Ohio State in More Trouble (merged)

#51
#51
The NCAA will do nothing of importance to OSU, book it! Hammering OSU would make the Big 10(12) whatever even more irrevalent than they already are and the AA will not allow that.
 
#53
#53
A few things

1. No way they can make a precedent with Pearl and not do the same to Tressel. If Tressel get's off then Pearl has to get off or has reason for lawsuit.
2. They have to understand that by Tressel letting the players compete all year he took a bcs spot from another team. That Osu team may have been .500 without those players.
3. If they plan to clean up ncaa sports then they are going to have to fine Tressel and put some type of ban on him. They have to.
4. This means that if Tressel knew about this he covered it up with the players and the players should be suspended for the entire 2011 season.


Fair is fair. Coaches cannot be getting away with murder and students get punished.
 
#54
#54
Share your thoughts. I feel if Pearl goes down for far less Tressel most certainly have to go down.
 
#55
#55
I'm pretty sure that the NCAA will be lenient on OSU.
Just how i feel, i guess. They gave them an I.O.U. for the bowl game, for cripes sake.
 
#57
#57
NewToVolCountry said:
OSU's AD has scheduled a press conference for this evening. News is that Tressel's job is in danger.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt that's the case.

But if OSU were to fire Jim Freaking Tressel, and UT continues to employ Bruce Pearl, the columnists are going to have a field day.
 
#59
#59
I'm not sure the NCAA judges failing to disclose information on your own volition as equal to lying to their face when questioned. If Tressel was asked when did you know by the AA (not the media) and lied, then we can start comparing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#61
#61
bamawriter said:
I highly doubt that's the case.

But if OSU were to fire Jim Freaking Tressel, and UT continues to employ Bruce Pearl, the columnists are going to have a field day.
Click to expand...
Agree, and they should, but I would argue that Tressel's violation is worse. As I said, I like the guy, so I hope not much comes of it.
 
#63
#63
TennTradition said:
I'm not sure the NCAA judges failing to disclose information on your own volition as equal to lying to their face when questioned. If Tressel was asked when did you know by the AA (not the media) and lied, then we can start comparing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
I agree. I'm a bit surprised, though. Until this past season, I never took Tressel as one to let things like this slide. I was very surprised that he didn't suspend the players for the bowl game.
 
Last edited:
#66
#66
Assuming that Tressel lied, which we don't know at this point:

How would committing multiple violations and lying about them be "far less" than lying about violations committed by others?
 
#67
#67
volberry said:
A few things

1. No way they can make a precedent with Pearl and not do the same to Tressel. If Tressel get's off then Pearl has to get off or has reason for lawsuit....
Click to expand...

What would be the basis for a lawsuit?
 
#68
#68
bamawriter said:
Assuming that Tressel lied, which we don't know at this point:

How would committing multiple violations and lying about them be "far less" than lying about violations committed by others?
Click to expand...


Lieing is lieing to the ncaa. At least up to this point. Also he let an entire season go by without saying anything then lied again to get the players in the bcs game they surely would have lost without them. The entire suspensions for next year is due to they were working with honest Jim Tressel. So if he lied then he already has affected the 2011 season. Those players playing half a season vs no games is the difference in 2-4 losses. Reshapes the new conference outcome.
 
#69
#69
bamawriter said:
I would love to hear that argument.
Click to expand...
One was lying about a minor recruiting violation.

If it's true that Tressel knew and lied about knowing (which I'm not sure he did), that means he knowingly used players that probably should have been ineligible. I'd say that's probably worse.
 
#73
#73
Pearl lying = Fact
Tressel lying = Rumor from a source

Ain't no one going down until it's proven
 
#74
#74
volberry said:
Lieing is lieing to the ncaa. At least up to this point. Also he let an entire season go by without saying anything then lied again to get the players in the bcs game they surely would have lost without them. The entire suspensions for next year is due to they were working with honest Jim Tressel. So if he lied then he already has affected the 2011 season. Those players playing half a season vs no games is the difference in 2-4 losses. Reshapes the new conference outcome.
Click to expand...

First, the NCAA isn't going to get into the hypotheticals about what might have happened had the five players not played. So the results of the season won't be factored in to any potential sanctions. That's not how they roll. Plus, they already chose not to rule the five players ineligible for the games they played in, so the NCAA didn't think enough of the violations to change the record book.

Second, Tressel's only offense would be lying about the violations. He didn't commit any other violation. Pearl lied about his own actions. What mitigating factor makes Pearl's behavior "far less" egregious than Tressel's?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top