5 players suspended for 5 games in 2011 regular season (Appeal has been denied)

[MaxBuck]

Let me say (as my last commentary on this thread) ...

Oops.

 

[daddyphatsacs]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this is if the NCAA cared so much about the integrity of the bowl games and fans (like some have suggested), then why didn't they wait to announce this until after the season?

In the end, JT has to make a decision that will put his program above these five players. I would have to think that they knew what they were doing was not right. It's just an unfortunate situation for the program...but I'm not losing any sleep over it.

 

[strohs]

Again, you are simply stating conclusions: "They broke the rules ... the suspensions should have started immediately." Why would that be "the right thing to do"? If it were so "simple", then I'd be able to see the merit of your position. I do not.

The NCAA concluded that they broke the rules and should be suspended for the first 5 games of next season (with Ohio State and the B10s helping to persuade them that "they didnt know they couldn't do it").
The fact that they broke the rules is reason why I believe the suspensions should start immediately. Thats not "stating a conclusion".

 

[strohs]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this is if the NCAA cared so much about the integrity of the bowl games and fans (like some have suggested), then why didn't they wait to announce this until after the season?

I dont think they learned about the situation until mid December

 

[dragurd]

Strohs you missed what he was saying. He was saying if they cared so much about the integrity of the bowl game you announce it after the bowl games are finished then you don't put the teams and yourself between a rock and a hard place.

 

[sflbuck]

Strohs you missed what he was saying. He was saying if they cared so much about the integrity of the bowl game you announce it after the bowl games are finished then you don't put the teams and yourself between a rock and a hard place.

Who knows, that might have been the original plan. Then the story starts leaking and tOSU was forced deal with it before the bowl game.

 

[osugrad21]

Likely already posted somewhere but worth the repeat...

SI

Suspended Buckeyes should cut ties with unfair system, turn Pro

To the gentlemen starring in this week's episode of Columbus Ink:
Go pro. Do it immediately after the Sugar Bowl. Play the game, take a shower, and sign with the agent of your choice. Then go drink a Hand Grenade at Tropical Isle to celebrate.
Think about it, Terrelle Pryor, Boom Herron, DeVier Posey, Mike Adams and Solomon Thomas. You don't need this aggravation.
Cont...​

Basically, you got suspended because the NCAA doesn't want you infringing upon your school's ability to make money on your backs. Click on the fan shop link on the official Ohio State football Web site. There, you'll find dozens of authentic, game-worn football jerseys for sale at $300 a pop.

​

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

SI

​

My following comment is directed at the article and not at Capo: Andy Staples needs to remember that all this money being "made off the backs of players" is going right back into the university so that the other 37 scholarship sports that OSU fields can exist. I'm tired of fucking nitwits implying that somehow a select few individuals at the university are somehow benefitting, riding around in gold-plated Escalades.

 

[osugrad21]

My following comment is directed at the article and not at Capo: Andy Staples needs to remember that all this money being "made off the backs of players" is going right back into the university so that the other 37 scholarship sports that OSU fields can exist. I'm tired of fucking nitwits implying that somehow a select few individuals at the university are somehow benefitting, riding around in gold-plated Escalades.

Definitely see that side of it...but the duality of the situation is worth noting. We can make make money directly off of you and what you earn, but you cannot.

Tough.

 

[Jake]

I don't know why some are so eager to flush away the bowl game by suspending the players NOW. Winning that game would be an excellent statement and a strong finish to another fine season.

I'm hopeful the appeal will get the suspensions reduced to the usual four games, meaning the guys will all be back for the entire conference schedule, assuming they don't leave early. If they're going to leave early, 4 or 5 games won't matter - they'll go either way. I'd rather they play the Sugar Bowl for tOSU before they do it.

 

[MaliBuckeye]

I don't know why some are so eager to flush away the bowl game by suspending the players NOW. Winning that game would be an excellent statement and a strong finish to another fine season.

I'm hopeful the appeal will get the suspensions reduced to the usual four games, meaning the guys will all be back for the entire conference schedule, assuming they don't leave early. If they're going to leave early, 4 or 5 games won't matter - they'll go either way. I'd rather they play the Sugar Bowl for tOSU before they do it.

I hear that, and feel that way part of the time.

The other part, I feel like "Wrong is wrong", and if it's worthy of suspension it should start immediately. This is also the part of me that's ridiculously cynical bout the NCAA's motivations and interest in student athletes rather than protecting the "brand" and marketing connections.

I'm a coin toss, and since my opinion doesn't matter a hill of beans in the larger scope of things, I'll watch and cheer for whatever players are on the field for the Buckeyes on the 4th. And in September.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Definitely see that side of it...but the duality of the situation is worth noting. We can make make money directly off of you and what you earn, but you cannot.

Tough.

I can see giving the players a stipend (actually, an increase in the stipend they already get). Still, even the NCAA in a sense is stuck between a rock and a hard place: 1.) Don't have tough rules in place and college football becomes a sell-off; 2.) Have rules in-place and enforce them and the NCAA are overbearing pricks.

To me, the money that football (not the indiviual players, but the program) brings in should not be a factor in what scholarship players get. The players would be getting the same benefits (free education, room and board, etc.) regardless if they were on a national title contender like Ohio State or some piss-ant school (like Michigan ). Look at the players at I-AA (FCS) Harvard--do they get they scholarship benefits reduced because their football program brings in jack shit for revenue? No. And with all due respect to OSU academics, a Harvard degree is light-years above an Ohio State degree. Moreover, when was the last time a player from Harvard was drafted in the first round?

Players at Ohio State get to train at world-class facilities, have top-flight coaching, play at one of the most revered sports venues in the world, get a valuable degree from an excellent academic institution, have a post-graduate job-placement network unmatched by any other major university, and have arguably the most NFL draft visibility than vurtually any other school. They get all of this for free and that's not enough?

There was an article earlier that stated a simple answer: Low-interest student loans. Players that have any NFL draft viability at all would be able to repay the entire loan off with a portion of the signing bonus or first NFL paycheck, and would be perfectly legit in the eyes of the NCAA. That would be the right way to do things if a player were to need money.

 

[Taosman]

Those calling for an immediate suspension should understand that there will be an appeals process and that will take time. Why make the players suffer more? Why force the issue?

 

[osugrad21]

I can see giving the players a stipend (actually, an increase in the stipend they already get). Still, even the NCAA in a sense is stuck between a rock and a hard place: 1.) Don't have tough rules in place and college football becomes a sell-off; 2.) Have rules in-place and enforce them and the NCAA are overbearing pricks.

Absolutely true. The difference is where the line is drawn...some will and have obviously stretched the loopholes until it became necessary for a hardline approach. In no way am I advocating breaking rules...no chance of that.

To me, the money that football (not the indiviual players, but the program) brings in should not be a factor in what scholarship players get. The players would be getting the same benefits (free education, room and board, etc.) regardless if they were on a national title contender like Ohio State or some [censored]-ant school (like Michigan ). Look at the players at I-AA (FCS) Harvard--do they get they scholarship benefits reduced because their football program brings in jack [censored] for revenue? No. And with all due respect to OSU academics, a Harvard degree is light-years above an Ohio State degree. Moreover, when was the last time a player from Harvard was drafted in the first round?

...but when was the last time Harvard packed in 100k+ at $70/ticket? How many players walk through Harvard bookstores and see their jerseys being sold? Are they even recognized in class? Is the media constantly hounding their every move? Players go to Harvard for the education. Most football players do not go to tOSU or any other major power for academics.

yes, I know that is part of the bargain when you play for a major powerhouse...but that doesn't make it 100% fair.

Players at Ohio State get to train at world-class facilities, have top-flight coaching, play at one of the most revered sports venues in the world, get a valuable degree from an excellent academic institution, have a post-graduate job-placement network unmatched by any other major university, and have arguably the most NFL draft visibility than vurtually any other school. They get all of this for free and that's not enough?

Yes and no. Again, many of these kids see tOSU as their one chance to make it big...many come from stable backgrounds and many come from nothing. You know my situation...over the years, I've given thousands of dollars to former players on full-scholarship just to help them keep up with the essentials. If I truly felt I was being hustled or the kids weren't in need, I would never give them the money.

There was an article earlier that stated a simple answer: Low-interest student loans. Players that have any NFL draft viability at all would be able to repay the entire loan off with a portion of the signing bonus or first NFL paycheck, and would be perfectly legit in the eyes of the NCAA. That would be the right way to do things if a player were to need money.

Definitely worth further investigation.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

The NCAA concluded that they broke the rules and should be suspended for the first 5 games of next season (with Ohio State and the B10s helping to persuade them that "they didnt know they couldn't do it").
The fact that they broke the rules is reason why I believe the suspensions should start immediately. Thats not "stating a conclusion".

Um, yes it is. "The fact that they broke the rules is reason why I believe the suspensions should start immediately." Seems pretty obvious to me that you are stating a conclusion, but maybe I'm just too stupid to see the nuances in your argument.

Okay, well the players broke the rules in 2009. Shouldn't the suspensions start then?

I'm not sure what to say. You break the rules, you're suspended.

Why don't you just say that, since you've already said it a dozen times now.

It's silly. Why on earth would the NCAA rule the kids eligible for the Sugar Bowl and push the suspensions into next year?

I don't know and I don't care. That wasn't the issue. The issue was whether Ohio State should suspend the players for the Sugar Bowl even though the NCAA has declared them eligible for the game.

But under this administration we'll just ignore the suspensions for the Sugar Bowl and push it into the 2011 season.... But they could still take the high road and suspend them for the bowl game, although it won't happen. If it were going to happen we would have just stuck with our initial compliance report and maintained the suspension.

Maybe you missed it, but there are no suspensions to ignore or maintain. The players are all eligible for the Sugar Bowl. But your gross mischaracterization of the situation certainly does make your post all nice and drama queeny.

Now on to a poster who is actually making some intelligent points, not merely repeating and rehashing the same old arguments time and time again.

I agree with this for the most part. The NCAA has ruled them eligible, and that would be fine if it weren't for the fact that there's a game in between now and the suspensions. I don't agree with picking and choosing which games suspensions should occur.

Believe me, I'm not trying to defend what the NCAA did here, because it seems like they pulled their decision out of someone's nether orifice. I have no reason why the NCAA decided to reinstate the players for the Sugar Bowl and then suspend them for the first five games of 2011. I certainly don't buy the "unique opportunity" rationale that they gave in the initial press release. Like most of us, I suspect that the NCAA wants Ohio State to be at full strength for the Sugar Bowl so that the game's sponsors do not have their investments impaired.

But the NCAA's illogical ruling isn't the issue - the issue is how should Ohio State respond.

LJB, if you have proof that some of the things you've said have happened in the past, my argument will obviously change. My side is based on speculation about what would happen. I'm assuming your side is as well.

No, I don't have "proof". I haven't analyzed NCAA rulings for several reasons: (1) I don't have the time; (2) no one is paying me to do so; and (3) the NCAA seems to just make stuff up as they go along, so why bother trying to find some precedent that would control the situation at hand.

In some cases taking a prospective action will lead to mitigation of penalties down the road. The problem here is that Ohio State has already done that - the self-reported violations and the self-imposed suspensions - but the NCAA reversed those suspensions and imposed a penalty of its own. Now what to do? I doubt that taking the same prospective action again will lead to a different result the second time around.

IMO, adding an additional game to the suspensions is similar to an "admission against interest" (basically a statement by the defendant that tends to establish his guilt). It's not exactly the same, for a variety of reasons, but I think that extending the suspensions now makes it much more difficult to argue for leniency later.

You don't plea bargain unilaterally. In other words, you don't impose a punishment on yourself and then ask the prosecutor to accept it because you think that it's fair ... even if it IS fair. IMO, Ohio State would run a great risk by suspending the players for the Sugar Bowl and then trying after the fact to get the NCAA to allow the Sugar Bowl to count as part of the NCAA's five-game suspension ... especially because the NCAA has already said that it won't count.

I'm sure that Ohio State's lawyers are up to speed on these issues, and that they will advise the school and the team to do what is "best under the circumstances" ... which by the way will not necessarily coincide with every fan's, announcer's, sports writer's, etc. notion of what is "right". If the guys in the pinstripe suits think that they can cut a good deal with the NCAA, then I'm sure that they will do it ... and if part of such a deal includes suspensions in the Sugar Bowl, then I'm sure that the players will be suspended. But it is my understanding that the lawyering is on hold for a while, so I don't anticipate any change in the players' statuses.

Here's one final legal aspect to consider: If Ohio State suspends the players for the Sugar Bowl, won't the players have the right to appeal those suspensions? If so, what will come out in those hearings? What will the suspended players say in their own defense? Will they point fingers at their co-defendants? Or at players who have not been implicated? Will they blame compliance or the coaching staff for anything? Will anything said in those hearings negatively impact the proceedings with the NCAA? Do we really want to know the answers to those questions?

I'd honestly prefer to have them suspended now and have them for the Michigan State game. The school would avoid PR issues and we probably wouldn't be hurt next year in terms of record.... OSU is going to take a huge PR hit if these guys play in the Sugar Bowl. I don't like seeing OSU's name ran through the mud because of something they had nothing to do with.... My side is all about the PR. I don't think OSU deserves a lesser reputation because a handful of kids wanted some tattoos. And that's exactly what will happen if they play in the Sugar Bowl, fair or not.

Bingo! I believe that most of the people asking for suspensions now are worried about the "PR issues" ... you yourself mentioned it three times in your post.

I'm pretty sure that The Ohio State University can handle the stain on its name caused by five players selling memorabilia for tattoos ... I mean, Ohio State didn't do anything wrong in this instance, as their was no lack of institutional control, no culture of corruption. I don't think that Ohio State will have a "lesser reputation" based on this incident, or based on how the school/team is handling it.

Jim Tressel gets paid a ton of money every year, partly to handle the PR issues ... and he seems to handle them very well. I'm not saying that he enjoys bad publicity, but it certainly doesn't bother him publicly. And again, Tressel did nothing wrong here, and absolutely no one is suggesting that he has, so there's no reason for his to save face by extending the suspensions to include the Sugar Bowl.

The players who did nothing wrong have no PR issues to deal with.

The players who did something wrong will have PR issues to deal with. That's to be expected when you do something wrong.

The Ohio State University will not do something against its interest, or the interests of the team and its players, just to avoid bad PR. And if the school would ever do such a thing, then they'll get a ton of bad PR from me.