After having had a few days to consider the situation, read some posts and
non-list articles on the subject, and talk with some people who are also
concerned, I'll finally weigh in with some thoughts.
 
In a way, this is a difficult situation for me.  Although I do not consider
myself to be a reporter per se, it has bothered me that because I know and
like many of the people at Maine, it has been hard for me to express an
unbiased opinion, and for that I feel I am letting some people down.  I
probably wouldn't make a very good journalist.
 
What I will try to do here after having had time to think, is to express
just such an unbiased opinion and qualify it by saying that nothing
personal is intended towards anyone at Maine, following Maine, or in any
way connected with the situation.  I welcome comments and rebuttals, but
first, please understand where I am coming from.
 
At 2:58 AM 12/25/95, MR ADAM C WODON wrote:
>I agree completely that these violations are no small
>potatoes.  With all due respect, this is what I meant in my
>prior post about the complete denial many Maine people
>continue to live in.
 
I don't think that most Maine people feel this way.  I do believe that some
are still trying to deny what has happened to a various extent - quotes I
have read from some people in newspaper articles make it clear that they
still believe no wrong was done, while others accept that some wrong took
place but are denying the extent to which it occurred.
 
>   You can point to an incident here or there at another
>school -- you can even rationalize this or that at Maine --
>but for cryin' out loud, when things happen over and over
>and over and over again -- something's wrong.  And then the
>idea of Walsh taking that money while on suspension -- c'mon
>-- people have been fired for a lot less than that.
 
This expresses the concern that I have.
 
I think there are a few different types of violations here.  Some occurred
because of the lack of accountability that the hockey program had and were
not a result of an intent to break rules by the people in charge of the
program.  These are a concern, but they seem to be in the process of being
remedied by the actions the university has taken towards improving its
compliance.
 
The violations that concern me and perhaps many people the most are the
ones where there seemed to have been a pattern of rule-breaking with the
knowledge and apparent consent of the program itself, including Shawn
Walsh.
 
Again, this is not easy for me because Heather and I like Shawn Walsh and
have talked with him several times, and we like what he has done with the
program at Maine overall and for college hockey in general.  But I am
trying to take an unbiased view and say what I think needs to be said.
 
It is difficult not to agree with what Adam says about people having been
fired for less than what Maine says Walsh was guilty of.  It is never easy
to fire someone who has done as much for Maine as Walsh has done and who is
as good a coach as he is.  But Maine is in a heap of trouble, and the only
way for them to fully demonstrate that they are trying to start over may be
for them to disassociate themselves from him, particularly when he was
found by Maine to have been at the root of some of the more serious
violations.
 
If it had been shown that he was unaware of the violations that occurred
and that they were primarily because of the lack of control that the school
itself had over the program, then a strong argument could be made for
keeping him on and simply fixing the source of the problem.
 
But taken together, the violations that do seem to be his fault can be seen
to reflect a pattern of intending to break rules.  This is something the
NCAA takes very seriously.  I am reminded of the situation where Lowell and
then coach Bill Riley were investigated by the NCAA several years ago, and
the result was a year of probation for Lowell and the NCAA's forbidding of
Riley to be involved with college hockey for five years.  The NCAA came
down upon Riley the hardest because he was shown to be someone who knew the
rules very well (some coaches do not), and yet he chose to break some of
them, several times.
 
I think a parallel can be drawn here, because Walsh also knows the rules
very well and apparently chose to break some of them.  The situation where
he, his attorney, and assistant coach were shown to have contacted
investigation witnesses after they had been directed not to, seems to
indicate an intent to somehow subvert the process of the investigation.  I
do not know that this was the case.  But, it is quite possible that the
NCAA will believe that subversion was the intent, and if so, they may well
come down hard.
 
>   And I've never figured out how Dunham came back from the
>Olympics, then played the remainder of that collegiate
>season. I've never seen that before or since.
 
This would have been during the 1991-92 season.  Dunham joined the Olympic
Team in late January, if I remember correctly (just before the Games), and
he was away from Maine for about a month.  I seem to recall that at the
time, it was said that Dunham's coursework was being sent to him and he was
fulfilling it, thus remaining eligible to play when he returned.  It is an
extraordinary and unusual situation.  However, I have also heard of cases
where a regular student suffered some type of injury and was stuck in a
hospital for several weeks, but he/she was still able to do coursework that
was brought to the hospital and keep up in classes.  It is unusual but not
impossible.
 
>Nevertheless, I stand by the notion that Maine got what it
>deserved and Walsh got off easy.
 
Having had a bit of a chance to sense some of the fallout both on and off
the list, I believe that one of the concerns the university should have is
that its punishments are seen by a number of people, including supporters
of the program and Walsh, to have not gone far enough.  Maine President
Frederick Hutchinson drew attention to the fact that they were trying to
take actions to deal with the problems, but if the perception is that they
did not take appropriate actions, then their attempt at self-policing may
fall by the wayside.
 
It may be that the school either cannot fire Walsh, as Deron Treadwell
suggested, or they do not wish to take such a drastic step and would prefer
that if it has to happen, it should be forced by the NCAA.
 
But if the NCAA hands down much more severe sanctions, possibly including a
judgment against Walsh in line with that against Bill Riley, then the
people who say that Maine did not take appropriate action will appear
justified in their viewpoint.
 
 
Finally, as I have said, the release of the report and publication of the
violations bother me personally because as I have said, I like Shawn Walsh.
I believe many people here feel the same way.  It is difficult for me to
reconcile what I know of him with what appears to be a pattern of intended
violations that he was involved in.  I wish I had an answer, but right now
both Heather and I feel very confused as I am sure many people do.  I hope
that someday we'll learn more and perhaps have that feeling of confusion
resolved.
 
I also hope that I've succeeded in my attempt to present an unbiased
opinion given the difficulty of the situation and the personal feelings
that it has evoked in me.  It took me over four days to be able to express
these thoughts on the list.  I look forward to the day when this is all
finally over and the people involved can go about their business normally
again.
 
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                   [log in to unmask]            *HMM* 11/13/93
>> Co-owner of the College Hockey Lists at University of Maine System  <<
*****       Unofficial Merrimack Hockey home page located at:       *****
*****   http://www.tiac.net/users/machnik/MChockey/MChockey.html    *****
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.