Locals who have asked for release

[Mr. Buddy Garrity]

14 minutes ago, WOSgrad said:

I think to justify the releases for these young men in terms of a morality play are misguided.  First, while CardinalBacker's language may be a little strong, the timeline of events fall squarely within his argument.  The allegations of a cover up of these sexual assaults had been apparent since late winter and all throughout the spring.  All the while, Hudson, Martin, et al remained silent and made no indication of their intention to not enroll and seek releases from their NLI's. That silence remained as the allegations went from mere rumor to clear and convincing.  Yet, the first time that these young men spoke up about not enrolling was when Briles and Starr, the men fingered as leading these cover up attempts, were removed from their respective posts.  If the existence of this activity was as shocking to these young men's moral conscious as some maintain, then the punitive measures made by Baylor should have provided the imputus to allow these young men to know that they were going to a university that would allow this no longer.  Yet, the act of removing Briles seemed to be the event that convinced them to seek release. So to claim that they are simply standing up for their convictions in seeking release does seem to me to be a bit far fetched.

Second, even if you disagree with my assessment above, I think that we can all agree that attempting to appeal to a major college program that it is the "right thing to do" is futile.  I mean if we have learned anything over the years and have had it yet affirmed again with the sexual assault cover up, it is that the moral compass of major college programs are usually fouled up.

No, the justification for Baylor to grant these young men the release from their NLI's comes from sheer pragmatism.  Right now, Baylor has about 10 players that, for whatever reason, have decided that they will never play a down as a Baylor Bear.  Sure, the university can hold the spector of these guys having to sit out a year, but haven't those that are seeking their releases already accepted that fate?  Hudson and Martin have decided not to enroll.  It seems that refusing releases would be Baylor cutting off it's nose despite its face.  Texas and Texas A&M have both recognized in very high profile transfer situations that trying to muscle a kid who no longer wants to be in the program only does harm to the program.

So, should the appeal be that it is the right thing to do?  No.  The appeal should be that it is the smart thing to do.  

Or maybe the chance to take a shot at Silsbee for a past incident. 

 

 

 

Baylor isnt the only school handing out offers for athletes, but I can name one school that's covering up rapes and in public doesn't give a damn about its victims only its football program and thats Rape University, I mean Baylor. 

[AggiesAreWe]

1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

Be honest. The kids want out because Briles is gone. If Briles still had the big desk in the field house, every single one of the kids would be enrolled. How about if a particular other recruit leaves? Is that a reason to get released to play elsewhere? What if the star QB gets hurt? Is that reason enough to get a release to play elsewhere? 

I also think that schools should have to honor their offers that are made to kids. It's garbage that kids get their offers pulled or reduced by schools.... That shouldn't happen either. 

But you have to admit that it's funny when a dad talks to the news about how Baylor should "do the right thing" by his son, because they would have NEVER wanted to be associated with a program that would cover up a rape..... Except that's exactly what the same kids high school program is most famous for.

Those kids committed to play foot ball for Baylor. There were no guarantees about who would be the coach, or who would be the Qb, or if they'd be contenders, or any such thing. Honor the commitment you made, or go play juco ball, or sit out a year. 

Kids the same age don't get to go home from the Army because things didn't turn out like they'd imagined. Man up, boys. 

Most famous for. smh

So bitter. Definite hater.

[CardinalBacker]

24 minutes ago, Mr. Buddy Garrity said:

Or maybe the chance to take a shot at Silsbee for a past incident. 

 

 

 

Baylor isnt the only school handing out offers for athletes, but I can name one school that's covering up rapes and in public doesn't give a damn about its victims only its football program and thats Rape University, I mean Baylor. 

Not taking a shot.... It's not a joking matter. 

[Pepper Brooks]

13 hours ago, setxguru said:

Regardless of if they sit out a year or not Baylor can still dictate which schools they give these student athletes that signed a NLI with Baylor permission to play for! 

 

Baylor cannot restrict the freshman who have requested their release from enrolling at another school within the conference if they are released. As a coach/ university you ONLY have 2 options 1) complete release. 2) no release, which means the player has to appeal to the NLI Committee. There is no such thing as a restricted or conditional release. This only applies if the student athlete has not already enrolled and started classes.

[L-Train11]

While it is a similar situation, the fact still remains that the Silsbee situation was 8 years ago. Doesn't have anything to do with the athletes we are taking about. What's happening at Baylor is recent, it's happening now! And you keep wanting to say how it's just part of life, well part of life is growing up and doing what you think is right regardless of the consequences. 

[STiger85]

11 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

Not taking a shot.... It's not a joking matter. 

No it's not a joking matter. Something you are ignorant about. 

[MossHill]

I believe it's totally justifiable for each of these student athletes to request and be granted that release, based on the entire situation. I have not looked into depth those who have requested release, but the majority of them are on the "offensive side" and the 3 that concern me have the potential to play in the league some day soon. So, this choice while it's certainly controversial to the public eye, is probably the most important decision of their young lives. The University took a nose dive for failure as soon as this was made known to the public and for me, just based on sheer athletics, I would want to steer as far away from the issues as possible, to focus my next 4 years on being developed by somebody who's going to get me to the next level without all the other elephants in the room that could potentially prevent me from reaching that goal. Just my opinion

[Cougar14.2]

2 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

Be honest. The kids want out because Briles is gone. If Briles still had the big desk in the field house, every single one of the kids would be enrolled. How about if a particular other recruit leaves? Is that a reason to get released to play elsewhere? What if the star QB gets hurt? Is that reason enough to get a release to play elsewhere? 

I also think that schools should have to honor their offers that are made to kids. It's garbage that kids get their offers pulled or reduced by schools.... That shouldn't happen either. 

But you have to admit that it's funny when a dad talks to the news about how Baylor should "do the right thing" by his son, because they would have NEVER wanted to be associated with a program that would cover up a rape..... Except that's exactly what the same kids high school program is most famous for.

Those kids committed to play foot ball for Baylor. There were no guarantees about who would be the coach, or who would be the Qb, or if they'd be contenders, or any such thing. Honor the commitment you made, or go play juco ball, or sit out a year. 

Kids the same age don't get to go home from the Army because things didn't turn out like they'd imagined. Man up, boys. 

You just made and killed  your own argument. You're basically asking teenagers to be held to a higher standard than a multi-million dollar athletic department as well as an entire board of regents. They covered up multiple sexual assault allegations and knowingly accepted transfers from kids who were accused of the same deeds. That's a lack of institutional control, the same as Penn St. was charged with which the NCAA eventually allowed any current player to transfer free and clear of restrictions. Not to mention a lot of these kids are guided by parents who may have been uninformed of the scope of the allegations before the Hamilton report came out. If you found out the company you were going to work for knowingly covered up sexual assaults of female employees would you still choose to work for them because you made a "commitment", do you stay because it's a good job? You're speculating the reason they all want to be released is because Briles got fired, what if they're trying to "man up" and do what's morally right instead of being "forced to get a free education"? The "play where you signed/committed" argument just doesn't hold water in this case.    

[WOSgrad]

18 minutes ago, theNeed4Speed said:

I believe it's totally justifiable for each of these student athletes to request and be granted that release, based on the entire situation. I have not looked into depth those who have requested release, but the majority of them are on the "offensive side" and the 3 that concern me have the potential to play in the league some day soon. So, this choice while it's certainly controversial to the public eye, is probably the most important decision of their young lives. The University took a nose dive for failure as soon as this was made known to the public and for me, just based on sheer athletics, I would want to steer as far away from the issues as possible, to focus my next 4 years on being developed by somebody who's going to get me to the next level without all the other elephants in the room that could potentially prevent me from reaching that goal. Just my opinion

And as a justification for wanting to transfer, I have no problem with that.  Certainly, Hudson and Martin, both reputed to be bright young men as well as exceptional athletes should look out for their future.  And they saw what happened at a post Paterno Penn St. in which a national power was pretty much reduced to second rate status after the type of shakeup that appears to be taking shape now at Baylor.

The question, though, then goes to whether or not this creates a moral duty on the part of Baylor to grant them their releases.  Again, without mandate from the NCAA, my answer would be no.

Look, I am not saying that Baylor possesses any moral high ground here as quite simply, they don't.  And those here that try to equate a single incident at a local High school (which by the way, was cleared by a federal district court, a start district court and various courts of appeal) to the goings on at Baylor is pretty ridiculous.  And as I stated earlier, pragmatism alone dictates that Baylor should grant the releases.

But as far them having a duty to do so, I just can't go that far.

[Scatright]

Let's not kid ourselves, they're transferring because of Briles. They're transferring because they signed with a program that had a chance to win championships, and they are reporting to a program that has a chance to sit at the bottom of the Big 12 for a long time. Regardless of their motivation, today's Baylor is not the Baylor they committed to.

[MossHill]

18 minutes ago, Scatright said:

Let's not kid ourselves, they're transferring because of Briles. They're transferring because they signed with a program that had a chance to win championships, and they are reporting to a program that has a chance to sit at the bottom of the Big 12 for a long time. Regardless of their motivation, today's Baylor is not the Baylor they committed to.

In SEC terms, they went from Alabama to Vanderbilt in 2.3 seconds. LOL

[ST413]

I know Briles leaving is a part of the reason for asking for a release but I know from some very close to Hudson that the morality and possible ramifications farther down the road from the findings played a major part.   Playing at Baylor in this time frame associates you with these acts and could have effects later.

[Scatright]

6 minutes ago, ST413 said:

I know Briles leaving is a part of the reason for asking for a release but I know from some very close to Hudson that the morality and possible ramifications farther down the road from the findings played a major part.   Playing at Baylor in this time frame associates you with these acts and could have effects later.

Let me be clear to state that I am on the side of the kids being released.....

Having said that, I have a question. Did Patrick have these concerns and second thoughts before Briles was fired? This controversy has been swirling around Baylor for a long time, and the timing is curious for to all of the be shaken morally. He doesn't need to make that excuse to justify the release. It is clearly justified.

[ST413]

The report and all its findings came out after he signed right before Briles was fired so at his signing point it was speculation or rumors.  Now there is researched evidence.

[ST413]

And don't get me wrong I haven't talked to Patrick personally but have been told by those it was a hard decision but those findings were a large part of it.

[setxguru]

Weather the kids are released or not makes me no difference, but say all you want to about morally right or wrong these kids are trying to be released as stated by many on this site that used common sense because Briles has been fired and the future of success in the program left with him. This topic has been out there for months about Baylor but not one kid that signed a NLI asked to be released or decided to back out of there agreement until Briles was fired. If Baylor would have gotten rid of the President, AD, Assistant AD, and kept the staff intact with no post season punishment I PROMISE you there would be not one kid trying to get out of a signed legal document. Sometimes in life things are not fair and you either man up or you don't!

[STiger85]

12 minutes ago, setxguru said:

Weather the kids are released or not makes me no difference, but say all you want to about morally right or wrong these kids are trying to be released as stated by many on this site that used common sense because Briles has been fired and the future of success in the program left with him. This topic has been out there for months about Baylor but not one kid that signed a NLI asked to be released or decided to back out of there agreement until Briles was fired. If Baylor would have gotten rid of the President, AD, Assistant AD, and kept the staff intact with no post season punishment I PROMISE you there would be not one kid trying to get out of a signed legal document. Sometimes in life things are not fair and you either man up or you don't!

You can not PROMISE nothing. You are not that kid in that situation making that decision. Like I said if they leave, they leave. For several years Baylor football will be know for rape scandals and a bad mark will be associated with it. Just like with Penn St. you will ask yourself how could they let that happened, how could they allow that to happen. 

[CardinalBacker]

2 hours ago, STiger85 said:

You can not PROMISE nothing. You are not that kid in that situation making that decision. Like I said if they leave, they leave. For several years Baylor football will be know for rape scandals and a bad mark will be associated with it. Just like with Penn St. you will ask yourself how could they let that happened, how could they allow that to happen. 

So transfer, sit out a year, and enjoy the rest of your college career. Just like everybody else that has a change of heart after signing an NLI. 

These kids gambled on Baylor thinking it gave them an awesome chance for a ring and an easy transition to the pros. Unfortunately it looks like that chance is a lot slimmer with Briles getting the boot, so they want out. There's no shame in that. Just wait it out and play wherever you want. 

[CardinalBacker]

5 hours ago, L-Train11 said:

While it is a similar situation, the fact still remains that the Silsbee situation was 8 years ago. Doesn't have anything to do with the athletes we are taking about. What's happening at Baylor is recent, it's happening now! And you keep wanting to say how it's just part of life, well part of life is growing up and doing what you think is right regardless of the consequences. 

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong..... Done, sorry. 

[Pepper Brooks]

2 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Coach Woodard the HC and AD eight years ago? It's hard to play for that guy, use the coach's help to get your offer from Briles, then have Pops out there worrying to reporters about the future ramifications of being associated with Baylor AFTER the situation is "fixed" by firing Briles. 

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm singling this particular kid out, because it's true of all of them wanting out. He's just the only one that I know of who played in a high school program with a similar history from before his time, but under the same coach from that time, who just so happens to be close personal friends with Briles. It's just too ironic to ignore. 

No Coach  Charlie Woodard has long been retired.

[CardinalBacker]

I did not know that. I'll edit my last post. 

[setxguru]

Coach Bobby McGallion was the HC at SHS in 2008. 

[STiger85]

5 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

I did not know that. I'll edit my last post. 

Like I said It's no joking matter, you are ignorant of the situation. Yet, you throw it around like a joke.

[ST413]

Definately not a joking matter.  And one the issue wasn't that school officials tried to cover up the incident, the issue was how to handle it while the case was untried.  Remember in this country even those accused of such acts are innocent until proven guilty.  Were  mistakes made or were there things that could have been handled better, of course.   But the big difference in that and Baylor is that during that school year the accusations and charges had been made but no official outcome had come out yet hence the school was in a tough spot. In Baylors case that official outcome has just come out and now after that outcome and its effects is when these young men are wanting out of their letters of intent.

[Peppermint Patty]

This is about more than just Baylor and the terrible things that happened on Briles' watch.

The NLI is a binding contract between a student-athlete and a NLI member institution. The contract is not between Art Briles or the athletics department and a student-athlete. The university is agreeing to provide financial aide for those student-athletes to attend their university (tuition, room, board). The football is secondary. 

1. Baylor has no obligation to agree to any releases. At this point, they university has NOT admitted to, nor have they been punished for or accused of any INSTITUTIONAL impropriety. In their opinion, they have fired all persons that have been accused of any wrong doing. They have resolved the issue in their opinion.

2. To agree to release these student-athletes from their NLI would set an irreversible precedent not only for Baylor, but for all NLI member institutions. (It would also be an admittance of guilt on Baylor's part IMO.) 

3. They have signed NLI's that have met all the legal requirements of a valid contract. Those are basically-

a.) an offer

b.) an acceptance of the offer

c.) consideration was provided(tuition, etc..)

d.) all parties had the capacity to enter into the contract

e.) all parties entered into the contract without duress

3. Why has the NCAA remained silent on this issue? Something terrible obviously happened here. They could step in and rectify this situation in one fail swoop. Take the burden of releasing these players AWAY from Baylor. Do it for them.

4. Finally, fix the damn transfer rules. If a coach leaves, allow the players to leave too- WITHOUT punishment.