BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

I just have lots of questions about the whole NCAA investigation and to tell the truth it frightens me...no one really has stopped and posted anything really substantive as to what is likely to happen to BU or CAB or anyone else.

To read the reports of what the letter said from NCAA which BU and CAB automatically get a chance to respond to so just part of the process...it seems that BU and CAB are facing some type of potential penalties...I don't know that any other individual faces scrutiny or not. CAB asked for an extension to respond so I would think there was something his side wanted to say about something...needing extra time makes sense as hew was out of the Country and who knows what information he might have needed to obtain to respond. No one said anything about BU needing more time but they get it becaseu of CAB any way so who knows if they would have needed or asked for more time.

No one from BU including CMR acts like there is anything to worry about...CAB had Ian come out and say he thought he would be exonerated by NCAA...not sure how that would even work but sure seemed odd timing...why put yourself out like that? Of course CAB interviews for a job and you would think the interim administrator who blamed it on waiting for NCAA ruling would be the normal stance to take...yet apparently CAB and the HC were pretty sure no show cause and CAB should know what he is facing...shouldn't he?

I also firmly believe that to a large degree BU and CAB are or should united on the NCAA front...as head coach if he did major things wrong then that is going to harm BU and I don't see us skating and him getting a show cause? I guess there is a chance that others above CAB...Ian, Starr, RR, Police Chief, individual BOR members...could based on their actions or lack of actions get hit with something and it affect BU but not CAB? But no other individual was mentioned as getting a notice letter...do we know it was just CAB and BU? Is that a good thing that it is limited?

I will say this the person and institution we know about neither act concerned...so I guess that is good?

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

---

So what about us? Baylor? are we going to be hit?

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

---

So what about us? Baylor? are we going to be hit?

---

The report that indicated that the NCAA intended to hit Briles also indicated that it intended to hit Baylor, so probably yes.

Liberal SJW internet mobs are powerful things.

Super effective tactic to use on spineless university officials.......they always fold.

Art probably needs to realize he is un-hirable now that the Regents and their PR firm have done their work.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Liberal SJW internet mobs are powerful things.

Super effective tactic to use on spineless university officials.......they always fold.

Art probably needs to realize he is un-hirable now that the Regents and their PR firm have done their work.

---

This just isn't accurate, as the USM AD literally told Briles that he was not hired primarily due to the pending NCAA investigation.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/southern-miss-coach-backs-art-briles-after-university-president-ad-nix-possible-hire/

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

---

So what about us? Baylor? are we going to be hit?

---

The report that indicated that the NCAA intended to hit Briles also indicated that it intended to hit Baylor, so probably yes.

---

So why are BU and CAB acting so unconcerned?

Eball said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

I will say this the person and institution we now about neither act concerned...so I guess that is good?

---

Here's what we know:

(a) Possible academic violations. I think those will be challenged. That's why the UNC lawyers are taking the case.

(b) Failure to monitor drug testing. This is where the NCAA really has something. It's been admitted as such that Baylor had multiple failures on this front. BUT, if you go back and look at things, McCaw has stated before that Baylor, being a private, religious institution, had a difficult time putting together a policy that allowed for an evenhanded approach that was in line with other schools. They were flying to Notre Dame, as I recall, to seek information/help on that front.

(c) In-house discipline. Grey area. This is where the NCAA is mostly a toothless organization. They leave a more than modest amount of leeway for programs/universities to handle punishing their players for a variety of offenses. So, who knows what they try and pull. If they want to dive into sexual assaults, they're going to be skewered in court.

ALL of these, particularly when combined, can amount to "failure to monitor" and "lack of control". I think Baylor and Briles have the upper hand at avoiding heavy sanctions. Who knows? This is why we have a legal system.

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

---

So what about us? Baylor? are we going to be hit?

---

The report that indicated that the NCAA intended to hit Briles also indicated that it intended to hit Baylor, so probably yes.

---

So why are BU and CAB acting so unconcerned?

---

No one but them could realistically answer that, however, at the same time, assuming that Briles' team has responded during its requested extension, what could they do differently at this point?

I just think Baylor should get credit for taking a play off national title contender program and knocking it back to starting over at 1-11 and all the indirect revenue loss from that, by allowing half recruiting class to leave plus others like Stidham and Terrance Williams without hassle amounts to scholarship reduction. The 1-11 and hence decrease in fan support amounts to a pretty heavy self imposed sanction. We agreed to a direct revenue cut by agreeing to let the XII take about an 14-18 million dollar penalty to enrich everyone we compete against in conference which is unprecedented for any conference. It amounts to almost a 2 million dollar donation to the athletic department of each of the other conference members. I just think even the NCAA has to say ok that's enough. You almost burned yourself down to where SMU was when they came back from death with their extreme case of repeated corruption. I just think our lawyers are armed with really good arguments. If the NCAA ruled in summer of 16 that Baylor had to do everything it voluntarily did, that would be considered an huge sanction.

Took the money and showed up at Rice.
I think he had terrible advice.
His lawyers knew to run a tab on the old coach.
He must have had enablers in his ears.

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

---

So what about us? Baylor? are we going to be hit?

---

The report that indicated that the NCAA intended to hit Briles also indicated that it intended to hit Baylor, so probably yes.

---

So why are BU and CAB acting so unconcerned?

---

BU is acting 'unconcerned' because it has to move forward.

Malbec said:

---

You don't ask someone to leave his team and fly in from out of the country to interview for a job unless you are serious and have done some homework. I don't care what spin they want to place on the reasons he wasn't hired, the truth is that the USM president is afraid of the SJW mob. Academia is run by that same mob. You won't stand against something if you are already standing with it. I guarantee you that this interview was run by the admin before they told Briles to come in for the interview, and again before Hopson had him meet the team. Bennett was weak for not telling Hopson not to bring Briles in for the interview when he knew full well he would never be willing to stomach making the hire. Hopson will never respect Bennett again.

---

SBNation reported that USM's coach did not in fact run it by the administration beforehand, and, after the issuing of that report, Patrick Magee asked USM's coach directly about whether that was the case. In response, USM's coach declined to comment.

Given that that is the case, it's unlikely that he actually ran it by the administration, and, if that's true, he may have just put himself on the hot seat.

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/university-of-southern-mississippi/article225529890.html

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Malbec said:

---

You don't ask someone to leave his team and fly in from out of the country to interview for a job unless you are serious and have done some homework. I don't care what spin they want to place on the reasons he wasn't hired, the truth is that the USM president is afraid of the SJW mob. Academia is run by that same mob. You won't stand against something if you are already standing with it. I guarantee you that this interview was run by the admin before they told Briles to come in for the interview, and again before Hopson had him meet the team. Bennett was weak for not telling Hopson not to bring Briles in for the interview when he knew full well he would never be willing to stomach making the hire. Hopson will never respect Bennett again.

---

SBNation reported that USM's coach did not in fact run it by the administration beforehand, and, after the issuing of that report, Patrick Magee asked USM's coach directly about whether that was the case. In response, USM's coach declined to comment.

Given that that is the case, it's unlikely that he actually ran it by the administration, and, if that's true, he may have just put himself on the hot seat.

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/university-of-southern-mississippi/article225529890.html

---

You fire for him that stunt.

Pretty stupid for the HC to go rogue on this. Does he not understand what a show cause is? I was wondering all along about how this didnt make sense unless a ruling was coming out within days and Briles and Southern Miss already had early unofficial word that he was cleared.

trey3216 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

---

So what about us? Baylor? are we going to be hit?

---

The report that indicated that the NCAA intended to hit Briles also indicated that it intended to hit Baylor, so probably yes.

---

So why are BU and CAB acting so unconcerned?

---

BU is acting 'unconcerned' because it has to move forward.

---

That wouldn't really explain why it's been leaked from Baylor's administration/AD that they don't expect any major penalties. Rhodes is pretty certain that Baylor will go fairly unscathed.

BarleyMcDougal said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

---

So what about us? Baylor? are we going to be hit?

---

The report that indicated that the NCAA intended to hit Briles also indicated that it intended to hit Baylor, so probably yes.

---

So why are BU and CAB acting so unconcerned?

---

BU is acting 'unconcerned' because it has to move forward.

---

That wouldn't really explain why it's been leaked from Baylor's administration/AD that they don't expect any major penalties. Rhodes pretty certain that Baylor will go fairly unscathed.

I havent heard or seen anyone official at Baylor say this publicly. Where and when was this?

---

xiledinok said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Malbec said:

---

You don't ask someone to leave his team and fly in from out of the country to interview for a job unless you are serious and have done some homework. I don't care what spin they want to place on the reasons he wasn't hired, the truth is that the USM president is afraid of the SJW mob. Academia is run by that same mob. You won't stand against something if you are already standing with it. I guarantee you that this interview was run by the admin before they told Briles to come in for the interview, and again before Hopson had him meet the team. Bennett was weak for not telling Hopson not to bring Briles in for the interview when he knew full well he would never be willing to stomach making the hire. Hopson will never respect Bennett again.

---

SBNation reported that USM's coach did not in fact run it by the administration beforehand, and, after the issuing of that report, Patrick Magee asked USM's coach directly about whether that was the case. In response, USM's coach declined to comment.

Given that that is the case, it's unlikely that he actually ran it by the administration, and, if that's true, he may have just put himself on the hot seat.

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/university-of-southern-mississippi/article225529890.html

---

You fire for him that stunt.

---

translate ..please....

Read the posts.
Southern Piss' coach forgot to run by his administration that he planned to interview Briles.
Not a good day for you robe touchers.
Where do I ship the therapy blankets?

PartyBear said:

---

BarleyMcDougal said:

---

trey3216 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Eball said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

He was not cleared, and that's the point. The NCAA indicated that it intended to hit Briles specifically with allegations in October 2018, and, because that was the case, it is in the best interests of anyone interested in hiring him to wait until that investigation is complete.

---

So what about us? Baylor? are we going to be hit?

---

The report that indicated that the NCAA intended to hit Briles also indicated that it intended to hit Baylor, so probably yes.

---

So why are BU and CAB acting so unconcerned?

---

BU is acting 'unconcerned' because it has to move forward.

---

That wouldn't really explain why it's been leaked from Baylor's administration/AD that they don't expect any major penalties. Rhodes pretty certain that Baylor will go fairly unscathed.

I havent heard or seen anyone official at Baylor say this publicly. Where and when was this?

---

---

There was a Mac Engel piece that said Baylor didn't expect any major punishment. I've heard interviews with Rhodes where I believe he said something similar.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Malbec said:

---

You don't ask someone to leave his team and fly in from out of the country to interview for a job unless you are serious and have done some homework. I don't care what spin they want to place on the reasons he wasn't hired, the truth is that the USM president is afraid of the SJW mob. Academia is run by that same mob. You won't stand against something if you are already standing with it. I guarantee you that this interview was run by the admin before they told Briles to come in for the interview, and again before Hopson had him meet the team. Bennett was weak for not telling Hopson not to bring Briles in for the interview when he knew full well he would never be willing to stomach making the hire. Hopson will never respect Bennett again.

---

SBNation reported that USM's coach did not in fact run it by the administration beforehand, and, after the issuing of that report, Patrick Magee asked USM's coach directly about whether that was the case. In response, USM's coach declined to comment.

Given that that is the case, it's unlikely that he actually ran it by the administration, and, if that's true, he may have just put himself on the hot seat.

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/university-of-southern-mississippi/article225529890.html

---

They didn't run it by the president. The AD knew, obviously, as he told Briles that they couldn't get it done before NCAA stuff was cleared up.

The university president doesn't have any power. Their BOR does, however, just like at Baylor. I'd be willing to bet you that some of those big boosters on their BOR knew.

BarleyMcDougal said:

---

They didn't run it by the president. The AD knew, obviously, as he told Briles that they couldn't get it done before NCAA stuff was cleared up.

The university president doesn't have any power. Their BOR does, however, just like at Baylor. I'd be willing to bet you that some of those big boosters on their BOR knew.

---

The SBNation article indicated that only the football staff knew in advance, and USM's coach did not indicate that that was not the case when he was asked about it, so it appears as though not even AD knew until after it took place.

EDIT for clarification: Art indicated that the AD told him -today- why it was not hiring him. That conversation did not take place prior to or during the interview, and that is important to note in order to avoid leading some to believe that that conversation took place earlier or that the AD was in fact informed.

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

BarleyMcDougal said:

---

They didn't run it by the president. The AD knew, obviously, as he told Briles that they couldn't get it done before NCAA stuff was cleared up.

The university president doesn't have any power. Their BOR does, however, just like at Baylor. I'd be willing to bet you that some of those big boosters on their BOR knew.

---

The SBNation article indicated that only the football staff knew in advance, and USM's coach did not indicate that that was not the case when he was asked about it, so it appears as though not even AD knew until after it took place.

---

I'd be hard pressed to believe that a coach can bring a candidate in for an interview without permission, let alone attempt a hire without talking to the AD. I'm guessing the interim AD basically gave it a green light since he was on the way out. That's when at the last second the president/BOR got involved.

Malbec said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Malbec said:

---

You don't ask someone to leave his team and fly in from out of the country to interview for a job unless you are serious and have done some homework. I don't care what spin they want to place on the reasons he wasn't hired, the truth is that the USM president is afraid of the SJW mob. Academia is run by that same mob. You won't stand against something if you are already standing with it. I guarantee you that this interview was run by the admin before they told Briles to come in for the interview, and again before Hopson had him meet the team. Bennett was weak for not telling Hopson not to bring Briles in for the interview when he knew full well he would never be willing to stomach making the hire. Hopson will never respect Bennett again.

---

SBNation reported that USM's coach did not in fact run it by the administration beforehand, and, after the issuing of that report, Patrick Magee asked USM's coach directly about whether that was the case. In response, USM's coach declined to comment.

Given that that is the case, it's unlikely that he actually ran it by the administration, and, if that's true, he may have just put himself on the hot seat.

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/university-of-southern-mississippi/article225529890.html

---

Nonsense. There's way too much planning involved for the admins not to know. This is not some guy driving in from Pascagoula. Use some common sense; if there is any of that left in the world.

---

While that's certainly possible, there has been no conflicting information provided or otherwise reported on that issue so it would be difficult to simply assume that what is available is inaccurate.

It looks like big donors wanted him.

Malbec said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Malbec said:

---

You don't ask someone to leave his team and fly in from out of the country to interview for a job unless you are serious and have done some homework. I don't care what spin they want to place on the reasons he wasn't hired, the truth is that the USM president is afraid of the SJW mob. Academia is run by that same mob. You won't stand against something if you are already standing with it. I guarantee you that this interview was run by the admin before they told Briles to come in for the interview, and again before Hopson had him meet the team. Bennett was weak for not telling Hopson not to bring Briles in for the interview when he knew full well he would never be willing to stomach making the hire. Hopson will never respect Bennett again.

---

SBNation reported that USM's coach did not in fact run it by the administration beforehand, and, after the issuing of that report, Patrick Magee asked USM's coach directly about whether that was the case. In response, USM's coach declined to comment.

Given that that is the case, it's unlikely that he actually ran it by the administration, and, if that's true, he may have just put himself on the hot seat.

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/university-of-southern-mississippi/article225529890.html

---

Nonsense. There's way too much planning involved for the admins not to know. This is not some guy driving in from Pascagoula. Use some common sense; if there is any of that left in the world.

---

I love meeting people that have never been to Mississippi.

Malbec said:

---

Aberzombie1892 said:

---

Malbec said:

---

You don't ask someone to leave his team and fly in from out of the country to interview for a job unless you are serious and have done some homework. I don't care what spin they want to place on the reasons he wasn't hired, the truth is that the USM president is afraid of the SJW mob. Academia is run by that same mob. You won't stand against something if you are already standing with it. I guarantee you that this interview was run by the admin before they told Briles to come in for the interview, and again before Hopson had him meet the team. Bennett was weak for not telling Hopson not to bring Briles in for the interview when he knew full well he would never be willing to stomach making the hire. Hopson will never respect Bennett again.

---

SBNation reported that USM's coach did not in fact run it by the administration beforehand, and, after the issuing of that report, Patrick Magee asked USM's coach directly about whether that was the case. In response, USM's coach declined to comment.

Given that that is the case, it's unlikely that he actually ran it by the administration, and, if that's true, he may have just put himself on the hot seat.

https://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/conference-usa/university-of-southern-mississippi/article225529890.html

---

Nonsense. There's way too much planning involved for the admins not to know. This is not some guy driving in from Pascagoula. Use some common sense; if there is any of that left in the world.

---

absolutely . . . no way a coach publicly announces an interview with any OC without talking first with the AD. Add to that the fact that Briles is the potential hire, and there is simply no way that the administration wasn't aware. Using the investigation as an excuse not to hire is simply an easy cover.

BarleyMcDougal said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

Again, I'm positive that the attorneys are the ones driving opinions here. Maybe Lanier/Cannon feel good about their chances vs the NCAA.

---

Of course, Cannon also felt good about suing Baylor and playing the scapegoat card -- a decision that effectively ended Art's coaching career. I'm not sure I'd trust his judgment at this stage if I was Briles.

Briles is a dream client for his lawyers.
Cha Ching!
Coach Hopson best get ready for a reassignment and 8 a.m. teaching P.E.

bear2be2 said:

---

BarleyMcDougal said:

---

BUBear24 said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

I would have thought the HC would have already cleared this with administration before hand. I also would have thought they had unofficial word from the NCAA that Briles is clear and there would be no show cause on him otherwise none of this made sense as I was saying yesterday.

---

I stay out of this CAB debate but if he was cleared I don't know why he would be the one asking for the extension on the ncaa ruling announcement.

---

Again, I'm positive that the attorneys are the ones driving opinions here. Maybe Lanier/Cannon feel good about their chances vs the NCAA.

---

Of course, Cannon also felt good about suing Baylor and playing the scapegoat card -- a decision that effectively ended Art's coaching career. I'm not sure I'd trust his judgment at this stage if I was Briles.

---

He sued 4 Regents not Baylor. I suspect it is the NCAA investigation that has kept him unemployable. Southern Miss says that anyway. I suspect once his show cause is over if there is one, he will be back somewhere as probably OC at least.

BarleyMcDougal said:

---

ALL of these, particularly when combined, can amount to "failure to monitor" and "lack of control". I think Baylor and Briles have the upper hand at avoiding heavy sanctions. Who knows? This is why we have a legal system.

---

NCAA isn't a legal system, however.

Exhibit A: the disparity in the way the NCAA handled UNC and Mizzou.