Sure, he told me he was depressed and violent, but I understood that to mean only regarding HIMSELF, not others, so I figured "roll the dice, art!" Ladies and Gentleman, the Briles defense. What an embarrassment. Time to stop digging.
Here's what I understand about this so far: 1. Petersen calls Briles and says there's a player at Boise who would be better off in Texas. What's said exactly is at issue. Petersen says he told Briles about the player's "disciplinary record and dismissal." Petersen never explicitly says that he told him that he was violent towards anyone. Briles says Petersen told him about a bad relationship with his girlfriend...one that caused depression for the player...he punched a window. Later, the player's high school coach says he was told that very same thing by Boise State coaches...with no mention of violence towards anyone. 2. Transfer papers are submitted. They include mention that the player is still eligible to attend Boise State...no mention of disciplinary issues...no disqualification or suspension. 3. Player comes to Waco and rapes someone. Terrible. Player is never on roster and never plays a down. He's not involved at all with the team while the legal process plays out. 4. Guy is convicted and gets 18 months. He's kicked out of program entirely. Rape is terrible anywhere and everywhere. It's way too common on college campuses. Violence against women is way out of control among college and pro football players, specifically. What I'm not understanding is the sentiment that Baylor should have known something here. It certainly isn't good and doesn't look good to have anyone at all associated with your football program or your university who is convicted of rape. That's awful. But I'm not getting the whole, "well Briles should be fired" sentiment given the context of college football or pro football...or even under a general concept of fairness. Briles kicked Josh Gordon off the team for mar1juana. Josh freaking Gordon. But he's an enabler to a guy who he knows is a terrible woman beater who never plays a down of football for Baylor? That doesn't really add up.
It does for Sam, apparently. Not sure what axe he has to grind with Baylor. And apparently if you have depression and have hurt yourself, giving you a chance to get better is 'throwing the dice'. I think it's a terrible incident and not knowing enough, I've been waiting and seeing.
You're wrong. Art Briles has forever tainted the pristine reputation that college football has enjoyed without question for decades. Before this happened, not only has there never been another football program where a player got in trouble or was accused of such scandalous actions. In fact, two of the last three winners of the most prestigious individual trophy in the sport spoon their romantic conquests after lengthy courtships that would make even the most the puritanical person say "**** her, already" and have not in any way shape or form risked their careers on such nonsense like drug and alcohol use while promoting a me-first attitude. Art Briles used to be such a good man that he would kick-off a talented WR who would be chosen in the NFL supplemental draft for something has awful as mar1juana use. I guess when ol' Uncle Drayton built him his Caligula-esque coliseum, he was forever changed after tasting the blood of the virgins they sacrificed on the banks of the Brazos. I can only be comforted by the memories of the sport that was once and promised to always be forever immaculate before the most evil man in the world, Art Briles, took a **** directly on college football's perfect chest. I, for one, wish to go back to a simpler time when a Longhorn can rape a girl while a teammate jerks it in the corner.
Cause you're a Baylor fan, framing the issue in a way that makes you feel good: The account offered by Boise state differs here. I'm not predisposed to believe iether, but even if you believe the Baylor version "Oh we knew he was depressed and violent, just toward windows,not women, and was going through a bad breakup" strikes me as an inherently bad defense. Put yourself in his shoes. Would you hire a prospective employee (cause let's face it, that's what he is) if you heard the same story from a previous employer? Of course you wouldn't...because you're acting normally. And you know that "yeah I knew he was violent and problematic, just not towards people" sounds terrible ex post. And what does this mean? That Art Briles' reliance defense is valid? Who gives a ****. This isn't a statute of frauds case, and this has nothing to do with the flawed judgment above. The only place you will see this "defense" treated seriously is Baylor message boards, so either you guys are right and the rest of the universe is wrong, or this piece of paper doesn't absovle meaningless. The above is a sidetrip into alternate reality. Aside from you framing it as if it's completely unpredictable, that's not really what happened at all. Player with history of violence comes to Waco (due to signed transfer paper!) Engages in a violent sexual assault, is arrested. Baylor Administration conducts low profile, extraordinarily lazy, investigation that clears him of all wrongdoing Meanwhile, over in football land, the investigation/indictment doesn't really exist for nearly 2 years, and described as "some issues" in 2014 and just this summer as the following: Well, there's one reaction that's entirely reasonable. Of course, (and I hate to make this a Texas- Baylor thing, because that's immaterial) when news of a sexual assault at Texas broke last year, the assailants were off the team within days, not 2 years after, when a conviction is returned. If you don't see why people are coming down hard on Baylor, with this set of facts, then you need to take a step back.
we certainly all have biases, Sam. No one is unbiased on anything. I'm not cool with rape though...I'm pretty biased against it. I also TRY to be fair. Certainly not perfect. Why does that strike you that way? I'm curious. People punch walls and windows and pillows and all sorts of stuff. People go through depression. Does that disqualify them from playing football? Or from going to college? Nothing he had done to that point had even disqualified him from going to college at Boise State, according to the transfer documents. Kind of a different standard with the admission of kids in a college football program and lawyers who I hire to work with me in my office. Again, I don't think it's unusual for a college football program to allow in a kid who had some depression issues around a girl and hit a window because of it. I knew some guys who I went to both high school and college with who dealt with tougher stuff than that...were still admitted into college...and have done ok for themselves. Not sure I'm willing to write someone off at 20 years old because he punched a window. Of course hindsight is a total b**** in this case. I don't understand. This whole thing turned on Saturday (I think it was Saturday) when Petersen delivers this very general statement of "I told Briles everything about his disciplinary issues and conduct"...media latches on to that like crazy to suggest Briles was an evil, awful terrible liar......but the fact the university submitted transfer papers suggesting the guy never had a disciplinary problem at Boise State and in fact was still eligible to attend Boise State is inconsequential? Yeah, I don't understand that line of reasoning. Again, this sounds really reactionary to me. If the guy had ever played a down of football, I'd likely agree with you. If Baylor were given some competitive edge by having this guy around, I'd likely agree with you. But he didn't and they weren't. The criticism I've seen of Briles and the football program has been entirely built around what they knew when they admitted the guy into the university and the program. If the concern is about how the university handled the follow up investigation, then I get that entirely, and I would agree. The investigation should have been handled better, obviously. Of course, prosecutors have subpoena power and private universities really don't...so I'm not sure what sort of investigation they were going to do that was going to rival the authorities prosecuting this case.
That is obviously not what happened in this case, it's not a child throwing a pillow at a wall, and I can't think of any reason to use that analogy. This incident was enough to disqualify him from playing football at Boise state. Is the standard really that different in terms of being a sexual predator? You probably need to be able to check the "no" box in both roles. Look, in case you haven't guessed it by now, Briles and the university are running a multimillion dollar enterprise. They knowingly hired an employee with a history of violent behavior (aka "some depression issues" in your parlance) who was dismissed from his previous employer because of it. Those issues resurfaced, in a violent and not entirely unpredictable way. That's not hindsight. And at no point in time did they think "well if he signs the transfer form, then if this guy rapes someone we're off the hook" Damage control then took priority over justice/ after that, from Briles and his staff, on to the School administration and even to an extent to local prosecutors who somehow managed to keep the case under wraps for years.
This, to me, should be the actual story. Also, once at Baylor, did he receive any support/counseling from the school regarding his depression/anger issues?
Those are all fair questions, I think. I particularly like the part about getting him help. That should have been done. That certainly could have been done. The investigation is going to be limited, frankly...mostly because the university doesn't have the authority to conduct the kind of investigation that ultimately warranted this kid getting 18 months in prison. (Does anyone else think 18 months is really light for rape??) That doesn't seem to be where the focus is at all, though. The focus has been entirely on his entry into the school...and I'm sorry, I don't think some depression issues and he punched through a window are enough to suggest he's a 20 year old who is about to rape someone. I think that's really easy to do in hindsight, but much more difficult going back to the origin of when he was admitted in.
Sam, I'm not suggesting a child threw a pillow or that it's akin to that....except that both are victim less crimes. Hitting a window is stupid...and it hurts yourself...and probably evidences that you need some help...but it's not a necessary conclusion that a guy who punches a window is about to go rape folks. The rest of your points are entirely based in assumption of what was known and unknown by Briles, the University and the football program. They had nothing to do with keeping the case "under wraps" unless you're suggesting the judge was all in on it too since he's the one who signed the gag order. But I'm guessing you are suggesting that...we are all to believe that Briles, the university, the district attorney (who agreed to gag order) and the judge were all in cahoots. Sure.
I know nothing about the actual court case, haven't read the TXMonthly piece yet either, but that did jump out at me as ridiculously lenient.
Sam is really invested in this for whatever reason. I'm finding that Longhorns fans have the biggest issue with this. I wonder why. Briles gettin in that ass has clearly upset some folks. If Baylor wasn't winning, this wouldn't be getting any attention.
