MaliBuckeye
1) Be A Man.
jwinslow;1894164; said:
I agree, but think it's been interesting that it was THE storyline for Bruce Pearl, but not mentioned at all for Jim Calhoun.
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter buckeyeinfla
- Start date
- Status
I agree, but think it's been interesting that it was THE storyline for Bruce Pearl, but not mentioned at all for Jim Calhoun.
JBaney45
Hall of Fame
I expect there to be NO MORE NCAA violations of any kind:
http://twitter.com/#!/OSUCompliance
So to break it down:
Tomato=Not a violation
Tomato Ketchup=Violation
Pumpkins=Need further clarification as to whether or not it is a violation
No one wants to forfeit their National Championship over a couple of packets of Jelly
http://twitter.com/#!/OSUCompliance
So to break it down:
Tomato=Not a violation
Tomato Ketchup=Violation
Pumpkins=Need further clarification as to whether or not it is a violation
No one wants to forfeit their National Championship over a couple of packets of Jelly
Upvote
0
MaliBuckeye
1) Be A Man.
JBaney45;1895407; said:
Yup, I don't think we're ready for that jelly.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Jagdaddy
Head Coach
At this point, I'm well beyond giving a fuck about what anybody besides me thinks of this kerfuffle; except to the extent that I'll be annoyed when some media douche bag makes some reference to it as part of the first question asked of Thad Matta when the Buckeyes win the men's hoops NC. As to what I think:
1. The current punishment is appropriate and should end the matter in any sane person's eyes. I'd have preferred that the imbeciles Ohio State hires to handle PR would have come up with this solution as part of the original presser. JT's cover-up was stupid and wrong but let's not forget that there's no underlying institutional misconduct, that the total financial value of the violations is negligible, and that the rule violated is at least arguably idiotic. In the grand scheme of NCAA things this just isn't that big of a deal.
2. I don't buy that the only choices as to why JT covered the matter up are the given confidentiality of a federal investigation excuse, a primary motivation of keeping guys eligible to get wins, or honest naivety about the rules. I think that the most logical explanation is that JT believed that the shitstorm of reporting the alleged violations would be grossly out of proportion to what they were and would be unfair to the players involved and that Cicero (an idiot BTW) could also be screwed if JT didn't keep things confidential. I also believe that JT wanted to keep the players on the field for competitive reasons and to avoid being reamed for not keeping closer tabs on them, but that these were secondary considerations. Finally, I believe that he knew that what he was doing was wrong but "looked to find a reason to believe" that they weren't and convinced himself that his actions were serving the greater good (the protection and subsequent personal development of the players involved).
3. The criticism of JT as having positioned himself as some sort of moral saint iwho is now getting his comeuppance is overblown. Initially, much of that came from Andy Geiger as partial justification for whacking John Cooper (and I think it's clear that JT has placed far more emphasis on academics and family atmosphere than Cooper ever did). I view JT's books and the Winners Manual and the Block O of life as unalloyed goods (even though I don't personally agree with every single thing in them) that he generated at least 95% to help other people and only MAYBE 5% to establish his own virtue in the public eye, and I've read the first and skimmed the second.
4. In line with ORD, I do think that JT has a tendency to substitute his own moral compass and professional judgment for that of anyone else's to an unusually high degree: I will say, however, that the vast majority of time that has served him, his players, and OSU very well. While it hasn't this time, sometimes if you treat your job as a "calling" rather than a job (it's not about the ball) you can mislead yourself, but IMO it's a fairly small price to pay for all the good the man has done over time.
5. I don't buy the haters' theory that JT is nothing more than a fraud/con man. Frankly, there's simply far too much evidence to the contrary established over far too long of a period of time for me to believe that: I simply don't believe that anybody could "fake it" for that long. I have ZERO doubt that he's a far better human being than the vast majority, and quite possibly all, of the writers criticizing him.
Rant over. Avanti.
1. The current punishment is appropriate and should end the matter in any sane person's eyes. I'd have preferred that the imbeciles Ohio State hires to handle PR would have come up with this solution as part of the original presser. JT's cover-up was stupid and wrong but let's not forget that there's no underlying institutional misconduct, that the total financial value of the violations is negligible, and that the rule violated is at least arguably idiotic. In the grand scheme of NCAA things this just isn't that big of a deal.
2. I don't buy that the only choices as to why JT covered the matter up are the given confidentiality of a federal investigation excuse, a primary motivation of keeping guys eligible to get wins, or honest naivety about the rules. I think that the most logical explanation is that JT believed that the shitstorm of reporting the alleged violations would be grossly out of proportion to what they were and would be unfair to the players involved and that Cicero (an idiot BTW) could also be screwed if JT didn't keep things confidential. I also believe that JT wanted to keep the players on the field for competitive reasons and to avoid being reamed for not keeping closer tabs on them, but that these were secondary considerations. Finally, I believe that he knew that what he was doing was wrong but "looked to find a reason to believe" that they weren't and convinced himself that his actions were serving the greater good (the protection and subsequent personal development of the players involved).
3. The criticism of JT as having positioned himself as some sort of moral saint iwho is now getting his comeuppance is overblown. Initially, much of that came from Andy Geiger as partial justification for whacking John Cooper (and I think it's clear that JT has placed far more emphasis on academics and family atmosphere than Cooper ever did). I view JT's books and the Winners Manual and the Block O of life as unalloyed goods (even though I don't personally agree with every single thing in them) that he generated at least 95% to help other people and only MAYBE 5% to establish his own virtue in the public eye, and I've read the first and skimmed the second.
4. In line with ORD, I do think that JT has a tendency to substitute his own moral compass and professional judgment for that of anyone else's to an unusually high degree: I will say, however, that the vast majority of time that has served him, his players, and OSU very well. While it hasn't this time, sometimes if you treat your job as a "calling" rather than a job (it's not about the ball) you can mislead yourself, but IMO it's a fairly small price to pay for all the good the man has done over time.
5. I don't buy the haters' theory that JT is nothing more than a fraud/con man. Frankly, there's simply far too much evidence to the contrary established over far too long of a period of time for me to believe that: I simply don't believe that anybody could "fake it" for that long. I have ZERO doubt that he's a far better human being than the vast majority, and quite possibly all, of the writers criticizing him.
Rant over. Avanti.
Upvote
0
When Tressel goes out and commits another blatant violation soon after apologizing for another recent violation, then I'll accept that comparison.TJnTN;1895694; said:
Upvote
0
Diego-Bucks
Lost in Canada
No. You have situations that are drastically different from one another that it would be highly unwarranted to end up with the same solution.
Upvote
0
JBaney45
Hall of Fame
TJnTN;1895694; said:
A year suspension would be a pretty big blow and since we are imo in the last few years of Tressel's career (I say 2014 is the latest he coaches) he could choose to hang it up if he faced that.
For reasons I've already stated I don't think the NCAA can pull off that type of punishment
You also can't ignore the fact that Pearl hasn't put up a Tressel like record on the hard wood. He's been pretty good yea, but not able to climb that hump. Notice he was only fired AFTER they were embarrassed in the tourney. If Pearl was winning the SEC year in and year out and making final fours he would still have a job. Throw on top of that all the football issues with Tennessee where they can't exactly afford to try to the NCAA's patience too much in their second sport
Upvote
0
Many pages ago, I had a spirited debate about the fact that no coach would ever out his players for anything that he couldn't handle internally. Interestingly, Mr. Bucknuts basically says this same thing in his bucket this week.
http://ohiostate.247sports.com/Article/Mr-Bucknuts-First-247-Bucket-18895
?Bob Hunter's relentlessly critical column about Jim Tressel's NCAA rules violation has it wrong. There is no doubt that there is a violation that must be punished. However, Hunter misses the most important point. Tressel did the right thing. There are times when a principled person like Tressel has to do something that violates the rules because, notwithstanding the rules, it is more important to protect his kids against being treated like criminals - when they are not. When that happens, he must suffer the consequences, but he still knows in his heart that, consequences and all, he had no other choice.
http://ohiostate.247sports.com/Article/Mr-Bucknuts-First-247-Bucket-18895
?Bob Hunter's relentlessly critical column about Jim Tressel's NCAA rules violation has it wrong. There is no doubt that there is a violation that must be punished. However, Hunter misses the most important point. Tressel did the right thing. There are times when a principled person like Tressel has to do something that violates the rules because, notwithstanding the rules, it is more important to protect his kids against being treated like criminals - when they are not. When that happens, he must suffer the consequences, but he still knows in his heart that, consequences and all, he had no other choice.
Upvote
0
- Status