Was that in reference to sexual harassment/violence, dating violence or stalking to them - or to a can of beer?Keyser Soze said:
Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...
Art Briles April 2011
If you believe in Art...
37,623 Views |
299 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by Forest Bueller
Keyser Soze said:
Not at all ...... but it does make the "we didn't know to report" line look foolish when all the excuse making is made for other things
So you are assuming he was well-versed and well trained in title IX compliance simply because he acknowledged the existence of judicial affairs in a private text, While we're at it, how do you know that he didn't go to judicial affairs about some of those minor infractions? Just because he expressed a reluctance to do so in a text doesn't mean that he didn't do it. I mean We know absolutely nothing about the context of those texts and what the truth was surrounding them.
57Bear said:Was that in reference to sexual harassment/violence, dating violence or stalking to them - or to a can of beer?Keyser Soze said:
Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...
Art Briles April 2011
It was a reference about knowing rules
When it is very clear rules about alcohol are know, it takes some insane mental gymnastics to believe they didn't know of rules on violence against women.
So Briles was honest? No wonder the BOR wanted him gone.Keyser Soze said:
Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...
Art Briles April 2011
So it was about a can of beer.Keyser Soze said:57Bear said:Was that in reference to sexual harassment/violence, dating violence or stalking to them - or to a can of beer?Keyser Soze said:
Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...
Art Briles April 2011
It was a reference about knowing rules
When it is very clear rules about alcohol are know, it takes some insane mental gymnastics to believe they didn't know of rules on violence against women.
57Bear said:So it was about a can of beer.Keyser Soze said:57Bear said:Was that in reference to sexual harassment/violence, dating violence or stalking to them - or to a can of beer?Keyser Soze said:
Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...
Art Briles April 2011
It was a reference about knowing rules
When it is very clear rules about alcohol are know, it takes some insane mental gymnastics to believe they didn't know of rules on violence against women.
I accept your yes
YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Bearish said:And 24 of 30 regents who voted to remove him were culprits in this scam?chorne68 said:
Art was a scapegoat for the Board of Regents.
The fact that some people consider the idea of Art being a rape-enabling cover-up artist ridiculous, while at the same time posit that 80% of a governing body of a university saved collective face by firing a football coach is something I'll never understand.
Not taking sides but your regent vote numbers to fire are WAY off......
Richard Reese
(True) Freshman - Bellville, TX
152 carries/791 yards/5.2 YPC/12 touchdowns
11 receptions/80 yards
1 game clinching studly TD vs Kansas
ZERO fumbles
Brett “Big Ballz” Yormark- Commissioner Big 12-16 Conference
One badass new TV contract with more goodies to come
(True) Freshman - Bellville, TX
152 carries/791 yards/5.2 YPC/12 touchdowns
11 receptions/80 yards
1 game clinching studly TD vs Kansas
ZERO fumbles
Brett “Big Ballz” Yormark- Commissioner Big 12-16 Conference
One badass new TV contract with more goodies to come
Or maybe he was told that he should try and resolve minor issues without involving JA if possible? Is there always a single explanation to every out-of-context transcription that you read? Especially one concocted for a specific purpose?Keyser Soze said:57Bear said:Was that in reference to sexual harassment/violence, dating violence or stalking to them - or to a can of beer?Keyser Soze said:
Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...
Art Briles April 2011
It was a reference about knowing rules
When it is very clear rules about alcohol are know, it takes some insane mental gymnastics to believe they didn't know of rules on violence against women.
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
NopeWineguy89 said:Bearish said:And 24 of 30 regents who voted to remove him were culprits in this scam?chorne68 said:
Art was a scapegoat for the Board of Regents.
The fact that some people consider the idea of Art being a rape-enabling cover-up artist ridiculous, while at the same time posit that 80% of a governing body of a university saved collective face by firing a football coach is something I'll never understand.
Not taking sides but your regent vote numbers to fire are WAY off......
He is correct 24-6
How does that make it any different? You are making the same assumption that you claim I am making. Your assumption is no more valid than my alternative explanation.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Hold on there, Clueless. If we cleaned house, why are Jackson, Holmes, Murdock, McCraw, and MLS still employed? RR and TLD are riding off into the sunset with no accountability while Livingstone herself stated in a recent article, "If you look at the actual changes that have taken place on campus, the vast majority of them were not related to the athletic department," she said. "Clearly the university understood that this was a much broader issue."
Just from the timeline below for Tevin Elliott, it's documented that 5 folks in leadership knew of allegations against him and watched him for >6 months before Briles was notified of the breadth of TE's activities. And that's not to mention a BOFR that knew of T9 non-compliances in 2014 with recommendations to fix.
So we've got documentation:
- October 5, 2011 email showing Doak and RR knew TE was "assaulting young women" (note the plural used from report)
- November 7, 2011 email noting that administration (Murdock, McCraw, and Martha Lou) knew of TE's "assaults" (note plural used from report),
- November 2011 football told of "an incident" (note singular used from report-unwanted contact)
- TE allegedly rapes a student on 4/15/12,
- Administration fully notifies football program on 4/25/12,
- Football program suspends Elliott on 4/27/12 the same day they learn Waco PD wants a cheek swab for their investigation.
From dated documents it appears football was never notified of breadth of the situation until 4/25/12. It further appears to me that that the clown show of RR, Doak, Murdock, McCraw, Martha Lou, were the problem. That's 5 senior folks in the administration that knew and did nothing. IMO they need to do time with TE. Fulking shameful!
Malbec said:How does that make it any different? You are making the same assumption that you claim I am making. Your assumption is no more valid than my alternative explanation.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
A serious lack of plausibility on the one you threw up against the wall.
The quotes were also preceded by ....examples of not reporting misconduct ....
The CIA could have taken down the WTC right. That is possible too. Equally full of it, but possible.
Please tell us how this is proof of something. Please tell us how this is your case.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
Reverend said:Please tell us how this is proof of something. Please tell us how this is your case.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
It's not my case.
It is one of multiple examples of where football avoided or attempted to avoid Baylor's disciplinary process in issues other than sexual assault.
Please cite a better one than "alcohol consumption." Otherwise just pray about it.Keyser Soze said:Reverend said:Please tell us how this is proof of something. Please tell us how this is your case.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
It's not my case.
It is one of multiple examples of where football avoided or attempted to avoid Baylor's disciplinary process in issues other than sexual assault.
On February 11, 2013, an assistant coach notified Coach Briles of a claim by a female student-athlete that a football player brandished a gun at her. Coach Briles responded: "what a fool she reporting to authorities" The assistant coach texted back: "She's acting traumatized Trying to talk her calm now Doesn't seem to want to report though." Coach Briles texted: "U gonna talk to [the player]." The assistant coach concluded: "Yes sir, just did. Caught him on the way to class Squeezed him pretty good." The matter was never reported to Judicial Affairs.Reverend said:Please cite a better one than "alcohol consumption." Otherwise just pray about it.Keyser Soze said:Reverend said:Please tell us how this is proof of something. Please tell us how this is your case.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
It's not my case.
It is one of multiple examples of where football avoided or attempted to avoid Baylor's disciplinary process in issues other than sexual assault.
On September 13 2013, Shillinglaw sent a text to Coach Briles about a player who got a massage and "supposedly exposed himself and asked for favors. She [masseuse] has a lawyer but wants us to handle with discipline and counseling." Coach Briles' first response was "What kind of discipline She a stripper?" When Shillinglaw said the player made the request at a salon and spa while getting a massage, Coach Briles wrote, "Not quite as bad."
On September 20, 2013, after a player was arrested for assault and threatening to kill a non-athlete, a football operations staff official tried to talk the victim out of pressing criminal charges. Meanwhile, Coach Briles texted Athletics Director Ian McCaw: "Just talked to [the player] he said Waco PD was there said they were going to keep it quiet Wasn't a set up deal... I'll get shill (Shillinglaw) to ck on Sibley (local attorney Jonathan Sibley)." Athletics Director Ian McCaw replied: "That would be great if they kept it quiet!"
In October 2013, Shillinglaw and Briles discussed their efforts to intervene on behalf of a player who was suspended for repeated drug violations. "Bottom line, he has to meet with (Vice President for Student Life Kevin) Jackson tomorrow morning. If Jackson does not reinstate President will," Shillinglaw wrote.
On May 14, 2014, after Coach Briles learned from an assistant coach that a player had been caught selling drugs, he texted: "I'm hoping it will take care of itself if not we can discuss best way to move on it." The offense was never reported to Judicial Affairs and Coach Briles arranged for the player to transfer to another school. The assistant coach texted: "Him just hanging around Waco scares me. [Another school] will take him. Knows baggage."
On August 15, 2015, after a player was arrested for possession of marijuana, Coach Briles texted an assistant coach: "**** how about that he's gonna b (sic) in the system now let me know what you think we should do I can get shill (Shillinglaw) to call Sibley or we can.... Do we know who complained?" The assistant coach responded that the complainant was the superintendent at the player's apartment complex. Coach Briles replied: "We need to know who supervisor is and get him to alert us first."
At some point, Pepper Hamilton stopped collecting such examples, which were not directly within
the scope of its engagement. There could be dozens more, but Pepper Hamilton believed it had
compiled enough to support a conclusion that those in charge of the football program, including
Shillinglaw, improperly covered up disciplinary problems other than sexual assault.
^Bold is the point.
So let's say that CAB thought he had the authority and discretion to decide not to report a minor incident and that he deliberately decided not to report that his player consumed alcohol . . . would you terminate him for that or perhaps for some other similar offenses? or would you consider counseling him to do a better job of reporting even minor stuff? Don't forget that CAB is clearly not a bad guy, even if he was a little lax at discipline. Do you try to counsel him, or do you fire the guy that helped put Baylor on the map?Keyser Soze said:On February 11, 2013, an assistant coach notified Coach Briles of a claim by a female student-athlete that a football player brandished a gun at her. Coach Briles responded: "what a fool she reporting to authorities" The assistant coach texted back: "She's acting traumatized Trying to talk her calm now Doesn't seem to want to report though." Coach Briles texted: "U gonna talk to [the player]." The assistant coach concluded: "Yes sir, just did. Caught him on the way to class Squeezed him pretty good." The matter was never reported to Judicial Affairs.Reverend said:Please cite a better one than "alcohol consumption." Otherwise just pray about it.Keyser Soze said:Reverend said:Please tell us how this is proof of something. Please tell us how this is your case.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
It's not my case.
It is one of multiple examples of where football avoided or attempted to avoid Baylor's disciplinary process in issues other than sexual assault.
On September 13 2013, Shillinglaw sent a text to Coach Briles about a player who got a massage and "supposedly exposed himself and asked for favors. She [masseuse] has a lawyer but wants us to handle with discipline and counseling." Coach Briles' first response was "What kind of discipline She a stripper?" When Shillinglaw said the player made the request at a salon and spa while getting a massage, Coach Briles wrote, "Not quite as bad."
On September 20, 2013, after a player was arrested for assault and threatening to kill a non-athlete, a football operations staff official tried to talk the victim out of pressing criminal charges. Meanwhile, Coach Briles texted Athletics Director Ian McCaw: "Just talked to [the player] he said Waco PD was there said they were going to keep it quiet Wasn't a set up deal... I'll get shill (Shillinglaw) to ck on Sibley (local attorney Jonathan Sibley)." Athletics Director Ian McCaw replied: "That would be great if they kept it quiet!"
In October 2013, Shillinglaw and Briles discussed their efforts to intervene on behalf of a player who was suspended for repeated drug violations. "Bottom line, he has to meet with (Vice President for Student Life Kevin) Jackson tomorrow morning. If Jackson does not reinstate President will," Shillinglaw wrote.
On May 14, 2014, after Coach Briles learned from an assistant coach that a player had been caught selling drugs, he texted: "I'm hoping it will take care of itself if not we can discuss best way to move on it." The offense was never reported to Judicial Affairs and Coach Briles arranged for the player to transfer to another school. The assistant coach texted: "Him just hanging around Waco scares me. [Another school] will take him. Knows baggage."
On August 15, 2015, after a player was arrested for possession of marijuana, Coach Briles texted an assistant coach: "**** how about that he's gonna b (sic) in the system now let me know what you think we should do I can get shill (Shillinglaw) to call Sibley or we can.... Do we know who complained?" The assistant coach responded that the complainant was the superintendent at the player's apartment complex. Coach Briles replied: "We need to know who supervisor is and get him to alert us first."
At some point, Pepper Hamilton stopped collecting such examples, which were not directly within
the scope of its engagement. There could be dozens more, but Pepper Hamilton believed it had
compiled enough to support a conclusion that those in charge of the football program, including
Shillinglaw, improperly covered up disciplinary problems other than sexual assault.
^Bold is the point.
Unless you have a smoking gun of some type of far worse behavior, I believe you should counsel him. Baylor unfortunately had a sexual assault problem that they had known about for years and had nonetheless chosen to retain Briles and try to fight through it. When the heat simply got hotter than they could stand, they killed the football program and dismissed a transfer with little due process in hopes that they would be able to move on quickly and without major consequence. I don't think they had it out for Briles initially or felt that he should be terminated for cause as they agreed to buy out his contract. However, when the heat didn't go away, they chose to try to destroy the reputations of certain people to save themselves. I've lost so much respect for the school I love as a result.
Exactly.Chuckroast said:So let's say that CAB thought he had the authority and discretion to decide not to report a minor incident and that he deliberately decided not to report that his player consumed alcohol . . . would you terminate him for that or perhaps for some other similar offenses? or would you consider counseling him to do a better job of reporting even minor stuff? Don't forget that CAB is clearly not a bad guy, even if he was a little lax at discipline. Do you try to counsel him, or do you fire the guy that helped put Baylor on the map?Keyser Soze said:On February 11, 2013, an assistant coach notified Coach Briles of a claim by a female student-athlete that a football player brandished a gun at her. Coach Briles responded: "what a fool she reporting to authorities" The assistant coach texted back: "She's acting traumatized Trying to talk her calm now Doesn't seem to want to report though." Coach Briles texted: "U gonna talk to [the player]." The assistant coach concluded: "Yes sir, just did. Caught him on the way to class Squeezed him pretty good." The matter was never reported to Judicial Affairs.Reverend said:Please cite a better one than "alcohol consumption." Otherwise just pray about it.Keyser Soze said:Reverend said:Please tell us how this is proof of something. Please tell us how this is your case.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
It's not my case.
It is one of multiple examples of where football avoided or attempted to avoid Baylor's disciplinary process in issues other than sexual assault.
On September 13 2013, Shillinglaw sent a text to Coach Briles about a player who got a massage and "supposedly exposed himself and asked for favors. She [masseuse] has a lawyer but wants us to handle with discipline and counseling." Coach Briles' first response was "What kind of discipline She a stripper?" When Shillinglaw said the player made the request at a salon and spa while getting a massage, Coach Briles wrote, "Not quite as bad."
On September 20, 2013, after a player was arrested for assault and threatening to kill a non-athlete, a football operations staff official tried to talk the victim out of pressing criminal charges. Meanwhile, Coach Briles texted Athletics Director Ian McCaw: "Just talked to [the player] he said Waco PD was there said they were going to keep it quiet Wasn't a set up deal... I'll get shill (Shillinglaw) to ck on Sibley (local attorney Jonathan Sibley)." Athletics Director Ian McCaw replied: "That would be great if they kept it quiet!"
In October 2013, Shillinglaw and Briles discussed their efforts to intervene on behalf of a player who was suspended for repeated drug violations. "Bottom line, he has to meet with (Vice President for Student Life Kevin) Jackson tomorrow morning. If Jackson does not reinstate President will," Shillinglaw wrote.
On May 14, 2014, after Coach Briles learned from an assistant coach that a player had been caught selling drugs, he texted: "I'm hoping it will take care of itself if not we can discuss best way to move on it." The offense was never reported to Judicial Affairs and Coach Briles arranged for the player to transfer to another school. The assistant coach texted: "Him just hanging around Waco scares me. [Another school] will take him. Knows baggage."
On August 15, 2015, after a player was arrested for possession of marijuana, Coach Briles texted an assistant coach: "**** how about that he's gonna b (sic) in the system now let me know what you think we should do I can get shill (Shillinglaw) to call Sibley or we can.... Do we know who complained?" The assistant coach responded that the complainant was the superintendent at the player's apartment complex. Coach Briles replied: "We need to know who supervisor is and get him to alert us first."
At some point, Pepper Hamilton stopped collecting such examples, which were not directly within
the scope of its engagement. There could be dozens more, but Pepper Hamilton believed it had
compiled enough to support a conclusion that those in charge of the football program, including
Shillinglaw, improperly covered up disciplinary problems other than sexual assault.
^Bold is the point.
Unless you have a smoking gun of some type of far worse behavior, I believe you should counsel him. Baylor unfortunately had a sexual assault problem that they had known about for years and had nonetheless chosen to retain Briles and try to fight through it. When the heat simply got hotter than they could stand, they killed the football program and dismissed a transfer with little due process in hopes that they would be able to move on quickly and without major consequence. I don't think they had it out for Briles initially or felt that he should be terminated for cause as they agreed to buy out his contract. However, when the heat didn't go away, they chose to try to destroy the reputations of certain people to save themselves. I've lost so much respect for the school I love as a result.
Witch hunt. Completely shameful. And those that try to justify it are as bad.
Let me try this from a different angle, just for kicks, but bear with me:Chuckroast said:Keyser Soze said:Reverend said:Keyser Soze said:Reverend said:Please tell us how this is proof of something. Please tell us how this is your case.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
It's not my case.
It is one of multiple examples of where football avoided or attempted to avoid Baylor's disciplinary process in issues other than sexual assault.
Unless you have a smoking gun of some type of far worse behavior, I believe you should counsel him. Baylor unfortunately had a sexual assault problem that they had known about for years and had nonetheless chosen to retain Briles and try to fight through it. When the heat simply got hotter than they could stand, they killed the football program and dismissed a transfer with little due process in hopes that they would be able to move on quickly and without major consequence. I don't think they had it out for Briles initially or felt that he should be terminated for cause as they agreed to buy out his contract. However, when the heat didn't go away, they chose to try to destroy the reputations of certain people to save themselves. I've lost so much respect for the school I love as a result.
When confronted with these disciplinary problems, what do you think Briles did? I believe he'd play the my way or the highway song and deny anything that wasn't right in front of his face. Baylor had to have known about it, I think the board for the most part had looked the other way. Ian definitely protected and colluded. In no way was Ian an effective advocate of the university's interests. Certain players were red flags from the second they landed on campus. People talked. These weren't model Baylor students by any stretch of the word. It raised the eyebrows of other Baylor players and even a few of them pointed it out. Guys caught flaunting guns, weed, picking fights. Baylor is too small for that to go unnoticed.
And that tactic works, until it doesn't. Because no one managed the ship, the SJW managed to get their story on the front page of a major news publication. Then you've got a full on crisis and no one stepping up to the plate. And when Briles is confronted with crafting a response, he drags his feet. Come to think if it, he's still dragging his feet. To this day, we have yet to see him respond. So you've got a board caught between a coach that doesn't seem engaged and millions of potential legal liabilities piling up and zero chance they can simply be avoided, either in court or the media. At some point, ANY board is going to cut bait, count their losses and just move on.
Briles doesn't seem to want to defend himself, so I don't see the point in defending him. There are a lot of things he could do to help his case, but his silence speaks loudly.
For the record, I think we may have been able to retain Briles, but not knowing all the facts, I can concede that letting him go could have been the right decision. There has not been enough transparency for us to know what really happened. Let's move past whether Briles should have been fired or not though and instead reflect on how he was treated in the aftermath.TellMeYouLoveMe said:Let me try this from a different angle, just for kicks, but bear with me:Chuckroast said:Keyser Soze said:Reverend said:Keyser Soze said:Reverend said:Please tell us how this is proof of something. Please tell us how this is your case.Keyser Soze said:
Fortunately the did add some context
On April 8, 2011, after a freshman defensive tackle was cited for illegal consumption of alcohol, Coach Briles sent a text message to an assistant coach: "Hopefully he's under radar enough they won't recognize name did he get ticket from Baylor police or Waco? Just trying to keep him away from our judicial affairs folks...."
I am sure you are clever enough to come up with more spin, but that is what it is - spin
It's not my case.
It is one of multiple examples of where football avoided or attempted to avoid Baylor's disciplinary process in issues other than sexual assault.
Unless you have a smoking gun of some type of far worse behavior, I believe you should counsel him. Baylor unfortunately had a sexual assault problem that they had known about for years and had nonetheless chosen to retain Briles and try to fight through it. When the heat simply got hotter than they could stand, they killed the football program and dismissed a transfer with little due process in hopes that they would be able to move on quickly and without major consequence. I don't think they had it out for Briles initially or felt that he should be terminated for cause as they agreed to buy out his contract. However, when the heat didn't go away, they chose to try to destroy the reputations of certain people to save themselves. I've lost so much respect for the school I love as a result.
When confronted with these disciplinary problems, what do you think Briles did? I believe he'd play the my way or the highway song and deny anything that wasn't right in front of his face. Baylor had to have known about it, I think the board for the most part had looked the other way. Ian definitely protected and colluded. In no way was Ian an effective advocate of the university's interests. Certain players were red flags from the second they landed on campus. People talked. These weren't model Baylor students by any stretch of the word. It raised the eyebrows of other Baylor players and even a few of them pointed it out. Guys caught flaunting guns, weed, picking fights. Baylor is too small for that to go unnoticed.
And that tactic works, until it doesn't. Because no one managed the ship, the SJW managed to get their story on the front page of a major news publication. Then you've got a full on crisis and no one stepping up to the plate. And when Briles is confronted with crafting a response, he drags his feet. Come to think if it, he's still dragging his feet. To this day, we have yet to see him respond. So you've got a board caught between a coach that doesn't seem engaged and millions of potential legal liabilities piling up and zero chance they can simply be avoided, either in court or the media. At some point, ANY board is going to cut bait, count their losses and just move on.
Briles doesn't seem to want to defend himself, so I don't see the point in defending him. There are a lot of things he could do to help his case, but his silence speaks loudly.
You're saying he was too silent, but some people argue Briles should have kept quiet and it all would have gone away. For a while he fought for his reputation until he realized his son and staff would be publicly castigated. Since he didn't want to hurt their careers, he mostly disappeared after dropping his lawsuit.
I think from the beginning Baylor should have set the record straight on Briles. If they truly believed he needed to be let go, they should have publicly stated that he was a good man but that the school simply needed to head in a different direction in order for healing to occur and then wished him well.
Instead, they chose to fuel a public narrative that Briles looked the other way on sexual assaults. They fueled it by their carefully worded summation of the PH audit and the WSJ article but mostly by their deafening public silence which encouraged rampant and inaccurate speculation that still prevails today . . . they were only privately willing to dispel the notion that Briles covered up sexual assault.
I believe our school and its leaders behaved horribly toward Briles by any standard, and the fact that we espouse Christian values just makes it even worse.
YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Hold on there, Clueless. If we cleaned house, why are Jackson, Holmes, Murdock, McCraw, and MLS still employed? RR and TLD are riding off into the sunset with no accountability while Livingstone herself stated in a recent article, "If you look at the actual changes that have taken place on campus, the vast majority of them were not related to the athletic department," she said. "Clearly the university understood that this was a much broader issue."
Just from the timeline below for Tevin Elliott, it's documented that 5 folks in leadership knew of allegations against him and watched him for >6 months before Briles was notified of the breadth of TE's activities. And that's not to mention a BOFR that knew of T9 non-compliances in 2014 with recommendations to fix.
So we've got documentation:
- October 5, 2011 email showing Doak and RR knew TE was "assaulting young women" (note the plural used from report)
- November 7, 2011 email noting that administration (Murdock, McCraw, and Martha Lou) knew of TE's "assaults" (note plural used from report),
- November 2011 football told of "an incident" (note singular used from report-unwanted contact)
- TE allegedly rapes a student on 4/15/12,
- Administration fully notifies football program on 4/25/12,
- Football program suspends Elliott on 4/27/12 the same day they learn Waco PD wants a cheek swab for their investigation.
From dated documents it appears football was never notified of breadth of the situation until 4/25/12. It further appears to me that that the clown show of RR, Doak, Murdock, McCraw, Martha Lou, were the problem. That's 5 senior folks in the administration that knew and did nothing. IMO they need to do time with TE. Fulking shameful!
You must be one of the attorneys sueing Baylor? It is common knowledge that a hundred employees in administration were relieved of duties after the scandal. What is your point? At least the BOR finally woke up and made serious changes.
SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Hold on there, Clueless. If we cleaned house, why are Jackson, Holmes, Murdock, McCraw, and MLS still employed? RR and TLD are riding off into the sunset with no accountability while Livingstone herself stated in a recent article, "If you look at the actual changes that have taken place on campus, the vast majority of them were not related to the athletic department," she said. "Clearly the university understood that this was a much broader issue."
Just from the timeline below for Tevin Elliott, it's documented that 5 folks in leadership knew of allegations against him and watched him for >6 months before Briles was notified of the breadth of TE's activities. And that's not to mention a BOFR that knew of T9 non-compliances in 2014 with recommendations to fix.
So we've got documentation:
- October 5, 2011 email showing Doak and RR knew TE was "assaulting young women" (note the plural used from report)
- November 7, 2011 email noting that administration (Murdock, McCraw, and Martha Lou) knew of TE's "assaults" (note plural used from report),
- November 2011 football told of "an incident" (note singular used from report-unwanted contact)
- TE allegedly rapes a student on 4/15/12,
- Administration fully notifies football program on 4/25/12,
- Football program suspends Elliott on 4/27/12 the same day they learn Waco PD wants a cheek swab for their investigation.
From dated documents it appears football was never notified of breadth of the situation until 4/25/12. It further appears to me that that the clown show of RR, Doak, Murdock, McCraw, Martha Lou, were the problem. That's 5 senior folks in the administration that knew and did nothing. IMO they need to do time with TE. Fulking shameful!
You must be one of the attorneys sueing Baylor? It is common knowledge that a hundred employees in administration were relieved of duties after the scandal. What is your point? At least the BOR finally woke up and made serious changes.
Name one regent that resigned or one exec admin fired as a result of this scandal. Name just one.
YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Hold on there, Clueless. If we cleaned house, why are Jackson, Holmes, Murdock, McCraw, and MLS still employed? RR and TLD are riding off into the sunset with no accountability while Livingstone herself stated in a recent article, "If you look at the actual changes that have taken place on campus, the vast majority of them were not related to the athletic department," she said. "Clearly the university understood that this was a much broader issue."
Just from the timeline below for Tevin Elliott, it's documented that 5 folks in leadership knew of allegations against him and watched him for >6 months before Briles was notified of the breadth of TE's activities. And that's not to mention a BOFR that knew of T9 non-compliances in 2014 with recommendations to fix.
So we've got documentation:
- October 5, 2011 email showing Doak and RR knew TE was "assaulting young women" (note the plural used from report)
- November 7, 2011 email noting that administration (Murdock, McCraw, and Martha Lou) knew of TE's "assaults" (note plural used from report),
- November 2011 football told of "an incident" (note singular used from report-unwanted contact)
- TE allegedly rapes a student on 4/15/12,
- Administration fully notifies football program on 4/25/12,
- Football program suspends Elliott on 4/27/12 the same day they learn Waco PD wants a cheek swab for their investigation.
From dated documents it appears football was never notified of breadth of the situation until 4/25/12. It further appears to me that that the clown show of RR, Doak, Murdock, McCraw, Martha Lou, were the problem. That's 5 senior folks in the administration that knew and did nothing. IMO they need to do time with TE. Fulking shameful!
You must be one of the attorneys sueing Baylor? It is common knowledge that a hundred employees in administration were relieved of duties after the scandal. What is your point? At least the BOR finally woke up and made serious changes.
Name one regent that resigned or one exec admin fired as a result of this scandal. Name just one.
Come over to the pay board. The mods have posted that many administrative people have been turned over since 2016. Also, many BOR members prior to 2014 are gone. The BOR that handled the 2016 scandal were just firemen putting out problems of the past. Maybe you should quit hating the school. Did you even attend Baylor?
VERY weak.Keyser Soze said:
Not at all ...... but it does make the "we didn't know to report" line look foolish when all the excuse making is made for other things
SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Hold on there, Clueless. If we cleaned house, why are Jackson, Holmes, Murdock, McCraw, and MLS still employed? RR and TLD are riding off into the sunset with no accountability while Livingstone herself stated in a recent article, "If you look at the actual changes that have taken place on campus, the vast majority of them were not related to the athletic department," she said. "Clearly the university understood that this was a much broader issue."
Just from the timeline below for Tevin Elliott, it's documented that 5 folks in leadership knew of allegations against him and watched him for >6 months before Briles was notified of the breadth of TE's activities. And that's not to mention a BOFR that knew of T9 non-compliances in 2014 with recommendations to fix.
So we've got documentation:
- October 5, 2011 email showing Doak and RR knew TE was "assaulting young women" (note the plural used from report)
- November 7, 2011 email noting that administration (Murdock, McCraw, and Martha Lou) knew of TE's "assaults" (note plural used from report),
- November 2011 football told of "an incident" (note singular used from report-unwanted contact)
- TE allegedly rapes a student on 4/15/12,
- Administration fully notifies football program on 4/25/12,
- Football program suspends Elliott on 4/27/12 the same day they learn Waco PD wants a cheek swab for their investigation.
From dated documents it appears football was never notified of breadth of the situation until 4/25/12. It further appears to me that that the clown show of RR, Doak, Murdock, McCraw, Martha Lou, were the problem. That's 5 senior folks in the administration that knew and did nothing. IMO they need to do time with TE. Fulking shameful!
You must be one of the attorneys sueing Baylor? It is common knowledge that a hundred employees in administration were relieved of duties after the scandal. What is your point? At least the BOR finally woke up and made serious changes.
Name one regent that resigned or one exec admin fired as a result of this scandal. Name just one.
Come over to the pay board. The mods have posted that many administrative people have been turned over since 2016. Also, many BOR members prior to 2014 are gone. The BOR that handled the 2016 scandal were just firemen putting out problems of the past. Maybe you should quit hating the school. Did you even attend Baylor?
You can't even name one outside of Athletics and Starr. Referral to the pay side is no way to live life kid. Research for yourself; ask serious questions. Baylor taught us to question.
BTW...I don't hate Baylor. I love Baylor; she's is in my genetic code so to speak. I am not a lawyer. I am a Baylor alum that's ashamed as to how our "leaders" treated victims, failed to deal with serious issues head-on, and refused to accept accountability and consequences then proclaimed "Christian Mission" when actions said otherwise. I'm happy that we're getting better, but we've still got decades of work to repair shattered lives and Baylor's reputation.
You will never get it. I have long been convinced of that, and you continue to reinforce that reality. Honestly, I am so tired of trying to get you to see what had been the method at BU going back over 40 years, not just in football, but in every sport, and in every department. You seemed at one time to understand how Baylor handled women that reported SA, but you put that in a separate box; except that you want to dump the contents of all the boxes together when it comes to Briles for some reason. You admit to the university culture when it comes to how the university discouraged SA reporting and publicity, but you can't seem to reconcile that they might do something similar when it came to somewhat less distasteful offenses.
Just think about what you know. You know the university routinely and for many decades dissuaded women from reporting SA using the student conduct code about drugs and alcohol and the threat of parental involvement as tools to avoid action and disclosure. You know this is a direct violation of Title IX protocol, yet you conveniently ignore this blatant and repeated violation and suggest that even though such was part and parcel of university-wide culture, that somehow the football program was expected to unilaterally break the long entrenched regimen; that finally after all of the regents, JA officials, administrators, professors, other coaches, campus police officers (all, both former and current) had utilized this system for years and years and were still operating under it despite Title IX guidance, that it was up to Art Briles to stand up and change the culture and be responsible for following a reporting protocol for which he had never even been trained?
This is why so many people think of you as a BOR shill. It's not because you back the ultimate decision of the Board to fire Briles, it's that you ignore what you already know and admit about BU disciplinary culture and refuse to apply it evenly. You think that Briles trying to avoid JA and publicity was done for his own benefit. It was done because that's how things were done at Baylor. If you applied your theory equally and fairly, I doubt you would need all the fingers on your left hand to count how many coaches and others with direct supervision of students at Baylor over the past few decades would have escaped the axe; and that's even if an unfortunate shop class accident had taken a finger or two. It may not have been Job 1 to protect the BU image, but it was always near the top of the list. It seems that you may be mad because Briles was simply the one with the baton when the times caught up to the university, even though the sweat hadn't even dried on the relay legs before him.
I hope that things have changed, but I fear that the beating that BU has taken in the press, and its relentless nature to blow every happening on campus into an extended scandal will make those running the school gun-shy and send everyone back into their trenches. After all, Briles isn't around to pin it on anymore. I hope they understand that it's on them now; to not accept that would be more than just unfortunate.
Just think about what you know. You know the university routinely and for many decades dissuaded women from reporting SA using the student conduct code about drugs and alcohol and the threat of parental involvement as tools to avoid action and disclosure. You know this is a direct violation of Title IX protocol, yet you conveniently ignore this blatant and repeated violation and suggest that even though such was part and parcel of university-wide culture, that somehow the football program was expected to unilaterally break the long entrenched regimen; that finally after all of the regents, JA officials, administrators, professors, other coaches, campus police officers (all, both former and current) had utilized this system for years and years and were still operating under it despite Title IX guidance, that it was up to Art Briles to stand up and change the culture and be responsible for following a reporting protocol for which he had never even been trained?
This is why so many people think of you as a BOR shill. It's not because you back the ultimate decision of the Board to fire Briles, it's that you ignore what you already know and admit about BU disciplinary culture and refuse to apply it evenly. You think that Briles trying to avoid JA and publicity was done for his own benefit. It was done because that's how things were done at Baylor. If you applied your theory equally and fairly, I doubt you would need all the fingers on your left hand to count how many coaches and others with direct supervision of students at Baylor over the past few decades would have escaped the axe; and that's even if an unfortunate shop class accident had taken a finger or two. It may not have been Job 1 to protect the BU image, but it was always near the top of the list. It seems that you may be mad because Briles was simply the one with the baton when the times caught up to the university, even though the sweat hadn't even dried on the relay legs before him.
I hope that things have changed, but I fear that the beating that BU has taken in the press, and its relentless nature to blow every happening on campus into an extended scandal will make those running the school gun-shy and send everyone back into their trenches. After all, Briles isn't around to pin it on anymore. I hope they understand that it's on them now; to not accept that would be more than just unfortunate.
YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Hold on there, Clueless. If we cleaned house, why are Jackson, Holmes, Murdock, McCraw, and MLS still employed? RR and TLD are riding off into the sunset with no accountability while Livingstone herself stated in a recent article, "If you look at the actual changes that have taken place on campus, the vast majority of them were not related to the athletic department," she said. "Clearly the university understood that this was a much broader issue."
Just from the timeline below for Tevin Elliott, it's documented that 5 folks in leadership knew of allegations against him and watched him for >6 months before Briles was notified of the breadth of TE's activities. And that's not to mention a BOFR that knew of T9 non-compliances in 2014 with recommendations to fix.
So we've got documentation:
- October 5, 2011 email showing Doak and RR knew TE was "assaulting young women" (note the plural used from report)
- November 7, 2011 email noting that administration (Murdock, McCraw, and Martha Lou) knew of TE's "assaults" (note plural used from report),
- November 2011 football told of "an incident" (note singular used from report-unwanted contact)
- TE allegedly rapes a student on 4/15/12,
- Administration fully notifies football program on 4/25/12,
- Football program suspends Elliott on 4/27/12 the same day they learn Waco PD wants a cheek swab for their investigation.
From dated documents it appears football was never notified of breadth of the situation until 4/25/12. It further appears to me that that the clown show of RR, Doak, Murdock, McCraw, Martha Lou, were the problem. That's 5 senior folks in the administration that knew and did nothing. IMO they need to do time with TE. Fulking shameful!
You must be one of the attorneys sueing Baylor? It is common knowledge that a hundred employees in administration were relieved of duties after the scandal. What is your point? At least the BOR finally woke up and made serious changes.
Name one regent that resigned or one exec admin fired as a result of this scandal. Name just one.
Come over to the pay board. The mods have posted that many administrative people have been turned over since 2016. Also, many BOR members prior to 2014 are gone. The BOR that handled the 2016 scandal were just firemen putting out problems of the past. Maybe you should quit hating the school. Did you even attend Baylor?
You can't even name one outside of Athletics and Starr. Referral to the pay side is no way to live life kid. Research for yourself; ask serious questions. Baylor taught us to question.
BTW...I don't hate Baylor. I love Baylor; she's is in my genetic code so to speak. I am not a lawyer. I am a Baylor alum that's ashamed as to how our "leaders" treated victims, failed to deal with serious issues head-on, and refused to accept accountability and consequences then proclaimed "Christian Mission" when actions said otherwise. I'm happy that we're getting better, but we've still got decades of work to repair shattered lives and Baylor's reputation.
I can't help you anymore young man.
SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Hold on there, Clueless. If we cleaned house, why are Jackson, Holmes, Murdock, McCraw, and MLS still employed? RR and TLD are riding off into the sunset with no accountability while Livingstone herself stated in a recent article, "If you look at the actual changes that have taken place on campus, the vast majority of them were not related to the athletic department," she said. "Clearly the university understood that this was a much broader issue."
Just from the timeline below for Tevin Elliott, it's documented that 5 folks in leadership knew of allegations against him and watched him for >6 months before Briles was notified of the breadth of TE's activities. And that's not to mention a BOFR that knew of T9 non-compliances in 2014 with recommendations to fix.
So we've got documentation:
- October 5, 2011 email showing Doak and RR knew TE was "assaulting young women" (note the plural used from report)
- November 7, 2011 email noting that administration (Murdock, McCraw, and Martha Lou) knew of TE's "assaults" (note plural used from report),
- November 2011 football told of "an incident" (note singular used from report-unwanted contact)
- TE allegedly rapes a student on 4/15/12,
- Administration fully notifies football program on 4/25/12,
- Football program suspends Elliott on 4/27/12 the same day they learn Waco PD wants a cheek swab for their investigation.
From dated documents it appears football was never notified of breadth of the situation until 4/25/12. It further appears to me that that the clown show of RR, Doak, Murdock, McCraw, Martha Lou, were the problem. That's 5 senior folks in the administration that knew and did nothing. IMO they need to do time with TE. Fulking shameful!
You must be one of the attorneys sueing Baylor? It is common knowledge that a hundred employees in administration were relieved of duties after the scandal. What is your point? At least the BOR finally woke up and made serious changes.
Name one regent that resigned or one exec admin fired as a result of this scandal. Name just one.
Come over to the pay board. The mods have posted that many administrative people have been turned over since 2016. Also, many BOR members prior to 2014 are gone. The BOR that handled the 2016 scandal were just firemen putting out problems of the past. Maybe you should quit hating the school. Did you even attend Baylor?
You can't even name one outside of Athletics and Starr. Referral to the pay side is no way to live life kid. Research for yourself; ask serious questions. Baylor taught us to question.
BTW...I don't hate Baylor. I love Baylor; she's is in my genetic code so to speak. I am not a lawyer. I am a Baylor alum that's ashamed as to how our "leaders" treated victims, failed to deal with serious issues head-on, and refused to accept accountability and consequences then proclaimed "Christian Mission" when actions said otherwise. I'm happy that we're getting better, but we've still got decades of work to repair shattered lives and Baylor's reputation.
I can't help you anymore young man.
You never did.
Malbec said:
You will never get it. I have long been convinced of that, and you continue to reinforce that reality. Honestly, I am so tired of trying to get you to see what had been the method at BU going back over 40 years, not just in football, but in every sport, and in every department. You seemed at one time to understand how Baylor handled women that reported SA, but you put that in a separate box; except that you want to dump the contents of all the boxes together when it comes to Briles for some reason. You admit to the university culture when it comes to how the university discouraged SA reporting and publicity, but you can't seem to reconcile that they might do something similar when it came to somewhat less distasteful offenses.
Just think about what you know. You know the university routinely and for many decades dissuaded women from reporting SA using the student conduct code about drugs and alcohol and the threat of parental involvement as tools to avoid action and disclosure. You know this is a direct violation of Title IX protocol, yet you conveniently ignore this blatant and repeated violation and suggest that even though such was part and parcel of university-wide culture, that somehow the football program was expected to unilaterally break the long entrenched regimen; that finally after all of the regents, JA officials, administrators, professors, other coaches, campus police officers (all, both former and current) had utilized this system for years and years and were still operating under it despite Title IX guidance, that it was up to Art Briles to stand up and change the culture and be responsible for following a reporting protocol for which he had never even been trained?
This is why so many people think of you as a BOR shill. It's not because you back the ultimate decision of the Board to fire Briles, it's that you ignore what you already know and admit about BU disciplinary culture and refuse to apply it evenly. You think that Briles trying to avoid JA and publicity was done for his own benefit. It was done because that's how things were done at Baylor. If you applied your theory equally and fairly, I doubt you would need all the fingers on your left hand to count how many coaches and others with direct supervision of students at Baylor over the past few decades would have escaped the axe; and that's even if an unfortunate shop class accident had taken a finger or two. It may not have been Job 1 to protect the BU image, but it was always near the top of the list. It seems that you may be mad because Briles was simply the one with the baton when the times caught up to the university, even though the sweat hadn't even dried on the relay legs before him.
I hope that things have changed, but I fear that the beating that BU has taken in the press, and its relentless nature to blow every happening on campus into an extended scandal will make those running the school gun-shy and send everyone back into their trenches. After all, Briles isn't around to pin it on anymore. I hope they understand that it's on them now; to not accept that would be more than just unfortunate.
First - I agree with a good number of your points.
There is the Seinfeld episode where George and Jerry are mistakenly thought to be a couple. Throughout the show they say "We're NOT, not that there is anything wrong with it". As much volume has there has been I have definitely failed to add "not that there is anything wrong with it" a lot. I can not tell you how many times I have edit my own post simply to go back and properly add the word "allegedly" to a post. There is no question of the widespread problems. I assure you I am very well versed in what they are.
My post are almost entirely responses to incorrect or misleading information - most of such posts of that nature are of the nature "Briles is a scapegoat". I feel strongly such things should not go unchallenged in a public forum - that hurts Baylor and I have great affection for Baylor.
I have said this to Yoak before, but it applies to you as well. You get too much of me because there is too little of you. YOU never challenge many of the blatantly wrong pro Briles conspiracies. I know you know, 0/0/0 is horribly wrong. The sane BOR / Admin critics never challenge the wacky team Briles members - you are kinda in the same clan so you let them slide. You leave it to me and just a handful of others.
You want me to say the admin was wrong - start a thread about how Starr was wronged or scapegoated. I'll be there.
I have a great deal more - but will get back.
YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:YoakDaddy said:SATXBear said:Thee University said:Well congratulations poindexter. You judged without FACTS in their entirety. Thanks for telling us what you believe.rileyroo said:
Here is what I believe:
1) Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies.
2) BU failed some women and didn't want the facts to come out (so they opened the university pocket books and bought their silence). For that, I say shame on our University.
3) Art was not a bad man and took for the fall for many of the university failures. He is not completely blameless, but the hysteria about him was over the top.
4) BU took chances on athletes, but the same thing is done by all universities.
The saddest part of all of this is that we will probably never know the truth. The media posted outrageous statements over and over and the public bought it. We are forever labeled as the "rape" university. Where are all of the gang rapists? Why haven't they been prosecuted?
If anything good came out of this, it is that BU finally realized that they are a major university and cannot pretend to be a vacation bible school anymore. We have real problems.
It is too bad that Briles and company cannot ever tell their story without being dragged throught the mud again. I hope he gets to coach again because I believe in second chances and I truly believe that we didn't hear the whole story. I refuse to judge someone without knowing the facts in their entirety. I would want the same if I was accused of something so egregious.
#1. Blame Ian instead of the BOR.
#2. That is a wild-@$$ed guess on your part. Who failed the women? Who bought silence?
#3. Art was a bad man for not doing his entire job and bringing in a cancerous element to his team. He built it. He drove it until it overheated, pulled to the side of the road with a strange smoke wafting out from underneath the Yugo, hopped out of the green and gold car and into the burnt orange Cadillac. Unfortunately for him the Caddy never had any intention of taking him to Austin.
#4 Great. Blame it all on the other schools. Baylor has made a few mistakes over the years but for the most part either vetted the bad apples out prior to arrival or let them go after one or two strikes.
We have a chance to shed the "rape U" image you mentioned above. We are working on it but it appears we earned a great deal of it.
My point you ask? You did a lot of judging without knowing the facts in their entirety.
His items 1 and 2 are utter nonsenses and is something repeated frequently on this free board.
Not only is it judging, but also lunacy.
Not lunacy; truth. Riley's #1 and #2 are true. 1) There was a Baylor commissioned study done by Margolis-Healy in 2014 specifically outlining our T9 deficiencies and non-compliance. That's why Patty Crawford was hired. The BOFR dang sure knew. 2) There were women coming out of the shadows to report SA claims with one going as far back as 1997. You bet the checkbook was open.
And that is why Starr was fired. He refused to implement title 9 reform. PH report helped expose more problems, so people got fired. No cover up.
No shlt, Sherlock. Old news. To Riley's point, "Our board of regents knew that BU screwed up by not having an adequate Title IX office in place (and that they were partially responsible). They proceeded to clean house to distract from their inadequacies." that you said was false is definitely true as I noted above with the regents knowing about T9 non-compliance through the 2014 Margolis-Healy report. Compliance was not a top priority (it was a Tier2 priority according to depos) and they didn't hold Starr accountable for 2 years until they fired him. Yeah, the verbal PH presentation identified even more.
Wrong again. They cleaned house to get rid of people not doing their job. You really love living in the crazy conspiracy world, don't you.
Hold on there, Clueless. If we cleaned house, why are Jackson, Holmes, Murdock, McCraw, and MLS still employed? RR and TLD are riding off into the sunset with no accountability while Livingstone herself stated in a recent article, "If you look at the actual changes that have taken place on campus, the vast majority of them were not related to the athletic department," she said. "Clearly the university understood that this was a much broader issue."
Just from the timeline below for Tevin Elliott, it's documented that 5 folks in leadership knew of allegations against him and watched him for >6 months before Briles was notified of the breadth of TE's activities. And that's not to mention a BOFR that knew of T9 non-compliances in 2014 with recommendations to fix.
So we've got documentation:
- October 5, 2011 email showing Doak and RR knew TE was "assaulting young women" (note the plural used from report)
- November 7, 2011 email noting that administration (Murdock, McCraw, and Martha Lou) knew of TE's "assaults" (note plural used from report),
- November 2011 football told of "an incident" (note singular used from report-unwanted contact)
- TE allegedly rapes a student on 4/15/12,
- Administration fully notifies football program on 4/25/12,
- Football program suspends Elliott on 4/27/12 the same day they learn Waco PD wants a cheek swab for their investigation.
From dated documents it appears football was never notified of breadth of the situation until 4/25/12. It further appears to me that that the clown show of RR, Doak, Murdock, McCraw, Martha Lou, were the problem. That's 5 senior folks in the administration that knew and did nothing. IMO they need to do time with TE. Fulking shameful!
You must be one of the attorneys sueing Baylor? It is common knowledge that a hundred employees in administration were relieved of duties after the scandal. What is your point? At least the BOR finally woke up and made serious changes.
Name one regent that resigned or one exec admin fired as a result of this scandal. Name just one.
Come over to the pay board. The mods have posted that many administrative people have been turned over since 2016. Also, many BOR members prior to 2014 are gone. The BOR that handled the 2016 scandal were just firemen putting out problems of the past. Maybe you should quit hating the school. Did you even attend Baylor?
You can't even name one outside of Athletics and Starr. Referral to the pay side is no way to live life kid. Research for yourself; ask serious questions. Baylor taught us to question.
BTW...I don't hate Baylor. I love Baylor; she's is in my genetic code so to speak. I am not a lawyer. I am a Baylor alum that's ashamed as to how our "leaders" treated victims, failed to deal with serious issues head-on, and refused to accept accountability and consequences then proclaimed "Christian Mission" when actions said otherwise. I'm happy that we're getting better, but we've still got decades of work to repair shattered lives and Baylor's reputation.
I can't help you anymore young man.
You never did.
If you consider yourself a friend of Baylor, she does not need enemies.
You've NEVER seen me ascribe to the theory of 0/0/0. I wouldn't say that about tennis or basketball either. But, I also do not abide 17/19/4 and the slick spin with which it was created. But to blame the coach for one or more of his players committing a SA is wrong, and suggesting whether directly or by silence, that a coach participated in covering up SA is even more wrong.
I think you are applying a stigma to the word "scapegoat" that over extends the nature of the beast. What happened to Briles at BU was not a first on our campus, it was just the most overt. When the press gets wind, or even if there is a possibility that the press might get wind of something embarrassing, someone is going to get saddled with the blame. And when you think the culture you have constructed is just (for whatever purpose you deem it to be just), you will seek to maintain the order that built the culture, and you will do so at the expense of those on the periphery of that culture. And, often, as that order has proven at BU, you will ease your guilt in doing so with the only thing you have that can allow you to perpetuate that order - money.
Now, there are those that will remain nameless, that like to suggest that the resultant brouhaha that created a worsening of the "scandal" was the action of Briles after he was terminated; that if he had just taken his money and gone away, he would be working now at another college, and that he was fully to blame for the way the press treated him, since he gave interviews and showed up at a ball game in another city. Well, let me give you something to think about here.
If Baylor had simply come out with a definitive statement that said, "Art Briles is a good man. We must make this clear. He did not attempt to cover up sexual assault. Nobody at Baylor attempted to cover up sexual assault. We take the safety of our students at Baylor with the utmost sincerity and will always put the welfare of our students before anything else. There simply was an attitude of relaxed discipline and accountability within the football program that the university doesn't wish to falsely portray Baylor as a school willing to win at any cost and we feel it is better to start fresh. We have paid Coach Briles a settlement of $15 million to honor our contractual obligation to him. We wish Coach Briles the best, and know that he will make another university an outstanding coach."
Instead the university chose to let the press run wild with false stories and allow a false narrative to be created and sustained. BU didn't even tell the press that they paid Briles and how much they paid him. It took required tax information filings to bring that info out. Had that information been released from the start, it would have quelled much negative press against Briles and there would have been no need for him to defend himself to the media. It is amazing that the very same critics that blame Briles for defending himself in the press, also claim that if he was wronged he would have sued Baylor and not dropped his lawsuit against the Regents. He shouldn't have defended himself! He should have defended himself! You guys have to make up your mind on this one.
I think all Briles wanted when he filed his suit was to have the Regents involved stop throwing gasoline on the fire. If they had not tossed out that 17/19/4 garbage, and had just made a statement that Briles was not a rape enabler, that lawsuit would have never been filed.
I think you are applying a stigma to the word "scapegoat" that over extends the nature of the beast. What happened to Briles at BU was not a first on our campus, it was just the most overt. When the press gets wind, or even if there is a possibility that the press might get wind of something embarrassing, someone is going to get saddled with the blame. And when you think the culture you have constructed is just (for whatever purpose you deem it to be just), you will seek to maintain the order that built the culture, and you will do so at the expense of those on the periphery of that culture. And, often, as that order has proven at BU, you will ease your guilt in doing so with the only thing you have that can allow you to perpetuate that order - money.
Now, there are those that will remain nameless, that like to suggest that the resultant brouhaha that created a worsening of the "scandal" was the action of Briles after he was terminated; that if he had just taken his money and gone away, he would be working now at another college, and that he was fully to blame for the way the press treated him, since he gave interviews and showed up at a ball game in another city. Well, let me give you something to think about here.
If Baylor had simply come out with a definitive statement that said, "Art Briles is a good man. We must make this clear. He did not attempt to cover up sexual assault. Nobody at Baylor attempted to cover up sexual assault. We take the safety of our students at Baylor with the utmost sincerity and will always put the welfare of our students before anything else. There simply was an attitude of relaxed discipline and accountability within the football program that the university doesn't wish to falsely portray Baylor as a school willing to win at any cost and we feel it is better to start fresh. We have paid Coach Briles a settlement of $15 million to honor our contractual obligation to him. We wish Coach Briles the best, and know that he will make another university an outstanding coach."
Instead the university chose to let the press run wild with false stories and allow a false narrative to be created and sustained. BU didn't even tell the press that they paid Briles and how much they paid him. It took required tax information filings to bring that info out. Had that information been released from the start, it would have quelled much negative press against Briles and there would have been no need for him to defend himself to the media. It is amazing that the very same critics that blame Briles for defending himself in the press, also claim that if he was wronged he would have sued Baylor and not dropped his lawsuit against the Regents. He shouldn't have defended himself! He should have defended himself! You guys have to make up your mind on this one.
I think all Briles wanted when he filed his suit was to have the Regents involved stop throwing gasoline on the fire. If they had not tossed out that 17/19/4 garbage, and had just made a statement that Briles was not a rape enabler, that lawsuit would have never been filed.
I know you don't believe in 0/0/0 - my point was you, as most others, let it slide and never challenged it. You let the same people challenge it over and over. Rather a whole snuffing out wrong information and moving towards a consensus we have all stuck to our sides.
Featured Stories
See All
In-Depth Preview: Baylor set to host key offensive line transfers
by Grayson Grundhoefer
8:35
3h ago
399
Tweety Carter: Former Baylor Star Is the Next to Join Scott Drew's Staff
by SicEm365 Radio
Analyzing the Commitments: Baylor goes 3-for-3 during big OV weekend
by Grayson Grundhoefer
Can Matt Jones Settle in at Inside Linebacker in His 6th Year?
by Travis Roeder