines, another development may prove to be far more influential in the long run — The Choose Act.
The split changes brackets.
The Choose Act could change behavior, movement, and decision-making.
And that’s where the real shift may happen.
The Choose Act is legislation aimed at expanding school choice options for families in Alabama. At its core, the law gives parents more flexibility in determining where their child attends school, removing some of the traditional barriers tied to geographic zoning.
While the bill is centered on education, its ripple effects naturally extend into athletics, where school enrollment and eligibility rules have always played a major role in competitive structure.
A key element tied to the current discussion is the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) involving Governor Kay Ivey and House Speaker Nathaniel Ledbetter. The TRO states that students transferring under the Choose Act framework are to be considered immediately eligible.
That single piece changes the landscape dramatically.
One of the most important — and often misunderstood — parts of the Choose Act is the financial component. The law operates through Education Savings Accounts (ESAs), which provide state-funded dollars that families can use for approved educational expenses.
Here’s what that means in real terms:
These funds can be used for tuition, instructional materials, certain educational services, and other approved academic costs — not for athletics directly, but the school choice tied to those dollars naturally affects sports participation.
The funding comes from Alabama’s Education Trust Fund (ETF) — the same source that supports public education. When a student uses ESA funds, the state dollars tied to that child’s education effectively follow the student.
That has two sides:
This is where the broader education policy debate lives, and why the Choose Act reaches beyond just classroom decisions.
Eligibility is tied to several factors, including:
Priority groups in early implementation include students with special needs and certain other categories, but the program is designed to widen access over time.
The Choose Act does not simply allow a student to attend any school automatically — the school must be a participating and approved option under the program structure.
There is no specific rule that says a student must be transferring from a high-performing or low-performing school to qualify for ESA funds. The financial assistance is tied to family eligibility and the receiving school’s participation status, not school performance labels.
That means, in theory, a student could move between different types of schools and still receive assistance, as long as eligibility requirements are met.
The Choose Act is not an “athletics bill,” but sports programs are part of school identity. Facilities, coaching staffs, player development history, exposure, and culture all matter to families with student-athletes.
This raises natural questions across the state:
These are not accusations — they are realities that leadership at every level will need to monitor carefully.
For years, transfer rules have acted as a stabilizing force in high school sports. Sit-out periods and eligibility reviews discouraged impulsive movement and helped programs maintain roster continuity.
Immediate eligibility introduces a new level of mobility.
This doesn’t automatically mean problems — but it does mean:
The rules of access are changing, and when access changes, behavior often follows.
From my viewpoint, the AHSAA public–private split is a positive move, but its impact is mild compared to what the Choose Act could mean.
The split adjusts postseason structure.
The Choose Act could influence where athletes choose to go before the season ever begins.
That’s a bigger lever.
Parents may now weigh athletic development, coaching stability, and program success more heavily in school decisions. That doesn’t make the decision wrong — but it does shift the environment programs operate in.
The big question becomes:
Does this create new roster-building opportunities for coaches?
Not in a recruiting sense that violates rules — but in relationship-building, program branding, and visibility. Schools with strong culture, proven development, and leadership may naturally become more appealing.
So who has the advantage?
It may not be strictly public or private schools.
The advantage may belong to programs with:
In other words, the Choose Act may reward well-run programs, not just certain school types.
Yes, the public–private split happened, and it will matter in how championships are structured. But that’s a format change.
The Choose Act represents a behavioral and structural shift in how families can approach education — and by extension, athletics.
One changes the bracket.
The other may influence the roster.
The Choose Act is not about sports on paper, but it may shape the future of Alabama high school athletics in ways that take years to fully understand.
More mobility means more opportunity — but also more responsibility for families, schools, coaches, and governing bodies to maintain integrity, balance, and fairness.
The conversation isn’t about panic. It’s about awareness.
Because when access changes, the game changes — even if the scoreboard doesn’t yet show it.
Families looking for official information or to apply can use the state-approved resources below:
