Football
Sponsored by

Latest from Mac Engel on Briles

16,691 Views | 84 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by jumpinjoe
lakersfan34
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/mac-engel/article230958903.html

Feel free to hate Briles and Baylor, but make sure to do your homework on the subject

There are too many sad elements in this tale to count, but the media has failed in the Art Briles/Baylor saga from the start.

From our inability to see some of these sexual assault allegations when they were occurring in real time at Baylor, to labeling Briles as a man who endorsed and fostered a culture of rape.

Aware of my own failings and hypocrisy on this story, I acknowledge why so many deplore my well-meaning good brothers and sisters in the media. As critical as we are to your community and a democracy, we can be a lazy judgmental pack of self-important blowhards.

As much as sports needs the media to make mortals immortal, to market a brand, and to sell tickets and move merchandise, the other side of that free air time can be an atomic bomb.

Crushing Briles and the school that recently hired him, Mount Vernon ISD, is an easy populist choice; it requires minimal effort, and it will generate rave reviews and big ratings.

I say this only because, with the exception of maybe two other people, no one has taken the time to know this sad tale more than I have.

I have read all of it. I have talked to coaches. I have spoken to victims. I have talked to Baylor administrators. I have spoken at length to high-ranking members of the Baylor Board of Regents who backed Briles, fought for him to stay, but supported the decision to fire him. I spoke to Baylor student-athletes who were there when this all happened. I spoke to coaches in the athletic department who were there.

This is an indictment on a narrative that refuses to acknowledge but one reliable trope. The narrative is out of control because we are just too lazy to accept additional details or to do any original reporting.

You don't have to like the details, and are free to question them, but don't deny they exist. There is more to this than 145 characters or a Search Engine Optimization headline.

In consuming the outrage at Mount Vernon's decision, I see a consistent theme: There are no datelines on any of these reports from Waco. There have not been for years. Few people have bothered to interview anyone, or taken the time to read beyond a few paragraphs, or explore some of the allegations.

I see a rehash of a rehash. I see no attempt to acknowledge anything beyond what fits the "Coach Rape" narrative.

People believe whatever they want. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story, or an opinion that makes you feel better about yourself because you were showered with confirmation from uninformed people.

Not long after the original report about this fiasco was published by Texas Monthly in the fall of 2014, a friend of mine, who is a criminal attorney and a proud Baylor alum, warned me: "Give it six months. There are going to be lawyers lined up around the block at Baylor's door." Took about five.

The allegations, complete with press releases designed to create a headline, overwhelmed the school. Since Baylor is a private school, the potential payouts in a court proceeding have no cap.

The one headline we keep using is the allegation of "52 rapes and five gang rapes in a four-year span" at Baylor. This case was settled out of court, and it has been accepted as fact.

If we are to believe that headline and allegation from an attorney, and so many others, we must acknowledge the other filings, claims and allegations.

We have to at least say that former Baylor defensive end Shawn Oakman, who had been accused of sexual assault a few months after he graduated from BU in April 2016, was found not guilty by a jury in 2019. While I would never have recruited Oakman when he transferred from Penn State because he was covered in red flags, it does not mean he is guilty of rape.

We should at least acknowledge that in May 2017, nearly one year to the day after Briles was fired and handed an $18 million check, Baylor's general counsel, Christopher Holmes, wrote a letter on Baylor letterhead to the ex-coach.

Holmes wrote, "We are unaware of any situation where you personally had contact with anyone who directly reported to you being the victim of sexual assault or that you directly discouraged the victim of an alleged sexual assault from reporting to law enforcement or University officials. Nor are we aware of any situation where you played a student-athlete who had been found responsible for sexual assault."

That essentially contradicts what Baylor officials deliberately leaked to The Wall Street Journal the previous year that selectively painted the football program under Briles as the problem while ignoring the larger issue, which was the university's practices as they related to sexual assault claims.

You likely have not seen that letter beyond a few times. If that. Why include it when it hurts the narrative?

You will see none of the stories about Briles include the sworn testimony of ex-Baylor athletic director Ian McCaw, or board member Phil Stewart in the current Jane Doe cases against the school.

Both men called out the Baylor board with harsh criticism; Stewart went so far as to say the investigation of the athletic department by the law firm of Pepper Hamilton was "orchestrated, staged to achieve desired results" to fire Briles.

One board member told me that another board member suggested to create an NCAA violation so the school would not have to pay Briles' buyout.

The latest court filing came last week, as part of the 10 Jane Doe cases against Baylor. The plaintiff has no incentive to play favorites among school officials.

The latest allegation stated, among other things, that Baylor has consistently created a "false narrative that failures were entirely sports-related, rather than broader culpability within Regents and Senior Administrators."
Probably have not read that one, either.

MEDIA'S ROLE IN BAYLOR'S MESS

Briles is no victim. Neither is former BU president Ken Starr, nor is McCaw. To suggest they are is offensive. They are professional leaders who accepted a check, and agreed to a provision in their buyouts that stipulates they would not publicly disparage Baylor University. That's on them.

The victims are the young adults at Baylor University who went to the actual adults to ask for help, but had their pain and hurt ignored, or suppressed. They will always be the victims, and no one else.

Baylor was justified in firing Briles; even his staunchest supporters said discipline was not his strength.
From a football standpoint, he gambled on too many transfers; before the NCAA created the transfer portal, if a good player was transferring, there was a reason. And it was seldom good.

Baylor had a problem in every room in its house, including the front porch, on which Briles stood. If college athletics is the "front porch" to your school, and you have the same problem there as you do in every other room, fire up the leaf blower.

Because BU had so many powerful people pushing multiple agendas, there was no one central narrative of error, or reform. The school operated in a state of panic and was as transparent as tar.
Kids were hurt, and the adults failed.

So did the media, of which I am a proud member. We fell in love with the narrative, because it has so many reliable components and is such an easy sell.

Feel free to hate Briles and the rest of BU, but try to learn more than 145 characters on the subject.
Calling a guy a bad coach is one thing.

Suggesting a guy condoned or covered up rape is quite another.

Read more here: https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/mac-engel/article230958903.html#storylink=cpy
PartyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If he is correct and a Regent did suggest the BOR commit an NCAA violation for purposes of framing Briles for it, that Regent better have been booted and banned from the university.
jackets320
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Engel was one of the first to pile on and he is one of the first to actually do a little investigating and one of the first to say that CAB was railroaded. I wish he had a larger national profile so some light could be shined on this nationally.
jumpinjoe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Startlegram can go to the defunct newspaper graveyard and take TCU professor Mac Engels with it. I stopped buying that rag 20 years ago.
Joined BaylorFans in 1999 under username jumpinjoe. Have always been Jumpinjoe. Proud 4 Year Baylor letterman and 1968 graduate and charter member of Quartermiler U, produced school record in 400 IH.
Timbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
At least Engel wrote this now. It helps , even if it is late.
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Engel was the first in print to suggest firing Briles in early May 2016 after suggesting it on various radio interviews prior to that. He still sticks by that suggestion. That said, he's the only "reporter" I've seen interview several participants from all sides of our debacle. Albeit late, he's attempting to hold his peers accountable.
Aberzombie1892
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There is nothing really new here. The reference to letter is particularly interesting because, as has been discussed in this forum at length, the letter doesn't say what some people think it does.
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's nice to see some truth come out about the media. But I wonder how much of this is self-serving on Engel's part. He's trying to take the moral high ground but I don't think he, or anyone else in the media, has a place there. Certainly not those who jumped on the Briles & Baylor hate bandwagon.
DoubleBearClaw
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Edited
Dumb take
Sent from hybrid satellite phone.
TexasScientist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nice to see Engel confirm what I have been saying since 2016 on this board. Finally, someone in the media is beginning to accurately reflect the truth of this matter.
ShooterTX
How long do you want to ignore this user?
F that guy.

Worthless piece of crap.
BusyTarpDuster2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Where he states, "I acknowledge why so many deplore my well-meaning good brothers and sisters in the media. As critical as we are to your community and a democracy, we can be a lazy judgmental pack of self-important blowhards" .... why do I immediately think of Dale Hansen?
BusyTarpDuster2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There are other things he could have mentioned, such as how the media jumped on then Boise State's coach Petersen saying, "I thoroughly apprised Coach Briles of the circumstances surrounding Sam's disciplinary record and dismissal" to mean that Briles knew about his past domestic violence but took him in anyway (when Petersen's statement didn't really say that at all) so they could push the "Briles puts women on campus at risk in order to win football games" narrative, when later all that was proven false, and you didn't read about it because it was tucked way in the back (probably like this Engel mea culpa will be) or not reported at all. Or how the BOR's only example they gave where Briles "knew about a rape but didn't report it" was about an allegation he heard second hand from another coach, and how he pushed for the woman to report it to police, and how both the coach AND THE GIRL involved praised Briles for how he handled it- and you didn't read about any of that either. Oh well, maybe Engel didn't want mention these out of guilt for having pushed these narratives harder than anyone, I'm guessing. I don't know.
RegentCoverup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here is what I think happened. I think Mac is the only journalist that was writing about this and he started to get some blowback from a broad section of people for the narrative. Some of it his fault, some of it others.

When writers start to find that their network and sources distrust them, well, they end up bloggers. Most are at this point anyway, but it makes it difficult to have anyone answer your call. I think this story swung on Mac and he finally accepted the reality.He's not really making a big leap to anyone here. But he is distancing himself from the herd of sportswriters that did no due diligence on the most relevant parts of the story.

Does anyone here think sportswriters, or for that matter, the media, will change their tune and make an effort to validate facts?

Not me.
Banned BarleyMcDougal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I said Engel's logic was flawed when he first began reporting on this. At least he stuck with it long enough to reach a sound conclusion. He'll be the only reporter on the subject to have done so. We're overrun with columnists now who do very little in the way of actual investigation. They simply quote lawsuits and so-called advocates to formulate an uninformed opinion.
Thee University
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What I think is hilarious is how many of the 365 Bubble Club thought Engel was the antichrist for a couple of years. Now that Engel is changing his tune he is all of the sudden a great sportswriter????

The damage was done. His repair job is a band aid on a gaping ax wound.
"The education of a man is never completed until he dies." - General Robert E. Lee
drahthaar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TellMeYouLoveMe said:

Here is what I think happened. I think Mac is the only journalist that was writing about this and he started to get some blowback from a broad section of people for the narrative. Some of it his fault, some of it others.

When writers start to find that their network and sources distrust them, well, they end up bloggers. Most are at this point anyway, but it makes it difficult to have anyone answer your call. I think this story swung on Mac and he finally accepted the reality.He's not really making a big leap to anyone here. But he is distancing himself from the herd of sportswriters that did no due diligence on the most relevant parts of the story.

Does anyone here think sportswriters, or for that matter, the media, will change their tune and make an effort to validate facts?

Not me.
Me either. That entire group of folks bit on the stink bait so hard that they swallowed the hook clear down to their individual and collective anuses. The media reaction to BU's poorly-managed mess was over the top and premature, and not one of those irresponsible people called for more inquiry into a larger university problem. While it may not have been intentional, Briles caught the full brunt of the media outrage for the university. The down side IMO is that the media could have helped resolve this disaster but made no effort beyond acquiring clicks and readers. They didn't really care about Briles or any other coach, for that matter. I'd go farther and say they didn't truly give a rat's sphincter about the victims, either. But they dad-gum sure were full-bore about scourging Baylor with a passion it did not have for Michigan State, OU or Ohio State, even when the evidence was public in their case.
drahthaar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

What I think is hilarious is how many of the 365 Bubble Club thought Engel was the antichrist for a couple of years. Now that Engel is changing his tune he is all of the sudden a great sportswriter????

The damage was done. His repair job is a band aid on a gaping ax wound.
Thee, there isn't any way to close this wound...it'll take a ton of grafting in multiple procedures and then it will have to heal from the inside out.
RegentCoverup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
witchmo said:

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

Here is what I think happened. I think Mac is the only journalist that was writing about this and he started to get some blowback from a broad section of people for the narrative. Some of it his fault, some of it others.

When writers start to find that their network and sources distrust them, well, they end up bloggers. Most are at this point anyway, but it makes it difficult to have anyone answer your call. I think this story swung on Mac and he finally accepted the reality.He's not really making a big leap to anyone here. But he is distancing himself from the herd of sportswriters that did no due diligence on the most relevant parts of the story.

Does anyone here think sportswriters, or for that matter, the media, will change their tune and make an effort to validate facts?

Not me.
Me either. That entire group of folks bit on the stink bait so hard that they swallowed the hook clear down to their individual and collective anuses. The media reaction to BU's poorly-managed mess was over the top and premature, and not one of those irresponsible people called for more inquiry into a larger university problem. While it may not have been intentional, Briles caught the full brunt of the media outrage for the university. The down side IMO is that the media could have helped resolve this disaster but made no effort beyond acquiring clicks and readers. They didn't really care about Briles or any other coach, for that matter. I'd go farther and say they didn't truly give a rat's sphincter about the victims, either. But they dad-gum sure were full-bore about scourging Baylor with a passion it did not have for Michigan State, OU or Ohio State, even when the evidence was public in their case.
Agree.

I will say that many went after Michigan State as well, but they also compared Baylor to Mich/St.
The two are in no way similar.

I don't like the idea, but I think organizations have to think about being on the offensive in situations like this.

Banned BarleyMcDougal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TellMeYouLoveMe said:

witchmo said:

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

Here is what I think happened. I think Mac is the only journalist that was writing about this and he started to get some blowback from a broad section of people for the narrative. Some of it his fault, some of it others.

When writers start to find that their network and sources distrust them, well, they end up bloggers. Most are at this point anyway, but it makes it difficult to have anyone answer your call. I think this story swung on Mac and he finally accepted the reality.He's not really making a big leap to anyone here. But he is distancing himself from the herd of sportswriters that did no due diligence on the most relevant parts of the story.

Does anyone here think sportswriters, or for that matter, the media, will change their tune and make an effort to validate facts?

Not me.
Me either. That entire group of folks bit on the stink bait so hard that they swallowed the hook clear down to their individual and collective anuses. The media reaction to BU's poorly-managed mess was over the top and premature, and not one of those irresponsible people called for more inquiry into a larger university problem. While it may not have been intentional, Briles caught the full brunt of the media outrage for the university. The down side IMO is that the media could have helped resolve this disaster but made no effort beyond acquiring clicks and readers. They didn't really care about Briles or any other coach, for that matter. I'd go farther and say they didn't truly give a rat's sphincter about the victims, either. But they dad-gum sure were full-bore about scourging Baylor with a passion it did not have for Michigan State, OU or Ohio State, even when the evidence was public in their case.
Agree.

I will say that many went after Michigan State as well, but they also compared Baylor to Mich/St.
The two are in no way similar.

I don't like the idea, but I think organizations have to think about being on the offensive in situations like this.
Yes. The PR tactic of being forthright is absolutely dead and the media is to blame. They pick you apart while you're still breathing. Not to blend politics, but our president is Donald Trump. He got where he is by constantly throwing verbal punches at the press, even if he's countlessly wrong about topics.
Banned BarleyMcDougal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I mean Baylor was being compared to Penn State. It was outright lunacy.
BearFan33
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Baylor football was the sacrificial lamb the media wanted for the college rape problem and they got an assist from our BOR.
George Truett
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The BS is much with this Mac Engel.

The simple story is that the BOR was in love with winning and simply looked the other way.

Furthermore, the whole Title IX situation at the school was a mess.

I think he lands pretty much on target. Everybody messed up, including Briles, and Briles deserved to be fired.
Sailor Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aberzombie1892 said:

There is nothing really new here. The reference to letter is particularly interesting because, as has been discussed in this forum at length, the letter doesn't say what some people think it does.
Bingo. An exoneration it was not.
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thee University said:

What I think is hilarious is how many of the 365 Bubble Club thought Engel was the antichrist for a couple of years. Now that Engel is changing his tune he is all of the sudden a great sportswriter????

The damage was done. His repair job is a band aid on a gaping ax wound.

Nobody is saying he's a great sportswriter. Do you even know how to read? Engel has never changed his mind as to whether or not Briles should be fired. No band-aid is needed. He actually unpacked the entirety of the scandal and talked to folks from all angles and came to the same conclusion; whereas, in his piece, he's admonishing his peers for their lack of doing the same.
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Engel is just one minor cog in a much larger problem: the media are a bunch of lazy, lying scumbags. That has always been the case and is only getting worse. What is different in recent years is that it used to be a handful of outlets who had almost a monopoly. Now there are other sources such as cable, the internet, etc. and people can choose where they get their news while ignoring the others. That's one reason some of the traditional outlets have been losing audience so much.

Unfortunately this does not make any of it easier for us: we still have lots of garbage masquerading as news (even more than before) and we still have to use some intelligence in deciphering it. This has always been the case but now it is more essential.

A good place to start: with every news report (especially political news!) ask yourself why is this reporting lying?
whitetrash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
George Truett said:



The simple story is that the BOR was in love with winning and simply looked the other way.


Not as much as they were in love with pharisaic self-righteousness.
Aliceinbubbleland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Because BU had so many powerful people pushing multiple agendas, there was no one central narrative of error, or reform. The school operated in a state of panic and was as transparent as tar.

Kids were hurt, and the adults failed.

This was the most accurate part of Mac Engel's article. The BOR is probably just like sicem365. Divided. There was no leader at the BOR. Pepper Hamilton was the biggest mistake and then the WSJ article. How can you reconcile that to the letter handed to Briles with his millions? The only way that was possible was lots of Regents pulling in lots of different directions.

historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aliceinbubbleland said:


The BOR is probably just like sicem365. Divided. There was no leader at the BOR. Pepper Hamilton was the biggest mistake and then the WSJ article. How can you reconcile that to the letter handed to Briles with his millions? The only way that was possible was lots of Regents pulling in lots of different directions.

Every discussion of these events provide ample reasons for the entire BOR to be replaced.
RegentCoverup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whitetrash said:

George Truett said:



The simple story is that the BOR was in love with winning and simply looked the other way.


Not as much as they were in love with pharisaic self-righteousness.
So true.

Ian played fetch all day for micromanaging regents. His duties were to deliver suite passes and perks to these clowns, and it distracted from what his real focus should have been.
RegentCoverup
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BarleyMcDougal said:

I mean Baylor was being compared to Penn State. It was outright lunacy.
And Mich State as well. Baylor isn't close to that. Not pretty, but still.
Most interestingly is how Tom Izzo handled the SJW.

Say what you will about that man, but he proved that you don't have to cower in fear to these bullies.
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
witchmo said:

TellMeYouLoveMe said:

Here is what I think happened. I think Mac is the only journalist that was writing about this and he started to get some blowback from a broad section of people for the narrative. Some of it his fault, some of it others.

When writers start to find that their network and sources distrust them, well, they end up bloggers. Most are at this point anyway, but it makes it difficult to have anyone answer your call. I think this story swung on Mac and he finally accepted the reality.He's not really making a big leap to anyone here. But he is distancing himself from the herd of sportswriters that did no due diligence on the most relevant parts of the story.

Does anyone here think sportswriters, or for that matter, the media, will change their tune and make an effort to validate facts?

Not me.
Me either. That entire group of folks bit on the stink bait so hard that they swallowed the hook clear down to their individual and collective anuses. The media reaction to BU's poorly-managed mess was over the top and premature, and not one of those irresponsible people called for more inquiry into a larger university problem. While it may not have been intentional, Briles caught the full brunt of the media outrage for the university. The down side IMO is that the media could have helped resolve this disaster but made no effort beyond acquiring clicks and readers. They didn't really care about Briles or any other coach, for that matter. I'd go farther and say they didn't truly give a rat's sphincter about the victims, either. But they dad-gum sure were full-bore about scourging Baylor with a passion it did not have for Michigan State, OU or Ohio State, even when the evidence was public in their case.
Part of it was because the evidence was public in those cases. We hid what happened, it forces people to speculate. And speculate they did.
Forest Bueller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TellMeYouLoveMe said:

BarleyMcDougal said:

I mean Baylor was being compared to Penn State. It was outright lunacy.
And Mich State as well. Baylor isn't close to that. Not pretty, but still.
Most interestingly is how Tom Izzo handled the SJW.

Say what you will about that man, but he proved that you don't have to cower in fear to these bullies.

This is true if your school has your back. Otherwise Izzo gets buried.
BUGWBBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't see any sincerity in any of that drivel of Mac's, particularly his self-depreciative use of the word "hypocrisy". Lefties like him never admit fault. They just hope you're stupid enough to forget it over time. As many of his fans are.
BUGWBBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Speaking of peenesless, liberal journalist dikheds...has Dale Hansen railed on Mt. Pleasant yet?
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.