• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Sexual Assault Ignored at Baylor

RJKarl said:
He knew about multiple sexual assaults by his players and did nothing. He even allowed a couple of them to continue playing. He recruited players who were dismissed for sexual assault accusations at previous schools.

How you can defend this guy is beyond my comprehension.
Click to expand...

I don't think ELC is defending him. Merely stating how baylor needs to handle this to get rid of him. Remember, right and legal don't always match up.
 
RJKarl said:
He knew about multiple sexual assaults by his players and did nothing. He even allowed a couple of them to continue playing. He recruited players who were dismissed for sexual assault accusations at previous schools.

How you can defend this guy is beyond my comprehension.
Click to expand...

I agree what he did is morally reprehensible, but he didn't break any NCAA rules, or any rules in his contract other than the vague morals clause. Baylor is going to try to find a way to fire him for cause, but it is going to be difficult. Not sure a contract could be written to cover this that any coach would sign. Briles should be gone, but I think Baylor is going to have to eat the money on his contract, and the donors don't want to do that.
 
RJKarl said:
He knew about multiple sexual assaults by his players and did nothing. He even allowed a couple of them to continue playing. He recruited players who were dismissed for sexual assault accusations at previous schools.

How you can defend this guy is beyond my comprehension.
Click to expand...

As usual, an overreaction on your part. I have read everything that has been released on the issue, and it is extremely light on details. There are no whos, whats, or wheres. There is a general allegation of wrongdoing against the coaching staff in general that does not offer details. Now either Baylor is withholding details because the details are terrible, or they are withholding details because what Baylor summarized in its report is pretty much verbatim what is in the P-H report.

I have heard conflicting reports, but the latest is that the P-H report itself is pretty ambiguous and any details were left out. I have also heard that a substantial portion of the report deals with the Waco PD and how they and not BU fucked things up. But again, very few people have actually seen the report so who knows.

The BOT doesn't want Briles gone. That much was clear when they attempted initially to make Starr the fall guy for everything and public pressure made them respond. AND what I have heard is the BOT didn't vote to remove Briles. An athletic committee below them did. If they can't demonstrate that they fired him for cause, they're going to owe him $40 million AND see a lot of tarping off of seats in their brand new multi-million dollar stadium. It is just a financial disaster of epic proportions. I suspect the BOT has the authority to overrule that committee and they will now that the fires have subsided somewhat (but not enough) unless BU can demonstrate that the firing was justified. And I'm sorry, but taking a couple transfers with cloudy histories isn't cause to terminate.
 
Briles played guys who had been accused of sexual assault. He recruited guys who have been accused and punished for sexual assault at other schools. That should be disqualifying.
 
I agree that Briles is involved (edit: at least he knew of the rumors/goings on and refused to push anything), surely...but firing a coach because he plays players that are "accused" of things? Innocent until proven guilty bud.
 
This a cival issue doesn't have to be proven guilty.
 
Deac83 said:
This a cival issue doesn't have to be proven guilty.
Click to expand...

So if somebody says you beat your wife, they won't probably fire you at work or ostracize you in your neighborhood? Insinuations are made of teachers all the time, especially male teachers and they lose their jobs whether proven guilty or not.
 
TheReff said:
So if somebody says you beat your wife, they won't probably fire you at work or ostracize you in your neighborhood? Insinuations are made of teachers all the time, especially male teachers and they lose their jobs whether proven guilty or not.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about spousal abuse, or insinuations of relations with students? Because the latter is absolutely false, especially in today's educational climate. Insinuations would be investigate and prosecuted if true, and NCAE would throw an absolute shitfit if any member of their association was ever fired based simply on insinuations. Not to detract from the subject at hand.
 
I was actually saying in a criminal case you have to be proven guilty, in a civil case, I believe, there is not as heavy of a requirement (i.e. people are not convicted but lose the civil case).

Contracts are an entirely different thing. Teachers, same reason they don't toss NFL players out of the league immediately, there are contractual rules that must be followed. Head coaches in college probably have morals clauses etc that allow the BOT to dismiss without cause.

I'll leave the official legal details to the lawyers, but the point is that there are different standards for criminal actions vs. civil and for college coaches it just depends on how smart their lawyers were in drafting their contract to determine when they get paid for being fired.
 
DeaconSlim2.0 said:
I agree that Briles is involved (edit: at least he knew of the rumors/goings on and refused to push anything), surely...but firing a coach because he plays players that are "accused" of things? Innocent until proven guilty bud.
Click to expand...

Huh? First off refusing to push anything makes him fireable

Secondly I'm pretty sure there has been documentation that his staff interacted with victims and their families. So ya guilty
 
I was agreeing that the first is fireable, and that Briles should be fired because there's no way he didn't know what was going on...the parenthetical was to clarify that "involved" did not mean Briles was in on assaults. RJ's suggestion that a coach that doesn't immediately disown or kick players off the team who are "accused" of something should be fired is silly.

Just trying to say that provable offenses should be justification for firings, not hearsay.
 
Saw a crawl under the news tonight that Briles definitely is not returning as Baylor FB coach.
 
I wonder if FAU and Kiffin knew about this when they hired Kendall.

I wonder if Grobe knew about this when he came in.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I wonder if FAU and Kiffin knew about this when they hired Kendall.

I wonder if Grobe knew about this when he came in.
Click to expand...

Rumors in Texas have been for a while that Grobe had some idea and said he would only do a year as a favor to Grant Teaff, but was not aware of how far it went

No idea on FAU but considering they went with I Kiffin/Briles combo I doubt they care
 
death penalty. this is the crap that makes me think college sports should just go away for good.
 
deacphan said:
death penalty. this is the crap that makes me think college sports should just go away for good.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

I'm no expert, but I have to think if even some of these allegations turn out to be true that this is a major, major Title IX issue for Baylor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top