tOSU being investigated for tattoo-gate?

[salsadancer7]

Games they won't be around for.
To make things equal & fair, the upcoming Bowl game should be included as well. Georgia didn't have the luxury of choosing which games Green sat out (for the exact same rule infraction), Ohio St. shouldn't either.

I agree....even though the rule is bull****.

 

[Ronnie-]

Games they won't be around for.
To make things equal & fair, the upcoming Bowl game should be included as well. Georgia didn't have the luxury of choosing which games Green sat out (for the exact same rule infraction), Ohio St. shouldn't either.

I agree.

 

[Jimbo]

Unless I misunderstood you, you said the exact same thing in the post I quoted previously. I was asking why that made it excusable. I was not making that statement as an excuse to break the rules.

Oh, don't get me wrong. It's a rule and ya it was broke, I never said that they didn't, but I know for a fact that it's a stupid rule and should be changed or at least adjusted.

I'm more against the rule than anything.

 

[charper1]

You are right....
However, the reason the Bucks are being alowed to play is because of MONEY, or the LACK of money that would be made if come next tuesday the starters were NOT to play, the fans and the SUGAR BOWL in particular would feel cheated as they would lose alot of revenue due to it.

I THINK, had it only been one player, they would have suspended him for the Bowl game, but this is a good portion of the entire offense.

Not that I want to reopen that can of worms, but its the same reason they didn't pursue the Cam Newton issue more vigorously; God forbid they would have had ORE and TCU in the big game (assuming the loss of Cam would have cost AUB a game or two). They have as much info on his step dad as they had in the Bush case and they managed to get Bush even tho 99.995% of everything was done by the parent; VERY similar to the dealings of Cam's parent (smaller scale it seems); BUT they are willing to let it slide; for now at least. In this OSU case they have these guys dead to rights and are simply changing the way they normally enforce based on exactly what you are saying; money; it would effect the game and the money draw. And they don't want to do that to one of their "big boy schools".

 

[salsadancer7]

I wouldnt think so for the fact that their responsibility ended when he violated the terms of his scholarship.

Should they have had he stayed there? Yeah, probably, I would have if I were them most likely, but they were under no obligation to do so.
I wont blame Salsa for wanting to have some spending money based on what he has said, but I wont blame the university for voiding the contract when he violated the rules either.
It seems to me that they held up their end of the deal in so much as we have been told.
More obviously could have been done, and it would have been the decent thing to do, but again....

Oh I KNEW that there was a very good chance I was gonna lose my ride. I just didn't get the star treatment that they showed when they wanted me to go there. Oh well.

 

[Ronnie-]

Oh, don't get me wrong. It's a rule and ya it was broke, I never said that they didn't, but I know for a fact that it's a stupid rule and should be changed or at least adjusted.

I'm more against the rule than anything.

Which is what I was asking. Yeah, may be a stupid rule, but that doesnt make breaking it any more excusable. The guys know of this rule according to posters here that have been through it.

I can get being against the rule though, but as long as it is a rule, athletes are expected to follow it. In this case, they got off easy as they arent made to miss the very next game, and that is a bigger issue than if the rule is bull. IMO anyway.

 

[Jimbo]

Not that I want to reopen that can of worms, but its the same reason they didn't pursue the Cam Newton issue more vigorously; God forbid they would have had ORE and TCU in the big game. They have as much info on his step dad as they had in the Bush case and they managed to get Bush even tho 99.995% of everything was done by the parent; VERY similar to the dealings of Cam's parent (smaller scale it seems); BUT they are willing to let it slide; for now at least. In this OSU case they have these guys dead to rights and are simply changing the way they normally enforce based on exactly what you are saying; money; it would effect the game and the money draw. And they don't want to do that to one of their "big boy schools".

Thats what I've een saying about the Newton stuff all along.

Guys are getting suspended for 5 games, THATS a HUGE amount of games for this infraction.
And you know that CAM got his money as well or he would be at S. Miss where he WANTED to go in the first place.

 

[salsadancer7]

Had you been able to stay in school would they have continued to allow you to use the facilities and finish your rehab ?

I don't know ....but they sure as hell didn't want much to do with me once the ruling came down. Again, not a star... so it is what it is....

 

[Jimbo]

Which is what I was asking. Yeah, may be a stupid rule, but that doesnt make breaking it any more excusable. The guys know of this rule according to posters here that have been through it.

I can get being against the rule though, but as long as it is a rule, athletes are expected to follow it. In this case, they got off easy as they arent made to miss the very next game, and that is a bigger issue than if the rule is bull. IMO anyway.

5 games, thats almost half the next season is MUCH HARSHER than missing the Bowl game.

 

[salsadancer7]

Not that I want to reopen that can of worms, but its the same reason they didn't pursue the Cam Newton issue more vigorously; God forbid they would have had ORE and TCU in the big game (assuming the loss of Cam would have cost AUB a game or two). They have as much info on his step dad as they had in the Bush case and they managed to get Bush even tho 99.995% of everything was done by the parent; VERY similar to the dealings of Cam's parent (smaller scale it seems); BUT they are willing to let it slide; for now at least. In this OSU case they have these guys dead to rights and are simply changing the way they normally enforce based on exactly what you are saying; money; it would effect the game and the money draw. And they don't want to do that to one of their "big boy schools".

Star treatment baby!

 

[Ronnie-]

5 games, thats almost half the next season is MUCH HARSHER than missing the Bowl game.

Not when you are a junior that is possibly going to go pro anyway. Even you said earlier it was about the money that they didnt miss this game. Personally, I think it would be worse on the players to miss their last possible game than 5 games of a season that they may not have stayed for anyway. Now they most surely wont, and wont get punished at all.

 

[charper1]

Thats what I've een saying about the Newton stuff all along.

Guys are getting suspended for 5 games, THATS a HUGE amount of games for this infraction.
And you know that CAM got his money as well or he would be at S. Miss where he WANTED to go in the first place.

Well even if HE didn't get any money or talk to anyone about money; he had an AGENT - his parent AND that's enough reason for me. HE KNEW, regardless of what they or the NCAA says in their official rulings.

 

[charper1]

Star treatment baby!

I 110% think it had more to do with the NCAA and the BCS than Cam Newton. If this would have been within the 1st 3 or 4 weeks of the season; we may have seen a different outcome in the findings!

 

[Jimbo]

Not when you are a junior that is possibly going to go pro anyway. Even you said earlier it was about the money that they didnt miss this game. Personally, I think it would be worse on the players to miss their last possible game than 5 games of a season that they may not have stayed for anyway. Now they most surely wont, and wont get punished at all.

Actually, it would surprise me if they all went pro ....
Just saw an interview tonight with the players apologizing to the public, either Possy or Pryor said he was definately coming back, but the interview was cut quickly between players, so I'm not sure who it was that said it.

Of course thats subject to change after the game as EVERYONE says one thing before and potentially another after.

 

[Jimbo]

I 110% think it had more to do with the NCAA and the BCS than Cam Newton. If this would have been within the 1st 3 or 4 weeks of the season; we may have seen a different outcome in the findings!

I agree.

 

[Jimbo]

I have a question for all you guys.

WHY did the official findings come out NOW ?
They could have come out 6 weeks ago...
They could have come out BEFORE the season.
They could have come out AFTER the Bowl games.

 

[Ronnie-]

I have a question for all you guys.

WHY did the official findings come out NOW ?
They could have come out 6 weeks ago...
They could have come out BEFORE the season.
They could have come out AFTER the Bowl games.

With the punishment handed down as it was I have no idea. It was just the time it came out is the best answer I have. lol

 

[Hall]

Actually, it would surprise me if they all went pro ....
Just saw an interview tonight with the players apologizing to the public, either Possy or Pryor said he was definately coming back, but the interview was cut quickly between players, so I'm not sure who it was that said it.

Of course thats subject to change after the game as EVERYONE says one thing before and potentially another after.

Video link on right-hand side...

Ohio State players apologize to 'Buckeye Nation' | BuckeyeXtra

 

[charper1]

LOL thanks God they apologized; now that makes it all better.

 

[Jimbo]

LOL thanks God they apologized; now that makes it all better.

I agree .... what would we all have done had they NOT !