Hoke on Tressel

Submitted by Jasper on March 9th, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Brady Hoke comments (in MGoBlog's Favorite Newspaper) on Tressel:


Regular version, in case the Print one expires:


His remarks seemed too unrehearsed and off-the-cuff for my taste.  Just saying Tressel is a "good man" (however preposterous that might be to some) and a "good coach" (much more supportable) would be fine.

But adding "... they'll fight through that situation ..." and then "... I don't know that situation ..." is, at best, awkward.  Why say anything like that?  Certain other coaches at UMich have been tattooed for being "unpolished."

One wonders what Corporate Guy Brandon (who would not be expected to shoot from the hip) thought when reading that.



March 9th, 2011 at 8:31 PM ^

That you'd (now) rather that he threw Rich under the bus by making it look shady with a "no comment" than say "geeze, everyone could get in trouble for that". And if that's what he had said then, there would have been a lot of screaming about Tressel making Rich look bad over the Freep BS. Maybe not you. Maybe.


March 10th, 2011 at 10:53 AM ^

I don't see how saying "no comment" makes it somehow look shady.  Maybe people are too sensitive?  Would it be better to say:  "I choose not to discuss those matters that do not concern our program" ?  Either way, same result.  No reason to discuss someone else's program, especially not when there are serious charges pending.  Its akin to someone discussing someone else's criminal charges.  No good can come of it.  And, for the record, Rodriguez did not need Tressel's support in my opinion.


March 9th, 2011 at 3:59 PM ^

I agree,  he just should have said he didn't know the specifics and doesn't want to comment on it...but still I find it much ado about nothing


March 9th, 2011 at 4:00 PM ^

If you're expecting Hoke to say anything remotely negative here about Tressel, that's not going to happen.  That would make him look very petty.  And honestly, as a football coach, Hoke is probably well aware that this kind of stuff can easily go on anywhere.  


March 9th, 2011 at 4:09 PM ^

Other than apparently lying about when he found out, the actual violations in question (free tattoos, sold gold pants, etc.) can very easily go on anywhere.  When you have cash-strapped players in a community that idolizes them and wants to do them favors, it's very easily for NCAA violations to occur, no matter how well-intentioned the coach is.  


March 9th, 2011 at 4:12 PM ^

They can; no argument. But we're not talking about free benefits, we're talking about an organized coverup by a highly paid athletic department official who admittedly knew better. As a head coach, he should have more integrity than this, and the fact is he doesn't.

I don't see anything in Brady Hoke's past as shady as Tressel's, so I'm hopeful that Hoke would do the right thing.


March 9th, 2011 at 4:28 PM ^

Yes, it's the lie that may end up getting OSU killed.  But I think college athletics are a lot dirtier than people think, and that it's likely that the average coach does sweep the occasional violation under the rug, because there are just so many rules and it's so easy for some of them to be broken.  Coaches are in a tough position, having to constantly keep vigilant, and I think they can sympathize with their colleagues when the nearly inevitable violations come to light.



March 9th, 2011 at 4:34 PM ^

There are, but if I was Tressel, the second I heard Pryor's name associated with possible violations in such specific terms, I don't think it's a moral gray area.

I could email Hoke right now and tell him that Denard and Roundtree are both being paid a million dollars a season to play, and I wouldn't expect him to follow it up. If I told him that I saw player a rack up a $1,500 bar tab at place x, y, and z on the night of the MSU win, which was then paid for by booster b, I would absolutely expect him to do something, or tell someone.

Tressel lied about major violations, and not just major in name. I think he deserves a very harsh penalty for just how unethical his actions were.


March 9th, 2011 at 4:02 PM ^

"If you're expecting Hoke to say anything remotely negative here about Tressel, that's not going to happen."

Where did you get that idea?  Seriously, where?  I must have required a leap of faith.

- - -

For the record, I very much agree that saying something negative would be poor form.


March 9th, 2011 at 4:07 PM ^

Where did he get that idea? Because he assumes Hoke isn't an idiot. Unpolished maybe, but I would hope that he's been around long enough to know not to come out and say negative things about Tressel at this point (or even later on, if OSU gets hammered by the NCAA).


March 9th, 2011 at 4:50 PM ^

I haven't seen enough of him to set expectations, but I'm not surprised at how he handled it.

Seriously, I realize that he won't be judged, ever, too harshly on incidents like this (except by me).  If he brings prosperity to the program I'll be happy.


March 9th, 2011 at 4:24 PM ^

Right, you're just jumping on Hoke for being "unpolished" in revenge for other people doing so when Rodriguez was coach. Making something out of nothing. Hoke handled the question very well, that's all.


March 9th, 2011 at 4:09 PM ^

I may be in the minority, but I think he is a good guy.  I have to run b/c I'm at work and don't have much time to get into why - he helped the grandson of a co-worker.  Suffice it to say that there are reasons for people to respect him despite the fact that we want to beat him on the field more than anything.

Feat of Clay

March 9th, 2011 at 5:18 PM ^

I think we could find many examples where coaches use their position to do good when they have a chance.  Kudos to them--scores of families and individuals and communities are the better for their actions.  Whether it's calling on sick kids or giving signed footballs to nonprofit fundraisers, coaches help out and give back a ton.  I'm glad Tressel is one of them, and I respect him for that.

I am sure I will feel a little more conflicted about this mess if I was told more about the times when he's been generous.  But it's not going to outweigh (what may turn out to be) a serious lapse in judgment, or any wrongdoing. 



March 9th, 2011 at 4:08 PM ^

" One wonders what Corporate Guy Brandon (who would not be expected to shoot from the hip) thought when reading that."

Brandon said many times after Hoke was hired that he's, "not the toastmaster general, but he's a hell of a football coach." I think we can apply this statement to what Brandon thinks of Hoke's statements. This statement from you is just some unnecessary speculative nonsense.


March 9th, 2011 at 4:16 PM ^

Toastmaster general?  That's hilarious.  Seems that he did actually say that, though:


Yes, it's probably true that Brandon won't be too concerned with the specifics here, but it's hard to imagine Urban Meyer / Nick Saban (ethics aside ... ethics aside) speaking that way.