Fidmeister;715753 wrote:He signed a form that said to the NCAA that he knew no more than he told them, all the while knowing that he didn't tell them the truth. So, yeah, it looks to me like he lied to them.

This does not prove that he was lying when he signed the forms. He signed that form months after the initial emails and months before the players suspensions. In order to use this as lying we have to assume that when he signed the form he was cognoscente of the fact that they were not in compliance. Everybody seems to leave out the fact that nothing had been proven to Tressel at that point, and they were all unsubstantiated rumors. It does not excuse his lack of action, but it does not prove that Tressel was purposefully deceptive when he was signing that form.

elbuckeye28;715767 wrote:This does not prove that he was lying when he signed the forms. He signed that form months after the initial emails and months before the players suspensions. In order to use this as lying we have to assume that when he signed the form he was cognoscente of the fact that they were not in compliance. Everybody seems to leave out the fact that nothing had been proven to Tressel at that point, and they were all unsubstantiated rumors. It does not excuse his lack of action, but it does not prove that Tressel was purposefully deceptive when he was signing that form.

When he signed that form, he'd already been contacted by Chris Cicero. He is far from a stupid man. He was an AD. He knows NCAA rules. He knew the second he got those e-mails that those players had broken a rule. And he knew he wasn't getting e-mails full of rumors. Read them. He certainly sounds like a man who thinks he's being told the truth.

Also, he didn't share with the NCAA that a lawyer had contacted him about the exact situation they were investigating. Then he signed a form saying he didn't know anything more than he'd told them, except he knew more than he'd told them.

He lied to the NCAA. Time to accept it.

Here's a question no one's asked: Wasn't Ellen a lawyer? If she was, why didn't he take the e-mails to her and see what he could and couldn't do?

Fidmeister;715769 wrote:When he signed that form, he'd already been contacted by Chris Cicero. He is far from a stupid man. He was an AD. He knows NCAA rules. He knew the second he got those e-mails that those players had broken a rule. And he knew he wasn't getting e-mails full of rumors. Read them. He certainly sounds like a man who thinks he's being told the truth.

I've read them a couple of times. Getting emails from a shady lawyer with a history of questionable activities based on bunch of hearsay is not solid evidence. Yes, Tressel should have done something about it, but those emails hardly makes him look like a man who thinks he's being told truth. The extremely intelligence, often stoic and serious Jim Tressel is told that his top players are committing NCAA violations and he responds with Go Bucks!!!! Then instead of getting rid of these emails, the most incriminating piece of evidence out there, he leaves them in his email for the university to discover. It does not excuse his lack of action, but there is no way somebody can read that and believe that Tressel responded in a way that one would expect somebody being told of these "serious" violations.

Fidmeister;715769 wrote:
He lied to the NCAA. Time to accept it.

When interviewed in December, he said that he had heard rumors about the issues with the tattoo parlor. That seems pretty consistent with truth.

So Hooley got fired? Wow. Didn't share his opinions on certain points, but that doesn't mean he should have been fired. Pretty weak on the Fan's part if they did fire him

Reported that Tressel requested and received the same 5 game suspension as the players.

RT @dispatcheditor: Source says Tressel asks for and receives same 5-game penalty as 5 #Buckeyes in tattoo/memorabilia scandal. dispatch.com

jordo212000;715794 wrote:So Hooley got fired? Wow. Didn't share his opinions on certain points, but that doesn't mean he should have been fired. Pretty weak on the Fan's part if they did fire him

From what I heard was that there was a huge huge listener outcry about him so they decided to take him off of the air.

jordo212000;715794 wrote:So Hooley got fired? Wow. Didn't share his opinions on certain points, but that doesn't mean he should have been fired. Pretty weak on the Fan's part if they did fire him

According to Hooley, it was mutual. I personally never listened to him, but if he was anything like the article I read by him, then the criticism he received was warranted. I believe criticism is great, but it is obvious the guy had an agenda against Tressel.

elbuckeye28;715781 wrote:When interviewed in December, he said that he had heard rumors about the issues with the tattoo parlor. That seems pretty consistent with truth.

Heard rumors? He had e-mails from a lawyer that named names. He asked for more names so he could withhold more rings from them.

He believed what he was being told. After all, the lawyer played at OSU when Tressel was an assistant there. So, there's a pretty good chance he trusted him.

He lied. His three best players at Ohio State have all been in trouble with the NCAA. That's not coincidence. It's a pattern.

Fidmeister;715807 wrote: He believed what he was being told. After all, the lawyer played at OSU when Tressel was an assistant there. So, there's a pretty good chance he trusted him.
.

So because the lawyer, who has had his license suspended, admitted to lying about the extent of his affair with a judge, and couldn't even spell Tressel's name right, played football at Ohio State(under Earl Bruce no less), he could be trusted. If this person had displayed these patterns of questionable behaviors in the past, then the familiarity would actually make somebody less likely to trust them.

Fidmeister;715807 wrote:
He lied. His three best players at Ohio State have all been in trouble with the NCAA. That's not coincidence. It's a pattern.

1. Maurice Clarett was suspended for a whole season and then tried to unsuccessfully bring down the Ohio State program. Tressel has not been supportive in turning his life around. If anything, the Mo C saga has reflected positively on Tressel as Mo C was proven wrong and Tressel has been forgiving.

2. Troy Smith accepted money and was suspended for multiple games. This very well might have cost the 2005 team, arguably the best team under Tressel, a chance at a national championship.

These are patterns of behavior. Tressel suspended his two best players off of two national championship caliber teams, instead of playing them and having a better shot at winning. That's why people are confused by this situation. IF he was trying to cover up for the sake of winning, then that would be inconsistent with past instances. Not to mention the fact that he didn't hide the biggest piece of incriminating evidence, but that never gets brought up in the argument against Tressel.

elbuckeye28;715812 wrote:So because the lawyer, who has had his license suspended, admitted to lying about the extent of his affair with a judge, and couldn't even spell Tressel's name right, played football at Ohio State(under Earl Bruce no less), he could be trusted. If this person had displayed these patterns of questionable behaviors in the past, then the familiarity would actually make somebody less likely to trust them.

Why did he accept a five-game suspension if he didn't know he broke the rules? Seems to me you'd fight to clear your name instead of meekly accepting punishment. His entire course of action in this mess has been of a man who knows he is guilty as charged.

Attack Chris Cicero's credibility all you want. Doesn't change the fact that Tressel broke NCAA rules and is being suspended for it.

He did it. He violated a pretty basic NCAA bylaw and compounded that by lying when he signed the form that said he knew no more than he'd told them. Hard to believe anyone disputes that.

If he didn't take that information seriously, he's a far dumber man than any coach who has sat in any Division I office. You get an e-mail like that, the first thing you do is check into it because you can't take the chance that it's true. Shit like that can sink programs. You don't ignore it.

elbuckeye28;715825 wrote: These are patterns of behavior. Tressel suspended his two best players off of two national championship caliber teams, instead of playing them and having a better shot at winning. That's why people are confused by this situation. IF he was trying to cover up for the sake of winning, then that would be inconsistent with past instances. Not to mention the fact that he didn't hide the biggest piece of incriminating evidence, but that never gets brought up in the argument against Tressel.

Because the argument against what Tressel did, not the man himself, is an easy one to construct. Had information about major rules violations by two of the best players on a national title caliber team. Did not report that information, even after the federal case connected to the matter was resolved months before a game was played. Was interviewed by the NCAA regarding said matter. Did not share all the information he had. Signed a form stating he did share all the information he had.

I think he's probably a decent human being. I also assume he does good things for people in the community.

That doesn't change what he did and what he has done in the past in his role as a college football coach.

The argument isn't against him as a person. It's that he has a history of bending NCAA rules that goes all the way back to Ray Isaac at Youngstown State.

Why did he accept a five-game suspension if he didn't know he broke the rules? Seems to me you'd fight to clear your name instead of meekly accepting punishment. His entire course of action in this mess has been of a man who knows he is guilty as charged.

If you have read what I have written, I have never said that Tressel did not break the rules. Nobody is debating the fact that not turning in the evidence was a violation. I am saying that there is been no proof that he was purposely deceiving the NCAA or University and was trying to cover up the incident.

Attack Chris Cicero's credibility all you want. Doesn't change the fact that Tressel broke NCAA rules and is being suspended for it.

Again I understand that Tressel broke the rules, but I was just pointing out the fallacy in your statement implying that familiarity=trustworthiness.

He did it. He violated a pretty basic NCAA bylaw and compounded that by lying when he signed the form that said he knew no more than he'd told them. Hard to believe anyone disputes that.

I'm disputing this fact because the NCAA, University, and Tressel himself have made no mention of lying and intentionally deceiving the NCAA. The compliance form was brought up by a reporter and people have made assumptions that this is proof for a cover up. Maybe Tressel did lie, but there has been no proof or mention from anybody that has any knowledge of investigation. Hard to dispute that.

If he didn't take that information seriously, he's a far dumber man than any coach who has sat in any Division I office. You get an e-mail like that, the first thing you do is check into it because you can't take the chance that it's true. Shit like that can sink programs. You don't ignore it.]

First of all, we have no idea how much information similar to this is sent to a Division 1 coach on a daily basis. They likely get hundreds if not thousands of emails, phone calls, and letters each day, with a good amount being false accusations that his players are cheating or committing violations. I bet that most coaches have unknowingly discarded information that was actually truthful. It's just impossible to take everyone for their word. In addition, you don't know if Tressel went to the players asking about these emails, they subsequently refuted the information, and he was satisfied by their responses.

It is easy for you and me to sit here and look back on this situation(with limited details no less) and act like we know how we would or should respond. It is obvious that Tressel made some mistakes, but by your propensity to act like you know the entire situation and Tressel's thought process with absolute certainty shows that you are just letting your biases cloud your perceptions.

Fidmeister;715878 wrote:Because the argument against what Tressel did, not the man himself, is an easy one to construct. Had information about major rules violations by two of the best players on a national title caliber team. Did not report that information, even after the federal case connected to the matter was resolved months before a game was played. Was interviewed by the NCAA regarding said matter. Did not share all the information he had. Signed a form stating he did share all the information he had.

One could also easily look at it like this.

1. Shady lawyer with shady past gives Tressel information about possible rule violations and a federal investigation.

2. Tressel, not sure if it is true or not, approaches the players and they refute this information.

3. Shady lawyer says that the federal investigation is all wrapped up.

4. Tressel, knowing that if the lawyer is telling the truth, expects to get verifiable information from the federal investigation.

5. Months pass and nothing comes of it. Shady lawyer's story(especially in relation to the player involvement) begins to lose the little credibility that was left.

6. Tressel signs form thinking they are in compliance.

If he signed the compliance form, which he did, then he lied to them. No person with his ego (You have to have one to be a successful major college coach. Don't try to tell me he's different.) lets himself be drug through the mud if he isn't guilty as charged.

He's not defending himself. Ohio State's not defending him. To me, it's because they both know he's guilty as charged.

elbuckeye28;715918 wrote:One could also easily look at it like this.

1. Shady lawyer with shady past gives Tressel information about possible rule violations and a federal investigation.

2. Tressel, not sure if it is true or not, approaches the players and they refute this information.

3. Shady lawyer says that the federal investigation is all wrapped up.

4. Tressel, knowing that if the lawyer is telling the truth, expects to get verifiable information from the federal investigation.

5. Months pass and nothing comes of it. Shady lawyer's story(especially in relation to the player involvement) begins to lose the little credibility that was left.

6. Tressel signs form thinking they are in compliance.

You're missing one step: Tressel doesn't defend himself against allegations, accepts punishment for them. Does that knowing it tarnishes both his image and his program.

I don't think he's a bad dude. But, he's definitely not squeaky clean, either.

What does this say: Right now, no one can argue with any facts on their side that Ohio State's football program is cleaner than Miami.

Fidmeister;715926 wrote:If he signed the compliance form, which he did, then he lied to them. No person with his ego (You have to have one to be a successful major college coach. Don't try to tell me he's different.) lets himself be drug through the mud if he isn't guilty as charged.

He's not defending himself. Ohio State's not defending him. To me, it's because they both know he's guilty as charged.

Tressel, NCAA, and Ohio State have not brought up this compliance form at all. This has not been brought up once by anybody remotely involved with the investigation. Therefore, there is nothing to defend at this point in time.

Fidmeister;715933 wrote:You're missing one step: Tressel doesn't defend himself against allegations, accepts punishment for them. Does that knowing it tarnishes both his image and his program.

I don't think he's a bad dude. But, he's definitely not squeaky clean, either.

What does this say: Right now, no one can argue with any facts on their side that Ohio State's football program is cleaner than Miami.

Again, the violation is for not reporting the violation. The violation isn't for not reporting the violation and then lying.

elbuckeye28;715941 wrote:Again, the violation is for not reporting the violation. The violation isn't for not reporting the violation and then lying.

NCAA's not done yet, either.

Fidmeister;715947 wrote:NCAA's not done yet, either.

Very true, and if they come out and say that Tressel was lying, then you will be right.

That being said, we have to remember that the university, a compliance firm hired by the university, and the NCAA have been involved in an investigation into this months before we even had the slightest idea. You would think that some of these issues would have been brought up by now if they were discovered and believed to be additional violations.

elbuckeye28;715959 wrote:Very true, and if they come out and say that Tressel was lying, then you will be right.

That being said, we have to remember that the university, a compliance firm hired by the university, and the NCAA have been involved in an investigation into this months before we even had the slightest idea. You would think that some of these issues would have been brought up by now if they were discovered and believed to be additional violations.

The NCAA won't release any info until the investigation is over. I believe we saw the press conference because of the leak, and they gave minimal information.

elbuckeye28;715937 wrote:Tressel, NCAA, and Ohio State have not brought up this compliance form at all. This has not been brought up once by anybody remotely involved with the investigation. Therefore, there is nothing to defend at this point in time.

You are wrong. Read the self report OSU filed.

Coach Tressel:

i. Signed the NCAA Certificate of Compliance Form on September 13, 2010, indicating he has reported any knowledge of possible violations to the institution;

http://www2.nbc4i.com/mgmedia/file/127/osu-tressel-emails/

So, Tressel and Ohio State have brought up said compliance form. Interesting ....

karen lotz;716178 wrote:You are wrong. Read the self report OSU filed.



http://www2.nbc4i.com/mgmedia/file/127/osu-tressel-emails/

I stand corrected, but my point still stands that that's not proof that he was deliberately deceiving the NCAA to cover-up the incident. I think he had hoped(maybe even believed) the information was false and the situation would go away and as it time passed it probably became less and less of an issue in his mind.