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

[CHU]

Change the locks on him also :) Don't forget they should fire him on friday, less chances of an incident

Or they could just fix the glitch

Or take away Gene's stapler.

 

[OneBuckeye]

Yep. The disasters of the press conferences might have been overlooked if the only year with no bowl was in 2011. I agree that he needs to go.

But I think firing Smith in conjunction with an appeal should be considered.

Yes, why are we so quick to accept unprecidented penalties? I don't get that part.

 

[Nicknam4]

The message the NCAA is sending to ADs across America:
Don't self-impose any punishments whatsoever, show no contrition, and don't co-operate at all, because we'll inevitably cave to PR and impose harsh penalties on top of what you've already imposed. You'll end up with fewer sanctions, and the media will rake you through the coals regardless of the penalties you get.

 

[CHU]

Yes, why are we so quick to accept unprecidented penalties? I don't get that part.

You have an AD who already knows he's fired (unless he's a complete moron).

He's not going to fight anything. That's probably why he said OSU will not appeal.

But a new AD may have a different thought.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Just as I shouldn't have spoken in uncertainties, you should not either. We will never know for sure. But to me, the additional scholly and probation were givens. I do not thinly they would have completely blown up past precidence with a second year ban. That's LOIC stuff right there.

It's "a given" that whatever we self-imposed, the NCAA was going to bump up just to prove a point...and their increases of the scholarship reductions and probation proved exactly that.

 

[NugentsMyHero]

So who were the people that told Urban Meyer there wasn't going to be anything else? Was this Gene lying ti hire the guy he wanted?

 

[muffler dragon]

For a little levity:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcClvRt9g2Q"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcClvRt9g2Q[/ame]

 

[Woody1968]

Just as I shouldn't have spoken in uncertainties, you should not either. We will never know for sure. But to me, the additional scholly and probation were givens. I do not thinly they would have completely blown up past precidence with a second year ban. That's LOIC stuff right there. I also just never understood after why not just do a self imposed post season ban this year when the bowl was going to be one of the most irrelevent games to be played in osu history and risk any portion of the future.

Sorry for poor spelling and grammar, I'm typing from my phone

Um, a one year ban is unprecedented for anything other than LOIC.

 

[stowfan]

I hate to say it, but I'm now going to be afraid to look at the recruiting board for the next month and a half.:(

 

[Merih]

It is NOT an unprecedented penalty. Once we were tagged as Repeat Offenders, that put us on par with the mid 2000s Mississippi State team that got a bowl ban with only FTM charges. The "Repeat Offender" status was key.

This is squarely in line with the Miss. St. penalties, even when it comes to the number of schollies lost.

 

[Nicknam4]

Dear Braxton Miller,
You seem like a nice guy, exactly the kind of polite, intelligent and hard-working young man we would want at the helm of any NCAA program. Fuck you.
-NCAA

 

[3074326]

Dear Braxton Miller,
You seem like a nice guy, exactly the kind of polite, intelligent and hard-working young man we would want at the helm of The Ohio State football program. Fuck you.
-tat5

fixed

 

[OneBuckeye]

It is NOT an unprecedented penalty. Once we were tagged as Repeat Offenders, that put us on par with the mid 2000s Mississippi State team that got a bowl ban with only FTM charges. The "Repeat Offender" status was key.

This is squarely in line with the Miss. St. penalties, even when it comes to the number of schollies lost.

I hate it when people bring logical arguements to the conversation. Reps for the info.

 

[craigblitz]

WAD - You clearly would have more info and insight then me on this but how in the world does Ohio State not appeal this. I don't care what Gene said, a bowl ban is clearly not something they were expecting (I think). What harm does it do? I agree with BB73 I would be a broken record... "Ohio State fully worked with and cooperated with the NCAA and the penalties do not reflect this corporation"

I see no other viable position other then an appeal. What the school has been charged vs president that has been established by the NCAA is not in alignment. That to me is the whole reason why an appeal process is in place right?

 

[BearBuck27]

Um, a one year ban is unprecedented for anything other than LOIC.

I understand that, and I think the one year ban self imposed would have been seen as enough. I personally don't think they would've added a second year. I don't think you can look at scholly reductions and probation and postseason bans in the same breath. They would have added the first two for sure, imo. Postseason bans are the harshest punishments given by the ncaa. I don't think you can say for sure they would've added another year of postseason ban bc they added additional years of probation or increased scholly reductions