Does Urban Meyer get fired at OSU?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

One thing that hasn't been addressed yet. Title IX lost a lot of its teeth when DeVos rescinded the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter and replaced it with nothing. OSU could make an argument that under the current (lack of) guidance, Meyer had no obligation to report. Of course this all happened before the DCL was rescinded but I have a hard time imagining this Office of Civil Rights coming after them for violating a standard that they rescinded.

Where Meyer has no wiggle room is with OSU's internal policies and his own contract, both of which clearly state that he needs to report any instance of violence the instance he becomes aware of it. I don't see any way he can argue around that. Of course, it would be up to OSU to enforce both of those documents. If they choose to do a sham of an investigation and excuse the behavior of their coach, I'm not sure if there's anything anyone can do to stop it. They would take a PR hit for sure, but is that enough to convince them to fire their coach? I would like to believe that doing the right thing would simply be enough motivation to fire him but we will see.

It will also be interesting to see where else this information went internally at OSU. If Mrs. Meyer only told Urban, than she is going down with him. If she told others at OSU and nothing was done....lots of people could be in a lot of trouble.

[LAZER]

I'm not sure why or how, but I have a feeling Meyer will be coaching at OSU in '18 & '19.

[warriorchick]

Or he'll throw his wife under the bus.

Or have Zach Smith do it for him.   

[CTWarrior]

I completely agree with not wanting to get into which type of abuse is "worse." Honestly though, I'd be lying if I said that my take isn't probably impacted by that. I acknowledge that may speak to my internalizing domestic abuse as "not as bad" which may be a blind spot on my part. But that being said -

I think the underlying crime, the identity of the victim(s), and the employer's role in bringing those victims to the perpetrator all play a role here.  Assuming the worst in both cases, Sandusky's employment at PSU played a not-insignificant part in enabling his crimes. They happened on campus, and his role at PSU provided him access to minors who became his victims. I'm not defending Urban (or Smith) any more than you're defending Paterno (or Sandusky) but I think the nature of Smith's alleged crimes are more detached from his employment/tOSU than Sandusky's were from PSU.

This is where I am.  If I was manager of an employee that abused his wife on two occasions six years apart and I did nothing about it, I would be a bad person but I certainly wouldn't expect to be fired or even disciplined for it by my employer.  But if one of my employees told me he witnessed another of my employees committing a heinous act against a child on company premises and I did not take every appropriate step to report and follow it through, I certainly would expect punishment from my company.  Personally I expect I would do the right thing in each case, but I'm a lot more sure I would in the JoPa situation than the Urban Meyer situation.

[GGGG]

One thing that hasn't been addressed yet. Title IX lost a lot of its teeth when DeVos rescinded the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter and replaced it with nothing. OSU could make an argument that under the current (lack of) guidance, Meyer had no obligation to report. Of course this all happened before the DCL was rescinded but I have a hard time imagining this Office of Civil Rights coming after them for violating a standard that they rescinded.

Where Meyer has no wiggle room is with OSU's internal policies and his own contract, both of which clearly state that he needs to report any instance of violence the instance he becomes aware of it. I don't see any way he can argue around that. Of course, it would be up to OSU to enforce both of those documents. If they choose to do a sham of an investigation and excuse the behavior of their coach, I'm not sure if there's anything anyone can do to stop it. They would take a PR hit for sure, but is that enough to convince them to fire their coach? I would like to believe that doing the right thing would simply be enough motivation to fire him but we will see.

It will also be interesting to see where else this information went internally at OSU. If Mrs. Meyer only told Urban, than she is going down with him. If she told others at OSU and nothing was done....lots of people could be in a lot of trouble.

So apparently he has a $38M buyout of his contract if he is fired for anything but misconduct.  However he can be fired "for cause" for not reporting a known Title IX violation.  That includes "(including, but not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual exploitation, intimate violence and stalking) that involve any student, faculty, or staff."

And "a “known violation” shall mean a violation or an allegation of a violation of Title IX that Coach is aware of or has reasonable cause to believe is taking place or may have taken place."

So he really is f*cked here. 

[JWags85]

As well he should be. I recall seeing an HBO Real Sports with him, and they kept trying to project some kind of depth or thoughtfulness on him. It didn't work. He came across as bland and a complete prisoner to his unconscious impulse to win college football games at any cost. This is a completely unsurprising outcome.

That said, he'll be coaching at Bowling Green within three years.

BG?  Pssh.  He could very well be the replacement for Brian Kelly at ND in a few years.  If not, he has 3 Nattys, a B12 or SEC school desperate for some success will happily throw money at him.  Urban and Baylor, match made in hell.

[mu03eng]

This is where I am.  If I was manager of an employee that abused his wife on two occasions six years apart and I did nothing about it, I would be a bad person but I certainly wouldn't expect to be fired or even disciplined for it by my employer.  But if one of my employees told me he witnessed another of my employees committing a heinous act against a child on company premises and I did not take every appropriate step to report and follow it through, I certainly would expect punishment from my company.  Personally I expect I would do the right thing in each case, but I'm a lot more sure I would in the JoPa situation than the Urban Meyer situation.

Agree to disagree, I think you should be punished in both circumstances. Further it's an imperfect anology simply because, while we can say Paterno could and should have done more, he did report up the correct channels for the one incident we absolutely know he knew about. In the Urban scenario, there are three possible scenarios A) By some improbable set of circumstances he didn't know of the 2015 incidencts B) He knew and he didn't report C) He knew, he reported and then participated in a cover up. Only in scenario C is Urban at the same "level" as Paterno, in which case I agree Urban was less evil than Paterno if we want to characterize it that way.

My whole point in removing which a$$hole was more evil is to get at the fact that the crime almost doesn't matter, it's the fact that people still think it's ok to look the other way.

[mu03eng]

So apparently he has a $38M buyout of his contract if he is fired for anything but misconduct.  However he can be fired "for cause" for not reporting a known Title IX violation.  That includes "(including, but not limited to, sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual exploitation, intimate violence and stalking) that involve any student, faculty, or staff."

And "a “known violation” shall mean a violation or an allegation of a violation of Title IX that Coach is aware of or has reasonable cause to believe is taking place or may have taken place."

So he really is f*cked here.

#hegowne

[CTWarrior]

Agree to disagree, I think you should be punished in both circumstances. Further it's an imperfect anology simply because, while we can say Paterno could and should have done more, he did report up the correct channels for the one incident we absolutely know he knew about. In the Urban scenario, there are three possible scenarios A) By some improbable set of circumstances he didn't know of the 2015 incidencts B) He knew and he didn't report C) He knew, he reported and then participated in a cover up. Only in scenario C is Urban at the same "level" as Paterno, in which case I agree Urban was less evil than Paterno if we want to characterize it that way.

My whole point in removing which a$$hole was more evil is to get at the fact that the crime almost doesn't matter, it's the fact that people still think it's ok to look the other way.

Yeah, I don't think we are far apart.  As far as his employer goes, I think there was a moral responsibility in the Meyer case, but both a moral and legal responsibility in the Paterno case.  Ohio State is not going to face problems other than PR ones because one of its employees abused his wife on his own time, but Penn State is in a much worse situation if there are repeated illegal acts against children by its employee on it premises.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Yeah, I don't think we are far apart.  As far as his employer goes, I think there was a moral responsibility in the Meyer case, but both a moral and legal responsibility in the Paterno case.  Ohio State is not going to face problems other than PR ones because one of its employees abused his wife on his own time, but Penn State is in a much worse situation if there are repeated illegal acts against children by its employee on it premises.

Actually there is a legal responsibility in the Meyer case as well. Title IX requires any university employee who becomes aware of an allegation of domestic violence to report it to the proper authorities at the university. It also requires that any employee accused of domestic violence be investigated and then held accountable if found responsible.

[Benny B]

One thing that hasn't been addressed yet. Title IX lost a lot of its teeth when DeVos rescinded the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter and replaced it with nothing. OSU could make an argument that under the current (lack of) guidance, Meyer had no obligation to report. Of course this all happened before the DCL was rescinded but I have a hard time imagining this Office of Civil Rights coming after them for violating a standard that they rescinded.

A valid thought, but I don't think the existence (or lack) of the DCL is going to matter much.  To Meyer, I would be surprised if there wasn't some flimsy language in his contract about reporting crimes or matters that could be detrimental to the University, so he gone.  And the fact that OSU undertook an investigation, though be it likely a sham, is essentially an admission that they knew they had a duty to do something.

Look at it this way... which of the states where marijuana is now legal also pardoned all previous marijuana-related crimes when it was legalized.  The law at the time governs, and neither SecEd or OCR is going to let a blatant violation get away just because the guidance may be different today... unless they're being run by an OSU grad. 

Now if those offices were being run by someone with ties to an OSU rival, say like a Michigan or perhaps, USC... different story.

[CTWarrior]

Actually there is a legal responsibility in the Meyer case as well. Title IX requires any university employee who becomes aware of an allegation of domestic violence to report it to the proper authorities at the university. It also requires that any employee accused of domestic violence be investigated and then held accountable if found responsible.

I obviously wasn't aware of this.  Seems Big Brotherish to me, but if that is the rule, that is the rule.  Something about being required to jeopardize your friend with his employer for activities outside of work doesn't seem right to me, but neither does ignoring domestic violence. 

[mu03eng]

I obviously wasn't aware of this.  Seems Big Brotherish to me, but if that is the rule, that is the rule.  Something about being required to jeopardize your friend with his employer for activities outside of work doesn't seem right to me, but neither does ignoring domestic violence.

Yeah but in the college setting, the line between work and life is so blurred as to be inconsequential. If you don't have that language you can easily have a coach look the other way when a player is, for example, beating up his girlfriend or sexually assaulting women off campus, under the heading of "well he didn't do it at the football facility so we're cool" (this is also known as the Baylor corollary).

Also, if I know of a co-worker who is engaged in violent behavior outside of work I'm sure as hell mentioning something to HR.

[barfolomew]

Also, if I know of a co-worker who is engaged in violent behavior outside of work I'm sure as hell mentioning something to HR.

What about fight club?

[mu03eng]

What about fight club?

I'm part of the machine, man!

[GGGG]

I obviously wasn't aware of this.  Seems Big Brotherish to me, but if that is the rule, that is the rule.  Something about being required to jeopardize your friend with his employer for activities outside of work doesn't seem right to me, but neither does ignoring domestic violence. 

He's not simply a friend, he's a subordinate employee. 

[DegenerateDish]

Wetzel nails it in this column and says what I’ve been saying. How could Meyer be so dumb to be so loyal to his wide receivers coach?


https://sports.yahoo.com/urban-meyers-loyalty-may-prove-downfall-222900080.html

[Dr. Blackheart]

Yes

[Galway Eagle]

I obviously wasn't aware of this.  Seems Big Brotherish to me, but if that is the rule, that is the rule.  Something about being required to jeopardize your friend with his employer for activities outside of work doesn't seem right to me, but neither does ignoring domestic violence.

I don't know what to do with this statement. I guess first do you believe in the right of a workplace to want to hire high character individuals and have them maintain a certain standard?

Second, do you believe that you should hire friends if you know you will be put in a position where you may need to terminate them based on character issues?

Not urban myer just anyone in general

[MerrittsMustache]

Wetzel nails it in this column and says what I’ve been saying. How could Meyer be so dumb to be so loyal to his wide receivers coach?


https://sports.yahoo.com/urban-meyers-loyalty-may-prove-downfall-222900080.html

Random hypothesis: Perhaps Smith, known as an excellent recruiter, was in charge of arranging the "dirty work" for Meyer on the recruiting trail and knows what's out there and who's out there with info.

A quote that stood out from Meyer: “I was never told about anything … never had a conversation about it.” If his wife only showed him the texts, it may be true that he was never told and never had a conversation about the situation. Technically, he may not have been lying but....Who am I kidding? Of course he was lying! He knew but simply didn't care.

[WarriorDad]

In today's world, probably fired, but Saban and Meyer are two guys that could have a dead body in the trunk driving around the town and perhaps escape it.

[GGGG]

In today's world, probably fired, but Saban and Meyer are two guys that could have a dead body in the trunk driving around the town and perhaps escape it.

Because driving around with a dead body in the trunk isn't a Title IX violation.

[CTWarrior]

I don't know what to do with this statement. I guess first do you believe in the right of a workplace to want to hire high character individuals and have them maintain a certain standard?

Second, do you believe that you should hire friends if you know you will be put in a position where you may need to terminate them based on character issues?

Not urban myer just anyone in general

As an employer I want people who are respectful in the workplace and do their job well enough to make me money.  If their behavior outside the workplace causes problems for my company, then I would not want them employed.

If a friend of mine engaged in illegal behavior outside the workplace, it should not be my responsibility to report it to my employer.  I don't have friends (at least I don't think I do, I'm sure many spouse abusers have friends who would never had thought it possible) who would abuse their spouse, but I'd guess I'd want to get them counseling or something rather than report them to our employer.  I would likely have an impossible time retaining a friendship with such a person. 

I agree with you that I would not be likely to hire a person with past behavior that could put me in a difficult position unless I was darned near 100% certain that behavior would not be repeated, and I don't know how you could be that certain.

[mu03eng]

As an employer I want people who are respectful in the workplace and do their job well enough to make me money.  If their behavior outside the workplace causes problems for my company, then I would not want them employed.

If a friend of mine engaged in illegal behavior outside the workplace, it should not be my responsibility to report it to my employer.  I don't have friends (at least I don't think I do, I'm sure many spouse abusers have friends who would never had thought it possible) who would abuse their spouse, but I'd guess I'd want to get them counseling or something rather than report them to our employer.  I would likely have an impossible time retaining a friendship with such a person. 

I agree with you that I would not be likely to hire a person with past behavior that could put me in a difficult position unless I was darned near 100% certain that behavior would not be repeated, and I don't know how you could be that certain.

Here's the question, why would you want to retain a friendship with someone who is A) an abuser and B) unwilling to seek help? Depending on what is going on, people are redeemable for the most part, but unless a friend actively tried to get help for a situation why would I want to retain them as a friend let alone want to continue to work with them?

[DegenerateDish]

The Meyer and Smith quotes today are laughable, I doubt it's a coincidence that Meyer's statement and the Zach Smith interview on ESPN both happened to come out today. I'm no Gene Smith fan, but man these guys are coordinating an effort to make Gene Smith the fall guy here. Which is warranted if Gene Smith did pull Zach Smith off of recruiting in 2015 after the allegation came up. I get that no charges were filed then, but they kept this guy on the coaching staff? Even after they knew his past??

If these quotes, especially from Zach Smith, are taken at face value, then how in the hell did Urban Meyer trust this guy to be on his staff at OSU?

Meyer's quote in his statement that he wasn't prepared at BIG 10 media day? This guy gets paid millions to be prepared to make split second decisions, and he wasn't prepared to answer questions on Smith's firing? Really?