How Much Trouble Is OSU and Tressel in Now?!

• bo shemmy3337

  password;706800 wrote:Some people on here think he is God Almighty when it come to OSU.The biggest thing is that OSU won Championships before he blessed OSU with his Holiness and OSU will win many more Championships when he is gone.Ohio State attracts some of the best athletes in the country to their school because of what the are and the history that goes with the school,not because of Tressel.They will always win games.

  
  Although many have hated on me for my comments on TP about not being as important as most think, JT is very important. Why? Because he has proven he can win at OSU. Once he is gone (whenever that maybe) a risk will be taken on someone who has not proven they can win at OSU. If Michigan can have 2 loosing seasons anyone can as a large part of the hiring of new coaches is hope and luck as there is no way to guarantee success.
• Fidmeister

  Didn't Yahoo! sports report the truth?
  
  Exactly what is wrong with reporting the truth? Is it that negative truth hit too close to home this time?
• LJ

  

  Fidmeister;706846 wrote:Didn't Yahoo! sports report the truth?
  
  Exactly what is wrong with reporting the truth? Is it that negative truth hit too close to home this time?

  
  What?
• bo shemmy3337

  Fidmeister;706846 wrote:Didn't Yahoo! sports report the truth?
  
  Exactly what is wrong with reporting the truth? Is it that negative truth hit too close to home this time?

  
  I wont consider anything the truth until the NCAA finishes there investigation until then the only reality is what JT is currently facing which is the 2 game suspension and the fine. The only thing I find laughable about the sanctions would be the fine. 250K? he makes something like 280K a game so he is still getting around 300K for the games he won't be at. The suspension is what it is, even if it was 5 games I still do not see OSU loosing any of those game with an exception to MSU but even that would be a long shot IMO. What I think should be the case is JT gets a 5 game suspension not paid which would cut his salary down to about 2 million for the year and make the 2010 season a lost one. I think those are more than fair and would make everyone happy.
• se-alum

  

  Fidmeister;706846 wrote:Didn't Yahoo! sports report the truth?
  
  Exactly what is wrong with reporting the truth? Is it that negative truth hit too close to home this time?

  It was the fact that they tried to claim it was some sort of big investigation they did. Someone leaked info that OSU was about to self report, and Yahoo! ran the story to try to make themselves look like they did something meaningful.
• enigmaax

  se-alum;706879 wrote:It was the fact that they tried to claim it was some sort of big investigation they did. Someone leaked info that OSU was about to self report, and Yahoo! ran the story to try to make themselves look like they did something meaningful.

  
  So, Yahoo lied about having been investigating it for the last two months?
• ytownfootball

  

  enigmaax;707078 wrote:So, Yahoo lied about having been investigating it for the last two months?

  
  Wut?
  
  I don't see where he said Yahoo lied about anything. It's the fact that they're trying to appear as the second coming of deep throat in the Watergate hearings...sorry Yahoo, not even close.
  
  Yahoo wants to claim they've done some intense "investigative reporting"...they didn't, they got a lousy, cheap ass scoop.
• enigmaax

  ytownfootball;707080 wrote:Wut?
  
  I don't see where he said Yahoo lied about anything. It's the fact that they're trying to appear as the second coming of deep throat in the Watergate hearings...sorry Yahoo, not even close.
  
  Yahoo wants to claim they've done some intense "investigative reporting"...they didn't, they got a lousy, cheap ass scoop.

  
  I haven't read every single article, so maybe I missed it. Yahoo said they investigated for two months. Why would you dispute that without having been there? And if they were the first to report it, then why wouldn't that make them look good? Isn't a lot of big time reporting about getting that scoop?
  
  One post said, "they ran the story to make themselves look like they did something meaningful". How fucking stupid. They ran the story because they HAD the story.
  
  I know you guys are pissy because your saint has fallen from grace a little, but geezus guys, don't take it out on Yahoo just because they continue to be way out in front on reporting this shit to the public.
• WebFire

  Here is what Michigan coach Brady Hoke had to say...
  

  Meanwhile, Michigan coach Brady Hoke, when asked Wednesday about the coach of his university’s biggest rival, said: “I’ve known Jim Tressel for a long time. He’s a quality guy and a dang good football coach. I don’t know that situation. I’m focused on what we’re doing here.”

• centralbucksfan

  WebFire;707281 wrote:Here is what Michigan coach Brady Hoke had to say...

  
  I actually got to meet Hoke right after UM hired him. He was very nice, respectful and seemed like a great guy. Seemed like a good ole boy.
• vball10set

  ^^^ and seems pretty intense as well-- he should bring a lot of energy (positive) to tsun
• thedynasty1998

  

  ytownfootball;707080 wrote:Wut?
  
  I don't see where he said Yahoo lied about anything. It's the fact that they're trying to appear as the second coming of deep throat in the Watergate hearings...sorry Yahoo, not even close.
  
  Yahoo wants to claim they've done some intense "investigative reporting"...they didn't, they got a lousy, cheap ass scoop.

  
  Who is to say that this didn't all surface because of Yahoo's investigation? Maybe Tressel didn't come forward until he learned of the investigation, and at that point the whole AD had to save face by saying they had been looking into it for a while now.
  
  That's what doesn't add up to me. To say they had this long investigation into Tressel's awareness of the situation, yet you file a one page release to the NCAA with emails attached is laughable.
• lhslep134

  

  karen lotz;706285 wrote:A lot of people are dismissing just how serious the violation is and that it very well could end up costing him his job. .

  
  Listen, Tressel was in the wrong, but the extenuating circumstances that exist here did not exist in the other 12 coach's cases.
• thedynasty1998

  

  lhslep134;707376 wrote:Listen, Tressel was in the wrong, but the extenuating circumstances that exist here did not exist in the other 12 coach's cases.

  
  Doesn't make it any less serious.
• lhslep134

  

  thedynasty1998;707385 wrote:Doesn't make it any less serious.

  
  I disagree. If it didn't, Tressel wouldn't have a job. I'm not saying it's not serious (it is), but it's not as serious as if there weren't extenuating circumstances, at least in the minds of his bosses IMO.
  
  Jim O'Brien was a winner too and was booted for 10.1
• thedynasty1998

  

  lhslep134;707387 wrote:I disagree. If it didn't, Tressel wouldn't have a job. I'm not saying it's not serious (it is), but it's not as serious as if there weren't extenuating circumstances, at least in the minds of his bosses IMO.
  
  Jim O'Brien was a winner too and was booted for 10.1

  
  You can't compare the basketball coach at OSU to the football coach at OSU.
  
  Tressel just has more job security than the others previously in this violation.
• LJ

  

  thedynasty1998;707367 wrote:Who is to say that this didn't all surface because of Yahoo's investigation? Maybe Tressel didn't come forward until he learned of the investigation, and at that point the whole AD had to save face by saying they had been looking into it for a while now.
  
  That's what doesn't add up to me. To say they had this long investigation into Tressel's awareness of the situation, yet you file a one page release to the NCAA with emails attached is laughable.

  
  Umm, that doesn't make any sense. Lets see, the document they sent to the NCAA was multiple pages long PLUS the emails, and Tressel didn't come foward, OSU found the emails on their own during a different investigation (some legal thing). So, fail on your part
• thedynasty1998

  

  LJ;707393 wrote:Umm, that doesn't make any sense. Lets see, the document they sent to the NCAA was multiple pages long PLUS the emails, and Tressel didn't come foward, OSU found the emails on their own during a different investigation (some legal thing). So, fail on your part

  
  How do you know OSU found the emails? The document that the media got a hold of was a joke, hardly contained any thorough investigating.
  
  How do we know for certain that Yahoo wasn't tipped off and called OSU and asked for any email correspondence between Tressel and Cicero?
• LJ

  

  thedynasty1998;707403 wrote:How do you know OSU found the emails? The document that the media got a hold of was a joke, hardly contained any thorough investigating.
  
  How do we know for certain that Yahoo wasn't tipped off and called OSU and asked for any email correspondence between Tressel and Cicero?

  
  Because OSU said to the NCAA "during an investigation of another matter, emails were uncovered"
  
  DURRR.
  
  And the I dunno what the hell you read, but the document that was multiple pages long was pretty in depth.
• thedynasty1998

  

  LJ;707408 wrote:Because OSU said to the NCAA "during an investigation of another matter, emails were uncovered"
  
  DURRR.
  
  And the I dunno what the hell you read, but the document that was multiple pages long was pretty in depth.

  So we are supposed to believe what OSU tells the NCAA? Sorry, but I'm skeptical. The NCAA still has to do their own investigation, and I'm sure they will contact the Yahoo writers. You may be right, but I'm not going to just blindly believe everything that is stated in that report.
• dat dude

  thedynasty1998;707403 wrote:How do you know OSU found the emails? The document that the media got a hold of was a joke, hardly contained any thorough investigating.
  
  How do we know for certain that Yahoo wasn't tipped off and called OSU and asked for any email correspondence between Tressel and Cicero?

  
  http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sports/stories/2011/03/10/tressel-timeline-is-lengthy.html?sid=101
  
  You may want to research the situation before you jump to your standard contrarian opinion.
• sherm03

  

  lhslep134;707387 wrote:I disagree. If it didn't, Tressel wouldn't have a job. I'm not saying it's not serious (it is), but it's not as serious as if there weren't extenuating circumstances, at least in the minds of his bosses IMO.
  
  Jim O'Brien was a winner too and was booted for 10.1

  
  What are the extenuating circumstances for Tressel?
  
  I will sort of agree with the extenuating circumstances for not reporting the issue in April (even though it's highly debatable because the first email never mentioned confidentiality...but I digress). So let's go ahead and give him a pass for that part.
  
  What extenuating circumstances exist in September when Tressel signs a paper for the NCAA saying that he has reported any possible violations knowing full well that he did not do that? What extenuating circumstances exist in December when the whole thing comes out, and in the investigation Tressel flat out claims that he found out about everything in December when he actually found out about it in April?
  
  Like I said before...protecting your kids and not reporting it initially is one thing. It's wrong, but with the situation...it's forgivable. Lying in September and then lying again in December (on multiple occasions) in an effort to cover your own ass is another thing. It's very wrong...and honestly, I think it's NOT forgivable. The question now will always linger, "what is he hiding? What is he lying about now? How can we trust what this man says?"
  
  You really need to step back and look at this objectively lhs. Like I said before, you're clearly close to the program. But you're disregard for what happened is laughable. You are coming off like the girl who just got smacked around by her boyfriend and is standing outside yelling at the cops that he loves you and you don't want to press charges because what he did wasn't that bad.
• karen lotz

  

  lhslep134;707376 wrote:Listen, Tressel was in the wrong, but the extenuating circumstances that exist here did not exist in the other 12 coach's cases.

  
  
  Tressel also said that he knew it was inevitable that the players would be ruled ineligible but chose to play them anyway. He also had many chances to mention that he did have knowledge of what was going on and failed to do so, and he signed an NCAA document in September that he had reported all violations that he was aware of. Do you honestly believe a head coach of 30 years or whatever it is and a former AD who has dealt with numerous NCAA violations in his career didn't know who to talk to? I understand you love Tressel, but you can't hide behind extenuating circumstances.
• karen lotz

  

  lhslep134;707387 wrote:I disagree. If it didn't, Tressel wouldn't have a job. I'm not saying it's not serious (it is), but it's not as serious as if there weren't extenuating circumstances, at least in the minds of his bosses IMO.
  
  Jim O'Brien was a winner too and was booted for 10.1

  
  lol, you think Gee has any clue what is going on? "I hope Tressel doesn't dismiss me." Are you serious? That isn't a good thing for a university president to say.
• thedynasty1998

  

  dat dude;707431 wrote:http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sports/stories/2011/03/10/tressel-timeline-is-lengthy.html?sid=101
  
  You may want to research the situation before you jump to your standard contrarian opinion.

  
  I stand corrected. That's the first time line I've seen with that much detail.