It's a little odd that you keep repeating things like "one side is told by disgruntled, underachieving folks instead of investigating facts" -- are you making up these things as you go along? If you have to make up facts, and cannot stick to real world events, it means you don't have a real argument.
I don't really get what you, and other defenders of the University of Tennessee, and Beth Alford-Sullivan are trying to justify. If you don't know any better, it could make sense when you make up facts, to make it seem like this is just normal cut of under-performing athletes. But the fact is, this kind of cut, at this time of year, of your top freshman recruits, before they've even had a chance to perform, looks pretty much unprecedented. No one understands it. And it seems to me completely unnecessary. I don't see the urgency of not letting them compete this year, and waiting to replace them next year, while giving the athletes time to setup a situation to transfer next year. The scholarship money is already gone for this year, and it hardly seems like the radical changes will bring any benefits in the first year.
From "The Shadow League" article, we see that those athletes that were cut were not just low level performers who couldn't make the cut. In the case of Morgan Harvey, for example, she was one of the nation's top recruits, and the fastest sprint/hurdler on the team.
Others seem to assume that for the athletes, it's somehow only about the scholarship money -- that's it's OK because they could still keep the money this year. In a shallow world, where money is the only important thing, getting "one year of FREE school" makes it sound like there is no damage. But the reality and the tragedy of this situation is that a bargain was struck between the athletes and the university that ultimately wasn't honored by the university, through no fault of the athlete. The athletes had several choices to make, and some chose to go to Tennessee based on the strength of the better offer -- an offer that ultimately was too good to be true. When a university offers you a full scholarship because of your desire and proven ability to run track, then actually running track for the university is a pretty high expectation. When you do not honor your commitments, (regardless of abiding by legal and contractual terms, which I'm sure favor the university), it is still correct to say the reneging of the bargain is dishonorable.
What the University of Tennessee, and Beth Alford-Sullivan lost, and deserve to lose, was honor and trust. Future student athletes should be skeptical, and question whether the school can be trusted to help develop the potential careers of these athletes.