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

[Taosman]

"Evil will always triumph because good is dumb!"

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2-J_2Rqxd0"]Morality - Solved - YouTube[/ame]

 

[bassbuckeye07]

maybe this belongs in the Gee thread but a pretty good piece



link

On a layover in Chicago, Gee settled into the American Airlines Admirals Club and called his office to check in. Herb Asher, counselor to the president, dispensed with the usual pleasantries. ?You won?t be happy with this,? Asher started. Then he delivered the bad news.
The football program Gee often referred to as the ?university?s budget running up and down the field? would soon be under N.C.A.A. investigation for apparent rules violations that included players selling memorabilia for cash and tattoos. Worse yet, e-mails that shattered Coach Jim Tressel?s earlier explanation of ignorance had been uncovered in Gee?s absence.
He scheduled a series of meetings for the next day, knowing this threatened to undermine the progress the university had made on other fronts. For all the ways Ohio State could be measured ? its importance to the state?s economy, the $1 billion medical center under construction, its half million living alumni ? Gee believes that even if football revenue represents only one-half of one percent of the total budget, it also garners 90 percent of the attention, an imbalance for which he has spent years trying to exploit and correct.
Until that month, Gee, 67, enjoyed his reputation as an outspoken critic of Division I athletics, as a grand reformer, bespectacled and bow-tied, who once ?declared war? on the culture of college sports. He knew this reputation would collide with the transgressions of the football program, his pleas for change marked hypocritical in the wake of the investigation.

 

[buckeyeinfla]

I go back to Dan Wetzel's tweet that osu is in the clear...he seems to have someone in the NCAA

 

[GeorgiaBuck2]

I don't know why, but the title of this thread reminds me of this:

One of the best movies of all time.

 

[Pheasant]

One of the best movies of all time.

Unless you think Steve Martin is so annoying you'd rather remove your toenails with a corkscrew than sit through an entire movie he stars in.

 

[GeorgiaBuck2]

I didn't find him annoying at all during Planes and Trains. John Candy is supposed to be the annoying one.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

I'm not trying to be Debbie Downer, but some of the language out of NCAA infractions has been more threatening than we have heard for a while....the "not bound by prior decisions" and the "need to increase penalties to deter" type sound bites.

That pretty much sums up my thoughts over this whole debacle. I expect to be void of postseason play this season, maybe next. The NCAA is the joke rent-a-cop who is being laughed at, I just get this feeling that they are going to come down on OSU in a fashion that will make us an example.

The NCAA also wants to make sure they don't deter self-reporting. If they ape-fuck us "to set an example", that example will be "no matter if you self-report like Ohio State or tell us to 'Fuck off!' and be completely uncooperative like USC, where gonna hammer you". And schools will roll the dice on hiding shit rather than come forward like we did. If, on the other hand, the NCAA comes forward and praises Ohio State on its openness and its diligence, and adds no additional penalties at all, you'll have schools going out of their way to report shit as soon as they find it.

 

[MaliBuckeye]

The NCAA also wants to make sure they don't deter self-reporting. If they ape-fuck us "to set an example", that example will be "no matter if you self-report like Ohio State or tell us to 'Fuck off!' and be completely uncooperative like USC, where gonna hammer you". And schools will roll the dice on hiding shit rather than come forward like we did. If, on the other hand, the NCAA comes forward and praises Ohio State on its openness and its diligence, and adds no additional penalties at all, you'll have schools going out of their way to report shit as soon as they find it.

Just to be clear, the "uncooperative like USC" thing is somewhat of a myth.

While the investigation took forever due to lack of subpoena power and the main figures being long gone from LA, and while the former AD had an air of arrogance/jackassery about him, the NCAA actually commended USC for their cooperation in the final report.

Of course, cooperation with a compliance office of one staffer might look a bit different than what Ohio State can and has provided...

 

[Gatorubet]

The NCAA also wants to make sure they don't deter self-reporting. If they ape-[censored] us "to set an example", that example will be "no matter if you self-report like Ohio State or tell us to '[censored] off!' and be completely uncooperative like USC, where gonna hammer you". And schools will roll the dice on hiding [Mark May] rather than come forward like we did. If, on the other hand, the NCAA comes forward and praises Ohio State on its openness and its diligence, and adds no additional penalties at all, you'll have schools going out of their way to report [Mark May] as soon as they find it.

Well, it is a difficult balance, to be sure. Your reasoning is valid. So is the thinking that not punishing a program severely when that program's head coach commits an infraction could lead to a "wink-wink" deal where the coach can do what he feels he needs to do to win or be competitive - and if it goes south, the agreed deal is for the coach to fall on the sword while the program shakes its head and utters a loud "Tsk-tsk!" - and then hires the next guy.

Ultimately, the sanctions are to deter behavior by the program, not the coach. Taking out the coach - but leaving the program with no schollie reductions or bowl bans - could be seen as too light. I mean, the NCAA knows almost all fan bases will respond with a "Who cares about vacated wins - we all know who won on the field!" type attitude - and just limiting the bad news to vacated wins and a new coach may not be the message that they want to send for the reason I gave.

The thing is, both arguments have merit. They are - in essence - the two sides of the carrot and the stick, with the carrot being recognition of the self report and the stick being whatever they think they have to do to get everyone's attention. I see the hesitancy to create - or "find" - or "allege" a LOIC or FTM finding as the carrot from the fantastic self report tOSU did when it found the e-mails.* Are the vacated wins and championship enough to satisfy the stick?? It would not surprise me to see them accept the offered penalty, or to add on a smidgen of scholly reductions to satisfy the out-for-blood demographic.

The good news is they will not leave you hanging in February at NLOI signing time. Whatever is gonna happen will have happened. That way the uncertainty cannot screw up recruiting - as uncertainty in and of itself is a bad thing.


* I agree that the facts really do not support it - but you can create about anything you want from the facts. Hell, they could go after the "Tress was previously found to be deficient in timely reporting infractions" rabbit hole and invent some hindsight-ish B.S. thing you "should have done". The Bastards can justify about anything, really.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Well, it is a difficult balance, to be sure. Your reasoning is valid. So is the thinking that not punishing a program severely when that program's head coach commits an infraction could lead to a "wink-wink" deal where the coach can do what he feels he needs to do to win or be competitive - and if it goes south, the agreed deal is for the coach to fall on the sword while the program shakes its head and utters a loud "Tsk-tsk!" - and then hires the next guy.

Ultimately, the sanctions are to deter behavior by the program, not the coach. Taking out the coach - but leaving the program with no schollie reductions or bowl bans - could be seen as too light. I mean, the NCAA knows almost all fan bases will respond with a "Who cares about vacated wins - we all know who won on the field!" type attitude - and just limiting the bad news to vacated wins and a new coach may not be the message that they want to send for the reason I gave.

The thing is, both arguments have merit. They are - in essence - the two sides of the carrot and the stick, with the carrot being recognition of the self report and the stick being whatever they think they have to do to get everyone's attention. I see the hesitancy to create - or "find" - or "allege" a LOIC or FTM finding as the carrot from the fantastic self report tOSU did when it found the e-mails.* Are the vacated wins and championship enough to satisfy the stick?? It would not surprise me to see them accept the offered penalty, or to add on a smidgen of scholly reductions to satisfy the out-for-blood demographic.

The good news is they will not leave you hanging in February at NLOI signing time. Whatever is gonna happen will have happened. That way the uncertainty cannot screw up recruiting - as uncertainty in and of itself is a bad thing.


* I agree that the facts really do not support it - but you can create about anything you want from the facts. Hell, they could go after the "Tress was previously found to be deficient in timely reporting infractions" rabbit hole and invent some hindsight-ish B.S. thing you "should have done". The Bastards can justify about anything, really.

This shit is getting old.

 

[lvbuckeye]

i thought you had him on ignore.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Ultimately, the sanctions are to deter behavior by the program, not the coach. Taking out the coach - but leaving the program with no schollie reductions or bowl bans - could be seen as too light. I mean, the NCAA knows almost all fan bases will respond with a "Who cares about vacated wins - we all know who won on the field!" type attitude - and just limiting the bad news to vacated wins and a new coach may not be the message that they want to send for the reason I gave.

Again, what the OSU players did does not rise to the level of warranting scholarship reductions and/or post-season bans. What the "Tat 5" did/received and what USC players did/received are nowhere near the same. Handing out punishment just for the sake of handing out punishment is counter productive.

 

[Gatorubet]

Again, what the OSU players did does not rise to the level of warranting scholarship reductions and/or post-season bans. What the "Tat 5" did/received and what USC players did/received are nowhere near the same. Handing out punishment just for the sake of handing out punishment is counter productive.

Absolutely true. Why do you limit punishment to just their behavior?

 

[strohs]

Absolutely true. Why do you limit punishment to just their behavior?

Good point, and that's why JT was fired.

 

[matcar]

Good point, and that's why JT was fired.

Agreed, but I'm not sure that, alone is sufficient. Now if the NCAA says it is, then GREAT. If they don't, I could understand them saying that something more is required.