One of 10 players who were either dismissed or left the team, the case of former Kansas quarterback Brock Berglund has gained notoriety in recent days when word got out that Berglund found out of his dismissal from the Jayhawks via Twitter, not from the school or head coach Charlie Weis.
Even if Kansas made attempts to contact the troubled QB to inform him of the decision before Weis announced it in his press conference earlier this week, the fact of the matter remains Berglund found out about his dismissal in about the worst way you could imagine.
Legal issues or not, Bergland deserves better. But he didn’t get it, so nothing left to do but move on, right?
Not necessarily. In a press release, Berglund’s attorney writes that not only did Kansas dismiss Berglund from the team for failing to attend a mandatory meeting, they refused to release him from his scholarship despite no apparent request for the latter by Berglund.
Below is a segment of the release, the entirety of which can be read HERE, which picks up at the point where Berglund requested the chance to talk to other schools about a possible transfer.
Despite the information communicated by Coach Weis, Berglund’s written request to KU made clear that it was “simply a request to communicate with other coaches and [was] not intended to alter [his] status as a University of Kansas student athlete in any way.”
What ensued was a six-sentence response letter from Theresa Becker, Associate Athletics Director at KU, which not only denied Berglund’s request to communicate with other coaches but made clear that, while he had not even asked, Berglund would not be released from his commitment to the KU football program. Specifically, Becker stated that:
“[i]n consultation with Dr. Sheahon Zenger, Director of Athletics for the University of Kansas, we are denying your request for permission to have contact with another university regarding your decision to transfer. Additionally, your request to be released from the University of Kansas is also denied.”
The balance of Becker’s letter informed Berglund that he had three business days to appeal KU’s decision to the KU Student-Athlete Appeals Board (SAAB). No reason for the denial or other information was contained in Becker’s response letter.
KU scheduled Berglund’s SAAB appeal hearing after Weis’ press conference, signaling that the athletic administration still intends to defend its denial of Berglund’s request.
“We’re in the institutional appeals process now and we’re not going to comment,” Kansas associate athletic director Jim Marchiony said.
Keep in mind the release is filled with lawyer hyperbole, but the most concerning part is Kansas’ refusal to release Berglund from his scholarship in December when it became apparent that Dayne Crist would be the quarterback for 2012. Additionally, the school intends to deny Berglund’s request to look around at other schools even after being dismissed from the team.
The athletic scholarship, a one-year, merit-based award, remains a ball-and-chain contract for the athlete and simply one of the worst deals in sports. If a kid doesn’t want to be with a program anymore — and it appears Kansas wants nothing to do with Berglund, either — then why should anyone prevent the athlete from leaving whenever they want while coaches control their future with absolutely zero repercussions?
It remains one of the many head-scratchers on an institutional and NCAA-based level.