Just because charges arent filed or they are dropped doesn't mean really bad things didn't happen. It just means they can't prove they happened. In DV happens more than not. Many times the abused goes back to the abuser. Most feel it is there fault so they change their story. This isnt a he said she said thing. There is physical evidence with pictures of the abuse.
Reality check for the anti-Beard folks…
- Thread starter gator mcCluskey
- Start date
No way dude. If that’s the case nobody would touch the AD job here. “Hey, we want you to be our AD and you are going to be evaluated on making the worst program in D1 history a winner”
Missing my point, you are re-surfacing something that has been handled. It’s done and in the past.
She's a 6' ish former volleyball player who said she'd not disagree with Beard's description that it was self-defense. Have you ever seen a woman come totally unglued and attack someone? She's very likely going to get visible injuries. Tell me exactly how you are certain her injuries were from spousal abuse and not an altercation from self-defense? And, why you are a better judge of what happened, than I don't know, let's say the 2 people who were actually involved? It's unseemly for sure, but as I've said dozens of times: hire an investigator and see if all these other cases of abuse and drunken behavior exist. If they do: move on. If they don't and it's down to this 1 case, then you sit down and talk with him and see if he can convince you that he's remorseful and has made changes that reflect it (stopped drinking, AA and seeing the woman for instance). Again, if you're not convinced, move on and if you are, then consider him further as a candidate.
If this was really about impacting the issue of domestic violence, and not just virtue signaling and caving to the woke mob, you would hire Beard and use it to promote resources for victims and mental health treatment for anger and alcohol abuse. But again, it’s not about doing anything about the issue.
Strawman.
Scott is mostly judged on how much he improves FB, notably FB revenue. It’s the only sport that really matters, therefore it can’t be ignored, even if IU is a “bball school.”
The real question about Beard is this: Is he really head and shoulders above all other options? If not....then comparable options should be getting equal time.
I tell you… that background check I did 11 years ago brought out all kinds of stuff. You would’ve thought I was trying to get hired by the fbi.
Beard is an excellent coach. That said, I doubt IU will offer him the position. Too much baggage that clouds the position.
I have seen so much. I have taken care of those who have been beaten enough to be on a ventilator who state things like it was my fault he did it in self defense.
They is what the police said at the scene.
bite mark on right forearm (with visible teeth marks and redness)
abrasion to right eyebrow/temple area
abrasion/scrape to left leg
cut to left thumb
Self defense goes two ways. I have read no physical evidence to Beard. That might be because he wasn't in the scene. It not a judgement it's my perception. I know my opinion doesn't matter. I mostly looking for someone to prove me wrong so I can get behind him getting hired.
Straw man? I didn’t say it should be ignored but his review isn’t based on if Cignetti did what he did. If he would have been 7-5 or 4-8, nobody would have been calling for Dolson to be fired.
That won't happen here. Nobody here was at the scene or is even really qualified to comment beyond having their own opinion on what's been published about it.
Even if you believe Ole Miss was willing to risk their reputation on hiring him (or has no reputation to even worry about), that is not the case for IU. If IU wants to hire him, I trust they will satisfy themselves as to what happened and if they don't like what they find they will pass.
Right. More interesting to me is how he uses that experience to teach and mentor the kids he's coaching - using his past experience to teach them.
He is judged on more than one year — big question is if Cig works out and FB produces more revenue. FB powers the whole athletic dept. at all schools, even IU.
There's another angle to this that just occurred to me. Beard has been through the media fire at Miss. already. While its a football school, he still went through the scrutiny and reopening of media scrutiny'publicity. he may not be willing to do that again right now....particularly since it will likely be even more of a publicity news event with IU. Neither need that kind of publicity....not just IU. Why would Beard want to relive the scrutiny all over again?
I don't know what happened, but I have seen an unhinged woman attack someone and I don't think a 6' college athlete would ever not sustain injuries from it, even just being restrained. Do I think that's what happened, no, I think Beard also had his emotions flowing and was probably being aggressive. I've also seen "victims" threaten and use the police as a weapon and inflict injuries on themselves that they could blame on others. Assuming if you've worked around victims, you've seen it too, but maybe you only treat injuries and don't try and determine who was at fault.
But, my point is I don't know what happened, and I don't feel IU is compelled to do more or assume more than the Austin PD did. My view is I'm going to remove what I don't know from the equation (exactly what happened that night) and focus on; 1) is there a history. If he's an abuser and an alcoholic, I believe there will be plenty of evidence out there an investigator would find easiy in a couple hours. If there is, he's out. If there's not, talk with him, and see what his explanation is and his reactions to that night. If he convinces you he's truly remorseful and made changes in his life to fix it, how as AD can you not consider one of the more accomplished folks you've got in your pool of candidates? I've had several people on here assure me there's more in his past: and not one of them has produced a shred of proof of it. I've looked myself and found nothing. In much less time I did find stuff that might indicate the lady was violent and unstable.
But, my point is I don't know what happened, and I don't feel IU is compelled to do more or assume more than the Austin PD did. My view is I'm going to remove what I don't know from the equation (exactly what happened that night) and focus on; 1) is there a history. If he's an abuser and an alcoholic, I believe there will be plenty of evidence out there an investigator would find easiy in a couple hours. If there is, he's out. If there's not, talk with him, and see what his explanation is and his reactions to that night. If he convinces you he's truly remorseful and made changes in his life to fix it, how as AD can you not consider one of the more accomplished folks you've got in your pool of candidates? I've had several people on here assure me there's more in his past: and not one of them has produced a shred of proof of it. I've looked myself and found nothing. In much less time I did find stuff that might indicate the lady was violent and unstable.
He absolutely may not, or he may feel an allegiance to Ole Miss for giving him a shot. The question is should IU consider Beard, not will he consider IU or accept if offered. I happen to think he will, given Pitino's comments. That didn't feel completely objective to me.
Because of the BiG conference contract. What AD’a have we had fired for Iu being the worse football program in NCAA history?
It's a tough one for me, but ultimately that's Beard's fault - not mine. My gut says NO.
But....I do believe in 2nd chances and that every case is different. No charges stuck, after all. He's steered clear of nonsense thereafter, w exemplary results. I think these are mitigators.
No, it’s quite a bit more than media rights. Schools with bigger football programs have materially more revenue than IU thanks to the football revenue they generate.
Scott is mostly judged on the results of by far the biggest college sport.
First, the "no charges were filed" argument is factually incorrect--charges were indeed filed but later dropped. Second, a DA isn't likely to move forward in such a circumstance without the victim's cooperation. Had she been a cooperating witness, there's a high probability it would have gone to trial or been plea-bargained.
For the purpose of a high-level, public job such as Indiana, for example, the facts of the case and public perception are more consequential than whether CB was brought to trial. A middling D1 program like Ole Miss was willing to deal with all that to grab a coach it couldn't otherwise attract; he was available to them for a reason. If a higher profile school were willing to take the risk, he would never had ended up in Oxford. Moreover, whether the incident occurred when he was coaching or not is immaterial; it goes to character.
Let's assume, for a moment, that Beard is a viable option and Dolson & Co. are currently vetting him. I'm sure they're considering the aforementioned details and much more; they have access to loads more information than we do. And I'm sure they're also factoring in that this occurred two years ago and (presumably) nothing of that nature has repeated itself.
Since, again, Dolson and crew have more information than we do, I'm sure they're looking into everything. If they decide Beard--the person and coach--is the best hire, then let's rock n' roll.
But, imo, logic dictates it won't be CB. For one, the Sampson debacle, while circumstantially different, is nonetheless similar; IU hired a person with known "baggage" and it Titan submersible'd the program. Furthermore, there are other good candidates without such a history ... and Beard, will undeniably a good coach, isn't Bob Knight 2.0. So, then, why would IU open up itself to scrutiny when there are other good coaching options out there?
I'm looking at this from Dolson's and IU's perspective, not that of a fan desperate for wins above everything else. Perception matters. Optics matter. I'm sure they're weighing the risk/reward of hiring CB. And, if there have been no other similar instances, they likely don't forsee it happening again. If it did, however, it would be an awful look, especially with the Sampson hire still in IU's (somewhat) recent history and collective consciousness. Furthermore, if it happed again, those involved in the hire would suffer major professional consequences.
If you'd like to offer a counteratgument, I'll be more than happy to listen and keep an open mind.
Look it up, schools with bigger football programs make more revenue than IU, often a lot more. Somewhere like Nebraska or Wisky or PSU is around 33% more revenue. OSU/UM are well over 50% more. Even midsize places like Iowa or MSU are 10-15% higher. FB is all that really matters to athletic dept financials and therefore the FB hire was a big deal for Scott.
The University of Texas still decided to fire Beard even after conducting its own investigation. That tells me a lot right there.
One difference with Sampson is his transgressions were NCAA violations. While not saying they are morally equivalent to the Beard allegations at all, his violations risked NCAA sanctions on the program. Personal behavior problems, you fire the guy and move on, the "program" is not at risk beyond that.
It wouldn't be a hard stop. How big of a dealer, how long ago, what efforts have been made for change? I could see a scenario that someone dealt meth in highschool and college and made a big change in their life. In fact, I have a very good friend who went to prison for selling meth while he was in college today. Today he is a fantastic human being and someone that I respect and look up to. I know that someone who has involved in DV can have a similar turn around but would I want them coaching at a top university just two years removed from the incident. That's a hard no.
Regardless of what people think of Beard, if hired, it would create a firestorm for Scott/Pam/BoT. I just cannot imagine them putting themselves through that. It's basically why UK, UL, and apparently now Miami didn't consider him -- he is just damn hard to hire.
Except Sampson was guilty of cheating. Beard? How is it not relevant to you that he wasn't convicted, nor even tried? I've seen folks who claim to be involved in the legal system say that, while unusual, they've seen cases tried without cooperation of the victim, so there must have been some doubt in the DA's mind. Cops were there and saw her injuries and talked with her.
Again, my view is I'm taking that night out of the equation, because 1) I don't know what happened and 2) he wasn't convicted, nor even tried. If there are no other incidents or history of abuse or violence, and he convinces you he's aware of the seriousness and has made actual life changes, I don't know how you're doing your job as AD if you don't consider one of the most experienced and accomplished candidates you have.
you mean you're guessing that's why they didn't consider him. Or, do you have evidence to show they didn't, or that he didn't rebuff interest from them?
You're correct about our limited knowledge. However, if Beard is indeed a candidate, you seem to discount that Doldon et al. have done CIA-level vetting and gleaned more information than we'll ever know.
If, after a deep dive, Dolson & Co. determine he's the man for the job, I'll trust they've made the right call. If he's not, it certainly won't be because of some superiority complex or "shit the bed again" mentality or decision-making.
It's inevitable that, if and when it's not Beard, some will freak out and conclude IU is some "holier-than-thou" entity incapable of doing what's best for IU basketball .... and the university. That's short-sighted, ignorant fanspeak. Dolson, the man most in the know, isn't stupid; he'll hire the right person/coach for the job, as he did with Cig.
So you're taking that night out of the equation, even though it's the very night that the prestigious University of Texas did their own investigation into, even after charges were dropped , and decided Beard was no longer fit to be their head basketball coach?
I mean...that's beyond stupid to 'just leave it out of the equation'.
It's what a few of my friends who cover CBB say. And it makes sense, he is hard to hire.
If Scott/IU look into him and get comfortable with him, fine. I trust Scott and he would be putting his career on the line, assuming he makes the hire this time and it sounds like he will. I would just be very surprised if he went that route and Pam/BoT were also okay with it. We'll see.
I don't know how you're doing your job as AD at UK or UL if you're not.....
Someone said that.
The truth is somewhere in between. Every relationship that has lasted awhile has the potential to become explosive. True, you still can't beat people up. But, it also normally takes 2 to tango.
People can do crazy stuff in the heat of a partners argument. I know of a woman who threw cups and saucers at her husband. Another one set fire to her own house.
I don't either, but frankly, I'm surprised at the willingness of folks to flush concepts like "innocent until proven guilty", due process and getting a 2nd chance, which to me are all pretty core principles of American life. Agree it's not ideal, and carries extra risk, but my goodness, look at the history of the guy we have as President. Good thing he wasn't trying to be a bball coach!
He's not in jail. He has just done something that disqualifies him from representing certain schools from being employed there. Those are totally different burdens of proof.
Similar threads
