Briles Out
- Thread starter Bret44
- Start date
The murdered a player and covered it up. I think that means they are still winning but football is quickly catching up.
Yeah, I saw another opinion piece on it and they were talking about Ole Miss having more of a chance of getting hammered by the NCAA and how ridiculous that is. The problem, in situations like this, is that if you do something to Baylor, no one who was in the wrong is getting that punishment. The NCAA really kind of has their hands tied because whatever they do just affects mostly people that had nothing to do with the problem. If I'm Baylor, I clean house from the AD down through the football program and just hope the NCAA takes it easy. That's what PSU didn't really do, not to mention it was a much longer time period. The people responsible for this stuff should burn, but I don't know that it's right for the entire institution and roster to get punished.
I tend to think the NCAA should be more of an investigative entity. Like in the Ole Miss case, I think they need to find someone to dig up what was actually going on, give Ole Miss a chance to clean it up and then move on. You don't have to kill the whole school or program, you just have to influence the future leaders. If enough coaches see enough coaches getting publicly exposed and fired, they are going to be motivated to do the right thing rather than keep one Shawn Oakman around.
confused:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't someone call it in the "Should Baylor fire Briles" thread regarding Starr? Something like "Starr will get removed as president but will have another position at the University and keep his pay" For some reason I remember that. Just wanting to give kudos to whoever that was
They can't though because the NCAA does NOT have subpoena power. The NCAA has to rely on open records laws and can't get information not giving through open records laws.
I just don't get the don't punish the innocent rationale. Yes there are some innocents harmed whenever someone is punished. Do the wife and kids of a drug dealer get hurt when the DEA seizes assets and the dealer ends up in the pokey? Absolutely. However the family profited from the illegal activity so they are not entirely innocent.
In this case other players on the team profited (see winning and all that comes with it) from a program that was keeping players eligible by sweeping illegal activity under the rug. While they may be innocent, they profited from the concealment of the illegal activity so they are not entirely innocent. Giving players who had nothing to do with the activity free ability to transfer is more than enough concession.
In this case other players on the team profited (see winning and all that comes with it) from a program that was keeping players eligible by sweeping illegal activity under the rug. While they may be innocent, they profited from the concealment of the illegal activity so they are not entirely innocent. Giving players who had nothing to do with the activity free ability to transfer is more than enough concession.
Take a look at SMU... they were up where Baylor is now. I wouldn't be surprised if this is Lack of institutional control.
Duke suspended its La Crosse team's season, over these types of things. But Baylor will play theirs
Oh wait that's right its football so okay to play the season.
This shows lack of institutional control, I would also expect scholarship reductions, and bowl season bans.
And I said it before I hope the victims name Briles in the lawsuit, and he will be busted financially as well.
Guy is an absolute piece of dog crap.
Oh wait that's right its football so okay to play the season.
This shows lack of institutional control, I would also expect scholarship reductions, and bowl season bans.
And I said it before I hope the victims name Briles in the lawsuit, and he will be busted financially as well.
Guy is an absolute piece of dog crap.
- Jun 20, 2006
- 39,426
- 24,746
- 113
I think the Duke deal is a lot different. Seeing how the allegations weren't true.
Sanctions change everything. I'm just saying in terms of a football program, it's still going to be solid, but probably not as good again.
If they get sanctioned hard they could end up at the bottom again.
exactly and yet they basically cancelled all the games. Why shouldn't Baylor do same with a lot more concrete evidence
Very different scenario.
The Duke situation, before the allegations were proved false, involved almost the entire team. If they suspended just the guys involved they wouldn't have enough guys to play. If it were the coaches that were in trouble they would have fired them and let the kids play.
I hope Baylor does get sanctions, but I'm not going to bet on it.
Sounds like if you read the report, Baylor might not be able to field a team.
For them to fire Briles, it had to be dozens and dozens of events.
I'm pretty sure that person was echoing what was being said in an article that was posted claiming that rumor.
You realize there's over 100 players on a football team, right? Baylor would still be able to easily field a team. Wouldn't be nearly as good, but could still easily field a team. Stop posting ridiculous things.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Bottom of page 6 and page 7, paraphrased: "The investigative staff at Judicial Affairs had no concept of what constitutes rape and what does not, so they focused on perceived consistencies and inconsistencies of the claimant's stories."
That's an outstanding staff hiring and training practice Baylor had going there.
That's an outstanding staff hiring and training practice Baylor had going there.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Page 11 is nice, where coaches sometimes took the role of investigators "which improperly discredited complainants."
So, the coaching staff actively took the initiative to discredit the potential accusers and keep things from progressing legally.
So, the coaching staff actively took the initiative to discredit the potential accusers and keep things from progressing legally.
