This is obviously an ugly story (for which specific details surrounding the transgressions are very vague) as it applies to the day-to-day proceeding of college sports in the US.
I happen to be quite familiar with the school itself; accordingly, from an Athletics standpoint, I follow their football and basketball teams to a modest extent from a distance. But while it's one thing for an institution like this to identify problem people and react, it's quite a different thing to moth-ball a scholarship Program for half a decade for such reasons. Saving those additional details, I'm still trying to get my hands around the fact this University decided it was institutionally-necessary to gas the Natatorium.
Should WKU be branded as almost indescribably horrible place due to the fact something this bad could have actually occurred (and presumably over a fair amount of time) ?? I mean something like this could......and possibly should......cost them students; both current and new ones. And if so, why are the President and AD still employed by the University ?? Or, is this an institution to be widely commended for quickly and decisively committing to a draw-a-line-in-the-sand action when victims under its "care" were listened to.....taken seriously......and their problem brought publicly to light ??
With nothing personal against WKU, I'd like it to be the latter.......but this whole thing smells so bad that I don't want jump to any conclusion (and perhaps some of you have additional perspective that's not currently in print).
This post was edited on 4/15 1:20 PM by COOL MAN
Linky
I happen to be quite familiar with the school itself; accordingly, from an Athletics standpoint, I follow their football and basketball teams to a modest extent from a distance. But while it's one thing for an institution like this to identify problem people and react, it's quite a different thing to moth-ball a scholarship Program for half a decade for such reasons. Saving those additional details, I'm still trying to get my hands around the fact this University decided it was institutionally-necessary to gas the Natatorium.
Should WKU be branded as almost indescribably horrible place due to the fact something this bad could have actually occurred (and presumably over a fair amount of time) ?? I mean something like this could......and possibly should......cost them students; both current and new ones. And if so, why are the President and AD still employed by the University ?? Or, is this an institution to be widely commended for quickly and decisively committing to a draw-a-line-in-the-sand action when victims under its "care" were listened to.....taken seriously......and their problem brought publicly to light ??
With nothing personal against WKU, I'd like it to be the latter.......but this whole thing smells so bad that I don't want jump to any conclusion (and perhaps some of you have additional perspective that's not currently in print).
This post was edited on 4/15 1:20 PM by COOL MAN
Linky
