MacIntyre contract approved in 8-0 vote

[sackman]

You should probably quit while you're behind in this one. The turner case at Stanford is not even remotely close to a similar situation as Tumpkin.

You should probably think a little more before making stupid comments. But it's never stopped you before.
This all depends on how you want to make associations. The swim coach at Stanford was equally responsible for the actions of his swimmer. The point is that Stanford would not have fired MM over this.

 

[sackman]

What did the swim coach do that was wrong according to Stanford procedure?

There was, to my knowledge, no investigation of the swim team's response to this matter and no violations by the swim coach.

The matter was a judicial matter (rape) not a matter of inappropriate reporting according to established procedures.

I fail to see your logic in your thinking about the Stanford situation nor the similarities to the CU situation where there were clear failures by three personnel, including reporting violations and violations of the Regent's clause.

Stanford did an investigation?

Do you get it now?

 

[hawg1]

You should probably think a little more before making stupid comments. But it's never stopped you before.
This all depends on how you want to make associations. The swim coach at Stanford was equally responsible for the actions of his swimmer. The point is that Stanford would not have fired MM over this.

Please tell me how the Stanford swim coach was equally responsible.

 

[Buffnik]

Please tell me how the Stanford swim coach was equally responsible.

Because MM had zero responsibility in any abuse someone may have suffered at the hands of Joe Tumpkin.

 

[sackman]

Please tell me how the Stanford swim coach was equally responsible.

Neither one was responsible in the least. That's pretty equal.

 

[hawg1]

Stanford did an investigation?

Do you get it now?

No, I don't get it because, frankly, I am not sure you get it.

Let's try It again, I fail to see the similarities between the Stanford situation and the CU situation.

To my knowledge there was not an investigation. Do you know differently?

What criminally or procedurally did the Stanford swim coach do wrong? To my understanding, he did nothing wrong. Maybe I am incorrect.

Stanford did not fire their coach because Turner's actions were criminal and beyond Stanford jurisdiction on procedural matters.

It was suggested you give up. It was suggested I am too hard to argue with. Let's consider them wrong and discuss.

 

[onealcd]

I will say this @hawg1 , I was looking through some domestic violence powerpoints from various schools around the country and there weren't many that pointed out the spouses of employees and students of the universities are covered under title 9. It seems like this was more of a recent addition if they were included so maybe the last training that mac, RG and even PD had did not show this part.

 

[Buffnik]

No, I don't get it because, frankly, I am not sure you get it.

Let's try It again, I fail to see the similarities between the Stanford situation and the CU situation.

To my knowledge there was not an investigation. Do you know differently?

What criminally or procedurally did the Stanford swim coach do wrong? To my understanding, he did nothing wrong. Maybe I am incorrect.

Stanford did not fire their coach because Turner's actions were criminal and beyond Stanford jurisdiction on procedural matters.

It was suggested you give up. It was suggested I am too hard to argue with. Let's consider them wrong and discuss.

Actually, the CU investigation showed that MM, RG & PD followed to the letter the procedures as OIEC trained in 2013.

 

[sackman]

No, I don't get it because, frankly, I am not sure you get it.

Let's try It again, I fail to see the similarities between the Stanford situation and the CU situation.

To my knowledge there was not an investigation. Do you know differently?

What criminally or procedurally did the Stanford swim coach do wrong? To my understanding, he did nothing wrong. Maybe I am incorrect.

Stanford did not fire their coach because Turner's actions were criminal and beyond Stanford jurisdiction on procedural matters.

It was suggested you give up. It was suggested I am too hard to argue with. Let's consider them wrong and discuss.

It's simple - neither the Stanford coach nor MM was responsible for the actions of their subordinates. Your assertion that Stanford would have fired MM is baseless. They have shown - recently - that they are willing to allow the criminal justice system run its course. That now brings us to your earlier assertion that MM would be fired at lots of schools. Now that we have determined that he wouldn't have been fired at Stanford, please pick another school that you think he would be fired for doing nothing wrong.

 

[hawg1]

Because MM had zero responsibility in any abuse someone may have suffered at the hands of Joe Tumpkin.

Yes, that is correct from a legal matter so far. A lawsuit is pending.

I speak of failure to follow school policies when I content a Stanford coach would have been fired under the current circumstances.

There were no policy violations in the Stanford matter to my understanding. To my knowledge, there wasn't even an investigation because there was no need for one.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[hawg1]

Actually, the CU investigation showed that MM, RG & PD followed to the letter the procedures as OIEC trained in 2013.

How do you say this with regard to Finding #1 in the Cozen report?

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

You should probably think a little more before making stupid comments. But it's never stopped you before.
This all depends on how you want to make associations. The swim coach at Stanford was equally responsible for the actions of his swimmer. The point is that Stanford would not have fired MM over this.

This isn't about whether or not MM or Stanford swim coach is responsible for the abuse. Mac got in trouble because he failed to report properly after being told by the victim. Period. Was the Stanford swim coach notified of the rape prior to other people finding out? Was there ever any implication that the swim coach didn't follow proper reporting procedures? No. The situations are not similar in the slightest. I know you're a bit of a simpleton when it comes to thinking about things in a way that doesn't align with your initial opinion, but you are comparing apples to oranges. IOW, you are wrong.

 

[sackman]

This isn't about whether or not MM or Stanford swim coach is responsible for the abuse. Mac got in trouble because he failed to report properly after being told by the victim. Period. Was the Stanford swim coach notified of the rape prior to other people finding out? Was there ever any implication that the swim coach didn't follow proper reporting procedures? No. The situations are not similar in the slightest. I know you're a bit of a simpleton when it comes to thinking about things in a way that doesn't align with your initial opinion, but you are comparing apples to oranges. IOW, you are wrong.

But he did report properly.

Why is this so hard?

 

[hawg1]

It's simple - neither the Stanford coach nor MM was responsible for the actions of their subordinates. Your assertion that Stanford would have fired MM is baseless. They have shown - recently - that they are willing to allow the criminal justice system run its course. That now brings us to your earlier assertion that MM would be fired at lots of schools. Now that we have determined that he wouldn't have been fired at Stanford, please pick another school that you think he would be fired for doing nothing wrong.

It's not that simple. Let's try this (and thanks for the discussuon)

If Stanford would have done the exact same investigation as CU and had found the exact same results as Cozen, what do you think the outcome would have been? I contend he would have been fired.

I think where we are getting crossed up is confusing the judicial matter with the CU investigation. They are two different issues.

 

[Buffnik]

How do you say this with regard to Finding #1 in the Cozen report?

How about we look at the WilmerHale report (Salazar's group brought in at the end to bring back sanity to the process) instead of the Title IX law firm that was brought in by OIEC to cover OIEC's asses?

 

[hawg1]

But he did report properly.

Why is this so hard?

How did MM report properly?

That is not what the Cozen report says on two of the findings. He did not report properly to OIEC (Finding 1) or to law enforcement (Finding 7).

This may anger you, but did you read the full report? Somewhere there is a major disconnect in our discussion and it seems to be the facts in the report.

 

[Buffnik]

How did MM report properly?

That is not what the Cozen report says on two of the findings. He did not report properly to OIEC (Finding 1) or to law enforcement (Finding 7).

This may anger you, but did you read the full report? Somewhere there is a major disconnect in our discussion and it seems to be the facts in the report.

I doubt that MM even knew who the people are at OIEC. He hadn't seen them in nearly 4 years.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

But he did report properly.

Why is this so hard?

It doesnt really matter in the context of this ridiculous debate. MM's conduct was investigated because he was made aware of the situation that had already happened. Stanford Swim coach was not. Completely different situation. Thanks for the morning banter old man.

 

[Highlander]

Baylor and Penn State didn't investigate...until the **** hit the fan in the national media. They absolutely investigated after the storm hit and in both cases those schools had massive alumni backlash for giving into the investigations.

CU had to investigate this after the SI article and every single other P5 program would have had an investigation if that SI piece was about their coach and school. Before the SI article, CU was not investigating the Tumpkin allegations. The investigation process might have played out differently at other schools, but the same basic sequence of actions and reactions that happened at CU would have happened at every other school as well.

That's fair and accurate.

 

[BuffLuke80]

It's apples and oranges, the situations aren't the same. Let the **** go already, good Lord.

 

[onealcd]

Just google domestic violence title 9 and you can see a lot of presentations, most of them do not talk about what happens off campus or to those who aren't involved with the university.

 

[sackman]

How did MM report properly?

That is not what the Cozen report says on two of the findings. He did not report properly to OIEC (Finding 1) or to law enforcement (Finding 7).

This may anger you, but did you read the full report? Somewhere there is a major disconnect in our discussion and it seems to be the facts in the report.

He reported up the chain immediately after he was made aware of the issue. After that, he followed the direction from his superiors. It's incredible to me how any fault can be found in this.

How about you tell me another school that would have fired MM over this.

 

[BuffLuke80]

I'd say the mods should lock this ****ing thread, it's over.

 

[Buffalo Brad]

This whole arguement is stupid. It is over, rearview mirror and hope it does not leave such a bad taste in the mouths of RG and MM that they leave in a couple of years. Either way, it showed there was no intent to hurt anyone or cover anything up. It showed weaknesses in the policies and procedures of CU which will be corrected. MM and RG donate funds which they would more than likely have done anyway (maybe to a different charity but for taxes and goodwill they more than likely would have made a donation)

 

[sackman]

This whole arguement is stupid. It is over, rearview mirror and hope it does not leave such a bad taste in the mouths of RG and MM that they leave in a couple of years. Either way, it showed there was no intent to hurt anyone or cover anything up. It showed weaknesses in the policies and procedures of CU which will be corrected. MM and RG donate funds which they would more than likely have done anyway (maybe to a different charity but for taxes and goodwill they more than likely would have made a donation)

I couldn't agree with you more. I get agitated whenever somebody tries to pin any culpability for any of this on MM. it's a definite trigger for me.

 

[hawg1]

I will say this @hawg1 , I was looking through some domestic violence powerpoints from various schools around the country and there weren't many that pointed out the spouses of employees and students of the universities are covered under title 9. It seems like this was more of a recent addition if they were included so maybe the last training that mac, RG and even PD had did not show this part.

I think that is likely true. Given the CU matter, I think contracts, policies and procedures are being rewritten all over the country.

That's a good thing. It may save someone's life some day.

 

[hawg1]

I doubt that MM even knew who the people are at OIEC. He hadn't seen them in nearly 4 years.

That is likely, unfortunately, true.

He knows now. That's a good thing.

 

[hawg1]

He reported up the chain immediately after he was made aware of the issue. After that, he followed the direction from his superiors. It's incredible to me how any fault can be found in this.

How about you tell me another school that would have fired MM over this.

That is true. I applaud that he called RG. While important, that is insufficient action as found by Cozen.

If another coach at another school (Stanford) had two reporting violation - and failing to adhere to that school's equivalent of the Regent's Clause - I maintain they would have received much more stringent punishment, likely firing at some schools (Stanford).

Let's agree to disagree. And move on.

Would be great to talk football.

 

[You Assholes]

Did you guys see the news about his contract extension? I'm psyched!

 

[buff4bcs1985]

That is true. I applaud that he called RG. While important, that is insufficient action as found by Cozen.

If another coach at another school (Stanford) had two reporting violation - and failing to adhere to that school's equivalent of the Regent's Clause - I maintain they would have received much more stringent punishment, likely firing at some schools (Stanford).

Let's agree to disagree. And move on.

Would be great to talk football.

I don't believe its insufficient. If anything was insufficient it was the OIEC who failed to update its procedures and educated and retrain