boognish_bear said:

---

So....the second DEC hearing did take place because new evidence came to light. Lynx Hawthorne looks to be in the middle of all of this. Sounds like Briles is trying to lay back....but it's tough to believe he didn't know about these improper connections. This might also burn the MV Supt since the first DEC went off his assurance that Lynx would not coach at MV.

This will continue to put BU in the headlines since a former player also seems to be implicated

https://www.wfaa.com/article/sports/high-school/hs-football/art-briles-mount-vernon-under-scrutiny-after-star-players-ruled-ineligible/287-a35339cf-08ff-4038-8c30-5d2f9f939e54

Why two star players at Art Briles' Mount Vernon were ruled ineligible

With new evidence coming to light, the DEC held a second hearing on Oct. 8 and ruled the players ineligible.


DALLAS In his first year as head coach, Art Briles has led Mount Vernon High School football to a 5-0 record.

On Tuesday, two of Briles' star players were ruled ineligible by the District Executive Committee (DEC), which is comprised of the district's superintendents. The committee voted 6-0 that the varsity starters transferred to Mount Vernon for athletic purposes.

Multiple sources tell WFAA's Jonah Javad that the ruling stemmed from the players' relationship with Lynx Hawthorne -- one of Briles' former players at Baylor.

Hawthorne and the brothers are related by marriage.

The brothers were ruled eligible at their first hearing because their parents and the Mount Vernon superintendent told the DEC that Hawthorne would not be coaching. The DEC was told Hawthorne was in town to film a documentary.

This is important because the UIL is strict about kids transferring schools if a family member is employed by that athletic department.

RELATED: Art Briles' Mount Vernon football team will not forfeit any games, officials say

Hawthorne is not employed by Mount Vernon ISD, but he had been seen wearing coaching attire and a headset during a team scrimmage this year. He's also been seen serving in a coaching manor, per source.

Furthermore, the bothers listed an inaccurate address on the UIL's Previous Athletic Participation Form (PAPF), which is required to transfer.

The brothers lived in an RV park with Hawthorne, per multiple sources. The address listed on the PAPF belongs to the owner of the RV park.

"New facts came out that were not presented or blatantly misrepresented at the first hearing," per source.

With new evidence coming to light, the DEC held a second hearing on Oct. 8 and ruled the brothers ineligible.

Since the brothers were initially ruled eligible, Mount Vernon does not have to forfeit previous games.

This case now moves to the UIL State Exec Committee, which can uphold or overturn the DEC's decision. The State Exec Committee can also institute further punishments for Mount Vernon.

It's worth noting: Art Briles did not show up to either hearing. His name is not on any paperwork. He never showed up to answer questions. He has, by all accounts, distanced himself from this whole thing.

---

Hmmmmmm ...

Timbear said:

---

The Dallas Morning News has just reported that Art and Mt Vernon will NOT forfeit any games because they were previously told the players were cleared to play. The players will be eligible again based on whatever rules apply to them, and the residence requirements. Art played them only after they were cleared by the DEC at the beginning of the season.

---

It sounds like the players are currently ineligible to play by 6-0 vote unless the protest overturns the ruling.

SATXBear said:

---

Timbear said:

---

The Dallas Morning News has just reported that Art and Mt Vernon will NOT forfeit any games because they were previously told the players were cleared to play. The players will be eligible again based on whatever rules apply to them, and the residence requirements. Art played them only after they were cleared by the DEC at the beginning of the season.

---

It sounds like the players are currently ineligible to play by 6-0 vote unless the protest overturns the ruling.

---

I agree. The MV rep vote made it unanimous.

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

Mt. Vernon has only played one district game. They've only beaten one of the teams that would be voting against them.

Osodecentx said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Troy Aikman volunteers as a coach at a private school in DFW.

---

Most private schools are the most corrupt in the nation.

---

Aikman's school is corrupt? People who volunteer at private schools are corrupt?

Or you can't reason your way through a simple logic paradigm?

---

At least I can read and comprehend!

Did I call out a school? I don't even know Aikman coaches.

Did I say volunteers are corrupt?

Who is the dumb @$$?

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

They got busted. It makes them come off as a Hee Haw operation. Whose idea was it warehouse the football players in a trailer park? Rootin tootin Texas football coach is not classy!

AvrgBear said:

---

There are 7 schools in district 7-3A. A school gets no vote on its own athletes.

---

Good to know

Thee University said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Troy Aikman volunteers as a coach at a private school in DFW.

---

Most private schools are the most corrupt in the nation.

---

Aikman's school is corrupt? People who volunteer at private schools are corrupt?

Or you can't reason your way through a simple logic paradigm?

---

At least I can read and comprehend!

Did I call out a school? I don't even know Aikman coaches.

Did I say volunteers are corrupt?

---

Yes

I think it is just amazing that Baylor Football is 5-0 and an Art Briles thread remains at the top of the page of the Baylor Football board. Kinda funny!

C'mon Milli. You know I'm right! Do it!!! I know you want to. See there, you can be silenced.

Osodecentx said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

Timbear said:

---

The Dallas Morning News has just reported that Art and Mt Vernon will NOT forfeit any games because they were previously told the players were cleared to play. The players will be eligible again based on whatever rules apply to them, and the residence requirements. Art played them only after they were cleared by the DEC at the beginning of the season.

---

It sounds like the players are currently ineligible to play by 6-0 vote unless the protest overturns the ruling.

---

I agree. The MV rep vote made it unanimous.

---

MV doesn't get to vote.

xiledinok said:

---

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

They got busted. It makes them come off as a Hee Haw operation. Whose idea was it warehouse the football players in a trailer park? Rootin tootin Texas football coach is not classy!

---

How did they get busted? What information do you have?

fadskier said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

Timbear said:

---

The Dallas Morning News has just reported that Art and Mt Vernon will NOT forfeit any games because they were previously told the players were cleared to play. The players will be eligible again based on whatever rules apply to them, and the residence requirements. Art played them only after they were cleared by the DEC at the beginning of the season.

---

It sounds like the players are currently ineligible to play by 6-0 vote unless the protest overturns the ruling.

---

I agree. The MV rep vote made it unanimous.

---

MV doesn't get to vote.

---

I was wrong.

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

They got busted. It makes them come off as a Hee Haw operation. Whose idea was it warehouse the football players in a trailer park? Rootin tootin Texas football coach is not classy!

---

How did they get busted? What information do you have?

---

The UIL DEC declared the players ineligible. They got busted.

Whose idea was it to warehouse high school students at an RV park? What small town derp signed off on that idea? What kind of parents sign off on that moronic thought process and move the kids only into a 3A school?

Do these high school students plan to attend college or just jump directly to NFL? Who thought that idea would be good for the youngsters' education? Do they just plan to wash cars in the future after football?

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

I think it is just amazing that Baylor Football is 5-0 and an Art Briles thread remains at the top of the page of the Baylor Football board. Kinda funny!

C'mon Milli. You know I'm right! Do it!!! I know you want to. See there, you can be silenced.

---

It is funny because Art is a fool.

xiledinok said:

---

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

They got busted. It makes them come off as a Hee Haw operation. Whose idea was it warehouse the football players in a trailer park? Rootin tootin Texas football coach is not classy!

---

How did they get busted? What information do you have?

---

The UIL DEC declared the players ineligible. They got busted.

Whose idea was it to warehouse high school students at an RV park? What small town derp signed off on that idea? What kind of parents sign off on that moronic thought process and move the kids only into a 3A school?

Do these high school students plan to attend college or just jump directly to NFL? Who thought that idea would be good for the youngster's education? Do they just plan to wash cars in the future after football?

---

The DEC cleared them, then after 5 games, declared them ineligible. Sorry, but the DEC doesn't get to declare what you live in. We have an RV park in the district in which I live that houses full time families.

Cletus?

PA.

- UL

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

They got busted. It makes them come off as a Hee Haw operation. Whose idea was it warehouse the football players in a trailer park? Rootin tootin Texas football coach is not classy!

---

How did they get busted? What information do you have?

---

The UIL DEC declared the players ineligible. They got busted.

Whose idea was it to warehouse high school students at an RV park? What small town derp signed off on that idea? What kind of parents sign off on that moronic thought process and move the kids only into a 3A school?

Do these high school students plan to attend college or just jump directly to NFL? Who thought that idea would be good for the youngster's education? Do they just plan to wash cars in the future after football?

---

The DEC cleared them, then after 5 games, declared them ineligible. Sorry, but the DEC doesn't get to declare what you live in. We have an RV park in the district in which I live that houses full time families.

---

Because the DEC found additional information and took action. This isn't rocket science. They busted Lynx for being a 6th coach as well. It's not very hard to understand.
It has nothing to do with declaring where you live but there are other rules that have to be followed.

They didn't get busted for stupidity but the players living with the assistant coach\ filmmaker makes at an RV park makes them look dumb.

Must be killing folk in here that no forfeits will be handed down.

Guess the UIL will have to adopt the NCAA eligibility rule, particularly if players come from out of state. They must sit out a year so that people don't bytch.

As for the unemployed coach, not worth 5 forfeits, apparently. That one is on CAB, though. 2 players? Not unless CAB got their daddies jobs-which he didn't.

https://www.wfaa.com/mobile/article/sports/art-briles-mount-vernon-football-team-faces-possible-forfeiture-after-two-players-ruled-ineligible/287-3ba17ce3-065d-400b-9f4c-e653002dab15

So the two players dont get to play unless it is over ruled on appeal. Is MV High going to win the rest of their games anyway?

PartyBear said:

---

So the two players dont get to play unless it is over ruled on appeal. Is MV High going to win the rest of their games anyway?

---

At this point, I'd be benching them until that status is officially changed-if not officially off the team entirely. As for the team taking care of business going forward? We'll see.

PartyBear said:

---

So the two players dont get to play unless it is over ruled on appeal. Is MV High going to win the rest of their games anyway?

---

BUGWBBear said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

So the two players dont get to play unless it is over ruled on appeal. Is MV High going to win the rest of their games anyway?

---

At this point, I'd be benching them until that status is officially changed-if not officially off the team entirely. As for the team taking care of business going forward? We'll see.

---

This is the only thing you can do. If appeal to UIL is unsuccessful, you put the rest of the season in jeopardy

xiledinok said:

---

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

They got busted. It makes them come off as a Hee Haw operation. Whose idea was it warehouse the football players in a trailer park? Rootin tootin Texas football coach is not classy!

---

How did they get busted? What information do you have?

---

The UIL DEC declared the players ineligible. They got busted.

Whose idea was it to warehouse high school students at an RV park? What small town derp signed off on that idea? What kind of parents sign off on that moronic thought process and move the kids only into a 3A school?

Do these high school students plan to attend college or just jump directly to NFL? Who thought that idea would be good for the youngster's education? Do they just plan to wash cars in the future after football?

---

The DEC cleared them, then after 5 games, declared them ineligible. Sorry, but the DEC doesn't get to declare what you live in. We have an RV park in the district in which I live that houses full time families.

---

Because the DEC found additional information and took action. This isn't rocket science. They busted Lynx for being a 6th coach as well. It's not very hard to understand.
It has nothing to do with declaring where you live but there are other rules that have to be followed.

They didn't get busted for stupidity but the players living with the assistant coach\ filmmaker makes at an RV park makes them look dumb.

---

That's not in the article. Where are you getting your information?

DioNoZeus said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

So the two players dont get to play unless it is over ruled on appeal. Is MV High going to win the rest of their games anyway?

---

---

Your meme can be said of this whole topic that is now a 5 page thread. I just bet they win the rest anyway even without these two players. This whole 5 page adventure is much ado about nothing.

xiledinok said:

---

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

They got busted. It makes them come off as a Hee Haw operation. Whose idea was it warehouse the football players in a trailer park? Rootin tootin Texas football coach is not classy!

---

How did they get busted? What information do you have?

---

The UIL DEC declared the players ineligible. They got busted.

Whose idea was it to warehouse high school students at an RV park? What small town derp signed off on that idea? What kind of parents sign off on that moronic thought process and move the kids only into a 3A school?

Do these high school students plan to attend college or just jump directly to NFL? Who thought that idea would be good for the youngster's education? Do they just plan to wash cars in the future after football?

---

The DEC cleared them, then after 5 games, declared them ineligible. Sorry, but the DEC doesn't get to declare what you live in. We have an RV park in the district in which I live that houses full time families.

---

Because the DEC found additional information and took action. This isn't rocket science. They busted Lynx for being a 6th coach as well. It's not very hard to understand.
It has nothing to do with declaring where you live but there are other rules that have to be followed.

They didn't get busted for stupidity but the players living with the assistant coach\ filmmaker makes at an RV park makes them look dumb.

---

Just got access to the original article. It will be interesting to see what the SEC decides should they appeal.

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

fadskier said:

---

xiledinok said:

---

oldbear69 said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

bear2be2 said:

---

Dman said:

---

SATXBear said:

---

I wish Baylor had a football coach who would win at all costs like Mt. Vernon. Wait a minute, this whole story sounds familiar.

---

As you kNow I'm a HUGE fan of Rhules..but you're implying Rhule wouldn't play a player that was ruled eligible for transfer from another school by the ncaa? And by playing him he's "winning at all costs"? Interesting position to take. Your opinion. And as we've learned. Everyone is entitled to their own. Cheers.

---

What I'm implying is that Rhule would be so on top of the situation that there would be no need for a second DEC hearing. He'd have known all the facts before anyone else did and acted accordingly. Again, you don't have to believe me, but this is how the vast majority of these cases are handled because the stakes of playing ineligible players are so high.

That there are new facts to be discovered tells me that Briles either A) didn't do his due diligence or B) intentionally overlooked pertinent factors in this case. Given his history, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say it's probably A. That doesn't make him a bad person, but it certainly makes him an inept administrator.

---

Again. You're the one having to imply a scenario that is impossible to know..to fit your narrative. And NO. Rhule would have done what all college coaches do..he would have waited for the NCAA ruling, and play them the moment they were cleared. In fact, Baylor would have HAMMERED him for getting involved separately within the admissions process.

I'll be the first to crucify Art, when you show us ANYTHING besides your narrative, that he manipulated the DEC hearing that ALL coaches use to determine eligibility.

---

The facts will come out eventually. And when they do, we'll see who's closer to the truth.

.

---

See..this is a statement that is factual without narrative. Wait. Let's see the facts. Im absolutely fine with waiting on the facts. If he's guilty. He's guilty. That's how it works when you're not trying to run to a corner to support your pre-existing ideology with just assumptions.

But you were feeding a narrative without facts. You were left to feed the narrative that A) He manipulated the first ruling of eligibility and you'd have to have proof, or B) he should have predicted the future and not played the kids, knowing a second ruling was coming...and wait for that outcome.

---

Not true. I was giving my opinion based on the facts available and the way such things usually play out. I don't have a preexisting ideology. I am and was content to let Art Briles coach in East Texas obscurity and wouldn't be talking about him at all if not for today's news.

But I think you -- and many others here -- are under the false impression that these things are common and strictly procedural. But that is not so. I've covered the same area now for 12 years. It spans a 200 mile radius and roughly 40 11-man schools. We have never in my time here had a school threatened with forfeiture for playing an ineligible player or reprimanded for using an illegal assistant. Those things just don't happen very often, and when they do they're almost always a product of poor oversight/compliance.

---

I'm not debating the assistant.

You were hanging MOST of your "non-biased" opinion on the eligibility.

Please show me 1....just 1..other high school coach who got a DEC ruling of eligibility, and still benched those kids, because they could predict the future and know another one was coming. Just 1. And I'll walk away. Eligibility Issues happen all the time. The DEC is the authority. They ruled one way. Now they are looking at ruling another way. NONE OF THAT IS ON Briles. Unless he manipulated. So again..you're the expert. Show us 1 coach who ignored the DEC ruling..and benched the kids despite the being ruled eligible by the DEC. 1 is a VERY low bar to clear since this is "how it happens"

---

The fact that there is a second DEC hearing at all makes this a truly unique case, which is why you guys need to stop pretending this is normal. It's not.

And it's not about predicting the future, man. It's about doing the right thing the first time to avoid future surprises. It is the coach's job IMO to know all the circumstances of a player's transfer before playing him in a varsity game. And I think if you asked most high school coaches, they would agree with me. There shouldn't be new facts to discover. Those should have all been determined and reported before the player(s) in question ever stepped foot on the field.

So whether facts were manipulated or Briles was just asleep at the wheel is really irrelevant. Either way, he shares some culpability here. It's his program and he doesn't know what the hell's going on inside of it, which is just way too damn familiar.

---

so after the first hearing everything is a-0k , players all legal and good to go...then comes the ass kickings and the whiny butt losing coaches go to their superintendents with some "new whistle blower" info and vote no on the players....dmn sends out woodward and bernstein to talk to "unnamed sources", telling them they dont live in the correct mobile home....geez, does all this sound familiar?....who even reads the dmn anymore,,,,rag of a paper, losing circulation and laying off workers....move on, nothing here...hey bear 2.... im the period guy...........

---

They got busted. It makes them come off as a Hee Haw operation. Whose idea was it warehouse the football players in a trailer park? Rootin tootin Texas football coach is not classy!

---

How did they get busted? What information do you have?

---

The UIL DEC declared the players ineligible. They got busted.

Whose idea was it to warehouse high school students at an RV park? What small town derp signed off on that idea? What kind of parents sign off on that moronic thought process and move the kids only into a 3A school?

Do these high school students plan to attend college or just jump directly to NFL? Who thought that idea would be good for the youngster's education? Do they just plan to wash cars in the future after football?

---

The DEC cleared them, then after 5 games, declared them ineligible. Sorry, but the DEC doesn't get to declare what you live in. We have an RV park in the district in which I live that houses full time families.

---

Because the DEC found additional information and took action. This isn't rocket science. They busted Lynx for being a 6th coach as well. It's not very hard to understand.
It has nothing to do with declaring where you live but there are other rules that have to be followed.

They didn't get busted for stupidity but the players living with the assistant coach\ filmmaker makes at an RV park makes them look dumb.

---

Just got access to the original article. It will be interesting to see what the SEC decides should they appeal.

---

SEC will decide to pay the players for sure. /s

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

I think it is just amazing that Baylor Football is 5-0 and an Art Briles thread remains at the top of the page of the Baylor Football board. Kinda funny!

C'mon Milli. You know I'm right! Do it!!! I know you want to. See there, you can be silenced.

---

Lulz, you Caber High trolls in your death throes over a high school coach are the one launching apologetics for the irrelevant hack on a thread about his latest rather boring scandal.

His name is mud, he's a punchline, that's why he's clickbait.

And your cadre of fools goes rabid for it, thinking you have a hero to defend rather than a disgrace to ignore.

If you read earlier you'd realize I think it is ridiculous that this is even newsworthy and that he ought to be left alone by the media.

Because I don't give a toss what he does in Mount Vernon, and neither do most people.

Although it is funny you guys ever thought this guy was going to rehab and move back to big boy football.

jbbear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

I think it is just amazing that Baylor Football is 5-0 and an Art Briles thread remains at the top of the page of the Baylor Football board. Kinda funny!

C'mon Milli. You know I'm right! Do it!!! I know you want to. See there, you can be silenced.

---

Funny? Really? It's pathetic. You would think a guy who has been exiled to a sad sack of a place like Mt. Vernon would be paying extra attention to details and doing everything possible to avoid problems and media attention. For a guy who wants to be left alone and just coach, he sure knows how to step in it. Wow. Just wow.

---

Well said

DioNoZeus said:

---

jbbear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

I think it is just amazing that Baylor Football is 5-0 and an Art Briles thread remains at the top of the page of the Baylor Football board. Kinda funny!

C'mon Milli. You know I'm right! Do it!!! I know you want to. See there, you can be silenced.

---

Funny? Really? It's pathetic. You would think a guy who has been exiled to a sad sack of a place like Mt. Vernon would be paying extra attention to details and doing everything possible to avoid problems and media attention. For a guy who wants to be left alone and just coach, he sure knows how to step in it. Wow. Just wow.

---

Well said

---

So now those of us who like Briles have to pile in and answer. Posts like the one you quote doesn't bring the family together.