WSU Conducting Internal Review Into Baseball Program

[WSUwatcher]

Interesting comment, Veritas. Personally, I have no way of knowing, but I certainly agree that Brent is a fine pitching coach and a plus for WSU in that regard.

As for trustworthiness, all successful executives have learned that it isn't the guys you can't trust for whom you have to watch out; you can allow for that and act accordingly. It's the guys you DON'T KNOW you can't trust who are dangerous.

[molly jabali]

Thanks, Veritas! Appreciate the answer...I don't know him well, but I DO think he is a great coach. As to loyalty, not sure...

[shockmonster]

I guess that if one considers Brent disloyal and lacking trust to Gene for leaving him, the same thing could be said for him divorcing his wife. Boy that would apply to a lot of people but it us similar in application.

[shocker3]

There isn't going to be much to see here folks. You can blame whomever you want to, the NCAA (imho) isn't going to say anything about lack of institutional control. It was a mistake, I'm not sure anyone even knew they were doing something wrong.

Some kids will probably have to sit out some games, hopefully they'll be staggered so as not to kill us, but who knows. I wouldn't anticipate anything beyond that.

In the grand scheme of things, this isn't a big deal and I flipping promise you it goes on everywhere, or something like it.

I agree with the Doc. I really don't think this is that big of a deal. I don't think anybody thought they were doing anything wrong.

The thing that really surprised me from this whole deal is the way they, in my opinion, mis-treated Shelley. Firing a loyal and hard-working 20 year employee, confiscating her computer and hauling her out of the office like she was some kind of criminal seems way over the top. I would think the normal thing to do in this situation is to bring it to her attention that what she was doing is a ncaa violation and tell her to stop doing it. You then do an investigation and then at that point you deal out some kind of punishment (something like a week off without pay and making everyone pay back the discounts). The ncaa of course will also hand out their punishment but I agree with Doc it shouldn't be worse than any players involoved missing a few games.

In my opinion, the way they mis-handled Shelley makes this deal seem a lot worse than it really should be.

[1972Shocker]

I agree with the Doc. I really don't think this is that big of a deal. I don't think anybody thought they were doing anything wrong.

The thing that really surprised me from this whole deal is the way they, in my opinion, mis-treated Shelley. Firing a loyal and hard-working 20 year employee, confiscating her computer and hauling her out of the office like she was some kind of criminal seems way over the top. I would think the normal thing to do in this situation is to bring it to her attention that what she was doing is a ncaa violation and tell her to stop doing it. You then do an investigation and then at that point you deal out some kind of punishment (something like a week off without pay and making everyone pay back the discounts). The ncaa of course will also hand out their punishment but I agree with Doc it shouldn't be worse than any players involoved missing a few games.

In my opinion, the way they mis-handled Shelley makes this deal seem a lot worse than it really should be.

It is my understanding that Shelley has not been fired at this point. Did I miss something?

[RoyalShock]

I don't know Shelley, never even talked to her or know anything about how she's viewed within the athletic department. I have no inside info. But if an investigation is going to be done, as it is in this case, you can't take the chance someone will attempt to retroactively cover things up. Taking the computer and suspending her while the investigation is ongoing is probably the prudent thing to do.

[WSUwatcher]

Agreed, Royal -- locking down potential evidence is just good practice, and it's nothing personal against Shelley. I'm sure the university's counsel would have been upset if it hadn't been done.

[shox1989]

It is my understanding that Shelley has not been fired at this point. Did I miss something?

Actually since she is a classified state employee I don't think they can fire her until they give her due process. But I think they have gone as far as they legally can until they go through the steps to make it official.

[shox1989]

I don't know Shelley, never even talked to her or know anything about how she's viewed within the athletic department. I have no inside info. But if an investigation is going to be done, as it is in this case, you can't take the chance someone will attempt to retroactively cover things up. Taking the computer and suspending her while the investigation is ongoing is probably the prudent thing to do.

I would agree with you if this were a case where someone was suspected of stealing money or breaking laws. But when you are talking about giving people discounts because you didn't know it was against ncaa rules, I think they went overboard myself. But I know Shelley and I don't think there is any way she would have intentionally broken any ncaa rules. There is no way she would want to endanger the program like that. Obviously the Athletic Dept is not giving her that benefit of a doubt and I believe it is because Sexton wants to get rid of her.

[Steeleshocker]

I would agree with you if this were a case where someone was suspected of stealing money or breaking laws. But when you are talking about giving people discounts because you didn't know it was against ncaa rules, I think they went overboard myself. But I know Shelley and I don't think there is any way she would have intentionally broken any ncaa rules. There is no way she would want to endanger the program like that. Obviously the Athletic Dept is not giving her that benefit of a doubt and I believe it is because Sexton wants to get rid of her.

But on the other hand, if they don't take these steps the NCAA is going to question why all potential relayed evidence was not taken. Royal is right, the NCAA is too unpredictable to be casual about how you handle an investigation.

NCAA: "So what happened when you discovered the potential infractions"
Option 1: "We let the admin who is suspected of making the errors to continue working because we didn't think it was serious and she told us it was unintentional."
Option 2: "We immediately confiscated records and computers to complete the investigation and put the suspected parties on administrative leave while we investigated."

I know which one they would be happier to see. It may not be a crime, but the NCAA certainly thinks they are a sheriff.

[Kung Wu]

Option 3: When we identified a potential rule violation we made a copy of her hard drive and emails and asked accounting to provide us with appropriate order histories. We froze her ability to place orders but allowed her to continue day-to-day secretarial duties in order to minimize disruptions and set a precedence of cooperation for the investigation.

Instead of cooperation we now have a 3rd party attorney involved and a pissed off employ (can you blame her if it was an innocent mistake) that might just try and mislead the investigation into thinking that there's more there behind the scenes than there is -- whether out of ignorance or spite.

There are pros and cons to any way you handle this.

[ShockTalk]

I would agree with you if this were a case where someone was suspected of stealing money or breaking laws. But when you are talking about giving people discounts because you didn't know it was against ncaa rules, I think they went overboard myself. But I know Shelley and I don't think there is any way she would have intentionally broken any ncaa rules. There is no way she would want to endanger the program like that. Obviously the Athletic Dept is not giving her that benefit of a doubt and I believe it is because Sexton wants to get rid of her.

Are you really listening to yourself? A 20 year employee of the baseball office giving people (athletes) discounts for non-related baseball items and not having any clues or questions that it might be against NCAA rules? How about you @shox1989:? Would you have done this, no questions asked? I have a feeling that if we had a poll, most all here would, at the minimum, question the practice enough to ask someone of authority (maybe she did/maybe she was told not to be concerned). In situations where you are dealing with the NCAA and have "had a past", you are not going to mess around and appear lax. Let's just wait and see how all this washes out. If she is fired, then WSU must have been able to show cause. If she resigns, it may be left up in the air (WSU had cause, but allowed her to resign or maybe she just resigns).

If you were an employee and you knew the employer was "out to get you fired" but needed cause, would you: 1) Resign, not wanting to be where you're not wanted, 2) Seek a transfer through the state, 3) Not do anything that might remotely give cause, 4) Build a case against WSU in case they attempt to fire you, 5) Do nothing, because you had no idea even if certain SNers knew they were out to get ya.

[WstateU]

Are you really listening to yourself? A 20 year employee of the baseball office giving people (athletes) discounts for non-related baseball items and not having any clues or questions that it might be against NCAA rules? How about you @shox1989:? Would you have done this, no questions asked? I have a feeling that if we had a poll, most all here would, at the minimum, question the practice enough to ask someone of authority (maybe she did/maybe she was told not to be concerned). In situations where you are dealing with the NCAA and have "had a past", you are not going to mess around and appear lax. Let's just wait and see how all this washes out. If she is fired, then WSU must have been able to show cause. If she resigns, it may be left up in the air (WSU had cause, but allowed her to resign or maybe she just resigns).

If you were an employee and you knew the employer was "out to get you fired" but needed cause, would you: 1) Resign, not wanting to be where you're not wanted, 2) Seek a transfer through the state, 3) Not do anything that might remotely give cause, 4) Build a case against WSU in case they attempt to fire you, 5) Do nothing, because you had no idea even if certain SNers knew they were out to get ya.

Praise the Lord, HALLELUJAH! :good:

[shockmonster]

Are you really listening to yourself? A 20 year employee of the baseball office giving people (athletes) discounts for non-related baseball items and not having any clues or questions that it might be against NCAA rules? How about you @shox1989:? Would you have done this, no questions asked? I have a feeling that if we had a poll, most all here would, at the minimum, question the practice enough to ask someone of authority (maybe she did/maybe she was told not to be concerned). In situations where you are dealing with the NCAA and have "had a past", you are not going to mess around and appear lax. Let's just wait and see how all this washes out. If she is fired, then WSU must have been able to show cause. If she resigns, it may be left up in the air (WSU had cause, but allowed her to resign or maybe she just resigns).

If you were an employee and you knew the employer was "out to get you fired" but needed cause, would you: 1) Resign, not wanting to be where you're not wanted, 2) Seek a transfer through the state, 3) Not do anything that might remotely give cause, 4) Build a case against WSU in case they attempt to fire you, 5) Do nothing, because you had no idea even if certain SNers knew they were out to get ya.

No, You are right. Gene would have been the one who she would have thought would save her job. There is no way that he didn't know. He was who she would have questioned. Gene would have done whatever he wanted to do. He may turn his back and act like he didn't know or maybe he would have a more active part. Whether others on the baseball coaching staff had knowledge, I wouldn't know but would suspect, yes. But it wouldn't have surprised me one bit that the Athletic Department didn't have any knowledge. Maybe Schaus and Sexton should not have allowed this Baseball KINGDOM to exist but it did and it didn't become this way over night. At one time, Gene had more power than anyone at WSU but after some sub-par seasons this changed. That is when Sexton had the chance to do something about it. No proof and a lot of assumptions that aren't without some facts to give them some legs.

[Kung Wu]

Keep in mind that we don't know yet if anything wrong was done. If a single non-athlete placed an order _or was even offered_ by Shelley or any of the other athletes, then it's arguable that no rule has even been violated. This according to:

NCAA Bylaw 16.11.1.1 (General Rule) notes that the “receipt of a benefit (including otherwise prohibited extra benefits per Bylaw 16.11.2) by student-athletes, their relatives or friends is not a violation of NCAA rules if it is demonstrated that the same benefit is generally available to the institution’s students and their relatives or friends