But you have no proof. Do I think OJ murdered his ex wife, sure. But I can't lock him up because of assumptions.

ohiotiger33;704990 wrote:There is not one shred of proof that they knew, sorry. There are emails in Tressel's inbox about that it is plain and simple. We are in an innocent until proven guilty society. Do I think Chizik and Carroll were dirty, YES. But that doesn't make it true. There is no hard evidence like there is in this case. Glad none of you are lawyers lol.

From Tressel's inbox, check out page 7: http://ht.cdn.turner.com/si/images/2011/03/08/Ohio_State_NCAA.pdf

ohiotiger33;705007 wrote:But you have no proof. Do I think OJ murdered his ex wife, sure. But I can't lock him up because of assumptions.

let's say you witness a murder, but in the court of law he was proven innocent because of lack of evidence or some bullshit. Would he still be innocent in your eyes?

thedynasty1998;704919 wrote:What do you mean looking into it? Looking into it would mean consulting someone. Making phone calls. Not completely ignoring it.

.

He is the head coach. Do you think Smith or someone wants him running to them every time he hears something, everytime he gets an email about something? 99% of thetime, its probably hearsay. As the head coach, he as a responsbility to look into things on his own first I would assume. If at that point he feels there is something legit, after talking/meeting with players, then I would assume he would report to Smith. I am sure there is a process there. Especially when you consider this violation. I happen to think athletes at EVERY school sell their shit. As i have mentioned, 25yrs ago, I bought a pair of turf shoes and a bowl watch from a football player. At that time, I had NO clue it would violate anything. As you yourself said, more is being made out of this than needs to be when considering the violations.

No, because there is evidence. That is a bad analogy that does not make sense to the logic of my argument. If I am there of course I am going to believe the murder happened. Did YOU witness Chizik or Carroll with your own eyes? With Chizik especially, there is no proven evidence. Hopefully some comes to light, but you can't nail someone for nothing. That is just how our justice system works.

Contrast that with Tressel, who clearly saw names of players and that they were selling big ten champ rings and such in that email and chose to do nothing about it. While it may not be worse, it looks worse because we can see the evidence.

centralbucksfan;705024 wrote:He is the head coach. Do you think Smith or someone wants him running to them every time he hears something, everytime he gets an email about something? 99% of thetime, its probably hearsay. As the head coach, he as a responsbility to look into things on his own first I would assume. If at that point he feels there is something legit, after talking/meeting with players, then I would assume he would report to Smith. I am sure there is a process there. Especially when you consider this violation. I happen to think athletes at EVERY school sell their shit. As i have mentioned, 25yrs ago, I bought a pair of turf shoes and a bowl watch from a football player. At that time, I had NO clue it would violate anything. As you yourself said, more is being made out of this than needs to be when considering the violations.

Read the link posted above regarding the emails and then come talk to me. Tressel held "collateral". He knew it was a big deal and have ongoing discussions on this.

The fact that he didn't act on it is inexcusable. The fact that he lied about it is grounds for dismissal, IMO.

BigAppleBuckeye;705009 wrote:From Tressel's inbox, check out page 7: http://ht.cdn.turner.com/si/images/2011/03/08/Ohio_State_NCAA.pdf

Those are some insightful, and damaging emails.

thedynasty1998;705006 wrote:Are we really trying to blame the media for trying to find dirt on Tressel?

No. I do think many of them dislike him to the point that they'd go that extra step to find dirt if they even remotely suspected something was going on. I think it's personal with a lot of them, for the reasons I said earlier.

But there's no "blame" being put on media by me. In the end, JT has only himself to blame for what is happening.

Do you really believe that reporters don't like taking down people who have been placed on a pedestal by others, like JT? Especially those that write books extolling virtues and character? Media are always hot for finding people they view as hypocrites (which is generally anyone who has strong views on morality and character).

Writerbuckeye;705080 wrote:Do you really believe that reporters don't like taking down people who have been placed on a pedestal by others, like JT? Especially those that write books extolling virtues and character? Media are always hot for finding people they view as hypocrites (which is generally anyone who has strong views on morality and character).

I think it has a lot more to do with Tressel being the head coach at one of the biggest and most popular college programs in the country, than him acting virtuously.

Yep, plus media members will always look like douchebags for digging up dirt because that is their job. Nobody is saying they are perfect but they don't claim to be. Their job is to get the story, and in this case there is a story.

There have been plenty of critical articles that have come out today that have made plenty of solid points, but this is a horrible article for a couple of reasons.

1. The Michigan comparison. He acts as if Michigan is morally outstanding because they fired Rich Rod for NCAA violations. They fired Rich Rod for losing football games.

2. The idea that the "Wolverines won." Seriously? While I am sure many Michigan fans are happy to hear this news, to equate this situation to a win-lose situation for a well-respected rival university is a discredit to both schools. I highly doubt the president of UM is throwing a party today in light of this situation.

3. I think he inadvertantly gives support to Tressel's case by stating this:

The report says Tressel admitted "he had received a tip about general rumors pertaining to a certain [number] of his players, [but] that information had not been specific, and it pertained to their off-field choices."

Considering that much of the information in those emails was incomplete(only 2 players stated, a great deal of I was hearsay), and it does not appear Tressel gave them too much credence(the emails from the lawyer are sketchy at best, no probing for more information, his strange and somewhat sarcastic responses), Tressel's response seems consistent with the information.

What I don't understand is if people are assuming he was covering this information up for the 2010 season and a NC run, why wouldn't he delete the emails? I know they could be retrieved from servers and what not, but it would make these discoveries a lot less likely to happen. In addition, if he knew the feds were involved and this information would come out eventually, what reason would he have to cover this up, especially with these emails out there? It just does not make any sense for him to "cover up" this information, then leave it out there to be found.

It isn't a coverup problem, it is negligence. And negligence is just as bad if you look at precedent set by the NCAA. See lack of institutional control.

Guilty!!!

derek bomar;704868 wrote:Umm accurate?

"In 10 years as the Buckeyes' coach, Tressel has often showed us his teams can't win big games.

On Tuesday night, Tressel showed us he can't win the big news conferences, either."

He's 5-3 in BCS games and he stomps UM every year....fucking joke that line is. Also, UM didn't fire RR because he cheated, they fired him bc he fucking sucked. This article sucks, even though what I think JT did deserves bashing.

Number 1 Michigan has been down for a while now. Number 2 please stick to your own team as you know nothing about UM IMO. Off the field issues were a huge reason in the firing of RR.

1. The Michigan comparison. He acts as if Michigan is morally outstanding because they fired Rich Rod for NCAA violations. They fired Rich Rod for losing football games. Agree but also his off the field issues played a major role as well. Had he been clean off the field he would have goten one more year as last season was his best yet and they are extremely young.

bo shemmy3337;705297 wrote:1. The Michigan comparison. He acts as if Michigan is morally outstanding because they fired Rich Rod for NCAA violations. They fired Rich Rod for losing football games. Agree but also his off the field issues played a major role as well. Had he been clean off the field he would have goten one more year as last season was his best yet and they are extremely young.

I don't believe he would have gotten another year. The way they lost out, he was gone.

bo shemmy3337;705297 wrote:1. The Michigan comparison. He acts as if Michigan is morally outstanding because they fired Rich Rod for NCAA violations. They fired Rich Rod for losing football games. Agree but also his off the field issues played a major role as well. Had he been clean off the field he would have goten one more year as last season was his best yet and they are extremely young.

Well obviously it is easier to fire somebody when they are not doing their job well AND doing it unethically, but he acts as if they fired him because he committed violations. Instead that was a minor reason he was fired. It's just poor journalism.

elbuckeye28;705136 wrote:There have been plenty of critical articles that have come out today that have made plenty of solid points, but this is a horrible article for a couple of reasons.

1. The Michigan comparison. He acts as if Michigan is morally outstanding because they fired Rich Rod for NCAA violations. They fired Rich Rod for losing football games.

2. The idea that the "Wolverines won." Seriously? While I am sure many Michigan fans are happy to hear this news, to equate this situation to a win-lose situation for a well-respected rival university is a discredit to both schools. I highly doubt the president of UM is throwing a party today in light of this situation.

3. I think he inadvertantly gives support to Tressel's case by stating this:

Considering that much of the information in those emails was incomplete(only 2 players stated, a great deal of I was hearsay), and it does not appear Tressel gave them too much credence(the emails from the lawyer are sketchy at best, no probing for more information, his strange and somewhat sarcastic responses), Tressel's response seems consistent with the information.

What I don't understand is if people are assuming he was covering this information up for the 2010 season and a NC run, why wouldn't he delete the emails? I know they could be retrieved from servers and what not, but it would make these discoveries a lot less likely to happen. In addition, if he knew the feds were involved and this information would come out eventually, what reason would he have to cover this up, especially with these emails out there? It just does not make any sense for him to "cover up" this information, then leave it out there to be found.

Great post. I think if Schlabach were in charge of handing out NCAA punishments, he would have Tressel exiled to St. Helena and have the 'Shoe and the WHAC burned to the ground. JMHO