Alumnus says coach part of scandal
I By RICHARD OLIVER
Sports Editor
I A claim by an anonymous alumnus that Texas
A&M University Head Basketball Coach Shelby
' Metcalf was part of a recruiting scandal in 1976 is
a “kind of sad situation,” said an Aggie athletic
cial Tuesday.
he claim by the alumnus appeared in an
icle in Tuesday’s Dallas Morning News.
The alumnus is one of three Texas A&M alum
ni who are forever banned from aiding the
r Bnool’s recruiting program after being con-
mpted of giving illegal inducements to former
[Aggie basketball stars Karl Godine and Jarvis
.aCra; Williams.
i EvelJtThe duo played for Houston Kashmere, where
101.71 [they were all-Americas for two straight years.
Bowever, as freshmen at Texas A&M, the
Hiletes were referred to as Frank and Jesse
erdaslAmes or the “Maytag twins” in reference to the
62. alleged illegalities.
The article quotes the anonymous alumnus as
it5-4! admitting to some illegalities in the recruiting
iSheffifjBjort, but said he’s upset Metcalf got off “scot
len SnjKee when he was dead in the middle of the whole
ind Ming.”
“They didn’t want Metcalf,” he told Morning
iwassi N ews reporter Jim Poyner. “They didn’t want to
take it that far.”
|[Metcalf, however, disagrees.
HI was cleared,” he said Tuesday night. “I
even offered to take a polygraph test. The
■t-«(Southwest Conference) investigator said it
wasn’t necessary.”
cting Texas A&M President Charles Sam-
5, (Mh
»o tinif
son, who was then head of the civil engineering
department at the University and also a member
of the SWC hierarchy, confirmed Metcalfs
claim.
“He was available to testify,” he said. “There
was never any question of his availability to tes
tify.”
Cliff Speegle, commissioner of the Southwest
Conference, told the Morning News Metcalf was
simply not asked to testify.
“To my knowledge,” he said, “Shelby was not
asked. The investigator did not see fit for him to,
I guess.”
The unnamed Texas A&M athletic official said
Speegle “could have been a little more emphatic
and simply said Metcalf was cleared.”
The alumnus said Metcalf urged him and the
other recruiters to secure Godine and Williams
by any means because “there was a lot of press
ure on him to win. I think that pressure over
came him.”
Metcalf said the charge is ridiculous because
the Aggies had won the SWC title in 1975 before
Godine and Williams had been on the team, and
there was no one “asking us to repeat.”
“We’d won the championship,” he said. “I
never said that they should do anything like
that. ”
Another athletic official, who was close to the
situation at the time, said he knew the circumst
ances regarding the recruiting “had gotten out of
hand, but I didn’t want to look at it that hard.”
The official added that Texas, Baylor and
Houston were also hot on the trail of Godine and
Williams, and had made similar offers. He added
the pair admitted this under polygraph examina
tion.
Metcalf did not deny he had asked the alumni
to assist in the recruiting effort.
“They came highly recommended as good re
cruiters,” he said. “I asked them to recruit Karl
and Jarvis.
“That was the first time they had recruited
basketball players. They’d never recruited any
thing but football players before then.”
One player who performed under Metcalf for
four years said he knew some things were awry
when he attended the University.
“Lots of crazy things go on,” he said. “Any
school that could lose two top assistants in two
years in a row is in trouble. Things are being run
so funny to me I don’t see how they get by.
“Sure, kids get money. I needed money, but I
didn’t ask. But some kids did. There’s no real
system down there. Everything is sneaky. Lots
of kids see that stuff but they’re afraid to speak
up. So many kids go through hell.”
The alumnus said he was an experienced re
cruiter.
“I had been recruiting for a couple of years
before that, and it had been pretty much on the
up and up,” he said. “Karl and Jarvis, though,
they were the first I’d run into like that. My
regret is my inability to withstand the pressure of
the coach who wanted that kind of kid.”
The charges were many against the two play
ers and their recruiters.
A loan for a 74 Camaro for Godine was co
signed by one Texas A&M former student, and
another alumnus provided Williams with a rent
car. Cash bonuses were also mentioned.
Also, the . unnamed Aggie official added,
Godine had some gasoline paid for and Williams
was, the conference determined, “overpaid” for
labor he did for one of the alumni.
The charges surfaced due to a letter written by
then-Texas coach Leon Black that was distri
buted throughout the conference. The ensuing
investigation began in 1975 and ended the fol
lowing year with the conference suspending the
two players. When the season concluded, the
full-scale NCAA investigation began.
The investigators determined the two players
had suffered enough with the one-year suspen
sion and reinstated them for the 1977-78 season.
Godine and Williams saw little action that
year, something that upset the alumnus.
“Nobody got new cars after the Jarvis and Karl
thing,” said the player, “but we didn’t get some
of the better recruits either. The NCAA knows
everybody’s doing it. The only bad thing about it
is the small schools can’t compete. How could
you not know what’s going on? The mistake was
made, and in order for Texas A&M to keep its
head above water, you got to tell everyone to
deny it.”
The Morning News article states “it absolutely
drives him (the alumnus) into a frenzy when he
recalls the way Metcalf more or less benched
Godine and Williams the rest of the time they
spent at A&M.”
“I must be naive, ” he said, “but I’m not accus
tomed to that kind of disloyalty. After all the
trouble we went through to get them, then he
doesn’t play them. The year of their ineligibility,
they didn’t want to practice with the team, so
Metcalf got his revenge.”
Metcalf scoffs at that idea.
“This is something he’s recalling off the top of
his head after five or six years,” he said. “It’s like
when you whisper something and pass it around
the room and it comes oht completely different.
“I’m going to play the best player. The year
they didn’t practice hurt them. They didn’t want
to practice. I don’t think at that age you can lay
off a year of basketball and not have it hurt them.
“He’s got to realize that any coach is going to
play his best players.”
One Texas A&M official said the two players
were still on scholarship the year they were out.
He added the athletic department has not used
many alumni for recruiting since the violations
occurred, and said Metcalf perhaps used “poor
judgment” in his selection of recruiters at that
time.
But, he said, if Metcalf knew of the violations,
“he kept it very hidden from everyone else.”
Samson said Texas A&M held a clinic last
spring on recruiting. The seminar included peo
ple involved in recruiting, and speakers in
cluded Samson, then-University President Jar
vis Miller, Athletic Director Marvin Tate, and
Speegle.
Also, a panel of student athletes discussed how
they were recruited.
“We got a very good response (from those
attending),” said Samson. “We’d certainly con
sider doing a second one.”
he Battalion
Vol. 74 No. 116
26 Pages in 2 Sections
Serving the Texas A&M University community
Thursday, March 12, 1981
College Station, Texas
USPS 045 360
Phone 845-2611
The Weather
Today
Tomorrow
High ....
61
High
... .65
Low
50
Low
... .53
Chance of
rain .... 50%
Chance of rain . .
. . 20%
Senate recommends $6
service
fee
increase
aii
By TERRY DURAN
I Battalion Staff
The student senate Wednesday recommended a $6 increase in the
Fall 1981 student service fee, from a $33.50-per-student maximum to
$39.50.
•f; The recommendations call for a budget totaling over $2.5 million.
The proposed fee increase and user fees for intramurals and health
center services dominated the Wednesday special senate meeting.
I||Original finance committee estimates called for only a $1 increase,
but Tracy Cox, vice president for finance, said this was the result of a
clerical misunderstanding with University Student Services Vice Pres
ident John Koldus.
I The $6 increase approved by the senate Wednesday night includes
about $125,000 for the hiring of additional staff for the A. P. Beutel
Health Center: two doctors, two nurses and one laboratory technician.
I The finance committee had originally recommended the hiring of
three new doctors, nurses and one technician, which would have
meant a $7 fee increase.
I “In the committee’s opinion,” Cox said, “three (new) doctors
seemed rather inflationary. ”
I Approved health center recommendations total $532,000, a 41 per
cent increase over the 1980-81 figure of $376,000; however, health
center officials had asked for $706,000. Cox said the difference, after
accounting for one less doctor and nurse, would probably have to be
made up from user fees from such services as prescriptions and X-rays.
He emphasized that such fees would be less than the cost for
comparable services elsewhere. Off-campus graduate senator Janet
Golub, author of the bill proposing the health center user fees, said the
most expensive X-rays would not be much over $5.
Other recommendations in the packet include:
— $436,000 for the intramural program, a 14.8 percent increase
over the 1980-81 figure, but much less than the $574,461 requested by
the department.
— $712,867 for the Memorial Student Center fund, a 13.9 percent
increase.
— $385,000 slated for the Personal Counseling Center.
— $154,679 for student activities, a 11.6 percent increase.
A bill that would raise user fees for intramural sports participants
was also passed. Current fees are $5 per team; Cox said several
alternatives, such as a $15 across-the-board fee or a prorated fee,
depending on class, were discussed, along with the possibility of a $1
fee for individual sports.
The student service fee recommendations now go to Koldus, Acting
President Charles Samson and the Board of Regents for approval.
Although 16 bills were on the agenda under “old business,” all but
three were held in committee.
Ag agencies reap good budgets
By LIZ NEWLIN
Battalion Staff
; Texas A&M’s five agricultural services and agencies brought in a
d crop Wednesday in Austin before the House Appropriations
mmittee.
‘The committee was very fair and reasonable and generous, ” said
Dr. Perry Adkisson, deputy chancellor for agriculture, who presented
we request. “We got a very friendly reception. They didn’t ask very
nany questions. In fact, they asked almost none.’
The committee reviewed the budgets for all of Texas A&M’s agricul-
al services and agencies: the Texas Agricultural Extension Service,
leTexas Extension Service, the Texas Veterinary Medical Diagnostic
boratory, the Texas Forest Service, and the Texas Rodent and Pest
ntrol Service.
The committee which must still make decisions on the budget
^mounts in what is known as a “mark-up” session, where representa
tives put final touches on the appropriations bill before it is submitted
on the House floor for final approval. The Senate goes through a similar
procedure, and Tuesday the budgets for the whole statewide Texas
|$&M System were reviewed by the Senate Finance Committee in
another generally friendly session. The budget, which must be
[approved in identical form by both houses, will provide money for
[fiscal year 1982, which begins Sept. 1, 1981, and fiscal year 1983.
Adkisson is optimistic the agriculture budgets will stay about the
same through the mark-up session.
“We don’t have any indication it won’t be good,” he said after he
returned to College Station from Austin. “The legislators understand
the crisis agriculture faces — the serious problems with energy and
inflation.”
That understanding, he said, comes from “good groundwork to
educate the legislators” and a consensus among commodity groups
about what should be requested.
In some cases the committee restored money that had been cut by
the governor’s Budget Board and by the Legislative Budget Board,
which reviews the agencies’ original requests. Adkisson said about
$800, (XX) was restored for construction of a toxicology lab at the Amaril
lo branch of the Texas Veterinary Medical Diagnostic Laboratory.
Money was also restored to the Texas Forest Service budget for a
small research group investigating pest control, wood utilization and
genetics.
He said the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station got almost every
thing it asked for, about $36.3 million for the first year of the biennium
and $39.4 million for the second year.
Before this hearing the budgets were reviewed by the House Agri
culture and Livestock Committee.
Messy but good
Staff photo by Chuck Chapman
Melanie Westerfield and Greg Cizik take
time out from studying to enjoy an ice
cream cone from the Creamery. Even
though the temperatures have only been
reaching the low 70s, ice cream is still a
good way to cool the heat of classes.
ommittee grants 18 of 71 housing policy appeals
By JANE G. BRUST
Battalion Staff
A committee authorized by the Department of Student
flairs has upheld 18 of 71 appeals by fifth-year and graduate
Students requesting on-campus housing for the fall semester.
I The appeals responded to the department’s controversial
Becision not to guarantee housing for fifth-year and graduate
'students, effective the fall of 1981.
I The policy included a provision for appeals which were
Weard by a committee of two University officials and six stu
dents, including one graduate student.
I Ron Sasse, associate director of Student Affairs, said most
If the appeals upheld were brought by students “who demon-
Itrated severe financial need.”
I Committee member Bill Way said some of the students
ippealing were asked to appear before the committee. He
explained that students who will be allowed to remain on
Pmpus because of financial need will be asked to move to the
pss expensive dorms.
I The committee set the condition so that someone claiming
has financial hardship would not be living on campus in
pton Hall, one of the most expensive dorms, Way said.
I Some other cases upheld were cases were a roommate
-jdc jjives with a handicapped as an attendant and they want to stay
together,” Way said.
Handicapped students, athletes. Residence Hall Associa
tion officers, resident advisers and head residents are exempt
from the policy.
Way said a few cases were upheld because of health
reasons. Some students need to stay on campus because of
restricted diets and health needs, he said.
Of the students who appealed, Way said, many said they
had a financial need to stay on campus. Some students said
they wanted to remain on campus for their last semester at the
University. Others said it would be difficult to set up an
apartment for one semester. Some students want to stay near
research they are conducting on campus.
Way said the majority of appeals were filed by fifth-year
students, not by graduate students.
Some graduate student leaders have spoken out against the
new policy, saying it discriminates against graduate and fifth-
year seniors. They also complain that the Department of
Student Affairs did not provide adequate opportunity for
input from the affected students.
Aubrey Johnson, Graduate Student Council president, said
graduate students are an integral part of the University but
they feel they are treated like second class citizens.
“Our basic concern is that this is a policy to affect all
incoming single graduate students,” he said, “and we were
not asked for an opinion.
“We’re concerned on the long-term effect this could have
on the graduate program.”
Johnson said on-campus housing is an attraction for gradu
ate students because of the convenience. He said the new
policy may deter the graduate school’s efforts to attract new
students.
“The graduate programs are generally what will build a
university’s reputation, ” he said. “To be more than just a state
university, there has to be a quality graduate program.”
Student Senator Fred Seals, also a graduate student, said
there is a general concern among graduate students. “We
wonder, ‘Where do we fit in?”’ he said.
“My main concern is that the groups affected were not
contacted for input,” Seals said. “The graduate council was
not asked to provide input.” He pointed out that the sole
graduate student on the appeals committee is an employee of
the Department of Student Affairs.
“I’m not sure where that individual’s loyalties lie,” he said.
Ron Blatchley, director of Student Affairs, said the policy
had been “kicked around” for over a year before the decision
was made and during that time he did solicit opinions from
students.
He also said both Brad Smith, student body president, and
Sherrie Balcar, RHA president, had opportunity to change or
add to their appointments to the policy implementation com
mittee in order to form the appeals committee. However, the
same group comprised the appeals committee.
In a previous story in The Battalion, Blatchley admitted he
“goofed” when the policy decison made in July was not for
mally announced until October. Blatchley did say, however,
that 120 fifth-year students were notified about the policy
over the summer. He said he sent out letters asking fifth-year
students to give up their on-campus spaces voluntarily, to
accomodate more freshmen.
The policy itself is a result of complaints from students and
parents who say freshmen have more difficulty adjusting to
college life when they must live off-campus.
“If it makes them more comfortable on campus. I’m for it, ”
Blatchley said.
He said he has heard complaints from fifth-year and gradu
ate students who say they experience trauma also and they do
not have adequate time to prepare for apartment life.
“The moratorium issue was a mute issue in my opinion
because the .freshmen setting up apartments are in the same
boat,” Blatchley said. He added that graduates and fifth-year
students should be able to adjust to apartment life.