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

[matcar]

Wrong. This sort of thing could fall under quite a few different federal statutes. This isn't CSI or Law and Order.

Wrong. There's no statute that says that when a "concerned party" shares this information with you that you have an obligation to him....because this isn't CSI or Law & Order...

 

[matcar]

There may be an obligation/requirement of confidentiality if it's a federal investigator who shares this kind of info as part of the investigation, but there is no such obligation for a personal email given voluntarily from some lawyer somehow involved in the case. Even if this "concerned party" was breaking a rule/law himself, Tressel should not have taken that burden upon himself as well, and WOULD NOT have been in jeopardy of committing a FELONY by sharing this info with his own legal/compliance counsel.

Hey, I agree that Tressel may have done what was right as a human being, in order to shield his players, but as a head football coach part of his responsibility to his players (all his players) is protecting their eligibility and conforming to NCAA rules by involving the Compliance people hired for just that purpose.


Edit: I stand by Tressel as staunchly as anyone, but I don't think we do him or the University a service by denying that any mistakes were made at all. This was a screw-up by a man who knew better, and hopefully it's truly a teachable moment for the master of teachable moments.

Well said, especially the last bit.

 

[Cicero]

There may be an obligation/requirement of confidentiality if it's a federal investigator who shares this kind of info as part of the investigation, but there is no such obligation for a personal email given voluntarily from some lawyer somehow involved in the case. Even if this "concerned party" was breaking a rule/law himself, Tressel should not have taken that burden upon himself as well, and WOULD NOT have been in jeopardy of committing a FELONY by sharing this info with his own legal/compliance counsel.

Hey, I agree that Tressel may have done what was right as a human being, in order to shield his players, but as a head football coach part of his responsibility to his players (all his players) is protecting their eligibility and conforming to NCAA rules by involving the Compliance people hired for just that purpose.

He said himself he sought legal advice. He didn't know who to go to at first. How do we know that the legal advice was not to keep quiet about it until the federal case is concluded.

Think carefully about it. What was to be gained by keeping this quiet? The facts were going to come out eventually in the federal case and they are smart enough to know it.

There was never a doubt that this would become public so other than a legal question regarding the aforementioned federal case what could anyone have to gain by not reporting this immediately?

I spoke to my father in law who is an attorney and he says that yes coach Tressel is protected by attorney client privilege in speaking to an attorney about this but to his knowledge this privilege would not extend to reporting information to the NCAA.

So what would you do?

 

[Apache]

Still love the Buckeyes and still admire a lot about Jim Tressel.

But simply put.

Kids broke the rules.

Tress found out.

Tress hid the truth and did not tell the complete truth.

Punishment follows.

Take ownership.

Move on.

 

[Gatorubet]

I read the e-mails and still think he did exactly the right thing. What in these e-mails says anything that makes this look somehow worse? Please enlighten me because you really seem to be making some leaps of logic here.

1) the first e-mail discloses to Tress that illegal activity is going on, and there is no mention of confidentiality in the e-mail. Tress promises to "get on it ASAP". Good answer, as the NCAA rules require him to disclose and investigate. He, however, does nothing.

2) Two weeks go by and he gets more information in two e-mails. While he tells tress to "keep this confidential", that has not a damn thing to do with the "federal investigation", other than the lawyer likely does not want anyone to know he is telling a freaking football coach his client's confidential and privileged information. The lawyer never said that he works for the FBI or Govt. like some people here think. The NCAA duty to disclose is not in any way affected by some comment about confidentiality. tOSU has a very good legal staff, and you can tell them what happened and they will make the call. It is inconceivable to many people that Tress really thought the mere mention of the word confidential would keep him from tOSU's duty to disclose and investigate allegations of selling stuff for money and tats in contravention of NCAA rules.

3) Tress gets another e-mail in June. Like the others, he tells nobody about any of this.

4) Tat gate hits in December. tOSU tell the world and the NCAA that they first heard of this in December, and they are allowed to use 5 guys in the Sugar Bowl, partly because they tell the NCAA that they just found out and immediately disclosed, investigated, and punished those that violated the rules. Again, to get the deal with the NCAA that many thought was too lenient and forgiving, in that Pryor and the other guys played, tOSU used as a major selling point the fact that they only found out about this in December and acted swiftly. That was a lie.

5) Part of the rationale for the NCAA (and tOSU) making the "players can play in the game with suspension next year" Sugar Bowl deal, was a reliance on Coach Tressel's signed off compliance certificate [strike]saying that the first he had heard of tat-gate was in December[/strike] a few months before on September 13, 2010 . That certificate was a false statement. (that is not clear, and it looks like I meant something different. Every year Tress has to sign a compliance form saying that he was unaware of any NCAA violations. Per the April and June e-mails, his signing off on that September cert was not true. The NCAA looks at what you knew and when you knew it when they decide punishments. So with the September compliance certificate from Tress, tOSU told the NCAA that they first heard of the tatgate issue in December. The NCAA relied upon the compliance certificate and the assertions from tOSU when making the "we are letting the 5 players play in the Sugar Bowl" ruling.) Edit: 07 is exactly right. Changed it.

6) The e-mails were discovered by an OSU investigation that was unrelated to the tat-gate deal. The e-mails were discovered. Not because Tress told them in April when he got the first e-mail April 2 and told the lawyer he'd "get on it ASAP", not when Tress got the two naming names e-mails April 16, and not when he got the June 6 e-mail. The e-mails were discovered by an OSU investigation not when the OSU received the news from the Feds in December, not when Tressel and tOSU signed off on the NCAA compliance certificate that resulted in his guys being allowed to play in the Sugar, but only later when some unrelated other search of his e-mails for some unknown reason disclosed that he had known since April.


Cicero, it is fine to believe Tress when he says he was only thinking about the players. But his intentional decision to not disclose the specific allegation of violations of NCAA rules about his players receiving illegal benefits - and to start institute a swift and thorough investigation - is a major violation of NCAA rules that is not even subject to debate. See your own AD and President admit that, and see the fact that they hope the $250,000 and two Mac games suspension is enough to satisfy the NCAA.

Cicero, the NCAA was criticized by the public and press for letting the tat-five players play in the Sugar Bowl. They (the NCAA) allowed that to happen based in part upon what was essentially a perjured certificate of compliance from your head coach, saying that the first anyone in authority at tOSU had heard of the tat gate improper benefit problem was in December.

How you can think that "he did exactly the right thing" blows my mind.

Most non-Buckeyes think that it is indefensible. Go look up the Bruce Pearl thread for a then-unbiased look at how BP thinks head coaches who lie to the NCAA in investigations should be treated.

I was all in on Coach Tressel. The amount of good that he has done and is doing for the community is undeniable. But good deeds, hospital visits, community service, higher grad rates and better team GPAs, and certainly not six straight Big-10 Titles have no bearing whatsoever as to whether he should have disclosed, or whether it was wrong not to. All of those things are a hell of a good reason not to fire Tress. He is a damn good coach. He should not have been fired. But his persona of doing the right thing always has taken a hit. An irreversible hit with some. What you have is a guy who ignored NCAA rules to commit a major violation, and by doing so got his starters to play the season and to win a BCS game over the hated SEC.

That does not make him a felon or axe murderer. Does not make him a bad bad man. But it makes him just like a whole lot of other coaches - it makes him a guy who will bend the rules to his advantage to win games. And before you get mad at that statement, you need to step back and realize that 1) the rules were not bent, they were crushed, and 2) it was to your advantage to play the guys all year and in post-season.

The "why" he did that is certainly up to speculation, and if he did it intentionally to keep his guys playing is up to speculation. That area is where the discussion lies. It does not lie in looking at what he did and approving it. Not unless you want to get a reputation like that of the schools that you do not respect.

 

[Cicero]

Wrong. There's no statute that says that when a "concerned party" shares this information with you that you have an obligation to him....because this isn't CSI or Law & Order...

Of course there is no legal obligation to his friend. But there certainly is a logical reason to be hesitant in running off to the NCAA with confidential information regarding an ongoing federal investigation.

And there certainly is an obligation to make damn sure you understand the complex legal issues here. Neither of us is privy to the facts in the case so if you want to condemn the man based on hastily constructed assumptions I can't stop you. If you it makes you feel all self righteous go for it.

 

[BayBuck]

He said himself he sought legal advice. He didn't know who to go to at first. How do we know that the legal advice was not to keep quiet about it until the federal case is concluded.

Think carefully about it. What was to be gained by keeping this quiet? The facts were going to come out eventually in the federal case and they are smart enough to know it.

There was never a doubt that this would become public so other than a legal question regarding the aforementioned federal case what could anyone have to gain by not reporting this immediately?

I spoke to my father in law who is an attorney and he says that yes coach Tressel is protected by attorney client privilege in speaking to an attorney about this but to his knowledge this privilege would not extend to reporting information to the NCAA.

So what would you do?

Who knows what I would do? Who cares? Jim Tressel had a contractual (and NCAA) obligation to share this information with OSU's legal and compliance folks, period. If he shared this with legal and was advised to stay mum, then that was a pretty big omission in yesterday's press conference. I understand completely the ethical conundrum JT may have personally faced in this situation, but the rules are the rules and there are penalties to pay when you break them. So Tressel's going to be suspended and fined, and then he's still our coach and I am confident we will all get through this...

 

[Mike80]

Deleting emails on your end doesn't delete them. They are almost always stored somewhere on the internet.

I wish the apology had simply been a lengthy "I screwed up."

I'm aware

I just wouldn't be surprised if that is occurring somewhere within D-1A Head Coaching offices right now.

 

[Jake]

I can accept not doing anything in April. Tressel probably gets a lot of emails and I don't expect him to act immediately on all of them. But as time went by my concern grows:

September - signing the compliance statement with the NCAA without discussing the emails internally. When in doubt, mention the emails to inside counsel before the University attests to knowing nothing.

December - Certainly at this point 2 + 2 = 4. The emails HAVE to be discussed in house as part of the investigation of the Tat 5.

For the emails to come to light in January during an internal investigation, after the season and the Sugar Bowl, looks very bad whether it was intentional or accidental.

If I'm a Trustee I want to meet independently with Gee, Smith, and Tressel, one after the other, on the same day. I want to ask specific questions and see them answer them directly. What I would do next would depend on how impressed (or not) I was by their answers.

 

[Muck]

. And the worst part isn't the cutting corners to win bit...it's the disingenous behavior once you're caught.

You seem to forget that Ohio State caught themselves by discovering the email chain...and immediately contacted the NCAA.

 

[Fremont Buckeye]

Of course there is no legal obligation to his friend. But there certainly is a logical reason to be hesitant in running off to the NCAA with confidential information regarding an ongoing federal investigation.

The information was not confidential to Tressel. It was confidential to the lawyer and his client, nothing more, nothing less. I'm not saying that Tressel should have ran straight to the NCAA with the email, but he should have darn well ran to his compliance office (who probably would consult with tOSUs legal team) with the email, which takes all of the burden of Tressel at that point.

And there certainly is an obligation to make damn sure you understand the complex legal issues here. Neither of us is privy to the facts in the case so if you want to condemn the man based on hastily constructed assumptions I can't stop you. If you it makes you feel all self righteous go for it.

What legal issues. A lawyer broke his client/lawyer confientiality clause to tell Tressel. No legal obigations on Tressel. Forward the email to compliance office who then gets legal advice for the school / Tressel / player(s).

That being said I stand by Tressel as coach. I just want an honest /sincere apology, which I thought he provided yesterday. As long as he knows (which I think he does) that what he did was totally and uterly wrong than I am willing to forgive him after he returns from whatever self-imposed and possibly any NCAA sanctions that are handed down and just move on.

 

[matcar]

You seem to forget that Ohio State caught themselves by discovering the email chain...and immediately contacted the NCAA.

No, I remember that. But I also vividly remember last night, where statements were made to the effect that no disclosure was made in April OR December because of the notion of confidentiality. Based upon the emails, that feels disingenous.

 

[buckeyesin07]

5) To get the Sugar Bowl deal, Coach Tressel signed off on compliance paperwork saying that they first he had heard of tat-gate was in December. That was a lie.

I hadn't heard this. Do you have a link?

 

[SEREbuckeye]

Wow, take a step back and get some perspective.

JT says himself in the press conference that he had to get advice on how to proceed and that the was a FEDERAL DRUG TRAFFICKING CASE. Would you prefer that he put himself in legal jeopardy so you can maintain your moral high ground? The bad news its that coach Tressel is sitting in the Loretto PA federal penitentiary for obstruction of justice and interfering with an FBI investigation but on the bright side matcar still has the moral high ground and is feeling pretty good about himself today.

He did exactly the right thing. He reported it as soon as he felt safe in doing so and made sure his players were protected.

Not sure if you read the emails but Coach Tressel still could have approached the compliance department and Gene Smith with the information. Just because some random lawyer says he can't do it shouldn't be the basis of his actions. For all JT knew from THOSE emails the guy could have been a lawyer or not.

He could have taken this to the AD and at least said, I can't divulge too much information BUT I have some proof that our players are selling their memorabilia while keeping the Drug Trafficking Case separated and/or omitted. Bottom line is that he could have said something about the OSU merchandise to at least the AD. Him keeping the information away from everyone doesn't protect his players, it just makes them eligible to play in a season where TP was hyped for Heisman and we had a shot at an MNC. Explain to me how JT bringing up the merchandise to the AD would have hurt the players?

 

[Gatorubet]

Who knows what I would do? Who cares? Jim Tressel had a contractual (and NCAA) obligation to share this information with OSU's legal and compliance folks, period. If he shared this with legal and was advised to stay mum, then that was a pretty big omission in yesterday's press conference. I understand completely the ethical conundrum JT may have personally faced in this situation, but the rules are the rules and there are penalties to pay when you break them. So Tressel's going to be suspended and fined, and then he's still our coach and I am confident we will all get through this...

All of this. And the last part too. One act does not define the man. While I'm disappointed, it does humanize him from some kind of Tebow-esque saint ( by that I mean the perception, not that Tim is some saint) to just a good guy who may have bent to the un-freaking-believable pressure to win that we force upon them. That I can understand, and though it is not mine to do, forgive him. But the tap dance that was the press conference makes it harder to do. I have to think that the whole thing was orchestrated by the consulting firm the Gee or Gene mentioned. So I doubt that the persser "strategy" was the result of Tress' ideas. Proly why he was so uncomfortable.