re: Art Briles vs. Kendall Briles...who would you take?

quote:

---

In the case of Arthur Briles vs. Baylor U the court finds the defendant

NOT GUILTY

---

Im shocked the biased judge made a biased ruling. Lol.

quote:

---

But rather made to be a scapegoat as epbart eloquently outlined in his exposure of the university's systemic corruption prior to Briles' arrival in Waco.

Add to that the fact that he seemingly didn't do anything wrong.

---

So if i enter a corrupt system, let's say a corrupt financial institution, and i knowingly participate in that system, then i would be innocent when that system is exposed? Just because you didn't create the systen doesn't excuse the role you played.

You obviously didn't read any of my responses as you would know he did in fact, in at least, one case do something wrong.

quote:

---

To answer your question - as was also stated, a 61 y/o man who got a $20M settlement for hitting the bricks won't be coming to LSU to take a job as an OC.

---

He got $20m out of $40m which is worth noting because that means both sides settled on this. They basically met in the middle, in terms of his buyout cost. Why would a guy who "did nothing wrong" be so quick to settle this? Perhaps he knew that if they kept digging he was going to be exposed further.

quote:

---

Are you a cop? A security guard? Some other area of law enforcement?

Between the time you've spent on this board crucifying Briles and Kiffin in hopes that LSU hires neither you clearly have some sort of criminal justice thing going on.

---

Nope I'm just someone who would like to make sure a clean football program is ran at the University where i graduated. I don't think Kiffin or Briles are worth the risk/pr baggage that comes with them.

So judge can you tell me why he is innocent when he knowingly didn't report at least one incident? He gets a pass on that?

Also if you believe he is truly innocent then he must have been asleep at the wheel for three plus years while his coaches helped covered up/quiet the 17 rapes because that's what happened. So if you're going that route, you want to hire a guy this dumb? Why? A guy who could possibly be so dumb that he hurts LSU football. Why take the risk?

Just give me a detailed explanation on why, compared to other available coaches, art briles (guilty or innocent) should beat out all others? That's what the conversation(s) about right? Why is he the best person for the job. Not really sold that he is considering the baggage he brings (guilty or not).

quote:

---

Art Briles vs. Kendall Briles

---

Her is what you do. Hire kendall and let daddy shadow coach/be a consultant. Best of both worlds.

quote:

---

Seems like an easy debunk

---

Not really as it's now just his word against theirs and media has already damned him. He signed a non-disparaging agreement. So he wouldn't be allowed to talk bad about Baylor or call them liars.

You can count on Saban and his recruiters using this against all the nice southern christian familes on his recruiting trips as well. "Son, do you want to play for a failed HC, and someone who could ruin your whole image in the blink of an eye with his screw ups?" They will gobble that shite up.

quote:

---

So after this discussion, do you think it would be wise, from a short and long term standpoint, for LSU to hire Briles as OC?

---

I see it as being akin to a high risk / high reward investment.... meaning the wisdom of such a hire can only be determined in hindsight after you've pulled the trigger. You just have to plan for the risk you undertake and be ready for a little blowback.

Short term:
- There would definitely be gasps and murmurs.
- I think a very small number of fans would actually be so offended they'd turn their back on the program... I've seen one or two post to that end, and while I don't know if they're serious, I'm sure a handful might. But I don't think many.
- I think a similarly small handful of parents would advise their kids to not hear the coaches out.
- I think coaches would try to use Baylor as a negative recruiting tactic.
- The press would mention it, but I think they'd be limited in what they say. I don't think they'd be in a position to reveal much beyond what the public knows. So, it would mostly be "Here's LSU's new OC, Art Briles, who was fired a couple years back due to his alleged involvement in a school wide mishandling of sexual assault cases. We'll see how this fresh start works out for him and the Tigers."

The worst case would be if some other information does come out. But if it hasn't yet-- the likelihood is dwindling.

And I don't think the negative recruiting will be that effective. I think it will be similar to what tiggertooth suggests a few posts up, that it'll be somewhat easy for Briles/LSU to offer a rebuttal. Briles just has to say something to the effect that: there were some ongoing problems at Baylor from before the time I got there. These problems only became apparent to me at the end of my tenure when the wheels that led to my dismissal were already in motion. While I maintain I didn't really do anything wrong, in hindsight I wish I'd done some things differently and made sure I had greater oversight into the day to day lives of my players on and off campus. I can't say that would have prevented some incidents, but it would have helped me to make sure that everyone was accountable and that we were all representing Baylor to the highest standards. I can tell you during my interview/vetting process at LSU, it was apparent to me that the coaches and administrative staff all care about the welfare of students/athletes and are vigilent in making sure everybody is on point with regards to expectations and there is a lot of transparency... and so on.

If opposing coaches try to harp on the issue beyond that, I think a lot of recruits and families will begin to view that as the coach being scared on what Briles is capable of doing on the field and a lack of focus on what the opposing coaches are offering themselves.

Longer term:
After 1 year, as long as there were no major incidents, the vast majority of noise would die down, tailing off to a small trickle.

fwiw, I'm actually open minded about LSU going after some of the other names being considered as much as Briles. I don't think anyone is a lock to jumpstart the offense into a 50+ppg juggernaut.

And I don't think Briles is likely to come. He's lived and coached in Texas pretty much his entire life, he's 61 now and just got a $20M payday from Baylor so they could avoid a wrongful termination suit. Unless he has that much of a passion to build up his rep again to get back on the field, I don't know how motivated he'd be to be LSU's OC. So, this is most likely pointless. I've been arguing on the behalf of Briles because I just don't think it's right the way some people are treating him. I'm not better than you and neither of us are better than Briles. We're all human. But some of these people are just biting at the chomp to throw stones at the man. This doesn't mean I'd trust Briles him in a room with my teenage daughter... but if that's the situation, I'm pretty sure I'd trust Briles in that room way before Kiffin, and I don't have a problem with LSU hiring him either.

quote:

---

not as easy to convince a kid and his momma that every other person on the planet is lying and only Briles is telling the truth

---

Huh? There's plenty of folks outside of Baylor who take a similar position.


It's not just Briles vs everyone else. Clearly Baylor didn't even want the Briles suit to go to court, would a jury hAve not ruled against him if he's so clearly guilty?

quote:

---

Not really as it's now just his word against theirs and media has already damned him.

---

There are others within the program that vouched for him. So it's not just his word vs theirs. It's who does the public choose to believe?

quote:

---

It's who does the public choose to believe?

---

Right, but that's the issue. The public doesn't believe him, for the most part. I would say majority of public is against him at this point. That could change, but unlikely since both sides agreed to "squash the beef" so to speak. I would find it surprising, although not impossible, at this point if the public perception about him ever changes. The only way i see that happening is if new evidence comes to light which was not in the summary.

I agree he is unlikely to come. This whole thing is probably an exercise in mental masturbation. .

To me, best case we win some football games with minimal noise. Worst case we win some games and the blowback is so harsh or another issue arises with him at lsu that it hurts the program for the foreseeable future.

I agree some people who are anti briles are actually just using a sound bite without research. I am on the opposite side because i feel like most pro briles are ignoring some major liability/negligence issues on his part. They also say you should forgive him. I don't disagree with that, but it also doesn't mean that he should be let around young adults again. He has proved, at the very least, he isn't comoetent enough to manage his own football program (whether intent to ignore the assault issues was there or not).

That's why i couldn't grasp people wanting him so badly. He is a huge liability. Like you said high risk/high reward. I think there are other high reward guys out there to get without the risk like Briles has.

Anyway, pleasure speaking with someone on the other side of the fence, about the issue, who actually took the time to do the research. We are interpreting the evidence differently is all.

quote:

---

I agree some people who are anti briles are actually just using a sound bite without research. I am on the opposite side because i feel like most pro briles are ignoring some major liability/negligence issues on his part.

---

There is also a group of people, including me, that don't want him, even if he were pure as the driven snow, because I think his style of offense will get us destroyed in the SEC.

Take the son and you should get the fatherly advice for free.