• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Team Meeting and Presser (Merged)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
MililaniBuckeye said:
Source?
Click to expand...
Milli:

I have a good source, but like a lot of people who have sources I will not reveal his name. You can choose to believe it, or (like O8ch said) you can choose to believe I'm making it up as I go along.

That was what was said, though: next one that screws up is gone. Maybe it was an idle threat, I don't know. I guess we'll find out (hopefully we won't).
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch said:
That is directly counter to everything I am reading. Do you have a source for this news that is not being reported? Or are you just passing on rumors and making it up as you go along?
Click to expand...
According to a poster at Bucknuts, who I trust on this one because of a fairly close connection to one of the players, and because other posters in a position to challenge it have not done so, Tressel informed certain players who were already skating on thin ice, with multiple or serious screw-ups, that one more screw-up and they were out for good. He informed several others who had already had a screw-up, but not as bad or as many as the prior group, that one more screw-up and they were suspended for the season. The ultimatims were only given to specific players, not to the team as a whole.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
seedubya said:
For the record, I did not get my info from a poster on Bucknuts. FWIW...
Click to expand...
And your point is...?

Obviously you didn't get it from the poster on BN, since your version is considerably different. I choose to go with the BN guy because of its detail and his past reliability, and because, IMO, your version is inherently unlikely. It is much more likely that such an ultimatim would be reserved for past offenders.
 
Upvote 0
hoyalawbuck said:
Obviously you didn't get it from the poster on BN, since your version is considerably different. IMO, your version is inherently unlikely.
Click to expand...
Why is his version unlikely? A new AD trying to change the climate and establish his position would certainly be capable of such a demand.
 
Upvote 0
According to a poster at Bucknuts, who I trust on this one because of a fairly close connection to one of the players, and because other posters in a position to challenge it have not done so, Tressel informed certain players who were already skating on thin ice, with multiple or serious screw-ups, that one more screw-up and they were out for good. He informed several others who had already had a screw-up, but not as bad or as many as the prior group, that one more screw-up and they were suspended for the season. The ultimatims were only given to specific players, not to the team as a whole.
Click to expand...

I have also seen it suggested that JT singled these folks out in a team meeting. I might expect that of an 8th grade English teacher who was trying to figure out who had put a lizard in her desk drawer, but not from an experienced coach and manager.

Now, has Tressel spoken to various players about their indescretions? I would hope so. Are there players who have made mistakes and who would be in serious trouble if they continue to make mistakes? Certainly. Might JT have discussed this with them? Again, I hope so. Might word of this have flitered out through various conversations involving players, and from there via additoinal conversation to folks who know players? That is pretty much the way the world works. Might some of these 'folks' have Internet access. I would imagine.

In other words, no news here.
 
Upvote 0
hoyalawbuck said:
And your point is...?
Click to expand...
My point is, I got my info from someone whom I know personally and not some internet message board. That's all. Sorry you took offense to it, no offense intended.

I heard what I heard, and I'll stand by it.

Grad21, thanks for supporting my back! Exactly right, why is what I know unlikely... maybe because it is true? :wink:
 
Upvote 0
osugrad21 said:
Why is his version unlikely? A new AD trying to change the climate and establish his position would certainly be capable of such a demand.
Click to expand...
If you don't see it as unlikely, then you don't. I do, because it would be an unreasonably severe penalty for a minor first-time offense, but not for a previous serious or multiple offender.
 
Upvote 0
hoyalawbuck said:
If you don't see it as unlikely, then you don't. I do, because it would be an unreasonably severe penalty for a minor first-time offense, but not for a previous serious or multiple offender.
Click to expand...
Drn...either scenario is not beyond my belief. However, I do see Smith laying out the law to JT and then JT laying it out the players. Therefore, both of your scenarios are quite possible.
 
Upvote 0
seedubya said:
My point is, I got my info from someone whom I know personally and not some internet message board. That's all. Sorry you took offense to it, no offense intended.

I heard what I heard, and I'll stand by it.

Grad21, thanks for supporting my back! Exactly right, why is what I know unlikely... maybe because it is true? :wink:
Click to expand...
I wasn't offended in the least. For the reason I stated to osugrad21, I find your version unlikely, but I don't demand that anyone agree with me. That is the same reason why, although I would agree that normally direct information is more likely to be reliable than secondhand information, in this case I personally choose to believe my secondhand source. And while I also generally agree with your implicit reservations about trusting info from internet posters, that concern is lessened when the source has provided similar, reliable info in the past. In this case, the details provided by the source make it virtually impossible that his direct source was simply inaccurately reporting; either things happened the way he stated, or the poster or his source were deliberately lying. I'm convinced that that was not the case.

BTW, I hope you don't think I am challenging your veracity, because I'm not, not in the least. Both you and my BN poster got it first hand. If we assume both you and the BN poster were reporting accurately (and I do), then the difference lies in what the original source reported. The details provided by the BN poster's source were specific; I don't know exactly what your source told you, but if he simply stated that Tressel said the next screw-up would mean dismissal from the team, he may have simply omitted the information that this was stated only to certain players - namely, past screw-ups.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
hoyalawbuck said:
Both you and my BN poster got it first hand. If we assume both you and the BN poster were reporting accurately (and I do), then the difference lies in what the original source reported. The details provided by the BN poster's source were specific; I don't know exactly what your source told you, but if he simply stated that Tressel said the next screw-up would mean dismissal from the team, he may have simply omitted the information that this was stated only to certain players - namely, past screw-ups.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. What was said to me was, among other things, "a zero tolerance policy". I don't know if that means dismissal from the team or not, and I don't think I ever said that. But the message was clear. Whether that meant first-time offenders or second-time offenders, my source was not specific.

But it was pretty clear that the directive came from above, and was in turn communicated to the team. They are pretty serious: no more screw-ups!

It's all good, hoyalawbuck. Seeing as how my reputation states I am pure scUM, I just didn't want people to think I went over to BN, read a post over there, and came over here and embellished. That's all.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top