Analyzing the penalty

[Deke]

I think one of my biggest issue with this whole ordeal is the light that it's casting GT in. ESPN is pretty much saying we tried to cover up the whole situation and were caught doing so. Of course, our side of the story won't be nearly as publicized, and even if we do successfully appeal, the seed of GT being a dirty program has already been planted in the public's head.

 

[alpha]

The NCAA can mollycoddle the likes of UNC ...

You think what the NCAA has done to UNC is "mollycoddling"? You do realize NCAA hasn't completed their investigation right? The punishment has yet to be announced. Even then there were almost two dozen players withheld at least one game in 2010.

On the other hand, both Auburn and Ohio State, both of those schools had NCAA eating out of their hands. I think Cam Newton was declared ineligible for less than a full day? Then there is Ohio State... where there were proof that several key players received impermissible benefits yet instead of declaring them ineligible from the Sugar Bowl, they somehow decided it was okay to serve their suspensions in 2011 season.

 

[alpha]

By the way, one of the main reasons why we got the "hammer" was because of our previous violation. NCAA can use that as bullshit excuses less punishment for OSU unless they were too under probation when all the tattooing occurred.

 

[ScionOfSouthland]

Can anyone find the thread that was posted a few months back about NCAA investigations in the future? I believe it was a radio show and someone tied to the NCAA said a 10 was on the way, bigger than tOSU.

 

[aeromech]

The decision to play a student athlete - especially in this case - should err in the favor of the student athlete. He's the one busting his ass to play football and study, he's the one getting ööööing slammed to the ground play after play, and he's the one risking lifelong injury on every play. Screw the NCAA.

...

I agree completely. I also believe in a case like this, once the NCAA is aware of the situation, the decision of eligibility should be in their court not the school's. I think it is a crock of poo to get penalized for playing a player the NCAA hasn't ruled ineligible. If you want to preempt the NCAA and go for time served, that's fine; but you should not get penalized when you proceed on and wait for their decision. You are supposed to make a quick decision while they take years to investigate :cool: give me a break.

 

[andrew]

By the way, one of the main reasons why we got the "hammer" was because of our previous violation. NCAA can use that as bullshit excuses less punishment for OSU unless they were too under probation when all the tattooing occurred.

OSU's already had to vacate their wins from last season including the Big X championship, so unless their coming punishment involves getting wins back I doubt they'll get less punishment than us.

 

[AllAmericanBuzz]

Using our previous "violations" against us just shows the NCAA's lack of common sense. We got in trouble for a clerical error in the registrar's office. The kids were going to legitimate classes, but we're treated as repeat offenders as if we did something nefarious and underhanded. It's like catching a college kid peeing in an alley at 2:30am and labeling him a sex offender.

 

[alpha]

OSU's already had to vacate their wins from last season including the Big X championship, so unless their coming punishment involves giving wins back I doubt they'll get less punishment than us.

Oh, you bring up a good point. NCAA can also bullshit and say we are giving them lesser punishment because OSU voluntarily vacated their wins from 2010. Just saying, given the preferential treatment given to OSU for the sugar bowl, knowingly allowing them to play ineligible players, who the hell knows what the NCAA would ultimately decide.

Yet we all know they only did so once the cold hard facts came to light the Jim Tressell knew of the violations.

 

[cyptomcat]

Can anyone find the thread that was posted a few months back about NCAA investigations in the future? I believe it was a radio show and someone tied to the NCAA said a 10 was on the way, bigger than tOSU.

That was about the yahoo reporter that exposed Ohio State. He said he is working on an even bigger report.

The Oregon expose was by yahoo sports too, but not sure if the same writer.

 

[andrew]

Oh, you bring up a good point. NCAA can also bullshit and say we are giving them lesser punishment because OSU voluntarily vacated their wins from 2010. Just saying, given the preferential treatment given to OSU for the sugar bowl, knowingly allowing them to play ineligible players, who the hell knows what the NCAA would ultimately decide.

Yet we all know they only did so once the cold hard facts came to light the Jim Tressell knew of the violations.

That's true, the decision to allow them to play in the Sugar Bowl boggles the mind. They brazenly and knowingly flaunted their own rules. They did get skewered for it by just about everyone though, so maybe that will be a turning point?

I think it will be very interesting to see what kind of punishments OSU, Oregon, and UNC end up receiving. I really think it's going to be pretty harsh, but like you said who really knows. I'm just glad we escaped scholarship loss/postseason ban.

 

[Allen Koholic]

Yes, he stated that and should have stopped there. On page 2 he further says:

"The decision to allow the student athlete to play was likely incorrect"

"One of my primary reasons for not declaring the young men ineligible...However, in hindsight, more detailed and accurate information might have been helpful and may have resulted in a different decision."

The dumb thing is, if we declare Thomas ineligible, he would have been reinstated 15 minutes later.

The proper way of handling this situation is apparently to have Thomas declared ineligible, have him give $45 to a charity of his choice, then declare him eligible to play the next day. This is how it is supposed to happen.

The way we handled it was to take advice from legal council, the ACC and others that said, given the evidence against Thomas, there's not enough to declare him ineligible.

The end result would have been exactly the same in both cases. Bebe Thomas would drop a fourth down pass and break my heart.