Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I don't have a problem with the hire, don't have a dog in the fight, so to speak. From what I've read about the situation, wasn't he found to have no wrong doing in a court of law? I mean the University is the one who covered it up and they pretty much got a slap on the wrist and kept it pushing. Briles is the one who bore the brunt of the punishment and was scapegoated, along with several other key figures.

In saying all that, he deserves a chance at redemption and should be heavily monitored. That's just what I've read about the situation, so I could be wrong. 

Posted
1 minute ago, AusMOJO said:

I don't have a problem with the hire, don't have a dog in the fight, so to speak. From what I've read about the situation, wasn't he found to have no wrong doing in a court of law? I mean the University is the one who covered it up and they pretty much got a slap on the wrist and kept it pushing. Briles is the one who bore the brunt of the punishment and was scapegoated, along with several other key figures.

In saying all that, he deserves a chance at redemption and should be heavily monitored. That's just what I've read about the situation, so I could be wrong. 

just gotta look into his texts that leaked and that says everything. Even if he was the scapegoat he still knew what was going on and took the money over doing the right thing.

Posted
15 minutes ago, Shmatt said:

just gotta look into his texts that leaked and that says everything. Even if he was the scapegoat he still knew what was going on and took the money over doing the right thing.

But as I said, what I read is that he was found to have done no wrong doing in a court of law? Was that before or after the texts leaked?

Posted
12 minutes ago, AusMOJO said:

But as I said, what I read is that he was found to have done no wrong doing in a court of law? Was that before or after the texts leaked?

Before and that honestly dosent mean much either. Trust me a lot of cases are settled even if the person is in the wrong, thats just called having a very good lawyer. He did hide stuff and he did turn a blind eye to it, 15+ women don’t just stay stuff like that either man that’s not a coincidence. The school used him as a scapegoat but the truth of the matter is they are all guilty.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Shmatt said:

Before and that honestly dosent mean much either. Trust me a lot of cases are settled even if the person is in the wrong, thats just called having a very good lawyer. He did hide stuff and he did turn a blind eye to it, 15+ women don’t just stay stuff like that either man that’s not a coincidence. The school used him as a scapegoat but the truth of the matter is they are all guilty.

So they leaked before and he was still found to have done no wrong doing? That doesn't seem like that would fly if the evidence was clear as day.....I don't know what to think, I'll have to go do some more research myself. 

Posted
Just now, AusMOJO said:

So they leaked before and he was still found to have done no wrong doing? That doesn't seem like that would fly if the evidence was clear as day.....I don't know what to think, I'll have to go do some more research myself. 

They didn’t convict him because legally what he did wasn’t against the law cause he didn’t do the crimes himself. But that doesn’t hide the fact that he put football over what was going on in the locker room. Either way there is no use to defend this man, he did contribute to a toxic culture. 

Posted

oh will yall shut the hell up?  

 

why has no one at all, since all this made a big deal about Ian being the AD at Liberty?  he didn’t know anything either?…

 

the court said he was innocent. he’s been away damn near 10 years.   move on. 

Posted
Just now, FAFO said:

oh will yall shut the hell up?  

 

why has no one at all, since all this made a big deal about Ian being the AD at Liberty?  he didn’t know anything either?…

 

the court said he was innocent. he’s been away damn near 10 years.   move on. 

 Nasty comment man, so all the victims are just supposed to move on essentially because it was 10 years ago? 

This a tread about this specific topic I think we can talk about it here lmao

Posted
3 minutes ago, Shmatt said:

 Nasty comment man, so all the victims are just supposed to move on essentially because it was 10 years ago? 

This a tread about this specific topic I think we can talk about it here lmao

i don’t think Briles was the one doing what was done… right?   

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.