KState Will Not Release Leticia Romero | Page 4 | The Boneyard

KState Will Not Release Leticia Romero

Status
Not open for further replies.
I googled Raging battle continues over Romero

got go powercat/ rivals.com story... is that it? It's a bit old... the coaches all have jobs in CO and their school is not on her list....
( that link won't work here either)
 
TDiNozzo said:
I googled Raging battle continues over Romero

got go powercat/ rivals.com story... is that it? It's a bit old... the coaches all have jobs in CO and their school is not on her list....
Expand ...

That's correct. The article is from April. But there is other content in there...
 
elzorrogris said:
So, Meyers, (and maybe Ozzie too), you are of the opinion that, in spite of the fact that the coaching team which recruited her to KSU has all been fired, that the school is entirely justified in refusing to grant the young lady a release,
Expand ...
No absolutely not. Where would you get that????????

elzorrogris said:
If this is not defending them, what is it, pray tell?
Expand ...
I haven't defended them at all. I said they were stupid. I said I don't like what they are doing. I said they should pack it in, give her the release and move on. I said she is getting F&*$ed by them. How pray tell is that defending them????
 
RadyLady said:
Try this link

The site appears to not to want to let me link to it. So I suggest you go to

https://kansasstate com/

and in the web search field, type
Raging battle continues over Romero

I just was able to get to the article doing this. I could copy and paste the relevant stuff here, but without the link, it is useless
Expand ...

All of the links aren't working - wonder if KState has blocked them?
 
elzorrogris said:
So, Meyers, (and maybe Ozzie too), you are of the opinion that, in spite of the fact that the coaching team which recruited her to KSU has all been fired, that the school is entirely justified in refusing to grant the young lady a release, and this in spite of the fact that they have nothing to gain and she has a great deal to lose, is that correct? In other words, because they have the power to refuse to release her, they also have the right to do so? "She should have read the fine print"? "All that is legal is justified"? "Caveat emptor"? Do you realistically think that there was any way she could or should have anticipated this sort of situation? If this is not defending them, what is it, pray tell?

Incidentally, RadyLady's link will not work for me. I would be interested to see the article.
Expand ...

I don't think Meyers is saying that at all. He clearly disdains what the University is doing. As I see it, he is objecting to some of the terminology some of us have been using. No one is defending KState here.
 
Last edited:
.-.
cabbie191 said:
All of the links aren't working - wonder if KState has blocked them?
Expand ...

You know, I don't know. It is odd, I'll give you that. TDiNizzo googled the title of the article and was able to find it:

Raging battle continues over Romero

 
Ozzie Nelson said:
I just checked...this was my only post in this thread, and I clearly take her side.

"I am just wondering, what could Ms Romero have done that was wrong, as in facts we don't know?"

I am not happy with your mistake.
Expand ...

My apologies. I took your Tennessee Ernie post as making light of Ms. Romero's financial difficulties. Obviously you did not mean it that way, but it sure looked like it. My bad.
 
From the above-linked Mercury article....

One of the issues in play is what took place — or didn’t take place — during the appeals hearing itself, led by K-State vice president of student life Pat Bosco. The committee, “comprised of individuals from the institution’s main campus and outside of athletics,” according to the school’s student-athlete handbook, failed to record the session or produce a transcript, despite assurances that it would.


Romero asked to record the hearing and after being told she could, Sonia Topliff, who works in Bosco’s office, later told Romero, it wasn’t necessary because K-State would take care of it and make it available.


“You do not have to provide your own recording equipment,” Topliff wrote in e-mail to Romero the morning of her hearing that was obtained by The Mercury. “The university will record your meeting with the hearing panel and make it available to you upon your request.”


Romero never received an audio recording or a transcript like she requested.


“Is there a transcript of tape of the hearing? No,” Jackson said. “These people knew exactly what they were doing. They didn’t want a record of it. They lied to her about recording and did not create a record of it — told her there was no copy.”
 
pap49cba said:
From the above-linked Mercury article....

One of the issues in play is what took place — or didn’t take place — during the appeals hearing itself, led by K-State vice president of student life Pat Bosco. The committee, “comprised of individuals from the institution’s main campus and outside of athletics,” according to the school’s student-athlete handbook, failed to record the session or produce a transcript, despite assurances that it would.

Romero asked to record the hearing and after being told she could, Sonia Topliff, who works in Bosco’s office, later told Romero, it wasn’t necessary because K-State would take care of it and make it available.

“You do not have to provide your own recording equipment,” Topliff wrote in e-mail to Romero the morning of her hearing that was obtained by The Mercury. “The university will record your meeting with the hearing panel and make it available to you upon your request.”

Romero never received an audio recording or a transcript like she requested.

“Is there a transcript of tape of the hearing? No,” Jackson said. “These people knew exactly what they were doing. They didn’t want a record of it. They lied to her about recording and did not create a record of it — told her there was no copy.”
Expand ...
KState needs to keep digging....the hole isn't big enough yet. :eek:
 
Ok, Meyers, I apologize to you too. If you say you are not defending them, then you weren't. Some of your posts sure sounded like you were saying that they really owed her nothing and were doing her no damage. Obviously that was not your intent, so apologies.

connfan68 said: ↑

Not quite. They are denying her the opportunity to continue her studies, as she can't afford it as a non-scholarship student. K-State may not get another decent wcbb recruit in a long time. Serves them right.

Well that's not true. She can go to K State for free. AND like millions of other people who can't afford to go to college, it's not K State's fault they can't afford it.

Meyers said:
Well that's not true. She can go to K State for free. AND like millions of other people who can't afford to go to college, it's not K State's fault they can't afford it.

I'm not defending K State, I don't like what they are doing. But some of you people need to think about what you are saying. The point was, she is not being held "hostage". She's being F& #ed over. And yes hopefully, K State regrets this down the road. (even if they fix it)

She is a financial hostage.

No, not really. She isn't being forced to buy anything. She isn't being forced to pay to leave.

I just don't think "hostage" is the right word.
 
.-.
elzorrogris said:
I just don't think "hostage" is the right word.
Expand ...
I accept that. Perhaps her lawyer's word is better.... "blackmail".

“This is nothing more than an athletic director and a school’s administration using a committee to uphold what is essentially blackmail of a student-athlete,” said Jackson, who told The Mercury financial arrangements have been made by Romero and her family in exchange for his services. “She used that term, blackmail, and the athletic department was troubled by it. She’s an 18 year old. Well, I’m a 48-year-old attorney and I’m using it in a different context.


“This athletic director’s actions amount not only to blackmail in the context she used it, but quite frankly criminal blackmail because he is clearly aware that she is an international student, and under the terms of her student visa, she has to have either money in the bank, financial support or a scholarship to cover the cost of her education. If she does not have that, her status as an international student — with her visa — is now is jeopardy.
 
Anyone surprised by the tone of her lawyer's public remarks? Personally, I'm a bit surprised but I like it. Hope he goes for the juggler on this.
 
meyers7 said:
No absolutely not. Where would you get that????????


I haven't defended them at all. I said they were stupid. I said I don't like what they are doing. I said they should pack it in, give her the release and move on. I said she is getting F& $ed by them. How pray tell is that defending them????
Expand ...
So I am not the only one reading you that way.
 
Icebear said:
So I am not the only one reading you that way.
Expand ...
Meyers problem seems to be my use of the word "hostage". At least that's how this all started. I said I would accept that and defer to Leti's attorney. He chose a different word. :)
 
meyers7 said:
Then you are not reading my posts right.

Then I'm sorry. Use smaller words. ;^)

Sure. But that is not denying her a free education. Actually that is providing her a free education. Which is the exact opposite.
Expand ...

The education is only "free" if she plays basketball for them. She doesn't want to do that and she has no options to continue school without a scholarship. KState screwed this young person badly. Shame on them.
 
Icebear said:
So I am not the only one reading you that way.
Expand ...
You guys need to read better. i.e. not read into things. ;)

And not say things are not true.
pap49cba said:
Meyers problem seems to be my use of the word "hostage". At least that's how this all started. I said I would accept that and defer to Leti's attorney. He chose a different word. :)
Expand ...
And yes, that was my point when I jumped into this.
 
Last edited:
.-.
cabbie191 said:
Anyone surprised by the tone of her lawyer's public remarks? Personally, I'm a bit surprised but I like it. Hope he goes for the juggler on this.
Expand ...

If this were a normal thread, I would post a video of W.C. Fields, but there is nothing at all funny about this situation. Incidentally, I googled Leticia Romero a while ago, and was happy to see that at least one French paper has picked up the story. KSU is going to be a world-wide doofus before this is all over.
 
uconnfan68 said:
The education is only "free" if she plays basketball for them. She doesn't want to do that
Expand ...
Exactly. They are not denying her. It is her choice. They are denying her ability to transfer and be on scholarship.

uconnfan68 said:
KState screwed this young person badly. Shame on them.
Expand ...
Agreed. I've even gone further than screwed, and have said F*&%ed.
 
RadyLady said:
You know, I don't know. It is odd, I'll give you that. TDiNizzo googled the title of the article and was able to find it:

Raging battle continues over Romero
Expand ...
I didn't find much I didn't know or suspect in the article. Deb Patterson was a polarizing and reportedly abusive coach who had a number of personnel issues over the years, an excellent read by Voepel appeared in the Kansas City Star on October 1, 2006 that ended Voepel's friendship with Patterson. It's still on-line if you want to read it. FWIW, and I didn't know it, she is Kamie Ethridge's partner, and that may account for her becoming an Assistant to Ethridge at Northern Colorado (the other 2 KState assistants are also now at No. Colorado), which is a Big Sky school. The Big Sky is Conference is dreadful, IMO - and mostly dominated by Montana.

There is no doubt in my mind that K State suspected tampering, especially given some of the other "stuff" in the article you found. That said, No. Colorado was not on her list - no one claims it was - so, whether or not Patterson et al encouraged her to want to leave, they certainly didn't convince her to come to them.

I really don't care if she told them tall tales and a bunch of lies (not that I think she did). The bottom line is that their system is stacked so that they can deny transfers and take the moral high road while doing so, when there is no real reason to deny the transfer. She doesn't want to be there, she isn't going to play there, the only reason to deny the transfer is because she committed to K State and you sincerely believe that it is your role as an institution of higher learning to hold her to her commitment which was spelled out in K State's rule book. Which is their privilege, and just plain stupid.
 
JS said:
KSU doing justice by clerical error.

Not exactly the high ground, if that's how this ends up getting resolved.
Expand ...
KSU wouldn't recognize high ground if it was situated at the base of the Rocky Mountains.
 
.-.
My impression is that she its permitted to speak with MTSU, but has not been granted a release to there or anywhere else.
Am I mistaken?
 
My email and post to KState.

"The refusal to let Leticia Romero leave unemcumbered is one of the ugliest actions I have ever seen a university taken. You certainly have now succeeded in becoming the scourge of women's college basketball and likely have damaged your academic reputation, as well. Women's fans all over America will make sure that recruits never forget how Kansas State has conducted itself bullying a college freshman."
 
Last edited:
msf22b said:
My impression is that she its permitted to speak with MTSU, but has not been granted a release to there or anywhere else.
Am I mistaken?
Expand ...
You raise a question of some complexity, msf.

Permission to contact a particular school means she can transfer to that school and can receive an athletic scholarship and practice with the team. Absent an exception, she still must sit out a year from competition.

Releases can come into the picture in three ways.

First, she either needs to be released from her National Letter of Intent or fulfill its obligation by completing one academic year at the original school. Seems the latter is imminent if not accomplished, so release from the NLOI is no longer a factor.

Second, releases are necessary to get a one-time exception that would enable her to compete right away at the new school. However, this exception doesn't apply to Div. 1 women's basketball.

Third, some conferences have rules requiring a two-year sit-out for transfers within the conference, unless there's a release. I don't know if the Big 12 has such a rule but if so it could easily enough be avoided by going elsewhere.

Summary: Permission to contact is the key to what she's trying to do, except it's currently limited to one school (albeit one with a pretty darned good basketball program). She won't get rid of the one year sit-out anyway, and the NLOI commitment is gone or all but gone. So as it stands, if she and MTSU are a match, she doesn't have to wait on any release from KSU.
 
Leticia looking at other Options to gain her release. http://themercury.com/articles/romero-exploring-other-options-to-gain-her-release

Another Article: http://www.kansascity.com/2014/05/22/5040578/leticia-romero-still-not-released.html

Don't know why KState doesn't end this publicity disaster by giving her an unconditional release. Looks like those in charge are pi$$ed off and are taking a position, you're not going to force us to do anything and we're going to hell to stand by our original decision that was based on flawed information.

Can't imagine this is going well in the Kansas/Missouri area, which is KState's primary recruiting area for WBB.
 
Last edited:
Just imagine the reaction if Geno, Warde M and UConn had taken a similar position with Engeln, Johnson, Walker or Banks. Not to mention EDD.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,979
Messages
4,547,943
Members
10,430
Latest member
TeganK


Top Bottom