Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
BrutusBobcat;1920389; said:So the $0 car wasn't a $0 car, as the rational members on here already knew. Half the cars selling below the "market average", of course, what anyone who has lasted past the "hand out the syllabus" stage of an intro stats class would expect, and the Dispatch is already "walking back" their little yellow journalism drive by.
Amazing.
Which leaves me with a question -- is the "objective" Ohio State fan still supposed to be demanding the immediate firing of Tressel, Smith and the entire compliance department and that the NCAA immediately suspend the football program until further notice? I mean, I want to be objective so as not to be an embarrassment to rational fans who have carefully weighed the evidence and waited for facts to be presented. /sarcasm
Saw31;1920406; said:Need to send more journalists to middle eastern countries in turmoil so they can be beaten by a mob...
y0yoyoin;1920415; said:
Rest of the article here.He doesn’t expect Jim Tressel to be on the sidelines coaching any football games in the 2011 season.
“I’d be surprised if he’s coaching next year (2011). Why I say that is I think there is more stuff coming out,” the Ohio State legend said.
So what has to happen, in my opinion, is that the people in charge have to take an honest look and say, ‘What is best for the university moving forward?’ Then they have to make a hard decision.
“And I do believe Coach Tressel owes it to our university, he has to look in the mirror and say, ‘What is best for the university looking forward.?’ ”
BKB, you are skipping over the core holding in the Auburn Newton ruling. One, the dad's offer was to Mississippi State - who declined to participate with Mr. Newton, and in fact reported the offer to either the SEC or NCAA or both, I forget how it went down. Auburn is a different story.Buckeyeskickbuttocks;1920375; said:It occurred to me - all the players who had family members also buy car have to do is say "I had no idea" and that should be sufficient under the Cam Newton holding....
They are the same, in that respect. The sins of the father are supposed to count against the son (NCAA rules-wise). But... we already know the NCAA doesn't believe that in a [censored]ing pay for play scheme, so why would they enforce it now?
BuckeyeNation27;1920062; said:Fine. Replace the helmets with every single jersey they sell.
Christ.
Gatorubet;1920428; said:BKB, you are skipping over the core holding in the Auburn Newton ruling. One, the dad's offer was to Mississippi State - who declined to participate with Mr. Newton, and in fact reported the offer to either the SEC or NCAA or both, I forget how it went down. Auburn is a different story.
As it stands, there is currently no evidence that Auburn was offered (or accepted) a plan to give improper benefits to Cam or his dad. Put another way, until you find that Auburn was approached or agreed to pay Cam, there is nothing you can point to regarding Auburn or Cam that is illegal because of his playing for Auburn.
If people associated with tOSU or family members of tOSU athletes took (or agreed to take) improper benefits, then they are in trouble. Not because of the sins of the father thing is ignored, but because the improper benefits were taken when they played for the institution the kid played for, and not an institution that they thought about playing for before the kids decided on tOSU.