Smells like Team Spirit?

The stench from Eugene is wafting north up I-5, and it has nothing to do with the use of certain "illegal substances." The University of Oregon’s response to the Ernie Kent controversy reeks of stonewalling.

Last Thursday Oregon athletic director Bill Moos announced the extension of men’s basketball coach Ernie Kent’s contract by one year, exercising the annual rollover condition. This announcement comes amidst persistent rumors about Coach Kent and what Kent described euphemistically in a press release as “family problems.” Specifically, the rumors are centered on alleged marital infidelity and certain recruiting violations.

If the speculation about Kent’s personal life is rumor only, why has the university handled the situation in such a covert manner?

Most Pac-10 coaches have a contract with a rollover clause, meaning their deal is automatically extended another season assuming the university does not negate the provision. Rollovers are seldom cause for a press conference and news release; besides, Kent’s rollover was already announced June 20.

A few months ago the Oregonian made a public records request to the university for documentation of Kent’s travel reimbursement and calls made on his university cell phone last year. According to the Oregonian, the university’s general counsel Melinda Grier responded to the request with a statement declaring she, “found no inappropriate expenditures or requests for reimbursement by Ernie Kent.”

The Oregon Open Records law grants free public access to government documents; the university seems curiously reluctant to comply with this statute.

It was also reported by the Oregonian that a lawyer was involved in preparing a statement dismissing these rumors. University sports information departments generally do not enlist the services of attorneys when drafting personal statements.

On top of all this, Kent has yet to address these rumors in a forthright manner. He cancelled two interviews with the Oregonian’s John Canzano and the Eugene Register-Guard. He instead opted for a soft press release making no mention of the specifics surrounding the controversy.

Moos has offered nothing but support for Kent saying, “I can personally attest to the integrity and leadership Ernie demonstrates for our student athletes.” According to Moos, “Our commitment and support of Ernie has never been a question.”

Moos’ handling of the situation raises more questions than it answers. With controversy and questions surrounding the program, Moos has offered unwavering, blind support. He has mentioned neither an investigation into the circumstances nor any intention to do so. Wouldn’t the director of athletics better serve Duck fans and supporters by addressing the issue head on?
If Kent's only wrong doing was marital infidelity, it seems curious the university would take such drastic measures to avoid the issue.

With such persistent rumors and evasive responses by Kent and the university athletic department, it seems that Kent’s actions may extend beyond the personal sphere and into the realm of NCAA infractions.

Circling the wagons is a predictable response. However, Moos would be well advised to take a page from Bob DeCarolis’ playbook and launch an investigation into these matters and make public his findings. Only in this way can the basketball program quash the rumors and restore credibility to Kent and the program.

Without a forthright inquiry, Kent might have a difficult time convincing the parents of high school basketball stars that their son is in good hands. The controversy may have already affected one Oregon prep prospect. Kevin Love, son of former University of Oregon basketball standout Stan Love, and widely considered the best prep player in Oregon, does not list Oregon as one of his “favorite schools.”

If in fact a cover up is taking place, past and present political events show the folly of concealment. It is always the cover up that draws more public outcry and censure than the initial misdeed itself.

Kent's future with the Ducks is on shaky ground and I do not think we have heard the last of this story.