University of Toledo president orders revamp of athletics

[Flipper]

The University seems to have paid the travel expenses, but the UT Foundation was reimbursed. The foundation is a seperate, non profit fund raising orginization that makes all financial records public, but the University does not appear to have any authority over how the foundation spends its funds.

The way I read the first story, it appears the coaches reimbursed the university for their credit card expenses BUT they appealed it. The appeals process took approximately one year (bureaucracy at its finest). When they lost the appeal, the UT Foundation stepped forward and reimbursed the coaches.

The Blade headline reads...."UT coaches' wives traveled for free; others paid costs back to foundation, not university"...why is he foundaion involved in this at all?

As O&B has noted...the UT foundation is a non profit and there are less controls regarding the disbursement of funds.

Let's pull up a chair and pop some popcorn...my gut reaction is that the real fun will begin when the outside counsel starts interviewing returning student athletes.

[transfer2BGSU]

I was speaking about the decision of the foundation to reimburse the coaches for the trip to Germany.

Regarding coaches wives and travel, I wonder how our university handled the trip to Oklahoma. Or how did the university handle it for the GMAC Bowl?

I know some coaches have it written in their contracts that they are allowed X number of seats on team charters (I believe Izzo has this at MSU as well as Tressel down in Columbus).

[always a falcon]

The University seems to have paid the travel expenses, but the UT Foundation was reimbursed. The foundation is a seperate, non profit fund raising orginization that makes all financial records public, but the University does not appear to have any authority over how the foundation spends its funds.

The way I read the first story, it appears the coaches reimbursed the university for their credit card expenses BUT they appealed it. The appeals process took approximately one year (bureaucracy at its finest). When they lost the appeal, the UT Foundation stepped forward and reimbursed the coaches.

The Blade headline reads...."UT coaches' wives traveled for free; others paid costs back to foundation, not university"...why is he foundaion involved in this at all?

As O&B has noted...the UT foundation is a non profit and there are less controls regarding the disbursement of funds.

Let's pull up a chair and pop some popcorn...my gut reaction is that the real fun will begin when the outside counsel starts interviewing returning student athletes.

Flipper- do you think they are using "counsel" to interview the athletes so it all stays under attorney client privilege? So the BLADE can't find out how many are not making much progress toward a degree?
I've already popped the popcorn.....time to look for a chair.

[Schadenfreude]

As for Schad's post, I don't think we need a lawyer.

Perhaps a lawyer could tell us whether there is such a thing as "attempted misappropriation of funds" in the Ohio Revised Code, and what the penalty could be. That's what I meant.

Or maybe there's an entirely different set of legal logic to this. I've also been trying to think about it as attempted theft, for instance. It may not be, but ... what is it?

[Zom]

To me, its the kind of thing a precariously poised private sector outfit indulges to trade (or try to) trade its sorry way out of cashflow problems on the basis that survival is better than catastrophic failure. Its not what you expect a public institution to indulge. I guess that's what cashflow does to people.

[Redwingtom]

Bottom line is that regardless of whether this transaction actually happened as indicated, there is probably no way to prove it. There is probably no direct receipt of what this money went for which when being funneled through a public institution is just not right.

Who knows if the money went to this company as reimbursement for personal purchases or what.

Again, maybe what Stan says happened actually happened but we will probably never know.

[Schadenfreude]

More today in The Blade:

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar ... 37/-1/NEWS

Essentially, Attorney General Marc Dann has appointed the lawyer who will interview Toledo football and basketball players to determine eligibility. The lawyer's firm has some experience representing university's interests when they are a target of an NCAA investigation.

The Blade spends many column inches ruminating on how unusual this is. After speaking with something like six other athletic departments, the story doesn't seem to reach a conclusion on why The Blade has taken this step.

That said, while they don't come out and say it, it's clear The Blade's sportswriters wonder if this is somehow related to the Scooter McDougle situation.

I can definitely see how this might be possible. Perhaps, by asking the right set of questions -- about players' contacts with McDougle, about contacts with other persons of interest to the FBI, about gambling habits -- the University of Toledo can get a clearer sense of whether players have broken certain team/university/NCAA rules. These issues could obviously have a bearing on eligibility.

Or, put another way: While this is officially just about being careful about eligibility this year, it could be the university's way of trying to be very proactive at a moment when the FBI and who-knows-who-else are nosing into this.

Obviously, I'm speculating, but that's the way I interpret this story. What do you all think?

[Rightupinthere]

other way: While this is officially just about being careful about eligibility this year, it could be the university's way of trying to be very proactive at a moment when the FBI and who-knows-who-else are nosing into this.

Obviously, I'm speculating, but that's the way I interpret this story. What do you all think?

I believe I'm on your page, Schad. UT is being very careful and pragmatic with this investigation. I wonder if some internal investigation turned up some potential violations and they are performing a CYA investigation to mitigate any potential penalties levied by the NCAA.

Again, speculation, but their actions are curious. But what do I know? This is just my rocket envy typing.

[Flipper]

Hmmm...the Ohio AG appoints a lawyer from a firm that has handled cases with the NCAA in the past. He will interview the athletes in the presence of a University faculty member, but not a coach or other member of the athletic department.

Then you have this nugget from the Blasde story...Jeff Opelt, whose son is Fremont Ross graduate and UT quarterback Aaron Opelt, said he trusted the coaches to "go to bat for our kids" if the players were made to do something that was unjust.

That's a curious statement....

Perhaps the Universtiy is simply trying to shine a light into the corners and crevices of the men's programs to make sue everything is above board...that makes sense given the shift in reporting duties and budgetary controls and all the noise about gamblers and point shaving.

Then again...it does look like a lot of pieces are moving in the direction of "we found some dirt here and we want to be the one's that shovel it out"
The University has taken a lot of steps that suggest there's some fire to accomapny the smoke.

At any rate...I really don't see UT going to the Big East untiil this is resolved.

[Schadenfreude]

Then you have this nugget from the Blasde story...Jeff Opelt, whose son is Fremont Ross graduate and UT quarterback Aaron Opelt, said he trusted the coaches to "go to bat for our kids" if the players were made to do something that was unjust.

That's a curious statement....

I see a parent who isn't really sure why the lawyer has been hired, who recognizes that it seems a bit strange, but figures if it was unjust, unconstitutional, or unfair to his son, that the coaches would be up in arms about it.

[Flipper]

Really? Does anyone think the University having a lawyer and a faculty rep interview a player could be seen as unjust? There's no indication that the players face any civil or criminal liability with respect to the University. If that's the meaning...I think it's oddly worded.

At any rate...It will be interesting to see what direction this takes

[NWLB]

When it comes to NCAA issues, it is always good for a University to look proactive and forthright. And frankly if this were BG, I'd expect a full-court press on all fronts. I'd WANT lawyers crawling all over the place hunting any shade of impropriety. Because if bad things were going to come, I'd want it all out and done with as quickly as possible, and for there to be zero indication that anybody tried to hide anything.

It could all mean something, but it could be nothing. Though the odds don't favor all the dirty laundry having been aired or cleaned yet.

[CapitalFalcon]

Wow. This is going to be interesting.

The Blade is going to detail those travel expenses tomorrow. For now, this is what we know:

"A Blade investigation has found numerous examples of questionable spending by the athletic department, spending that Dr. Jacobs confirmed was also being investigated by UT officials.

"Records obtained by The Blade show that the wives and girlfriends of UT coaches, and boosters and other nonessential personnel, were allowed to fly with the football and men’s and women’s basketball teams at university expense. Records also show that coaches traveled to Germany and charged trip expenses to their UT credit cards."

They ought to also be looking into the football program's slushie fund, its quarter pounder fund, its Krispy Kreme fund, its hotdog fund, its chips 'n' dip fund, its Twinkie fund, its Snickers fund, its Milky Way fund, its Kit Kat fund, its Butterfinger fund, its Gummy Bear fund, its Whatchamacallit fund, its buffalo wing fund, its double fudge brownie Blizzard fund, its Twix fund, its Chunky fund, its Oreo fund, its Funyuns fund (that's kind of fun to say), its Doritos fund, its Cheetos fund, its Chili Cheese Fritoes fund, its Slim Jim fund, its Chex Mix fund, its Barbacoa with pinto beans salsa double cheese sour cream and guacamole fund, its Starburst fund, its Little Debbie fund, its Tastykake fund, its Moonpie fund, it's Spicy Chicken Sandwich fund, its RC Cola fund, it Keebler Fudge Stripe fund, its Extra Tasty Crispy fund, it Sturffed Crust Pizza fund, its Chuckles fund, its Milk Dud Fund, its Reeses fund, it M&M fund, its Munchos fund, its Hot Sam's fund, its Orange Julius fund, its Andy Capp Hot Fries fund, its Cinnabon fund, its Chubby Hubby fund, its Crave Case fund, its Seven Layer Burrito fund, and its Chicken and Chees Stuffed Breadsticks fund.

[NWLB]

They ought to also be looking into the football program's slushie fund, its quarter pounder fund, its Krispy Kreme fund, its hotdog fund, its chips 'n' dip fund, its Twinkie fund, its Snickers fund, its Milky Way fund, its Kit Kat fund, its Butterfinger fund, its Gummy Bear fund, its Whatchamacallit fund, its buffalo wing fund, its double fudge brownie Blizzard fund, its Twix fund, its Chunky fund, its Oreo fund, its Funyuns fund (that's kind of fun to say), its Doritos fund, its Cheetos fund, its Chili Cheese Fritoes fund, its Slim Jim fund, its Chex Mix fund, its Barbacoa with pinto beans salsa double cheese sour cream and guacamole fund, its Starburst fund, its Little Debbie fund, its Tastykake fund, its Moonpie fund, it's Spicy Chicken Sandwich fund, its RC Cola fund, it Keebler Fudge Stripe fund, its Extra Tasty Crispy fund, it Sturffed Crust Pizza fund, its Chuckles fund, its Milk Dud Fund, its Reeses fund, it M&M fund, its Munchos fund, its Hot Sam's fund, its Orange Julius fund, its Andy Capp Hot Fries fund, its Cinnabon fund, its Chubby Hubby fund, its Crave Case fund, its Seven Layer Burrito fund, and its Chicken and Chees Stuffed Breadsticks fund.

What about the "Would you like to supersize that for just $0.89 more" fund?