Please share the other stories. I think Beard is a terrific candidate, but I've always said you have to vet him obviously and see if there's anything else. If it's that one incident, I think that could be accepted if you talk to him and he convinces you he's addressed it personally. If he's had other DV issues, there will be a trail and I think that would disqualify him.
Beard and Ole Miss about to beat Alabama at Bama
- Thread starter 4IUfourever
- Start date
I believe the other issues are being a drunk a la Kevin Wilson. Being a drunk and having a DV background aren't a good mixture. I may be wrong that those are the other rumored issues though.
Seems to me they are trying to be Carmel but without the median income level and tax base to support it.
Living in Georgia I’m overly familiar with the city/college town versus rural dichotomy. Atlanta/Athens/Savannah/Augusta could not be more different than the rest of the state….especially Atlanta and Athens.
Hard to beat the difference in the Raleigh/Durham (Research Triangle) area vs the rest of the state. Probably the Medical Center of Houston vs the rest of the state?
You don't know crap. He was not even married. Texas made a mistake in firing him. Hopefully IU hires him. Maybe he will add Gregg Marshall as an assistant.
I don’t think there is any way President Whitten allows Beard to be hired. She already faced a no confidence vote - the optics and backlash she would face from faculty wouldn’t fly. It doesn’t matter if he committed the assault or not. JMO
I’m not too familiar with either, but can’t imagine a college town trying to be an exurb. Athens wants to be anything but a John’s Creek.
Any fanbase that wants to hire Beard must ask themselves if they want an abuser as their HC. This article summed it up well when Arkansas was looking for a Musselman replacement: Got off of the charges on a technicality over the way he choked her
Yeah he's got no shot. I'd take one more run at Brad if he's not interested I have no idea. All I know for sure is he has to be pure as the driven snow.
there's a difference between needing to be as pure as the driven snow and trying to choke a woman out while on a drunken rampage
I have no doubt that there was some sort of physical altercation, but I don't think anyone who wasn't there will ever know what happened. If he is an alcoholic with a violent temper or history of being an abuser, there will be a lot more than 1 incident, and they will be easy to uncover. If it all comes back to this 1 night, where no criminal charges were pressed and you investigate it and interview him about it and are satisfied with the answers you get, I would have no problem if they would hire him. I think what that writer says about being choked with a forearm vs hands is a bunch of BS unless he talked to the officers/DA involved or has a whole lot more knowledge about domestic assaults than one would assume of a sportswriter.
Why do you think it's BS? There was no physical evidence based on the way it happened. If there had been physical evidence, it wouldn't have mattered that she changed her tune. Author didn't provide any opinion in the whole piece, it didn't seem to me.
Saying because he used a forearm it wouldn't leave marks vs using your hands and that's why he got off. If they were in a drunken knock down drag out, there would be plenty of physical evidence, I believe. But that's my opinion too. Personally, from the comments I've seen I think she was at least partially responsible for the altercation and as I said, if this is the only episode and you investigate it and are satisfied with what you hear from him, I see no problem with hiring him. As I've also said, if he's an alcoholic, has a violent temper and history of domestic abuse, there will be a lot of evidence to that and then I think he shouldn't be considered.
I don't think you read it very closely if you didn't catch that the whole reason it was dropped was because they couldn't prove strangulation. There was no doubt or denial of the physical altercation. The strangulation part was what drove it to a felony and without her testimony that it happened, they would be reliant on physical evidence, which they didn't have based on the way that he did it.
Nah, they dismiss misdemeanor domestic assaults all the time with solid evidence.
Similar threads
