[givemethemic]

We did work together here in Raleigh for a while, I also don't really consider that name dropping. I could really drop some names but no need too.

[ballah09]

We are getting crushed nationally. I have reached out to the school to see if Jr. will come on with my buddy Bomani Jones later this afternoon on ESPN Radio. It would be the perfect outlet for him to explain some things. I will keep you updated if he accepts the invite.

This surpasses Falwell and Trump endorsement and him being in the running for sec of education. you're right Liberty and JR are getting destroyed right now. My Facebook is going crazy right now like it has never before.

Will probably lose Sam Ponder as an athletic supporter. She was going hard on Briles and Mccaw during the summer. Wont be surprise if we lose more support for the school and athletics

[givemethemic]

Actually if you really listened then you would know that Cowherd is on from Noon-3pm EST and Bo is on from 4-7pm.

We are getting crushed nationally. I have reached out to the school to see if Jr. will come on with my buddy Bomani Jones later this afternoon on ESPN Radio. It would be the perfect outlet for him to explain some things. I will keep you updated if he accepts the invite.

Oh, you mean that guy who makes me flip over to Colin Cowherd every afternoon when I get in my car?

[Jonathan Carone]

We did work together here in Raleigh for a while,

I know you did. That's why I made the joke.

[rmiller1959]

I'm afraid that's not even remotely accurate. I don't know how this was being pitched out there in the general public, but it's simply not true. Each player was allowed to present whoever they wanted to speak on their behalf, and they were allowed to have legal representation present for advisory support even though it wasn't a legal proceeding. Some of them took advantage while others didn't.

Being allowed and having witnesses willing to testify are two different things. The witnesses testified with the police because they knew there would be no negative blowback unlike if they testified to the school.

There's a reason the athletics department was fighting for kids and not distancing themselves. They knew the kids were innocent.

Innocence and meeting the prosecutorial standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" are two different things, as we've discussed before. They may have met the latter, but that doesn't automatically presume innocence.

Title IX is a different beast, and the rules are very clear about the differences between a criminal and a Title IX investigation, even making the point that the lack of a criminal charge does not mean an assault didn't occur. Neither past sexual history nor previous consensual relationships preclude an assault investigation of a specific incident. To quote the rules: "a school should recognize that the mere fact of a current or previous consensual dating or sexual relationship between the two parties does not itself imply consent or preclude a finding of sexual violence."

I accept that people will draw their own conclusions based on the information to which they may be privy, or the circles in which they commune. What bothers me is the assumption that everyone involved in this process is somehow complicit in a grand conspiracy to provide cover for Jerry to hire a big-name athletic director with the stain of a failed Title IX process.

The young people involved in these allegations, the accuser and the accused, were valued by the people who made these decisions - some of the people who had to make these decisions taught them as students - and there were no winners here. No one was thinking about football or athletics or how it would make the University look. Do you think that every single individual in the Title IX office or the Dean of Students office or the faculty chosen independently to conduct the appeal are calloused enough to casually discard these young lives?

[Purple Haize]

I'm afraid that's not even remotely accurate. I don't know how this was being pitched out there in the general public, but it's simply not true. Each player was allowed to present whoever they wanted to speak on their behalf, and they were allowed to have legal representation present for advisory support even though it wasn't a legal proceeding. Some of them took advantage while others didn't.

Being allowed and having witnesses willing to testify are two different things. The witnesses testified with the police because they knew there would be no negative blowback unlike if they testified to the school.

There's a reason the athletics department was fighting for kids and not distancing themselves. They knew the kids were innocent.

Innocence and meeting the prosecutorial standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" are two different things, as we've discussed before. They may have met the latter, but that doesn't automatically presume innocence.

Title IX is a different beast, and the rules are very clear about the differences between a criminal and a Title IX investigation, even making the point that the lack of a criminal charge does not mean an assault didn't occur. Neither past sexual history nor previous consensual relationships preclude an assault investigation of a specific incident. To quote the rules: "a school should recognize that the mere fact of a current or previous consensual dating or sexual relationship between the two parties does not itself imply consent or preclude a finding of sexual violence."

I accept that people will draw their own conclusions based on the information to which they may be privy, or the circles in which they commune. What bothers me is the assumption that everyone involved in this process is somehow complicit in a grand conspiracy to provide cover for Jerry to hire a big-name athletic director with the stain of a failed Title IX process.

The young people involved in these allegations, the accuser and the accused, were valued by the people who made these decisions - some of the people who had to make these decisions taught them as students - and there were no winners here. No one was thinking about football or athletics or how it would make the University look. Do you think that every single individual in the Title IX office or the Dean of Students office or the faculty chosen independently to conduct the appeal are calloused enough to casually discard these young lives?

The Dean of Student Affairs will dance to the tune they are told to

[rmiller1959]

The Dean of Student Affairs will dance to the tune they are told to

Wow. Back to my regularly scheduled program, I suppose.

[Baldspot1]

I worked in Student Devel for a number of years and once was at the center of sending our prized QB to Bobby Bowden and Fl State before he later received a life time ban from the NFL. Our coach from the NFL was none too happy with us and a high priced attorney (players' dad) brought a host of PIs and threatened staff, faculty and students involved in the process. Protecting the girl was far more important to all those in the process. I only share because everything was picked up in the press. My personal belief is nothing SuperJon and Purple are saying is true. There are just too many independent parties including faculty, students and staff involved in the process to follow those conspiracy theories.

[olldflame]

I worked in Student Devel for a number of years and once was at the center of sending our prized QB to Bobby Bowden and Fl State before he later received a life time ban from the NFL. Our coach from the NFL was none too happy with us and a high priced attorney (players' dad) brought a host of PIs and threatened staff, faculty and students involved in the process. Protecting the girl was far more important to all those in the process. I only share because everything was picked up in the press. My personal belief is nothing SuperJon and Purple are saying is true. There are just too many independent parties including faculty, students and staff involved in the process to follow those conspiracy theories.

I wasn't aware there was any accusation of assault with that incident I have always heard the couple were steaming up the windows of his car on one of the back roads on the mountain and were caught in the act by some guy driving a black SUV

[thepostman]

Risky hire...but if he can find a way to get us into the FBS then it is worth it. First call I make is to Jim Grobe and beg him to come here. Next call is to Atlas Van Lines and tell them we have another stop on the route. Head over to Turner Gill's house and pack up his boxes after they get done with Barbers crap.

Whoa a gmtm siting!!!??? I thought you had died.

Also do you have stock in atlas? Geez

[Jonathan Carone]

I don't know how you dispute that witnesses were bullied in the Cam Jackson case.

I'm also not saying athletes were targeted. What I am saying is that the admin ramped up their enforcement this year in part to show we had systems in place to make us different from Baylor. These players were casualties of that.

[Purple Haize]

I'm saying the person who alleged the assault changed the story several times. I don't doubt there was some sexual activity going on Whether or not it was assault is where I get skeptical. Add to that students being 'encouraged' to stay silent out of their own best interest It was all dubious.

[rmiller1959]

I will make a couple more points and then I will do my Matthew 10:14 thing and scoot on out of this discussion.

1) The accuser could be a raging nymphomaniac and a pathological liar. Title IX review boards are charged to focus like a laser on the one episode in question and make a determination whether or not, at any time during the episode, a non-consensual sex act occurred. Even if the initial sex act was consensual, if at any time during the episode consent is withdrawn, that constitutes non-consent. If it's determined that the victim was impaired and therefore incapable of granting consent, that constitutes non-consent. This is not my opinion - this is the guidance given to every Title IX review board in the country. It may offend our moral sensibilities, it may be political correctness or feminism run amok, but "them's the rules."

2) FWIW, there may or may not have been "witness intimidation" directed at the players, but there were documented threats directed at the accuser and others who intially spoke up for her but backed down under duress. If what you say happened, it was going both ways.

I know you're supposed to be a skeptic, even a cynic, on a message board; it makes it fun and keeps the conversation going. It's also prudent to question everything that is said here. I can only speak to what I know of the parties involved in this decision-making process, but I don't believe them to be so capricious that they would sacrifice the truth and place this boulder in the path of these young men's lives out of concern for the current political environment or how it would make the university look.

In fact, I have heard these people speak solemnly and sadly about the weight of this decision and how it affected the lives of all concerned, the accusers and the accused. This isn't Baylor; if we can show that we acted expeditiously the moment the charges were brought to our attention, and we can show that there was a valid appeal process and that the students were given every consideration during that process, then we have followed the letter and the spirit of the law.

Whatever you think of Liberty University and its leadership, there are still a lot of people who take these kinds of responsibilities seriously and believe they will be held accountable to God for their decisions, and therefore approach them with great seriousness and humility.

[adam42381]

Well LU just sold it's soul to the devil for wins

I think that happened long ago.

[flameshaw]

I'm afraid that's not even remotely accurate. I don't know how this was being pitched out there in the general public, but it's simply not true. Each player was allowed to present whoever they wanted to speak on their behalf, and they were allowed to have legal representation present for advisory support even though it wasn't a legal proceeding. Some of them took advantage while others didn't.

Being allowed and having witnesses willing to testify are two different things. The witnesses testified with the police because they knew there would be no negative blowback unlike if they testified to the school.

There's a reason the athletics department was fighting for kids and not distancing themselves. They knew the kids were innocent.

Innocence and meeting the prosecutorial standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" are two different things, as we've discussed before. They may have met the latter, but that doesn't automatically presume innocence.

Title IX is a different beast, and the rules are very clear about the differences between a criminal and a Title IX investigation, even making the point that the lack of a criminal charge does not mean an assault didn't occur. Neither past sexual history nor previous consensual relationships preclude an assault investigation of a specific incident. To quote the rules: "a school should recognize that the mere fact of a current or previous consensual dating or sexual relationship between the two parties does not itself imply consent or preclude a finding of sexual violence."

I accept that people will draw their own conclusions based on the information to which they may be privy, or the circles in which they commune. What bothers me is the assumption that everyone involved in this process is somehow complicit in a grand conspiracy to provide cover for Jerry to hire a big-name athletic director with the stain of a failed Title IX process.

The young people involved in these allegations, the accuser and the accused, were valued by the people who made these decisions - some of the people who had to make these decisions taught them as students - and there were no winners here. No one was thinking about football or athletics or how it would make the University look. Do you think that every single individual in the Title IX office or the Dean of Students office or the faculty chosen independently to conduct the appeal are calloused enough to casually discard these young lives?

Be careful, you are making too much sense here. That is not allowed on this board. You are not allowed to have an opinion here, if you do not disagree with everything that Jr. does. SMH

[thepostman]

I don't disagree with everything jerry does. Nor does anybody else.

[flameshaw]

I worked in Student Devel for a number of years and once was at the center of sending our prized QB to Bobby Bowden and Fl State before he later received a life time ban from the NFL. Our coach from the NFL was none too happy with us and a high priced attorney (players' dad) brought a host of PIs and threatened staff, faculty and students involved in the process. Protecting the girl was far more important to all those in the process. I only share because everything was picked up in the press. My personal belief is nothing SuperJon and Purple are saying is true. There are just too many independent parties including faculty, students and staff involved in the process to follow those conspiracy theories.

Absolutely. There is so much misinformation in this thread, one might think it was a campaign speech by Hillary. Jerry knew this was going to happen since last summer, so he was preparing to smooth the way for a new AD from Baylor, by throwing college kids under the bus? Laughable. You can't make this stuff up. It does take away ones ability to make things up and for silly conjecture. The only thing is that it doesn't pass the smell test. SMH. Carry on.

[thepostman]

I finally read through through this thread and even though I think this hire is a HUGE mistake I won't go as far as some. To state that this hire had been planned and is why the changes were taking place with the disciple over the past few months is such a huge stretch. It also goes against most of the things I have been hearing coming out of the athletic department.

I Disagree with the hire but I refuse to cling to conspiracy theories that have been thrown around on here today like they are fact.

[Purple Haize]

I finally read through through this thread and even though I think this hire is a HUGE mistake I won't go as far as some. To state that this hire had been planned and is why the changes were taking place with the disciple over the past few months is such a huge stretch. It also goes against most of the things I have been hearing coming out of the athletic department.

I Disagree with the hire but I refuse to cling to conspiracy theories that have been thrown around on here today like they are fact.

I don't think the hire and the expulsion of players were related. Just both ill advised

[Just John]

I will make a couple more points and then I will do my Matthew 10:14 thing and scoot on out of this discussion.

1) The accuser could be a raging nymphomaniac and a pathological liar. Title IX review boards are charged to focus like a laser on the one episode in question and make a determination whether or not, at any time during the episode, a non-consensual sex act occurred. Even if the initial sex act was consensual, if at any time during the episode consent is withdrawn, that constitutes non-consent. If it's determined that the victim was impaired and therefore incapable of granting consent, that constitutes non-consent. This is not my opinion - this is the guidance given to every Title IX review board in the country. It may offend our moral sensibilities, it may be political correctness or feminism run amok, but "them's the rules."

2) FWIW, there may or may not have been "witness intimidation" directed at the players, but there were documented threats directed at the accuser and others who intially spoke up for her but backed down under duress. If what you say happened, it was going both ways.

I know you're supposed to be a skeptic, even a cynic, on a message board; it makes it fun and keeps the conversation going. It's also prudent to question everything that is said here. I can only speak to what I know of the parties involved in this decision-making process, but I don't believe them to be so capricious that they would sacrifice the truth and place this boulder in the path of these young men's lives out of concern for the current political environment or how it would make the university look.

In fact, I have heard these people speak solemnly and sadly about the weight of this decision and how it affected the lives of all concerned, the accusers and the accused. This isn't Baylor; if we can show that we acted expeditiously the moment the charges were brought to our attention, and we can show that there was a valid appeal process and that the students were given every consideration during that process, then we have followed the letter and the spirit of the law.

Whatever you think of Liberty University and its leadership, there are still a lot of people who take these kinds of responsibilities seriously and believe they will be held accountable to God for their decisions, and therefore approach them with great seriousness and humility.

While I have some serious concerns with several decisions by Jr. I can't fathom that individuals involved in the process would go along in a "set up" to affect a controversial hiring several months down the road. Just doesn't make sense. If it were the case, LU has much bigger problems than a bad AD hire.

[Jonathan Carone]

Let me clarify again: I don't think there has been any type of setup of players. There were no traps or anything like that. What I'm saying is that we made our enforcement so much more strict than it's ever been so that we could say we have the systems in place. The three players were casualties of that crackdown. It's obvious by statements made by the school about the vetting of McCaw and with Jeff's contract not being renewed over the summer that this hire has been in the works for a significantly longer period than any of us realized.

[thepostman]

You may be right but I am not going to latch onto hypotheticals and theories. It distracts from the real issue. We hired someone still under investigation from covering up sexual assault. That is the only thing I know as fact in this whole situation.

[ballcoach15]

I am confident that LU did a good background check on situation at Baylor, and on McCaw. I believe most naysayers are over reacting.

[#10]

One thing is indisputable - you don't " fire" your AD in the middle of the week and have another one in place less than two weeks later without some prior serious back room dealings going on. I'm not saying this is wrong - but even a snap decision takes time.

Baylor was my first love and I'm sad for them. I pray that in a few years we will be able to say this hire wasn't a mistake. Right now it's hard to be positive.

[Purple Haize]

Can we combine these 2 threads?