Some Folks (or schools) Never Learn....Baylor At It Again!

[Inhogswetrust]

Stuff like scandals of the sort going on at Baylor happen when leadership doesn't do due diligence in who they hire. Which is why stuff like that hasn't happened at Liberty. Of course it's possible it could, but chances go way down when leadership are very discerning in who they hire. It can happen at Arkansas too and did with petrino. But then steps were taken to try to make sure there wasn't a repeat occurance. That happens with good leadership. Which Baylor must not have.

I've hired and fired a lot of people in my 30 years in business and someone can do ALL the due diligence possible yet they still have no complete control over what others might do.

[Inhogswetrust]

The BS in his statement was singling out Christian universities for brainwashing. There's indoctrination that goes on to some degree at every university or college.

He wasn't singling them out since the thread was specifically about them to begin with.

[oldhawg]

Lighten up he was joking. BUT he easily could have been serious. It's OK to joke about religion and religious schools and any other type school for that matter. And before you jump on me about it you might need got know I was raised as a Baptist.

Hmmmmm.  That explains a lot. 

[Vantage 8 dude]

Guys and gals, sorry that my original posting has degenerated into an argument/debate (by some)or for some a brawl about religion versus non-religious schools. That was most certainly NOT my intent; rather, it was to merely point out that  this particular university, which just happens to be Baptist-based, has run into so many problems and issues. And despite what might be the best efforts and intents of the administration to address and clean up past problems/crimes, to some degree some similar problems remain. As the old saying goes "it is what it is". Now it's up to them to get a handle on dealing totally with continued bad behavior. And yes, I realize that while careful and diligent screening processes can help limit future transgressions, it's still up to the employees and staff of the program to ensure they get the program back on course to proper conduct. 

I would just hope that the folks associated with (including fans and supporters) of the Bears would realize their toxic environment isn't going to solve itself and can only continue to damage the long term standing of the program.

[bennyl08]

What they need is a complete sanitized house cleaning of the leadership up there seems like to me. Then bring in a new AD, new attitude. New way of doing business.

If any school has deserved the ncaa death penalty, it is Baylor right now.

The school has a complete lack of institutional control, it isn't just in one sport or just among a handful of people but is widespread all the way to the top. Further, the crimes aren't relatively benign liking paying players but sex crimes that are badly hurting others.

Program needs to be sanitized and then quarantined for several years before the are allowed to compete again.

[oldhawg]

As a start, perhaps they should consider hiring Jeff Long to provide moral leadership, and "right the ship." 

[Inhogswetrust]

Hmmmmm.  That explains a lot. 

It might explain why I think religions sometimes brainwash.......................

[longpig]

The BS in his statement was singling out Christian universities for brainwashing. There's indoctrination that goes on to some degree at every university or college.

Them sciences  really messes em up.

[Vantage 8 dude]

As a start, perhaps they should consider hiring Jeff Long to provide moral leadership, and "right the ship." 

You laugh or at least throw out sarcastically, however, even if you don't approve of Long (which I suspect you might not), we're far in better shape from many aspects than BU. Or as my late dad would point out "beats the hell out of the alternative".

[rtr]

They were not as pure as they portrayed even when they were in the old SWC. 

Dirtiest playing team in the SWC and Grant Teaff held himself out as a paragon of virtue. 

[oldhawg]

You laugh or at least throw out sarcastically, however, even if you don't approve of Long (which I suspect you might not), we're far in better shape from many aspects than BU. Or as my late dad would point out "beats the hell out of the alternative".

Actually I was serious.  Jeff Long would not tolerate the shenanigans that have occurred at Baylor.  He would set a good example at the top and expect others to follow that example.  I have never had any real disagreement with his management of the athletic department at Arkansas, and hope he stays a while longer.

[PonderinHog]

Baylor should send their entire coaching staff to the UofA and learn a thing or 2 from our staff and our program.

Forty days and forty nights on Mt. Nebo probably wouldn't help those stiff necked people follow the rules.

[Inhogswetrust]

If any school has deserved the ncaa death penalty, it is Baylor right now.

The school has a complete lack of institutional control, it isn't just in one sport or just among a handful of people but is widespread all the way to the top. Further, the crimes aren't relatively benign liking paying players but sex crimes that are badly hurting others.

Program needs to be sanitized and then quarantined for several years before the are allowed to compete again.

Penn State deserved the death penalty.

[Inhogswetrust]

Dirtiest playing team in the SWC and Grant Teaff held himself out as a paragon of virtue. 

Grant Teaff was no paragon of virtue. The only team that came close to their dirty play was TAMU under Jackie.

[bennyl08]

Penn State deserved the death penalty.

Disagree. First, it had nothing to do with the players. It was strictly among the upper levels, from HC up. Two, the terrible things happening weren't football related at all. Which makes it worse from a personal level, but less relevant to the NCAA. The university had zero to gain from covering for this guy. Players wouldn't have been suspended, wins wouldn't have been vacated, there was no program based reason to cover for this guy, the only reason was that he was presumably a friend of theirs and had formerly been a coach there. Lastly, the biggest perpetrator wasn't even a part of the program. He was had been years before hence the connection to the university. The program's involvement was the coverup and allowal of the actions. Which yes, is very, very bad. However, if you put on athletic program blinders and only look at it from that perspective, no competitive advantage was gained, nothing about those actions benefited the university. From an athletic program point of view, the only thing there to punish is the bad PR from said incident. Which in this case, was very, very bad PR. So, I thought the punishment received from the NCAA was fitting, though i'd have ordered a larger financial penalty to be paid to the victims. As far as the NCAA is concerned, the important thing to accomplish there is to make the administration and upper level people feel some pain and that typically requires financial punishment.

[Steef]

Disagree. First, it had nothing to do with the players. It was strictly among the upper levels, from HC up. Two, the terrible things happening weren't football related at all. Which makes it worse from a personal level, but less relevant to the NCAA. The university had zero to gain from covering for this guy. Players wouldn't have been suspended, wins wouldn't have been vacated, there was no program based reason to cover for this guy, the only reason was that he was presumably a friend of theirs and had formerly been a coach there. Lastly, the biggest perpetrator wasn't even a part of the program. He was had been years before hence the connection to the university. The program's involvement was the coverup and allowal of the actions. Which yes, is very, very bad. However, if you put on athletic program blinders and only look at it from that perspective, no competitive advantage was gained, nothing about those actions benefited the university. From an athletic program point of view, the only thing there to punish is the bad PR from said incident. Which in this case, was very, very bad PR. So, I thought the punishment received from the NCAA was fitting, though i'd have ordered a larger financial penalty to be paid to the victims. As far as the NCAA is concerned, the important thing to accomplish there is to make the administration and upper level people feel some pain and that typically requires financial punishment.

The basic premise of your point could be "why punish the innocents, while you're punishing the guilty?" And there is some merit to that mercy.

However, in levying punishment against a program in any fashion, some innocents must, by definition, get dragged into it. There will be innocent players on the Baylor team you ARE willing to give a death penalty to.

Both Baylor and Penn State exhibited lack of institutional control, which really means their decision makers' motives were both deplorable and irredeemable. Same could be said of Miami (a couple of times), SMU, etc.

Finally, your argument that Penn State didnt benefit on the field isnt true, either. Ultimately, the institution was protecting Paterno, who was guilty of protecting the rapist. JoePa had made himself an accessory by his silence. If they had (rightfully) punished JoePa early on, it would definitely have impacted wins/losses.

It's ALWAYS about the wins...and the money.

No program, imo, deserved the death penalty more than Penn State. What they were doing is really no different than Baylor, except the age of the victims.

The real debate, afain imo, is....is the death penalty a useful tool? Its so severe, no one wants to use it any more. A punishment no one will use, is a useless threat.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

The basic premise of your point could be "why punish the innocents, while you're punishing the guilty?" And there is some merit to that mercy.

However, in levying punishment against a program in any fashion, some innocents must, by definition, get dragged into it. There will be innocent players on the Baylor team you ARE willing to give a death penalty to.

Both Baylor and Penn State exhibited lack of institutional control, which really means their decision makers' motives were both deplorable and irredeemable. Same could be said of Miami (a couple of times), SMU, etc.

Finally, your argument that Penn State didnt benefit on the field isnt true, either. Ultimately, the institution was protecting Paterno, who was guilty of protecting the rapist. JoePa had made himself an accessory by his silence. If they had (rightfully) punished JoePa early on, it would definitely have impacted wins/losses.

It's ALWAYS about the wins...and the money.

No program, imo, deserved the death penalty more than Penn State. What they were doing is really no different than Baylor, except the age of the victims.

The real debate, afain imo, is....is the death penalty a useful tool? Its so severe, no one wants to use it any more. A punishment no one will use, is a useless threat.

I don't think the NCAA realized the full and eventual impact of the punishment that they meted out to SMU at the time. SMU has never fully recovered. Because of this I doubt that, while we may see a variety of punishments issued in cases like Baylor and Penn State, we will never see another program issued the "death penalty" in the way it was to SMU. I do however think that schools should take more responsibility for the actions of their employees who oversee their programs and be more proactive in penalizing themselves, short of when that penalty might have a negative effect on future opponents.

And you are right, for the vast majority it is all about the wins and the money and that is true not just for the schools, but for the NCAA as well. So we will probably never again see anything as severe as the death penalty being handed down, ever again.

The one thing that I think deserves to be protected are the "innocents" that get trapped in situations like this. The NCAA needs to make sure that in any penalty that is handed down that is as severe as the Baylor penalty is likely to be, that those student athletes who had no involvement, are allowed to transfer to any school of their choosing (including current conference schools) and have immediate eligibility. Those kids are already being unfairly punished by being uprooted from their school of choice and could very well lose some accrued hours towards graduation by transferring. Yes, these kids chose this school and at some point after being involved in the program they probably saw that something was amiss within the organization, but just like a mistake made by so many in picking a life partner, they may have chosen to stick it out hoping it would get better.

[Inhogswetrust]

Disagree. First, it had nothing to do with the players. It was strictly among the upper levels, from HC up. Two, the terrible things happening weren't football related at all. Which makes it worse from a personal level, but less relevant to the NCAA. The university had zero to gain from covering for this guy. Players wouldn't have been suspended, wins wouldn't have been vacated, there was no program based reason to cover for this guy, the only reason was that he was presumably a friend of theirs and had formerly been a coach there. Lastly, the biggest perpetrator wasn't even a part of the program. He was had been years before hence the connection to the university. The program's involvement was the coverup and allowal of the actions. Which yes, is very, very bad. However, if you put on athletic program blinders and only look at it from that perspective, no competitive advantage was gained, nothing about those actions benefited the university. From an athletic program point of view, the only thing there to punish is the bad PR from said incident. Which in this case, was very, very bad PR. So, I thought the punishment received from the NCAA was fitting, though i'd have ordered a larger financial penalty to be paid to the victims. As far as the NCAA is concerned, the important thing to accomplish there is to make the administration and upper level people feel some pain and that typically requires financial punishment.

The upper levels doing bad stuff is exactly WHY and WHEN a school should get the death penalty. Most of the time a current student is not involved in any serious violation because of the time it takes before it becomes known. I do agree that some things there were out of the control of the NCAA but the criminal nature of what happened should be a factor and reason for the NCAA to have some tighter control in those type situations. Same at Baylor with the mens basketball program years ago and the coverup afterwards and the sexual assault charges now.

[Inhogswetrust]

I don't think the NCAA realized the full and eventual impact of the punishment that they meted out to SMU at the time. SMU has never fully recovered. Because of this I doubt that, while we may see a variety of punishments issued in cases like Baylor and Penn State, we will never see another program issued the "death penalty" in the way it was to SMU. I do however think that schools should take more responsibility for the actions of their employees who oversee their programs and be more proactive in penalizing themselves, short of when that penalty might have a negative effect on future opponents.

And you are right, for the vast majority it is all about the wins and the money and that is true not just for the schools, but for the NCAA as well. So we will probably never again see anything as severe as the death penalty being handed down, ever again.

The one thing that I think deserves to be protected are the "innocents" that get trapped in situations like this. The NCAA needs to make sure that in any penalty that is handed down that is as severe as the Baylor penalty is likely to be, that those student athletes who had no involvement, are allowed to transfer to any school of their choosing (including current conference schools) and have immediate eligibility. Those kids are already being unfairly punished by being uprooted from their school of choice and could very well lose some accrued hours towards graduation by transferring. Yes, these kids chose this school and at some point after being involved in the program they probably saw that something was amiss within the organization, but just like a mistake made by so many in picking a life partner, they may have chosen to stick it out hoping it would get better.

The innocent players can be protected athletically at least by allowing schools to play a reduced number of games. For example no non conference games one year or no bowls should be administered more often. Any player that is looking at the pros or pros are looking at them still gets to see them in game film and such. Any innocent upper class player should be allowed to transfer at will and all scholarships have to be paid by the offending school even if the player transfers or even if the school like SMU getting the death penalty decides to not play any games like they did. A lot of times in a life partner they divorce.

[tusksincolorado]

Guys and gals, sorry that my original posting has degenerated into an argument/debate (by some)or for some a brawl about religion versus non-religious schools. That was most certainly NOT my intent; rather, it was to merely point out that  this particular university, which just happens to be Baptist-based, has run into so many problems and issues. And despite what might be the best efforts and intents of the administration to address and clean up past problems/crimes, to some degree some similar problems remain. As the old saying goes "it is what it is". Now it's up to them to get a handle on dealing totally with continued bad behavior. And yes, I realize that while careful and diligent screening processes can help limit future transgressions, it's still up to the employees and staff of the program to ensure they get the program back on course to proper conduct. 

I would just hope that the folks associated with (including fans and supporters) of the Bears would realize their toxic environment isn't going to solve itself and can only continue to damage the long term standing of the program.

Troublemaker....

[tusksincolorado]

Dirtiest playing team in the SWC and Grant Teaff held himself out as a paragon of virtue. 

Some of the biggest frauds and criminals I have read about, met, or known hid behind the shield of religion....

Why do you think so many people are non-believers of organized religion....

[tusksincolorado]

I don't think the NCAA realized the full and eventual impact of the punishment that they meted out to SMU at the time. SMU has never fully recovered. Because of this I doubt that, while we may see a variety of punishments issued in cases like Baylor and Penn State, we will never see another program issued the "death penalty" in the way it was to SMU. I do however think that schools should take more responsibility for the actions of their employees who oversee their programs and be more proactive in penalizing themselves, short of when that penalty might have a negative effect on future opponents.

And you are right, for the vast majority it is all about the wins and the money and that is true not just for the schools, but for the NCAA as well. So we will probably never again see anything as severe as the death penalty being handed down, ever again.

The one thing that I think deserves to be protected are the "innocents" that get trapped in situations like this. The NCAA needs to make sure that in any penalty that is handed down that is as severe as the Baylor penalty is likely to be, that those student athletes who had no involvement, are allowed to transfer to any school of their choosing (including current conference schools) and have immediate eligibility. Those kids are already being unfairly punished by being uprooted from their school of choice and could very well lose some accrued hours towards graduation by transferring. Yes, these kids chose this school and at some point after being involved in the program they probably saw that something was amiss within the organization, but just like a mistake made by so many in picking a life partner, they may have chosen to stick it out hoping it would get better.

Speaking of the "innocents"...maybe the solution would be to fine the institution's athletic department to the existent of costing jobs in the management and administration levels. Then the university would have to provide "free" scholarships to cover housing, fees, and tuition for the "innocents" to continue their education.

I mean we are going for a degree....right?

[Vantage 8 dude]

Troublemaker....

Yep, that's me alright.

[Inhogswetrust]

Speaking of the "innocents"...maybe the solution would be to fine the institution's athletic department to the existent of costing jobs in the management and administration levels. Then the university would have to provide "free" scholarships to cover housing, fees, and tuition for the "innocents" to continue their education.

I mean we are going for a degree....right?

Another good idea. There can be ways of protecting the innocent players while still punishing the school,  administration and athletic department.

[oldhawg]

The innocent players can be protected athletically at least by allowing schools to play a reduced number of games. For example no non conference games one year or no bowls should be administered more often. Any player that is looking at the pros or pros are looking at them still gets to see them in game film and such. Any innocent upper class player should be allowed to transfer at will and all scholarships have to be paid by the offending school even if the player transfers or even if the school like SMU getting the death penalty decides to not play any games like they did. A lot of times in a life partner they divorce.

The problem with no non-conference games as a punishment is that you leave a group of schools who had the misfortune of scheduling Baylor suddenly having to scramble to find a suitable replacement on short notice, or losing that game (and subsequent payday).

[tusksincolorado]

The problem with no non-conference games as a punishment is that you leave a group of schools who had the misfortune of scheduling Baylor suddenly having to scramble to find a suitable replacement on short notice, or losing that game (and subsequent payday).

We picked up CSU on short notice....I am sure that the NCAA would have some type of exception concerning these matters...

[Inhogswetrust]

The problem with no non-conference games as a punishment is that you leave a group of schools who had the misfortune of scheduling Baylor suddenly having to scramble to find a suitable replacement on short notice, or losing that game (and subsequent payday).

Finding replacements can be tough but not impossible. Perhaps make the school on probation pay any buyout and let the schools they had scheduled use that money to sign a different school to play.

[Vantage 8 dude]

Perhaps in the end all the related bad behavior issues down in Wacko can simply be addressed by the wise old observation that "sometimes you just can't fix stupid". Yep, sometimes the most logical explanation is the best.

[bennyl08]

The basic premise of your point could be "why punish the innocents, while you're punishing the guilty?" And there is some merit to that mercy.

However, in levying punishment against a program in any fashion, some innocents must, by definition, get dragged into it. There will be innocent players on the Baylor team you ARE willing to give a death penalty to.

Both Baylor and Penn State exhibited lack of institutional control, which really means their decision makers' motives were both deplorable and irredeemable. Same could be said of Miami (a couple of times), SMU, etc.

Finally, your argument that Penn State didnt benefit on the field isnt true, either. Ultimately, the institution was protecting Paterno, who was guilty of protecting the rapist. JoePa had made himself an accessory by his silence. If they had (rightfully) punished JoePa early on, it would definitely have impacted wins/losses.

It's ALWAYS about the wins...and the money.

No program, imo, deserved the death penalty more than Penn State. What they were doing is really no different than Baylor, except the age of the victims.

The real debate, afain imo, is....is the death penalty a useful tool? Its so severe, no one wants to use it any more. A punishment no one will use, is a useless threat.

If I had to sum up the basic premise of my point, it would be to punish in the realm that you have jurisdiction to do so. For example, say Bielema was running a drug cartel in Bolivia, but wasn't using any of that money to pay players or using any of it to allow the department to spend more money elsewhere and nobody in the department knew. What Bielema was doing would be very bad, but what punishment, if any should the NCAA do? The college would obviously fire him, but the criminal acts had zero to do with football. Acts that either benefit the football program or lead to black eye for the sport are where the NCAA, IMO, has reason to issue punishments.

By what you say counts as lack of institutional control, pretty much every college would qualify for that because the decision makers motives are often deplorable and irredeemable on how they fund the schools with deplorable tuition, often making the students fund the athletic programs, etc...

Protecting a child predator, that is one of the most deplorable things, especially compared to giving money to players which seems quite tame in comparison. However, the NCAA isn't charged with prosecuting crimes in general, they are charged with running college sports. The college deserved a punishment for protecting him, but the crimes had virtually zero to do with football.

Now, you argue that the institution was protecting Paterno. If so, yeah, I would concede that that is pretty substantially football related. However, from what I know of the case, Paterno was not guilty of protecting the rapist.

http://www.npr.org/2011/11/08/142111804/penn-state-abuse-scandal-a-guide-and-timeline

This provides a pretty detailed timeline of events. The graduate student saw Sandusky having intercourse with a minor in the shower. He reported it to Paterno the next day who went on to pass it to AD the following day as well. Paterno was not silent about the incident. He should have reported that very day and not the next. At OSU, he should have reported that to the sexual harassment/abuse center of the university and not just the AD. However, this was 2002 and there's a good chance the university didn't  have anything like that. If not, then Paterno followed what he was supposed to do, to a T. As a university employee myself, I've had to go through training on what to do if there is sexual abuse, either to myself, something I see, of something that somebody else reports to me. I am not a detective. I am not a police officer. My responsibility isn't to judge the situation myself. My responsibility is to report that situation to the proper people. I do not have the authority to make a police report on somebody else's behalf when all I have is heresay. The graduate assistant could have gone to the police himself since he was a witness, but without knowing who the victim was, the police could question Sandusky but will in all likelihood reach a dead end.

The GA reported the incident to his superior, the HC, the HC reported it to his superior, the AD. The followed through by either convincing himself that the incident was just horseplay and wrestling because he was too uncomfortable to do anything about it or did so because he was actively trying to suppress anything from coming out. Either way, based off the information that I am aware of, there was zero need for the university to cover for Paterno seeing as he reported the incident and to the knowledge available did not try to cover anything up. The person was a former coach, but hadn't been coaching there for 3 years and so again, doubtful they were protecting wins there either. If Smiley came on to campus today, was seen having sexual conduct with a minor in the bathroom by small, and Long heard about it on Tuesday, the incident was reported, investigated, and everything came out in a police investigation, would we be in trouble as a university? No unless the AD knew that Smiley did that while he was here and was complicit in covering it up and based on the known facts, there is no information to suggest the university knew about Sandusky before 2002 at which point they banned him from being with children on campus due to convincing themselves that it was inappropriate horseplay but nothing worse.

Contrast that to Baylor. 16+ players raping women. Coaches and AD knowing it was rape and explicitly covering it up vs a GA seeing an ex-coach in the shower with a boy having sexual misconduct, this being reported up the chain, the AD investigating it, being convinced it was just horseplay, though inappropriate, and taking action to make sure Sandusky doesn't interact with children on campus ever again. The university should have taken the report more seriously, but the Baylor situation is infinitely worse in my opinion.

[tusksincolorado]

If I had to sum up the basic premise of my point, it would be to punish in the realm that you have jurisdiction to do so. For example, say Bielema was running a drug cartel in Bolivia, but wasn't using any of that money to pay players or using any of it to allow the department to spend more money elsewhere and nobody in the department knew. What Bielema was doing would be very bad, but what punishment, if any should the NCAA do? The college would obviously fire him, but the criminal acts had zero to do with football. Acts that either benefit the football program or lead to black eye for the sport are where the NCAA, IMO, has reason to issue punishments.

By what you say counts as lack of institutional control, pretty much every college would qualify for that because the decision makers motives are often deplorable and irredeemable on how they fund the schools with deplorable tuition, often making the students fund the athletic programs, etc...

Protecting a child predator, that is one of the most deplorable things, especially compared to giving money to players which seems quite tame in comparison. However, the NCAA isn't charged with prosecuting crimes in general, they are charged with running college sports. The college deserved a punishment for protecting him, but the crimes had virtually zero to do with football.

Now, you argue that the institution was protecting Paterno. If so, yeah, I would concede that that is pretty substantially football related. However, from what I know of the case, Paterno was not guilty of protecting the rapist.

http://www.npr.org/2011/11/08/142111804/penn-state-abuse-scandal-a-guide-and-timeline

This provides a pretty detailed timeline of events. The graduate student saw Sandusky having intercourse with a minor in the shower. He reported it to Paterno the next day who went on to pass it to AD the following day as well. Paterno was not silent about the incident. He should have reported that very day and not the next. At OSU, he should have reported that to the sexual harassment/abuse center of the university and not just the AD. However, this was 2002 and there's a good chance the university didn't  have anything like that. If not, then Paterno followed what he was supposed to do, to a T. As a university employee myself, I've had to go through training on what to do if there is sexual abuse, either to myself, something I see, of something that somebody else reports to me. I am not a detective. I am not a police officer. My responsibility isn't to judge the situation myself. My responsibility is to report that situation to the proper people. I do not have the authority to make a police report on somebody else's behalf when all I have is heresay. The graduate assistant could have gone to the police himself since he was a witness, but without knowing who the victim was, the police could question Sandusky but will in all likelihood reach a dead end.

The GA reported the incident to his superior, the HC, the HC reported it to his superior, the AD. The followed through by either convincing himself that the incident was just horseplay and wrestling because he was too uncomfortable to do anything about it or did so because he was actively trying to suppress anything from coming out. Either way, based off the information that I am aware of, there was zero need for the university to cover for Paterno seeing as he reported the incident and to the knowledge available did not try to cover anything up. The person was a former coach, but hadn't been coaching there for 3 years and so again, doubtful they were protecting wins there either. If Smiley came on to campus today, was seen having sexual conduct with a minor in the bathroom by small, and Long heard about it on Tuesday, the incident was reported, investigated, and everything came out in a police investigation, would we be in trouble as a university? No unless the AD knew that Smiley did that while he was here and was complicit in covering it up and based on the known facts, there is no information to suggest the university knew about Sandusky before 2002 at which point they banned him from being with children on campus due to convincing themselves that it was inappropriate horseplay but nothing worse.

Contrast that to Baylor. 16+ players raping women. Coaches and AD knowing it was rape and explicitly covering it up vs a GA seeing an ex-coach in the shower with a boy having sexual misconduct, this being reported up the chain, the AD investigating it, being convinced it was just horseplay, though inappropriate, and taking action to make sure Sandusky doesn't interact with children on campus ever again. The university should have taken the report more seriously, but the Baylor situation is infinitely worse in my opinion.
[/b]

Raping children, or raping women....now we are down to which offense is worse in society....    

[Vantage 8 dude]

Yeah, kinda like the old choice of "pick your poison". Neither PSU or Baylor will go down in the annuals of college football examples of how the vast majority programs would want to model themselves. The responses to both situations are beyond nauseating or putrid.

[Pork Twain]

Well this thread went to shirt.

Is it odd that I just type in shirt now?

[Vantage 8 dude]

Well this thread went to shirt.

Is it odd that I just type in shirt now?

Hunh

[Pork Twain]

Hunh

If you type the vulgar word for poop (darn), it changes it to shirt.  I take that back it is darn now.

[DeltaBoy]

The Baylor theme song. !!!!! :razorback:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CduA0TULnow

[Vantage 8 dude]

The Baylor theme song. !!!!! :razorback:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CduA0TULnow

Good one alright.

[goodguytex]

I've hired and fired a lot of people in my 30 years in business and someone can do ALL the due diligence possible yet they still have no complete control over what others might do.

I've hired and fired quite a few too in 22 years of business. It's true you can do all the due diligence you want and still turn up a bad apple. But what's important is that you do due diligence. You have such a rigorous process that makes the chances of hiring someone of questionable character very slim.

Liberty University is Baptist too. No scandals, no issues of any kind. So what they are doing appears to be working.

[tusksincolorado]

I've hired and fired quite a few too in 22 years of business. It's true you can do all the due diligence you want and still turn up a bad apple. But what's important is that you do due diligence. You have such a rigorous process that makes the chances of hiring someone of questionable character very slim.

Liberty University is Baptist too. No scandals, no issues of any kind. So what they are doing appears to be working.

Apples to Oranges....

[LZH]

And before you jump on me about it you might need got know I was raised as a Baptist.

But the question is.....are you still one?

[LZH]

As a start, perhaps they should consider hiring Jeff Long to provide moral leadership, and "right the ship." 

Snap!  Post of the week....

[PorkSoda]

Well this thread went to shirt.

Is it odd that I just type in shirt now?

it used to be "crap" 

a while back in the recruiting forum, someone misspelled "redshirted" and the censor changed it to "redcraped" 

which triggered people commenting "holy shirt" etc.

another funny one was when you couldn't type "assist", because it would always come out as "buttist"

[Inhogswetrust]

I've hired and fired quite a few too in 22 years of business. It's true you can do all the due diligence you want and still turn up a bad apple. But what's important is that you do due diligence. You have such a rigorous process that makes the chances of hiring someone of questionable character very slim.

Liberty University is Baptist too. No scandals, no issues of any kind. So what they are doing appears to be working.

Maybe Baylor can take lessons from them as to how to cover up anything that happens.........................Any rigorous process of hiring humans is by nature flawed.

[Inhogswetrust]

But the question is.....are you still one?

Didn't take me long once I was old enough to think for myself to disavow it. Most of my family is religious (but not necessarily Baptist) and my Dad was a deacon back then.

[Pork Twain]

Didn't take me long once I was old enough to think for myself to disavow it. Most of my family is religious (but not necessarily Baptist) and my Dad was a deacon back then.

Same here.  Not a big fan of any organized religion, based on the way I see them rolling in the dough and enjoying those tax breaks.  Pretty sure that the God they claim to work for, would be ashamed of them.

[Inhogswetrust]

Same here.  Not a big fan of any organized religion, based on the way I see them rolling in the dough and enjoying those tax breaks.  Pretty sure that the God they claim to work for, would be ashamed of them.

The most judgmental people I've ever met are those that quote scriptures about not being judgmental. Also the most hypocritical and least understanding of others views are religious dogmatic people. Without the emotions of fear or death there would be no religions.

[goodguytex]

Same here.  Not a big fan of any organized religion, based on the way I see them rolling in the dough and enjoying those tax breaks.  Pretty sure that the God they claim to work for, would be ashamed of them.

Based on my own personal experience, most Baptist churches aren't like that at all. I know of 2 at least including my own who genuinely want to and do help and care for others. They don't care about making money. They care about saving people, and making a difference. Seems like you've had encounters with the wrong kind of churches.

Most in the state of Arkansas for instance, are the small country ones, that aren't the mega churches taking in the millions. The mega ones are the exception not the rule.

[mweston]

I have a feeling that the NCAA is about to step in and drop the hammer on Baylor.  I feel like they have been waiting for just the right situation to drop the hammer like they did against SMU, BUT it couldn't be against a major program like Bama or even Ole Miss.  They tried against Penn St., but didn't quite have the authority and got embarrased for it.  Now they have a program that isn't a traditionally top program with enough clout to get their way out of it that they can drop the hammer on and make an example.  They may have bought some time by cleaning house, but if these similar incidents keep happening I'm afraid Baylor is going to go down hard.

[goodguytex]

I have a feeling that the NCAA is about to step in and drop the hammer on Baylor.  I feel like they have been waiting for just the right situation to drop the hammer like they did against SMU, BUT it couldn't be against a major program like Bama or even Ole Miss.  They tried against Penn St., but didn't quite have the authority and got embarrased for it.  Now they have a program that isn't a traditionally top program with enough clout to get their way out of it that they can drop the hammer on and make an example.  They may have bought some time by cleaning house, but if these similar incidents keep happening I'm afraid Baylor is going to go down hard.

Programs like Ole Miss and Baylor seem to be the type of programs the NCAA can go after and make examples out of, and show everyone they still have some teeth to do something. Of course their standards are selective, because they let the kind of crap programs like bama and auburn go by without a word being said. There won't be a death penalty I don't think, but there's going to be some pretty serious sanctions I would guess.

[Pork Twain]

Based on my own personal experience, most Baptist churches aren't like that at all. I know of 2 at least including my own who genuinely want to and do help and care for others. They don't care about making money. They care about saving people, and making a difference. Seems like you've had encounters with the wrong kind of churches.

Most in the state of Arkansas for instance, are the small country ones, that aren't the mega churches taking in the millions. The mega ones are the exception not the rule.

I have lived all over the US and one thing that is usually in every town I have lived in are several very large and very nice churches.  I grew up attending a small Baptist church that still had an outhouse in the mid-80s.  The people made that church.  I have not seen a lot of that in my travels and I finally stopped looking for it.  Whatever god you believe in, He is not in one of those places, He is in each of us.

[goodguytex]

I have lived all over the US and one thing that is usually in every town I have lived in are several very large and very nice churches.  I grew up attending a small Baptist church that still had an outhouse in the mid-80s.  The people made that church.  I have not seen a lot of that in my travels and I finally stopped looking for it.  Whatever god you believe in, He is not in one of those places, He is in each of us.

The church is the people, not a building. I get it if you don't believe in God or religion or faith is someone more than ourselves. I do. And that's fine to disagree. The church though is what the people in it make of it. That's true everywhere.