Why BARNETT wasn't ever in contention

[PhirePhilBennett]

Lawsuit alleging assault by Colorado players, recruits settled
Associated Press

Updated: December 5, 2007, 11:55 AM ET
Comment
Email
Print
DENVER -- The University of Colorado has agreed to pay $2.85 million to settle a lawsuit by two women who claimed they were gang-raped at an off-campus party for football recruits.

University spokesman Ken McConnellogue said Wednesday the school also agreed to hire an adviser to monitor compliance with Title IX and add a position in the office of Victim Assistance as part of the settlement.

A message left for Baine Kerr, an attorney for one of the women, was not immediately returned.

McConnellogue said one of the women, Lisa Simpson, will receive $2.5 million, with the other woman, who did not wish be identified publicly, receiving $350,000.

The Associated Press does not identify the victims of alleged sexual assault without their permission.

University President Hank Brown was to answer questions later Wednesday.

The women's lawsuit alleged CU violated federal law by fostering an environment that allowed sexual assaults to occur. The suit accused the university of failing to adequately supervise players when the women were raped in 2001.

A U.S. district judge dismissed it in 2005, saying the women produced no evidence that the school acted with "deliberate indifference."

In September, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived the lawsuit, saying there was evidence the university had an official policy of showing high school recruits a "good time" and had shown deliberate indifference. The appeals judges sent the lawsuit back to district court.

CU has insisted its policies do not place female students at risk and said it has become a leader in policies to prevent sexual assault and harassment.

No sexual assault charges were filed after the 2001 party, but the lawsuit sparked a scandal over CU's football recruiting practices that led to broad reforms and a shake-up of the university's top leaders.

The fallout included the resignations of CU System President Betsy Hoffman and Athletic Director [deleted] Tharp.

The football team's head coach at the time, Gary Barnett, survived the scandal, but later accepted a buyout after a 70-3 loss to Texas in the 2005 Big 12 championship game.

A grand jury investigation resulted in a single indictment against a former football recruiting aide for soliciting a prostitute and misusing a school cell phone.

A separate inquiry, backed by the university's governing Board of Regents, concluded that drugs, alcohol and sex were used to entice blue chip recruits to the Boulder campus but said none of the activity was knowingly sanctioned by university officials.

The school responded by overhauling oversight of the athletics department and putting some of the most stringent policies in place for any football recruiting program

[Lawgrad]

A very good explanation as to why NO ONE is willing to talk to Barnett. I think he and Bliss have got about the same chance of getting a college job again. Funny, don't they both live in Colorado now? Throughout the entire process, this is the only school that Barnett's name has been attached to, and that was more by his own doing than anything else. A settlement after a federal appellate court concludes that there was an "official policy" to show recruits a good time does nothing to improve one's image.

While I think from an X's and O's standpoint, he would have been a good selection, the baggage is too much to carry, especially for us, as SMU's baggage cart has been filled since the 1980's.

[EastStang]

A separate inquiry, backed by the university's governing Board of Regents, concluded that drugs, alcohol and sex were used to entice blue chip recruits to the Boulder campus but said none of the activity was knowingly sanctioned by university officials.

That part cleared Barnett of wrongdoing. He may have not been watching them as close as he should have, but he didn't sanction the activity.

[Lawgrad]

A separate inquiry, backed by the university's governing Board of Regents, concluded that drugs, alcohol and sex were used to entice blue chip recruits to the Boulder campus but said none of the activity was knowingly sanctioned by university officials.

That part cleared Barnett of wrongdoing. He may have not been watching them as close as he should have, but he didn't sanction the activity.

Remember, however, that the "investigation" that cleared Barnett of wrongdoing was run by the university, who had more than a vested interest in reaching a finding that there was no lack of institutional control. As I recall when the investigation was concluded, there were many people who felt it was nothing more than a whitewash.

[me@smu]

Guy was a good coach but it is goign to take an AD with a brass set to bring him in. Right or wrong, Barnett in alot of minds represents the out of control football programs.

[Dement-ed]

Agreed.
Would rather have him than Johnson (the option is so high school), but SMU wouldn't go anywhere near Barnett, from the sound of things.

[huskerpony]

Guy was a good coach but it is goign to take an AD with a brass set to bring him in. Right or wrong, Barnett in alot of minds represents the out of control football programs.

Hmmm....similar to SMU? The fact that the same things were going on everywhere, but one coach/school gets blamed? Seems like he'd fit right in!

[ThadFilms]

Despite my AppleBowden sig pic.... then SomethingelseBowden then CarrollBowden sig pics.... Barnett has long (always?) been my numero uno choice. But no one's asking me for insight or money..... okay, again I am lying, because Pete Carroll would be your top choice if you're in fantasy land.


However, the more I read about PJ, the more I hope it's him.

[icehawks18]

Barnett would absolutely be a better choice.

beat UT in big-12 championship with inferior talent > runs triple-veer option with a bunch of sub-par athletes playing tier-3 competition.

[Lawgrad]

Barnett would absolutely be a better choice.

beat UT in big-12 championship with inferior talent > runs triple-veer option with a bunch of sub-par athletes playing tier-3 competition.

You are completely missing the point. Whether or not he would be a better choice isn't important at all. All of the issues that came up at CU (which would have given us the DP again had they happened here, I'm sure), came up under his watch, and there was enough evidence to at least hint at a lack of institutional control. In this day and age of 24/7 coaching, either he a) knew about the issues and didn't do anything about it, or b) had no clue what his players and recruits were doing on a regular basis, which would simply show that he was completely out of touch.

You may not want to admit it, but there exists a different hiring standard here than at other places. Having said that, I think it is more than a little bit telling that nobody else is interested in him as their new head coach. That speaks volumes, and his baggage makes him more trouble than he is worth.

For the record, I think that he likely would have succeeded here, but I can't fault the university for not extending him the opportunity. Simply put, he is somewhat of a pariah right now in the coaching ranks.

[Cadillac]

A settlement after a federal appellate court concludes that there was an "official policy" to show recruits a good time does nothing to improve one's image.

Actually, the court concluded only that there was enough evidence of an official policy to proceede with the case, not that there was an official policy.

-CoS

[mr. pony]

A Bowden or Barnett is what we need.

[Dwan]

The Policy of showing recruits a good time when they visit is something that Colorado has in common with every other college in the nation. That is not to say that I support rape or sexual assault, but I caoch who says make sure the recruits have fun is what every coach would say. It seems that there was a night that got way out of control and the players involved were held accountable. It would be one thing if Barnett were there or approved of it, but to say show the recruits a good time is vastly different than Dave Bliss trying to cover up a murder.

[EastStang]

And one of those actually involved in an assault at Colorado is a Heisman candidate at Hawaii. Wouldn't that be a kick in the sack. Former player convicted of sexual assault wins Heisman, but coach who knew nothing about it, can't find a job.

[Lawgrad]

The Policy of showing recruits a good time when they visit is something that Colorado has in common with every other college in the nation. That is not to say that I support rape or sexual assault, but I caoch who says make sure the recruits have fun is what every coach would say. It seems that there was a night that got way out of control and the players involved were held accountable. It would be one thing if Barnett were there or approved of it, but to say show the recruits a good time is vastly different than Dave Bliss trying to cover up a murder.

Unfortunately, it was not just one night. There were multiple independent allegations of sexual assaults, over a period of years, and I think it is naive to think that the partying alleged by recruits was a one time thing. Do most schools do it, or something like it? Of course, the problem is that because of who we are, we have to stay away from that kind of stench. In both Bliss and Barnett's cases, it is clear that the inmates were running the asylum, and we can't afford to have even the whiff of that happening here, due to our past. I'm not saying that this is fair, I'm just pointing out what reality is on the Hilltop.