Dman said:
George Truett said:
Dman said:
witchmo said:
TheDom said:
witchmo said:
Keyser Soze said:
You clearly live inside a bubble - go to Texas Ags - Shaggy anywhere outside and See what they think to get some perspective - they think the absolute worst possible of Briles. Briles is a scapegoat is an absurdly small number of the whole.
I'm not defending or whitewashing Art but that's a pretty low standard for assessing the man's character and actions. It is no trade secret that horn, sooner, frog and aggy wanted Art gone for competition reasons. There has been some strong suggestion that Art's firing came out of the Big 12 office, fueled by Boren, sooner and horn, with the Big Boys swapping a firing of Art for a school dismissal from the league. We'll never know the facts behind this but other schools' opinions of Briles are to be disregarded from the get-go. The opinions of the coaching profession are another thing altogether and are largely ignored. Those with whom I have spoken have an entirely different take on this deal.
In short, Art is gone and the firing can be justified solely on the grounds of Baylor's personnel management guidelines and the Regents' wishes. That is all that is needed. The question of whether he was the recipient of the bulk of the attention for this disaster is not open for debate: he was. The reason for this seems obvious: successful big-time football wedded to the press which is often intentionally biased coupled with culture's sensitivity/awareness of sexual assault/rape. Perfect storm.
The role the Regents played in all this is what is being fought over or should be fought over: total failure to respond well to claims of sexual assault and rape on the part of the university ultimately falls on the Regents who are charged with setting policy. (I don't know how safety for women can be insured beyond prevention counseling in situations where women's decisions led to such activity of which we are now aware.) I do know that the law has to be adhered to until the law is changed: it doesn't matter if a top-flite lawyer thinks it "unconstitutional". It is the law until the court says it isn't. Starr, The Regents, the COO and Baylor's legal counsel ALL know this, which begs the question(s) of why they led us to this place.
The signal question demanding answers is why the Regents "didn't come clean" to begin with but allowed the bulk of the vitriol to flow down onto Art Briles, destroying his reputation beyond his culpability and wrecking his career. Using one man for an air raid shelter to shield themselves from the incoming rounds seems fearful at best and shirking responsibility at worst. "Protecting the university" is really weak sauce to serve with this **** sandwich they cooked up. When drawing conclusions about Briles and his termination, we'd best recall that there is a lot of conflicting information (depending on the source) and that the opinions of competing schools is completely unreliable.
I see post like this and I guess I start to see how the human mind can begin to justify and believe nearly anything. Three people, very powerful and well paid people, are in charge of running a school and hard proof is found of overstepping & abusing their power, creating their own system to side step laws and rules and some claim some bigger plan that called for their demise. Also goes to show that blind loyalty exists within the human physique.
The Briles is a God worship is not healthy.
There's no Briles worship stated or implied in my comments so you are good there.
There is also no blind loyalty on my part in regards to any of the leadership at BU, so have a Shiner on me and chill a bit. As I have said all along, everyone was culpable so the firings seem appropriate.
Hope your Board meetings become less problematic this year.
It's their only jutification for carving out the acceptance of failure from the BoR. Make it about "Briles". They all failed. They weren't all held accountable. There's no spin around that.
Why is there this madness that the BOR made it all about Briles?
They didn't. This is an incontrovertible fact. The PH FOF was pointed about university-wide failures.
You guys just keep talking in circles, making up your own facts and conspiracy theories.
1. That's not what I'm saying at all..but . I'll reserve final opinion on that as more information is leaked from their control. It's all Coming out eventually
2. What I'm saying is the few remaining BoR shills such as yourself ALWAYS resort to invalidating any criticism and justifying hypocrisy of this BoR by saying said person is hung up in Briles or "they fixed it". Literally. That's all you, THEE, and Keyser have as comebacks. Anytime negative evidence towards the BOR, Actions of their own doing that had NOTHING TO DO WITH BRILES, comes out (more concrete than what you use to hold against others) , you knee jerk and shout "Briles" when he's not even the topic or justify them staying because "it's fixed now".
The BoR failed us on MANY LEVELS that had nothing to do with Briles. When caught in being unable to explain away the hypocrisy of accountability of the meddling, conflicts of interest, institutional lack of control, financial mismanagement...you simply say "it's fixed" or yell "Briles". There's NEVER the subject of accountability for their actions. These actions aren't even in doubt. Just ignored. You don't get to call for complete accountability from everyone else when you helped create the **** storm, and then tell us it smells great now.
I'll nuance it a little differently even. The BOR first made it about Briles in the way they presented their findings of fact and then fired CAB and no one else at the policy implementation level. If the BOR is going to make it about Briles . . . which they absolutely did . . . then show us the evidence . .. . which they have not done.
I'm called a CAB apologist simply because I recognize that this particular matter is about Briles and more simply put, about questioning the wisdom of killing our football program. You apologists are so busy spinning this trying to suggest that anyone that doesn't fully support the BOR's decision simply cares about football and not the safety of our students. I don't accept that premise.
Just show me why we gave ourselves the death penalty and hung a few select individuals out to dry but not other individuals. Those are decisions with immense ramifications on Baylor's welfare and on the welfare of the individuals affected. I believe we are entitled to question those decisions until the BOR is transparent about them. I believe we are entitled to question those decisions when Starr, Barnes, McCaw, Crawford, and a multitude of former regents are also questioning them. I think we are also entitled to question them when CAB's contract was bought out, and he wasn't fired for cause.
To make a simplistic statement that it's all about Briles for anyone who questions the wisdom and even the integrity of the BOR in their handling of this particular matter is a smokescreen. The BOR made it all about Briles/football, and I'm just playing along.
