Mike Lantry, 1972
I've had a lot of questions about where Michigan's 2012 recruiting class will be ranked come February. This is almost impossible to predict since there are no constants in the recruiting world. Since that won't satisfy anyone though I figured I would give you a projection based off of past years, and what Michigan's class could potentially look like around signing day.
This is all conjecture based off the assumption that nothing will change with Michigan's current commitments. It's more or less for fun. Don't take it too seriously.
Michigan currently has 19 commitments not counting greyshirt Jeremy Clark. There are 10 four star prospects committed and 9 three stars. We'll also assume that Michigan is going to take 25-26 prospects, just for argument sake meaning there are 6-7 spots left. In order to project where the class will be ranked let's first look at how the class could close out [For simplicity all star rankings are per Rivals].
|Jordan Diamond||Illinois||6'6", 289 lbs.||4|
|Josh Garnett||Washington||6'5", 275 lbs||4|
|Adam Bisnowaty||Pennsylvania||6'6", 275 lbs||4|
|Zach Banner||Washington||6'9", 310 lbs||4|
Michigan is only taking one more prospect from this group. I kept these names on because these are the most likely prospects to choose Michigan. We'll project Michigan will land one more 4 star prospect for the class from the offensive line.
|Aziz Shittu||California||6'3", 275 lbs||5|
|Ondre Pipkins||Missouri||6'3", 325 lbs||4|
|Danny O'Brien||Michigan||6'2", 293 lbs||
The coaches have told some of these prospects that they will only be taking one more interior lineman, but I still think there's a good chance they take two. We'll just assume for this exercise that they'll take two. The most likely from that group are Pipkins and O'Brien, so let's add two 4 star prospects to the list from the defensive tackle group.
|Adolphus Washington||Ohio||6'4", 230 lbs.||4|
|Chris Wormley||Ohio||6'4", 255 lbs.||3|
You're probably only looking at one prospect from this group if you want two defensive tackles. Until Adolphus Washington actually visits I'm not sure where he actually has Michigan ranked. We'll go with Wormley and say that Michigan adds one 3 star prospect to the commit list. [ed: It's worth noting that 247 and Scout both have Wormley in their top 100s.]
|Aaron Burbridge||Michigan||6'1", 175 lbs.||4|
|Dwayne Stanford||Ohio||6'5", 185 lbs.||4|
|Jordan Payton||California||6'2", 199 lbs.||4|
|Amara Darboh||Iowa||6'2", 190 lbs.||4|
|Jehu Chesson||Missouri||6'3", 182 lbs.||3|
There's likely three spots left in our scenario, so let's say the coaches will take two receivers from this group. There's a possibility that we could see other receivers earn offers if Michigan doesn't land anyone from this list. This group is a little tougher because Burbridge has grade issues. For our purposes though let's include Aaron Burbridge/ unnamed four star, and one other prospect.
Jehu Chesson, Jordan Payton, and Dwayne Stanford have shown the most interest from the rest of the group. I'll go on the conservative side here though and say Michigan lands a 3 star receiver. So we have one 4 star and one 3 star. It's too early to tell if that's likely, but like I said it's on the conservative side. The scenarios within this group are tough to predict.
|Bri'onte Dunn||Ohio||6'2", 215 lbs.||4|
|EJ Fatu||Texas||5'10", 235 lbs.||3|
|Juwan Lewis||Michigan||5'11", 208 lbs.||3|
|Sione Houma||Utah||6'0", 211 lbs.||2|
Given that we took two wide receivers we only have room for one from the running back position group. That was partially why I added a 4 star and a 3 star to the receivers, because the 3 star receiver could potentially be interchangeable with a fullback.
This is also a hard group to predict because of the uncertainty with Bri'onte Dunn. As I reported earlier in the week I don't think Dunn's recruitment is over. With Michigan landing Kyle Kalis that helps their chances. However, I'm going to go conservative again, and this time just take the average stars rating of 3. There's too many factors that could play into this and it's too hard to predict. I left Greg Garmon off this list because he still doesn't have Michigan as his leader even after a visit to Ann Arbor. He did tell me that he loves Michigan, but at this point I left him off. So Michigan adds a 3 star from this group.
The projected class above leaves Michigan with a total of 26 prospects. The new prospects that we've added to the list here are as follows:
- One 4 Star Offensive Lineman
- Two 4 Star Defensive Tackles
- One 3 Star Defensive End
- One 4 Star and One 3 Star Wide Receiver
- One 3 Star Running Back/Fullback
If you add these numbers to the current class, it looks something like this:
Just to reiterate, these projections are assuming there is no change in the current state of the recruiting world, there are no re-ranks, players don't move up or down, etc. We know that's not the case, so there is certainly a chance that a few Michigan commits could move up or down. Both Kyle Kalis and Erik Magnuson for example have been mentioned as potentially moving up to 5 stars. That would change things, but I can't predict if that happens.
In order to project a final ranking we'll have to look back at where previous teams were ranked after signing day that have similar classes to Michigan. For a somewhat realistic comparison I'll give a little leeway in the stars. I'll include classes that finished with one or two 5 stars and similar 4 stars, just to show a broad spectrum.
Here's what other teams have finished with star wise and where they ranked out according to Rivals:
|Year||Team||Total Commits||5 Stars||4 Stars||3 Stars||Rank|
It's important to note that these rankings aren't just factored in by star rankings. Rivals uses a number of different factors that includes class size and their individual scores as well. Again for simplicity will just compare classes off of somewhat similar size to Michigan's 2012 class and their star rankings.
As you can see from the chart the highest ranked classes that Michigan could potentially compare to are the 2011 Texas and 2009 Ohio state classes that were both ranked third. Texas had one 5 star and Ohio State had two, so in order for Michigan to get up to that type of ranking they would most likely need to either add a five star or have a few of their prospects reranked into that status. [Ed: if Kalis remains 18th he he will almost certainly grab a fifth star. Rivals averages around 35 per year and have only handed out half of those so far. Magnuson will also be on the cusp if he maintains his current status.] Another good comparison would be Tennessee's 2010 class which ranked number 9 overall. They have a similar number of total committed prospects and somewhat comparable number of stars.
Tennessee had an outstanding class in 2011 as well, ranked 13th overall. If nothing were to change then that's a pretty good comparison for the range that Michigan could be in. Since the Vols had around the same number of prospects committed with around the same number of 3 and 4 stars I'd be comfortable putting Michigan in that range. Since Michigan has two more 4 star prospects committed [in our hypothetical scenario] I would also feel safe moving them up to around the 10-11 range. That's based off of the assumption that Michigan does not add any five stars.
As of right now I would say that the class could finish out in the 7-13 range. If they get a little lucky with Dunn and some guys moving up when the class re-ranks (Ondre Pipkins seems due for a major surge) they'll crack the top five.
I hope this kind of analysis hasn't been done already; if so, my apologies. I was wondering, in light of Brian's analysis of the defense, if we could quantify the effect of having Mattison rather than GERG as our defensive coordinator. To that end, I have tried to quantify the effect of having Greg Robinson as defensive coordinator: the GERG effect. I looked up the scoring defense ranks of Michigan, Syracuse, and Texas for 2003-2010 (data from Rivals). They are as follows:
GERG was DC at Texas in 2004, HC at Syracuse in 2005-2008, and DC at Michigan in 2009-2010. We can therefore display the data graphically as follows (note that the Y axis is team defense scoring rank): We can also try to calculate a crude GERG effect by comparing the average rank of these defenses with and without GERG. This yields the following:
Note that positive is bad and negative is good. So GERG's Texas defense was 11 ranks better than the non-GERG average, whereas his Michigan defenses were 60 ranks worse than the non-GERG average.
To calculate the overall GERG effect, we simply multiple the differences in rank by the number of years at each school, divided by the total number of years (7), to arrive at our overall GERG effect of 29.77 [this figure has been updated]. That is, on average, GERG adversely affects the scoring rank of the defenses he is associated with by 30 positions.
If we take Brian's projection of Michigan's 2011 defense (82nd), and subtract 30 ranks to adjust for the GERG effect, we get to 52, a ranking that a number of commentators were predicting based on their "gut" feeling of player development and the new coaching staff's abilities (particularly Mattison).
Again, this is wild speculation, and incredibly simple -- hopefully it is not completely misguided. Other more advanced metrics should also be used. I am aware that there are far more variables at work that determine how good a defense is--and it is almost certain that GERG was not allowed to run his defense at Michigan. Also, it is likely that Mattison is an excellent DC, something that this analysis does not account for. I was still curious to see if anything could be done to account for the coaching change.
UPDATE: I made an arithmetical error which has been corrected. Also, I ran the same analysis with S&P+ play-by-play ratings from Football outsiders and got a GERG effect of 27.75 ranks (using only Syracuse and Michigan; S&P+ data are only available from 2005 and later).
[ed: We should be taking all of this, including my original post, with a grain of salt because of sample size issues.
That said, Michigan was an the extreme outlier because of its youth and trying to run two different schemes, one of which was something no one's ever tried before, and could expect to rebound further with Mattison--and more importantly, sanity--hanging around campus. The numbers offered here in the two posts (54 using S&P+ data and 82) seem like the ends of a range of reasonable expectations.
The moral of the story is the same one learned by the offenses of Notre Dame in 2008 and Michgian in 2009--you're going to be a lot better but still very far from good.]
Winner. I put out the call for someone affiliated with the program to cackle evilly about what's going down in Columbus, and Larry Foote stepped to the plate:
Foote said he expects the NCAA to come down hard on the Buckeyes, who will go before the committee on infractions in August, giving them, he said, "what they deserve."
And what would that be?
"Ten-year ban, take all the victories away, lose 100 scholarships," Foote said, clearly exaggerating. "Give that (bowl money) back and donate it to the rest of the Big Ten teams."
Helpful note on the exaggeration there. Jalen Rose is also unsurprisingly straightforward about his glee (yes, irony); Jimmy King and Brandon Graham fall into the Serious Face About Serious Issue camp.
Also Graham says he really wants see Denard develop into a drop-back passer. Who wants another 3500 words about the shotgun? I'm warning you, people who can be quoted in newspapers about Denard Robinson: I will do this.
Speaking of. Al Borges isn't exactly wrong here…
"Well, the thing we gotta do is play efficiently, Borges told Matt Shepard on WDFN-AM 1130 Detroit, "and by that I mean take care of the ball, number one, because you don't want to put your defense in bad positions, because that will get you beat faster than anything – when your opponent is playing on a short field. "That's first and foremost."
…but I have not missed the "controlling turnovers is job one" meme the last three years. I have missed non-brain-melting turnover margins, though, so maybe I should just shut up and feel the soothing coachspeak flow through me.
Not Willingham, so we've got that going for us. Brady Hoke does not look like a natural with a golf club in his hands. He looks like a bear waving a toothpick:
This is more reassuring than it should be. Also at that link: massive donor Al Glick hanging out with Carr and Hoke. He is very old and tiny.
Yes, there were two separate Michigan golfing events—the Foote quotes come from another Rose Leadership Academy fundraiser—in one weekend. Out of control.
Just a dude. This quote from Mike Martin…
"I'm a really humble guy," Martin said. "I was talking to someone and said, 'I don't look at myself as a big-time senior football player at Michigan. I look at myself as a dude playing a game.' They're like, 'You're awesome.' "
…is awesome. Get your head around that.
I hear tell that varmint convinced Kyle Kalis to commit. You're aware that Kyle Kalis committed to Michigan over the weekend*. You'll be shocked and appalled at what went down to make that happen:
I'm told that Kyle Kalis' stepdad just called into WKNR and said that Kyle is being manipulated by Hoke and his dad.
The head coach of the university of Michigan and one of Kalis's parents conspired to have him accept a scholarship offer from a school that knows who its head coach will be next year and how many scholarships it will have, whereupon his stepfather called a radio station to complain. It's going to be awkward to ask for the mashed potatoes for a while.
Kalis, meanwhile, declared it to be open season in Ohio:
"He is the type of guy I want to play for," Kalis said. "(Hoke) has an incredible amount of passion. I believe the Michigan-Ohio border is now open. I think you're going to see eight or nine guys from the state of Ohio going over to Michigan this year."
They've already got
seven nine, so that's not a huge stretch (or any at all). Five-star RB Bri'onte Dunn may or may not be next; he is either 100% committed to Ohio State or sort of committed to Ohio State or technically committed to Ohio State but actually encouraging Kalis to defect, which was a wild rumor I thought I saw somewhere but I can't track down and therefore probably isn't true.
*[Something that was on the verge of happening for a couple weeks now. That was why Tom posted the "buckle up" tweet that riled up the board. #nowitcanbetold]
Which is it? Even I think Brooks has been a little unhinged about this Ohio State stuff but he does do a service by pointing out the ever-shifting story behind Tressel's firing/resignation/retirement. May 30th:
“Jim Tressel decided to resign.”
Tressel was not told he would be fired if he didn’t quit, Gee said.
“He was not given an ultimatum.”
That's directly contradicted by OSU's response, which pats itself on the back over and over again for "seeking and accepting" Tressel's resignation, as well as planning to ban Tressel from recruiting for a year—but not bothering to announce or, you know, actually do it.
The school also praises itself for self-reporting when the legal department found the Tressel emails as they responded to a FOIA—without someone else asking for information they never would have found the violation.
Etc.: Touch The Banner interviews Jack Miller. Some complicated calculations about Brady Hoke's record being more than meets the eye. Five stars appear next to Greg Mattison's name. NEEDS MOAR STARS. WVU linebacker Branko Busick charged with armed robbery. The weapon: his name. Also his dad had a short career as a WWF heel with an epic mustache in the mid-90s. (HT: DocSat)
Let's take some small sample sizes and extrapolate wildly. It will be fun. Here's Bill Connolly breaking down expected improvement from teams that return varying numbers of defensive starters:
So Cincinnati returns 11 defensive starters. That's probably a good thing, right? But how good? And how much can a bad defense improve in one offseason just because of experience? Let's take a look, shall we?
Average Change In Def. F/+, Last Three Years Starters
N Avg Chg in
1 1 -12.4% 2 4 -10.9% 3 10 -8.4% 4 32 -2.1% 5 53 -1.1% 6 69 -0.5% 7 85 1.1% 8 56 1.5% 9 37 4.2% 10 9 6.0% 11 3 5.4%
So basically, if you return between five and eight starters, you are likely not going to change much, but three or fewer is a problem, and nine or more is a good thing.
F/+ is Connolly's advanced metric; it's play-based instead of drive-based like FEI. Don't be fooled by the % symbol—the metric is percentage based and from context it's clear the difference is meant to be added to the score, not multiplied. Since the best defenses are around +17% and the worst around –13%, 6% is about a fifth of the entire scale.
Michigan is, unsurprisingly, right at the bottom of that scale at 115th. They were 12% worse than an average defense down-to-down. The good news is they return 9-ish starters, losing Greg Banks, James Rogers and Jonas Mouton while reacquiring Troy Woolfolk. (They also lose Ray Vinopal and Obi Ezeh, but Ezeh had been replaced and Michigan should get JT Floyd back so let's call it a wash.)
The numbers are thin at both ends of the spectrum but, hey, extrapolating wildly from small sample sizes. Doing so says Michigan's defense will storm forward from 115th nationally to…
I have no source for this, unfortunately.
But wait! Our sample sizes are not small enough and our extrapolation is not making out with other nubile young extrapolations in front of a television camera. Bill added a second factor, the previous year's defense, and finds that a defense with an F/+ under –10% that returns nine starters should expect (for a given confidence level that is not high at all) to improve by 8.6%, which would see them get to…
You might be able to argue that Mike Martin wasn't right and the team was even younger than the average team that returns nine starters and GERG is rubbing stuffed animals on the faces of other stuffed animals at a tearful tea party and for the first time in a long time they'll just run one damn defense per year and that they should expect to improve even more. You're probably setting yourself up for disappointment. Like installing the spread 'n' shred, digging out of a hole this big is a multi-year project.
Hurray issues. So this morning an iframe insert got put in the js file. It has been removed and we are monitoring that particular file intently; the good news is that no other files on the server have been changed. I've turned off js aggregation, which will make the site marginally slower for first loads. We are still looking for the entry vector; if a js file gets updated we will know about it and check to make sure it does not have the malicious code in it. We have a request in to Google for a clearance.
If you are concerned, running a noscript module on your browser is a good idea. Apologies.
(Note: this is unrelated to the scattered reports people were having of malware from the Google Ads, which are client-side issues.)
Fun with hats. Ace has it:
There's Waldo. Insane axe-murdering Waldo.
Hatch update. Via his CaringBridge page:
By the grace of God, Austin James is showing improvements everyday. He is comfortable and stable. He has begun opening his BIG BLUE EYES a little bit more! We understand that his healing will be a very slow and gradual process; we're not sure whether Austin has any awareness of what he sees yet.
He's got a long way to go, but it sounds like he's getting out of the woods.
Further evidence for the skinflint theory. The Big Ten continues to pile up the cash:
They continue to not spend it on football coaches:
The SEC paid its assistant coaches an average of $276,122 in 2010, according to figures compiled by St. Louis attorney and agent Bob Lattinville of the firm Stinson Morrison Hecker.
The Big 12 was second at $232,685 and the Big Ten a distant fourth, behind the Atlantic Coast Conference, at $187,055. In each instance, the averages do not include salaries at private schools such as Baylor, Penn State and Vanderbilt.
You may have noticed that Penn State is not a private school, but they have some sort of state law that protects them from FOIA requests. They likely pay their assistants more than the Baylors and Vanderbilts of the world but Northwestern is also omitted and Penn State isn't closing a 50-grand gap with the Big 12, let alone the 90 grand to the SEC.
Not that I have a problem with not heaping even more money on football coaches, but Braves & Birds's theory that the Big Ten is falling behind because they refuse to lay out money for proven coaches is looking pretty good these days. At least Michigan bucked the trend by 1) wildly overpaying their version of Gene Chizik and 2) finding their own Mahlzahn in Mattison.
Dominoes go further. College hockey lurches towards its final configuration apace, with Northern Michigan making the obvious move to the WCHA. Northern was in (an almost completely different) WCHA until the late 90s and returns, renewing a conference rivalry with Michigan Tech and easing their travel burden.
Interestingly, word from Marquette has a surprising second school on the WCHA hit list: Alaska. The WCHA retains Anchorage and the conventional wisdom holds that two Alaska schools are too many for one conference since teams could be required to make more than one trip up north per year. If the WCHA's endgame is an eight team league, you'd think the conference schedule would be 28 games—four each against seven opponents. That would require two trips per year. Even if you go to a division system where you play four teams only twice, you're averaging 1.5 trips to Alaska per year. Lake Superior seems like a more logical option due to its natural rivalries with the other UP teams.
Meanwhile, the smoking husk of the CCHA takes another hit. Notre Dame's gone sooner or later. Western Michigan's openly pleading for someone to take them. Lake State has to be angling for a WCHA invite along with Alaska. Poor Bowling Green and Ferris State are hanging out in Fred Pletsch's basement drinking the cheapest beer on the market until Atlantic Hockey teams start to look attractive.
Current wild-ass guess at what college hockey in the West looks like in two years:
|UAA||Ferris State||Michigan State||Notre Dame|
|Minnesota State||Mercyhurst||Penn State||WMU|
|MTU||Robert Morris||Ohio State||North Dakota|
If LSSU does not move to the CCHA you can insert Cansisius, another Buffalo-area AH team, or UAH into the CCHA to make eight.
Is that viable for everyone in the WCHA and CCHA? I think the WCHA will be okay. Most of the programs there have recent financial commitments from their universities; at all of them hockey is unquestionably the top dog. That's the case for everyone in the CCHA, as well, except for Ferris (no recent insertion of capital) and BGSU (MAC football and basketball probably more important). I think Ferris would be able to keep its footing.
What would really help is having a formal state of Michigan championship. In this new doomsday scenario Michigan teams are split across four leagues, making the previous plan—which relied on a lot of conference games being counted for the championship—dubious. On the other hand, in this new world there are a ton of nonconference games that need filling.
Have fun storming the castle. Even if Russell Wilson isn't certain doom for Wisconsin's opponents this year he's better than whatever the Badgers had before. KC Joyner makes an interesting point, though: Scott Tolzien was one of the most underrated players of the last decade in the league and Wilson won't approach his insane efficiency.
Etc.: Michigan's new white hockey jersey is going to be regrettable in a few years, and I miss the cool Rangers-esque lettering on the maize one. Outrage is low because they'll just change them next year anyway. Yost Built also says "you're out, White Jersey" in a flat sexy German monotone. Holdin' The Rope assembles things.
Let's deploy the fourth-grader test on Ohio State's response to the NCAA:
The institution is very surprised and disappointed by the lack of action in this matter by then Head Football Coach Jim Tressel. His behavior in this situation is out of character for him, as he has been a man of integrity and high moral standards since his hiring as the head football coach in 2001. His lack of action in this matter appears to have been the result of indecisiveness regarding the appropriate actions to take in this specific situation in which he was placed, as opposed to a blatant disregard of NCAA legislation. … The institution will not excuse such behavior. As a result, the institution has imposed significant corrective and punitive actions upon itself and sought and received the resignation of Tressel.
This is why, possessing every scrap of information about Tressel they have today, they fiercely suspended him for two games against MAC schools, and then suspended him for five games, before finally accepting his resignation, oops wait it's actually a retirement and that 250k you owe us… yeah, nevermind. Truly the behavior of Jim Tressel was a heinous deed the university abhors. It is clear that the Ohio State University took one look at Jim Tressel's actions and said "this will not stand." We are embarrassed.
What say you, fourth graders?
Hmm. The fourth-graders do not seem to buy it.
Fourth graders, what do you think about the assertion that Jim Tressel's "indecisiveness" led him to email a shady "mentor" about this a dozen times, but not compliance? Or the NCAA any of the three subsequent times he had an opportunity to say "oh, right, that whole thing about tattoos some guy I know personally who has helped us out before and I spent large parts of my summer emailing people who were not my compliance department about… yeah, that"? Fourth graders, do you believe Jim Tressel is an indecisive person?
No. No you do not.
The danger is that the NCAA might buy it, though, isn't it? If the NCAA buys that the problem is limited to Tressel because nine Buckeyes ticketed in loaner cars and reports that are unconfirmed but obvious from a half-dozen Buckeyes about Hookups on Tats and other things, and they aren't incensed by being duped about the Sugar Bowl, and they aren't incensed by OSU's actions against a "very successful coach in a very popular sport in a very short period of time" then they could get away with violating the most important aspect of NCAA enforcement: you are expected to police yourself.
So, NCAA: are you dumber than a fourth grader?
This is an important question to answer. Here's hoping the answer is "no," because an organization that reacts to the things Jim Tressel did in the way Ohio State did and then has the audacity to say something like this if the NCAA dares add punishment to what can't even be described as a wrist-slap…
"I'll be shocked and disappointed and on the offensive," Smith said. "Unless something new arises from where we are today, it'll be behavior (from me) you haven't witnessed."*
…you're being called out. Ohio State is daring you. They are double-dog daring you. Either send Gene Smith on the warpath and the unemployment line or establish defiant see-no-evil as the new baseline for enforcement.
*[What would that be? Contrition? A lack of wholesale delusion? The vague impression of competency.]
Excessively Defensive Section
Twitter was overrun with Buckeyes in various states of glee, denial, and smack-talking yesterday, with much of it directed at Michigan fans for their various states of butthurt, disbelief, and cynicism. These emotions are not limited to Michigan fans. It's hard to find someone who's not mocking Ohio State in the aftermath.
TSN's Dave Curtis:
As this story evolves, it’s tougher to conceive of Tressel as the only evil in that football program or athletic department. If he’s not, and the NCAA finds out, the Buckeyes will face USC-style sanctions. If he was, then Ohio State is guilty of failing to monitor its coach, and lacking institutional control by letting Tressel gain so much power.
Some concession, some spreading of the problem behind the head coach, would have marked a small first step in helping the Buckeyes win back the public. It would have helped with the NCAA, too.
The public’s only recourse is ranting and complaining. NCAA officials can punish to the point of paralyzing the program for a while. And come the fall, that’s exactly what they will do.
ESPN's Brian Bennett:
I can envision the following conversation during Ohio State's hearing before the NCAA Committee on Infractions next month.
"So, you vacated your wins from 2010?" an infractions committee member says.
"Yes," Ohio State president E. Gordon Gee says. "It was the least we could do."
"You're right," the committee member responds. "It was technically the least you could possibly do."
Tom Fornelli and Jerry Hinnen, Notre Dame and Auburn fans respectively:
Fornelli: Ohio State just really doesn't seem to get it, or they're in a deep state of denial. The NCAA isn't going to see that the school has vacated it's wins from last season and move on. There will be scholarships lost, and there will be a postseason bowl ban for a year or two. It's not fair to the players on the team or whichever coach eventually takes over for Tressel, but unfortunately for Ohio State, the NCAA knows that you can't just erase the past and fix things.
Hinnen: We're assuming they do. Since we're discussing the NCAA's Committee on Infractions here, there's no way to know exactly what they're going to do until they do it. Precedents mean nothing and logic is frequently tossed aside like so many babies in so much bathwater.
But if the COI ever wants to be taken seriously, rubber-stamping OSU's self-imposed "punishment" and giving the Buckeyes a pat on the head just can't be an option. Without subpoena power, the only thing standing between the NCAA and utter investigative helplessness is honesty and cooperation from those involved. What it got instead from from OSU was Tressel lying through his teeth with Gee and Smith nodding genially at his side. The NCAA tried to be lenient with the Buckeyes once already--and was repaid with a sham of a Sugar Bowl and a carton's worth of egg on its face for its troubles.
The Cleveland Plain-Dealer's Bud Shaw only speaks in one-sentence paragraphs:
The question is whether it's doing so as a strategy or out of delusion. Delusion is the leader in the clubhouse.
The Buckeyes started out looking nonchalant in all this, remember. Now, they just look arrogant.
Early on, they opened themselves to charges that their internal investigation amounted to, "Nothing to see here, move along."
This is an administration that initially wrist-slapped Tressel with a two-game ban, then increased it to five, then sought his resignation and now is fitting him for a pillory for display before the NCAA.
The designated media contrarian—there's always one—is Stewart Mandel, who argues that the media firestorm in the aftermath of the NCAA's allegations hasn't materially affected the charges, which the school argues are limited to Tressel. I'd think the head coach lying to keep six players eligible for an entire season obviously deserves a bowl ban and scholarship pain even when you don't account for OSU's persistently nose-thumbing response.