Sarniak vs Martin
So our basketball program has been screwed for 10 plus years because of Martin and the players that took extra benefits. Also, if Pryor went to OSU over Michigan because of the money, that is a huge swing in the rivalry. As much as I, and probably most here, find Pryor to be an athetic idiot, he would have definitely got RR off to a better start. That said, is there some reason OSU doesn't seem to be receiving the same treatment from the NCAA regarding Sarniak as we did with Martin?
August 17th, 2011 at 8:49 AM ^
August 17th, 2011 at 10:12 AM ^
Sarniak has admitted to giving Pryor money. The NCAA has ruled that he was not a booster at the time. OSU supposedly told him to stop (at least thats thier story)
David Cornwell, Pryor's attorney, told Mortensen that Pryor admitted his mentor, Ted Sarniak, gave him and his mother cash and helped with car payments.
After a 2008 NCAA investigation into Pryor's recruitment, Sarniak, a family friend, was told he could no longer give Pryor money or gifts. Cornwell said he believes the violation makes Pryor eligible for the NFL's supplemental draft, since it would have affected Pryor's 2011 eligibility.
The full article is about the supplemental draft but can be found here
August 17th, 2011 at 8:54 AM ^
NCAA ruled Sarniak wasn't a booster. He's not associated with OSU. He actually wanted Pryor to go to another school and told Pryor to avoid any schools that were offering him money (according to the NCAA interview of Tressel).
August 17th, 2011 at 8:59 AM ^
Did you just say according to Tressel?
August 17th, 2011 at 9:42 AM ^
And therefore that is an unreliable statement
August 17th, 2011 at 9:05 AM ^
Sarniak was cleared in 2008 under the precedent that benefits to Pryor would stop. It doesn't sound like the benefits stopped. Pryor is basically throwing OSU under the bus by admitting he was still getting money from Sarniak which makes him ineligible to play at OSU, so he should be eligible for the NFL draft.
August 17th, 2011 at 9:14 AM ^
Pryor has to throw ohio under the bus. The only way he is going to be deemed eligible for the draft is if all this stuff comes out. ohio knew what was going on so to avoid penalty and cover up the evidence, told him to go pro to avoid having to testify to the NCAA. Now that he has to prove that he would have been ruled ineligible, it's to his benefit to go out and tell everyone what was going on.
August 17th, 2011 at 12:50 PM ^
In November (just in time for The Game) or possibly as late as Bowl season.
Tell all interview.
Ohio fans go further crazy that 'the world leader' is out to get them...[they are btw...]
Raback That.
August 17th, 2011 at 9:21 AM ^
I don't think enough is known about Sarniak yet to compare him to Martin:
The similarity is that Sarniak provided benefits to a player prior to that player's arrival at said institution and continued to provide these benefits while enrolled. The unanswered questions are did said institution introduce Sarniak to other recruits? Did said institution provide tickets and lodging for Sarniak? Did Sarniak provide benefits to other players at said institution?
Our punishment would have been much lighter had it just been benefits to Chris Weber. What got us in serious trouble with the NCAA was Martin's benefits to other players, i.e., Bullock, Traylor, etc., the use of Martin as a recruiting tool by setting him next to recruits at games, and paying for his lodging at the NCAA tournament.
August 17th, 2011 at 9:26 AM ^
the UofM's ongoing investigation and cooperative openess around the Ed Martin case ultimately landed the sanctions we received.
The lessoned learned in all of this is doing the right thing (fully cooperating), gets you screwed more than pretending to do the right thing while seeing how much you can get away with each step of the way.
August 17th, 2011 at 9:31 AM ^
you got that right. michigan was proactive...forthright...and extremely brutal on punishing ourselves. osu has been reactive...defensive...and bare minimum on self imposed sanctions....and apparently thats the way to go. terrible precedent this is setting
August 17th, 2011 at 9:56 AM ^
Agree 100%. Although I'm very proud of how we dealt with the sanctions, it still pains me to see our rival getting away with cheating.
August 17th, 2011 at 9:45 AM ^
You also need to remember that Michigan wasn't punished for 5 years after the Martin things came to light.
The NCAA moves at a snails pace.
August 17th, 2011 at 9:48 AM ^
If I remember correctly there was also a long delay in the USC case. So maybe OSU will get it, just not on the timetable we all want.
August 17th, 2011 at 11:30 AM ^
how a criminal investigation continued to unravel the case. I believe it was Michigan that kept the NCAA case ongoing, and effectively invited the NCAA to take another look five years later - which is why we were still under probation when strecthgate occured.
And, yes, I am happy we pursued the case ethically. I just wish the plainly obvious less than ethical approach some insitutions seem to take woudl be met with 3x sanctions versus looking the other way and whistling.
It will be interesting to see if OSU ends up being a multi-year unraveling like USC.
August 17th, 2011 at 7:15 PM ^
We were punished twice. The NCAA's initial verdict in 1997 was that there was a "strong probability of major violations" (or something like that) but only a few minor violations could be documented, and so we lost a few recruiting visits. The case was closed. It was only reopened a few years later when the FBI raided Martin's house.
August 17th, 2011 at 10:03 AM ^
Specifically, within the definition of a representative of schools athletic interests (i.e., a "booster"), what distinguishes Sarniak from Martin (especially taking into account the 4th and sixth bullets below)?
The NCAA recognizes you as a representative of the athletic department if:
• You have participated or are a member of an agency or organization promoting the school's athletics programs.
• You have made financial contributions to the athletics department or to an athletic booster organization.
• You have assisted or been requested (by the athletics department staff) to assist in the recruitment of prospects.
• You have assisted or are assisting in providing benefits to enrolled student-athletes or their families.
• You have been involved in promoting the schools athletics program.
• You have assisted a student-athlete in finding a job, or employed a student-athlete for a summer job.
• You have ever donated money through being a season ticket-holder.
August 17th, 2011 at 10:24 AM ^
Neither Ed Martin, nor the NCAA, made Michigan hire Brian Ellerbe... Just because a program receives sanctions doesn't mean it has to implode. Look at Alabama, which has lost scholarships and had wins vacated twice in the last 10-15 years and still has won a couple SEC titles and a National Championship.
If you want to blame someone for why Michigan bball took so long to recover, blame Bill Martin, not Ed.
August 17th, 2011 at 11:23 AM ^
we seem to have had a Martins problem ...
August 17th, 2011 at 12:22 PM ^
Tom Goss hired Brian Ellerbe, not Martin.
August 17th, 2011 at 7:19 PM ^
Closer to home, OSU basketball has been on probation twice in the last 15 years or so, and they obviously aren't struggling. It's rarely the sanctions themselves that kill a program. It's the coaching changes that follow. We panicked and hired a terrible candidate, and watched our in-state rival clean up in local recruiting. (It did not help that we took forever to update our facilities as well.)
August 17th, 2011 at 11:32 AM ^
I think one other big piece that makes the cases different, is that Martin had the Feds breathing down his neck with regards to his money laundering and gambling. They were able to subpena anyone they wanted, and basically did the NCAA's research for them. So far, there isn't any kind of Federal pressure on Sarniak directly linked to the infractions. Now, if the Feds came after the car dealer for tax fraud, maybe some testimony would come out that the NCAA could use.
August 17th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^
The shit didn't hit the fan in the form of penalties for UM basketball until 11 YEARS after Webber showed up on UM's campus. That should tell you everything you need to know for now. This stuff takes awhile.
You have no clue what kind of treatment Sarniak will or will not ultimately get nor do you know how deep it went at this stage. Have patience.
August 17th, 2011 at 12:06 PM ^
Gordon Gee is Mark Emmert's mentor and friend. Therefore, Sarniak "wasn't a booster" and THE Ohio State University walks with as little as Emmert can possibly justify.
Also, Michigan was honest in their self-investigation and penalized themselves harshly. Ohio always stonewalls and suggests ludicrous "penalties" for themselves that aren't really penalties at all.
What has to happen at Ohio for most of us to be truly happy is for one of the figures involved to give the kind of info to the NCAA that Shapiro just gave them about Miami. Because of Mark Emmert's prior relationship with Gordon Gee, the committee will have to be given evidence that is so etched in stone that they can't possibly ignore it. The evidence will also have to be revealed to the public in a way that the backlash from another wrist-slap would be prohibitive.
If THE Ohio State University isn't punished to the fullest extent of the bylaws of the NCAA, Mark Emmert should be fired. If they had any spine in Columbus, they would fire Gordon Gee and Gene Smith, but they know Gee's relationship with Emmert is their best friend right now.
August 17th, 2011 at 12:22 PM ^
You have zero credibility when it comes to talking about muckety muck. Why even try?
August 17th, 2011 at 12:27 PM ^
Here is Yahoo sports' take today on the game OSU' is playing now with Pryor's eligibility.
“Pryor’s story is a tower of lies laid out by one handler after another in order to make it all good. In the process, no one has ever had to take responsibility for anything, least of all Ohio State or the NCAA. Instead of those two institutions doing something to actually fix the problem, they get to hope that Pryor escapes to the NFL and that they never have to deal with him again.
….A rundown of what happened over the past eight months with Pryor and Ohio State: In December, Pryor admitted to his participation in the tattoo scandal and received a five-game suspension for the 2011 season from Ohio State for his wrongdoing. He failed to tell the whole truth, ….. At the time, Ohio State made it clear that it thoroughly investigated the problem and punished not only Pryor and other players, but also coach Jim Tressel. Then, as the story got worse following the reporting of …Yahoo!.., it became apparent that Pryor had to go. In May, Tressel resigned after Pryor refused to cooperate with NCAA investigators earlier that month. In June, Pryor applied for the supplemental draft, contending that he was not going to be eligible, even though he had yet to be ruled ineligible.
In July, two important things happened. First, the NFL said it wasn’t sure if Pryor qualified for the supplemental draft under its rules. Second, the NCAA announced it would have no further penalties against Ohio State, mostly because Pryor was no longer cooperating.
But then, shockingly, Ohio State did Pryor a huge solid on July 26 by stating publicly that Pryor was to “disassociate” from the program for five years….(saying) that Pryor would have been ineligible to play and, by extension, eligible for the NFL supplemental draft.
In fact, Larry James, Pryor’s lawyer in Columbus, Ohio, said he sought the letter from Smith…(who) was more than happy to help Pryor escape talking to the NCAA.
Pryor was ineligible because he was willing to hide the truth, not because he was willing to tell the truth. His ineligibility is a shell game that has been done to protect Ohio State.”
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Ah9AYPtbJ2lGDCzVUCeiqEI5nYcB?slug…
August 17th, 2011 at 3:03 PM ^
None of that should matter. OSU can get hit as a repeat offender even without additional allegations on Talbott, Kniffin, Sarniak, etc.
In the American court system, this kind of thing happens all the time. Judge knows the defendant is guilty of something major that they cannot technically prove, so he or she throws the book at him for something minor that they can.