enigmaax;786670 wrote: Or maybe the weekend is just when he took a good guy break to hang out with innocent college kids.

LJ;786654 wrote:My friend used to hang out with the owners of Captain Woody's all the time and she never got into any shit.

Speedofsand;786679 wrote:So you're admitting your friend could have been accused of guilt by association?

sherm03;786682 wrote:My question to those that are so upset with this article and dismissing it as nothing but shoddy journalism and libelous accusations is this...

IF there were nothing to these accusations, and this is all the author really had, why does OSU force Tressel to resign? They were behind him for months leading up to this point. But they get wind of this supposedly shit storm of an article, call him back from vacation, and force him to resign. Why would they do that if there was nothing to this? Why would they do that if this was all the author had?

Sure, this article was not a big bombshell. But maybe the author does have quite a bit more info that he wasn't able to print like he says and that's why OSU got out in front of it. It just doesn't add up that Gee and Smith would be 100% behind Tressel this whole time and then force him out because some guy is saying that there's more players getting tattoos. There HAS to be something else there, and he must have some way to prove it. Otherwise, Smith and Gee are morons for dropping Tressel over this "information."

Quote Originally Posted by Speedofsand View Post
So you're admitting your friend could have been accused of guilt by association?

LJ;786684 wrote:You mean an accomplice? ROFL no

Speedofsand;786702 wrote:Wrong. Not Guilty, but anyone can be accused.

LJ;786674 wrote:Which is exactly what the owners of Captain Woody's were doing. They fucking had HOUSES where the college kids who worked there in the summers lived. They also made Rife look like a teenage weed dealer standing at the bus stop with the shit they were trafficking. ASSumptions are the mother of all fuck ups

enigmaax;786721 wrote:I don't know anything about who that is. You are saying that the owners were drug dealers and they attended house parties with college kids, but no one was doing any drugs at the parties?

Speedofsand;786706 wrote:Its obviously the cars for players stories that got Tressel punted. All focus shifted to that immediately after his resignation. I've seen the May 7 Dispatch, WBNS video story of Pryor's Challenger, TSN, and today's sworn statement. Starting to look like the NCAA will have more work to do. They may have had a don't ask don't tell with Gene Smith. If they knew Kniffin and Archie's stories already where is the LOIC?

jordo212000;786781 wrote:Some of my fellow Buckeye fans are either dense or in denial. Seriously, how many times did karen have to post that they received tattoos and/or money haha

password;786769 wrote:The cars may nave helped with the decision but I think this is going to get a lot bigger. The SI report was just the beginning and yes, I do believe that they uncovered more than cars, money and drugs being supplied to the players and with the mention of drugs being supplied, this can turn in to a criminal investigation and when that starts and people start getting informed of their punishment for being involved, they start singing to save their ass and before you know it, there are Asst. Coaches, big time businessmen, boosters, escorts and banks involved and they will be trying to save their own ass and this will be another SMU investigation.

Writerbuckeye;786908 wrote:I realize this is probably your version of a wet dream, but wake up. It's not likely to happen anywhere close to that way. The article in question had ZERO proof of anything, and the accusers weren't named and/or had criminal records. Credibility means something, and I don't see enough there to interest the NCAA when nobody (1) speaks on the records (2) or has proof.

rydawg5;786640 wrote: "Pryor handed in shoulder pads... howd you get those.. "I get anything I want" -- LOL

WebFire;787021 wrote:If it's not, or if certain athletes are allowed to get out with what they want, that can lead to "lack of control".

SportsAndLady;787022 wrote:You'd like that wouldn't you webby?

Writerbuckeye;786908 wrote:I realize this is probably your version of a wet dream, but wake up. It's not likely to happen anywhere close to that way. The article in question had ZERO proof of anything, and the accusers weren't named and/or had criminal records. Credibility means something, and I don't see enough there to interest the NCAA when nobody (1) speaks on the records (2) or has proof.

KnightRyder;787094 wrote:how much credibility did david stanley have when he outed SMU?

password;787011 wrote:What makes you think that the article contained everything that was uncovered? You speak of credibility meaning something and right now there is zero credibility coming out of OSU at the current moment. Every time a player comes forward and tells of the rules violations that have occurred, you claim they have no credibility or they are criminals, what does that say for Tressel and his staff, considering they are his former players. Depending on what the investigation did uncover, there may be things that are being investigated by the government and the NCAA and could not be published by order of the agencies involved. People will start talking and spilling the beans on each other and if you think this is over, you are living in a pipe dream.

Writerbuckeye;786184 wrote:Keeping in mind that selling merchandise wasn't an NCAA violation until 2004 (I believe), the article goes back to 2002 and cites 28 players (the last 9 of which are highly suspect because of who made the allegation and the total lack of any proof). But for sake of argument, let's say they participated.

That means .03 percent of OSU players during that period were involved in this activity. POINT ZERO THREE PERCENT.

Does this constitute a "widespread" problem for the program?

I think OSU can make a very logical argument to the NCAA that this was a minority of a minority of students who even participating in this, that no competitive advantage is gained on the field by this activity, and it simply doesn't rise to the level of an infraction that should warrant stiffer penalties like loss of scholarships or post season bans.

They should also make it clear to the NCAA that they've been cited by that organization as a "model" institution when it comes to reporting infractions and taking action in the past -- so they are not dealing with a university that has gone out of its way to obfuscate or delay when problems arise. All of this should be considered when talking about possible penalties.

My feeling is that if they hammer OSU as some pundits keep saying (hoping for?) it sets a very bad example on two fronts: it punishes a program for offenses that simply aren't that egregious in the overall scheme of things and (2) it sends the message to other schools that it doesn't pay to be proactive in reporting offenses, because the penalties you get won't be any lighter. May as well just keep your mouth shut and hope they don't find out.

Writerbuckeye;787159 wrote:While anything is certainly possible -- I don't see this happening. I heard all the same kind of shit when Clarett was mouthing off 9 years ago, and his accusations were followed by those of several ex-players who had axes to grind or had become criminals. In the end, NOTHING was found despite two NCAA investigations.

I realize that's then and this is now, but I'm seeing much the same kind of unsubstantiated crap being thrown out there, and players being linked to stuff without one shred of real proof. Thank God the NCAA doesn't judge on hearsay and has a bit higher standard than what's allowed to be published without corroboration in this country.