Jim Tressel (merged)

#152
#152
VOLorNuttin said:
Oh...I see. You equate a vacated win as a loss, in a conversation about whether he can coach a team or not? :loco:

Also...I'll accept your apology regarding TRESSEL'S record against SEC teams. Show me where HE is 0-9 against SEC Teams

Here's a quote from him in an ESPN article:
“

I know personally I have lost three in a row against the SEC. I'm not tired of hearing about it. It's a reminder to me of just how good the SEC is in football.
” -- Ohio State coach Jim Tressel

Patterson, Kelly and just about every other coach we could think of, would lose to the SEC Champs the past several years...even Chip Kelly. :loco:

That means they are no good, eh? Then I guess Saban is no good. He lost to LSU last year...before winning the NC. Most years he wouldn't have even gotten a chance to play in the BCS NC with that loss.
Click to expand...

He is 1-9 vs. SEC. A simple google search will tell you that. He used ineligible players to beat Arky and still barely won.

As for his punishment, it was for technically jerseys & tattoos but the NCAA was chasing him for more than that. You might want to do a little research first. He has been dirty from the day he started coaching.

Sports Illustrated investigation on Jim Tressel, Ohio State - SI.com - Magazine
 
#153
#153
MSCE09 said:
Not compeltely banned. If a school hires him they are instantly required to appear before the NCAA to explain themselves. If they convince the NCAA that its on the up and up he would be allowed to coach after serving the suspensions. However the NCAA can decide to impose additional penalties on the school that hires him for violating the order. Which is why this is incredible stupid to even consider.
Click to expand...
Violating an ORDER? What order is that? A Show Cause is NOT an order to ban a coach. All they can do is apply penalties that both the program and coach would have to comply with.

There is no reason why Tennessee would incur penalties for hiring a coach with Show Cause. They would simply notify the NCAA that they are willing to comply with the penalties stipulated therein.

In this case, he already paid his penalty last year, as an assistant with the Colts. It's very likely that the NCAA would accept that and reduce or waive the penalty...meaning that we get him for pennies on the dollar and with NO tangible penalty for us.

Again, people like you freak out and assume the worst, by reading more into than what is actually there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#154
#154
tri_vol said:
He is 1-9 vs. SEC. A simple google search will tell you that. He used ineligible players to beat Arky and still barely won.

As for his punishment, it was for technically jerseys & tattoos but the NCAA was chasing him for more than that. You might want to do a little research first. He has been dirty from the day he started coaching.

Sports Illustrated investigation on Jim Tressel, Ohio State - SI.com - Magazine
Click to expand...
He's dirty just like we state Bama and Auburn is...right? Every opposing fanbase sees their adversary as "Dirty." That is what was driving all the fuss. If Tressel hadn't terrorized the Big Ten for so long, there would have been no NCAA investigation.

It's just like our fanbase trying to make a big case (a few years ago) out of Bama athletes selling textbooks. Nothing happened with that, yet it's practically the same thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#156
#156
VOLorNuttin said:
He's dirty just like we state Bama and Auburn is...right? Every opposing fanbase sees their adversary as "Dirty." That is what was driving all the fuss. If Tressel hadn't terrorized the Big Ten for so long, there would have been no NCAA investigation.

It's just like our fanbase trying to make a big case (a few years ago) out of Bama athletes selling textbooks. Nothing happened with that, yet it's practically the same thing.
Click to expand...

Did you even read the article? He has a laundry list of documented offenses. It's not just some fans making up crap. Tressell will not coach again. Just admit you had a bad idea.
 
#157
#157
VOLorNuttin said:
Violating an ORDER? What order is that? A Show Cause is NOT an order to ban a coach. All they can do is apply penalties that both the program and coach would have to comply with.

There is no reason why Tennessee would incur penalties for hiring a coach with Show Cause. They would simply notify the NCAA that they are willing to comply with the penalties stipulated therein.

In this case, he already paid his penalty last year, as an assistant with the Colts. It's very likely that the NCAA would accept that and reduce or waive the penalty...meaning that we get him for pennies on the dollar and with NO tangible penalty for us.

Again, people like you freak out and assume the worst, by reading more into than what is actually there.
Click to expand...

...that you have no clue of what you are talking.
 
#159
#159
VOLorNuttin said:
Oh...I see. You equate a vacated win as a loss, in a conversation about whether he can coach a team or not? :loco:

Also...I'll accept your apology regarding TRESSEL'S record against SEC teams. Show me where HE is 0-9 against SEC Teams

Here's a quote from him in an ESPN article:
“

I know personally I have lost three in a row against the SEC. I'm not tired of hearing about it. It's a reminder to me of just how good the SEC is in football.
” -- Ohio State coach Jim Tressel

Patterson, Kelly and just about every other coach we could think of, would lose to the SEC Champs the past several years...even Chip Kelly. :loco:

That means they are no good, eh? Then I guess Saban is no good. He lost to LSU last year...before winning the NC. Most years he wouldn't have even gotten a chance to play in the BCS NC with that loss.
Click to expand...

NCAAF Buckeyes know history vs. SEC - ESPN
 
#160
#160
I know everyone is down on his record vs the SEC but we all know that the SEC is far superior to anybody else in the nation especially against the big 10? Big 12? What ever them folks up north lol. If you can't beat'em join'em!! Proven head coach with NC's on two levels. Yeah yeah NCAA violations etc. I think some of y'all would take a NCAA hit just to win again!! But I think the sweater vest would keep it clean. Hart would have to keep a close eye on him
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#163
#163
He's really already served 2 years anyway. Tennessee could petition the NCAA to reinstate him and waive the balance of his time since he has served 2 years. This is not too farfetched an idea. Further, I wouldnt expect the NCAA to treat our football program differently for hiring him since it happened at Ohio St not here. Also, as we all know the NCAA makes allowances for the blue bloods in football and basketball. We are a blue blood in football not basketball which might explains why Bruce Pearl got fired and Auburn and Bama (also blue bloods) have never gotten the death penalty.Auburn even got away with Cam Newton. Since we are a blue blood in football would be allowed to hire Tressel without issue.
 
Last edited:
#164
#164
Read the shiite for yourself. Here is the full ruling (pdf). Below the link is a quote from the section that refers specifically about Tressel's penalties. THERE IS NOT A SINGLE WORD ABOUT A 5YR BAN:

http://espn.go.com/photo/preview/!pdfs/111220/ohio_state_report.pdf

The Ohio State University Public Infractions Report
December 20, 2011

As set forth in Finding B-2, the committee found that the former head coach violated NCAA ethical conduct standards when he failed to report his knowledge of NCAA violations and in doing so, permitted football student-athletes to participate in intercollegiate athletics competition while ineligible during the 2010
season. That season culminated in a Big Ten Conference Championship and an appearance in a Bowl Championship Series (BCS) postseason contest. Further, in September 2010, the former head coach falsely attested that he reported to the institution any knowledge of NCAA violations when he signed the institution's certification of compliance form, which is required under Bylaw 18.4.2.1.1.4.

Therefore, the former head coach will be informed in writing by the NCAA that, due to his involvement in violations of NCAA legislation found in this case, the
committee imposes a five-year show-cause period upon him pursuant to NCAA Bylaw 19.5.2-(k). During the period, which begins December 20, 2011, and concludes on December 19, 2016, the committee restricts the athletically related duties of the former head coach as follows:

a. He shall be suspended from all coaching duties for the first five games during the initial year he is employed as well as any postseason contest(s) during that year. During this suspension, the former head coach shall not be present in the venue where the games are played and shall not have any contact with other members of the coaching staff or any football student athletes while the games are ongoing.

Further, the head coach may not participate in any activities that are defined as "coaching," including, but
not limited to, team travel, practice, video review and team meetings. The suspension from the first five contests includes all coaching activities commencing when the team reports for fall practice through the
conclusion of the fifth game.

The suspension from the postseason contests commences at the end of the last regular season contest and expires at the conclusion of the final postseason contest. [NOTE: Postseason includes both a conference championship contest and a bowl game.

b. Any employing institution shall file within 60 days of hiring the former head coach (or, if he is employed at a member institution presently, 60 days after the release of this case), a report with the office of the Committees on Infractions detailing how it will monitor the former head coach so as to prevent a recurrence of the violations set forth in this report, as well as information documenting compliance with the restrictions imposed.

Thereafter, the institution shall file reports every six months until the end of the show-cause period, detailing its efforts to monitor the former head coach. If an institution chooses to contest these sanctions, it

Page No. 21
__________
shall schedule an appearance before the Committee on Infractions to show cause why such restrictions should not be implemented.
 
#165
#165
VOLorNuttin said:
How does his having to sit 5 games bring this mysterious black cloud of the NCAA over our heads? It is what it is. A 5 game penalty that both he and a new team would have to share.

It's a natural human tendency to over-react to things. As a society we are prone to read too much into things. Look for hidden meaning into things where there simply isn't any.

This is a classic case of that very thing. The NCAA punishes OSU and wants to ensure that the coach takes some of the penalty with him, wherever he might go. It's entirely up to the University to determine if they are willing to accept a coach with a scratch or ding in his reputation. In this case, I contend that the reward FAR outweighs the risk. It's just that simple.
Click to expand...

If you want an unethical lying coach, that's fine. I don't. He has some history. No....to Tressel, IMO.
 
#166
#166
Slydell said:
If you want an unethical lying coach, that's fine. I don't. He has some history. No....to Tressel, IMO.
Click to expand...
You don't pay attention, do you? Read the beginning of the NCAA ruling. It is EXACTLY as I have been saying throughout this thread.

The NCAA went on a witch hunt because of all the stink opposing fanbases made out of this. Some players traded THEIR OWN BELONGINGS for tattoos. Whoopty freakin doo!

They even mention in the opening statement, that the guy WAS NOT A BOOSTER. The NCAA is meddling where they had absolutely no cause to. How in the hell can they tell anyone that they cannot sell their own shiite? If I were Tressel and OSU, I would have threatened the NCAA with legal action if they didn't drop this silly damn witch hunt. The players didn't do anything wrong, and that's why Tressel blew it off. They come back later and say "You should have told us your players committed an infraction." His response was essentially, and I agree..."I don't consider a person selling or trading their own belongings as a violation or infraction, therefore what would I report?"

If any party was unethical it was the NCAA for trying to make a case where there was absolutely none. On one hand they have billions they make off these kids, then on the other they have the audacity to tell the athletes that they can't sell or trade any of their belongings? Are you freakin kidding me? Somebody needs to take the NCAA to court and sue the heck out of them.

They are running a lucrative BUSINESS all the while hiding behind the fallacious term "Amateur Athletics." How can a Multi-Billion dollar business legally call basically label itself non-profit/amateur....so it doesn't have to pay the workers who actually generate that income? They are corrupt, through and through...and Tressel's the real scumbag in all of this?
 
Last edited:
#167
#167
VOLorNuttin said:
You don't pay attention, do you? Read the beginning of the NCAA ruling. It is EXACTLY as I have been saying throughout this thread.

The NCAA went on a witch hunt because of all the stink opposing fanbases made out of this. Some players traded THEIR OWN BELONGINGS for tattoos. Big Funking whoop!

They even mention in the opening statement, that the guy WAS NOT A BOOSTER. The NCAA is meddling where they had absolutely no cause to. How in the hell can they tell anyone that they cannot sell their own shiite? If I were Tressel and OSU, I would have threatened the NCAA with legal action if they didn't drop this silly damn witch hunt. The players didn't do anything wrong, and that's why Tressel blew it off. They come back later and say "You should have told us your players committed an infraction." His response was essentially, and I agree..."I don't consider a person selling or trading their own belongings as a violation or infraction, therefore what would I report?"
Click to expand...

Yes, I do pay attention. Is this your tact for anyone not agreeing with your position on things? Tressel has a history before this. Feel however you want for him as I do. Difference of opinion. :hi: Have a nice night.
 
#168
#168
Slydell said:
Yes, I do pay attention. Is this your tact for anyone not agreeing with your position on things? Tressel has a history before this. Feel however you want for him as I do. Difference of opinion. :hi: Have a nice night.
Click to expand...
What Tressel did is no worse than Bama athletes selling textbooks a few years ago, but because Bama had not been that big of a PITA to the SEC, very few made a stink about it.

If we want to hang Tressel, then Saban should be next.
 
#169
#169
TennesseeOrange said:
He was penalized under 19.5.2. That section of the NCAA code is: "Penalties for Major Violations." The show-cause penalty is a way to effectively ban a coach by threatening institutions with penalties if they hire the coach. It is a major violation, it is treated as such, and they intend for him to be done for five years.
Click to expand...
Read it for yourself, Rain Man. Page 20-21:

GIFSoup

http://espn.go.com/photo/preview/!pdfs/111220/ohio_state_report.pdf

Still want to keep talking shiite?
 
#170
#170
I feel like he would leave in the middle of the night as soon as the job at Rutgers or UNC becomes available. You think we could keep him compared to the clout of those two teams?
 
#171
#171
Wonder about his recruiting.. He got most of his players right out of his back yard.. The show cause makes it not a possibility anyway..
 
#172
#172
Nerd-Vol said:
I feel like he would leave in the middle of the night as soon as the job at Rutgers or UNC becomes available. You think we could keep him compared to the clout of those two teams?
Click to expand...
Why would he leave a program on the same level as OSU for UNC or Rutgers?

I think his contract would have a hefty buyout clause, and if UT is willing to pull his fanny out of the fire, surely there would be some level of appreciation/loyalty. When I said we could get him cheap, I don't mean less than what we are paying Dooley. If we pay too little, then his buyout is a piece of cake for other teams, if he is successful.

Tressel is a Lexus with a small dent in the quarter panel, so to speak. Will it cost you to have it repaired? Yes, but how much are you saving? If the dent reduces the price $10k or more, yet only costs $500 to fix, then why not? Some buyers won't care if it's steal. They don't want any visible defects and are willing to pay full price instead of taking the deal. That's fine.

I just recall watching OSU playing some damn good football and for a long time, at that. Whether Big 10 talent can match SEC talent is immaterial to me. He dominated his conference for several years. No reason to think he can't recruit SEC caliber players here, and excel in this conference too.
 
Last edited:
#174
#174
If all the options say no, which I doubt, we should hire Tressell. Here is why...

Tressel is 229-79-2 with the record he had at Youngstown st and Ohio St. He was 94-22 at Ohio St minus the 12 wins he had in his last year. 1 year of show cause isn't going to hurt guys. I don't see why we don't hire Tressel he would be a tremendous hire.
Also to add he won 5 National Championships at Youngstown St before he came to Ohio St. He of course won the National Championship at Ohio St. The guy can flat out coach. I just don't see what the problem is with this guys. The Show cause penalties are not that bad.

Tressell should be our number one choice. I don't see why we shouldn't hire him. I think he would turn this program around in a jiffy.

Go Vols find the right hire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top