Jump to content

College Football Thread v2.0


Dr. Pomade
 Share

Recommended Posts

They still would have had a 2012 ban.

 

At least that's what they said. It's easy for the NCAA to say that after they've already done it.

 

I agree though, OSU and Miami were two completely different violations, yet handled the same. Either Miami deserved more, or OSU deserved less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 811
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They still would have had a 2012 ban.

 

I mean, you can't prove that and I can't prove my claim either (although there seems to be more evidence on my side). I know you love Gene Smith and will bring in the useless praise/awards he's received from whatever organization but you're just not going to ever convince me or most other OSU fans that he handled the situation well. At all. He flat out told Urban that a bowl ban was not on the table because that's what he "knew" from his NCAA connections. Then boom, undefeated season becomes significantly less meaningful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, you can't prove that and I can't prove my claim either (although there seems to be more evidence on my side). I know you love Gene Smith and will bring in the useless praise/awards he's received from whatever organization but you're just not going to ever convince me or most other OSU fans that he handled the situation well. At all. He flat out told Urban that a bowl ban was not on the table because that's what he "knew" from his NCAA connections. Then boom, undefeated season becomes significantly less meaningful.

 

The evidence is more on the side of a 2012 ban no matter what, per statements the NCAA has made. As long as OSU hires Urban Meyer before the NCAA rules on their sanctions, OSU is getting a 2012 ban. They didn't get a bowl ban because of tats. They got a bowl ban for improper benefits, the coach covering it up, then players still taking improper benefits. The issues in winter and spring sealed the repeat offender status (even though the basketball program basically put OSU into that status). OSU is lucky that they didn't get hit with LOIC. We should be happy what we got is ALL we got.

 

Also, I don't "love Gene Smith". I just think that most OSU fans are idiots when it comes to balancing the positive vs the negative. Apparently 1 negative = -500 points, 1 positive = 1 point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should be happy what we got is ALL we got.

 

:dumb:

 

Obviously you're not going to change your mind on the subject and neither am I or, as I said, most other OSU fans. It's a very, very small number of people who think the NCAA stuff was handled even remotely well by Gene Smith but if you want to be in that group then, by all means, have at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:dumb:

 

Obviously you're not going to change your mind on the subject and neither am I or, as I said, most other OSU fans. It's a very, very small number of people who think the NCAA stuff was handled even remotely well by Gene Smith but if you want to be in that group then, by all means, have at it.

 

I never said it was handled all that well. It was a whole foot in mouth situation. I just laugh at people that think we would've been bowl eligible in 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also it's pretty funny to use an example of a team self imposing a 2 year bowl ban and a conference championship ban, to say that OSU would have only gotten a 1 year ban

 

:dumb:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$170k+ of impermissible benefits, the involvement of multiple coaches and lying/misleading statements by at least one vs. around $10k and Tressel not turning his players in over an e-mail from a lawyer he knew back in the 80's? Yeah, it's a laughable comparison.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

$170k+ of impermissible benefits, the involvement of multiple coaches and lying/misleading statements by at least one vs. around $10k and Tressel not turning his players in over an e-mail from a lawyer he knew back in the 80's? Yeah, it's a laughable comparison.

 

and a lying statement from Tressel.

 

But you forget this

 

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/3/27/4154708/ncaa-botched-miami-investigation-mark-emmert-donna-shalala

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "lying statement" from Tressel was a signed document which only would have gone unsigned or resulted in him reporting something had he gone all in based on the e-mail I mentioned.

 

And I didn't forget that. The NCAA didn't use any information attained through those methods. The number I used predates the NCAA investigation (comes from the Yahoo article which blew it all open in the first place I believe) and the multiple coaches were cited in the NCAA's findings this morning.

 

I do think this part of the article you linked is hilarious though...

 

Meanwhile, UM also will allege that NCAA investigators lied to interview subjects by claiming that other people interviewed made comments they never made, in order to trick the subjects into revealing incriminating information they otherwise might not, according to multiple officials familiar with the NCAA’s case against UM and former coaches.

 

That's a pretty standard interrogative technique. But hey, UM doesn't think it's fair or playing nice so they're going to use it against the NCAA...lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "lying statement" from Tressel was a signed document which only would have gone unsigned or resulted in him reporting something had he gone all in based on the e-mail I mentioned.

 

And I didn't forget that. The NCAA didn't use any information attained through those methods. The number I used predates the NCAA investigation (comes from the Yahoo article which blew it all open in the first place I believe) and the multiple coaches were cited in the NCAA's findings this morning.

 

I do think this part of the article you linked is hilarious though...

 

 

 

That's a pretty standard interrogative technique. But hey, UM doesn't think it's fair or playing nice so they're going to use it against the NCAA...lol.

 

He lied to investigators during the original tat scandal as well.

 

And UM's method worked out well, as they didn't get any punishment beyond their self imposed. The scholarship reduction is LESS than what they had self imposed. The NCAA was facing a legitimate lawsuit had they done anything to impede the athletic department.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I am absolutely envious of UM's athletic department today. They did everything right as far as minimizing future damage was concerned.

 

On a lighter note, OSU will be wearing their alternate home jerseys again Saturday night (same as Wisconsin game) AND... pink socks and gloves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I figured that's what it would end up being. Purdue is atrocious and the BTN needs a conference game from us. Enjoy, BTN!

 

What I wonder is how long they've used the AP poll before the BCS becomes available. It makes no sense. Their name is attached to the coaches' poll AND the coaches' poll has an actual impact on the BCS rankings. The AP is completely useless. Obviously I liked it last season but it really just doesn't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my eyes, the moral of the story with regard to the NCAA is give them the big middle finger. Deny everything and dare them to try and prove otherwise as they cant. It worked for Oregon, Texas, Miami, Auburn, Alabama ect.

 

The NCAA has NO legal power, so give them nothing and they can not enforce anything. They are a JOKE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miami didn't really do that until the NCAA fucked up though. They were sitting back waiting to get reamed, NCAA fucked up and basically just gave up. They had enough even from before they fucked up to do anything they wanted to do to Miami and just decided not to. Because, as you said, they're a joke.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they added another year, then so be-it.

 

That's the biggest thing right there. What was gained by playing in that Gator Bowl? Other than rewarding a class of seniors that included the same kids whose actions led to the sanctions in the first place with a winter trip to Florida? And what could possibly have been gained by not playing in it? A LOT. Like, a fucking national championship for example.

 

Apparently the biggest reason Gene hasn't been let go is he's being protected by a very powerful donor/BoT member who likes to basically use Gene as his proxy to control the AD himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one I knew had any interest in playing a 6-6 Florida squad. I surely didn't. Everything to lose in that game: a bowl loss, another loss to Florida, another loss to an SEC squad, and risk pissing off NCAA because you aren't self-imposing. And nothing really to win: even if you win, it's a meaningless bowl, and no you can't beat your chest because everyone will laugh and say all you managed to do was beat one of the worst SEC teams in recent memory.

 

That makes sense about why Gene is still around. I'm convinced he and the President knew about Tattoo-gate and just made Tressel take the fall for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...