• 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)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...state-pays-law-firm-142k-to-represent-players

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7090283/ohio-state-buckeyes-pay-players-lawyer-142000

People are acting like this is an extra benefit. Where these articles mention The Lantern's article (LINK), they fail to mention a key part from the article:

"NCAA spokeswoman Stacey Osburn said according to NCAA rule 16.3.2, the cost of legal representation is allowed to be provided by the university in any investigation into a student-athlete's eligibility."
 
Upvote 0
Ohio State's full response (with redactions) to ESPN's public records request: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/tempx/695282.pdf

It is a lengthy read (over 700 pages w/ some duplicates). Its illustrative of Ohio State's comprehensive investigation into Tatgate and Jim Tressel, as well as the classification of Ted Sarniak as a non-booster.

The last 300 pages or so detail some secondary violations reported over the last couple of years, many of which involved Seantrel Henderson. Ticky tack shit really that Ohio State had no control over. There's also a free meal that President Gee gave a student-athlete's family.
 
Upvote 0
OH10;2011344; said:
Ohio State's full response (with redactions) to ESPN's public records request: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/tempx/695282.pdf

It is a lengthy read (over 700 pages w/ some duplicates). Its illustrative of Ohio State's comprehensive investigation into Tatgate and Jim Tressel, as well as the classification of Ted Sarniak as a non-booster.

The last 300 pages or so detail some secondary violations reported over the last couple of years, many of which involved Seantrel Henderson. Ticky tack [Mark May] really that Ohio State had no control over. There's also a free meal that President Gee gave a student-athlete's family.
Click to expand...

Why would Seantrel Henderson be mentioned in OSU's report? Unless the violations broken were during his recruitment...?
 
Upvote 0
TooTallMenardo;2011347; said:
Why would Seantrel Henderson be mentioned in OSU's report? Unless the violations broken were during his recruitment...?
Click to expand...

They also asked for a history of violations... we self reported the Seantrel stuff back during his recruitment (one of the issues, I believe, was allowing him to talk with President Gee on camera and to meet with Cris Carter)
 
Upvote 0
OH10;2011344; said:
Ohio State's full response (with redactions) to ESPN's public records request: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/tempx/695282.pdf

It is a lengthy read (over 700 pages w/ some duplicates). Its illustrative of Ohio State's comprehensive investigation into Tatgate and Jim Tressel, as well as the classification of Ted Sarniak as a non-booster.

The last 300 pages or so detail some secondary violations reported over the last couple of years, many of which involved Seantrel Henderson. Ticky tack [Mark May] really that Ohio State had no control over. There's also a free meal that President Gee gave a student-athlete's family.
Click to expand...

Forthcoming ESPiN Headline:

ESPN FoIA Request Forces Ohio State to Release 700 page document outlining years of NCAA Violations, Including Impermissible Benefits Provided Directly By University President
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
Several former Buckeyes have sent a letter to the NCAA asking for the suspension to be overturned.

Dr. Mark A. Emmert
President
National Collegiate Athletic Association
700 W. Washington Street
P.O. Box 6222
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6222

Dear Dr. Emmert:

As former football players and proud alumni of The Ohio State University, we have watched the recent issues surrounding the Buckeye football program with great concern and disappointment. Having played a game from which one learns so many life lessons, we readily acknowledge that actions have consequences and that when players make mistakes, on or off the field, there is a price to be paid and responsibilities to be accepted.

When we learned last week of the additional game suspensions leveled against certain players, however, we were not only surprised but, to be candid, troubled. This reaction is based upon prior knowledge and understanding of the content of the evidence submitted by counsel to support the players? position that the pay they received was for actual work done. Why those charged with the responsibility of assessing the evidence?be it Ohio State, or the NCAA or its enforcement consultants -- failed to conclude likewise is troublesome, at best.

With the imposition of the additional suspensions the college career of at lease one of these players is effectively over. This seems to be by any standard of equity and fairness an incredibly steep price to pay for selling memorabilia and, if the position of the NCAA is to be accepted, receiving $700 extra dollars in pay from an employer. We would hope that upon additional reflection by the NCAA it would agree.

Accordingly, as former players?men who have in fact worn the uniform and know what the experience means to these young men-- we call upon the parties involved, both the NCAA and Ohio State, to revisit this penalty. We ask that given (i) the nature of the infraction; (ii)the disparity between the NCAA and the athletes relative to challenging this ruling; (iii) the impact this ruling has had and will have upon the lives of these young men, and (iv) the serious concerns we have over the analysis of the evidence submitted on the players? behalf, the ?Rule of Reason? will be followed and the players in question will be immediately reinstated.

Respectfully, said yet another way, they have been punished enough.

Sincerely,
Jim Conroy ?71, ?74 ? Football 1968-1970
Bruce Smith ?71 ? Football 1968
Jan White ?71 ? Football 1968-1970
Ralph Holloway ?71 ? Football 1968-1970
Phil Strickland ?71 ? Football 1968-1970
Bruce Jankowski ?71 ? Football 1968-1970
Fred Schram ?72 ? Football 1969-1971
John Hicks ?74 ? Football 1970, 1972-1973
Steve Langenkamp ?98 ? Football 1992-1995
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
That says a lot to me, former players and alumni stepping up to bat for this. I'm not really familiar with any of the names save for Jankowski, which rings a bell in my head for some reason, but it seems that this is kind of...odd and unprecedented (can't think of a better word). Anyone know a bit more about the players, if they were held in high regard, or relative "issues?"
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top