athlete37;790022 wrote:You realize Tressel retired after he and Ohio State got wind of this article?? It was passed along to them before it was published and was to be published the day after Memorial Day... Hence why Tressel retired Memorial Day before it came out. Actions speak volumes

queencitybuckeye;790032 wrote:I've attended two better schools, so by your logic, me > you. Which happens to be true, but not for that reason alone.

queencitybuckeye;790032 wrote:I've attended two better schools, so by your logic, me > you. Which happens to be true, but not for that reason alone.

karen lotz;790038 wrote:Two better schools than who? athlete?

athlete37;790043 wrote:Did I say that? No I said some writer with a Pulitzer Prize and a degree from Notre Dame has more credibility than an internet troll that lives in his mom's basement (sleeper). And I'm not sure how the correlation between Ohio State forcing Tressel to resign specifically before the release of the article proves nothing.

athlete37;790043 wrote:Did I say that? No I said some writer with a Pulitzer Prize and a degree from Notre Dame has more credibility than an internet troll that lives in his mom's basement (sleeper). And I'm not sure how the correlation between Ohio State forcing Tressel to resign specifically before the release of the article proves nothing.

athlete37;790043 wrote:Did I say that? No I said some writer with a Pulitzer Prize and a degree from Notre Dame has more credibility than an internet troll that lives in his mom's basement (sleeper). And I'm not sure how the correlation between Ohio State forcing Tressel to resign specifically before the release of the article proves nothing.

queencitybuckeye;790045 wrote:Yep. His chest was getting a little too puffed out for a second-tier guy.

athlete37;790051 wrote:Where did I say anything about my personal education??

queencitybuckeye;790052 wrote:If I am incorrect about you attending the same university as Mr. Dohrman, I apologize.

Where are you going to law school?

queencitybuckeye;790048 wrote:Correlation never proves anything, lacking evidence of causation.

athlete37;790058 wrote:"That support crumbled suddenly over Memorial Day weekend. Tressel was forced out three days after Sports Illustrated alerted Ohio State officials that the wrongdoing by Tressel's players was far more widespread than had been reported. SI learned that the memorabilia-for-tattoos violations actually stretched back to 2002, Tressel's second season at Ohio State, and involved at least 28 players -- 22 more than the university has acknowledged. Those numbers include, beyond the six suspended players, an additional nine current players as well as nine former players whose alleged wrongdoing might fall within the NCAA's four-year statute of limitations on violations."

^^^http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/31/sportsline/main20067497.shtml He was forced out intentionally before the article hit...

queencitybuckeye;790048 wrote:Correlation never proves anything, lacking evidence of causation.

athlete37;790058 wrote:"That support crumbled suddenly over Memorial Day weekend. Tressel was forced out three days after Sports Illustrated alerted Ohio State officials that the wrongdoing by Tressel's players was far more widespread than had been reported. SI learned that the memorabilia-for-tattoos violations actually stretched back to 2002, Tressel's second season at Ohio State, and involved at least 28 players -- 22 more than the university has acknowledged. Those numbers include, beyond the six suspended players, an additional nine current players as well as nine former players whose alleged wrongdoing might fall within the NCAA's four-year statute of limitations on violations."

^^^http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/31/sportsline/main20067497.shtml He was forced out intentionally before the article hit...

Writerbuckeye;790063 wrote:It's pretty well known here (Columbus) that it was the loss of Les Wexner's support on the Board of Trustees that prompted the call for his resignation, and that was more due to the cumulative effect of all the bad publicity as opposed to any single story or broadcast.

The Board just got tired of the constant pounding by media pundits and were (are) hoping JT's resignation helps to lessen that. It was his (Tressell's) scalp the media sought, so there's a good chance things will quiet down some. I don't expect it to completely quiet, simply because OSU stories tend to generate lots of attention (website hits, viewers, readers) and all that translates into advertising revenue.

SI would like to claim their article brought down Tressel, but that's just boasting with no basis in fact. That they get some people to believe it would be kind of funny, it if weren't also a bit sad.

athlete37;790064 wrote:I'm glad you think Tressel resigning on a National holiday was a coincidence

queencitybuckeye;790052 wrote:If I am incorrect about you attending the same university as Mr. Dohrman, I apologize.

Where are you going to law school?

athlete37;790076 wrote:And to answer your question, I attend law school at Ohio State.

FatHobbit;790069 wrote:Did you read the article? If that is why they forced him out (based on the word of a convicted criminal and unnamed sources) they are bigger pussies than I think.

queencitybuckeye;790082 wrote:Cool, good luck. Can you translate your rules of evidence cite into layman's terms? Are you saying that SI is somehow lawsuit-proof without regard to the level of truth in the article?

athlete37;790076 wrote:And to answer your question, I attend law school at Ohio State. My professors are constantly in communication with Gene Smith. I personally have spoken to Gene Smith within the last month as well.

athlete37;790017 wrote:Difference being you don't have a Pulitzer Prize and a degree from a top 20 University....

elbuckeye28;790091 wrote:Congratulations on speaking to Gene Smith. What does that prove the cause and timing of Tressel's resignation?

athlete37;790088 wrote:I'd be happy to. It's a Civil Procedure Rule and not an evidence rule. A suit will be dismissed if Sports Illustrated has done nothing on which a claim can be granted against them. From my understanding, the author just cites sources and is neither hampering anyone's constitutional rights nor acting maliciously in an intentional tort. Those would be the only two claims that I could see stemming from a situation similar to this one, but I still think neither apply here. So it'd be similar to if you told me I was balding and I tried to take it to court, but there is no statute that I could use to bring a claim that the court can grant me relief under.