Recruiting Forum Football Talk [RIP 9.3.2019]

[MemphisVol3]

Who the hell is Brenda Tracy?

She has 20K followers

 

[Smokey123]

Exactly! So, I am saying, it is fair for someone to ruin "your" name/life based on assumptions?

"Innocent until proven guilty" has everything to do with it. Lol. The man is innocent because he was not proven guilty.

You are saying he should not be allowed to coach at the University of Tennessee because of assumptions. There are no facts to back your poor opinion of him. He is guilty of no crime, therefore, nothing should hinder him from being hired by UT unless his resume' doesn't fit the bill.

My assumptions of you are only opinions and can not be held against you. That is only an opinion. So, please, continue with your rhetoric.

Kendal’s life is ruined if he doesn’t get the UT job? Since when is he entitled to the UT job?

That’s.... That’s not the way that works

What is my opinion of him then? Since you apparently know me oh so well lol. When did I ever say he should be thrown in jail, convicted of a crime, covered up rape, He’s a bad person, ect? Guess what, I haven’t. The only thing I’ve said that is not a fact is “the chances of him not knowing are probably close to zero IMO”, but I never said that’s the reason he shouldn’t get the job. So far you’ve made more assumptions about me than I have about Kendal...

My opinion that Briles past at Baylor should be looked at heavily and not just brushed off as “innocent until proven guilty” can be held against him? Really?!

 

[reVOLution33]

Kendal’s life is ruined if he doesn’t get the UT job? Since when is he entitled to the UT job?

That’s.... That’s not the way that works

What is my opinion of him then? Since you apparently know me oh so well lol. When did I ever say he should be thrown in jail, convicted of a crime, covered up rape, He’s a bad person, ect? Guess what, I haven’t. The only thing I’ve said that is not a fact is “the chances of him not knowing are probably close to zero IMO”, but I never said that’s the reason he shouldn’t get the job. So far you’ve made more assumptions about me than I have about Kendal...

My opinion that Briles past at Baylor should be looked at heavily and not just brushed off as “innocent until proven guilty” can be held against him? Really?!

If I had read nothing more of what you posted other than the bolded part, I would know you are an idiot. (In my opinion) You are saying he shouldn't be allowed to coach here, right? Or I must be reading everything you have said wrong.

 

[Power T-Rev]

Smokey, this is not a thread for a pissing contest. No need to clog up the thread with your post crusade

 

[Smokey123]

If I had read nothing more of what you posted other than the bolded part, I would know you are an idiot. (In my opinion) You are saying he shouldn't be allowed to coach here, right? Or I must be reading everything you have said wrong.

So Kendal’s life is ruined if he doesn’t get the UT job?

And I’ll ask again, Since when is he or anyone else entitled to a coaching job? If Fulmer/Pruitt/Administration decides his potential wrong doings at Baylor is too much to allow him to coach at UT... Who’s to say they aren’t allowed to do that? He. Is. Not. Entitled. To. Any. Job. “Innocent until proven guilty” does not apply here

And no, you’re incorrect... Again

 

[Smokey123]

Smokey, this is not a thread for a pissing contest. No need to clog up the thread with your post crusade

 

[Weezer]

If I had read nothing more of what you posted other than the bolded part, I would know you are an idiot. (In my opinion) You are saying he shouldn't be allowed to coach here, right? Or I must be reading everything you have said wrong.

Reading the part you bolded, I think your interpretation skills are horrible. Not sure what was said in other posts, but that post doesn't say that he shouldn't be allowed to coach here, just that we are not obligated to give him the job.

 

[reVOLution33]

So Kendal’s life is ruined if he doesn’t get the UT job?

And I’ll ask again, Since when is he or anyone else entitled to a coaching job? If Fulmer/Pruitt/Administration decides his potential wrong doings at Baylor is too much to allow him to coach at UT... Who’s to say they aren’t allowed to do that? He. Is. Not. Entitled. To. Any. Job. “Innocent until proven guilty” does not apply here

And no, you’re incorrect... Again

No one has said he is entitled. You keep saying that. No one has said his life is ruin if he doesn't get the Tennessee job. I was saying it in a hypothetical way.

I'll spell it out for you.

If he were not employed and was trying to get a job, you think it is fair for him to not be hired/"black-balled" based on assumptions of him and not based on facts?

 

[reVOLution33]

Reading the part you bolded, I think your interpretation skills are horrible. Not sure what was said in other posts, but that post doesn't say that he shouldn't be allowed to coach here, just that we are not obligated to give him the job.

No one said we were obligated. @Smokey123 continues to say that we are not obligated to hire him. I have never said we were obligated to hire him. My point is that it is not fair to judge someone on assumption when he is guilty of no crime. He deserves an interview if Pruitt it interested in him. He/UT should not be persecuted if we hired him based on assumptions.

 

[Smokey123]

No one has said he is entitled. You keep saying that. No one has said his life is ruin if he doesn't get the Tennessee job. I was saying it in a hypothetical way.

I'll spell it out for you.

If he were not employed and was trying to get a job, you think it is fair for him to not be hired/"black-balled" based on assumptions of him and not based on facts?

I already answered that question when you asked your very first question.

In which you replied with the “innocent until proven guilty” garbage and asking me about my political party

 

[Smokey123]

No one said we were obligated. @Smokey123 continues to say that we are not obligated to hire him. I have never said we were obligated to hire him. My point is that it is not fair to judge someone on assumption when he is guilty of no crime. He deserves an interview if Pruitt it interested in him. He/UT should not be persecuted if we hired him based on assumptions.

It’s not an assumption that he was at Baylor during that time. It’s not assumption that he defended his dad on numerous occasions. It’s not an assumption that he refused to apologize, condemn or take any sort of accountability for what happened at Baylor.

I haven’t made assumptions as to why we shouldn’t hire him. Heck, I didn’t even use the quote that was actually in the Lawsuit.

What you’re failing to realize, is Innocent until proven guilty doesn’t work here. If Pruitt/Fulmer thinks his baggage is too much than, yes it’s 100% Fair. He’s not entitled to a job, Pruitt/Fulmer doesn’t haven’t to overlook things at baylor because he wasn’t criminally prosecuted.

 

[Weezer]

No one said we were obligated. @Smokey123 continues to say that we are not obligated to hire him. I have never said we were obligated to hire him. My point is that it is not fair to judge someone on assumption when he is guilty of no crime. He deserves an interview if Pruitt it interested in him. He/UT should not be persecuted if we hired him based on assumptions.

Your mistake is believing life is fair. It's not. And if he were to get hired, you can expect comments will be made. Many UT fans roasted Schiano over assumptions. Doesn't matter he was being looked at as HC while Briles is being looked at for OC, the media will see it as hypocrisy, and they won't be completely wrong.

 

[Weezer]

It’s not an assumption that he was at Baylor during that time. It’s not assumption that he defended his dad on numerous occasions. It’s not an assumption that he refused to apologize, condemn or take any sort of accountability for what happened at Baylor.

I haven’t made assumptions as to why we shouldn’t hire him. Heck, I didn’t even use the quote that was actually in the Lawsuit.

But it would be an assumption to think any of that makes him guilty. I don't disagree that it seems far-fetched he knew nothing of the going-ons, but it is possible it was hidden from him. IF this is the guy Pruitt wants, he'll weigh everything before making a decision. No one has to agree with any hire Pruitt makes, but ultimately, you have to accept it's his prerogative to hire whomever he damn well pleases.

 

[Smokey123]

But it would be an assumption to think any of that makes him guilty. I don't disagree that it seems far-fetched he knew nothing of the going-ons, but it is possible it was hidden from him. IF this is the guy Pruitt wants, he'll weigh everything before making a decision. No one has to agree with any hire Pruitt makes, but ultimately, you have to accept it's his prerogative to hire whomever he damn well pleases.

I agree, but its also is a bad look imo and definitely enough to take a hard look at it before hiring him. Which was my main point, just because he wasnt convicted doesn’t mean we should ignore it/defend it.

Agree, and if Briles is the hire I’m fine with it. I’m just not gonna defend the baggage that comes with it

 

[reVOLution33]

It’s not an assumption that he was at Baylor during that time. It’s not assumption that he defended his dad on numerous occasions. It’s not an assumption that he refused to apologize, condemn or take any sort of accountability for what happened at Baylor.

I haven’t made assumptions as to why we shouldn’t hire him. Heck, I didn’t even use the quote that was actually in the Lawsuit.

What you’re failing to realize, is Innocent until proven guilty doesn’t work here. If Pruitt/Fulmer thinks his baggage is too much than, yes it’s 100% Fair. He’s not entitled to a job, Pruitt/Fulmer doesn’t haven’t to overlook things at baylor because he wasn’t criminally prosecuted.

I feel like neither one of us fully understand what the other is trying to say and maybe we are saying the same thing in our own way and just don't understand the way the other person is putting it. I agree 100% with the bolded part.

Main focus originally was based on Brenda Tracy's tweet:..."#Tennessee has its own history. If they’re trying to show us they’re doing better - this isn’t it. #SetTheExpectation"

She is saying that we shouldn't hire him because of accusations about him and that if we do we are not striving to "do better." Nothing was proven, therefore, he should be given a fair interview "IF" Pruitt/Fulmer feel he may fit their system.

If you did not agree with that part of her quote then I'm sorry I took what you said the wrong way.

 

[UTSuave’]

What a shitshow this has turned into.

Suspended until after the coaching search is over.

 

[chargervol]

First we turn on our own, now we're becoming the political forum.

 

[UTProf]

If I had read nothing more of what you posted other than the bolded part, I would know you are an idiot. (In my opinion) You are saying he shouldn't be allowed to coach here, right? Or I must be reading everything you have said wrong.

That's not at all what he's saying. He is saying Kendal isn't entitled to it. There's a difference.

 

[Smokey123]

I feel like neither one of us fully understand what the other is trying to say and maybe we are saying the same thing in our own way and just don't understand the way the other person is putting it. I agree 100% with the bolded part.

Main focus originally was based on Brenda Tracy's tweet:..."#Tennessee has its own history. If they’re trying to show us they’re doing better - this isn’t it. #SetTheExpectation"

She is saying that we shouldn't hire him because of accusations about him and that if we do we are not striving to "do better." Nothing was proven, therefore, he should be given a fair interview "IF" Pruitt/Fulmer feel he may fit their system.

If you did not agree with that part of her quote then I'm sorry I took what you said the wrong way.

Yea I don’t necessarily agree with her on that. I posted it because of who she is, she spoke with Kendal directly earlier this year and I felt she posted some valid points in the tweet.

 

[nicksjuzunk]

 

[reVOLution33]

Yea I don’t necessarily agree with her on that. I posted it because of who she is, she spoke with Kendal directly earlier this year and I felt she posted some valid points in the tweet.

Ok... bygones be bygones?

 

[UTProf]

I feel like neither one of us fully understand what the other is trying to say and maybe we are saying the same thing in our own way and just don't understand the way the other person is putting it. I agree 100% with the bolded part.

Main focus originally was based on Brenda Tracy's tweet:..."#Tennessee has its own history. If they’re trying to show us they’re doing better - this isn’t it. #SetTheExpectation"

She is saying that we shouldn't hire him because of accusations about him and that if we do we are not striving to "do better." Nothing was proven, therefore, he should be given a fair interview "IF" Pruitt/Fulmer feel he may fit their system.

If you did not agree with that part of her quote then I'm sorry I took what you said the wrong way.

Briles is a fantastic coach but if we hire him we're really not trying to do better and it's not really debateable. You'd have to do a lot of mental gymnastics to convince yourself that he wasn't involved in the cover-up. Some people are ok with that if it's the price of winning because Kendal was at least smart enough not to leave a paper or witness trail but we need to be honest about it. In no way, does hiring Kendal Briles send a positive message about how our university treats women. I love our university, our fanbase, and our football team but even we don't get to have it both ways. We have to choose what we can live with.

 

[Glocker_Alum_2005]

Here's a piece on Lebby. Only been UCF QB Coach for one season. I know he's reported to have interviewed for OC, but maybe that was just a favor to Briles...get Lebbys name out there. Hard to believe Pruitt would pin such a large portion of his success or failure at TN to a guy with Lebbys "thin" resume. Kind if just hoping for Yurcich at to his point. I think the Will Friend issue will be a deal breaker for Briles.

New UCF quarterbacks coach Jeff Lebby confident Knights will have a great offense in 2018

 

[chargervol]

Here's a piece on Lebby. Only been UCF QB Coach for one season. I know he's reported to have interviewed for OC, but maybe that was just a favor to Briles...get Lebbys name out there. Hard to believe Pruitt would pin such a large portion of his success or failure at TN to a guy with Lebbys "thin" resume. Kind if just hoping for Yurcich at to his point. I think the Will Friend issue will be a deal breaker for Briles.

New UCF quarterbacks coach Jeff Lebby confident Knights will have a great offense in 2018

The bolded
If we had no reports on Freeze or Briles etc; and were hearing Friend but then hired Yurcich, I would be pleasantly surprised.
Instead, we interview coaches that get me all hyped up, followed by "I would just be happy with _____, AT THIS POINT."

That's a 'me problem', and just perception but the perception sucks. To the point of convincing myself we're holding out for an NFL guy or something. I care way too much about this stuff

 

[Buddy’s Bandit]

No clue to his validity but a FSU 247 poster that their posters seem to believe is legit and hits often is claiming this will be Taggart/Briles 3rd meeting and he expects a deal to be done and Briles to be recruiting for them on Monday.

Take with a grain of salt but not suprising. I haven't expected us to land him since they said he was meeting with FSU Sunday as it clearly means we didn't close

Or could it mean 1) there was never any intension to hire him but only to discuss philosophies or 2) in the interview, we decided to back off ??