Skip to content

Kansas State: Leticia Romero ruling ‘final and binding’

May 22, 2014, 1:49 PM EDT

AP Photo AP Photo

Leticia Romero will not be getting her release from Kansas State anytime soon, according to a statement released by the athletic department late on Wednesday night.

“There is no university procedure to reexamine one of those decisions,” the statement, written by VP of Communications and Marketing Jeffery Morris, said. “Thus, the university’s procedure concludes with the Appeal Committee’s decision. Also, the final and binding nature of these decisions does not allow for them to be overturned by university administrators.”

If you have not been tracking this story, Romero, a native of Spain, was a freshman on the Kansas State women’s team last season, leading the 11-19 Wildcats with 14.2 points, 5.2 boards and 4.9 assists. But she asked for a release to transfer after the coaching staff that recruited her was fired.

Kansas State did not grant her that release, in large part because Athletics Director John Currie inaccurately suspected the former coaching staff of tampering. Currie has since written a letter, obtained by the Wichita Eagle, in support of Romero’s attempt to get a release, stating that “although it is unprecedented, I believe that is in the student-athlete’s best interest for the committee to reconvene to consider this new information and potentially approve her request for a conditional transfer release.”

It goes without saying that this ruling is utterly ridiculous.

Let’s ignore, for a second, how hypocritical and wrong it is for a university to be able to deny a STUDENT-athlete the ability to transfer and receive athletic aid from another university. I’m guessing we don’t see this happen too often with chemistry students or business majors.

Currie has since admitted that his suspicions about tampering were inaccurate, but the school is not willing to overturn their ruling that Romero not be granted her release because they already made a decision based off of what has been determined to be incorrect information.

What kind of sense does that make?

In what way is that ruling at all fair for Romero?

Romero can transfer to another school, but if she doesn’t receive a release from Kansas State, she will not be allowed to be on scholarship during her redshirt transfer season. As an international student, she cannot afford to pay her own way. Going to Junior College for a year is an option, but that will cost her a season of eligibility and will be detrimental to what is a very promising hoops career.

This nonsense has simply gone on for too long. Kansas State should be ashamed of what they are doing to Romero.

  1. usm418 - May 22, 2014 at 4:21 PM

    Typical of the NCAA.

  2. sailbum7 - May 22, 2014 at 11:10 PM

    And now come the lawyers! This really is a stupid decision on the party of Kansas State. I think that there needs to be new NCAA rule that if there are major changes in the coaching staff, such as the head coach leaving, that transfer requests are automatically approved. After all, who the coach is factors heavily into the choice of where to go to school for many college athletes. In effect, a coaching change is a change in the circumstances under which the athlete agreed to attend the school. I mean let’s face it, most of these players are not going to school for an education, they are going to play and advertise their skills in the hopes of being drafted by the pros.

  3. bvance18 - May 23, 2014 at 4:56 AM

    Mr. Dauster, The rhetorical questions you pose have actually touched on some dark secrets about Kansas State University as an institution. It is not a place that cares about fairness or that makes sense when it concerns its own mistakes. Administrators at Kansas State rarely take responsibility for their own mistakes. Notice in the quotation the absolute banality of the university’s approach: since there is no procedure to handle this unique set of circumstances, the university administration concurs with the appeal committee’s decision, which is somehow binding and final. Notice the implicit motive to control the fate of this young woman. Even though Currie wrote of the “student-athlete’s best interest,” the university was unmoved. Its response, however, is completely consistent with its character. Kansas State University rarely has its students’ best interests at heart. Only so long as students kow-tow to the groupthink paradigm endemic at the university does the university look favorably upon those students. The operating paradigm at Kansas State University is that students must serve the institution. Students are there to glorify the university, to boost its reputation. The university is not there to serve students really (even though it may seem to be so on the surface). It is an undemocratic, authoritarian, totalitarian, and myopic institution. And for women, it feels as if it is 100 years behind the times, pre-women’s suffrage. Mussolini said something akin to “all within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.” This notion is completely applicable to the culture at Kansas State University. Ms. Romero did not know just how much she was expected to surrender when she accepted her athletic scholarship. Now we all do.

  4. aztecperuano - May 23, 2014 at 9:38 AM

    Here is the link to email Athletics Director John Currie.

  5. socalcharger - May 24, 2014 at 11:24 AM

    Why would anyone choose to play ball at Kansas State after this mess? Dysfunctional.

  6. seanb20124 - May 25, 2014 at 8:29 PM

    How do we know she can’t pay her own way? Has the author of this article examined her parents financial status?

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!