not sure Isal, but I'll second Flutterby...
and back to '94... I always felt that that was largely the result of DMN reporting and the supv out to make a story versus having reported the athlete's work habits during the job to his mgmt and/or the team/ coaching/ etc during the period that the work was happening or not as the case may be... the Hill episode was aged by nearly a year b4 it broke when if it had been handled like any other case of employee performance it would have been a non-story... moral-> coaches must know what their players are up to all of the time.
on 2nd thought- we definitely were made the example in '94 for the big schools to know what to expect...