That's the thing. Nobody knows what the university knew. As far as we know, Urban lied to the media at Big Ten media days and that's it. Should he be fired for lying to the media?

Maybe the university didn't want anymore of this getting out there to add fuel to other things. I don't know. We don't know the whole story so it's silly to think one way or the other whether or not he'll remain the head coach.

Agree - we do not know for sure one way or the other - yet. If it is found he knew about the 2015 allegations and did not tell the administration - he will be fired. If its is found he knew about the 2015 allegations and did not tell the administration when they specifically asked - he will be fired and his contract will be voided - no payout. I happen to agree with Reece Davis - the administrative leave is to work out a contract buyout that makes this go away as fast as possible for all involved.

The NBC news story is about 4 minutes long.
It starts by saying the story was "excerpted" from an 11 minute video they obtained.

They then say that 11 minute video they obtained was already edited from longer interviews.

How much more proof do you want that there was an unedited video ?

If you want to give NBC the benefit of the doubt,maybe the video De Sabato's company provided NBC had already had De Sabato's and Yett's embarrassing comments edited out.

There are people on TheMat.com who have seen the unedited video and quoted DeSabato and Yetts directly from it.

Its also interesting to note that De Sabato had 2 brothers who wrestled at OSU.
Neither of them has come forward to say anything about this.
In fact I believe one of DeSabato's brothers coached at OSU.

I'm not asking for proof that a longer video exists. I'm asking for proof that it exonerates the coaching staff.

You yourself haven't seen the unedited video and your knowledge of it is from anonymous posters on a wrestling message board. That's not evidence that warrants ignoring the claims by victims.

It's clear what you want to believe to be the case, because you're weighting very thinly sourced evidence that supports that desire far more than you should.

I'm asking why. Why do so? What's your motivation? We see time and again in these cases that people in power fail to act when they should. It seems to me that for purely political reasons you're bending over backwards to believe one side over the other with very little supporting evidence. Why?

Doug Gottlieb interviews Brett McMurphy, who broke the story.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2nIl8l2KHc



Interesting here that even McMurphy admits that had Urban simply explained the situation and why they kept Smith (no charges were filed, not enough evidence), but then fired him after he broke the restraining order, then all of this wouldn't be an issue. It's because he lied to the media that people are now digging deeper.

Because what we have come to as a society is so much more than that. Also, you only hear about the Urban Meyers of the world in the news. Stuff like this happens to regular folks every day and it never gets on your radar.

And it's not just the report/not report thing (which itself can be an ethical and legal dilemma). It's the fact that in today's world, allegations = they must be eliminated. You are one cross look away from having your life turned upside down. If you do something, say something that could be the least bit misinterpreted - you're done. Not to mention, those with an ax to grind have the ability to make things up that will automatically be believed.

I have a good friend that is a high school teacher. In the last several years, he has said that the anxiety of "walking on eggshells" at school is virtually unbearable. Every teacher knows that all it takes is one student or parent to bring up a wild accusation and you are done for. You would be fired with your license revoked before there's any time for the truth to come out. It has created a culture where teachers are literally afraid of students and - in some cases - each other.

To your first point:

What do you propose as the alternative? Changes to employment law? Greater employee protections?

But more to the point: I think, frankly, you're vastly overstating the problem. What is the actual data on this? Have there been a significant increase in firings for the reasons you outline? Or is this just media fueled hysteria that plays well into people's fears about the world changing around them?

To your second:

It's super easy, report what you know to the appropriate people so the situation can be monitored. Companies making hiring decisions do similar due diligence all the time.

Further, the main issue at hand here is the 2015 incident which happened at Ohio State and led to Smith's firing. If Meyer knew about that and failed to alert the university, that is a serious issue.

To me, the digging to see when Meyer knew about it is a textbook example of that "lynch mentality". In the grand scheme of things, Urban Meyer does not matter one iota to this case. It's a story that has become a story for the sole reason of trying to bring someone down. Why wasn't there a story that the Director of Football Ops might have known? Or the GA?

Meyer knowing about it would not have changed one thing for the alleged victim or the way it played out in the legal system. It's manufactured outrage.

As Stunter has been pointing out, no charges ever came of this. What is Urban Meyer to do? The police were already aware. He's inconsequential to a police investigation.

That's how leadership works. When you are in charge, you are responsible for your organization. Leaders sometimes face consequences for the actions of those they lead. It's part of the job.

And in this case, there was an organizational failure in which (it seems) the University was not aware of two separate instances in which police investigated an employee of theirs over serious allegations of physical abuse. It is perfectly reasonable to ask what Meyer knew and when, because he has an obligation to the university to make them aware of issues such as this.

The idea that the story here is about a society that's overzealous in their desire to see people fall seems super misguided to me. The bigger societal question is -- to me -- is why serial abusers never seem to face appropriate consequences and their abusive behavior is allowed to continue on for so long. We have seen consistently that organizations fail to protect victims because people in power fail to act. Ohio State is right to investigate the football program and take strides to understand where the organizational structure failed.

There is danger in lumping all of the examples you included into one bucket and comparing it to the Urban Meyer situation. In all of the situations you listed, the allegations happened at the university/workplace or directly in connection with employment. In the Urban Meyer case, nothing happened at the institution or directly with the school. Also, in this case, unlike the other cases you cited, the police investigated the incident and declined further action.

To be clear, the actions of PSU and MSU disgust me that actions were not taken to protect minors and that there was a cover up. But that's not the same thing that is happening here.

When I asked you what, legally, the school should have done in this case, your answer is to "monitor" it. My point is that when employers start monitoring what is happening at home -- on an employee's time, when nothing illegal has been determined to have occurred -- it sets a scary precedent.

I'm not so sure this is an issue about PC culture, honestly. I've argued here -- notably in the NFL protest thread -- about how hypocritical both sides of our country are when it comes to 'Political Correctness'. By and large, the same people who want to make sure Colin Kaepernick faces punishment for hurting their feelings get the angriest when somebody on the other side says something they deem a fireable offense. I'm actually quite conservative politically about language. I think I've shown myself to be, frankly, a bigger supporter of the first amendment than most people here. I've defended equally the rights of Kaepernick and James Demore (sp?). Many others' have opinions that fall predictably along party lines.

That said, I think there's a serious signal to noise issue with many of these cases. You criticize the "media industrial complex," but I think cases of wrongful terminations over 'PC' issues get media coverage that's disproportionate to their actual frequency. I think the idea of PC Culture taking over is, on some level, self-fulfilling. It's just a new front in the culture war, and too many people are far too willing to participate and stake sides on the issue in cases where it's not really relevant.

This is one of those cases.

We are, at a very basic level, talking about how a serial abuser failed to face repercussions for his behavior for so long. It's perfectly reasonable to ask if part of that failure was organizational and whether leadership in the Ohio State University football organization could have acted more appropriately.

Looking at this case through the lens of PC culture run amok feels, frankly, wrong. If merely investigating the leader of an organization who continued to employ a twice accused domestic abuser is a bridge too far, what message does that send to victims of abuse? Does that create an environment in which victims of abuse have the confidence to pursue action against their abusers?

There's a real, actual victim in all of this. It's not Urban Meyer.

Of course they would take those steps. But not at the expense of people who had no bearing on my personal behavior outside of the organization. How is my behavior against my spouse away from work a result of my management team? There are certain things that employers can't control.

Now, given that, my position has nowhere near the pressures of a Division I football coach. Maybe he was under pressure from Meyer and that LED to his behavior.

There's an important word in there: accused. Despite some very serious accusations, no one was ever convicted of a crime. Are you arguing that accusations should lead to firing? That's a very reckless and dangerous position to take.

The attitude your position displays (accusations = nail them to the wall) demonstrates my point exactly.