OSU ruling comes out this afternoon - Page 2

FootballGod · 12-20-2011, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shane P. Hallam

Self reporting probably saved this from being worse IMO.

No F'in way. Auburn didn't give up any information and they walked away scotch free. I bet PSU, UNC, and Miami do not comply with the NCAA one bit. They are probably burning emails, hardrives, and photos as we speak. UNC and Miami better get the death penalty if this is what OSU gets for some kids getting tattoos by selling their own property and for a coach that covered up something that wasn't even a crime.

Sloopy · 12-20-2011, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shane P. Hallam

Self reporting probably saved this from being worse IMO.

If thats the case then the ruling is extremely inconsistent. FTM and LOC getting the same penalty works against them on a # of levels.

No team is going to self report as it doesn't help for **** and if your going to get the same penalty for LOC as FTM you might as well go all out with your recruiting violations and impermissible benefits etc.

I just really don't see how they quantify this with any sort of precedent. I mean the 5 players violations, in monetary measure, don't even come close to the smallest of USC's violations (over $7,000 worth of long distance calls made from the AD phone by a student-athlete IIRC)

EDIT: On ESPN, Joe Schad is reporting that legal advisors do not believe that there is any precedent for this type of punishment.

This punishment comes under a new NCAA president. This is why the NCAA is such a joke. There is no consistency, schools have no idea what to expect from year to year.

- 2 years ago USC receives death penalty for 3 notable players receiving extreme impermissible benefits
- Last year Auburn walks out scotch free
- This year Ohio State receives 1 year bowl ban and 1 year probation

What are we supposed to believe will happen to Miami, UNC or Oregon? Nothing? Death penalty? Somewhere in between?

keylime_5 · 12-20-2011, 02:18 PM

The punishment really doesn't bother me that much. The Tattgate and JT's coverup alone would not have netted a punishment this bad...but the DiGoronimo stuff that came out this summer on top of it was gonna give us some kind of strict punishment even if it was just scholarship loss and probation. The bowl ban wouldn't be that bad of thing either if we self-imposed it in advance.

...THAT is what bothers me - the fact that Gene Smith had a chance to self-impose a bowl ban this year with a 6-6 team instead of letting the chance linger that the NCAA would hit us with one that could hurt a potential Big Ten championship/BCS bowl caliber team next year. It also can potentially hurt our 2012 recruiting class.

...Gene Smith really messed up big time. Epic failure on his part. I cannot stand him, he needs to go - the media needs to turn up the pressure on Gene Smith big time. He's handled this thing about as badly as he could have.

Sloopy · 12-20-2011, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

The punishment really doesn't bother me that much. The Tattgate and JT's coverup alone would not have netted a punishment this bad...but the DiGoronimo stuff that came out this summer on top of it was gonna give us some kind of strict punishment even if it was just scholarship loss and probation. The bowl ban wouldn't be that bad of thing either if we self-imposed it in advance.

...THAT is what bothers me - the fact that Gene Smith had a chance to self-impose a bowl ban this year with a 6-6 team instead of letting the chance linger that the NCAA would hit us with one that could hurt a potential Big Ten championship/BCS bowl caliber team next year. It also can potentially hurt our 2012 recruiting class.

...Gene Smith really messed up big time. Epic failure on his part. I cannot stand him, he needs to go - the media needs to turn up the pressure on Gene Smith big time.

This is very true

JoeJoeBrown · 12-20-2011, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shane P. Hallam

Self reporting probably saved this from being worse IMO.

How? I don't see it. Not enough for an Loic.

FootballGod · 12-20-2011, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeJoeBrown

How? I don't see it. Not enough for an Loic.

I second this ^

Shane P. Hallam · 12-20-2011, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeJoeBrown

How? I don't see it. Not enough for an Loic.

Doesn't mean the penalty couldn't have been more. There was more to it even that the NCAA couldn't prove that could have increased the penalty.

Shane P. Hallam · 12-20-2011, 02:41 PM

Here is the full report:
http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.s...tball_p_4.html

yodapoop · 12-20-2011, 02:47 PM

I don't like bowl bans man, I think its stupid. And this is coming from some1 that hates Ohio State. Didn't all the players that broke the rules move on to other stuff? The coach got fired. Just like in USC, the **** hit the fan AFTER Reggie Bush left. So why punish the kids that are doing it right for their school's bull ****.

Cudders · 12-20-2011, 02:51 PM

First, the last program to receive the death penalty was SMU. There's a huge difference between a bowl ban and the death penalty.

Secondly, as an Ohio State fan, I'm hardly enraged by the ruling. I don't think anyone would argue that the NCAA's imposed sanctions haven't been somewhat of a joke lately, but sadly, the only way to establish a stronger deterrent to rule-breaking is by making an example of a program. If you willingly ignore the rules and lie about it to investigators, then be prepared to swallow your punishment. Now, if the next ruling on failure to monitor or lack of institutional control is more lenient, Buckeye fans will have reasonable grounds to complain. Until then, channel your frustrations at athletic director Gene Smith.

keylime_5 · 12-20-2011, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cudders

First, the last program to receive the death penalty was SMU. There's a huge difference between a bowl ban and the death penalty.

Secondly, as an Ohio State fan, I'm hardly enraged by the ruling. I don't think anyone would argue that the NCAA's imposed sanctions haven't been somewhat of a joke lately, but sadly, the only way to establish a stronger deterrent to rule-breaking is by making an example of a program. If you willingly ignore the rules and lie about it to investigators, then be prepared to swallow your punishment. Now, if the next ruling on failure to monitor or lack of institutional control is more lenient, Buckeye fans will have reasonable grounds to complain. Until then, channel your frustrations at athletic director Gene Smith.

I think if you read any OSU message board right now, you will find out that about 99% of the complaining and hate speech is aimed at Gene Smith and Gordon Gee for being complete and total morons about how they handled this whole thing - most specificially with the whole bowl ban thing that they could have easily dodged with little backlash.

Getting a bowl ban isn't a huge deal....but being assured by the administrators that we wouldn't and still getting one is really frustrating to say the least.

bearsfan_51 · 12-20-2011, 03:04 PM

This is less than USC, and will be far less than Miami. I don't think it's that bad.

iowatreat54 · 12-20-2011, 03:05 PM

Seriously, it's not that bad at all. For a school like OSU, this hurts them maybe for one season (next). But honestly, Meyer is bringing a lot of talent in, but it's not like they were expected to go undefeated and make the NCG. The no Big Ten Champ. game hurts, but it's only one season.

Meyer will likely have them in the Champ. game annually, so not being able to win it in his first season is hardly worth crying over.

And the scholarships? Oh, so you go from being able to offer 22 per year for 3 years instead of 23.4 per year over 3 years (I believe). How on earth will you manage without that extra 3* player?

Plus, stop with the "I guess if you self report you will get punished harder than if you don't" bs. It's not like OSU just found out and reported it right away and was 100% cooperative. They only started coming clean after they were caught and then tried to save face by imposing minimal punishments. The lesson isn't "don't report or you get screwed," it's "report it before the media finds out and when your star player is driving a new car every week don't act like you had no idea **** was going on."

Anyways, the point is moot because this will have little to no negative effects on OSU. It will only cause fans to ***** and moan come this time next year when they can't play in a bowl game.

EDIT: Also had to add that the OSU athletic department completely botched this, no idea how they are all still employed. And it doesn't matter that none of the kids are still on the team, they were a part of the university so the university is punished. That's how it is everywhere, it's not like the NCAA is picking on OSU.

soybean · 12-20-2011, 03:39 PM

I love how all the OSU fans are claiming they should have self imposed a bowl ban this year. doubt you all would be singing the same tune if you were going to the Rose Bowl.

keylime_5 · 12-20-2011, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soybean

I love how all the OSU fans are claiming they should have self imposed a bowl ban this year. doubt you all would be singing the same tune if you were going to the Rose Bowl.

no **** sherlock. the fact that we are 6-6 this year and in a meaningless gator bowl getting bowl practices from a coaching staff and offensive/defensive systems that won't be at Ohio State next season made it so self-imposing a bowl ban this year would've been low risk/high reward opportunity. If we won a Big Ten title and were in a BCS bowl then obviously we would've taken that without second thought and suffered a bowl ban next year.

soybean · 12-20-2011, 04:20 PM

Furthermore, you guys are assuming that if you self imposed a bowl ban, ncaa would have taken leniency in 2012-2013. You don't know that. For all we know you'd not only miss out on the this years bowl along with next years.

keylime_5 · 12-20-2011, 05:22 PM

Considering that they gave us a ONE year bowl ban, it is safe to assume that they would not have given us a two year bowl ban when looking at precedents set. It would've been way unfair. In fact, what we got busted for in the past did not call for a bowl ban which is exactly why everyone is shocked and stunned that we ended up getting even a one year postseason ban. No question in my mind do we not get the 2012/13 postseason ban if we self impose a 2011/12 one........AND even if we did get another year it would be worth it to try and avoid a future one in the first place. It's not like the NCAA didn't accept Ohio State's self-imposed sanctions, they just added to them. Accepting a self-imposed postseason ban means no way would they give us an extra one.

soybean · 12-20-2011, 05:39 PM

the NCAA is garbage. there's no precedent or predicting what they hand down. And who cares? yes you miss out next year but at least the ban is lifted when your freshman qb is a junior having a year under him in Meyer's belt. It may seem like a big deal but it won't be in the grand scheme of things. The scholarship reduction wont hurt much if at all, all it does it depth but OSU doesn't go 88 deep regardless. None of the top teams do.

keylime_5 · 12-20-2011, 05:44 PM

I know that the NCAA isn't very consistent with it's precedents and the one year ban is proof of that, but it was quite obvious that there is no freaking way they would give Ohio State a TWO year ban with the violations they had. This is not USC or Miami, nothing close to that.

The Bowl ban hurts b/c it is a potential Big Ten title and even BCS or national title hyphothetically speaking. That is a big deal. it also takes away bowl practice time which is a pivotal thing in the development of a team and probably the one thing that coaches will miss the most out of all of this. Having to go to 82 scholarships per year for 3 years instead of 85 isn't the biggest of deals but it hurts a little. the Postseason ban is definitely the biggest thing though and could have been avoided if our GM wasn't a moron (who btw is taking a lot of heat right now from boosters and media I hear).

JoeJoeBrown · 12-20-2011, 05:50 PM

Professionalize. The NCAA is garbage. CFB is shady and it's because a bunch of people want to pretend that these kids are amateurs.

Shane P. Hallam · 12-20-2011, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soybean

Furthermore, you guys are assuming that if you self imposed a bowl ban, ncaa would have taken leniency in 2012-2013. You don't know that. For all we know you'd not only miss out on the this years bowl along with next years.

Most experts feel that it would have removed the bowl ban.

Smooth Criminal · 12-20-2011, 05:58 PM

I've always hated bowl bans on teams. Doesn't punish the people that it should be punishing. Yes, its the same program and its really the only power the NCAA has, but it just sucks for the entire team that is banned that didn't do anything to deserve it.

As to the punishment itself, its about what I was expecting, and I can't believe its not this year instead of next year. I'd love to see Smith fired over this, its his job to know things like this are coming. Just makes no sense to move it back a year, punish a new coach and players rather than the ones that are still remaining.

College football is inconsistent and unfair at times, but this is the most just punishment I've seen out of USC, Auburn, and OSU. The other two schools should have been closer to this type of a thing.

JoeJoeBrown · 12-20-2011, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shane P. Hallam

Most experts feel that it would have removed the bowl ban.

Yep. Gene Smith is an incompetent idiot. I have no idea how he has a job.

Smooth Criminal · 12-20-2011, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shane P. Hallam

Most experts feel that it would have removed the bowl ban.

Not to mention no one would care if we missed this years bowl with a 6-6 team.

Sloopy · 12-20-2011, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soybean

I love how all the OSU fans are claiming they should have self imposed a bowl ban this year. doubt you all would be singing the same tune if you were going to the Rose Bowl.

I've actually said on numerous occasions that we should decline any bowls. All for a # of reasons but one of which was the whole sanctioning thing