i**r
发帖数: 998 | 1 1). Why the delay in reporting Tressel's violations?
It was crystal clear on Jan. 13 that Tressel had knowingly played ineligible
players throughout the 2010 season, but Enforcement wasn't notified for
nearly three weeks, until Feb. 3, the day after National Signing Day.
2). Do you want to be affiliated with someone like Tressel?
Ohio State makes the case in its response to the NCAA Notice of Allegations
that it suffered a serious penalty by taking "decisive action against a very
successful coach in a very popular sport in a very short period of time."
In other words, firing Tressel is punishment enough for the school because
he was a prolific winner.
That "decisive action" taken by the school took nearly five months before
media reports shamed OSU into the grudging realization that its initial two-
game, then five-game suspension proposed for the coach was inadequate.
Why is it that the school paints Tressel's exit as a "serious penalty?" Aren
't schools supposed to want to distance themselves from coaches who deceive
the school's own investigators and the NCAA's?
Were Tressel's actions truly "out of character?"
Ohio State also told the NCAA that Tressel's secretive actions and repeated
lying were "out of character for him, as he has been a man of integrity and
high moral standards since his hiring as the head football coach in 2001.
His lack of action in this matter appears to have been the result of
indecisiveness regarding the appropriate actions to take in this specific
situation in which he was placed, as opposed to a blatant disregard of NCAA
legislation."
The NCAA compliance form Tressel signed in September was a one-paragraph
statement to which he attested that he had told Gee, Smith, other Ohio State
officials and the NCAA of "any knowledge of violations of NCAA legislation"
at OSU during 2009-10.
Tressel received multiple, detailed emails regarding clear NCAA violations
by quarterback Terrelle Pryor and DeVier Posey in April. Despite that
information, Tressel printed his name, signed his name and dated the NCAA
compliance form anyway.
When the NCAA suspended Pryor, Posey and three other players in December for
five games for the exact violations Tressel had learned about eight months
earlier, he said nothing. In fact, Tressel lied again about not knowing who
sent him the emails, saying he had received only one about his players' "
lifestyle choices."
Tressel did not acknowledge his duplicitous behavior until busted by the
university's search of his emails in January.
Lying once is out of character. If you lie repeatedly?
Was Tressel concerned with his players' safety, or the safety of his team's
national championship hopes?
Tressel has stated repeatedly that he did not come forward with information
about Posey's and Pryor's violation of NCAA extra-benefits standards because
he was afraid for his players' safety, given that their dealings with a
Columbus tattoo parlor owner were part of a federal drug investigation.
Tressel has said that's why he reached out to Ted Sarniak, a glass-factory
owner in Pryor's hometown, because Sarniak had influence over Pryor and
could perhaps rein in Pryor's behavior.
OK, then where is the email or telephone call to Posey's mother or some
other person of influence in Posey's life? There is no evidence, nor has
Tressel ever contended, that he contacted anyone affiliated with Posey.
If Pryor was in danger, wasn't Posey in danger, too? If Tressel was
concerned enough about Pryor's safety to contact Sarniak, wouldn't the coach
have feared for Posey and tried to contact someone on Posey's behalf?
Why cancel the independent investigation of the players' cars?
After Sports Illustrated alleged improprieties with Pryor's use of cars and
with car sales to other Buckeyes in a May expose, the school promised an
independent investigation of those matters. That was to follow an Ohio
Bureau of Motor Vehicles probe of 25 car sales to Ohio State athletes from
two dealerships.
But when the BMV reported finding no violations of state law regarding sales
numbers listed on vehicle titles, OSU immediately announced it would not
conduct its promised investigation.
The Ohio BMV said it did not search for any NCAA violations by OSU players,
or whether they were given preferential treatment by the two dealers
involved.
So if the BMV didn't search for NCAA violations, why didn't OSU?
Why weren't Tressel's job evaluations performed like those of other coaches?
Former Ohio State athletic director Andy Geiger gave Tressel low marks for
reporting secondary NCAA violations in his program in 2005-06, rating him "
unacceptable" in that category. Geiger also sent Tressel a letter advising
the coach that he was responsible for monitoring the cars his players were
driving.
Yet when Smith replaced Geiger, Tressel's written evaluations — subject to
disclosure via open-records laws — were discontinued.
Smith chose to evaluate Tressel orally, and that meant there would be no
record available to reporters via the Freedom of Information Act.
Other Ohio State coaches receive written annual evaluations, as is routine
for other members of the OSU faculty.
Why reclassify Tressel's exit from "resignation" to "retirement?"
OSU announced a $250,000 fine for Tressel on March 8, upon disclosing his
previous lies to the school and the NCAA. Smith told The Associated Press in
May the fine would not begin to cover the cost to OSU of retaining outside
legal counsel to steer the school through the NCAA investigation birthed by
the Tressel scandal.
Smith on Tuesday told the AP the investigation cost OSU more than $800,000.
More than a week after the coach resigned on May 30, Gee promised Tressel
would pay the fine, despite his departure.
"We have levied a $250,000 fine against the coach, and he will pay that,"
Gee said on June 11.
But instead, less than a month later, OSU reached a legal agreement with
Tressel in which it agreed to waive the $250,000, pay him $52,500 for the
month of June (a month he did not work), to pay him even more for accrued
sick time and vacation and to reclassify his exit from a resignation to a
retirement.
Under the terms of Tressel's contract, a resignation would have precluded
him from receiving "any further compensation or benefits under this
agreement."
And by having his exit rebranded as a retirement, Tressel also became
eligible to purchase health insurance for himself and his family at the
reduced rate offered all state retirees.
Why vacate only the 2010 season?
The NCAA's Notice of Allegations alleges that the six Ohio State players who
sold their memorabilia engaged in those transactions beginning in November
2008 and continued them throughout the spring and summer of 2009.
OSU has proposed vacating the 2010 season as sufficient punishment for the
players' violation of NCAA rules.
But if the players were made ineligible for 2010 for selling their
memorabilia in 2008 and 2009, were they not also ineligible throughout the
2009 season for those same actions?
Why not apply the repeat-violator statute?
Ohio State is subject to harsher penalties because its major violations in
football occurred within five years of major rules infractions in its
basketball program levied in March 2006.
OSU argues in its response to the Notice of Allegations that it shouldn't be
hit with repeat-violator penalties because the sports involved are
different and the violations are different.
That's true, but there are similarities to consider.
While the school offers 36 varsity sports, only two are profitable —
football and men's basketball. So the violations occurred in the only two
sports that make money and, hence, could have the greatest extra-benefit
temptations.
The basketball violations in 2006 involved payments to a recruit who was
seen as a difference-maker capable of elevating Ohio State to national
championship level in basketball.
Pryor, the focal point of the football violations, certainly fits that
profile.
And the basketball violations involved a coach (Jim O'Brien) who was revered
for his integrity.
Tressel had that same cache at OSU. | b**j
发帖数: 20742 | 2 this article should be titled "grumblings from a loser". lol
ineligible
Allegations
very
【在 i**r 的大作中提到】
: 1). Why the delay in reporting Tressel's violations?
: It was crystal clear on Jan. 13 that Tressel had knowingly played ineligible
: players throughout the 2010 season, but Enforcement wasn't notified for
: nearly three weeks, until Feb. 3, the day after National Signing Day.
: 2). Do you want to be affiliated with someone like Tressel?
: Ohio State makes the case in its response to the NCAA Notice of Allegations
: that it suffered a serious penalty by taking "decisive action against a very
: successful coach in a very popular sport in a very short period of time."
: In other words, firing Tressel is punishment enough for the school because
: he was a prolific winner.
| i**r
发帖数: 998 | 3 I found Feb 3rd report is really interesting.
OSU is very good at calculated "play". Your AD's relationship with the
committee chair definitely is interesting too.
【在 b**j 的大作中提到】
: this article should be titled "grumblings from a loser". lol
:
: ineligible
: Allegations
: very
| j******u
发帖数: 1968 | 4 你丫就知道打嘴炮，见面都把你吓鸟裤子了
ineligible
Allegations
very
【在 i**r 的大作中提到】
: 1). Why the delay in reporting Tressel's violations?
: It was crystal clear on Jan. 13 that Tressel had knowingly played ineligible
: players throughout the 2010 season, but Enforcement wasn't notified for
: nearly three weeks, until Feb. 3, the day after National Signing Day.
: 2). Do you want to be affiliated with someone like Tressel?
: Ohio State makes the case in its response to the NCAA Notice of Allegations
: that it suffered a serious penalty by taking "decisive action against a very
: successful coach in a very popular sport in a very short period of time."
: In other words, firing Tressel is punishment enough for the school because
: he was a prolific winner.
| Y******e
发帖数: 20256 | | g*********d
发帖数: 8125 | 6 估计是老成鸟了不好意思见爱泼。害得爱泼等了伊很久怏怏而去
现在倒打一耙....
【在 j******u 的大作中提到】
: 你丫就知道打嘴炮，见面都把你吓鸟裤子了
:
: ineligible
: Allegations
: very
|
|
