Been avoiding this but finally spilling my thoughts.

[NU_Alum]

The lawsuit stated that the University didn't order an investigation. If that it is true, which it might not be, that was an egregious error, especially if there were differing stories about what the relationship was or if there was any wrongdoing.

Something that could have happened is that there was an investigation but Scoggins wasn't interviewed or made aware of the investigation. This too would be an oversight to not try and gain an understanding from someone who might have been a victim in this situation.

The only way I can see not opening an investigation at all is if they both admitted to wrongdoing and she never mentioned that he had used his position of power as leverage over her. Even then, I struggle to believe that Nebraska's legal team would have simply let everything get swept under the rug, knowing a lawsuit could be possible.

Does an investigation have anything to do with calling the cops? I'm still laughing at this.

If the university knew what happened you can bet they spoke to everyone involved and had HR/attorney involved. Maybe it was more an informal investigation. Maybe the player, at that time, didn't want anymore to come out. Maybe she didn't participate in the investigation/dodged questions or whatever. No idea, lots of different scenarios that could have happened to get here. I've seen people sue when they are way in the wrong before. Again, no idea if this is that case or not. Lots TBD still.

And yet, the cops being called by someone in Nebraska that wasn't in PA about a situation he heard 2nd or 3rd hand and still has to guess if it's accurate and then guess if a crime's been committed and then guess what harm has occurred (criminal harm), and guess why the "victim" didn't call the cops at the time. It's hilarious, but some people think they know everything and love attention.

 

[Nehunter88]

College kids don't have a track record of just making a lot of great decisions. If I was the University, I would have opened an investigation and met with every single member of the team to ask what they knew, suspected, told, etc. and at what point they had experienced those. Similarly, I would attempt to get to the root of why they felt like this was the best approach for the situation, not because you can fix what happened, but because it might be indicative of a larger cultural issue that needs to be addressed.

Yeah college kids make bad decisions, and how they handled this is one of them. But I can see them not wanting to go to coach Williams making claims about coach Love without something more than their suspicions.

 

[Bigger Ed]

Yeah college kids make bad decisions, and how they handled this is one of them. But I can see them not wanting to go to coach Williams making claims about coach Love without something more than their suspicions.

Particularly in primary and secondary education systems, the mantra is, "If you see something, say something." You're not required to have proof. You're obligated to report your suspicions and let administration follow up. I make the assumption this is true in collegiate situations as well, especially since the Sandusky scandal.
I worked in Omaha Public Schools for 8 years and this was stressed in annual training; recognizing yellow and red flags and reporting anything suspicious. Like the policy or not, you were not allowed to make judgements; you were required only to make reports.
Under sucha policy, the players were not required to present proof, only suspicions that something was amiss. I don't know what UNL's policies were at the time.

 

[RedRum]

I don't completely disagree with you, but a lot of this comes down to whether she entered the relationship by force or not. If she was groomed, threatened, forced, or manipulated into it, she deserves to be treated with a lot more grace than someone who just willfully engaged in it.

He should have lost his job regardless, but if she was the victim, as her lawsuit outlines, it should have been handled in a different manner than if she was not one.

What do you mean groomed? Force or not?

Let's put this in perspective.

She graduated High School in 2016. Garrett McGuire was a junior when she was a senior.

She turns 26 in a month.

 

[Cornhuskers7]

What do you mean groomed? Force or not?

Let's put this in perspective.

She graduated High School in 2016. Garrett McGuire was a junior when she was a senior.

She turns 26 in a month.

You can still have people in positions of power use that power to their advantage. That isn't something that only happens to people who are underaged. Similar situation to Ime Udoka when he got suspended by the Celtics.

 

[Cornhuskers7]

Does an investigation have anything to do with calling the cops? I'm still laughing at this.

If the university knew what happened you can bet they spoke to everyone involved and had HR/attorney involved. Maybe it was more an informal investigation. Maybe the player, at that time, didn't want anymore to come out. Maybe she didn't participate in the investigation/dodged questions or whatever. No idea, lots of different scenarios that could have happened to get here. I've seen people sue when they are way in the wrong before. Again, no idea if this is that case or not. Lots TBD still.

And yet, the cops being called by someone in Nebraska that wasn't in PA about a situation he heard 2nd or 3rd hand and still has to guess if it's accurate and then guess if a crime's been committed and then guess what harm has occurred (criminal harm), and guess why the "victim" didn't call the cops at the time. It's hilarious, but some people think they know everything and love attention.

I'm talking about an internal investigation, not a police investigation. Other people have suggested the cops should have been called about the players obtaining access to the coach's room. I am not in that camp.

 

[NU_Alum]

I'm talking about an internal investigation, not a police investigation. Other people have suggested the cops should have been called about the players obtaining access to the coach's room. I am not in that camp.

Provided the university knew about this, I can promise you an investigation happened. Maybe more informally than some might have liked, but it happened. People were talked to, statements written, etc...

I wouldn't be surprised if they requested video from the hotel or statements from the hotel about who did what/when.

 

[Nehunter88]

Particularly in primary and secondary education systems, the mantra is, "If you see something, say something." You're not required to have proof. You're obligated to report your suspicions and let administration follow up. I make the assumption this is true in collegiate situations as well, especially since the Sandusky scandal.
I worked in Omaha Public Schools for 8 years and this was stressed in annual training; recognizing yellow and red flags and reporting anything suspicious. Like the policy or not, you were not allowed to make judgements; you were required only to make reports.
Under sucha policy, the players were not required to present proof, only suspicions that something was amiss. I don't know what UNL's policies were at the time.

I agree, I think I was looking at it from the player's point of view. If she's getting playing time because of their relationship, we say something and we're wrong how would that affect our playing time. We better be sure before saying anything, so we confront our teammate in a situation where she has to own up to what's happening.

Again it wasn't the right way to do it, but if that was their thinking I can understand it.

 

[Yoda]

Please find any post where I said that my belief was that there wasn't even players going into the room. Why are you making things up? Why are you stating falsehoods? Are you intentionally misrepresenting what has been said; or, are you just unable to comprehend what has actually been stated?

...

Post 15 and 29

Are you serious...or just unable to comprehend the written language?

Post 15:

Where are you getting your information that the "practice player" went into the room? What police was Trev supposed to call? When did he become aware? What was the crime that the police needed called for?

Absolutely nothing that indicates a belief that players didn't go into the room.

Post 29:

You respond to a post asking specific questions, including sources for certain statements (that were not contained in the complaint or any other article) and also asking what cops should be called and for what crime, and want to go down a tangent of allegations rather than sources for the allegations and other statements? That's interesting. Nutt'n to do with what I like or don't. But assertions not based on 'fact' or factual allegations don't help, and statements about calling the cops in the context of what is going on are ill informed. Whether you like it or not...discussion of actual facts and asserted facts is important...references to unestablished facts and factual allegations not made only serves to dumb the discussion down. It was stated as a fact that the the other practice player went into the room. First time I'd heard or read that allegation. Asking for the source of that allegation should be fair game...but apparently not.

You believe the system didn't work (wasn't followed), but can't explain the basis of that belief? Normal peeps would question their beliefs if they can't explain them, rather than relying on others to explain their beliefs. You seem to be ignoring your statement that the system wasn't followed, but waiting for others to tell you how it wasn't. That is a bold strategy.

Yep, again absolutely nothing referencing a belief or opinion that players didn't go into the room.

This is why you have no credibility. Anyone with an elementary understanding of the English language would not read any of those posts to indicate a belief was expressed similar to the one you claim was. You should give honest discussion a try sometime..

 

[Yoda]

Being alone in a coach of the opposite sex's hotel room with the door closed (whether he was in there or not) would be a major no-no. That alone should have prompted an investigation, even if they both adamantly denied any wrongdoing. You can't even have the appearance that something like that could be going on if you are a male coach.

Probably, maybe? Does it depend? Why just a coach of the opposite sex?

And, assuming just this warrants an "investigation"...what level of investigation? Is it internal to the team? Does it have to get 'larger' just because two people of the opposite sex were in a room together (and in this circumstance, there potentially was only 1 person in the rom).

 

[NU_Alum]

Probably, maybe? Does it depend? Why just a coach of the opposite sex?

And, assuming just this warrants an "investigation"...what level of investigation? Is it internal to the team? Does it have to get 'larger' just because two people of the opposite sex were in a room together (and in this circumstance, there potentially was only 1 person in the rom).

I imagine an investigation, internal only, would be warranted IF the university knew of a relationship between a coach and a player. It would makes sense, to me and based on my experience, to at least talk with everyone involved and make sure the facts are known. Where there promises of playing time, gifts, improper power dynamics at play, causing morale issues with the team, etc...

I have no idea why the room situation really matters except/unless it's what led to the U knowing about the relationship.

 

[Hville]

Are you serious...or just unable to comprehend the written language?

Post 15:

Absolutely nothing that indicates a belief that players didn't go into the room.

Post 29:

Yep, again absolutely nothing referencing a belief or opinion that players didn't go into the room.

This is why you have no credibility. Anyone with an elementary understanding of the English language would not read any of those posts to indicate a belief was expressed similar to the one you claim was. You should give honest discussion a try sometime..

You should try being honest. Kettle calling the pot black. Its so obvious you questioned it. You asked where I was getting the information and not only me but another poster responded. Then you even questioned the credibility of the media source so I had to find it in the actual lawsuit. Good day. Can't deal with your misdirection BS trying to be right.

 

[Cornhuskers7]

Probably, maybe? Does it depend? Why just a coach of the opposite sex?

And, assuming just this warrants an "investigation"...what level of investigation? Is it internal to the team? Does it have to get 'larger' just because two people of the opposite sex were in a room together (and in this circumstance, there potentially was only 1 person in the rom).

There isn't a good explanation for a female player to be alone in a male coach's hotel room, or for them to be in that room alone together. Coach of the same sex could also be an issue, but there are certain lines you can't allowed to be crossed if you are a male coach.

Speaking as a male who has coached females, you have to go out of your way to get nowhere near lines that could be potentially misconstrued. Having a female player in your hotel room is well over that line.

When you start dealing with investigations, it is generally best for it to be something a third party or someone with at least legal knowledge handles or supervises the handling of.

 

[Cornhuskers7]

Provided the university knew about this, I can promise you an investigation happened. Maybe more informally than some might have liked, but it happened. People were talked to, statements written, etc...

I wouldn't be surprised if they requested video from the hotel or statements from the hotel about who did what/when.

I concur, which is why I have my doubts about at least some of what is outlined in the lawsuit.

 

[Yoda]

The lawsuit stated that the University didn't order an investigation. If that it is true, which it might not be, that was an egregious error, especially if there were differing stories about what the relationship was or if there was any wrongdoing.

Something that could have happened is that there was an investigation but Scoggins wasn't interviewed or made aware of the investigation. This too would be an oversight to not try and gain an understanding from someone who might have been a victim in this situation.

The only way I can see not opening an investigation at all is if they both admitted to wrongdoing and she never mentioned that he had used his position of power as leverage over her. Even then, I struggle to believe that Nebraska's legal team would have simply let everything get swept under the rug, knowing a lawsuit could be possible.

What was to investigate as to the hotel hijinks? Contrary to misinformation being put forth by another poster, is there really anything to investigate? What harm was caused to Scoggins for the failure to investigate this? Seriously, what was there to investigate and why is this important? What additional information could have been discovered from an investigation conducted a day or more after the incident, after the 2 team members went to the coach with the video?

Keep in mind, that a few days after the hotel room hijinks, and with her parents at a meeting with at least Trev and Williams, Scoggins continued to deny any type of illicit relationship with Love. At this point, she has maintained a lie after the initial even in Pennsylvania, and apparently to her parents too.

Timeline: Hotel room hijinks. Scoggins and Love deny anything sexual. Scoggins suspended form team (maybe kicked off or quits within a few days. Love is placed on paid admin leave. Day or a few later, Scoggins continues to deny any illicit behavior. Scoggins finally makes a Title IV complaint on March 11, approximately 1 month later.

Gathering form Scoggins complaint, at no point prior to March 11 is there an allegation or statement that Scoggins even admitted to the relationship. March 11 based on the complaint appears to be the first time issues of power and control are raised. This is after she is either voluntarily or involuntarily removed from the team, and after she lost certain perks that came from being a scholarship player. Of course once the Title IX complaint is made, there has to be action taken related to that complaint.

However, there's no allegation as to whether any other investigation had been taken place, and even if it had, whether Scoggins had any right to that investigative material at that time. There's approximately a 1 month time period where Scoggins herself is at best interfering with an investigation, and at worst preventing it by lying about the nature of her relationship with Love.

I'd like to hear what exactly the University should have been investigating in this time period.