FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

TeamPlayer said:

---

Good post. This board views appreciation for Briles and Rhule as mutually exclusive. It's absurd.

---

Agreed. I do not get why there is some sort of Briles vs. Rhule tribalism.

Briles should be revered for where he took Baylor football to heights where we never thought possible.

Rhule came in at our lowest point and brought remarkable success.

Both should be celebrated for what they did for the university.

Yes, I wish Rhule was still coaching here, but it is not like he left Baylor for Texas or TCU.

---

My main issue with Briles is that his own lack of leadership and integrity ruined what was and should have remained a very good thing at Baylor.

He cut corners you can't cut, especially at a place like Baylor, that a) claims to hold a higher standard, and b) won't get the media indifference/protection that large state schools do.

And it wasn't something that happened to him. It was conscious decisions he made, as his illicit use of and incriminating conversations with a low-rent fixer would prove.

Art Briles was an offensive genius. He should have gone down as one of the great college football coaches of all time. Unfortunately, his own failures kept that from happening, and he took us down with him.

I have good memories from his time in Waco. But I don't have any real reverence for him for that reason.

I have a lot more respect for Rhule, who brought us a high-level of success without sacrificing what we claim to stand for as a university. Same for Aranda as well. He just hasn't won enough, unfortunately.

---

I just did not think Rhule or Areanda do what they did without Briles putting us on the map. He broke the rules necessary to break the ceiling. Caught up with him, picked too many bad apples to get on field talent, no doubt. But he made BU a no laughing stock.

---

The platform that Rhule and especially Aranda were building from was certainly higher than the one Briles inherited. No question about that.

I give him credit for being a good football coach. I give him none for being an organizational leader.

D. C. Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

TeamPlayer said:

---

Good post. This board views appreciation for Briles and Rhule as mutually exclusive. It's absurd.

---

Agreed. I do not get why there is some sort of Briles vs. Rhule tribalism.

Briles should be revered for where he took Baylor football to heights where we never thought possible.

Rhule came in at our lowest point and brought remarkable success.

Both should be celebrated for what they did for the university.

Yes, I wish Rhule was still coaching here, but it is not like he left Baylor for Texas or TCU.

---

My main issue with Briles is that his own lack of leadership and integrity ruined what was and should have remained a very good thing at Baylor.

He cut corners you can't cut, especially at a place like Baylor, that a) claims to hold a higher standard, and b) won't get the media indifference/protection that large state schools do.

And it wasn't something that happened to him. It was conscious decisions he made, as his illicit use of and incriminating conversations with a low-rent fixer would prove.

Art Briles was an offensive genius. He should have gone down as one of the great college football coaches of all time. Unfortunately, his own failures kept that from happening, and he took us down with him.

I have good memories from his time in Waco. But I don't have any real reverence for him for that reason.

I have a lot more respect for Rhule, who brought us a high-level of success without sacrificing what we claim to stand for as a university. Same for Aranda as well. He just hasn't won enough, unfortunately.

---

I just did not think Rhule or Areanda do what they did without Briles putting us on the map. He broke the rules necessary to break the ceiling. Caught up with him, picked too many bad apples to get on field talent, no doubt. But he made BU a no laughing stock.

---

He broke rules that were unnecessary to break to break the ceiling.

While we may certainly say, and rightly so, that Baylor more broadly had real problems with Title IX issues, even independent of the regulations, it is simultaneously true that Briles could have and should have created a system such that the disaster that overtook us would never have happened in his program.

---

Briles had no interest in running a tight, disciplined program. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a liar.

He made conscious choices to take chances on players of questionable character and conscious choices to shield them from accountability when they crossed reasonable boundaries.

Yogi said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

TeamPlayer said:

---

Good post. This board views appreciation for Briles and Rhule as mutually exclusive. It's absurd.

---

Agreed. I do not get why there is some sort of Briles vs. Rhule tribalism.

Briles should be revered for where he took Baylor football to heights where we never thought possible.

Rhule came in at our lowest point and brought remarkable success.

Both should be celebrated for what they did for the university.

Yes, I wish Rhule was still coaching here, but it is not like he left Baylor for Texas or TCU.

---

My main issue with Briles is that his own lack of leadership and integrity ruined what was and should have remained a very good thing at Baylor.

He cut corners you can't cut, especially at a place like Baylor, that a) claims to hold a higher standard, and b) won't get the media indifference/protection that large state schools do.

And it wasn't something that happened to him. It was conscious decisions he made, as his illicit use of and incriminating conversations with a low-rent fixer would prove.

Art Briles was an offensive genius. He should have gone down as one of the great college football coaches of all time. Unfortunately, his own failures kept that from happening, and he took us down with him.

I have good memories from his time in Waco. But I don't have any real reverence for him for that reason.

I have a lot more respect for Rhule, who brought us a high-level of success without sacrificing what we claim to stand for as a university. Same for Aranda as well. He just hasn't won enough, unfortunately.

---

With all due respect, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. This was an issue of Baylor's compliance department being ignorant of new executive orders that were issued in 2011 by President Obama that fundamentally changed the manner in which sexual assault cases are handled under Title IX.

In an effort to make it easier for a woman to successfully claim sexual assault and force legal recourse against a man, the rules were changed regarding how these cases were then processed. The process has been altered again since.

One of my contacts in the Texas Tech Athletic Department back in 2015 opined to me that he was glad Baylor got caught because if Baylor hadn't been caught, they would have because they also were not in full compliance with the new regulations at that time.

Another of my contacts, a major UT donor, stated (in a nutshell) that CAB was getting what he deserved - not for anything he did related to the scandal - but for turning down UT's offer to interview in 2013. He also attributed it to knowing that Baylor's compliance at the time was "completely inept".

So just understand that you are making judgments based on only what you have heard about the story. Much of what you have heard is not true, and that which is true has an underscoring of nefarious events and circumstances that got us to where we are today - and fundamentally changed the manner in which Baylor University, and really all universities, handled these compliance issues thereafter.

And, FWIW, Baylor conducted its own investigation that found no violations by CAB.

We're just a society that has a knee jerk reaction to the words "sexual assault" and so we like to jump to conclusions in nearly all those cases without rationally reviewing the situation. Politicians know this trend, and that is why they take advantage of it.

---

With all due respect, you have well established personal biases where the Briles family is concerned that make it difficult for you to acknowledge the very real role Art played in his own downfall.

Secondly, my criticisms of Briles aren't in regards to the sexual assault scandal itself. They never have been. They are in regards to the complete and intentional lack of program discipline/accountability that not only made such a scandal possible but made it the most likely outcome of a Briles-run program.

We were constantly playing with fire in that era. It was only a matter of time until we got burned.

D. C. Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

TeamPlayer said:

---

Good post. This board views appreciation for Briles and Rhule as mutually exclusive. It's absurd.

---

Agreed. I do not get why there is some sort of Briles vs. Rhule tribalism.

Briles should be revered for where he took Baylor football to heights where we never thought possible.

Rhule came in at our lowest point and brought remarkable success.

Both should be celebrated for what they did for the university.

Yes, I wish Rhule was still coaching here, but it is not like he left Baylor for Texas or TCU.

---

My main issue with Briles is that his own lack of leadership and integrity ruined what was and should have remained a very good thing at Baylor.

He cut corners you can't cut, especially at a place like Baylor, that a) claims to hold a higher standard, and b) won't get the media indifference/protection that large state schools do.

And it wasn't something that happened to him. It was conscious decisions he made, as his illicit use of and incriminating conversations with a low-rent fixer would prove.

Art Briles was an offensive genius. He should have gone down as one of the great college football coaches of all time. Unfortunately, his own failures kept that from happening, and he took us down with him.

I have good memories from his time in Waco. But I don't have any real reverence for him for that reason.

I have a lot more respect for Rhule, who brought us a high-level of success without sacrificing what we claim to stand for as a university. Same for Aranda as well. He just hasn't won enough, unfortunately.

---

I just did not think Rhule or Areanda do what they did without Briles putting us on the map. He broke the rules necessary to break the ceiling. Caught up with him, picked too many bad apples to get on field talent, no doubt. But he made BU a no laughing stock.

---

He broke rules that were unnecessary to break to break the ceiling.

While we may certainly say, and rightly so, that Baylor more broadly had real problems with Title IX issues, even independent of the regulations, it is simultaneously true that Briles could have and should have created a system such that the disaster that overtook us would never have happened in his program.

---

Right back to the argument. Let's leave it that Briles was a Favorite Son in Texas and Rhule was a northern mercenary. Briles will get the benefit of the doubt, Rhules not so much.

FLBear5630 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

TeamPlayer said:

---

Good post. This board views appreciation for Briles and Rhule as mutually exclusive. It's absurd.

---

Agreed. I do not get why there is some sort of Briles vs. Rhule tribalism.

Briles should be revered for where he took Baylor football to heights where we never thought possible.

Rhule came in at our lowest point and brought remarkable success.

Both should be celebrated for what they did for the university.

Yes, I wish Rhule was still coaching here, but it is not like he left Baylor for Texas or TCU.

---

My main issue with Briles is that his own lack of leadership and integrity ruined what was and should have remained a very good thing at Baylor.

He cut corners you can't cut, especially at a place like Baylor, that a) claims to hold a higher standard, and b) won't get the media indifference/protection that large state schools do.

And it wasn't something that happened to him. It was conscious decisions he made, as his illicit use of and incriminating conversations with a low-rent fixer would prove.

Art Briles was an offensive genius. He should have gone down as one of the great college football coaches of all time. Unfortunately, his own failures kept that from happening, and he took us down with him.

I have good memories from his time in Waco. But I don't have any real reverence for him for that reason.

I have a lot more respect for Rhule, who brought us a high-level of success without sacrificing what we claim to stand for as a university. Same for Aranda as well. He just hasn't won enough, unfortunately.

---

I just did not think Rhule or Areanda do what they did without Briles putting us on the map. He broke the rules necessary to break the ceiling. Caught up with him, picked too many bad apples to get on field talent, no doubt. But he made BU a no laughing stock.

---

He broke rules that were unnecessary to break to break the ceiling.

While we may certainly say, and rightly so, that Baylor more broadly had real problems with Title IX issues, even independent of the regulations, it is simultaneously true that Briles could have and should have created a system such that the disaster that overtook us would never have happened in his program.

---

Right back to the argument. Let's leave it that Briles was a Favorite Son in Texas and Rhule was a northern mercenary. Briles will get the benefit of the doubt, Rhules not so much.

---

Briles killed the goose that laid the golden egg.

D. C. Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

TeamPlayer said:

---

Good post. This board views appreciation for Briles and Rhule as mutually exclusive. It's absurd.

---

Agreed. I do not get why there is some sort of Briles vs. Rhule tribalism.

Briles should be revered for where he took Baylor football to heights where we never thought possible.

Rhule came in at our lowest point and brought remarkable success.

Both should be celebrated for what they did for the university.

Yes, I wish Rhule was still coaching here, but it is not like he left Baylor for Texas or TCU.

---

My main issue with Briles is that his own lack of leadership and integrity ruined what was and should have remained a very good thing at Baylor.

He cut corners you can't cut, especially at a place like Baylor, that a) claims to hold a higher standard, and b) won't get the media indifference/protection that large state schools do.

And it wasn't something that happened to him. It was conscious decisions he made, as his illicit use of and incriminating conversations with a low-rent fixer would prove.

Art Briles was an offensive genius. He should have gone down as one of the great college football coaches of all time. Unfortunately, his own failures kept that from happening, and he took us down with him.

I have good memories from his time in Waco. But I don't have any real reverence for him for that reason.

I have a lot more respect for Rhule, who brought us a high-level of success without sacrificing what we claim to stand for as a university. Same for Aranda as well. He just hasn't won enough, unfortunately.

---

I just did not think Rhule or Areanda do what they did without Briles putting us on the map. He broke the rules necessary to break the ceiling. Caught up with him, picked too many bad apples to get on field talent, no doubt. But he made BU a no laughing stock.

---

He broke rules that were unnecessary to break to break the ceiling.

While we may certainly say, and rightly so, that Baylor more broadly had real problems with Title IX issues, even independent of the regulations, it is simultaneously true that Briles could have and should have created a system such that the disaster that overtook us would never have happened in his program.

---

Right back to the argument. Let's leave it that Briles was a Favorite Son in Texas and Rhule was a northern mercenary. Briles will get the benefit of the doubt, Rhules not so much.

---

Briles killed the goose that laid the golden egg.

---

Ultimately, can't be denied. But he also brought it to Waco, as well.

DAC said:

---

Stefano DiMera said:

---

Did you read the text messages?

---

No and neither have any of you

---

Weird flex..

I never got a copy of MLKs I Have A Dream speech..or Lincoln's Gettysburg address.. but I know what they said ..

They were released..

You call literally Google 'Briles text messages '

https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/s/bkt7H6c0S3