Skip to content

OSU vacates ’10 wins, doesn’t self-impose bowl ban, scholarship losses

NCAA Football: Sugar Bowl-Ohio State vs Arkansas

Ohio State released its response to the NCAA’s Notice of Allegations Friday and it’s, to say the least, an interesting tack the university has chosen to take.

In the response, OSU “acknowledges that this case is major due to the ethical conduct citation” in regards to former head coach Jim Tressel, but it “believes that little institutional responsibility exists for the preferential treatment violation in allegation #1″, which involves the players and impermissible benefits they received as well as — and this will be the crux of their argument in front of the NCAA in August — distancing themselves from allegation #2, which involves unethical conduct on the part of Tressel.

“While the University recognizes that the institution must take responsibility for its employee’s actions with respect to Allegation #2, the responsibility is upon Tressel,” the report read.

“No other institutional personnel were aware of the preferential treatment violations, and Tressel had an obligation to report the potential violation to the appropriate institutional officials.”

As a result, OSU has self-imposed the following sanctions on its football program, which the NCAA can sign-off on or add to:

a. Vacate all victories during the 2010 football season, including the 2011 Allstate Sugar Bowl;
b. Vacate the 2010 Big Ten Conference Football Championship (co-champions);
c. Imposed a two-year probationary period effective July 8, 2011;
d. Withhold four current student-athletes named in Allegation #1 from the first five games of the 2011 football season (additionally, one student-athlete who would have been withheld for five games has departed the institution to pursue a professional football career);
e. Withhold one student-athlete named in Allegation #1 from the first game of the 2011 football season and withhold another student-athlete named in Allegation #1 from those number of games resulting from the decision of the SAR Staff; and
f. Sought and accepted the resignation of Tressel on May 30, 2011

The punitive actions mentioned in “d” and “e” have been known for months, while “f” was revealed by athletic director Gene Smith during an interview that appeared in the Columbus Dispatch today.  What’s most interesting, however, is what’s not contained in the punitive actions self-imposed by the school, namely no bowl ban and no loss of scholarships.

Based on the message sent by the NCAA to USC around this time last year, it’s hard to fathom that the OSU football program will be permitted to skate without one or both of those sanctions being slapped on the program by the time all of the NCAA dust clears.

In addition to the punitive measures, the university has also instituted, or will institute, several corrective actions, including an increase in the number of full-time compliance officials from six to eight; waiting until a player’s eligibility has expired to issue institutional awards, including the storied “gold pants”; and further educate both players and Columbus-area businesses on preferential treatment.

Add it all up, and OSU firmly believes that the sanctions they imposed on themselves should be enough and asks that the NCAA take no further action while once again stressing their lone-wolf characterization of Tressel.

Regarding Tressel’s penalties, the institution’s analysis was that Tressel’s penalties should reflect the seriousness of the position in which he placed both himself and the University. One of his penalties was suspension for the first five games of the 2011 season, which was the same as the student-athletes’ penalties. The University also intended to prohibit all of his off-campus recruiting activities for one year, which reflected the seriousness of Tressel’s failure to report. The University eventually determined that it was in the best interest of the University and Tressel for Tressel to resign, and he agreed to do so.

In summary, the University believes that the corrective and punitive actions are appropriate and negate any competitive advantage gained by the institution as a result of these violations. The University asks the Committee on Infractions to accept these penalties and take no further action.

Ohio State is schedule to appear before the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions on Aug. 12, with a decision from The Association expected at some point during the 2011 regular season.  After some initial uncertainty, it was reported today that Tressel will appear in front of the COI.

For OSU’s full response, click HERE.

Permalink 60 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Big Ten Conference, Ohio State Buckeyes, Rumor Mill, Top Posts
60 Responses to “OSU vacates ’10 wins, doesn’t self-impose bowl ban, scholarship losses”
  1. myopinionisrighterthanyours says: Jul 8, 2011 2:14 PM

    Guess which Big 10 school is now, yet again, winless against the SEC in bowl games. Too bad it still counts as a loss in Arkansas’ book.

  2. lakesidegator says: Jul 8, 2011 2:16 PM

    Lightly spank thyself.

  3. soflatrojan says: Jul 8, 2011 2:21 PM

    Considering the fact the NCAA allowed them to use illegal players in the bowl game, I can’t see how the NCAA would be able to give them a bowl ban. I also don’t think they would have been able to make them forfeit the bowl win. Granted its the NCAA and they can do whatever the want.

  4. mdnittlion says: Jul 8, 2011 2:21 PM

    Looking back at it if I were a Michigan State fan I’d be so mad that my team didn’t play in the Rose or Sugar Bowl especially considering the Sparty would have been able to keep the trophy over the Buckeyes.

    Seriously no big tOSU jokes I just feel sorry for MSU players, fans, alums and coaching staff. All that hard work robbed by a team that couldn’t keep any of it’s stuff anyway, it’s just sad.

    NOW START ALL THE CRAZIES

  5. edgy and imtalking are one in the same says: Jul 8, 2011 2:30 PM

    @myopinionisneverright

    don’t kid yourself, OSU won that game just like USC won the national championship during the bush years, just becuse the ncaa decides games don’t happen doesn’t mean they never occured

    @mdnittlion

    you mean those same spartans that lost by 6 tds to alabama? Just checking which team you thought really deserved to be in there, the one that won, or the one with no chance at all

  6. dcviking says: Jul 8, 2011 2:41 PM

    The NCAA should amend the self-imposed sanction to vacating their appearance in the Sugar Bowl, and thus, no appearance = tOSU needs to return the cash.

    The whole vacating wins thing is almost meaningless, as was mentioned above, the game was played on the field and everyone saw who won (likewise with USC).

    Also, while the President and the institution may not have known what was going on, they may invoked the “plausible deniability” clause — they didn’t know because they didn’t want to know.

    There is no way this can be a defense for the institution. As I have debated with other’s before, I understand that it is unfair to punish incoming freshman for the sins of those who have left (or will be leaving), simply saying “OK, we didn’t win those games after all” is not much of a penalty.

  7. mdnittlion says: Jul 8, 2011 2:48 PM

    @ edgy and imtalking are one in the same

    Ya same team cause it’s easier to beat Arkansas than Bama I’m a Penn State fan and if I had to choose between the Hogs or the Tide I’d choose the Hogs hands down. And for the record OSU was 0-9 verse the SEC till that game. But like I said I feel sorry for the Spartans they did the right thing and got screwed.

    By the way I never hear SEC fans complain when they get to play weaker teams in the Sugar bowl I mean come on Cincy, Hawaii, Notre Dame and than the weak teams they can’t beat Utah, WVU and tOSU (sorry vacated)

  8. frug says: Jul 8, 2011 2:51 PM

    I feel kinda bad for Arkansas. The record books will now record them as having lost a BCS game to an 0-13 team…

  9. 89seminole says: Jul 8, 2011 3:35 PM

    All they did was spare the NCAA from vacating the season for them. Buckeye fans don’t fret, you still have your recruiting monopoly in the state of Ohio. If you were in FL, AL, TX, or CA, then you would realize what it is really like to recruit against the competition. Too bad Bowling Green and Toledo, you’re not going to pick up the pieces.

  10. cosanostra71 says: Jul 8, 2011 3:42 PM

    O$U

  11. edgy and imtalking are one in the same says: Jul 8, 2011 3:46 PM

    mdnittlion

    you make me laugh lol that osu team last season would have kicked mich st’s a**

    I mean if they lost to alabama by maybe 2 or 3 tds, you just maybe, MAYBE, have an argument, but 7 tds? Get real

  12. overratedgators says: Jul 8, 2011 3:49 PM

    I asserted months ago that the SEC homers, particularly Gator fans, were praying for the Sugar Bowl to be vacated, because it drove them crazy that they could no longer repeat their “OSU is winless against the SEC in bowl games” mantra. I was told that I was stupid, because after all, what was the difference between winless and a single win.

    Lo and behold, the first two commenters out of the gate are SEC homers pouncing on the “winless against the SEC” meme. You idiots are more predictable than train schedules.

    As an aside, no way in hell the NCAA doesn’t come down with harsher penalties.

  13. dkhhuey says: Jul 8, 2011 3:56 PM

    Why did I know that no matter what OSU self imposed, the usual suspects would be on the boards pissing and moaning that it wasn’t enough. I find it laughable how predictable some of you are.

    Personally, it seems a reasonable position for OSU to take given the actual violations. Tressel was the person who chose to commit the major infractions and it is Tressel who has deservedly paid the high price tag for his actions. You’ve already penalized the Tat 5 with 5 game suspension and now they have extended that punishment to the rest of the players on the team by striping away the season, the title, and the bowl win. Unless the NCAA has some other dirt on OSU, since they didn’t levy an institutional control violation, I’m not really sure why taking away scholarships and/or bowl bans would be appropriate, unless, of course, the NCAA decides to take the big hammer swing based on the ‘repeat offender’ piece.

    Regardless – it was a great season last year (except for the Wisconsin game) as we kicked Michigan’s ass again and put on a great Sugar Bowl performance. Regardless of the now ‘vacated’ status, it only changes the official record book – not what actually happened on the field!

    Whatever the NCAA decides to dole out next month, we Buckeyes will still show up this year being as fanatical as we always are!

  14. pricecube says: Jul 8, 2011 4:06 PM

    so trading memorabilia for tattoos is worse than asking for $200,000.00 in compensation… interesting …

  15. Deb says: Jul 8, 2011 4:07 PM

    Good grief … where to start??

    Props to Ohio State for trying to drive this situation rather than just sitting back waiting for the hammer to fall. In my opinion, the school had no reason to vacate the Sugar Bowl win. The NCAA knowingly let ineligible players take part in that game to avoid a possible ratings dip that might have negatively affected BCS revenues. And based on what’s currently known, OSU did not need to voluntarily accept a two-year probation.

    If there’s evidence of anything more than a handful of players engaged in minor infractions, it hasn’t been publicly produced. The only instituional failure revealed so far was Tressel’s, and he has suffered the punishment. The school shouldn’t have to suffer with him. Unless the NCAA knows something we don’t, this should end it.

  16. buckeye2280 says: Jul 8, 2011 4:09 PM

    I swear the media is full of idiots.

    First off tOSU will not get hit like USC and comparing the two is apples and oranges.

    Fact, tOSU self reported what Tressel Did, USC stone walled the NCAA and tried to deny wrong doing. tOSU reported what happened a month before the Yahoo article.

    Fact, tOSU has one of the absolute BEST compliance departments in the NCAA and has been called that by the NCAA.

    If the NCAA hammers the institutions that work with it and are willing to self report then any and all cooperation will end. Would tOSU ever have been in trouble had they just not reported the email????

  17. mdnittlion says: Jul 8, 2011 4:12 PM

    @ edgy and imtalking are one in the same

    But they didn’t play either so you can go on all day long about how bad the bowl lose was, but the truth is OSU never played MSU and it’s all just talk about who should have played in what bowl. Like I said before an coach would have chosen Arkansas over Bama in a bowl. I don’t like either situation cause it means Penn State would have had to play Bama again at the Capital One bowl.

  18. Deb says: Jul 8, 2011 4:15 PM

    @myopinionisrighterthanyours …

    Ohio State beat Arkansas on the field. This isn’t a victory for the SEC. I don’t get people who rejoice in other people’s problems, but that’s between you and your conscience. But DO NOT act like the SEC needs another team’s leavings. You embarrass us all. Twit.

    @overratedgators …

    One SEC twit fan does not an entire fanbase make. Get over yourself. Our record stands on its own merit. :roll:

    @mdnittlion …

    The SEC has repeatedly taken on the best the Big 10 and every other conference has to offer in the national championship wiped the floor with them. We don’t need to play your little sisters of the poor to win. We’ll win anyway. And I pity whatever sacrificial lamb you wanted to throw at Bama’s feet in the Spartans’ place. ROLL TIDE!

  19. southernpatriots says: Jul 8, 2011 4:34 PM

    Some posters blaim the NCAA for these penalties (read the postings). Did they read the story? tOSU self-imposed these penalties upon themselves and the NCAA can agree or add. These penalties are harsh and it looks like tOSU was truly serious in putting this tragedy behind them. I applaud the attitude of the current tOSU administration and staff because they are biting the bullet and wanting to end this matter and go forward.

    We all hope they will be able to and once again be a factor on the national stage. With Michigan once again building a national ranked team and Nebraska coming into the Big10/12, there may be competition in the conference again. That would be
    good for college football and all college football fans.

    The SEC will once again the conference to watch and we will watch it and its great entertainment value as we have for many decades now. The East is coming back and the West will be strong as always to make for some great contests and what should be a great conference championship.

  20. dkhhuey says: Jul 8, 2011 4:36 PM

    @Deb

    Excellent posts as usual!!!

  21. pricecube says: Jul 8, 2011 4:43 PM

    @southernpatriots

    These self imposed sanctions are a preemptive strike by OSU. What the NCAA lays down will likely be more harsh.

  22. florida727 says: Jul 8, 2011 4:50 PM

    Hey Deb, good to read your posts (as usual). Roll Tide (except on October 1st if you know what I mean :) ).

    I have to laugh a little at Ohio State’s move here. I think it’s kind of funny how a school “self-imposes” its own punishment… as if to say, “hey, NCAA, please go lightly on us, see how we’re trying to do what’s right”.

    Of course, there’s no mention of returning the Sugar Bowl revenue, is there?

    QUESTION: very first poster above said that even though OSU “vacates” its wins, the game still appears on Arkansas’ record as a LOSS. (I’m assuming that holds the same for every other team they played throughout the year.) Is that true? If so, what’s the point?

  23. tlndma says: Jul 8, 2011 5:50 PM

    Seems OSU fans have many more things in common with SC fans than just their upcoming sanctions.
    Being delusional and in denial are two.

  24. angelheartsbuckeyes says: Jul 8, 2011 6:02 PM

    Some of the history of 10.1 violations and the outcomes:

    Cal/ Bozerman- vacated wins, probation.

    Minnesota/ Haskins- vacated wins, probation.

    Baylor/ Bliss- no OOC games for a year, vacated wins, probation.

    IU/ Sampson- probation.

    Calm down people.

  25. Deb says: Jul 8, 2011 6:13 PM

    @dkhhuey and florida727 …

    Thank you! :)

    florida727, to me vacating wins is just a symbolic gesture. Unless there’s evidence that a team somehow cheated on the field, a win is still a win. Guys trading trinkets for tattoos doesn’t change that. I honestly believe Auburn paid Newton because that’s what the circumstantial evidence suggests. But even if that’s eventually proved, it won’t change what happened on the field during the Iron Bowl. They won. That’s why I don’t believe in awarding victories to the also-rans. They didn’t earn them.

    As to the revenue from those games … the best the NCAA could do is fine schools a guesstimate of why they might have received as a result of their infraction. If Tressel had reported the Tat5, they’d only have missed a couple of games, and OSU likely would have made the Sugar Bowl anyway. The NCAA knew about the infractions before the Sugar Bowl and opted to let the kids play, so how could they now fine OSU for those revenues because the school chose to sanction itself? On the other hand, would Auburn have gotten near the SEC or National Championship games without Newton? If proof were found regarding infractions there, how would you begin to calculate that fine?

    The sanctioning business is an imperfect science. My problem with the NCAA is that it also seems too subjective at times.

  26. angelheartsbuckeyes says: Jul 8, 2011 7:14 PM

    @myopinionisblahblahblah…

    While you are busy turning the pages of record books, I will be watching 2 quarters of ass-whipping and two more of Tresselball with a final piece de resistance of an interception called the Sugar Bowl.

    You can find your w’s and l’s on paper, I prefer getting mine on the field.

  27. whatswiththehate says: Jul 8, 2011 10:59 PM

    Deb says:Jul 8, 2011 6:13 PM

    @dkhhuey and florida727 …

    Thank you!

    florida727, to me vacating wins is just a symbolic gesture. Unless there’s evidence that a team somehow cheated on the field, a win is still a win. Guys trading trinkets for tattoos doesn’t change that. I honestly believe Auburn paid Newton because that’s what the circumstantial evidence suggests. But even if that’s eventually proved, it won’t change what happened on the field during the Iron Bowl. They won. That’s why I don’t believe in awarding victories to the also-rans. They didn’t earn them.
    ——————–
    What circumstantial evidence?” You mean evidence coming from folks who never even met Cecil. Someone spends way to much time watching tv.

    That is why it’s good to wait until the NCAA make their final report before we jump to conclusion because there is the media spun version of a story and the truth that comes to light when folks go before the NCAA. And it’s the NCAA who is the final judge, not the media.

    Unless the school who is being viciously attacked in the media is your arch rival. Then I gues you will believe everything you read.

    Opinion is coming from someone with no loyality to any school, just a love of sports.

  28. titan40 says: Jul 8, 2011 11:57 PM

    Say what you want, the final score is what matters. The NCAA is just trying to bring down one of the best schools in the world. We still won the Sugar Bowl, and we still beat Michigan. It’s sad when you people have to use something like this to say we lost to an SEC team or to Michigan. Our win streak for Michigan and our BCS titles will continue. We will do what we do best, we’ll go and have a winning season and win a BCS game and shut the media and all you cock sucking assholes up. Then again, most of you people are too damn fat and stupid to go to college and play D1 ball, so the best thing you can do is act like you know what you’re talking about and jump on the critic wagon.

  29. overratedgators says: Jul 9, 2011 12:50 AM

    I still don’t know if I agree, but Stuart Mandel of SI says he believes Ohio State’s self-imposed penalty may be the end of this:

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/stewart_mandel/07/08/ohio-state-ncaa-response/index.html?sct=cf_t11_a1

  30. waynefontes says: Jul 9, 2011 2:46 AM

    overratedgators says:
    Jul 8, 2011 3:49 PM
    I asserted months ago that the SEC homers, particularly Gator fans, were praying for the Sugar Bowl to be vacated…
    ————————————————–

    I think Gator fans are satisfied with whipping Ohio State for the national championship in both football and basketball in the same year.

  31. edgy says: Jul 9, 2011 6:00 AM

    Some are missing the bigger issue: REAL sanctions. USC refused to give ANY and they got taken behind the woodshed for it and the NCAA may pile on for that. Come on, tOSU, a one year bowl ban and a couple of scholarships for a couple of years and you could have made a case (and I was right about why Smith finally admitted to “firing” Tressel) but this may be enough for them to make it a two-year ban and 10 total scholarships (5 for 2 years) and a financial taste, as tOSU was VERY conspicuous with their lack of offering up money.

  32. denverdude7 says: Jul 9, 2011 7:09 AM

    Dear Mr. Pryor,

    Were a few tatoos and some pocket change really worth all of this?

    I must have missed you on ESPN standing up like a man and taking some heat over all this.

    You put your wants (not NEEDS) over the entire institution and brought shame to it and to yourself.

    You have a debt re-pay.

  33. georgeanderson2 says: Jul 9, 2011 10:05 AM

    Go after the money, that is all that matters. If OSU feels they were apart of something illegal under NCAAA rules then every dollar they took in should be returned from ticket sales, sponsorships, merchandise, bowl game,etc… every dollar. Otherwise it all means nothing. You can say OSU vacates every win in their entire history and nothing will change. Will people not think they are one of college footballs legendary programs, no…return the money.

  34. dragopooch says: Jul 9, 2011 10:54 AM

    You know to me it seems funny that the number 1 Big 10 team takes it on the chin after the Pac 10’s number 1 finally takes a hit for their blatant disregard for the rules. I would be looking at my staff for a dyed in the wool USC fan.

  35. edgy says: Jul 9, 2011 11:03 AM

    BTW, SI had a great article that had me laughing because it was not only funny but sadly, true. Go there and look up Cheating For Dummies. :)

  36. southernpatriots says: Jul 9, 2011 11:55 AM

    dragopooch: Thank you for your post. We never thought that way and when we consider it, it does seem funny, though sad.

    edgy: A good article at SI. We needed some humor and that certainly helped. Thank you.

  37. dcroz says: Jul 9, 2011 12:13 PM

    frug:

    Actually, Ohio State’s “official” 2010 record will be 0-1, assuming the NCAA does not change this particular proposed sanction. The 12 wins were vacated, NOT forfeited, meaning that they are simply removed from the “W” column and not moved into the “L” one. The loss to Wisconsin is the only game that would remain as part of their record.

  38. Deb says: Jul 9, 2011 1:30 PM

    @whatswiththehate …

    Circumstantial evidence:

    1. Cecil confessed to telling MSU Cam’s asking price was $200,000.

    2. Cam had a relationship with Dan Mullen, so MSU was offered a $20,000 discount.

    3. Cam visited Auburn once.

    4. Cam immediately signed with Auburn, supposedly on his father’s instructions.

    Since Cecil demanded $180,000 from Mullen, it’s illogical that he would have given Cam to Auburn after one visit.

    I don’t need to meet Cecil to know he admitted soliciting pay-for-play. You don’t offer to sell a friend your house for $180,000 then just give it to a stranger.

    Please stop being silly.

  39. florida727 says: Jul 9, 2011 2:44 PM

    With all due respect, Deb, many a court battle is lost because “circumstantial” evidence doesn’t equate to PROOF. Don’t get me wrong, rooting loyalties aside, I think something underhanded went on too. But without PROVING it beyond a reasonable doubt (ie. bank balances, cars driven, homes lived in… something), even I’ve moved on from this one and have to accept that maybe they were legit.

    The thing that bothers me from a “vacated” standpoint is this: so OSU’s record drops to 0-1. Does (fill in the blank) gain a win on their record, or do they still get saddled with a LOSS? Dropping to 0-1 just makes it look like they took the season off. Drop them to 0-13 and now their beloved “history and tradition” takes a hit. Dropping to 0-1 is no punishment, it’s a blip on their historical radar.

    BTW, OSU, appreciate you being our pasty for those national championships in football and basketball. You’re a terrific footnote: only team in history to LOSE both national title games in the same year :) The best part? You can’t even brag about getting to them.

  40. pricecube says: Jul 9, 2011 4:58 PM

    @Deb

    “The SEC has repeatedly taken on the best the Big 10 and every other conference has to offer in the national championship wiped the floor with them.”

    Not sure if this counts… but now that Nebraska is part of the Big Ten… I certainly have some painful memories of them from the mid nineties… I have never before or since seen the best the SEC has to offer chewed up and spit out the way the Huskers did repeatedly in bowl games of that era. Remember the 96′ Fiesta Bowl and the look on Spurrier’s face? Or how about 97′ when they did the same steamroll on Peyton Manning and company?

  41. dcroz says: Jul 9, 2011 8:32 PM

    florida727:

    The wins Ohio State would be vacating would still be counted as losses on their opponents’ official records. I know, it makes no sense to say that one team lost a game that the other team did not officially win, which is why I think the whole concept is absurd. It’s little more than a nuisance, because everyone remembers who actually won those games on the field, and no one wants to go through the verbal gymnastics of explaining how that win really didn’t count in the record books because of sanctions.

  42. tr975 says: Jul 9, 2011 9:10 PM

    florida727 says:

    I have to laugh a little at Ohio State’s move here. I think it’s kind of funny how a school “self-imposes” its own punishment… as if to say, “hey, NCAA, please go lightly on us, see how we’re trying to do what’s right”.
    ————————–
    So, I assume you will be heading over to the page listed below and leaving a comment about laughing a little at West Virginia’s move to “self-impose” its own punishment?

    http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/08/ncaa-accepts-wvus-self-imposed-sanctions-following-investigation-of-program/

  43. florida727 says: Jul 9, 2011 10:16 PM

    tr975, i would if i cared about west virginia football :)

    deroz, thanks for the explanation… you’re right, it makes NO sense whatsoever…

  44. tr975 says: Jul 9, 2011 10:36 PM

    You don’t care about OSU football either. You’ve shown that with all of your comments about the national championships. So, I guess you are nothing more than a hypocrite.

  45. edgy says: Jul 10, 2011 6:34 AM

    Vacated wins aren’t counted against either (forfeited are different). Losses will count. Basically, tOSU’s record will be 0-1.

  46. edgy says: Jul 10, 2011 6:37 AM

    I take it back. I think that the games aren’t counted against tOSU but stand against their opponent.

  47. southernpatriots says: Jul 10, 2011 6:38 AM

    pricecube: There is no doubt that the addition of Nebraska adds quality to the Big 10. We also remember how Cornhuskers dismantled SEC teams including ours (LSU) in decades past. Also, in decades past, they had one of the dirtiest programs in the U.S. So which Nebraska team is joining the Big 10, the one of excellence, or the one of widespread infractions?

  48. edgy says: Jul 10, 2011 11:00 AM

    In case you’re still confused by what I said, here it is:

    All games that tOSU vacated are null and void against THEM but count against their opponents so their 2010 record is now 0-1 BUT their wins will count against their opponents so technically, their win against Arkansas stands as a LOSS and sorry, guys, so does their win against Michigan.

  49. southernpatriots says: Jul 10, 2011 11:28 AM

    edgy: tOSU’s 2010 record will now be 0-1? Even though they are vacating ALL their wins for 2010? Would the NCAA impose something a little different to change that to a more representative year, like 0-12 or something? That would seem much more fair than 0-1. Just a thought.

  50. edgy says: Jul 10, 2011 11:37 AM

    spats, vacating a win isn’t the same as a forfeit. A forfeited season would actually mean 0-13 but vacating means 0-1 (can’t vacate a loss). BTW, that means that Tressel would lose those wins but they won’t be added on as losses. Alabama, Florida State and USC had vacated wins and that is reflected in their updated records (Calipari had to vacate wins because of what happened at Memphis and the NCAA forced Kentucky to acknowledge that because they knew that the wins were vacated but chose to honor Calipari and now, they’ll have to do it again in about 2 years when his team wins the 43 games that they were forced to shave off the total that they were recognizing).

  51. southernpatriots says: Jul 10, 2011 3:34 PM

    edgy: Thank you for the explanation. We are glad you understand the situation.

    It is a shame that we have to learn the difference and have this in our reference knowledge for the future.

    If the NCAA wants to flex their power, it would seem that they would not just rubber stamp the self-imposed penalty of tOSU, but we wonder what they would add to it. All of this coming as a result of a coach not living up to his reputation as an honest man, but lying in sworn statements to the NCAA and covering up minor infractions of his players. What a disgrace and shame!

    Now the tOSU alums, players, fans, etc. have this penalty and likely even worse to deal with. Nebraska will probably have an easy job in winning the Big 10 this upcoming season, if Michigan is not yet ready and needs another year.

  52. Deb says: Jul 10, 2011 7:41 PM

    @florida727 …

    I have moved on. The discussion was about winning on the field vs. the record book. My argument was that even though I believe Auburn met Newton’s price, even if that’s eventually proved, it won’t change the fact that they were the best team in the Iron Bowl–which was a compliment to Auburn’s football team. But whatswiththehate can’t leave it alone. He’s determined that I have to acknowledge Auburn’s innocence, and I can’t do that anymore than I can acknowledge O.J. Simpson’s innocence just because he was acquitted. The evidence says Simpson–a player I adored as a child–was guilty, and logic suggests Auburn paid Newton. But if no evidence is ever found, I can live with that because Bama wouldn’t have won the championship last year any way you look at it.

    @pricecube …

    My loyalty is to Bama … but as a Missouri grad, I hate Nebraska. Will they have to play OSU, Michigan, Penn State, etc., now? Wow … never thought I’d be rooting for all those Big 10 teams :)

  53. edgy says: Jul 11, 2011 4:51 AM

    I don’t see them rubber stamping this because it doesn’t impose a bowl ban and a loss of scholarships, which is what this would require. USC tried to get away with just banning Bush and it earned them a big penalty and I think that the NCAA adds one year ban and 10 scholarships.

  54. southernpatriots says: Jul 11, 2011 11:35 AM

    edgy: Your reasoning is sound. But, if the NCAA does impose such a penalty on tOSU, it will really challenge their program and patience of the fans.

  55. edgy says: Jul 11, 2011 1:44 PM

    spats, I believe that tOSU would rather that that NCAA give them the extra penalties so they can fire up their fans with an “us against the world” argument. I have to believe that even they know that they should be offering up scholarships, bowls and money because the NCAA has accepted the penalties for schools that did that and imposed those penalties on those that didn’t so they’re either stupid for believing that the NCAA will let this go or they’re willing to let the NCAA play the bad guy to take heat off the school officials. BTW, no matter what people think, this is NOT the end of it for tOSU. This only addresses the previous issues and not the newer ones that came to light after April so there’s more to come.

  56. pricecube says: Jul 11, 2011 2:01 PM

    @southernpatriots

    I am by no means a fan of Nebraska… but I think it is hyperbolic to suggest they had one of the dirtiest programs in the country. Instead I would say that was the most dominant college football team of all time.

    The only incident I remember at Nebraska of that era was Lawrence Phillips playing in the Fiesta Bowl. Honestly Tom Osbourne needed Phillips for that game like he needed a hole in the head. It ruined his reputation as a coach. If you do not believe me the evidence is on youtube all these years later. They would have won by just as large a margin running Tommy Frazier, Ahman Green and one of the Mackovickas.

    My gut reaction is that Phillips should have been in jail… but I don’t think Osbourne had control over that. Instead he let him play one last game to increase his NFL stock and then encouraged him to leave a year early and get off the team. It certainly would have been better for Osbourne’s legacy to get him out earlier. Were there other incidents? This is the only one I remember. Does that really make them one of the dirtiest programs in the country in your opinion? I think all the major programs of the SEC or any power conference have played some “thugs” at one point or another.

  57. southernpatriots says: Jul 11, 2011 4:27 PM

    pricecube: What we heard was contemporary with the issues during the time of the activities from alums of Nebraska, fans of other teams in their conference, etc. Most “infractions” were not even investigated by the NCAA because Dr. Osborne had such a good relationship with the then NCAA president and other NCAA officers. We do not speak anything negative about Dr. Osborne and believe him to be a good Christian man of high moral fiber.

    However, his close relationships with those who were entrusted to conduct any investigation may have certainly influenced them to look the other way. Other coaches were screaming at times about what they heard and what they witnessed but their words and even screams fell on deaf ears. Some of the opposing coaches who complained were coaches of teams under investigation themselves, so often the response was it was just “sour apples” from those opposing coaches. Whether it was the cozy relationship, or a time of leniency by the NCAA, or whatever, it left bitter tastes in the mouths of coaches who faced Nebraska during those years, even with some we know to this day.

    edgy: We think you are correct that this is not the end for tOSU. It just is so sad that the actions of one coach (so far at least) covering up the minor infractions of some of his players, instead of costing a few games of suspension, has now resulted in such a tremendous cost to the coach, the school, and the fans. It is sort of like, one who is later proven non-guilty of a crime, but during the process of the investigation was found to have lied to the FBI or other law enforcement and then has a prison sentence which he/she would not have had if he/she had told the truth. Seems like that is being played out in Florida right now, and Scooter Libby, and others before.

  58. tdub821 says: Jul 13, 2011 3:31 PM

    O$U…the USC of the Mid West

    Hey come to O$U…we pay our players top dollar.

    What a joke of a program.

    Hey all you hillbilly buckeys fans….”Dead Man Walking”.

  59. tr975 says: Jul 14, 2011 1:47 AM

    tdub821 says:

    Hey come to O$U…we pay our players top dollar.
    ———————
    Yet they were #12 in recruiting. Guess the other 11 schools pay better…

  60. angelheartsbuckeyes says: Jul 14, 2011 6:07 PM

    People are still commenting on this story…LOL. Funny how 6/7 of the top commented stories have something to do wtih tOSU.

    After seeing what just happened to Tech, anyone still think a bowl ban is coming?

    Cant wait to hear Buckeye Hater Nation rationalize that one…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!