OSU vacates 2010 wins

• KnightRyder

  

  Writerbuckeye;827849 wrote:You wouldn't know good or real journalism if it bit you on the ass.

  
  nor would you, if you call what you write good journalism. you keep whining about proof and facts , but everything you write is mere wishful thinking and pipe dreams.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  KnightRyder;827860 wrote:nor would you, if you call what you write good journalism. you keep whining about proof and facts , but everything you write is mere wishful thinking and pipe dreams.

  
  Everything I've stated IS factual -- unlike the crap you post. I've backed up my comments with stats and precedents from the NCAA. You've provided NOTHING...either in the way of content or thought.
• lhslep134

  

  Writerbuckeye;827868 wrote:Everything I've stated IS factual -- unlike the crap you post. I've backed up my comments with stats and precedents from the NCAA. You've provided NOTHING...either in the way of content or thought.

  
  This is actually true. From a completely objective perspective Knightryder has done nothing except shoot down posts or call people out without actually providing anything near as substantial as the facts being posted from the story. The media is actually blowing this out of proportion. Notice how I didn't say they are out to get us, because I have no way of knowing if that's true, but they are indeed blowing it out of proportion.
• KnightRyder

  

  Writerbuckeye;827868 wrote:Everything I've stated IS factual -- unlike the crap you post. I've backed up my comments with stats and precedents from the NCAA. You've provided NOTHING...either in the way of content or thought.

  
  you mean like how you claim the media is anti OSU ? is that fact? and as far as precedents, new precedents are set every day. and you talk about how OSU has been soo cooperative. is that what you call tressel lying to ncaa ?
• Writerbuckeye

  

  You're flailing. It's kind of fun to watch.
• KnightRyder

  

  Writerbuckeye;827908 wrote:You're flailing. It's kind of fun to watch.

  
  i also like how when you speak of precedents you leave details out (intentionally). didnt the ncaa have a 2 for 1 penalty? for every one athlete involved 2 scholarships are lost. seems the ncaa forgot about that precedent with usc. so much for precedents. and BTW how is lying to the ncaa being cooperative? care to answer that?
• dwccrew

  

  WebFire;827809 wrote:That's just it. They might have to. We'll see.

  
  If a court rules they have to, then so be it. I am talking about right now. OSU has cooperated w/ the NCAA.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  KnightRyder;827912 wrote:i also like how when you speak of precedents you leave details out (intentionally). didnt the ncaa have a 2 for 1 penalty? for every one athlete involved 2 scholarships are lost. seems the ncaa forgot about that precedent with usc. so much for precedents. and BTW how is lying to the ncaa being cooperative? care to answer that?

  
  I've answered the last question before but you ignore it. Go back and read my prior posts. I'm not wasting my time on repeat nonsense.
  
  USC had more than 30 major violations of NCAA bylaws. Ohio State had five. Do you really want to compare those situations?
  
  USC was hit with loss of institutional control in its letter of allegations; OSU was not.
  
  USC stonewalled the NCAA for something like 5 years before cooperating with the NCAA; OSU invited the NCAA to investigate twice: the first time when the Tat5 thing was found; the second when it was discovered Tressel lied on the compliance form.
  
  In the last 10 years, there have been 28 schools hit with major violations of NCAA regulations where no LOIC was in the letter of allegations and NONE of those received bans or loss of scholarships.
• WebFire

  dwccrew;827916 wrote:If a court rules they have to, then so be it. I am talking about right now. OSU has cooperated w/ the NCAA.

  
  Agreed.
• cats gone wild

  SportsAndLady;827699 wrote:Come on...
  
  Didn't LSU just get accused of cheating? They were just smart about it and led no trails?

  People get accused of things all the time, doesnt mean they are guilty. LSU is clean
  

  FatHobbit;827714 wrote:I disagree. IMHO CBF provides pretty good analysis of football and basketball. He's one of my favorite posters.
  
  

  Thats why you are a fathobit or cbf's son.
• Y-Town Steelhound

  

  Sorry for being late to the party on this one, but here's my basic thought on the vacting of the wins.
  
  You can "vacate" wins all you want but you can't vacate memories....12 teams still know who the better men were.
• FatHobbit

  

  cats gone wild;827955 wrote:Thats why you are a fathobit or cbf's son.

  
  clever
• KnightRyder

  

  Writerbuckeye;827929 wrote:I've answered the last question before but you ignore it. Go back and read my prior posts. I'm not wasting my time on repeat nonsense.
  
  USC had more than 30 major violations of NCAA bylaws. Ohio State had five. Do you really want to compare those situations?
  
  USC was hit with loss of institutional control in its letter of allegations; OSU was not.
  
  USC stonewalled the NCAA for something like 5 years before cooperating with the NCAA; OSU invited the NCAA to investigate twice: the first time when the Tat5 thing was found; the second when it was discovered Tressel lied on the compliance form.
  
  In the last 10 years, there have been 28 schools hit with major violations of NCAA regulations where no LOIC was in the letter of allegations and NONE of those received bans or loss of scholarships.

  
  i dont think you would want to compare usc to ohio state. usc's football program had one athlete involved osu had how many? and also in usc's case there was no proof that the staff had any knowledge, none. the ncaa went soley on the the testimony of lloyd lake. who has been arrested seven times, spent several years in jail and is characterized as a career offender in a U.S. District Court Southern District of California. why didnt you mention that? it seem you overlook things that weaken your argument. every former player that said any thing negative about osu, you would state he had no credibilty or had a axe to grind. it seems the ncaa set a precedent in believing felons. thats a precedent i didnt see you mention that one. furthermore there is a trail that leads back to tressel having knowledge and covering up.
• se-alum

  

  Writerbuckeye;827929 wrote:I've answered the last question before but you ignore it. Go back and read my prior posts. I'm not wasting my time on repeat nonsense.
  
  USC had more than 30 major violations of NCAA bylaws. Ohio State had five. Do you really want to compare those situations?
  
  USC was hit with loss of institutional control in its letter of allegations; OSU was not.
  
  USC stonewalled the NCAA for something like 5 years before cooperating with the NCAA; OSU invited the NCAA to investigate twice: the first time when the Tat5 thing was found; the second when it was discovered Tressel lied on the compliance form.
  
  In the last 10 years, there have been 28 schools hit with major violations of NCAA regulations where no LOIC was in the letter of allegations and NONE of those received bans or loss of scholarships.

  This is no place for facts, sir!
• Writerbuckeye

  

  KnightRyder;828050 wrote:i dont think you would want to compare usc to ohio state. usc's football program had one athlete involved osu had how many? and also in usc's case there was no proof that the staff had any knowledge, none. the ncaa went soley on the the testimony of lloyd lake. who has been arrested seven times, spent several years in jail and is characterized as a career offender in a U.S. District Court Southern District of California. why didnt you mention that? it seem you overlook things that weaken your argument. every former player that said any thing negative about osu, you would state he had no credibilty or had a axe to grind. it seems the ncaa set a precedent in believing felons. thats a precedent i didnt see you mention that one. furthermore there is a trail that leads back to tressel having knowledge and covering up.

  
  Keep flailing.
• KnightRyder

  

  Writerbuckeye;828083 wrote:Keep flailing.

  
  and didnt you also state that osu would not be vacating their sugar bowl victory? was that fact too? and show me proof of this media bias against osu that whine about all the time.
• LJ

  

  KnightRyder;828095 wrote:and didnt you also state that osu would not be vacating their sugar bowl victory? was that fact too?

  
  Most people said the NCAA would not make them vacate it, which is still true. OSU vacated voluntarily.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  Obviously, OSU did that based on the fact that it wasn't yet known that other players would have been ineligible who played in the Sugar Bowl -- so they pro-actively vacated the game. I think it was the right thing to do and have no problem with it.
  
  You have to remember there were two time frames at work here, and comments made before the remainder of the players were known, and Tressel's lie came to light. Let's also not forget that it was the Big Ten that pushed for those players to play in that game and take the suspensions the following regular season...again based on what was known at the time.
  
  My hope is that the NCAA doesn't further sanction OSU beyond what they've done...but there's always the chance that some scholarships may be taken away and/or a bowl ban implemented. If that happens, I hope OSU appeals it, because with no LOIC or FTM being alleged, I don't think it's appropriate. While some view OSU's self-imposed penalties as too light -- they ignore the fact that losing arguably one of the top 5 coaches in the country over the past decade is a HUGE penalty for the program. And one that will likely be felt for a long time.
  
  If OSU wanted to be truly uncooperative, they could have (1) not brought the NCAA in immediately when violations were discovered and (2) kept Tressel as coach, allowing him to serve out whatever suspension the NCAA hands down, and allowed him to come back and coach.
• dat dude

  Btw, not sure if it has been posted but the new OSU player to be suspended for tats was Dorian Bell. He was already suspended for the season, so no harm.
• vball10set

  dat dude;828644 wrote:Btw, not sure if it has been posted but the new OSU player to be suspended for tats was Dorian Bell. He was already suspended for the season, so no harm.

  
  thanks, he was the suspected player...btw, what's he doing now?
• thedynasty1998

  

  vball10set;828735 wrote:thanks, he was the suspected player...btw, what's he doing now?

  
  I thought he transferred to Pitt. Not sure how a suspension fits into his year sitting due to the transfer.
• se-alum

  

  thedynasty1998;828738 wrote:I thought he transferred to Pitt. Not sure how a suspension fits into his year sitting due to the transfer.

  Pitt had no interest in Bell, currently, he is still a Buckeye. I imagine that won't be for long though.
• thedynasty1998

  

  se-alum;828741 wrote:Pitt had no interest in Bell, currently, he is still a Buckeye. I imagine that won't be for long though.

  
  Was he the one rumored to be transferring to Pitt or is that someone else?
• se-alum

  

  thedynasty1998;828743 wrote:Was he the one rumored to be transferring to Pitt or is that someone else?

  He was the one.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  As I understand it, Pitt didn't want him (for whatever reason).
  
  Also, regardless of where he transfers, he would have to sit out the required suspension since it comes from the NCAA and not OSU.