[Cider Jim]

Well said! Great interview.

[olldflame]

In his deposition for one of the Jane Doe rape cases at Baylor conducted just last week in Lynchburg, IM reveals his reasons for leaving Baylor.

http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Former ... 11731.html

“McCaw expressed disgust at the coordinated effort to conceal the University-wide failures by instead focusing exclusively on African-Americans…with racially charged labels like ‘’300 pound black football player” being freely thrown around to the exclusion of other instances of University-wide misconduct,” the motion says.

McCaw testified, according to the motion, that Patty Crawford, who was then the school’s Title IX director, told him “she had had upwards of approximately 300 cases since she’d arrived at Baylor, and she had not detected any pattern relative to student athletes within that number.”

This is a must read guys. He rips the Baylor Board of Regents and basically says Briles and Starr were scapegoats. If I were a cynic, I might say this sets things up for a possible Briles hire at Liberty.

[Jonathan Carone]

These quotes show there was so much more going on down there institutionally than any of us knew.

[cruzan_flame13]

I knew something was going than just such accusations on athletes and other individuals. The Regents hoped that everyone would accept the typical stereotypes of the bad athlete/turn the other way HC/AD and the media took it and set sail to get people to read their product. It looked at a win/win at first, but now since things are coming to light, it is quite the opposite. As stated before, is this a possible opportunity for Briles becoming the next head coach at LU? I will not hold my breath, but what a redemption story that would be!

[Jonathan Carone]

The big question here is how much of these quotes is believable? How much of it is true vs how much of it is a narrative to take blame off of himself?

Personally - I think there's some truth in what he said in these quotes. I don't know that it's 100% true, but there are believable pieces to it. I don't think he's making the whole thing up. I just don't know that he's the white hat he's making himself look like.

[Class of 20Something]

The big question here is how much of these quotes is believable? How much of it is true vs how much of it is a narrative to take blame off of himself?

Personally - I think there's some truth in what he said in these quotes. I don't know that it's 100% true, but there are believable pieces to it. I don't think he's making the whole thing up. I just don't know that he's the white hat he's making himself look like.

There is probably sufficient truth that it can be discovered and proven in court. In court rooms the truth doesn't matter these days. It is all about what you can prove, true or not.

[gerb]

This is fire. Yuge if true:

""Although urged to remain, McCaw refused to continue on as Baylor Athletic Director because he, 'was disgusted at that point with the regents, the racism, the phony finding of fact' and because he 'did not want to be part of some Enron cover-up scheme,'" the motion states."

"The motion stated that McCaw testified that "Doak and others discouraged reporting and systematically buried rape reports, concealed them from McCaw when they involved sports, causing McCaw to learn of them only through ESPN.""

"The motion states that McCaw said that select regents had a meeting with Pepper Hamilton attorneys - at which McCaw wasn't present - which resulted in "Regent Cary Gray writing 'false' and 'misleading finding of fact skewed to make the football program look bad to cover up the campus-wide failings.'" The motion also stated that there were "racially charged labels like '300 pound black football player' being freely thrown around to the exclusion of other instances of university-wide misconduct," although it doesn't attribute those comments to any particular person."


"According to the motion, McCaw said that Glenn Bunting, the head of Baylor's public relations firm at the time, encouraged McCaw to lie about "when a sports-related rape had been reported to and made known to Baylor officials," although the motion doesn't include what McCaw was instructed to say. It was "a scheme Bunting promised would be 'mutually beneficial' to Baylor and McCaw," the motion states, adding that McCaw told Bunting, "that's not true," and that Bunting hung up on him when he wouldn't agree to go along."

http://www.espn.com/college-football/st ... lt-scandal

[flamehunter]

The big question here is how much of these quotes is believable? How much of it is true vs how much of it is a narrative to take blame off of himself?

Personally - I think there's some truth in what he said in these quotes. I don't know that it's 100% true, but there are believable pieces to it. I don't think he's making the whole thing up. I just don't know that he's the white hat he's making himself look like.

You honestly think he'd fabricate a lot of stuff for a sworn deposition?

[Jonathan Carone]

Fabricate? No.

Stretch and spin? Yes.

[jinxy]

It would be awfully gutsy and against what ive heard of his character from virtually everyone to suggest that. Obviously its possible but i cant believe he would do that with the ramirications this could have. The couple times ive talked to him he doesnt seem to be vengeful. He almost seemed relieved that to be out of the situation. I was surprised to hear him somewhat recuse briles. Other than that i had heard clay travis basically say every word he said on one of his afternoon periscope shows several times. Doesnt make sense why he would defend briles since he has nothing to gain unless....hes really considering hiring him ha. Otherwise seems like he would just leave him alone.

[JK37]

The reputation for high character IM has earned in his relatively short time at LU leads me to believe every word. I’ve heard this for awhile now, and I’m glad it’s in the public eye finally. I, for one, have zero problem believing every word. I do not believe there is any stretch or spin involved. It simply isn’t in IM’s character as I perceive it.

[TH Spangler]

Those working for him @ LU sure seem to like him and speak VERY highly. Time will tell but might be one of the best hires we've ever made.

[Class of 20Something]

Those working for him LU sure seems to like him and speak VERY highly. Time will tell but might be one of the best hires we've ever made.

That is actually incredibly telling at LU. I don't think there is a workplace where so many people consistently and brazenly dissent from the administration, and given that context, IM is still praised, tells me a lot.

[Jonathan Carone]

I'm not implying anything negative about Ian's character by questioning this. I've heard nothing but incredible things about him since arriving at Liberty.

However, we naturally see ourselves as the hero in every story. His view of things (i.e. his spin of it) could be what he believes to be true while still only partially being true in the entirety of what happened. There are so many sides to this narrative that it's tough to see exactly where the truth falls.

[cruzan_flame13]

I'm not implying anything negative about Ian's character by questioning this. I've heard nothing but incredible things about him since arriving at Liberty.

However, we naturally see ourselves as the hero in every story. His view of things (i.e. his spin of it) could be what he believes to be true while still only partially being true in the entirety of what happened. There are so many sides to this narrative that it's tough to see exactly where the truth falls.

Yet that's the point; to keep those viewers or readers confused while wanting more of the drama. I'm not saying that you're wrong, but as I see one side covering up situations and then not immediately responding to the accusation that is presented makes me believe that they(the regents) were mostly in the wrong. Clearly they don't want to respond to possibly take time to choose their words and actions carefully. I will say that this may be a good thing, but I believe they thought they were in the clear with this situation.

[olldflame]

These revelations in some ways turn the entire situation on it´s head from what it had previously seemed to be. The perception was that it was a huge problem with the football team, and the coaches, campus police, administration etc. were all prioritizing the image of the program and conspiring to protect it. Now we learn that, at least from the standpoint of the Regents, it was the campus wide problem and overall image of the school they were trying to do damage control on, and they had no problem throwing the football team under the bus to do it. IMHO it is actually quite possible that both were going on, with the Regents having a different agenda than most of the others involved, because apparently (somewhat to my surprise) Baylor does not have a large endowment fund, and is very dependent on keeping their enrollment at a certain level to make ends meet. Bringing light to a long time and ongoing campus wide problem would be a lot bigger problem in terms of assuring prospective students and their parents Baylor is safe. By focusing it on football, they could get rid of a few people and say they had fixed the problem.

[Jonathan Carone]

Baylor's endowment is something like $1.3 billion. The small endowment comment confused me because of that. I'm sure there are some technicalities within it that I don't know of.

I have no doubt the regents at Baylor were corrupt. At the same time, we do know the situation with the volleyball player/coach wasn't handled properly by Ian and his office. We also have seen some text messages tied to him. So while I don't think he was corrupt, or even mostly to blame, he's also not the shiny example of a white hat that these quotes make it out to be. He made mistakes along the way as well.

What we are seeing that we can agree with is that Ian has learned from the situation and is thriving at Liberty. He has an incredible reputation and everyone who works with him has nothing but great things to say about him.

[Sly Fox]

Baylor has relied on a few exceptionally wealthy donors to fund most of their capital projects over the past three decades. Athletic success was a primary tool in raising those funds. Ann Richards/Bob Bullock essentially saved Baylor from becoming SMU by forcing them upon the Big XII. So their situation at the time of the crisis being exposed was probably more tenuous than most recognized nationally. It also illustrates what an amazing job our AD performed in Waco during his time there.

[Class of 20Something]

Baylor's endowment is something like $1.3 billion. The small endowment comment confused me because of that. I'm sure there are some technicalities within it that I don't know of.

I have no doubt the regents at Baylor were corrupt. At the same time, we do know the situation with the volleyball player/coach wasn't handled properly by Ian and his office. We also have seen some text messages tied to him. So while I don't think he was corrupt, or even mostly to blame, he's also not the shiny example of a white hat that these quotes make it out to be. He made mistakes along the way as well.

What we are seeing that we can agree with is that Ian has learned from the situation and is thriving at Liberty. He has an incredible reputation and everyone who works with him has nothing but great things to say about him.

Baylor is at $1.23B however looking in the Big XII they are one of two (TCU) private schools in the entire conference. So while their endowment would be on par with most universities at that level, without that sweet taxpayer money, they are more vulnerable with a seemingly strong endowment.

[Purple Haize]

Baylor's endowment is something like $1.3 billion. The small endowment comment confused me because of that. I'm sure there are some technicalities within it that I don't know of.

I have no doubt the regents at Baylor were corrupt. At the same time, we do know the situation with the volleyball player/coach wasn't handled properly by Ian and his office. We also have seen some text messages tied to him. So while I don't think he was corrupt, or even mostly to blame, he's also not the shiny example of a white hat that these quotes make it out to be. He made mistakes along the way as well.

What we are seeing that we can agree with is that Ian has learned from the situation and is thriving at Liberty. He has an incredible reputation and everyone who works with him has nothing but great things to say about him.

That’s a pretty solid analysis

[R i]

I did not interpret his comments as "protecting Briles". Ian's main defense is that the school made athletics the scapegoat. Mentioning Ken Starr and Art by name seems to help Ian's case.

Ian likely feels some type of kinship with Art due to the fact that they are taking on the Board of Regents in a life altering court case together, but as calculated and intentional as Ian has proven to be, I cannot see him brining Art over to LU.

I cannot imagine living with this type of story for a couple years and not being able to tell my side of the story as Ian has. Congrats Ian, really grateful for your time here at LU.

If Ian left tomorrow for a P5 job, he has already guided LU through some of the most crucial times in our athletics department history. The trajectory he has helped put us on will have an impact for decades. Also thank you Jerry for the vision and hiring Ian despite the PR risks associated.

[ballcoach15]

I hope Ian is at LU for a long time.

[thepostman]

All the things coming out the last few months proves I was completely wrong in my initial assessment of IM. I didn't like the hire and thought it would be a negative. Clearly I was wrong and am happy he seemed to genuinely want to fix the problem at Baylor, not cover it up. I'm sure his version of events are true but I'm not naive enough to believe it isn't at least a little skewed. Our version of events is always more favorable to us whether we know we are doing it or not. Regardless there have been plenty of other things to come out that proves it was a Baylor problem more and more.

Too bad the others in the national media who completely trashed IM multiple times won't also take the time admit they were wrong about him.

[flameshaw]

Seems to be a pretty good hire being that Jr. only vetted him for 4 days.

[Baldspot1]

Seems to be a pretty good hire being that Jr. only vetted him for 4 days.

4 days (x) 8 business hours/day = 32 hours. I run background checks all the time . How much more time do you think it would take to run the background checks and talk to the necessary people?