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

[billmac91]

Cinci ? Where has it come out that Gene Smith lied and that the compliance instruction actually took place? Just the Thad Gibson comments? And where has it come out the players lied about helping their families and actually just got tats? I thought in the NCAA the money amounts were for cash they received and the services amounts were for the tattoos?

I also continue to fail to understand how there is an ethical decision to made regarding whether to suspend them for the bowl. They players broke an NCAA rule and the NCAA punished them by suspending them for five games next year. Why the University would take the extreme step of suspending them for an extra game when they are already appealing the length of the suspension is beyond me. I can?t recall any team that has ever imposed a stiffer suspension than that imposed by the league or governing body of the sport for a violating of league/governing body rules.

As for Tressel taking the easy road by letting the seniors decide whether they play in the bowl, I completely disagree. I think the decision he made is absolutely appropriate and very smart. This seems to be quite a unique incident, what with the players apparent lack of knowledge of the rule, the fact it took place some time ago, and that an NCAA punishment had already been handed down. Right now it is simply a matter of them having made a decision that caused a distraction and let their teammates down. Who better to decide if they play than those very teammates?

You can basically put 2 and 2 together...

Terrelle Pryor tweeted he paid for his tattoos. Terrelle Pryor was also caught selling memorabilia for cash. Gene Smith said the players were selling the items due to the economic times.

So again, Terrelle says he paid for his tattoos (from what I've been told - 2 sleeves with as much color as his could easily be in the thousands) but had to sell his memorabilia to help his mother.

Maybe his mom needed him to get those tattoos and it somehow helped her soul? I'm not sure.

Our AD made an ass of the university by spinning the situation to fit what the NCAA wanted. That's what burns me. I can't see any scenario where Andy Geiger gets up there and sugar-coats the situation so the players can play in a bowl game.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

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?

Harvard might have been a bad comparison, particularly since the Ivies don't offer any athletic scholarships to begin with. I, however, do agree with the underlying premise. Just change the name of the school. Virtually every mid-major football program and athletic department lose money, yet those players are on full scholarship. Nobody can tell me that someone is going to Boise for the education unless driving a Peterbilt has been a lifelong dream, and they're clearly not bringing in millions for their school, so that completely undercuts the argument for giving them any formal payment beyond the terms of their scholarship.

With regards to the bigger picture, I've stated before that I don't believe the players are bringing in a single penny at Ohio State. If all of the Buckeye 5 had chosen one of their other offers, Ohio State would be pulling in the exact same amount of television, attendance and bowl money as they did with them. The program and the brand that it has created over the last century are what drive the revenue.

 

[kentuckbuck]

If only there were an upcoming buckeye bowl game to distract us from this topic.......

Let's hope the team and staff are more focused moving forward than the fans are!

Go Bucks!!!

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

The rule was in place. Ignorance of the rule is not excusable in any legal system that I'm aware of. It is clear that they had the opportunity to know what the rule was. It has been stated by a member of the team at the time under consideration that the athletic department and the coaches made the rule clear.

Since the story broke we have been told by the AD and the HC that it was something not taught -- clearly trying to CYA for the athletes. By the players that it was money spent to help out the family, not for tattoos. We have subsequently discovered that both statements were false.

If this team is, as advertised, a family then this is a case en loco parentis and the parents (i.e. the Athletic department, the coaches and the university) have the obligation to make and enforce the punishment, not to push that responsibility down on the oldest siblings.

In essence the actions of a few have a great impact on the lives of many. To allow them to play seems to me to validate a sliding moral code -- yes, that was illegal, but not bowl game illegal behavior. It suggests that we can neatly compartmentalize just how illegal depending on perceived impact in the eyes of several interested parties.

For this, I find fault in the players (thanks Script O), the athletic department, the university, the BCS and the NCAA, All have failed to step up to the matter squarely.

If this is not an ethical issue, then how is the Cam Newton situation any different?

I have to agree that Gene Smith's press conference was pretty horrible. Both the statement of "helping out their families" (proof please!) and throwing the compliance department under the bus to the national press were pretty damned revolting. I've gone from simply not being a fan of Gene Smith (Geiger-Light anyone?) to now actually longing for the day that he hits the road.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Harvard might have been a bad comparison, particularly since the Ivies don't offer any athletic scholarships to begin with. I, however, do agree with the underlying premise.

Learn something new every day...

With regards to the bigger picture, I've stated before that I don't believe the players are bringing in a single penny at Ohio State. If all of the Buckeye 5 had chosen one of their other offers, Ohio State would be pulling in the exact same amount of television, attendance and bowl money as they did with them. The program and the brand that it has created over the last century are what drive the revenue

QFT

 

[Bleed S & G]

Cinci ? Where has it come out that Gene Smith lied and that the compliance instruction actually took place? Just the Thad Gibson comments? And where has it come out the players lied about helping their families and actually just got tats? I thought in the NCAA the money amounts were for cash they received and the services amounts were for the tattoos?

Even Speilman said they were taught back in the 80's not to do this stuff.. NO WAY these guys weren't taught/told about this rule.. it's total bullshit, IMO.

Our AD made an ass of the university by spinning the situation to fit what the NCAA wanted. That's what burns me. I can't see any scenario where Andy Geiger gets up there and sugar-coats the situation so the players can play in a bowl game.

Couldn;t agree more Bill. I would have much rather these guys come out and say "hey, we fucked up." The spin is disgusting and embarrassing as a fan - I don't expect others to feel this way.. but it does embarrass me, personally, as a fan.

 

[osugrad21]

Harvard might have been a bad comparison, particularly since the Ivies don't offer any athletic scholarships to begin with.

True...to a point. It is a semantics thing...there are numerous grants/scholarships in place to cover athletes. Heard Dartmouth and Brown recruiting pitches over the last couple of years...not called an athletic scholarship, but many of the 'grants' are athlete specific.

 

[stkoran]

As an initial matter, here is a picture of Terrelle in high school, already with a significant amount of tattoos, so it's not like he got all of them while in college:

Also, it is very possible that some of the cash went for tattoos while the rest of it went towards other expenses and/or helping their families. That could very well be completely false, but we really don't know either way.

I am also really curious why so many people think that Gene Smith was lying when he said that OSU didn't provide proper compliance education on this issue? I think it is a bold claim indeed that the Ohio State Athletic Director would lie to the public regarding this issue. What I especially don't understand is that if he is indeed lying, why he wouldn't have just said that they were never properly instructed, versus that they were not instructed when the violations occurred, but did receive proper instruction later, when that is the reason they are getting an extra game suspension. And the University had already suspended them for the bowl game, so it's not as if he made that up to get them eligible for it. Heck, he could have just slowed down the investigation and released the findings post bowl game if he wanted to ensure that they players were eligible. But he did not of those things.

In actuality, I feel like it would have been much easier to just say that the players made a mistake and leave it at that. Instead, he conducted a swift investigation, immediately levied suspensions, and admitted to an institutional failure, placing his department at fault. I feel like we'd be much better off if more institutions conducted investigations in this manner, and were actually able to critically evaluate themselves and where they have failed.

Edit: 1) why would OSU have taught this in the 80s since it wasn't against the rules then? 2) just because something was covered 25 years ago doesn't mean it was covered in the specific training sessions pertinent here. I'm sure that they interviewed they compliance staff that presented the pertinent training sessions and reviewed the materials distributed at the same to find out what was in fact taught.

 

[BB73]

True...to a point. It is a semantics thing...there are numerous grants/scholarships in place to cover athletes. Heard Dartmouth and Brown recruiting pitches over the last couple of years...not called an athletic scholarship, but many of the 'grants' are athlete specific.

I had a conversation with somebody about admissions over the weekend. She had a discussion with the head of Admissions at one of those places. The person told her that they had certain criteria to meet, in terms of specifics and in terms of diversity. They'll fill designated spots for flute players, fullbacks, etc., and after those were filled up they would go over the remainder of the applicants.

 

[Jake]

These same 5 guys played all season (after the events occurred), I don't feel any less about the wins we have or the one we will have in bowl game with them playing.

Nor do I. The governing body made the decision and Ohio State is following it. I see no reason to apologize for it nor would there be any benefit to OSU to go beyond the decision and sit them for the bowl game, other than (apparently) make some people feel better. I don't understand that thought process but I do understand consistency.

Those who feel they should sit out the bowl game, lest a potential win be tainted or the like, should also be calling for OSU to forfeit every win it has garnered since the events took place. I haven't seen ANYONE suggest that course, although I admit I have not read every post in this thread.

 

[Steve19]

A brief reminder. Dismounting can be difficult.

 

[PlanetFrnd]

True...to a point. It is a semantics thing...there are numerous grants/scholarships in place to cover athletes. Heard Dartmouth and Brown recruiting pitches over the last couple of years...not called an athletic scholarship, but many of the 'grants' are athlete specific.

I had a conversation with somebody about admissions over the weekend. She had a discussion with the head of Admissions at one of those places. The person told her that they had certain criteria to meet, in terms of specifics and in terms of diversity. They'll fill designated spots for flute players, fullbacks, etc., and after those were filled up they would go over the remainder of the applicants.

Ivy aid packages are need-based (no athletic or academic 'scholarships'), and require a host of paperwork to determine a student's family's household income to determine the amount of aid needed... that being said, going back about 8-9 years now, most Ivies (I think all, actually, but I haven't been keeping up) offer a shitton of aid to remain competitive with the other schools to attract the top students, athletes or otherwise

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I'm pretty sick of this high road stuff. If a judge sentences me to 2 years probation, I'm not about to insist I serve 5 years hard time instead.

 

[stowfan]

I'm pretty sick of this high road stuff. If a judge sentences me to 2 years probation, I'm not about to insist I serve 5 years hard time instead.

Agreed, If JT feels his players have been punished enough, I have no problem with his being man enough to say so, regardless of what anyone thinks.

 

[JBaney45]

As an initial matter, here is a picture of Terrelle in high school, already with a significant amount of tattoos, so it's not like he got all of them while in college:

There's significant irony here in that the tattoo that he received is almost certainly the Block "O" Ohio State tat with the buckeye leaves.