It is my understanding that Mr. Swilling also filed his own lawsuit against the alleged "victim" but I do not know the result of that litigation.
Briles as OC?
- Thread starter RealTUTypical
- Start date
LEC has been telling his friends that for years ...
And this is from two months ago but does Boren hear the words coming out of his mouth?
http://m.oudaily.com/news/new-sexua...066-88de-11e6-82fc-5f101a5e6248.html?mode=jqm
http://m.oudaily.com/news/new-sexua...066-88de-11e6-82fc-5f101a5e6248.html?mode=jqm
Any guy handing out Boones Farm and any gal actually drinking the stuff both have problems. I've got no problem with Briles attending a bowl practice nor Coach Monty ( a close friend, mentor and colleague) inviting him. I thought Emig painting TU the same color in one sentence out of 2 full pages of Gooner (reformed) bad boys copy was a real cheap shot.
If Coach Briles' wins that lawsuit, he gets his life back and becomes a hot coaching property again.
If Coach Briles' wins that lawsuit, he gets his life back and becomes a hot coaching property again.
Last edited:
The standard of proof to send him to jail for a crime is of course much different than the standard of proof to take other non-criminal action. Conviction would be enough of course but I don't think it follows that lack of conviction is inadequate.
Higher ed has a higher standard. Football is a privilege and to play at the highest level it is a privilege as well. I don't care if you weren't convicted of a crime, but Indont want my son looking at an athlete and wanting to emulate them in any way if there is a question the person has been violent towards women. Westbrook, while not convicted of any crime has a violent past towards women, especially the mother of at least one of his children. And I'm not even talking about necessarily striking her, but throwing things, smashing things, etc. is still using violence to intimidate someone and exert control over their psyche. It should not be tolerated. Fact that OU knew this about him before he arrived on campus is almost worse than allowing Mixon to stay. Stoops and OU have shown a pattern of callous disregard in issues concerning violence towards women.
^OU is saying they didn't know this about Westbrook. That their background check didn't get any of it. So if that's the truth how hard are they even looking?
They of course knew about Green Beckham before making room for him though.
They of course knew about Green Beckham before making room for him though.
Not sure I agree with your assumption that Kelly's article insinuates anything about Briles as a possibility as OC, much less even joining the staff.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsext...cle_68705842-f582-5d59-b99a-bd2845441c48.html
On Saturday, two days removed from filing a lawsuit against school officials for alleging he knew about the assaults and didn’t report them, Briles attended the Hurricane’s practice and blended in with the coaching staff, wearing TU sweats and shouting words of encouragement to players.
“It’s just great to have him around,” Montgomery said. “I haven’t gotten to be on the field or in a coaching setting with him in a while. It’s good to have good friends around.”
Asked whether he could envision a situation in which he and Briles were on the same staff again, Montgomery said: “We haven’t been in a scenario like we are now. If that were to happen, that would be great.
“I’ve learned so much from him. We’ll just see what the future holds. … He loves coaching and he loves kids. This is his passion. He definitely wants to coach again."
If Briles is having serious coaching withdrawal, IMO the best case scenario for Briles working with Monty at TU is likely Briles taking the role of a "Consultant" or "Quality Control". He would stay out of the spotlight, no presence on the sideline, possibly no presence at games period. An active role assisting with practices, breaking down film, and preparing game plans. More less a part-time role with modest compensation, but a way for him to make an positive impact and help rehab his image without being the center of attention. Monty is unlikely to give up play-calling and frankly I see no reason why he would, he has done a great job establishing his own identity in that regard.
Just my .02
TX
Last edited:
No doubt. Anyone comparing the going's-on in Norman to 11th and Harvard seriously needs their head and journalism credentials examined.
TX
Simple search of Texas' equivalent of OSBI and arrest records would turn up every complaint. My wife can basically find out if anyone has been arrested or had a protective order filed, etc. OU should hire her and she can basically vet any recruit and their families. Ignorance only works as an excuse so often before it becomes recklessness. There have been too many of these at OU the last few years and all of them have gone excused and relatively unpunished while OU continues to win 10-11 games a year. What is the difference between what is happening at Baylor and this? Other than it does not (as far as we know) involve sexual assault, nothing. It is still an environment complicit to violence against women.
I heard from some people in sports admin over a month ago that there were ongoing discussions related to Briles.
The article lent more possibility to what I had personally been told.
Do you know if Title IX violations are considered criminal activity or just as a violation of a regulation that results in fines and loss of Federal funding?
Hell no on Briles. Scumbag who let a culture exist at Baylor. Can't even believe this is a consideration.
Exactly. You can draw conclusions from a pattern of conduct. Guilt or innocence in a criminal court room has nothing to do with whether or not you did something or you are a scumbag.
Well, the tea leaves say 1. Montgomery has been negotiating a new salary deal for about two months. 2. That deal included more money for assistants. 3. Briles would be a new "assistant"/advisor.
So do the math.
We did have a "mentor" on staff during the Kragthorpe era. His Dad was paid $1 by the University, (in part because of insurance and liability issues related to non-employees in risk situations). So, we have to be consistent in our policies I guess. I say we offer Briles $2.00
Well, the tea leaves say 1. Montgomery has been negotiating a new salary deal for about two months. 2. That deal included more money for assistants. 3. Briles would be a new "assistant"/advisor.
So do the math.
We did have a "mentor" on staff during the Kragthorpe era. His Dad was paid $1 by the University, (in part because of insurance and liability issues related to non-employees in risk situations). So, we have to be consistent in our policies I guess. I say we offer Briles $2.00
I have a very good friend that was a track athlete at TU back in 1988 to 1992 (part of the TU track scandal) and he was falsely accused of sexual assault while attending TU. Luckily, one of the accuser's friends came forward and let authorities know the accusations were false.
I have a friend who was part of the track scandal as well (but not accused of sexual assault). He said the track coach at the time would come into Mabee on Thursday night and ask kids playing basketball if anyone wanted to go on a trip and participate in a track meet. He said he did this a couple of times and in one meet he participated under 2 different names.
Kinda random but we watched the Duke lacrosse 30 for 30 last night on Netflix. Really good. Was also shocked with what's happened with some of the people involved in the last couple of years.
That's why skepticism on these cases is merited. Remember the Michael Irvin/ Eric Williams scandal in the 90s?
I'm infinitely more concerned about unreported cases.
The Duke case boiled down to an inexperienced OOC DA who not only was disbarred but was found guilty of contempt. Frankly, the accuser was railroaded by him almost as much as the accused. The only reason it went anywhere is him and a crooked detective who wound up killing himself.
The Duke case boiled down to an inexperienced OOC DA who not only was disbarred but was found guilty of contempt. Frankly, the accuser was railroaded by him almost as much as the accused. The only reason it went anywhere is him and a crooked detective who wound up killing himself.
That was the case where the DA pushed the accuser to keep up with false claims correct?
I agree with viewing claims such as these with a healthy dose of skepticism. However, it's hard to ignore 19 reported sexual assaults involving 15 football players over a four year period. At least one of those players is now in prison for one of the assaults.
There was no DNA linking any of the players. There was DNA from 10-12 other males that the DA instructed the labs to leave out. The detective put her through an illegal lineup situation of only the guys who were at the house that night and made her pick out 3, a month after the alleged incident. The detective changed his reports to match their descriptions despite her initial descriptions not matching them. And get this, the DA literally never questioned the accuser once. The timeline of their alleged story was also impossible based on phone records of the accuser and the 3 players.
She was/is mentally ill and is now serving a sentence for murder. Her 911 call doesn't start with being assaulted, it almost takes on a life of its own between the operator and the hospital.
He was pretty much the Steven Avery prosecutor.
What was interesting is that the perspective of the documentary was mostly from Durham itself. I recall there being an extreme amount of skepticism elsewhere about the accusations a couple of weeks after the fact with no charges, seemingly no evidence and then the state's DNA tests coming back not matching any of the players. She didn't get the benefit of the doubt long at all, IMO. It'd be insanity in the social media era today, though.
Last edited:
I remember this dragging on far longer than normal with no real action. I think I need to go back and watch the 30 for 30.
If you've never been to Durham, it's kind of interesting. Duke is sort of a blue-blood type of school, and one where the community senses (and somewhat resents) the entitlement many Duke students place on themselves (I would liken it to SMU),where Durham is really a blue-collar place. Chapel Hill is more the "upper crust" if you will. Many Duke professors actually live in Chapel Hill, which I just find odd.
This is why the suit against the school is so important. I admit that common sense says that over time, the coach was told. It may take a couple of years, but the truth & proof should come out & let the chips fall where they may.
Meanwhile, Emig continues to pound on Coach Monty in the TW for daring to invite Coach Briles to bowl practice. In life, we should all be so lucky to have a loyal friend like Coach Monty who assess's the situation & says, in effect, bleep it, my friend is hurting & this is something I can do. And I'm not covinced of the detriment to TU's or Coach Monty's reputation by doing so. Apparently, Guerin Emig doesn't have any friends like that.
Good Stuff Junkie did this DA go to North Carolina????? Wow what a douche.
GO TU!!!
The DA was up for re-election and in a tough fight. He did what he did to appease the AA community and get their vote. It worked btw and he won re-election. ESPN did a really good 30 for 30 on the whole ordeal. It's worth a watch if anyone has any interest in what really happened. One of the defendants defense attorney's got hold of a book about DNA testing and self taught himself the ins and outs. He did an outstanding job with cross of the DA's DNA expert and got him to admit that none of the accused DNA was found at the scene or on the "victim". He also got the expert to admit that he told the DA that but that he was told to leave that out of the report. Good TV.
It looks like Nifong did go to UNC. They paint the detective as over the top hostile and aggressive about Duke too.
He'd been appointed midterm bc of a vacancy and hadn't won the position prior to that election. His campaign manager has a significant part in the documentary and states she knew pretty early on there was no merit to accuser's story. She quit after he won the primary.
Also never knew that Jay Bilas wrote a scathing letter to the editor of the Duke magazine which they didn't publish. Nearly every member of the lacrosse team reached out of court settlements with Duke.
He'd been appointed midterm bc of a vacancy and hadn't won the position prior to that election. His campaign manager has a significant part in the documentary and states she knew pretty early on there was no merit to accuser's story. She quit after he won the primary.
Also never knew that Jay Bilas wrote a scathing letter to the editor of the Duke magazine which they didn't publish. Nearly every member of the lacrosse team reached out of court settlements with Duke.
I found this comment from P Martin nteresting:
http://m.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra...cle_202915d4-77a3-525a-ae1a-9df0f5da137c.html
http://m.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra...cle_202915d4-77a3-525a-ae1a-9df0f5da137c.html
Yeah, that's not how the settlement worked. They didn't admit anything, it was to keep Briles from going forward on the wrongful termination suit. That's not to say Baylor is admitting he was wrongfully terminated, rather there is a lot of skeletons Baylor didn't want coming out in court.
Similar threads
