Jim Tressel (merged)

[LebanonVolunteer]

Nice backpedal you got going there, Rain Man.

GIFSoup

I did not backpedal at all. Nowhere did I say a school could not hire him. Your just making false claims that the NCAA would do nothing to a school who does hire him. You have NOTHING to support that. Your going off some article you read online. The NCAA came down on JT for his actions at OSU. If a school hired him now, I have no doubt the NCAA would not just take it in stride and do nothing about it. The show cause is a major punishment. You can deny it and fight the good fight. The man will not be hired here.

Something tells me you were picked on alot as a child right? All your name calling screams of little man syndrome. Your name calling and claims of "racists" on here is just pathetic. You need help my friend.

 

[VOLorNuttin]

I did not backpedal at all. Nowhere did I say a school could not hire him. Your just making false claims that the NCAA would do nothing to a school who does hire him. You have NOTHING to support that. Your going off some article you read online. The NCAA came down on JT for his actions at OSU. If a school hired him now, I have no doubt the NCAA would not just take it in stride and do nothing about it. The show cause is a major punishment. You can deny it and fight the good fight. The man will not be hired here.

Something tells me you were picked on alot as a child right? All your name calling screams of little man syndrome. Your name calling and claims of "racists" on here is just pathetic. You need help my friend.

Something tells me you got picked on for showing such an inordinate level of stupidity.

You keep reading into the ruling what is not there. Don't let the facts hinder you, though. It is what it is. If it were a ban, they would have added more penalty to the coach. It is a slap on the wrist, and a slap that a team has to be willing to give him should he be hired. THAT IS ALL THERE IS TO IT. It's not UT daring the NCAA to hammer them or anything of the sort.

Now, because you just love to take a beating

GIFSoup

...proceed with the BS.

 

[VOLorNuttin]

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/!pd...ate_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.

 

[TennesseeOrange]

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:

19.5.2 Penalties for Major Violations. Penalties for a major violation shall be significantly more severe
than those for a secondary violation and shall be consistent with the penalty structure and guidelines used by other regulatory committees (e.g., Division I Committee on Academic Performance). The Committee on Infractions may impose one or more of the following penalties:

(k) Requirement that an institution that has been found in violation, or that has an athletics department staff member who has been found in violation of the provisions of NCAA legislation while representing another institution, show cause why a penalty or additional penalty should not be imposed, if, in the opinion of the Committee on Infractions, the institution has not taken appropriate disciplinary or corrective action against athletics department personnel involved in the infractions case or any other institutional employee, if the circumstances warrant, or a representative of the institution’s athletics interests.

(1) The penalty imposed under this provision may include a recommendation to the membership that the
institution’s membership in the Association be suspended or terminated.

(2) “Appropriate disciplinary or corrective action” may include severance of relations with any representative
of the institution’s athletics interests who may be involved; the debarment of the head coach or any
assistant coach involved in the infraction from coaching, recruiting, or speaking engagements; and the
prohibition of all recruiting in a specified sport for a specified period. The nature and extent of such action
shall be determined by the institution, but the determination of whether the action is appropriate in
the fulfillment of NCAA policies and principles, and its resulting effect on any institutional penalty, shall
be solely that of the Committee on Infractions (or the Infractions Appeals Committee per Bylaw 19.2).

(3) In the event the Committee on Infractions imposes additional penalties upon an institution, the institution
shall be provided the opportunity to appear before the committee; further, the institution shall be
provided the opportunity to appeal (per Bylaw 19.6.2) any additional penalty imposed by the Committee
on Infractions.

The suspension and monitoring are in addition to the show cause, they're not the entire punishment. I'll try to summarize what we've been trying to say. None of us have said it is an ACTUAL BAN. We're arguing it is an effective ban because it threatens hiring institutions with additional penalties. No one knows whether or not they would impose additional penalties for hiring someone under a show cause, because it has never been done. The threat alone is what makes it an effective ban.

I understand you're arguing it's not an effective ban because someone could hire him; however, if no one hires him because there is a show cause in place, it's an effective ban.

I also said that I think the Committee on Infractions intended Tressel to be done for 5 years. I think that because they are well aware of the effect of a show cause, if they did not intend for him to be done, they wouldn't have gone to this extent.

 

[globadoc]

19.02.1 Show-Cause Order. A show-cause order is one that requires a member institution to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Committee on Infractions (or the Infractions Appeals Committee per Bylaw 19.2) why it should not be subject to a penalty (or additional penalty) for not taking appropriate disciplinary or corrective action against an institutional staff member or representative of the institution’s athletics interests identified by the committee as having been involved in a violation of NCAA regulations that has been found by the committee. (Revised: 1/10/95, 4/24/03)

We can hire Tressel tomorrow, no problem. However, your assumption is that the Infractions Committee will merely look at the University of Tennessee's hiring of Tressel with a benevolent attitude. Keep in mind that that is the same committee (including Greg Sankey, COO of the SEC) that threw the book at Tressel two years ago, calling Tressel's behavior "very serious, and frankly, disappointing" (link). The same committee that did no find reason to administer additional punishments in 2011 for football, but that was after significant self-imposed punishments (and several resignations in BB and FB). This does not mean that UT was or is squeaky clean and above the reproach of the NCAA; quite the contrary. Given our history, and more importantly Tressel's history, it is possible if not likely that the NCAA would add to Tressel's suspension. I would not be surprised for them to make him ineligible for a full year.

Even if the committee did not choose to impose additional penalties beyond his suspension (from the first fall practice until after the 5th game on 10/18), the university would still be subject to additional penalties if he or any member of his staff committed any other infractions, even secondary violations. Remember the new enforcement regulations add to the head coach's responsibilities and his culpability for the actions of his staff (link).Given how "easy" it is for a staff member to commit a secondary violation these days, would you really take that chance?

Tressel would be a good choice under different circumstances, but unfortunately the risk would probably be waaaay too great to justify hiring him until 2016.

 

[VOLorNuttin]

We can hire Tressel tomorrow, no problem. However, your assumption is that the Infractions Committee will merely look at the University of Tennessee's hiring of Tressel with a benevolent attitude. Keep in mind that that is the same committee (including Greg Sankey, COO of the SEC) that threw the book at Tressel two years ago, calling Tressel's behavior "very serious, and frankly, disappointing" (link). The same committee that did no find reason to administer additional punishments in 2011 for football, but that was after significant self-imposed punishments (and several resignations in BB and FB). This does not mean that UT was or is squeaky clean and above the reproach of the NCAA; quite the contrary. Given our history, and more importantly Tressel's history, it is possible if not likely that the NCAA would add to Tressel's suspension. I would not be surprised for them to make him ineligible for a full year.

Even if the committee did not choose to impose additional penalties beyond his suspension (from the first fall practice until after the 5th game on 10/18), the university would still be subject to additional penalties if he or any member of his staff committed any other infractions, even secondary violations. Remember the new enforcement regulations add to the head coach's responsibilities and his culpability for the actions of his staff (link).Given how "easy" it is for a staff member to commit a secondary violation these days, would you really take that chance?

Tressel would be a good choice under different circumstances, but unfortunately the risk would probably be waaaay too great to justify hiring him until 2016.

Nothing you've said is any different than the false assumptions others here have made.

First, he can't coach: BUSTED

Well, He can coach, but he is EFFECTIVELY banned: BUSTED

OK. He's not effectively banned, but the NCAA would be camped next to the ROCK, counting down the hours til they can bust him/us again: RETARDED :crazy:

 

[VegasBaby!]

Tressel is an Ohio guy through and through. He grew up in Mentor Ohio, which is northeast of Cleveland, and has never worked more than 325 miles from his home town. He has a $200,000 base salary administrative job at U. of Akron, writes books and is in demand on the speaking circuit. I think he would be great at UT, but you should not expect him to come even if he is offered the opportunity. That not a slam on UT or Tennessee. He's just an Ohio/eastern Midwest guy.

 

[globadoc]

Nothing you've said is any different than the false assumptions others here have made.

First, he can't coach: BUSTED

Well, He can coach, but he is EFFECTIVELY banned: BUSTED

OK. He's not effectively banned, but the NCAA would be camped next to the ROCK, counting down the hours til they can bust him/us again: RETARDED :crazy:

Fine. Believe what you want. I agree that Tressel is a very good coach and thought of him earlier this season, but he is effectively banned, as intended by the NCAA especially due to his egregious violations (in their opinion, not necessarily mine). Go back and look at the list of coaches that have received the show-cause orders in any sport. Very very few (Bozeman is the only one that I can find) of them have EVER gotten back into coaching at any level, even after the show cause penalty expired. Only one. If that isn't an effective ban, what is?

I'm done. Carry on.

 

[LebanonVolunteer]

Fine. Believe what you want. I agree that Tressel is a very good coach and thought of him earlier this season, but he is effectively banned, as intended by the NCAA especially due to his egregious violations (in their opinion, not necessarily mine). Go back and look at the list of coaches that have received the show-cause orders in any sport. Very very few (Bozeman is the only one that I can find) of them have EVER gotten back into coaching at any level, even after the show cause penalty expired. Only one. If that isn't an effective ban, what is?

I'm done. Carry on.

He is a lost cause. He trolls just looking for fights and even when he is proved a fool 934 times, he stills claims to be right. I think Pearl is another example of just what a show cause does to a coach. Pearl had a BBQ and lied about it. Why did noone hire him right away? He turned UT BB around in no time. Oh, that's right. He had a show cause.

 

[SteveninTenn]

Tressel may be a midwestern guy but Knoxville is closer to Cinncinatti OH than Atlanta Ga. So its not like hed be moving to Florida. I also think he'd be interested in getting back into coaching as long as it was at level eqivalent to Ohio St. which Tenn is.

 

[SteveninTenn]

The show cause is NOT a ban!!! Nor is it effectively a ban.

 

[Slydell]

Snapshot of the damage he caused.

Ohio State's NCAA penalties

The NCAA has cited Ohio State with failure to monitor, preferential treatment and extra benefit violations in its football program. Jim Tressel has received a show-cause. Here are the penalties.
• One-year bowl ban for the 2012 postseason.
• Reduction of football scholarships from 85 to 82 over each of the next three seasons. Total scholarship reduction of nine.
• Three years of probation from Dec. 20, 2011, through Dec. 19, 2014.
• Five-year show cause order for Tressel, making it tough for him to coach in college during this period.
• Vacation of all wins for the 2010 football regular season, including the Big Ten co-championship and participation in the Sugar Bowl.
• Forfeiture of $338,811 the university received through the Big Ten for appearing in the Sugar Bowl.
• Disassociation with a booster for 10 years.
• Disassociation with a former player, believed to be Terrelle Pryor, for five years.

 

[VOLorNuttin]

This article shows exactly what I'm talking about. How media members and opposing fans can try to drive a non-issue and make it a federal case.

Tennessee QB Tyler Bray: 'I'm paid to win games'

Tyler had phrased an answer wrongly. He was saying you're paid to hype these things (his NFL status), I'm paid to win. The reporter quickly asked him "PAID?!" He said, I'm referring to the free education and such."

USA Today is trying to take this innocent slip of the tongue, and make something juicy and controversial with it. That is EXACTLY what they did with the players at OSU. If there were agents, big boosters, Land Rovers, drugs, etc. I could see it.

The opposing fanbases along with the media tried to drive Tressel out because he was making life miserable for them. If it were Vandy or Kentucky....no one would care if a player traded his jersey for a tattoo. It really is just that simple. The bigger the menace you are in your conference, the bigger the target you are.

This is why I've been saying that everything that shines isn't Gold. Tressel isn't the Boogie Man, and the NCAA isn't going to open up an office on campus if we hire him. Over reacting is common human behavior. Folks here scared that the NCAA is just waiting to pounce if we hire Tressel is doing just that.

 

[VOLorNuttin]

He is a lost cause. He trolls just looking for fights and even when he is proved a fool 934 times, he stills claims to be right. I think Pearl is another example of just what a show cause does to a coach. Pearl had a BBQ and lied about it. Why did noone hire him right away? He turned UT BB around in no time. Oh, that's right. He had a show cause.

What have you proven? I'm the one who had to bring the facts here and put them right under your nose. You're the one trying to sell your opinion as some form of evidence. Pure Dumba$$ery. :crazy:

Your assertion that a 5 game + bowl penalty is a 5yr ban is absolute bull caca. A caller asked about the prospect of Tressel, on Tony Basilio's show today. He broke it down just as I did here, and both he and Jerry Colquit agreed it might make good sense, because apart from the 5 game penalty, he is the one coach who meets all the criteria we are looking for in a new HC.

 

[Slydell]

Pretty sure the issue was Tressel lying to the university and the NCAA and using players who he knew were ineligible all season. That's how I saw it, anyway.

 

[VOLorNuttin]

Pretty sure the issue was Tressel lying to the university and the NCAA and using players who he knew were ineligible all season. That's how I saw it, anyway.

How do you lie about something you don't see as an infraction? How many times do I have to repeat that. The NCAA doesn't care about Bama players selling textbooks, so why would a player trading his jersey for a tattoo be something wrong. The NCAA can always come back later and say, "Oh but we think it is an infraction, and you didn't report it to us." I can see why Tressel failed to report nothing as if it was something. It was nothing. I don't tell you that you can't sell your TV on LSN or Craigslist...why should the NCAA have authority to tell and athlete they can't do the same?

 

[Slydell]

I'm not arguing about the idiot NCAA rules. Most of them are. If it were up to me, I'd probably bust the NCAA up or reorganize to perform worthwhile duties. I feel that he knowing lied about all of this. That's the only thing I'm looking at.

 

[VOLorNuttin]

I'm not arguing about the idiot NCAA rules. Most of them are. If it were up to me, I'd probably bust the NCAA up or reorganize to perform worthwhile duties. I feel that he knowing lied about all of this. That's the only thing I'm looking at.

I don't know all the specifics, nor do I care to know. I can read right in their own ruling what THEY claim he did wrong. It says he failed to report the players actions after an attorney friend of his e-mailed him about it.

I'm just putting myself in his shoes. How would I handle it if I were him? I too would say "What business is it of mine, yours, the media, or the NCAA if a young man wants to sell one of his own belongings to someone.
I think he honestly did not see it as a wrong doing, and the NCAA is the one who dug into it and made a non-issue into one...all because a rumor got out and the all the opposing fanbases went in an uproar over it.

How in the hell does Bama's Book Gate and Cam Gate get swept under the rug and yet this petty little issue get blown way out of proportion? If it was a flagrant violation, I'm pretty sure Tressel would have reported it.

 

[Slydell]

I don't know all the specifics, nor do I care to know. I can read right in their own ruling what THEY claim he did wrong. It says he failed to report the players actions after an attorney friend of his e-mailed him about it.

I'm just putting myself in his shoes. How would I handle it if I were him? I too would say "What business is it of mine, yours, the media, or the NCAA if a young man wants to sell one of his own belongings to someone.
I think he honestly did not see it as a wrong doing, and the NCAA is the one who dug into it and made a non-issue into one...all because a rumor got out and the all the opposing fanbases went in an uproar over it.

How in the hell does Bama's Book Gate and Cam Gate get swept under the rug and yet this petty little issue get blown way out of proportion? If it was a flagrant violation, I'm pretty sure Tressel would have reported it.

I'm with you on those two.

 

[SteveninTenn]

Tressel is big time. We would be back to winning championships in 3 years.

 

[volswillrise12]

Matt Hayes (SN) tweeted that he's a serious candidate for the job. I'm saying no way we roll the dice on the guy. One of Hart's criteria for a coach was "integrity"--please see "not Jim Tressel" even though I acknowledge the guy's coaching ability. Thoughts anyone?

 

[soda23]

Hell no

 

[BigOrangeFanatic]

How about Jon Gruden?

 

[05_never_again]

Tressel has baggage, plus some of his playcalls make Fulmer look like a wildman.

 

[volswillrise12]

Yeah, I heard a guy from the 247 Ohio State site say that a draw play was considered exotic by Jim Tressel standards...not a guy I want. The show cause stuff is something this University needs to stay far away from.