LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we can agree to disagree on this, but I do think the board's handling of the situation did contribute to the PR firestorm. Literally every football fan I've talked to or seen post anywhere online thinks that Briles should be in jail. I've seen people on the internet openly talk about how they think he deserves a violent death. I've had a few question why Baylor is still allowed to operate. Maybe you don't think there is anything that they could have done to avoid that being the opinion of random people. I don't agree. They could have been far more specific in the reasoning behind the firing. They left more than plenty of room for random fans to assume that Briles was actively and knowingly harboring rapists and that is exactly what random fans think happened.

As to this post-

I just can't take any bragging about getting the recommendations in place seriously at all. The board oversaw all of this. If they didn't know that Starr wasn't keeping up with Title IX well enough, shame on them. There are more than 30 of them. There was an athletics compliance sub-committee. If we had a sub-committee on athletics issues and none on Title IX compliance and campus security, shame on our board. Surely some of the more than 30 of them had heard of the 100+ schools with Title IX problems before ours came up. If none of them had, shame on them for not keeping up with university news. Don't brag to me about trying to put out a fire that started on your watch.

Our school is poorly run. I won't be sending my kids there. I grew up on the campus. I wish I could have more faith in the people who run the school. I have no reason to think that I should.

---

I don't know how stating a fact (that the 105 recommendations have been materially implemented) can be called bragging. You certainly could not get that from the context in which I posted it.

FWIW - The regents received regular reports on football that showed no such problems existed (they were later discovered by Pepper). I do not know who was preparing those reports but I assume the AD's office who ending up being very complicit with many problems. The AD's office reported to Starr.

My main BOR complaint has always been they never held Starr's feet to the fire on T9 implementation. NoBSu knows far more about this than anyone so I defer to him. While behind in T9, they do look like most other boards across the country in that regard.

Lost in some of this discussion, Briles termination is warranted with or without Title IX. Every (alleged) rape, assault, theft, or drug sale is against school policy and requires reporting outside of football. Briles took character risk in favor of football talent over and over again. When trouble happened, he showed a clear pattern of not reporting and doing next to nothing in holding players responsible for their actions.

Malbec said:

---

NoBSU said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

bearlyafarmer said:

---

Just to get us back to the OP question, the answer is still "there is no such evidence."

---

This is true

---

CABers demand links, URLs, and court quality proof from BORers. CABer to CABer, truth is a much friendlier word. This is why you guys can't talk to each other.

---

I don't know about "court quality proof," but has there even been one "victim" that said that Briles (or his staff) tried to cover up a rape, or pay them off, or threaten them in some way? And no, saying, "they didn't believe me" is not the same thing. Neither is asking a "victim" what they wanted the coaches to do about it.

This suggestion that just because some T9 reporting protocol says that a complaint must be reported even if the "victim" doesn't want it reported, somehow makes someone a "rape enabler" or a "**** shamer" for following the "victim's" wishes is beyond senseless. In fact, the suggestion of such is dispassionate at the very least.

---

First, I doubt from what few depositions and filings that I have read that Baylor had such a report policy for the instance the media is raking Briles over the coals.

Last, when a school can lose their federal financial aid, then they should report a suspected Title IX case to protect themselves. Easiest case to investigate in the world if the victim says go away and I am not tslking. Offer them access to counseling and close the file. People in charge of Clery Act should know that info as well.

Keyser Soze said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we can agree to disagree on this, but I do think the board's handling of the situation did contribute to the PR firestorm. Literally every football fan I've talked to or seen post anywhere online thinks that Briles should be in jail. I've seen people on the internet openly talk about how they think he deserves a violent death. I've had a few question why Baylor is still allowed to operate. Maybe you don't think there is anything that they could have done to avoid that being the opinion of random people. I don't agree. They could have been far more specific in the reasoning behind the firing. They left more than plenty of room for random fans to assume that Briles was actively and knowingly harboring rapists and that is exactly what random fans think happened.

As to this post-

I just can't take any bragging about getting the recommendations in place seriously at all. The board oversaw all of this. If they didn't know that Starr wasn't keeping up with Title IX well enough, shame on them. There are more than 30 of them. There was an athletics compliance sub-committee. If we had a sub-committee on athletics issues and none on Title IX compliance and campus security, shame on our board. Surely some of the more than 30 of them had heard of the 100+ schools with Title IX problems before ours came up. If none of them had, shame on them for not keeping up with university news. Don't brag to me about trying to put out a fire that started on your watch.

Our school is poorly run. I won't be sending my kids there. I grew up on the campus. I wish I could have more faith in the people who run the school. I have no reason to think that I should.

---

I don't know how stating a fact (that the 105 recommendations have been materially implemented) can be called bragging. You certainly could not get that from the context in which I posted it.

FWIW - The regents received regular reports on football that showed no such problems existed (they were later discovered by Pepper). I do not know who was preparing those reports but I assume the AD's office who ending up being very complicit with many problems. The AD's office reported to Starr.

My main BOR complaint has always been they never held Starr's feet to the fire on T9 implementation. NoBSu knows far more about this than anyone so I defer to him. While behind in T9, they do look like most other boards across the country in that regard.

Lost in some of this discussion, Briles termination is warranted with or without Title IX. Every (alleged) rape, assault, theft, or drug sale is against school policy and requires reporting outside of football. Briles took character risk in favor of football talent over and over again. When trouble happened, he showed a clear pattern of not reporting and doing next to nothing in holding players responsible for their actions.

---

no, I am just a well-trained employee that knows where I report. I read some other schools (like IU) policies and know where my employer "borrowed" our policy. Brooks Bear knows how these departments are set up and executed.

I didn't read all 7 pages of posts but basically I haven't seen a single shred of evidence to answer the OPs question......


So it still looks like we fired our coach, killed our program and hired a disaster for nothing.

MidWestBear2010 said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

MidWestBear2010 said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

MidWestBear2010 said:

---

K'





If letting Briles go had anything to do with loyalty then our BOR is full of egotistical maniacs and they need to step down immediately.

But my guess is it had nothing to do with that and you are full of it.

---

If you had the balls to believe what you just wrote there, and clearly you don't, you wouldn't have used the word, "GUESS."


Here, watch how I do it. "I''m pretty f'ing sure that a big reason they parted ways was broken trust."

See how that works? That you're tiptoeing there tells me all I need to know about how confident you are.

---

Oh so you know exactly why Briles was fired? That would make you the only person on this site with that information and means that you are either on the board or closely associated with it.

---

Please. Please tell me you aren't a Baylor grad. That's all I ask of this exchange.

---

I like how you resort to insults instead of actually refuting anything I've said.

---

This is me being nice, you want to talk some trash, I'll give it right back.

Ask an intelligent question and do your own homework and quit wasting my time.

Osodecentx said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

'

That event, and how it was handled was a wake up call that for reasons good and bad, right or wrong, Art had no loyalty to Baylor U.

---

This isn't true

---

I guess we need him to write another book about it? He seems unable to say it in public since he's gone.

---

How many books has he written?

---

At least two....maybe three?

NoBSU said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

That event, and how it was handled was a wake up call that for reasons good and bad, right or wrong, Art had no loyalty to Baylor U.

---

This isn't true

---

I guess we need him to write another book about it? He seems unable to say it in public since he's gone.

---

How many books has he written?

---

This is mostly likely where the 0/0 fits.

---

Briles wrote two books.

They were sold in a large display in the bookstore.

Please, pay attention..

LBKBEAR said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we can agree to disagree on this, but I do think the board's handling of the situation did contribute to the PR firestorm. Literally every football fan I've talked to or seen post anywhere online thinks that Briles should be in jail. I've seen people on the internet openly talk about how they think he deserves a violent death. I've had a few question why Baylor is still allowed to operate. Maybe you don't think there is anything that they could have done to avoid that being the opinion of random people. I don't agree. They could have been far more specific in the reasoning behind the firing. They left more than plenty of room for random fans to assume that Briles was actively and knowingly harboring rapists and that is exactly what random fans think happened.

As to this post-

I just can't take any bragging about getting the recommendations in place seriously at all. The board oversaw all of this. If they didn't know that Starr wasn't keeping up with Title IX well enough, shame on them. There are more than 30 of them. There was an athletics compliance sub-committee. If we had a sub-committee on athletics issues and none on Title IX compliance and campus security, shame on our board. Surely some of the more than 30 of them had heard of the 100+ schools with Title IX problems before ours came up. If none of them had, shame on them for not keeping up with university news. Don't brag to me about trying to put out a fire that started on your watch.

Our school is poorly run. I won't be sending my kids there. I grew up on the campus. I wish I could have more faith in the people who run the school. I have no reason to think that I should.

---

I'm sorry, but this is sort of ridiculous. If your BOR is super up-to-date on Title IX prior to 2015, it's becauee you've ****ed up HUGE.

It's amazing that people can give Briles a walk on Title IX responsibities, but blame 30 fundraisers that meet 6 times a year for not knowing intricate details on a law their own University President refused to engage in.

Title IX and OCR worry mostly about being "put on notice" and what you do after that point. When the BOR was finally made aware of the details, they acted.

---

The letter went out in 2011. 55 schools were announced as being under investigation in 2014.

How many industries have major compliance changes that the governing board is unaware of 4-5 years after the changes are announced?

This might well be a surprise to you, but I do think that some would guess that a football coach would know less about university compliance issues than the people in charge of governing the university.

If they are only fundraisers and aren't interested in helping run the school, get them out. We need people asking the right questions. If they only ask the right questions after the school is in a firestorm, they serve no purpose and aren't worthy of getting the fancy title they love to brag about in the good times.

Your middle paragraph just actually makes me more worried about the board. Shouldn't the board be all over it if the university president is openly ignoring a federal regulation relating to students being raped? If they aren't, why in the world are they there? Were they just thinking 'Oh well Ken is just ignoring the regs about rape, so I guess don't ask any questions there.'?

Last edit on this post - the number of people I have seen trying to say the board isn't at fault for anything that happened because they didn't actually didn't do anything blows my mind. I'm relatively young, but I've never heard anyone use the excuse 'I couldn't have done a bad job, because I wasn't doing the job at all.' outside of people saying that here for the board.

---

This is revisionist history and hindsight 20/20 viewing in its breathtaking finest.

First off, most of this "fun stuff" started in 2014. The first major DCL came out in 2011. However, it's been an iterative process ever since, with guidance being honed, tweaked, clarified nearly yearly. Also, most people have no idea how many guidance/mandates colleges and Universities get on a day-to-day basis. It's a huge part of the economy. That doesn't dismiss the need to pay attention, but it should help someone understand that there's a whole ecosystem out there. Universities are constantly putting out fires and juggling voices.

For instance, Baylor got hammered for not having a full-time, dedicated, professional Title IX Coordinator by the press. However, I happened to know that the two largest University Systems in the state didn't either at that time on their flagship campuses.

I'm just saying that 3 years is a blink of the eye. If you sincerely expect your BOR to have more than a working knowledge of Title IX structures in 2014-2015, you have no idea how a BOR works. Your expectations are wholly unrealistic.

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself. There IS proof of this. He literally texted others about "keeping this away from Judicial Affairs." I'm sorry, but his goose was ****ing cooked when he wrote that. And that's just ONE time that we know of. For every text you've sent, you've had dozens of conversations in person or on the phone.

Secondly, there's a saying in Higher Education: "if you want to kill something, get a Regent involved." Regents have a purpose. They're there for guidance and oversight from a 60,000 ft view. If they're honestly getting involved on an inter-department basis, its because something is ****ed up. If they're asking questions about compliance, it's almost always already too late. They're not experts in education (usually). If they're counting reams of paper or asking about a student event, something is wrong.

But still, it's amazing that someone would blame a BOR (which meets like 3-6 times a year and rotates membership) for not having in-depth knowledge of a new guidance from OCR, but will give a walk to someone who is actually working full time with students. That's ****ing bonkers.

cowboycwr said:

---

I didn't read all 7 pages of posts but basically I haven't seen a single shred of evidence to answer the OPs question......


So it still looks like we fired our coach, killed our program and hired a disaster for nothing.

---

We are news consumers not a court jury. We are never going to get proof using that standard. Demanding proof like that is just being obtuse.


No we have been told plenty. Surely you have read these accounts. You can have a very low bar and say that was not enough, or conspiracy guy and not believe the stories ..... but people need to stop with the childish "can't prove it" angle as to Briles firing

(Note: OP was about covering up rape, that did not happen - loads of other stuff)

BrooksBearLives said:

---

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself.

Secondly, there's a saying in Higher Education: "if you want to kill something, get a Regent involved." Regents have a purpose.

But still, it's amazing that someone would blame a BOR (which meets like 3-6 times a year and rotates membership) for not having in-depth knowledge of a new guidance from OCR, but will give a walk to someone who is actually working full time with students. That's ****ing bonkers.

---

Briles was fired to cover BOR asses. They did get involved and have done the university great repetitional damage, not to mention killing a top ranked football program, probably for a decade, maybe longer

I blame the regents. Those defending the regents are f*ing ignorant

Osodecentx said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself.

Secondly, there's a saying in Higher Education: "if you want to kill something, get a Regent involved." Regents have a purpose.

But still, it's amazing that someone would blame a BOR (which meets like 3-6 times a year and rotates membership) for not having in-depth knowledge of a new guidance from OCR, but will give a walk to someone who is actually working full time with students. That's ****ing bonkers.

---

Briles was fired to cover BOR asses. They did get involved and have done the university great repetitional damage, not to mention killing a top ranked football program, probably for a decade, maybe longer

I blame the regents. Those defending the regents are f*ing ignorant

---

MilliVanilli said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

MilliVanilli said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

MilliVanilli said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Quote:

---

Outside the bubble, people think Art ran an exotic zoo park with dangerous lions and tigers.

---

---

That's what our BOR told everyone.

---

Art didn't do himself any favors with the bad dudes comment. I reckon there was lots of stupid on both sides. Its a shame that nobody recognized how much money was on the line. Tellme is right that it coulda been fixed a long time ago. Both sides coulda done or said something here and there to lay down a good foundation. Neither did.

---

Yeah, loss of some money was the greatest shame...

---

Ain't what I said. And don't try putting words in my mouth again. You understand that? That aint a joke. Don't you ever f'n do that again.

---

It's in bold letters above, it's EXACTLY what you lamented, the loss of money.

---

Greatest shame? Did I say that? So I'm gonna tell you again for good measure. Do not put words in my mouth. Do you understand that? Never again will you do that. I'm not gonna put up with your bull. And I'll see to it that staff handles you.

---

These are your words "Its a shame that nobody recognized how much money was on the line." you lamented NOTHING else, absolutely NOTHING, only money.

So quit pretending you can spin your way out of it, man up and own your contemptible words.

It's interesting how you think you're a victim of anything after showing such callousness to actual victims.

---

Greatest shame was your stupid choice of words you little weasel. I am only talking about the athletics program. Do not put words in my mouth. Do not spin my words. People being hurt and athletic funds are two separate things entirely. Only victim here is you to your own dumbassedness. And if you don't like what I say buddy boy hit the ignore button. And then go run off and talk about living in people's heads like a psychopath.

there is no evidence other than from TCU fans that have gotten on our board pretending to be Baylor fans

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we can agree to disagree on this, but I do think the board's handling of the situation did contribute to the PR firestorm. Literally every football fan I've talked to or seen post anywhere online thinks that Briles should be in jail. I've seen people on the internet openly talk about how they think he deserves a violent death. I've had a few question why Baylor is still allowed to operate. Maybe you don't think there is anything that they could have done to avoid that being the opinion of random people. I don't agree. They could have been far more specific in the reasoning behind the firing. They left more than plenty of room for random fans to assume that Briles was actively and knowingly harboring rapists and that is exactly what random fans think happened.

As to this post-

I just can't take any bragging about getting the recommendations in place seriously at all. The board oversaw all of this. If they didn't know that Starr wasn't keeping up with Title IX well enough, shame on them. There are more than 30 of them. There was an athletics compliance sub-committee. If we had a sub-committee on athletics issues and none on Title IX compliance and campus security, shame on our board. Surely some of the more than 30 of them had heard of the 100+ schools with Title IX problems before ours came up. If none of them had, shame on them for not keeping up with university news. Don't brag to me about trying to put out a fire that started on your watch.

Our school is poorly run. I won't be sending my kids there. I grew up on the campus. I wish I could have more faith in the people who run the school. I have no reason to think that I should.

---

I'm sorry, but this is sort of ridiculous. If your BOR is super up-to-date on Title IX prior to 2015, it's becauee you've ****ed up HUGE.
Secondly, there's a saying in Higher Education: "if you want to kill something, get a Regent involved." Regents have a purpose. They're there for guidance and oversight from a 60,000 ft view. If they're honestly getting involved on an inter-department basis, its because something is ****ed up. If they're asking questions about compliance, it's almost always already too late. They're not experts in education (usually). If they're counting reams of paper or asking about a student event, something is wrong.

But still, it's amazing that someone would blame a BOR (which meets like 3-6 times a year and rotates membership) for not having in-depth knowledge of a new guidance from OCR, but will give a walk to

It's amazing that people can give Briles a walk on Title IX responsibities, but blame 30 fundraisers that meet 6 times a year for not knowing intricate details on a law their own University President refused to engage in.

Title IX and OCR worry mostly about being "put on notice" and what you do after that point. When the BOR was finally made aware of the details, they acted.

---

The letter went out in 2011. 55 schools were announced as being under investigation in 2014.

How many industries have major compliance changes that the governing board is unaware of 4-5 years after the changes are announced?

This might well be a surprise to you, but I do think that some would guess that a football coach would know less about university compliance issues than the people in charge of governing the university.

If they are only fundraisers and aren't interested in helping run the school, get them out. We need people asking the right questions. If they only ask the right questions after the school is in a firestorm, they serve no purpose and aren't worthy of getting the fancy title they love to brag about in the good times.

Your middle paragraph just actually makes me more worried about the board. Shouldn't the board be all over it if the university president is openly ignoring a federal regulation relating to students being raped? If they aren't, why in the world are they there? Were they just thinking 'Oh well Ken is just ignoring the regs about rape, so I guess don't ask any questions there.'?

Last edit on this post - the number of people I have seen trying to say the board isn't at fault for anything that happened because they didn't actually didn't do anything blows my mind. I'm relatively young, but I've never heard anyone use the excuse 'I couldn't have done a bad job, because I wasn't doing the job at all.' outside of people saying that here for the board.

---

This is revisionist history and hindsight 20/20 viewing in its breathtaking finest.

First off, most of this "fun stuff" started in 2014. The first major DCL came out in 2011. However, it's been an iterative process ever since, with guidance being honed, tweaked, clarified nearly yearly. Also, most people have no idea how many guidance/mandates colleges and Universities get on a day-to-day basis. It's a huge part of the economy. That doesn't dismiss the need to pay attention, but it should help someone understand that there's a whole ecosystem out there. Universities are constantly putting out fires and juggling voices.

For instance, Baylor got hammered for not having a full-time, dedicated, professional Title IX Coordinator by the press. However, I happened to know that the two largest University Systems in the state didn't either at that time on their flagship campuses.

I'm just saying that 3 years is a blink of the eye. If you sincerely expect your BOR to have more than a working knowledge of Title IX structures in 2014-2015, you have no idea how a BOR works. Your expectations are wholly unrealistic.

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself. There IS proof of this. He literally texted others about "keeping this away from Judicial Affairs." I'm sorry, but his goose was ****ing cooked when he wrote that. And that's just ONE time that we know of. For every text you've sent, you've had dozens of conversations in person or on the phone.
someone who is actually working full time with students. That's ****ing bonkers.

---

A-Frickin'-Men!

These questions still remain unanswered.

Why was Art Briles terminated?

If he was terminated for "cause", why was a large payout made?

The President (Ken Starr), the BOR, and the Interim President have never directly answered these questions.

The only sources of information have been ESPN (and other news media), Internet Boards, and some limited release of information from court records.

A new question arose when a letter from BU was released that clears Briles of direct participation of a coverup.

The forecast for information release from Baylor Leadership continues to be cloudy.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we

As to this post-



Our school is poorly run.

---

Title IX

---

The

---

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself. There IS proof of this. He literally texted others about "keeping this away from Judicial Affairs." I'm sorry, but his goose was ****ing cooked when he wrote that. And that's just ONE time that we know of. For every text you've sent, you've had dozens of conversations in person or on the phone..

---

This.

99% of public companies and all but the trash heap universities will fire you if you are caught lying that blatantly. I don't care how successful the employee, you lie like that and you're done.

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

MidWestBear2010 said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

MidWestBear2010 said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

MidWestBear2010 said:

---

K'





If letting Briles go had anything to do with loyalty then our BOR is full of egotistical maniacs and they need to step down immediately.

But my guess is it had nothing to do with that and you are full of it.

---

If you had the balls to believe what you just wrote there, and clearly you don't, you wouldn't have used the word, "GUESS."


Here, watch how I do it. "I''m pretty f'ing sure that a big reason they parted ways was broken trust."

See how that works? That you're tiptoeing there tells me all I need to know about how confident you are.

---

Oh so you know exactly why Briles was fired? That would make you the only person on this site with that information and means that you are either on the board or closely associated with it.

---

Please. Please tell me you aren't a Baylor grad. That's all I ask of this exchange.

---

I like how you resort to insults instead of actually refuting anything I've said.

---

Kiss my ass. This is me being nice, you want to talk some trash, I'll give it right back.

Ask an intelligent question and do your own homework and quit wasting my time.

---

Yep that's what I thought.

A coach who makes a school tens o' millions and more with donations aint let go because he went against school policy. Hiding somebody's drunk and disorderly from Beth Mccraw sure aint covering up sexual assault. The only dadgum reason you fire him is if you think he covered up sexual assault. Anybody that says different aint got a clue.

And you gotta be kiddin me that people on the board back then didn't know about Title IX or Baylor's no drug testing policy. If they weren't aware of a federal mandate that changed what you might call the college landscape then that right there is criminal. They didn't know Starr was pond hopping over to Charlottesville? They didn't happen to hear about Tevin Elliott? None of that stuff deserved a second glance?

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we can agree to disagree on this, but I do think the board's handling of the situation did contribute to the PR firestorm. Literally every football fan I've talked to or seen post anywhere online thinks that Briles should be in jail. I've seen people on the internet openly talk about how they think he deserves a violent death. I've had a few question why Baylor is still allowed to operate. Maybe you don't think there is anything that they could have done to avoid that being the opinion of random people. I don't agree. They could have been far more specific in the reasoning behind the firing. They left more than plenty of room for random fans to assume that Briles was actively and knowingly harboring rapists and that is exactly what random fans think happened.

As to this post-

I just can't take any bragging about getting the recommendations in place seriously at all. The board oversaw all of this. If they didn't know that Starr wasn't keeping up with Title IX well enough, shame on them. There are more than 30 of them. There was an athletics compliance sub-committee. If we had a sub-committee on athletics issues and none on Title IX compliance and campus security, shame on our board. Surely some of the more than 30 of them had heard of the 100+ schools with Title IX problems before ours came up. If none of them had, shame on them for not keeping up with university news. Don't brag to me about trying to put out a fire that started on your watch.

Our school is poorly run. I won't be sending my kids there. I grew up on the campus. I wish I could have more faith in the people who run the school. I have no reason to think that I should.

---

I'm sorry, but this is sort of ridiculous. If your BOR is super up-to-date on Title IX prior to 2015, it's becauee you've ****ed up HUGE.

It's amazing that people can give Briles a walk on Title IX responsibities, but blame 30 fundraisers that meet 6 times a year for not knowing intricate details on a law their own University President refused to engage in.

Title IX and OCR worry mostly about being "put on notice" and what you do after that point. When the BOR was finally made aware of the details, they acted.

---

The letter went out in 2011. 55 schools were announced as being under investigation in 2014.

How many industries have major compliance changes that the governing board is unaware of 4-5 years after the changes are announced?

This might well be a surprise to you, but I do think that some would guess that a football coach would know less about university compliance issues than the people in charge of governing the university.

If they are only fundraisers and aren't interested in helping run the school, get them out. We need people asking the right questions. If they only ask the right questions after the school is in a firestorm, they serve no purpose and aren't worthy of getting the fancy title they love to brag about in the good times.

Your middle paragraph just actually makes me more worried about the board. Shouldn't the board be all over it if the university president is openly ignoring a federal regulation relating to students being raped? If they aren't, why in the world are they there? Were they just thinking 'Oh well Ken is just ignoring the regs about rape, so I guess don't ask any questions there.'?

Last edit on this post - the number of people I have seen trying to say the board isn't at fault for anything that happened because they didn't actually didn't do anything blows my mind. I'm relatively young, but I've never heard anyone use the excuse 'I couldn't have done a bad job, because I wasn't doing the job at all.' outside of people saying that here for the board.

---

This is revisionist history and hindsight 20/20 viewing in its breathtaking finest.

First off, most of this "fun stuff" started in 2014. The first major DCL came out in 2011. However, it's been an iterative process ever since, with guidance being honed, tweaked, clarified nearly yearly. Also, most people have no idea how many guidance/mandates colleges and Universities get on a day-to-day basis. It's a huge part of the economy. That doesn't dismiss the need to pay attention, but it should help someone understand that there's a whole ecosystem out there. Universities are constantly putting out fires and juggling voices.

For instance, Baylor got hammered for not having a full-time, dedicated, professional Title IX Coordinator by the press. However, I happened to know that the two largest University Systems in the state didn't either at that time on their flagship campuses.

I'm just saying that 3 years is a blink of the eye. If you sincerely expect your BOR to have more than a working knowledge of Title IX structures in 2014-2015, you have no idea how a BOR works. Your expectations are wholly unrealistic.

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself. There IS proof of this. He literally texted others about "keeping this away from Judicial Affairs." I'm sorry, but his goose was ****ing cooked when he wrote that. And that's just ONE time that we know of. For every text you've sent, you've had dozens of conversations in person or on the phone.

Secondly, there's a saying in Higher Education: "if you want to kill something, get a Regent involved." Regents have a purpose. They're there for guidance and oversight from a 60,000 ft view. If they're honestly getting involved on an inter-department basis, its because something is ****ed up. If they're asking questions about compliance, it's almost always already too late. They're not experts in education (usually). If they're counting reams of paper or asking about a student event, something is wrong.

But still, it's amazing that someone would blame a BOR (which meets like 3-6 times a year and rotates membership) for not having in-depth knowledge of a new guidance from OCR, but will give a walk to someone who is actually working full time with students. That's ****ing bonkers.

---

Nobody that I know of is blaming the BOFR for not knowing the details and intricacies of T9 and how it's implemented on campus. That's the job of the executive function. My disgust is from the BOFR's function of failing to provide proper oversight to insure that regulatory matters are handled in such a manner to insure compliance. The failure to accept any kind of responsibility or be held accountable for a university-wide systemic failure is unconscionable. We have business "leaders" on the BOFR that receive regulatory status updates all the time related to their businesses whether it be in healthcare, oil and gas, product safety, etc. Heck, I give monthly regulatory updates and their applicability to our business at least quarterly to insure we are operating within current and proposed regulation. How they didn't have a simple regulatory update or ask the right questions is mind boggling seeing as how they do it outside of their BOFR responsibilities. And the harm they've caused to victims and the Baylor brand by that failure is staggering.

Chanceux said:

---

A coach who makes a school tens o' millions and more with donations aint let go because he went against school policy. Hiding somebody's drunk and disorderly from Beth Mccraw sure aint covering up sexual assault. The only dadgum reason you fire him is if you think he covered up sexual assault. Anybody that says different aint got a clue.

---

School policy?

You work for an organization with more than 1000 people and you get caught lying, and I mean on an expense report, to a vendor, or to the CEO, VP legal, or Head of HR, you're probably done.

Even the University of Houston won't play that.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/houston-sends-clear-message-about-art-briles-coaching-future-in-denying-interview/

YoakDaddy said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we can agree to disagree on this, but I do think the board's handling of the situation did contribute to the PR firestorm. Literally every football fan I've talked to or seen post anywhere online thinks that Briles should be in jail. I've seen people on the internet openly talk about how they think he deserves a violent death. I've had a few question why Baylor is still allowed to operate. Maybe you don't think there is anything that they could have done to avoid that being the opinion of random people. I don't agree. They could have been far more specific in the reasoning behind the firing. They left more than plenty of room for random fans to assume that Briles was actively and knowingly harboring rapists and that is exactly what random fans think happened.

As to this post-

I just can't take any bragging about getting the recommendations in place seriously at all. The board oversaw all of this. If they didn't know that Starr wasn't keeping up with Title IX well enough, shame on them. There are more than 30 of them. There was an athletics compliance sub-committee. If we had a sub-committee on athletics issues and none on Title IX compliance and campus security, shame on our board. Surely some of the more than 30 of them had heard of the 100+ schools with Title IX problems before ours came up. If none of them had, shame on them for not keeping up with university news. Don't brag to me about trying to put out a fire that started on your watch.

Our school is poorly run. I won't be sending my kids there. I grew up on the campus. I wish I could have more faith in the people who run the school. I have no reason to think that I should.

---

I'm sorry, but this is sort of ridiculous. If your BOR is super up-to-date on Title IX prior to 2015, it's becauee you've ****ed up HUGE.

It's amazing that people can give Briles a walk on Title IX responsibities, but blame 30 fundraisers that meet 6 times a year for not knowing intricate details on a law their own University President refused to engage in.

Title IX and OCR worry mostly about being "put on notice" and what you do after that point. When the BOR was finally made aware of the details, they acted.

---

The letter went out in 2011. 55 schools were announced as being under investigation in 2014.

How many industries have major compliance changes that the governing board is unaware of 4-5 years after the changes are announced?

This might well be a surprise to you, but I do think that some would guess that a football coach would know less about university compliance issues than the people in charge of governing the university.

If they are only fundraisers and aren't interested in helping run the school, get them out. We need people asking the right questions. If they only ask the right questions after the school is in a firestorm, they serve no purpose and aren't worthy of getting the fancy title they love to brag about in the good times.

Your middle paragraph just actually makes me more worried about the board. Shouldn't the board be all over it if the university president is openly ignoring a federal regulation relating to students being raped? If they aren't, why in the world are they there? Were they just thinking 'Oh well Ken is just ignoring the regs about rape, so I guess don't ask any questions there.'?

Last edit on this post - the number of people I have seen trying to say the board isn't at fault for anything that happened because they didn't actually didn't do anything blows my mind. I'm relatively young, but I've never heard anyone use the excuse 'I couldn't have done a bad job, because I wasn't doing the job at all.' outside of people saying that here for the board.

---

This is revisionist history and hindsight 20/20 viewing in its breathtaking finest.

First off, most of this "fun stuff" started in 2014. The first major DCL came out in 2011. However, it's been an iterative process ever since, with guidance being honed, tweaked, clarified nearly yearly. Also, most people have no idea how many guidance/mandates colleges and Universities get on a day-to-day basis. It's a huge part of the economy. That doesn't dismiss the need to pay attention, but it should help someone understand that there's a whole ecosystem out there. Universities are constantly putting out fires and juggling voices.

For instance, Baylor got hammered for not having a full-time, dedicated, professional Title IX Coordinator by the press. However, I happened to know that the two largest University Systems in the state didn't either at that time on their flagship campuses.

I'm just saying that 3 years is a blink of the eye. If you sincerely expect your BOR to have more than a working knowledge of Title IX structures in 2014-2015, you have no idea how a BOR works. Your expectations are wholly unrealistic.

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself. There IS proof of this. He literally texted others about "keeping this away from Judicial Affairs." I'm sorry, but his goose was ****ing cooked when he wrote that. And that's just ONE time that we know of. For every text you've sent, you've had dozens of conversations in person or on the phone.

Secondly, there's a saying in Higher Education: "if you want to kill something, get a Regent involved." Regents have a purpose. They're there for guidance and oversight from a 60,000 ft view. If they're honestly getting involved on an inter-department basis, its because something is ****ed up. If they're asking questions about compliance, it's almost always already too late. They're not experts in education (usually). If they're counting reams of paper or asking about a student event, something is wrong.

But still, it's amazing that someone would blame a BOR (which meets like 3-6 times a year and rotates membership) for not having in-depth knowledge of a new guidance from OCR, but will give a walk to someone who is actually working full time with students. That's ****ing bonkers.

---

Nobody that I know of is blaming the BOFR for not knowing the details and intricacies of T9 and how it's implemented on campus. That's the job of the executive function. My disgust is from the BOFR's function of failing to provide proper oversight to insure that regulatory matters are handled in such a manner to insure compliance. The failure to accept any kind of responsibility or be held accountable for a university-wide systemic failure is unconscionable. We have business "leaders" on the BOFR that receive regulatory status updates all the time related to their businesses whether it be in healthcare, oil and gas, product safety, etc. Heck, I give monthly regulatory updates and their applicability to our business at least quarterly to insure we are operating within current and proposed regulation. How they didn't have a simple regulatory update or ask the right questions is mind boggling seeing as how they do it outside of their BOFR responsibilities. And the harm they've caused to victims and the Baylor brand by that failure is staggering.

---

Yessir. Thinkin they didn't get a memo about a federal mandate is foolish. And then you got the Tevin Elliott case right on yer front porch. Does not add up.

Guy Noir said:

---

These questions still remain unanswered.

Why was Art Briles terminated?

If he was terminated for "cause", why was a large payout made?

The President (Ken Starr), the BOR, and the Interim President have never directly answered these questions.

The only sources of information have been ESPN (and other news media), Internet Boards, and some limited release of information from court records.

A new question arose when a letter from BU was released that clears Briles of direct participation of a coverup.

The forecast for information release from Baylor Leadership continues to be cloudy.

---

He was fired becausea few regents painted a Picture of sexual violence by his players that wasn't true . This was done to gloss over the board's own deficiencies over the years in reporting sexual accusations in the past. Three years Baylor did not report any accusations . Because they re routed these accusations downtown . This is the coverup . This is the scandal and it implicates influential board members . So they blamed the blacks and the guy who brought them here. Everything else is fiction

YoakDaddy said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your firstfinally made aware of the details, they acted.

---

---

The letter went out in 2011. 55 schools were announced as being under investigation in 2014.

How many industries have major compliance changes that the governing board is unaware of 4-5 years after the changes are announced?

This might well be a surprise to you, but I do think that some would guess that a football coach would know less about university compliance issues than the people in charge of governing the university.

If they are only fundraisers and aren't interested in helping run the school, get them out. We need people asking the right questions. If they only ask the right questions after the school is in a firestorm, they serve no purpose and aren't worthy of getting the fancy title they love to brag about in the good times.

Your middle paragraph just actually makes me more worried about the board. Shouldn't the board be all over it if the university president is openly ignoring a federal regulation relating to students being raped? If they aren't, why in the world are they there? Were they just thinking 'Oh well Ken is just ignoring the regs about rape, so I guess don't ask any que

---

This is revisionist history and hindsight 20/20 viewing in its breathtaking finest.

First off, most of this "fun stuff" started in 2014. The first major DCL came out in 2011. However, it's been an iterative process ever since, with guidance being honed, tweaked, clarified nearly yearly. Also, most people have no idea how many guidance/mandates colleges and Universities get on a day-to-day basis. It's a huge part of the economy. That doesn't dismiss the need to pay attention, but it should help someone understand that there's a whole ecosystem out there. Universities are constantly putting out fires and juggling voices.

For instance, Baylor got hammered for not having a full-time, dedicated, professional Title IX Coordinator by the press. However, I happened to know that the two largest University Systems in the state didn't either at that time on their flagship campuses.

I'm just saying that 3 years is a blink of the eye. If you sincerely expect your BOR to have more than a working knowledge of Title IX structures in 2014-2015, you have no idea how a BOR works. Your expectations are wholly unrealistic.

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself. There IS

---

Nobody that I know of is blaming the BOFR for not knowing the details and intricacies of T9 and how it's implemented on campus. That's the job of the executive function. My disgust is from the BOFR's function of failing to provide proper oversight to insure that regulatory matters are handled in such a manner to insure compliance. The failure to accept any kind of responsibility or be held accountable for a university-wide systemic failure is unconscionable. We have business "leaders" on the BOFR that receive regulatory status updates all the time related to their businesses whether it be in healthcare, oil and gas, product safety, etc. Heck, I give monthly regulatory updates and their applicability to our business at least quarterly to insure we are operating within current and proposed regulation. How they didn't have a simple regulatory update or ask the right questions is mind boggling seeing as how they do it outside of their BOFR responsibilities. And the harm they've caused to victims and the Baylor brand by that failure is staggering.

---

Agree with this.

The board can't articulate responsibility. But there were warning signs well in advance .

No excuse for not being proactive.

YoakDaddy said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we can agree to disagree on this, but I do think the board's handling of the situation did contribute to the PR firestorm. Literally every football fan I've talked to or seen post anywhere online thinks that Briles should be in jail. I've seen people on the internet openly talk about how they think he deserves a violent death. I've had a few question why Baylor is still allowed to operate. Maybe you don't think there is anything that they could have done to avoid that being the opinion of random people. I don't agree. They could have been far more specific in the reasoning behind the firing. They left more than plenty of room for random fans to assume that Briles was actively and knowingly harboring rapists and that is exactly what random fans think happened.

As to this post-

I just can't take any bragging about getting the recommendations in place seriously at all. The board oversaw all of this. If they didn't know that Starr wasn't keeping up with Title IX well enough, shame on them. There are more than 30 of them. There was an athletics compliance sub-committee. If we had a sub-committee on athletics issues and none on Title IX compliance and campus security, shame on our board. Surely some of the more than 30 of them had heard of the 100+ schools with Title IX problems before ours came up. If none of them had, shame on them for not keeping up with university news. Don't brag to me about trying to put out a fire that started on your watch.

Our school is poorly run. I won't be sending my kids there. I grew up on the campus. I wish I could have more faith in the people who run the school. I have no reason to think that I should.

---

I'm sorry, but this is sort of ridiculous. If your BOR is super up-to-date on Title IX prior to 2015, it's becauee you've ****ed up HUGE.

It's amazing that people can give Briles a walk on Title IX responsibities, but blame 30 fundraisers that meet 6 times a year for not knowing intricate details on a law their own University President refused to engage in.

Title IX and OCR worry mostly about being "put on notice" and what you do after that point. When the BOR was finally made aware of the details, they acted.

---

The letter went out in 2011. 55 schools were announced as being under investigation in 2014.

How many industries have major compliance changes that the governing board is unaware of 4-5 years after the changes are announced?

This might well be a surprise to you, but I do think that some would guess that a football coach would know less about university compliance issues than the people in charge of governing the university.

If they are only fundraisers and aren't interested in helping run the school, get them out. We need people asking the right questions. If they only ask the right questions after the school is in a firestorm, they serve no purpose and aren't worthy of getting the fancy title they love to brag about in the good times.

Your middle paragraph just actually makes me more worried about the board. Shouldn't the board be all over it if the university president is openly ignoring a federal regulation relating to students being raped? If they aren't, why in the world are they there? Were they just thinking 'Oh well Ken is just ignoring the regs about rape, so I guess don't ask any questions there.'?

Last edit on this post - the number of people I have seen trying to say the board isn't at fault for anything that happened because they didn't actually didn't do anything blows my mind. I'm relatively young, but I've never heard anyone use the excuse 'I couldn't have done a bad job, because I wasn't doing the job at all.' outside of people saying that here for the board.

---

This is revisionist history and hindsight 20/20 viewing in its breathtaking finest.

First off, most of this "fun stuff" started in 2014. The first major DCL came out in 2011. However, it's been an iterative process ever since, with guidance being honed, tweaked, clarified nearly yearly. Also, most people have no idea how many guidance/mandates colleges and Universities get on a day-to-day basis. It's a huge part of the economy. That doesn't dismiss the need to pay attention, but it should help someone understand that there's a whole ecosystem out there. Universities are constantly putting out fires and juggling voices.

For instance, Baylor got hammered for not having a full-time, dedicated, professional Title IX Coordinator by the press. However, I happened to know that the two largest University Systems in the state didn't either at that time on their flagship campuses.

I'm just saying that 3 years is a blink of the eye. If you sincerely expect your BOR to have more than a working knowledge of Title IX structures in 2014-2015, you have no idea how a BOR works. Your expectations are wholly unrealistic.

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself. There IS proof of this. He literally texted others about "keeping this away from Judicial Affairs." I'm sorry, but his goose was ****ing cooked when he wrote that. And that's just ONE time that we know of. For every text you've sent, you've had dozens of conversations in person or on the phone.

Secondly, there's a saying in Higher Education: "if you want to kill something, get a Regent involved." Regents have a purpose. They're there for guidance and oversight from a 60,000 ft view. If they're honestly getting involved on an inter-department basis, its because something is ****ed up. If they're asking questions about compliance, it's almost always already too late. They're not experts in education (usually). If they're counting reams of paper or asking about a student event, something is wrong.

But still, it's amazing that someone would blame a BOR (which meets like 3-6 times a year and rotates membership) for not having in-depth knowledge of a new guidance from OCR, but will give a walk to someone who is actually working full time with students. That's ****ing bonkers.

---

Nobody that I know of is blaming the BOFR for not knowing the details and intricacies of T9 and how it's implemented on campus. That's the job of the executive function. My disgust is from the BOFR's function of failing to provide proper oversight to insure that regulatory matters are handled in such a manner to insure compliance. The failure to accept any kind of responsibility or be held accountable for a university-wide systemic failure is unconscionable. We have business "leaders" on the BOFR that receive regulatory status updates all the time related to their businesses whether it be in healthcare, oil and gas, product safety, etc. Heck, I give monthly regulatory updates and their applicability to our business at least quarterly to insure we are operating within current and proposed regulation. How they didn't have a simple regulatory update or ask the right questions is mind boggling seeing as how they do it outside of their BOFR responsibilities. And the harm they've caused to victims and the Baylor brand by that failure is staggering.

---

Have you not read any of OSOdesentx whatever's posts?

He is literally blaming the BOR for not preventing Art Briles from doing what he was doing.

And can we be honest? He's not alone, AT ALL.

The FACT is that there IS proof of Briles trying to hide things from Judicial Affairs. That happened. Now there are people trying to contort their logic into all of this being the BOR's fault, as opposed to CAB's because they "didn't provide oversight." That only works if you don't allow yourself to consider that Briles himself is responsible for the actions of himself and those of his staff.

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

A coach who makes a school tens o' millions and more with donations aint let go because he went against school policy. Hiding somebody's drunk and disorderly from Beth Mccraw sure aint covering up sexual assault. The only dadgum reason you fire him is if you think he covered up sexual assault. Anybody that says different aint got a clue.

---

School policy?

You work for an organization with more than 1000 people and you get caught lying, and I mean on an expense report, to a vendor, or to the CEO, VP legal, or Head of HR, you're probably done.

Even the University of Houston won't play that.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/houston-sends-clear-message-about-art-briles-coaching-future-in-denying-interview/

---

I'm sayin there are levels of wrongdoing. And its gotta be egregious to filet the golden goose. Stealing pencils aint pilfering the petty cash. Reprimand vs firing and such. I never want to excuse some of the things Briles did. Never. It was said that he walked out of that meeting not thinking he was gonna be fired. If thats true then I think Briles thought he got caught stealing the pencils and not the money.

OldSchoolBU said:

---

Some of you on here don't have much common sense? Who fires the most successful coach in school history and a wildly popular one with the fanbase unless they had to?

No one. Let that common sense test comfort you in your moments of conspiratorial psychosis. And yes the past is last. Move on or go buy some Florida Atlantic shirts and go all in with that win at all costs program.

---

Great advice.
You do realize that they think Florida Atlantic is a stepping stone for Lame? I guess going from coaching a franchise worth billions to a program that has less interest than about 60 high school programs in Texas is big deal for the bottom of the barrel.

YoakDaddy said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

LBKBEAR said:

---

As to your first reply, we can agree to disagree on this, but I do think the board's handling of the situation did contribute to the PR firestorm. Literally every football fan I've talked to or seen post anywhere online thinks that Briles should be in jail. I've seen people on the internet openly talk about how they think he deserves a violent death. I've had a few question why Baylor is still allowed to operate. Maybe you don't think there is anything that they could have done to avoid that being the opinion of random people. I don't agree. They could have been far more specific in the reasoning behind the firing. They left more than plenty of room for random fans to assume that Briles was actively and knowingly harboring rapists and that is exactly what random fans think happened.

As to this post-

I just can't take any bragging about getting the recommendations in place seriously at all. The board oversaw all of this. If they didn't know that Starr wasn't keeping up with Title IX well enough, shame on them. There are more than 30 of them. There was an athletics compliance sub-committee. If we had a sub-committee on athletics issues and none on Title IX compliance and campus security, shame on our board. Surely some of the more than 30 of them had heard of the 100+ schools with Title IX problems before ours came up. If none of them had, shame on them for not keeping up with university news. Don't brag to me about trying to put out a fire that started on your watch.

Our school is poorly run. I won't be sending my kids there. I grew up on the campus. I wish I could have more faith in the people who run the school. I have no reason to think that I should.

---

I'm sorry, but this is sort of ridiculous. If your BOR is super up-to-date on Title IX prior to 2015, it's becauee you've ****ed up HUGE.

It's amazing that people can give Briles a walk on Title IX responsibities, but blame 30 fundraisers that meet 6 times a year for not knowing intricate details on a law their own University President refused to engage in.

Title IX and OCR worry mostly about being "put on notice" and what you do after that point. When the BOR was finally made aware of the details, they acted.

---

The letter went out in 2011. 55 schools were announced as being under investigation in 2014.

How many industries have major compliance changes that the governing board is unaware of 4-5 years after the changes are announced?

This might well be a surprise to you, but I do think that some would guess that a football coach would know less about university compliance issues than the people in charge of governing the university.

If they are only fundraisers and aren't interested in helping run the school, get them out. We need people asking the right questions. If they only ask the right questions after the school is in a firestorm, they serve no purpose and aren't worthy of getting the fancy title they love to brag about in the good times.

Your middle paragraph just actually makes me more worried about the board. Shouldn't the board be all over it if the university president is openly ignoring a federal regulation relating to students being raped? If they aren't, why in the world are they there? Were they just thinking 'Oh well Ken is just ignoring the regs about rape, so I guess don't ask any questions there.'?

Last edit on this post - the number of people I have seen trying to say the board isn't at fault for anything that happened because they didn't actually didn't do anything blows my mind. I'm relatively young, but I've never heard anyone use the excuse 'I couldn't have done a bad job, because I wasn't doing the job at all.' outside of people saying that here for the board.

---

This is revisionist history and hindsight 20/20 viewing in its breathtaking finest.

First off, most of this "fun stuff" started in 2014. The first major DCL came out in 2011. However, it's been an iterative process ever since, with guidance being honed, tweaked, clarified nearly yearly. Also, most people have no idea how many guidance/mandates colleges and Universities get on a day-to-day basis. It's a huge part of the economy. That doesn't dismiss the need to pay attention, but it should help someone understand that there's a whole ecosystem out there. Universities are constantly putting out fires and juggling voices.

For instance, Baylor got hammered for not having a full-time, dedicated, professional Title IX Coordinator by the press. However, I happened to know that the two largest University Systems in the state didn't either at that time on their flagship campuses.

I'm just saying that 3 years is a blink of the eye. If you sincerely expect your BOR to have more than a working knowledge of Title IX structures in 2014-2015, you have no idea how a BOR works. Your expectations are wholly unrealistic.

And for the 9 BILLIONTH time, Art Briles didn't get fired because he wasn't filling out the proper paperwork. He got fired because he was actively subverting the Universities apparatus to police itself. There IS proof of this. He literally texted others about "keeping this away from Judicial Affairs." I'm sorry, but his goose was ****ing cooked when he wrote that. And that's just ONE time that we know of. For every text you've sent, you've had dozens of conversations in person or on the phone.

Secondly, there's a saying in Higher Education: "if you want to kill something, get a Regent involved." Regents have a purpose. They're there for guidance and oversight from a 60,000 ft view. If they're honestly getting involved on an inter-department basis, its because something is ****ed up. If they're asking questions about compliance, it's almost always already too late. They're not experts in education (usually). If they're counting reams of paper or asking about a student event, something is wrong.

But still, it's amazing that someone would blame a BOR (which meets like 3-6 times a year and rotates membership) for not having in-depth knowledge of a new guidance from OCR, but will give a walk to someone who is actually working full time with students. That's ****ing bonkers.

---

Nobody that I know of is blaming the BOFR for not knowing the details and intricacies of T9 and how it's implemented on campus. That's the job of the executive function. My disgust is from the BOFR's function of failing to provide proper oversight to insure that regulatory matters are handled in such a manner to insure compliance. The failure to accept any kind of responsibility or be held accountable for a university-wide systemic failure is unconscionable. We have business "leaders" on the BOFR that receive regulatory status updates all the time related to their businesses whether it be in healthcare, oil and gas, product safety, etc. Heck, I give monthly regulatory updates and their applicability to our business at least quarterly to insure we are operating within current and proposed regulation. How they didn't have a simple regulatory update or ask the right questions is mind boggling seeing as how they do it outside of their BOFR responsibilities. And the harm they've caused to victims and the Baylor brand by that failure is staggering.

---

Where did the BOR avoid taking responsibility? It's an unpaid position that rotates in and out. What were they going to do? Seriously?

Their job was to take care of business. They were the ones who hired Pepper Hamilton to find out what was actually going on (it was clear there was a lot of lying going on). They were the ones who got the report. They were the ones who mandated the changes be made. And they're also the ones who made changes in their own structure as well recommended by the report.

They're the perfect bogey-man for y'all desperate to slide any blame off of Briles because they're a group of 30+ people. But have you ever noticed that when you ask about this specific regent or that one, everyone thinks they're a "great person"? It's easy to de-individuate and hate a group of people without one face, but when you actually have to use examples it gets harder.

The fact is that there are two types of people on the outside of this: those who can deal with the fact that there is information they're not going to get and move on; and those that can't.

But people who are holding on to this idea that something was afoul and the BOR alone is to blame, are deluding themselves.

Chanceux said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

A coach who makes a school tens o' millions and more with donations aint let go because he went against school policy. Hiding somebody's drunk and disorderly from Beth Mccraw sure aint covering up sexual assault. The only dadgum reason you fire him is if you think he covered up sexual assault. Anybody that says different aint got a clue.

---

School policy?

You work for an organization with more than 1000 people and you get caught lying, and I mean on an expense report, to a vendor, or to the CEO, VP legal, or Head of HR, you're probably done.

Even the University of Houston won't play that.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/houston-sends-clear-message-about-art-briles-coaching-future-in-denying-interview/

---

I'm sayin there are levels of wrongdoing. And its gotta be egregious to filet the golden goose. Stealing pencils aint pilfering the petty cash. Reprimand vs firing and such. I never want to excuse some of the things Briles did. Never. It was said that he walked out of that meeting not thinking he was gonna be fired. If thats true then I think Briles thought he got caught stealing the pencils and not the money.

---

It wasn't stealing pencils. It was something that put him in the same box as Jerry Sandusky. If it wasn't egregious the networks (ESPN and the NFL) wouldn't be calling the CFL telling them that the sponsorship money would pull out if Art was entertaining the CFL. Do we need to define what "egregious" means outside the bubble?
Everyone knows mistakes were at every level. The rogue regents, former school president, former athletic director, former head coach and his staff have all been hit on this deal for being sorry at their jobs and (or not) being responsible.

xiledinok said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

A coach who makes a school tens o' millions and more with donations aint let go because he went against school policy. Hiding somebody's drunk and disorderly from Beth Mccraw sure aint covering up sexual assault. The only dadgum reason you fire him is if you think he covered up sexual assault. Anybody that says different aint got a clue.

---

School policy?

You work for an organization with more than 1000 people and you get caught lying, and I mean on an expense report, to a vendor, or to the CEO, VP legal, or Head of HR, you're probably done.

Even the University of Houston won't play that.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/houston-sends-clear-message-about-art-briles-coaching-future-in-denying-interview/

---

I'm sayin there are levels of wrongdoing. And its gotta be egregious to filet the golden goose. Stealing pencils aint pilfering the petty cash. Reprimand vs firing and such. I never want to excuse some of the things Briles did. Never. It was said that he walked out of that meeting not thinking he was gonna be fired. If thats true then I think Briles thought he got caught stealing the pencils and not the money.

---

It wasn't stealing pencils. It was something that put him in the same box as Jerry Sandusky. If it wasn't egregious the networks (ESPN and the NFL) wouldn't be calling the CFL telling them that the sponsorship money would pull out if Art was entertaining the CFL. Do we need to define what "egregious" means outside the bubble?
Everyone knows mistakes were at every level. The rogue regents, former school president, former athletic director, former head coach and his staff have all been hit on this deal for being sorry at their jobs and \ or not being responsible.

---

The Sandusky crimes and what Briles did or didn't do aint alike at all. And the reason the CFL made that call was because we live in a time where the mob rules in spite of what of the truth is. It just wasn't worth their time.

xiledinok said:

---

It wasn't stealing pencils. It was something that put him in the same box as Jerry Sandusky. If it wasn't egregious the networks (ESPN and the NFL) wouldn't be calling the CFL telling them that the sponsorship money would pull out if Art was entertaining the CFL.

---

This isn't true

Robemcdo said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

These questions still remain unanswered.

Why was Art Briles terminated?

If he was terminated for "cause", why was a large payout made?

The President (Ken Starr), the BOR, and the Interim President have never directly answered these questions.

The only sources of information have been ESPN (and other news media), Internet Boards, and some limited release of information from court records.

A new question arose when a letter from BU was released that clears Briles of direct participation of a coverup.

The forecast for information release from Baylor Leadership continues to be cloudy.

---

He was fired becausea few regents painted a Picture of sexual violence by his players that wasn't true . This was done to gloss over the board's own deficiencies over the years in reporting sexual accusations in the past. Three years Baylor did not report any accusations . Because they re routed these accusations downtown . This is the coverup . This is the scandal and it implicates influential board members . So they blamed the blacks and the guy who brought them here. Everything else is fiction

---

Absolute bullhockey and libel.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

He is literally blaming the BOR for not preventing Art Briles from doing what he was doing.

And can we be honest? He's not alone, AT ALL.

---

This is true

And for malpractice. BOR could not have handled it any worse if they tried.

Keyser Soze said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

I didn't read all 7 pages of posts but basically I haven't seen a single shred of evidence to answer the OPs question......


So it still looks like we fired our coach, killed our program and hired a disaster for nothing.

---

We are news consumers not a court jury. We are never going to get proof using that standard. Demanding proof like that is just being obtuse.


No we have been told plenty. Surely you have read these accounts. You can have a very low bar and say that was not enough, or conspiracy guy and not believe the stories ..... but people need to stop with the childish "can't prove it" angle as to Briles firing

(Note: OP was about covering up rape, that did not happen - loads of other stuff)

---

So he didn't cover up rape.

Then why did he get fired?

No evidence to back up why he was fired. Still. And he got a letter clearing him from the BOR.

So my original statement stands.

We fired our coach, killed the program and hired a disaster for no reason.

Chanceux said:

---

MilliVanilli said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

MilliVanilli said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

MilliVanilli said:

---

Chanceux said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

Quote:

---

Outside the bubble, people think Art ran an exotic zoo park with dangerous lions and tigers.

---

---

That's what our BOR told everyone.

---

Art didn't do himself any favors with the bad dudes comment. I reckon there was lots of stupid on both sides. Its a shame that nobody recognized how much money was on the line. Tellme is right that it coulda been fixed a long time ago. Both sides coulda done or said something here and there to lay down a good foundation. Neither did.

---

Yeah, loss of some money was the greatest shame...

---

Ain't what I said. And don't try putting words in my mouth again. You understand that? That aint a joke. Don't you ever f'n do that again.

---

It's in bold letters above, it's EXACTLY what you lamented, the loss of money.

---

Greatest shame? Did I say that? So I'm gonna tell you again for good measure. Do not put words in my mouth. Do you understand that? Never again will you do that. I'm not gonna put up with your bull. And I'll see to it that staff handles you.

---

These are your words "Its a shame that nobody recognized how much money was on the line." you lamented NOTHING else, absolutely NOTHING, only money.

So quit pretending you can spin your way out of it, man up and own your contemptible words.

It's interesting how you think you're a victim of anything after showing such callousness to actual victims.

---

Greatest shame was your stupid choice of words you little weasel. I am only talking about the athletics program. Do not put words in my mouth. Do not spin my words. People being hurt and athletic funds are two separate things entirely. Only victim here is you to your own dumbassedness. And if you don't like what I say buddy boy hit the ignore button. And then go run off and talk about living in people's heads like a psychopath.

---

I don't think it is my word choice that is the problem here you intellectual coward.

You just emphasized loss of hypothetical money in writing as the chief loss of Baylor's recent scandal and have flown off the handle for being told how ridiculous your assertion is.

You are the one defensive because you have bedded down saying something utterly indefensible and aren't courageous enough to walk it back.

cowboycwr said:

---

Keyser Soze said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

I didn't read all 7 pages of posts but basically I haven't seen a single shred of evidence to answer the OPs question......


So it still looks like we fired our coach, killed our program and hired a disaster for nothing.

---

We are news consumers not a court jury. We are never going to get proof using that standard. Demanding proof like that is just being obtuse.


No we have been told plenty. Surely you have read these accounts. You can have a very low bar and say that was not enough, or conspiracy guy and not believe the stories ..... but people need to stop with the childish "can't prove it" angle as to Briles firing

(Note: OP was about covering up rape, that did not happen - loads of other stuff)

---

So he didn't cover up rape.

Then why did he get fired?

No evidence to back up why he was fired. Still. And he got a letter clearing him from the BOR.

So my original statement stands.

We fired our coach, killed the program and hired a disaster for no reason.

---

He still had 19 players accused of assault by 17 victims, four of which were gang rapes. One alleged gang rape he knew about and did not report to Judicial Affairs as was school policy. Nothing happened to the players accused. That is not literally covering up rape, but it is impeding the investigation into an alleged rape. It is still very bad.

He had assistant coaches conduct their own investigations. There is a whole laundry list of bad decisions. Evidence includes his own text messages and his admissions.