Beth Sullivan making headlines at UT

Wa wa wa wrote:

Whiny kids need to find a school. You got yourself cut because you were not nearly as fast as you thought you were. Go search for a new home instead of posting on letsrun.

Knoxville IP address.

1. I meant the quality of SEC coaches. Of course, most o them are alums, so, you may have a point there.2. UTK is common shorthand for University of Tennessee Knoxville. It distinguishes that campus from the others, like, say UTC which is a common shorthand for University of Tennessee Chattanooga. Your ignorance is not really an indictment of my grammar.3. I know you were aiming for a folksy metaphor here, but, really, you settled on something so classless and inapt, that I won't bother taking the undoubtedly many many paragraphs to convince you why you're wrong here.4. How do you know?

It's not Yale wrote:

1. What grammar is considered SEC quality? Half the athletes can't even write their name.

2. What is the UTK administration? If you meant UT, while bashing someone's grammar that's unfortunate.

3. Saying a good coach can turn any runner into a champion is very unfair. They don't race donkeys at the Kentucky derby.

4. Very unlikely that was BAS.

Eeek! If that really is BAS, then whoever hired her should be fired, if for no other reason than her spelling and grammar are not even of SEC quality.

A good coach would be one who was able to turn these runners into champions. What BAS is saying by letting them go is that she's not a good coach. I hope the UTK administration is listening to her.[/quote][/quote]

All six, all within about ten days of the start of school, all with no trail of mis-behavior. Anyone pulling that out as a reason is somewhere south of stupid or knee-jerk defensive for the coach/school. To be mentioning this possibility this deep in to the thread makes any poster asserting or even raising the issue look like they have nothing to contribute.

One who knows wrote:

ACC coach you don't know SH*T about these girls. You're making wild assumptions and you have never seen these girls...EVER! They were not out of shape. They were dismissed so Sulivan could have scholarships available for DISTANCE runners in Fall of 2015. Now that she has released them those scholarships ARE officially available for this years recruiting class. This year the early signing has facilitated Sulivan to want those scholarships now.

I don't think ACC's remarks were assumptions. These girls might have been in shape, but that doesn't mean they were in SEC shape. There's a BIG difference.

Also, I think you are the one "assuming" that these athletes were cut so that BAS can bring in DISTANCE runners. I would assume that she wants SEC talent.

I agree with some of the more recents posts. I initially felt sympathy for these athletes, but I am now starting to get annoyed with the parents and all of the drama. This is going to end up hurting the athletes if the parents don't let it go and stop blowing up these forums.

The new schools are getting an inside look at what's coming their way when they get these new athletes AND their parents.

Stop the Madddnnneesss wrote:

I agree with some of the more recents posts. I initially felt sympathy for these athletes, but I am now starting to get annoyed with the parents and all of the drama. This is going to end up hurting the athletes if the parents don't let it go and stop blowing up these forums.

The new schools are getting an inside look at what's coming their way when they get these new athletes AND their parents.

LOL @ attempt to blackball the victims. Is this a new tactic from the staff of UT?

If it was my kid, I would have them stay and take the free year. Red shirt and then go compete for 4 years for a coach that wants them.

Remember the September Six!!!

Beth, get OFF the message boards. The people posting are not the parents, they are concerned track fans who are disturbed about what you have done. Even if they were the "parents" they are 100 percent justified to complain. You, nor any of your sockpuppet "supporters" still haven,t said anything at all to justify your terrible actions.

...but don't they run track in the spring? What kind of shape should a hurdler be in September? When does indoor track start?

The new early signing period does not allow coaches to offer scholarship dollars that are not currently available or expected to be available via graduation or exhausted eligibility.

This is why it benefited BAS to cut these girls now rather than after this season. She could not recruit with these girls' dollars unless they were off the team.

The truly despicable aspect of this is that she made sure she looked good in the media by "keeping the recruiting class intact" (her words) and at the same time making sure these girls never showed up on another conference rival's roster. She knew what she was going to do before school ever began. She could have done the right thing and let them loose during the summer and let them go where they would be wanted.

These girls did nothing wrong and (in the case of the three scholarship athletes) are definitely SEC material, albeit not full scholarship SEC.

As a long time and successful DI coach, I find her actions reprehensible. "Remember the September Six" will be repeated every time BAS name is mentioned to remind people what an injustice she oversaw in this situation.

Wow, 19 pages of nothing. It looks like about 4 or 5 people have posted multiple times. Whoever it was who said Beth is looking better and better is right. At first glance her actions look terrible, but after the 19 pages of complaining by a few people it looks like a witch hunt. The "September six", won't be remembered next year if UT turns it around. You're fooling yourself if you think that phrase is clever or that it will stick. Remember people it's just Track and Field. If the ladies want vindication the best avenue is for all six girls to score at Nationals. If the difference between being a top ten or top three team is the points scored by those athletes BAS will look like an idiot. If they just fade to black, no one will remember. If they become what people on this thread think they have the potential to be, that will speak louder than anything.

Feel free to attack my spelling and grammar or my point. It won't hurt my feelings, and I'll never see the remarks. This thread has run it's course. There is no substance here. Just one side treating an article like the gospel truth and the other side speculating on "what ifs"

Since there seems to be a question that so many people could feel that what BAS did is wrong, here is how to make it clear to UT that this is not how decent coaches and universities treat their athletes. I am mailing a letter to the president of the school and encourage everyone who feels similarly to do the same. It doesn't matter how long or short, signed or not--please put your words in writing and send it to:

Dr. Joe DiPietro, 831 Andy Holt Tower, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996. Or send a fax to: 865-974-3753.

BTW, I am thousands of miles from the school, have never met any of these six girls, but am the parent of an elite track athlete. The actions of this coach are inexcusable. I am spreading the word to all of the track community that I interface with about how UT treats their recruits and walk-ons. I encourage all of the posters who have expressed similar outrage (95% of these posts) to do likewise. Surely there are better schools and athletic opportunities than UT.

New to thread wrote:

Wow, 19 pages of nothing. It looks like about 4 or 5 people have posted multiple times. Whoever it was who said Beth is looking better and better is right.

Beth, STFU. "New to thread"? ROTFLYAO

The real villian here is the NCAA.

They should treat all sports equally. For the NCAA to say that some sports, ie gymnastics with a relatively low participation rate, MUST be given full scholarships while track athletes who come from a substantially larger competitive pool can have their scholarships divided into partials is mind boggling. And for a full season sport (CC) to be allocated zero scholarships is equally insane.

You can maintain that football gets 85 scholarships because it generates income and I get that. But for the NCAA to say running can ONLY get 15? Why? So that Cheap State University can remain competitive withouth having to invest in any athletes? It should be up to each University to choose whether or not to fully fund any sport.

And Title IX is not to blame for the problems occuring in many of the minor sports. Again, it is the NCAA's rules that are the issue.

At the end of the day nothing will happen. BAS will continue to live in la-la land.

Wasn't the first time she pulled this and it won't be the last.

Good points, the best recourse for the girls is to transfer and shove it down her throat. There are waiver's that the conference office can grant that allows the girls to transfer within the SEC and compete immediately. It's also a good deal to anyone with aid left at semester. 1/2 price year 1. I don't have a dog in the hunt, but I do have a daughter, and would be outraged if she were treated in the manner that the article suggested. There is a human component when it comes to letting someone go, whether it's a relationship, or a business decision, there should be a certain level of tact involved. I also agree that too many of the posters here on L.R. have gotten away from the facts and let their emotions paint a picture of a witch hunt. The facts against BAS are strong enough. Attacking her with accusations not substantiated by the article or anything else other than personal relationships that may or may not be accurate, actually invalidates your argument to an extant. Because the decision makes no sense, (from a business standpoint) it actually does paint a picture that the girls may have had some fault here. If BAS thought a girl was worth 80% in the B1G than she's probably not worth a full ride in the SEC, but it doesn't make sense to let her go either. The aid is tied up until after the spring semester. Why not at least get something out of the athlete before you let her relocate next year? It very well could be that she's just as much of a witch as the posters here say, but I see the point that too much bashing, makes it look like there's a side of the story we can't see. Again as a father with no skin in the game here, I'd advise the posters to use a little tact themselves for the sake of the girls involved. On a side note, 36 full scholarships in headcount sport fashion that are written for the duration of the athletes eligibility, would solve problems like this. "A good padlock will keep an honest man honest"

The villain isn't the NCAA, it's the captain of the ship at UT. It's the same kind of BS that joker at Ole Miss has been pulling since he took over the program 2 years ago. He's let coaches go to save his own job and athletes go to free up aid, and Beth will do the exact same thing. Unfortunately that's become common in the SEC. When you have a league full of coaches who treat people like commodities this is the kind of BS you can expect. If I were a top tier athlete (which I'm not anymore) I'd look at the Big Ten. At least I can sign a 4 year deal and not have to worry about my coaches ethics as far as my aid is concerned. When coaches don't have the core values to do the right thing, rules need to be implemented that force integrity.

Stop the Madddnnneesss wrote:

One who knows wrote:

ACC coach you don't know SH*T about these girls. You're making wild assumptions and you have never seen these girls...EVER! They were not out of shape. They were dismissed so Sulivan could have scholarships available for DISTANCE runners in Fall of 2015. Now that she has released them those scholarships ARE officially available for this years recruiting class. This year the early signing has facilitated Sulivan to want those scholarships now.

I don't think ACC's remarks were assumptions. These girls might have been in shape, but that doesn't mean they were in SEC shape. There's a BIG difference.

Are you really that stupid or are you just blindly defensive. This is less than two weeks in to the school year for the girls and they are primarily spring athletes. That is covers each of the six (this is not some subset, it is the whole group). Can you just cut the crap on 'these girls were not performing/were misbehaving etc. It just shows how little defense there really is for the actions of the university.

I really dislike athletic scholarships. I know, I went to college on one over thirty years ago. I was a serious student, at or near the top of a very highly ranked national university. For a serious student with significant career aspirations (because professional running only makes sense at best for a handful of people), athletic scholarships, which by their nature make athletics an unfortunate first priority,

don't make much sense.

I tell parents that they are not all they are cracked up to be, and that the focus should be on attending schools which are the best value in terms of education. These parents think I am nuts, until, of course, an issue like we now see at UT arises. The parents typically are over the moon their son or daughter is a "scholarship athlete". I know this sounds harsh, but the one year scholarship terms blessed by the NCAA are one sided and lousy contracts - digest that and live with it. I was one of the top high school athletes in the nation and was then subjected to a lousy athletic contract? You bet. I am now one of the better known people in my profession, and would I sign a one year contract with no upside for great performance other than to live another year? Heck no, not in a million years. Put emphasis on value in education above else. If you want to run, great, do so to express yourself. But don't be tied to an athletic scholarship.

Those contracts are responsible for thousands of degrees that never would have happened otherwise.