Update: Urban Meyer suspended 3 games

[ramssuperbowl99]

7 minutes ago, Raves said:

Obviously Meyer's issues are separate as that seems to be a reasonable expectation that he should know even if he didn't.  I also agree that the whistleblower policy etc, I'm just saying that if a person didn't know, or didn't have a reasonable expectation of knowing, then it's not on them.  If a manager or coach created an environment where they were purposely insulated from the dirty details, then they are at fault.  My level of reasonable expectation is also probably a lot easier to justify than some other, though there are situations where it's possible.  For example if during the JT/Tatgate situation, if the email had never been sent to JT, then I would think there wouldn't be a reasonable expectation for Tressell to know that some players were trading signatures/memorabilia for tattoos.  Obviously Tressel's issue was that he not only had received an email but also lied to the NCAA about it, but I was simply focusing on his realistic expectation of knowing about the circumstance of those tattoos being obtained without it.

You're not all the way wrong or all the way right. From a corporate or manager side, it's about defending yourself proactively. If something like this happens, you can then step up and immediately say "we have policies x, y, x and these processes and this training and etc. etc." so that you can show you've done everything reasonable to prevent this type of situation from happening or not being reported.

With the tattoos, had Tressel not lied about anything, then he could have said, "this is our NCAA compliance training, we go through situations like tattoos explicitly, we report every violation we know of, here's our compliance department these are their processes, etc. etc." Same thing. You can and should make a proactive case in corporate America these days.

[Texasmade]

1 minute ago, Raves said:

I think the problem with your thinking is, why do those other employees get a pass but Meyer doesn't?  Everything you point out why you shouldn't hold them responsible also applies to Meyer, he wasn't an eye witness, outside of a reported accusation that he tried to suppress the 2009 incident (i haven't read those reports/texts so I don't know) we don't know that he tried to do it in 2015, it was a marital dispute and they do have kids together.  They are also all held to the same expectations under Title IX that Meyer is so they should all be held to the same standard.

They aren't Zac Smith's superiors, and they have no organizational authority to make neccessary changes, nor are they paid $7 mill a year to do so. Urban Meyer has both of those things, he's at the top of the organizational food chain, thus the onus falls on him. 

 

[Raves]

2 minutes ago, Texasmade said:

They aren't Zac Smith's superiors, and they have no organizational authority to make neccessary changes, nor are they paid $7 mill a year to do so. Urban Meyer has both of those things, he's at the top of the organizational food chain, thus the onus falls on him. 

 

The position and the amount of money they make have 0 to do with the situation as you are trying to portray it.  Per the rules of Title IX, all employees are required to report accusations/incidents of domestic violence among other issues, plain and simple.  Now the only onus on Meyer is his decision to hire/not fire Smith based on the accusations at the time that they happened if he knew, though that becomes a slippery slope that I would prefer to stay away from.

[brownie man]

Yeah I cant see him surviving this 

wow man what a way to go

A simple "no comment" and we have none of this

thats a lesson I'll keep with me 

[winitall]

2 minutes ago, Raves said:

The position and the amount of money they make have 0 to do with the situation as you are trying to portray it.  Per the rules of Title IX, all employees are required to report accusations/incidents of domestic violence among other issues, plain and simple.  Now the only onus on Meyer is his decision to hire/not fire Smith based on the accusations at the time that they happened if he knew, though that becomes a slippery slope that I would prefer to stay away from.

I believe that the other coaches only have to report the incident to their superior. They don’t have to report it to the Title IX office. Due to Meyers position he has to notify his superior and report it. That’s a big difference. As it seems the other coaches can prove pretty easily that Meyer had been made aware of the incidents. 

[Raves]

14 minutes ago, winitall said:

I believe that the other coaches only have to report the incident to their superior. They don’t have to report it to the Title IX office. Due to Meyers position he has to notify his superior and report it. That’s a big difference. As it seems the other coaches can prove pretty easily that Meyer had been made aware of the incidents. 

That seems like a poor way of doing things and I'm sure there are specific individuals that you are required to report incidents to, not someone in your direct chain of command.  I know when I was in the military, there was a SHARP Officer/NCO who's job was to have incidents reported to them and they were required to continue the process, it wasn't our immediate supervisor or the next level up, but a specific person who's job was take the appropriate actions once an accusation has been made and I'm sure colleges have a similar position.

[MWil23]

As a high school teacher and football coach, I have zero empathy or tolerance for anyone who pleads ignorance in regards to physical/domestic or sexual violence. As a 22 year old, I knew the law in regards to reporting to CPS or law enforcement, and sometimes both. Ignorance is never an excuse. Priests and pastors are even legally obligated to report these things, and often these people are acknowledged by law to be given legal leeway about crimes EXCEPT FOR THESE TWO because they endanger others.

As for the other part, people need to realize that plausible deniability is practically impossible in today’s day and age of social media, texts, cameras on every corner, emails, or various other apps. It’s absurd to think otherwise.

Also, not that it should be applauded, but there’s a reason you’re advised by agents, lawyers, and employers not to comment on ongoing legal matters or terminations, period. Say as much and move on to the next question. Every athletic department and agent should play Urbana interview and flippant off the cuff  response as an example of what not to say.

[Texasmade]

17 minutes ago, Raves said:

The position and the amount of money they make have 0 to do with the situation as you are trying to portray it.  Per the rules of Title IX, all employees are required to report accusations/incidents of domestic violence among other issues, plain and simple.  Now the only onus on Meyer is his decision to hire/not fire Smith based on the accusations at the time that they happened if he knew, though that becomes a slippery slope that I would prefer to stay away from.

Of course it does. It's possible I'm confusing Ohio State's policy with title ix's but it's my understanding they're required to report to their superiors, who then are required to run it further up the food chain. Again, maybe I'm misinterpreting things, but considering there's about a dozen different interpretations as what should've happened, then it's clearly not that "plain and simple". Assuming there's any sort of code of conduct mandated by Ohio State, if your employees are out beating up women, or at least being accused of it, that's pretty cut and dry, so I'm not sure how you could remotely conclude it's a slippery slope. Maybe you don't  fire the guy off the cuff based on allegations, but at least a suspension pending a further investigation into what really happened and go from there. Given his position he's obligated to do at least that much. 

[IDOG_det]

39 minutes ago, Raves said:

I think the problem with your thinking is, why do those other employees get a pass but Meyer doesn't?  Everything you point out why you shouldn't hold them responsible also applies to Meyer, he wasn't an eye witness, outside of a reported accusation that he tried to suppress the 2009 incident (i haven't read those reports/texts so I don't know) we don't know that he tried to do it in 2015, it was a marital dispute and they do have kids together.  They are also all held to the same expectations under Title IX that Meyer is so they should all be held to the same standard.

You're looking at this from a perspective of whether or not you agree with the rules. That doesn't really matter though, the rules are the rules and they are in place for good reason. You should look at this from a "legal" and ethical perspective. When you look at it that way...things don't look so good.

The reality is that, to be a part of the NCAA, you agree to their rules. You also agree to abide by Title IX. Urban Meyer under these rules is responsible to report these things immediately after he becomes aware of them (and not look into it himself to try to determine the validity of the allegation). He is also responsible to know about these things. Ignorance is not an excuse, it is his job to not be ignorant of these things. If he doesn't know he may still be in violation of the rules if there weren't an almost ridiculous amount of safeguards put in place (and they clearly weren't if he actually didn't know considering that someone like Brett McMurphy outside of the program found out, considering his wife knew, considering his mentor knew, considering Smith's grandfather knew, considering the wives of other coaches knew, etc).

[Raves]

14 minutes ago, Texasmade said:

Of course it does. It's possible I'm confusing Ohio State's policy with title ix's but it's my understanding they're required to report to their superiors, who then are required to run it further up the food chain. Again, maybe I'm misinterpreting things, but considering there's about a dozen different interpretations as what should've happened, then it's clearly not that "plain and simple". Assuming there's any sort of code of conduct mandated by Ohio State, if your employees are out beating up women, or at least being accused of it, that's pretty cut and dry, so I'm not sure how you could remotely conclude it's a slippery slope. Maybe you don't  fire the guy off the cuff based on allegations, but at least a suspension pending a further investigation into what really happened and go from there. Given his position he's obligated to do at least that much. 

I think that's where we are differing.  From my understanding in different areas, reporting to your immediate supervisor these type of things isn't the correct way to go but rather to a specific representative that handles accusations of abuse and harassment, who knows the procedures that must accompany such accusations, not your immediate supervisor who may or may not know the specific steps taken. -edit- Also as we've seen not all allegations turn out to be true, which is where I agree a suspension while they investigate was warranted.  I haven't continued to follow the LeSean McCoy incident but last I knew it went from her friend accusing McCoy of it and her saying she though McCoy was behind it, to not being so sure anymore.  The process is fluid and needs to be investigated properly first before actions taken, not to mention moral grandstanding on other areas, which I'm trying very hard to not start diving into.

13 minutes ago, IDOG_det said:

You're looking at this from a perspective of whether or not you agree with the rules. That doesn't really matter though, the rules are the rules and they are in place for good reason. You should look at this from a "legal" and ethical perspective. When you look at it that way...things don't look so good.

The reality is that, to be a part of the NCAA, you agree to their rules. You also agree to abide by Title IX. Urban Meyer under these rules is responsible to report these things immediately after he becomes aware of them (and not look into it himself to try to determine the validity of the allegation). He is also responsible to know about these things. Ignorance is not an excuse, it is his job to not be ignorant of these things. If he doesn't know he may still be in violation of the rules if there weren't an almost ridiculous amount of safeguards put in place (and they clearly weren't if he actually didn't know considering that someone like Brett McMurphy outside of the program found out, considering his wife knew, considering his mentor knew, considering Smith's grandfather knew, considering the wives of other coaches knew, etc).

I'm not disagreeing with the rules.  The rules are the rules.  I'm simply stating that @Texasmade belief that the other staff members shouldn't be held to the same accountability as Meyer if everyone knew what was going on and didn't report is incorrect as the same reasoning for wanting to take it easy on those members of the staff can also be applied to Meyer.  Once again, which I've stated numerous times, if Meyer did know, lied about not knowing, and/or didn't report it, whatever happens is his own fault.  The same though goes for all the other staff members, including his wife, that knew and didn't report it to the appropriate person, which I doubt is Urban Meyer as that creates massive conflict of interest with his desire to keep his staff intact to win games and doing the right thing, then they are also equally to blame as Meyer and should/will share in his fate.

[NateDawg]

Hard to feel for Meyer or anyone else that makes millions of dollars to coach a stupid game but doesn’t have the spine to go out of his way to look out for a woman’s physical or emotional well being. Though there are many false accusers, Shelly’s texts clearly display genuine concern. Urbz was educated in Title IX and can’t plea ignorance. Additionally, there’s the human aspect. When you are falling on the sword for a subpar WR coach, what won’t you do? 

Good luck with your retirement.

[winitall]

20 minutes ago, Raves said:

I think that's where we are differing.  From my understanding in different areas, reporting to your immediate supervisor these type of things isn't the correct way to go but rather to a specific representative that handles accusations of abuse and harassment, who knows the procedures that must accompany such accusations, not your immediate supervisor who may or may not know the specific steps taken. -edit- Also as we've seen not all allegations turn out to be true, which is where I agree a suspension while they investigate was warranted.  I haven't continued to follow the LeSean McCoy incident but last I knew it went from her friend accusing McCoy of it and her saying she though McCoy was behind it, to not being so sure anymore.  The process is fluid and needs to be investigated properly first before actions taken, not to mention moral grandstanding on other areas, which I'm trying very hard to not start diving into.

I'm not disagreeing with the rules.  The rules are the rules.  I'm simply stating that @Texasmade belief that the other staff members shouldn't be held to the same accountability as Meyer if everyone knew what was going on and didn't report is incorrect as the same reasoning for wanting to take it easy on those members of the staff can also be applied to Meyer.  Once again, which I've stated numerous times, if Meyer did know, lied about not knowing, and/or didn't report it, whatever happens is his own fault.  The same though goes for all the other staff members, including his wife, that knew and didn't report it to the appropriate person, which I doubt is Urban Meyer as that creates massive conflict of interest with his desire to keep his staff intact to win games and doing the right thing, then they are also equally to blame as Meyer and should/will share in his fate.

https://hr.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/policy115-faq-general.pdf

 

I recommend taking a look through the policy. It appears this would fall under the ‘sexual misconduct’ section. In regards to that, the only mandatory reporters are people who supervise staff or students. In which case, I’m guessing that the assistant coaches arguments around not reporting it to title ix will revolve around that. They told the person that was the mandatory reporter in the group. 

[Raves]

22 minutes ago, winitall said:

https://hr.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/policy115-faq-general.pdf

 

I recommend taking a look through the policy. It appears this would fall under the ‘sexual misconduct’ section. In regards to that, the only mandatory reporters are people who supervise staff or students. In which case, I’m guessing that the assistant coaches arguments around not reporting it to title ix will revolve around that. They told the person that was the mandatory reporter in the group. 

Actually everyone is a mandatory reporter if you look at it.

Question 9) "Because all employees have a duty to report sexual assault, they must know what it is and where to report."

-This hits all coaching positions

Question 10) "HRPs; anyone who supervises faculty, staff, students, and volunteers; chairs/directors; and all faculty members have an additional obligation to report known or suspected incidents of sexual misconduct. Because of their positions of authority, these individuals have always had a heightened responsibility to report all other incidents of sexual misconduct"

-Basically sounds like this isn't just actual accusations/observations but any perceived threats.  This also seems a little convoluted where I bolded, how I read it is that the commas doesn't extend the the supervisory role to those positions as it should've been an "or" instead of an "and" before volunteers.  Though coaches at all positions do supervise students so therefore would still fall under that category.

Question 13) " All employees have an obligation to immediately report that a sexual assault has occurred and all known information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that sexual assault may have occurred involving anyone covered under the policy.

 HRPs; anyone who supervises faculty, staff, students, and volunteers; chairs/directors; or faculty members have an additional obligation to report all other incidents of sexual misconduct within five work days."

-Pretty straight forward, everyone is required to report and includes how fast they must report.  Assistant Coaches fall under the supervisor of students if you want to try to specify that.

Question 18) Specifies who you report to.

-None of those listed are a supervisor or a head coach.  They are all specific departments.

 

So there is no single mandatory reporter in the group, they are all mandatory reporters, and none of them would have reported it to the correct department, ones that are specifically setup to handle these sort of incidents.

[BobbyPhil1781]

Yeah so as I'm understanding this, if everyone knew, everyone is gone. Not sure how this can be limited to just Urban

[Raves]

Just now, JTagg7754 said:

Yeah so as I'm understanding this, if everyone knew, everyone is gone. Not sure how this can be limited to just Urban

That was my only argument with how Texasmade was trying to phrase it.  If the requirement is to report, and no one reported it to the correct department, then they are all guilty unless they have physical proof that they all agreed that Meyer would report the incident and he didn't, but that would require text messages, recorded phone messages/physical meetings, something that would substantiate the claim, for them to keep their jobs.