• 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!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Yahoo, Tattoos, and tOSU (1-year bowl ban, 82 scholly limit for 3 years)

Status
Not open for further replies.
3074326;1931079; said:
I personally think it's worse. Years of what boils down to pay for play is worse to me than extra practice. Either way, they're difficult to compare because they're so different.

I think there should be a disctinction drawn between some guys trading memorabilia for extra benefits, which at this point has not been shown to be known by the university (other than JT getting the emails about 2 guys in April '10) ; and other situations where athletes have been handed bags of cash by assistant coaches or allegedly received debit cards from a bank owned by somebody on the board of trustees for a university, or allegedly gotten rigged payoffs at a racetrack/casino owned by a prominent booster. Or Ed Martin giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to a handful of basketball players.

I agree that the tOSU situation is worse than 'practice-gate' at TSUN, but until any payments are known to be arranged by somebody associated with tOSU, I don't think it's right to use the 'pay-to-play' phrase.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck;1931044; said:
Let's face it: elite HS athletes commonly live a life in which they are treated like pampered superstars, and many if not most of them acquire some level of "entitlement" in their attitudes. That doesn't make them bad people; it must be hard to hear that kind of praise all the time without its going to your head.

This is very true.

Celebrities of every stripe live inside a sort of bubble. They have handlers/enablers/posse that shield them from, and take care of for them, life's unpleasant little details and are often genuinely ignorant of, and blind-sided by, life's realities when confronted by them.

I doubt very much that anyone - say a car dealer - is going to say "Because you are an OSU football player, I'm giving you this sweet deal on a car". It just happens. And anyone who gets that sweet deal would naturally think that the sweet deal is standard operating procedure available to anyone - that it's just how car dealers work. That would apply especially to kids who grew up poor/without fathers/etc.
 
Upvote 0
3074326;1931125; said:
I get his point. Tressel covering up info didn't make OSU a better team. They weren't juicing, they weren't practicing more.

But they were ineligible, and that's a competitive advantage.

Personally, I think you're splitting hairs that don't need to be split. I mean, you're pretty much arguing that you know the vanilla ice cream is yummy because you ate it already.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks;1931129; said:
Personally, I think you're splitting hairs that don't need to be split. I mean, you're pretty much arguing that you know the vanilla ice cream is yummy because you ate it already.

This is the same as every debate I've ever been in with Kyle. It's usually over something very minor in the grand scheme of things.

No offense Kyle, you fuck. :p
 
Upvote 0
3074326;1931125; said:
I get his point. Tressel covering up info didn't make OSU a better team. They weren't juicing, they weren't practicing more.

But they were ineligible, and that's a competitive advantage.
I thought the point was whether jaywalking or dead hooker buying gives one a better competitive advantage.

I vote for dead hooker burying, as it unquestionably builds up the forearms..............I've read. :paranoid:
 
Upvote 0
I get his point. Tressel covering up info didn't make OSU a better team. They weren't juicing, they weren't practicing more.

But they were ineligible, and that's a competitive advantage.
i don't think that's his point. selling things you own but might not necessarily want for things you do want is not a competitive advantage.
 
Upvote 0
BuckeyeNation27;1931133; said:
i don't think that's his point. selling things you own but might not necessarily want for things you do want is not a competitive advantage.

We were talking about the playing of ineligible players.

Who gives a shit either way? OSU broke the rules and we're all seeing the consequences. Whether or not we think it's a competitive advantage or not is pretty irrelevant.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top