I'm not saying he shouldn't be a allowed to coach, but the post was clearing giving Babcock the benefit of doubt because he served his time away and has moved on in his life. It was about expecting a different iteration of Babcock just because he "served his time." It was not about let the man coach because he's a good coach and hasn't been convicted of anything. Babcock hasn't done anything but be forced away for 3 years, so why should anybody give him the benefit of doubt like he learned from his mistakes?