Baylor coach on Tulsa sidelines this Saturday; against NCAA rules

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

If we're going to play that card, then let's talk about the Sumlin/OU incident. When Sumlin took over at Houston, Briles left all of his play calls/signals with the new staff to make the transition easier. Sumlin then faxed all of that information to OU. Briles was very unhappy.

And John Blake burned all of OU's recruiting files before Stoops got on campus. None of those things are against NCAA rules, but sending a coach to scout another team dressed as an opposing coach is. Like I said, it is just the stupidity of the whole situation.

[SicEmBaylor]

And John Blake burned all of OU's recruiting files before Stoops got on campus. None of those things are against NCAA rules, but sending a coach to scout another team dressed as an opposing coach is. Like I said, it is just the stupidity of the whole situation.

I've said all along that it is absolutely an NCAA violation, and I even agree there should be some sort of sanction or internal punishment. What I'm arguing is that Libby was not there to cheat. Neither Briles nor Monty had him on the sideline to do anything untoward.

My example with Sumlin/Briles/OU is entirely based on the *ethics* of the situation. Yes, Libby was there; no, he wasn't there to cheat or get any sort of advantage. It was against NCAA rules, but it was *not* unethical. On the other hand, Sumlin may not have broke NCAA rules but I consider his actions to be entirely unethical.

So which is worse? Breaking an archaic NCAA rule that hasn't kept apace of current technology or breaking some clear ethical standards to get an actual advantage?

[SoonerorLater]

I've said all along that it is absolutely an NCAA violation, and I even agree there should be some sort of sanction or internal punishment. What I'm arguing is that Libby was not there to cheat. Neither Briles nor Monty had him on the sideline to do anything untoward.

My example with Sumlin/Briles/OU is entirely based on the *ethics* of the situation. Yes, Libby was there; no, he wasn't there to cheat or get any sort of advantage. It was against NCAA rules, but it was *not* unethical. On the other hand, Sumlin may not have broke NCAA rules but I consider his actions to be entirely unethical.

So which is worse? Breaking an archaic NCAA rule that hasn't kept apace of current technology or breaking some clear ethical standards to get an actual advantage?

Breaking an archaic NCAA rule because it is just that, a rule. If the NCAA feels the behavior you described as 'unethical' is detrimental to college football then they need to make a rule to that effect.

[SicEmBaylor]

Breaking an archaic NCAA rule because it is just that, a rule. If the NCAA feels the behavior you described as 'unethical' is detrimental to college football then they need to make a rule to that effect.

Well, fair enough -- to each their own. I think, objectively speaking, that unethical behavior is worse than an archaic NCAA infraction. That's just me, but that's not to say that I don't think the NCAA should do something and/or an internal punishment. Because the end result here is that OU benefited from learning the signals of a team they play each year; whereas, in the case of Libby, that isn't the case.

[CincySooner]

Ugh... so tired of hearing about this. If he wasn't there to get information, then just levy a fine at both schools and be done with it. No one is getting suspended over this, so lets all stop crossing-our fingers for that to happen.

[Soonerjeepman]

Well, fair enough -- to each their own. I think, objectively speaking, that unethical behavior is worse than an archaic NCAA infraction. That's just me, but that's not to say that I don't think the NCAA should do something and/or an internal punishment. Because the end result here is that OU benefited from learning the signals of a team they play each year; whereas, in the case of Libby, that isn't the case.

you still think briles uses the same hand signals? wow...the benefit is gone....and if briles was smart there never was an advantage.

[SicEmBaylor]

you still think briles uses the same hand signals? wow...the benefit is gone....and if briles was smart there never was an advantage.

Well, since it was Briles' first season at Baylor and he was pretty busy rebuilding one of the worst programs in FBS football, I think it's pretty reasonable to assume he had more on his plate than changing all of his signals. Especially since he was switching to a different conference where he wouldn't be playing Houston. So, yeah, I think he probably did use the same signals that season.

[herecomedajudge]

Looks like Baylor is suspending Lebby for 1st half of game with OU.

http://www.big12sports.com//ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=210365430&DB_OEM_ID=10410
Big 12 Issues Public Reprimand

[SicEmBaylor]

Looks like Baylor is suspending Lebby for 1st half of game with OU.

http://www.big12sports.com//ViewArti...B_OEM_ID=10410
Big 12 Issues Public Reprimand

Should be the entire game.

[olevetonahill]

Well, fair enough -- to each their own. I think,

objectively speaking

, that unethical behavior is worse than an archaic NCAA infraction. That's just me, but that's not to say that I don't think the NCAA should do something and/or an internal punishment. Because the end result here is that OU benefited from learning the signals of a team they play each year; whereas, in the case of Libby, that isn't the case.

You cant be Objective about this, You rush to defend when theres really nothing to defend. Oh and You know for a fact none of those 3 had any motive to get an advantage? were you in a meeting with them?

[SicEmBaylor]

You cant be Objective about this

I'm as objective about this as a Baylor fan as you are as an OU fan. What I am, however, is rational. I'm also more objective about this situation than you are. I said he violated NCAA rules. I said he should be suspended for the entire game. I said either internal punishments or NCAA sanctions would be appropriate. The only thing you've done is argue ape-**** crazy lunacy with not a shred of evidence to support anything you say.

You rush to defend when theres really nothing to defend.

This makes absolutely no sense. What is it that you think I'm defending? The fact that assumptions are being made by people who have absolutely no, zero, zip, nadda evidence to support in any shape, form, or function the accusations that have been made?

Oh and You know for a fact none of those 3 had any motive to get an advantage? were you in a meeting with them?

Were you in a meeting with them? WTF advantage, which is a question I've been asking over and over and over again, could Libby possibly have got out of that above and beyond what Briles is going to get from Montgomery himself? Libby is an *offensive* coach. Do you think Briles and the rest of the staff need help in game planning from observations that Libby makes? Seriously? And you honestly think that of all the coaches and staff members on the Baylor staff that Briles would sneak in the one coach who not only used to be on the OU staff but also played for OU? O'Rlly? That cheap beer you drink has killed enough brain cells. Be logical and rational for once and apply just a little bit of common sense to the situation.

[SoonerorLater]

Well, fair enough -- to each their own. I think, objectively speaking, that unethical behavior is worse than an archaic NCAA infraction. That's just me, but that's not to say that I don't think the NCAA should do something and/or an internal punishment. Because the end result here is that OU benefited from learning the signals of a team they play each year; whereas, in the case of Libby, that isn't the case.

As far as the violation, I don't see it as some huge deal in and of itself. As as a stand alone issue it probably should be a wrist slap.

If ethics are an issue I would suggest that Baylor seems to be constantly tight-roping on the edge of principled behavior more so than any other current Big 12 Program. Each time Briles just sort of shrugs his shoulders and feigns incredulity. Sort of West Texas version of Captain Renault in Casablanca.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjbPi00k_ME

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I've said all along that it is absolutely an NCAA violation, and I even agree there should be some sort of sanction or internal punishment. What I'm arguing is that Libby was not there to cheat. Neither Briles nor Monty had him on the sideline to do anything untoward.

My example with Sumlin/Briles/OU is entirely based on the *ethics* of the situation. Yes, Libby was there; no, he wasn't there to cheat or get any sort of advantage. It was against NCAA rules, but it was *not* unethical. On the other hand, Sumlin may not have broke NCAA rules but I consider his actions to be entirely unethical.

So which is worse? Breaking an archaic NCAA rule that hasn't kept apace of current technology or breaking some clear ethical standards to get an actual advantage?

You skipped over the fact that the reason for that "archaic" rule has to do with protecting signals. There is a reason that the Pats lost a 1st round draft pick over it when they do -> teams can't change their signals every game for 200 plays. And btw, the NFL has 10x the practice and meeting time as college football. Correlating the Pats punishment to this would mean a loss of 5-6 scholarships (Pats lost a 1st rounder and 2 supplementals)

[olevetonahill]

I'm as objective about this as a Baylor fan as you are as an OU fan. What I am, however, is rational. I'm also more objective about this situation than you are. I said he violated NCAA rules. I said he should be suspended for the entire game. I said either internal punishments or NCAA sanctions would be appropriate. The only thing you've done is argue ape-**** crazy lunacy with not a shred of evidence to support anything you say.

This makes absolutely no sense. What is it that you think I'm defending? The fact that assumptions are being made by people who have absolutely no, zero, zip, nadda evidence to support in any shape, form, or function the accusations that have been made?
Were you in a meeting with them? WTF advantage, which is a question I've been asking over and over and over again, could Libby possibly have got out of that above and beyond what Briles is going to get from Montgomery himself? Libby is an *offensive* coach. Do you think Briles and the rest of the staff need help in game planning from observations that Libby makes? Seriously? And you honestly think that of all the coaches and staff members on the Baylor staff that Briles would sneak in the one coach who not only used to be on the OU staff but also played for OU? O'Rlly? That cheap beer you drink has killed enough brain cells. Be logical and rational for once and apply just a little bit of common sense to the situation.

You just want to argue Ya moran.
Go argue with your Mom and sister, they love you.

[SicEmBaylor]

You skipped over the fact that the reason for that "archaic" rule has to do with protecting signals. There is a reason that the Pats lost a 1st round draft pick over it when they do -> teams can't change their signals every game for 200 plays. And btw, the NFL has 10x the practice and meeting time as college football. Correlating the Pats punishment to this would mean a loss of 5-6 scholarships (Pats lost a 1st rounder and 2 supplementals)

I agree the rule was violated and agree there should be a punishment. I don't agree that signals were being stolen. And it's archaic because technology exist now rendering the rule moot. There are any number of ways, easier than putting a coach on the sideline, to steal the signals.

[SoonerorLater]

Briles' daughter too? This whole thing really does have a Belichick feel to it.

http://www.scout.com/college/oklahom...tulsa-sideline

[SicEmBaylor]

Briles' daughter too? This whole thing really does have a Belichick feel to it.

http://www.scout.com/college/oklahom...tulsa-sideline

Briles daughter is married to Libby, for God's sake. That's his wife whom he was with which we've known from the very beginning. They were in Norman for a wedding, and Monty invited them both to the sideline for the game. And are we seriously going by a grainy photo of her pulling out a cell from her purse? Seriously?

Jeeezus Christ some of you people are paranoid beyond belief.

[JLMSOONER]

Briles daughter is married to Libby, for God's sake. That's his wife whom he was with which we've known from the very beginning. They were in Norman for a wedding, and Monty invited them both to the sideline for the game. And are we seriously going by a grainy photo of her pulling out a cell from her purse? Seriously?

Jeeezus Christ some of you people are paranoid beyond belief.

Sir, you do realize this is a SOONER board that you are trying so preciously to defend your bears on......right?

[SicEmBaylor]

Sir, you do realize this is a SOONER board that you are trying so preciously to defend your bears on......right?

Whoa, dude, this is a Sooner message board? Well, bend me over and slap me silly.

[Salt City Sooner]

What advantage could be gained by Lebby scouting the Sooners in person? While Art Briles admitted that Lebby's presence in Norman was “unethical," he downplayed the incident's importance. “From a strategic standpoint or an advantage, it's absolutely goose egg," he told ESPN Central Texas. “You learn more watching on TV than you can standing on the sideline."

Three Big 12 assistant coaches disagreed, pointing out the advantage of seeing an opposing team's hand signals, and hearing snap counts and play calls. They said that creates a decisive advantage in preparation. “Some of the things you can't get on film, the cadence, if the quarterback's hard counting, maybe checks at the line," says one assistant. “Defensively, if they're making calls, what they're doing."

http://www.campusrush.com/baylor-art...364221682.html