CDAGRIZ said:
They're for court. The court of public opinion.
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Urban Meyer
- Thread starter Grizwold
- Start date
They're for court. The court of public opinion.
3 game suspension. Can start coaching on Sept. 2 during the week, after Sept 1 game, but can't coach the following 2 games. AD suspended without pay for several weeks.
I just skimmed the 20 plus page summary of the report. The summary was well-done and easy to read. Seemed liked a fair report.
Report indicated no coverup. Meyers knew about some things and the basics, but neither he nor Ohio St knew about other smaller things,
Reporting upstream violations at Ohio St were pretty technical and minor. I think the report said that the Title IX person was the person who first learned about the 2015 investigation from the police, and she informed the AD who then informed Meyer.
The report said that Meyer and the AD generally believed coach Smith more than his wife, thought the wife was not honest in 2009 incident and otherwise, and relied on the lack of charges and lack of arrest(s) in 2015. The report didn't indicate that Meyer and the AD were wrong to do this, but said Ohio St may want to look closely at its places.
I believe the report was to cost $500,000.
I just skimmed the 20 plus page summary of the report. The summary was well-done and easy to read. Seemed liked a fair report.
Report indicated no coverup. Meyers knew about some things and the basics, but neither he nor Ohio St knew about other smaller things,
Reporting upstream violations at Ohio St were pretty technical and minor. I think the report said that the Title IX person was the person who first learned about the 2015 investigation from the police, and she informed the AD who then informed Meyer.
The report said that Meyer and the AD generally believed coach Smith more than his wife, thought the wife was not honest in 2009 incident and otherwise, and relied on the lack of charges and lack of arrest(s) in 2015. The report didn't indicate that Meyer and the AD were wrong to do this, but said Ohio St may want to look closely at its places.
I believe the report was to cost $500,000.
On Day 2 (Aug. 3), someone made this post:
"But based on what I know at this point, I don't see a reason to fire Meyer. Yes, he shouldn't have lied. That's not a firing offense."
On Aug.5:
"As for Meyer, I assume he will penalized. Don't think he should be fired, and I'm guessing he won't based on what I can see so far...."
Nailed it.
"But based on what I know at this point, I don't see a reason to fire Meyer. Yes, he shouldn't have lied. That's not a firing offense."
On Aug.5:
"As for Meyer, I assume he will penalized. Don't think he should be fired, and I'm guessing he won't based on what I can see so far...."
Nailed it.
mtgrizfankb
Well-known member
I'm gonna take some medication and "forget" OSU ever plays a football game again
argh! said:
Not looking for anything. Just pointing out that I have been right on the basics of every single legal matter (about 15) that I've posted about on egriz over the years, whether about UM or otherwise, except Donaldson. I was also right that the downtown fight around Stocks several months ago, was probably not going to amount to much. That seems to be the case. I was right on Strong's fight at WSU a year ago, to the extent I posted.
Maybe some of you ought to admit how often you are wrong on the legal stuff--and otherwise.
argh! said:
I tend to focus on sports and sports people or programs on egriz. Yes, there are lots of hypocrites in the world. The matter of the hotshot female NYU prof, and her harassment of her male grad student for years--and the amount of support she has gotten from friends and feminists--is another good one. Excluding extreme and other bad ones like Weinstein, I tend to be more sympathetic to the person being hammered by social media and the press. I don't believe these things are black and white, nor do I believe the complainer should always be believed. While it is a bit hypocritical of the NYU prof supporters, I am fine with the support for the NYU prof. I also doubt that the kid was that much of a victim in the Asia matter.
I'm an equal opportunity supporter of people whom I think are getting screwed over unfairly. I believe in rights and due process. While most victims don't lie, many do. I had never heard of Asia until her Weinstein stuff, and then Bourdain connection, I hope she doesn't get prosecuted criminally for the kid thing. And, even thought Manafort was very corrupt and dishonest, and stupid, I feel a bit sorry that he got caught up in the special counsel thing, and now will spend the rest of his life in prison (if Trump doesn't pardon him).
Here's the link to a pretty good article poking holes in the Meyer/Ohio stuff/decision, without being overly biased. https://www.yahoo.com/sports/ohio-states-culture-cover-helped-save-urban-meyers-job-190356145.html
Too many of the "anti" Meyer/Ohio St articles are more like: a woman accused Smith, she must believed, Meyer knew about some of this, he should have fired Smith sooner or bumped it upstairs for someone else to do it, and therefore he should have been fired.
Meyer's honesty is a bit on the weak side, tho.
If the rules are going to be changed to "everyone who lies must fired", and I mean everyone, I'm okay with that. But I don't like that some are pushing a rule that only athletic coaches who lie or don't completely follow rules/procedures, especially regarding women, have to be fired. Particularly if part of the rule is that the woman must be believed--even if the police, her mother and her mother-in-law don't believe her.
Too many of the "anti" Meyer/Ohio St articles are more like: a woman accused Smith, she must believed, Meyer knew about some of this, he should have fired Smith sooner or bumped it upstairs for someone else to do it, and therefore he should have been fired.
Meyer's honesty is a bit on the weak side, tho.
If the rules are going to be changed to "everyone who lies must fired", and I mean everyone, I'm okay with that. But I don't like that some are pushing a rule that only athletic coaches who lie or don't completely follow rules/procedures, especially regarding women, have to be fired. Particularly if part of the rule is that the woman must be believed--even if the police, her mother and her mother-in-law don't believe her.
Here's an odd thing I don't understand. Some accuse Meyer of not reporting the Smith 2015 incident upstairs to the Ohio St Title IX office. But look at who informed Smith, who then informed Meyer.
"In October 2015, Miechelle Willis, then the Deputy Title IX Coordinator for the Athletics Department, received information from the Ohio State Campus Police about the Powell Police investigation; Willis immediately notified AD Smith, who in turn notified Coach Meyer...."
So, is Meyer really supposed to inform the Title IX office, when the Title IX office is the one who informed the AD and Meyer?
"In October 2015, Miechelle Willis, then the Deputy Title IX Coordinator for the Athletics Department, received information from the Ohio State Campus Police about the Powell Police investigation; Willis immediately notified AD Smith, who in turn notified Coach Meyer...."
So, is Meyer really supposed to inform the Title IX office, when the Title IX office is the one who informed the AD and Meyer?
4theluvofgriz
Well-known member
PlayerRep said:
The politically correct police who now run this country wanted their pound of flesh, and they got it. the whole incident was a "he said/she said" situation. The coach's wife was a confirmed wacko going back many years, yet Meyer was supposed to believe her story, and fire his assistant coach? This is the environment we all have to live with today in America. The old "innocent until proven guilty" standard is long gone with this lynch-mob mentality.
4theluvofgriz said:
Read the latest SI story it answers most of your questions. Appearently technical violation of the contract. SI posits Smith and Urban deviated from their specific contract obligations. Appearently doesn’t matter how they get notice but they both had a duty to go through the reporting process even if it appeared as an absurdity. Also faulted urb for not informing Smith about the 2009 allegations even though the arrest didn’t show up on background report. Found that urban withheld this information from Smith when he lobbied Smith to hire Zach Smith in 2012 which is a violation of his contract language. So I don’t think there is a time frame for what is reportable. I think they just want everything to be reported by people like urban who had actual knowledge of an incident and didn’t tell Smith. Had he, Zach may have still gotten hired but it would have been noted and addressed directly with Zach and wife before they would hire him. I think urban handled things poorly and compounded it by “not deliberately” lying; lol what does that mean? Spoliation or at least the appearance of spoliation of evidence in order to deprive his employer of information critical to his contract obligation and the investigation; and Claiming lack of memory even though he had talked with Smith and other AD staff about Zach Smith situation the night before presser. They also went through 10,000 of his text for the last year but couldn’t find any older then a year; and urb and his wife don’t share everything about his program. Thats all pretty implausible. He also claimed that Zach’s wife told him back in 2009 that it didn’t happen, but both Zach and wife claim only Zach met with urban and that she didn’t meet with them. That looks like Urban is making shit up to diminish the situation.PlayerRep said:
Bottom line Urban made himself look bad by himself. He might have had been fired for cause but he's too successful of a coach and his $38 million was too big of a risk to be possible unlawful discharge/breach of contract by the university. Wonder why he just didn’t say you know I would like to fully answer your questions but I’ll have to get back to you with more accurate information because it’s complicated. Domestic abuse has really been coming more and more into focus in our society and especially at colleges and when coaches get paid that much they are held to a really high standard that he failed to meet. People may not like it but that is the way things are done now. The more I read about this Urban and Zach became more diminished in my mind then the wife did. You talked about this in an earlier post about her actions costing him his high paying job and her child support. I don’t think she wanted him fired because she didn’t report it to either university, only to police and Urbans wife. We’ll see what comes out at show cause hearing. Good discussion and yeah you called it.
Dutch Lane said:
Dutch, the Report pointed out a few little things that weren't even jaywalking. I already posted the paragraphs on that subject from the Report, above in this thread.
The only fault in reporting, for Meyer or the AD, were that, despite having learned of the 2015 incident from a senior Title IX officer, who learned of it from the campus police, who had been told about it by the city police; is that they should have informed the NCAA compliance officer at the athletic department and, in the case of the AD, another similar compliance officer. The Report also said that the campus police, the AD and Meyer monitored the investigation.
The NCAA compliance officer wasn't going to do anything else. Jeez, the investigators and the Ohio St board/committee knew that this was absolutely no big deal.
No, this stuff wasn't a violation of their contracts. I've read the SI article. The author can't be a lawyer. Most of what the author wrote is wrong. It's a terrible article. It was about as bad as having a chemistry professor who has never played or watched sports, analyze the Super Bowl. The hotshot lawyers who didn't the investigation and wrote the Report pointed out a number of things, but basically absolved Meyer of any significant wrongdoing. They know how to analyze facts and contracts. Violations have to be material. They can't be little technical things. That won't fly in court and in cases. I'd love to have the case for Meyer if he was fired for not informing the ncaa compliance officer, even tho more senior people at Ohio St knew and were involved in monitoring the investigation.
He couldn't have been fired for cause, because there was nothing that rose to the level of cause. Ohio St. would have had a major league lawsuit, gotten a lot of worse publicity, and then lost that lawsuit. Ohio St. had no choice.
