Dr. Sat: OSU has 3.7 million reasons to fire Tressel
lol,
"And you can forget all that "buyout" business — if the university sees fit to fire him for cause, it won't owe Tressel a cent:"
Then maybe those idiots will quit calling me up for donations just because I went there. But then again, I get a kick of saying I spend my money on Michigan Athletics, not your school.
Maybe your response should be something closer to this: I refuse to support an academic insitution that fails to have the integrity to uphold basic ethics when faced with sacrificing a few wins on the football field. Let me know when you have a university president who is not scared of the football coach.
I love how the supporters continue to tout....
The kids just sold their own property.
Get over it. It's about your coach and the cover up.
$10 Million spent in damages from the rioting.
There are certain rules they must abide by in order to be eligible to play. They failed to abide by them, and they were ineligible. No one's claiming that they're criminals.
Moreover - why aren't more OSU fans pissed off at the kids? How much could B1G championships and wins over their chief rivals possibly mean to them when they sell the stuff associated with those accomplishments?
I'd be interested to know how some of you would feel about an M player if he did the same thing. Wouldn't you be pissed off? If C-Webb's reputation has taken a hit when he just took money and didn't sell items associated with his M accomplishments, I can only imagine what the reaction would have been if he did what TP and co. did (which, to my mind, is significantly worse).
April 28th, 2011 at 12:17 AM ^
the players, too. I blame TP for pretty much all of this; he was the ringleader of the group who were selling things, and I'd be happy if they yanked his scholarship.
April 28th, 2011 at 12:19 AM ^
Besides TP losing his scholarship, what would you, as an allegedly rational OSU fan, consider a fair punishment for Tressel, the players, and the program WRT the allegations as they stand today?
suspensions, and I don't know that I'd impose sanctions on the program beyond vacating wins and maybe a couple years of probation. It seems pretty clear that Tressel kept the rest of the athletic department in the dark, and once the school found out about the issue, they self-reported and imposed punishments. Story I'm hearing from folks at OSU is that the decision to increase Tressel's suspension wasn't really his idea, and Tressel actually fought against it before running out and announcing it. That's pissed off a lot of people, and I'd be surprised if Tressel goes beyond this season.
2010 for sure, but Clarett is still a question mark in my book. I don't know if the NCAA would consider Troy Smith's $500 handshake job ban-hammer-worthy, but that's still an open debate as well.
@JGB--Gordon Gee is an empty suit and everyone knows it. He's there to schmooze with big donors and put a friendly face on the program.
I'm not rational and sure as hell not a tOSU fan.
One weekend in a Pillory outside the horseshoe for the players and one weekend outside every B10 Stadium for Tressel since he stole the B10 title by using ineligible players.
Pryor doesn't have the brains to be a trained monkey in the circus, let alone a ringleader of any sort. I seriously believe that this has been going on for a while and he adopted the actions of star athletes that came before him. Pittman, Smith, and Clarrett, just to name a few that have been caught up in something or have publicly acknowledged taking extra benefits.
Didn't OSU end up owing O'Brien his buyout after he sued them? I doubt Tressel would sue but it seems like pretty similar circumstances.
Also, didn't we talk about this with RR and wasn't the consensus that after the school stood behind him they had a far weaker case for firing with cause?
I thought we actually had a stronger case for firing RR with cause after we stood behind him. I think it might be dependent on the sanctions. If the NCAA comes down harsh against Tressel, they can fire him with cause because it hurts the school.
I thought we actually had a stronger case for firing RR with cause after we stood behind him.
Can you explain the logic behind that? It seems counterintuitive.
I think the idea was that we supported him and gave him a chance by standing behind him. When he still did not meet expectations W/L wise (along with the NCAA/stretching issues) we then had cause to fire him.
Maybe I am lost, but that seems to be the logic I am following there.
Wins/Losses are not "cause" to fire a coach. Of course they really are, but in terms of firing a coach for "cause" in regards to an employment contract, it usually has something to do with breaking rules, cheating, lying, etc. like the examples in the article. You still have to pay the buyout if it's just wins/losses, not if he's breaking the rules.
He quotes Tressel's contract and it seems pretty airtight from a legal standpoint they basically spell out this exact situation in multiple clauses as cause for termination (unless Tressel did notify Smith which at this point would be a thousand times worse for OSU). He even sites O'brien as the reason his contract is so specific.
i think they put in specific language for this specifically in response to the o'brien situation
Actually I'm with you,I doubt he would sue but God I never want this story to end! lol
April 28th, 2011 at 12:19 AM ^
didn't have the clause saying an NCAA violation would be grounds for termination wtihout a buyout, IIRC.
By standing behind him, the university can claim it did everything it could to support the coach. If the sanctions come down because of the coach's actions, then the university can fire the coach with cause. If the university distances itself from the coach after the allegations, the coach can claim he was made a fall guy and the university was "out to get him" and therefore didn't have cause. This is an oversimplification, but that was my understanding during the RR saga.
Anyone else have more insight on this than me??
That does make a good amount of sense, but I also think there was a "ticking clock" so to speak; they could only fire him within a reasonable amount of time after learning of his violations.
This might have been more important since some wanted to use it as an excuse to can RR months later with no further allegations, I don't know.
I think it would definitely be reasonable, and the school would still have "cause," if they waited for the punishment to come down before making the decision to fire. You don't have to fire someone on first notice of a violation for the firing to "for cause." It's reasonable to allow the school to look at the sanctions then decide if it's worth it to keep the coach.
Another good point. All of which probably mean nothing because OSU apparently has no self respect. If it were up to most of them Woody would have never been fired, and for all his lying and cheating, Tressel didn't come close to assaulting an opposing player.
i just don't see osu firing him without a show-cause penalty. gee and gordon don't have the balls. to be fair to previous osu admin, while they probably didn't want to fire woody, at least they knew it was the right thing to do and were swift with their justice.
Here's for hoping that they fire him for cause and create an ugly court battle!!
If you're waiting for the school or Jim Tressel to "do the right thing" you may be waiting a while.
I don't care what any sports writer says, Tressel isn't going to be fired. I'm OSU is willing to trade a few scholarships and a couple vacated wins for guaranteed 10 win seasons by keeping Tressel.
10.1c = show cause. Show cause = fired. They've already admitted he broke 10.1c
the wins are getting vacated regardless. schollies i dont know but then even after all that theyd have to explain to the ncaa COI why they should be allowed to not fire him for this offense (which has never even been tried for a HC, and i dont think this case has any chance of being the first success, though they may have the arrogance to try it)
Its over, I'm convinced (i think) the only out is that they didnt hit him with failure to maintain atmosphere of compliance, which, wtf?
no, he won't be coaching Tofu in fall 2012.
The NCAA threatens program-crippling sanctions.
April 27th, 2011 at 10:10 PM ^
shall we? It's what they're going to be when this is over.
fire Jim Tressel at some point probably after the sanctions or the result of the NCAA meeting in Aug. But, they will give him a buyout. The buy out is almost sacred imo. My logic is what coach is going to come there and possibly risk not getting a buy out not if but when he is asked errr is fired. I don't really remember any coach being fired in recent memory and did not get at least a portion of the buyout.
April 27th, 2011 at 11:03 PM ^
are working through the scenarios. (That's the AD's job.)
My guess is that they wait until after the NCAA rules, then quietly terminate, say they had no choice. Fans will have gone through their x phases of mourning by then, be ready to move on (it'll be kind of a crappy season, that will help make cutting him loose easier). By then Tressel has had a chance to come back--"my players promised they would, and I wasn't going to let them down by not coming back myself"--issue a few more mea culpas, get out a story they can all live with ("good guy, tough situation, made a mistake").
They'll also want to take their time eyeballing the coaching situation, even quietly getting someone lined up. . . All in all, they're looking for a soft landing.
A partial buyout, maybe? They'll barely mention his transgressions as they thank him for his service, talk about his class. . .
I know what H.L. Mencken said, but this time I don't think it's about the money - at least in a micro sense. $3.7M would be a drop in the bucket to a program the size of OSU.
I haven't reviewed the contract, and take Hinton at his word that Tressel can be discharged for cause without compensation (that's how most of these deals work), but IMHO the threat of a buyout wouldn't change OSU's decision. They're likely more worried about balancing their institution's reputation for integrity with the desires of their rabid fan base.