(06-16-2016 10:44 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 09:40 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  No surprise here:
http://bohls.blog.statesman.com/2016/06/...-be-right/

Nope.

Briles threatens to sue Baylor
http://www.chron.com/sports/college/arti...239227.php

(06-16-2016 04:08 PM)Old Sammy Wrote:  Briles threatens to sue Baylor
http://www.chron.com/sports/college/arti...239227.php

At this point, Baylor would be better served to cut all ties, pay Briles the remainder of his contract, and aggressively seek to repair their image. Bringing Briles back would give the impression that they value wins over student safety and the integrity of their institution.

(06-16-2016 04:22 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 04:08 PM)Old Sammy Wrote:  Briles threatens to sue Baylor
http://www.chron.com/sports/college/arti...239227.php

At this point, Baylor would be better served to cut all ties, pay Briles the remainder of his contract, and aggressively seek to repair their image. Bringing Briles back would give the impression that they value wins over student safety and the integrity of their institution.

Absolutely right. Do the right thing.

I think Briles is burning the bridge back by what he is saying now.

(06-16-2016 05:01 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 04:22 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 04:08 PM)Old Sammy Wrote:  Briles threatens to sue Baylor
http://www.chron.com/sports/college/arti...239227.php

At this point, Baylor would be better served to cut all ties, pay Briles the remainder of his contract, and aggressively seek to repair their image. Bringing Briles back would give the impression that they value wins over student safety and the integrity of their institution.

Absolutely right. Do the right thing.

I would love for Baylor to fight him in court and break him. Push him out of the business forever.

(06-16-2016 04:22 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  Bringing Briles back would give the impression that they value wins over student safety and the integrity of their institution.

Impression? !

(06-16-2016 08:56 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 04:22 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  Bringing Briles back would give the impression that they value wins over student safety and the integrity of their institution.

Impression? !

I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Easy to say 'do the right thing' and buy him out but difficult to write a $40M check. Big by even Baylor standards and would really set them back financially. Eventually have to bring in a 'name' to get things going and with the Big 12 TV deal only generating a fraction of just the buyout and less from ticket sales now...Baylor in a world of financial hurt. That financial hurt has to influence 'the right thing' to do.

http://thecomeback.com/blog/ncaa/baylor-...nsion.html

(06-16-2016 10:14 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Easy to say 'do the right thing' and buy him out but difficult to write a $40M check. Big by even Baylor standards and would really set them back financially. Eventually have to bring in a 'name' to get things going and with the Big 12 TV deal only generating a fraction of just the buyout and less from ticket sales now...Baylor in a world of financial hurt. That financial hurt has to influence 'the right thing' to do.

http://thecomeback.com/blog/ncaa/baylor-...nsion.html

They could sell the med school. It was the Baylor board that voted down the merger. After all nothing is sacred if it will save the football program, the new stadium, and keeping the deep pockets athletic donors happy. /s

Can/should we cancel our game with Baylor? Not joking. I'd be fine with never playing them again in anything.

I have had two conversations in the last few days that both indicated some huge Baylor donors are getting ready to cut ties over this. That might cause them to pay attention.

(06-16-2016 10:54 PM)Wiessman Wrote:  Can/should we cancel our game with Baylor? Not joking. I'd be fine with never playing them again in anything.

I've been thinking along the same lines for a while now. I see no upside in playing them at this stage, but the cost of backing out may be prohibitive for Rice football.

(06-17-2016 05:28 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I have had two conversations in the last few days that both indicated some huge Baylor donors are getting ready to cut ties over this. That might cause them to pay attention.

But which way? Cut ties unless they hire Briles back again (Drayton McClain)? Or cut ties because the whole episode is embarassing? (And, although McClain is pressuring the board to reinstate Briles, I think he's made it clear that he won't cut ties).

(06-17-2016 05:52 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(06-17-2016 05:28 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I have had two conversations in the last few days that both indicated some huge Baylor donors are getting ready to cut ties over this. That might cause them to pay attention.

But which way? Cut ties unless they hire Briles back again (Drayton McClain)? Or cut ties because the whole episode is embarassing? (And, although McClain is pressuring the board to reinstate Briles, I think he's made it clear that he won't cut ties).

These are donors on the academic side who are cutting ties because there is even a suggestion that Briles might come back.

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the athletic donors are saying bring him back and the academic donors are saying get rid of him. That presents the administration with the question of whether they want a university that their football team can be proud of.

(06-17-2016 07:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-17-2016 05:52 AM)I45owl Wrote:  

(06-17-2016 05:28 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I have had two conversations in the last few days that both indicated some huge Baylor donors are getting ready to cut ties over this. That might cause them to pay attention.

But which way? Cut ties unless they hire Briles back again (Drayton McClain)? Or cut ties because the whole episode is embarassing? (And, although McClain is pressuring the board to reinstate Briles, I think he's made it clear that he won't cut ties).

These are donors on the academic side who are cutting ties because there is even a suggestion that Briles might come back.

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the athletic donors are saying bring him back and the academic donors are saying get rid of him. That presents the administration with the question of whether they want a university that their football team can be proud of.

It certainly appears that both sides are drawing lines in the sand. Without a President this will fall completely in the lap of the Board, whether that is fair or not. One thing that will come out of this is a search for a real President and not someone like Starr whose political notoriety was a big factor in his hiring.

The one thing we have not seen is what is going on within the Baptist General Convention of Texas.

It appears Briles has found the amount of money to make him go away. Guess they will need a bigger collection plate at Sunday services to pay him off.
http://footballscoop.com/news/report-bay...rt-briles/

And now from the Statesman:
http://collegesports.blog.statesman.com/...ettlement/

Lots of Baptist churches abandoned Baylor long ago. There are those Baptists who shed a blind eye to the goings on there, but most know if you want a conservative Baptist education, you go to the smaller schools. I know many who try and make sure none OC their money goes to Baylor- me included, and that was long before this mess.

(06-16-2016 10:26 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 10:14 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Easy to say 'do the right thing' and buy him out but difficult to write a $40M check. Big by even Baylor standards and would really set them back financially. Eventually have to bring in a 'name' to get things going and with the Big 12 TV deal only generating a fraction of just the buyout and less from ticket sales now...Baylor in a world of financial hurt. That financial hurt has to influence 'the right thing' to do.

http://thecomeback.com/blog/ncaa/baylor-...nsion.html

They could sell the med school. It was the Baylor board that voted down the merger. After all nothing is sacred if it will save the football program, the new stadium, and keeping the deep pockets athletic donors happy. /s

I assume you are referring to the recent (failed) deal between BCM and Rice. Baylor University and Baylor College of Medicine have nothing to do with one another any more. BCM became an independent institution in 1969, so I don't see how any Baylor U board would have had a say.

(06-17-2016 10:57 AM)HooCares Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 10:26 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  

(06-16-2016 10:14 PM)owl40 Wrote:  Easy to say 'do the right thing' and buy him out but difficult to write a $40M check. Big by even Baylor standards and would really set them back financially. Eventually have to bring in a 'name' to get things going and with the Big 12 TV deal only generating a fraction of just the buyout and less from ticket sales now...Baylor in a world of financial hurt. That financial hurt has to influence 'the right thing' to do.

http://thecomeback.com/blog/ncaa/baylor-...nsion.html

They could sell the med school. It was the Baylor board that voted down the merger. After all nothing is sacred if it will save the football program, the new stadium, and keeping the deep pockets athletic donors happy. /s

I assume you are referring to the recent (failed) deal between BCM and Rice. Baylor University and Baylor College of Medicine have nothing to do with one another any more. BCM became an independent institution in 1969, so I don't see how any Baylor U board would have had a say.

I think that perception was deemed false as the details were discussed. Baylor University still had a measure of control over the destiny of BCM. I don't have the link to the article, but I'm sure someone else can produce said article.