Story Poster
Baylor Football

Baylor responds to Star Telegram Report

August 7, 2018
26,473

In response to the Star Telegram report, Baylor University released the following statement regarding a potential self-imposed bowl ban for the 2018 season:

“It is irresponsible to report that Baylor is considering a football bowl ban for the 2018 season when in fact the NCAA investigation into the prior football staff and previous athletics administration remains active and ongoing. Additionally, it is premature to speculate as to what the University’s sanctions will be at this point in time.”

 

 

Tags: Football, Baylor, 2018
Discussion from...

Baylor responds to Star Telegram Report

16,157 Views | 44 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by PartyBear
lakerat
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Just the tip of it. Hopefully more will be released.
Dungeon Athletics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dungeon Athletics said:

lakerat said:

Hopefully news will be out tonight concerning the BOR. the information was filed today.
Is this what you were referring to? Technically not about the BOR, but likely their lead henchmen...
http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Court-filing--Top-BU-officials-concealed-reports-of-serial-sexual-assault-490499971.htm
Ramsower and Doak, I assume. I think it's unlikely they were both rogue employees acting without the knowledge of anyone higher up. I'll edit that to make it clearer what I meant.
lakerat
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Likely no BOR names will come out. But you are correct. I stand corrected. I think the biggest take will be that admin kept info from the athletic dept.
LionBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
lakerat said:

Likely no BOR names will come out. But you are correct. I stand corrected. I think the biggest take will be that admin kept info from the athletic dept.

You hope that "take" is correct , right? Otherwise, how would someone known to you have been able to make the "Bad Dudes" comment?

Listen -- I have nothing in any of this and am not involved other than being a pissed off fan who loves BU. I don't know what your angle is but all of these new "filings" and "information" (hardly) stemming from a collection of idiots from 6-7 years ago seem to just be reaching for one thing:

BESMIRCH THE SCHOOL

What is your angle here?
Branch155
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There are so many factual inaccuracies in that article (not to mention the typos), it's hard to know what to believe.
Dungeon Athletics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Branch155 said:

There are so many factual inaccuracies in that article (not to mention the typos), it's hard to know what to believe.
And it's been edited heavily since I first linked it. It's like they're posting it while they write it.
jason_cook
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Following is the University statement re: today's news...

This case is not about former Baylor football player Tevin Elliott, who has already been convicted in a court of law and is currently serving in a state prison. None of the 10 Plaintiffs in this case are claiming they were assaulted by Elliott.

The Court has made it abundantly clear through prior rulings that this case is about whether Baylor created a "heightened risk of sexual assault" that actually caused the Plaintiffs' assaults or that Baylor was deliberately indifferent to the Plaintiffs' reports of their alleged assaults.

The assertion that Baylor "concealed" documents related to the Elliott case is false and completely absurd. Baylor produced these materials as part of discovery in the Hernandez case involving Elliott, which is precisely why third-party Art Briles had possession of them given that he was a named defendant in the Hernandez lawsuit. These documents have never been concealed or hidden by Baylor or outside counsel.

As for discovery in this lawsuit, the time span ordered by the Court stretches from 2003 through 2016 and involves millions of pages of documents. Consistent with the Court orders in this case, Baylor has been methodically and systemically producing all of the records as ordered by the Court. Baylor has been producing student records starting with the most recent records from the Title IX Office, which was created in 2014. The Elliott files predate the creation of the Title IX Office. These records, and many others, will be produced in accordance with the Court's orders and in accordance with the timetable set by the Court, which is currently set at Sept. 17, 2018.

Regarding the substance of the documents, there is no evidence to suggest that Reagan Ramsower was aware of a March 2011 alleged sexual assault involving Elliott, despite the conspiracy being spun by Plaintiffs' counsel. Also, the portion of the "60 Minutes" interview of Ramsower referred to in today's filing does not pertain to Elliott.

Additionally, evidence used during the recent Ian McCaw deposition shows that the police report involving the Sept. 2011 Class C misdemeanor allegation involving Elliott was sent by Judicial Affairs to the appropriate contact within the Athletics Department.

Many of these same documents and others made available to the Pepper Hamilton independent investigators informed the May 26, 2016 Findings of Fact, which outlined fundamental failures campus-wide in Baylor responding to reports of sexual violence and resulted in the subsequent departures of Ken Starr, Ian McCaw and Art Briles. In fact, the theory purported by the Plaintiffs' counsel in today's filing only reinforces the unprecedented actions taken by the Baylor Board of Regents related to leadership changes and the adoption of 105 recommendations to enhance the safety and security of Baylor's campus community.

###

LionBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
lakerat said:

Just the tip of it. Hopefully more will be released.

Released?

You mean more allegations made in court filings seeking to either get money from the school or harm the school, right?

If your hate on is for board members or certain administrators, sue them directly right? Oh, and what was your parties harm in this matter? That they didn't execute their jobs very well either and had to be terminated?

I think I speak for 99% of Baylor grads when I say everyone involved was an idiot and deserved what they got -- whether a coach, an administrator, whatever. I get the hate on for the board members but they have other day jobs. They weren't the ones doing the stupid ***** They just had to come in, investigate and start firing all of the idiots involved (again -- everyone).

If your hate on is for Ramsower, I understand that. I don't know why they keep him around either unless the school's lawyers don't want him to turn into a hostile witness (a fair point). Since you seem to know a lot about the law and "filings" and "information" and such, I get that you will understand how that works also.

Right? What am I missing. Fill me in on your angle.
Knight Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CizzLark said:

Are we all that Mac Engel writes about? At this point it seems to be a conflict of interest him writing about us all the time. Went to school at TCU, works for TCU.

If I were Baylor, I'd start putting some legal pressure on him or the paper.


Mac is a hack but is longer working for TCU. BS in Journalism from Kansas (how appropriate) and Masters in Liberal Arts (again, a fitting title). He has an enlarged phallus for anything Baylor related because he knows we will read it and so will the purple pansies in Fort Worth. It's all about page clicks when you are trying to keep a job like his nowadays. For what it's worth, most Frogs hate him too.
PartyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm sure the folks in today''s filing aren't going to be left to hang. If this ends up like a federal investigation they will cut deals and and talk about who was directing them to do what.
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.