I disagree, Bush received benefits to draw him to USC, Ohio State had players trading memorabilia for free tats. The latter is a lesser offense, the big problem was Tressel tried to cover it up and HE got popped hard for that has he should have.
I think the blatant coverup by pretty much everyone at tOSU is what makes this as bad as USC.
The NCAA basically trolled the rest of us by letting Terelle Pryor and co. play in their bowl game before being "suspended," which never happened because he then left for the NFL.
I disagree, Bush received benefits to draw him to USC, Ohio State had players trading memorabilia for free tats. The latter is a lesser offense, the big problem was Tressel tried to cover it up and HE got popped hard for that has he should have.
I think the blatant coverup by pretty much everyone at tOSU is what makes this as bad as USC.
The NCAA basically trolled the rest of us by letting Terelle Pryor and co. play in their bowl game before being "suspended," which never happened because he then left for the NFL.
Now I agree with you there, those dudes had NO business playing in that game.
GoDucksIn09 wrote:We are not Ohio State though. The NCAA has a vested interest in protecting the SEC or schools like Ohio State, Michigan, Texas or Notre Dame. I have no idea what they are going to do. It scares me given their history of unequal treatment of programs. It would be a lot easier if they were consistent. I do feel they need to be consistent to be thought of as credible or fair but those are words that seem to escape the NCAA.
Dude…y’all are “the ohio state” and “the SEC” now. You are a major brand like USC and Bama. If you were not, this would of been over last year and ended in a big back hand against the face.
Mad Props here from Bud! Me thinks you are not like most other SEC Fans...
2012 Rose Bowl Champions 2013 Fiesta Bowl Champions Still Dedicated to the Ducks Winning the Natty!
pezsez1 wrote:Yeah, Ohio State should have been hit harder than USC, imo.... or at least, the two should have been equal.
I disagree, Bush received benefits to draw him to USC, Ohio State had players trading memorabilia for free tats. The latter is a lesser offense, the big problem was Tressel tried to cover it up and HE got popped hard for that has he should have.
Maybe Braveheart can enlighten us, but I always thought the Bush "issues" didn't revolve around his recruitment to SC, but his recruitment to an agency so that when he went pro, he'd sign with them. Basically, the issues at both schools happened once the players were already on campus. Not to mention that everything that Maurice Clarett levied against OSU seems like the truth considering Troy Smith and Terrelle Pryor. (there is a whole lot more going on in Ohio then was revealed during that hasty investigation; "Gee: I just hope the football coach doesn't fire me")
pezsez1 wrote:Yeah, Ohio State should have been hit harder than USC, imo.... or at least, the two should have been equal.
I disagree, Bush received benefits to draw him to USC, Ohio State had players trading memorabilia for free tats. The latter is a lesser offense, the big problem was Tressel tried to cover it up and HE got popped hard for that has he should have.
Maybe Braveheart can enlighten us, but I always thought the Bush "issues" didn't revolve around his recruitment to SC, but his recruitment to an agency so that when he went pro, he'd sign with them. Basically, the issues at both schools happened once the players were already on campus. Not to mention that everything that Maurice Clarett levied against OSU seems like the truth considering Troy Smith and Terrelle Pryor. (there is a whole lot more going on in Ohio then was revealed during that hasty investigation; "Gee: I just hope the football coach doesn't fire me")
Both cases (tOSU and usc) are summed up pretty simply- IMPROPER BENEFITS TO STUDENT ATHLETES. Improper benefits are simply defned- giving to or making avialable something to a student athlete that is not available to another student. That can be anything from a package of gum to a house or a car or an easy grade on a test or a free text book. If you give a package of gum free of charge to a student athlete but charge me 75 cents for it you have violated an NCAA rule. That's the bottom line and I realize the gum example is trivial but that is the way the rules are clearly written. That is the #1; big Kahuna violation for the NCAA. Look at the Miami case.
Recruting violations are clearly a big deal BUT (and a big BUT it is) those rules governing recruiting are far less clear than the rules on improper benefits, thus the reason the UO case has taken almost 2.5 years.
GoDucksIn09 wrote:We are not Ohio State though. The NCAA has a vested interest in protecting the SEC or schools like Ohio State, Michigan, Texas or Notre Dame. I have no idea what they are going to do. It scares me given their history of unequal treatment of programs. It would be a lot easier if they were consistent. I do feel they need to be consistent to be thought of as credible or fair but those are words that seem to escape the NCAA.
Dude…y’all are “the ohio state” and “the SEC” now. You are a major brand like USC and Bama. If you were not, this would of been over last year and ended in a big back hand against the face.
Mad Props here from Bud! Me thinks you are not like most other SEC Fans...
pezsez1 wrote:Yeah, Ohio State should have been hit harder than USC, imo.... or at least, the two should have been equal.
I disagree, Bush received benefits to draw him to USC, Ohio State had players trading memorabilia for free tats. The latter is a lesser offense, the big problem was Tressel tried to cover it up and HE got popped hard for that has he should have.
Maybe Braveheart can enlighten us, but I always thought the Bush "issues" didn't revolve around his recruitment to SC, but his recruitment to an agency so that when he went pro, he'd sign with them. Basically, the issues at both schools happened once the players were already on campus. Not to mention that everything that Maurice Clarett levied against OSU seems like the truth considering Troy Smith and Terrelle Pryor. (there is a whole lot more going on in Ohio then was revealed during that hasty investigation; "Gee: I just hope the football coach doesn't fire me")
Both cases (tOSU and usc) are summed up pretty simply- IMPROPER BENEFITS TO STUDENT ATHLETES. Improper benefits are simply defned- giving to or making avialable something to a student athlete that is not available to another student. That can be anything from a package of gum to a house or a car or an easy grade on a test or a free text book. If you give a package of gum free of charge to a student athlete but charge me 75 cents for it you have violated an NCAA rule. That's the bottom line and I realize the gum example is trivial but that is the way the rules are clearly written. That is the #1; big Kahuna violation for the NCAA. Look at the Miami case.
Recruting violations are clearly a big deal BUT (and a big BUT it is) those rules governing recruiting are far less clear than the rules on improper benefits, thus the reason the UO case has taken almost 2.5 years.
As mentioned, the USC violations were not recruiting violations, they were improper benefits given to a player. That situation took nearly 3 years also. This really has nothing to do with the type of violation, so much as it does with the NCAA proving how extremely inconsistent they are.
The NCAA needs to be kicked out of college sports. A clear set of guidelines needs to be made, including an already drawn out punishment for specific violations, death penalty included. Repeat offenders within certain time frames will get harsher punishments, but again, those scenarios should already be written down to avoid inconsistenties. If a situation occurs that is not in the already drawn out rule book, no further investigation and consulting is needed. Have a vote amongst coaches and ADs to see if it should be added as a violation.
Did anyone hear on the radio in Portland yesterday about some new wrong doings by a booster? I assume it was another false rumor about sanctions especially since at this late date nothing has come out about it before.
soduck wrote:Did anyone hear on the radio in Portland yesterday about some new wrong doings by a booster? I assume it was another false rumor about sanctions especially since at this late date nothing has come out about it before.
Yea, it turns out the Uncle Phil is one big sugar daddy. He goes and pays for all these major babes to come to Oregon, then he gives them a whole bunch of cash and items so long as they go out on dote on the football players.
soduck wrote:Did anyone hear on the radio in Portland yesterday about some new wrong doings by a booster? I assume it was another false rumor about sanctions especially since at this late date nothing has come out about it before.
No, but why post it if there is nothing to back it up???????
soduck wrote:Did anyone hear on the radio in Portland yesterday about some new wrong doings by a booster? I assume it was another false rumor about sanctions especially since at this late date nothing has come out about it before.
No, but why post it if there is nothing to back it up???????
I might be wrong on this, but I just have a gut feeling we are going to hear on this tomorrow. No source or anything. Just a gut feeling based on fact Miss State appeared before the infractions committee at the same time Oregon did and they got their ruling last Friday.
GoDucksIn09 wrote:I might be wrong on this, but I just have a gut feeling we are going to hear on this tomorrow. No source or anything. Just a gut feeling based on fact Miss State appeared before the infractions committee at the same time Oregon did and they got their ruling last Friday.
Hope you're right, but my gut says this will drag out until someone from Oregon forces ncaa's hand. Nobody has any reason to think this will be done anytime soon and with any fairness. This should've been finished years ago
GoDucksIn09 wrote:I might be wrong on this, but I just have a gut feeling we are going to hear on this tomorrow. No source or anything. Just a gut feeling based on fact Miss State appeared before the infractions committee at the same time Oregon did and they got their ruling last Friday.
I saw a tweet from someone earlier this week at the R-G that said the decision was rumored to be coming out today or tomorrow, but I have no clue if this individual was credible or not. Moseley didn't seem particularly impressed, so there's really nothing for sure.
I do know this. Like everyone else, I'm very, very tired of waiting. This sucks.
GoDucksIn09 wrote:I might be wrong on this, but I just have a gut feeling we are going to hear on this tomorrow. No source or anything. Just a gut feeling based on fact Miss State appeared before the infractions committee at the same time Oregon did and they got their ruling last Friday.
I saw a tweet from someone earlier this week at the R-G that said the decision was rumored to be coming out today or tomorrow, but I have no clue if this individual was credible or not. Moseley didn't seem particularly impressed, so there's really nothing for sure.
I do know this. Like everyone else, I'm very, very tired of waiting. This sucks.
That rumor has been floating around for a few days. Rivals boards were saying we should've heard 2 or 3 days ago. Everyday we should hear something, and everyday we don't.
