OSU TV Ban

Submitted by goblue20111 on May 31st, 2011 at 6:31 PM

Can somone explain to me how a possible TV ban as a part of OSU's punishment would work? I keep hearing it coming up as a possible punishment but I don't know too much about it.  Are they just off national TV? Blackedout in OH and local areas?

Comments

jmblue

May 31st, 2011 at 6:33 PM ^

They wouldn't be televised at all.  Fans of the opposing team would just be screwed.  Fortunately, it's extremely doubtful to happen.  The NCAA has moved away from that type of punishment.

WolverineHistorian

May 31st, 2011 at 6:43 PM ^

I can save you the time and just say, it's not going to happen.  Not in the year 2011.

This isn't like the old days.  Sparty got punished with a 5 year ban of televised games in the 70's.  But in those days, teams only got 2 televised games per season anyway.  The bigger punishment was for Michigan fans not being able to see Bo's troops crush MSU by 40.  I wasn't alive yet but I know I would have been ticked off. 

These days, I think there would be too much of an outrage for OSU's opponents. 

Mi Sooner

May 31st, 2011 at 7:40 PM ^

to have been at most of those games,

The bigger punishment was for Michigan fans not being able to see Bo's troops crush MSU by 40.

most of those games were not televised. they started at 1pm and ended by 3:30pm-ish, because they weren't on TV. My dad would say, and still does, he loved those days. Me, I can't wait for the night time game against ND.

Ps. I have tix available.....

ken725

May 31st, 2011 at 6:35 PM ^

I think most people have said that the NCAA will not do a TV ban because it hurts other programs too much.  As far as I understand, TV ban means no game will be televised at all, regardless of location.

 

EGD

May 31st, 2011 at 6:42 PM ^

I remember when the NCAA imposed a TV ban on Auburn in the mid '90s.  None of their games were on TV.   It was annoying.  I am not an Auburn fan or anything but they were a top-10 program through most of those two years, so they were involved in a lot of big games--none of which we got to see.

WolvinLA2

May 31st, 2011 at 6:37 PM ^

Yeah, I highly doubt that would happen, since it would be a punishment on every other Big Ten team almost as much as it would be on OSU.  The amount of money that the Big Ten would lose on that would be enormous, and I hope Delany and every B1G AD lobbies against it.  I would be extremely pissed if I couldn't watch the UM-OSU game, especially if we won. 

I'm much more in favor of the punishments that hurt only OSU, such are bowl bans and scholarship reductions.  Massive scholarship reductions.

ken725

May 31st, 2011 at 6:52 PM ^

Do we have revenue sharing when it comes to money that the school gets from going to bowl games?

If we do, I guess that hurt the B1G schools a little since the pie would be smaller.  One team not getting to go to bowl game would hurt us much less than them getting a TV ban. 

justingoblue

May 31st, 2011 at 7:42 PM ^

Yes. The only way that it will hurt us for OSU not to go, though, is if they would have qualified for a BCS game and the number three (but bowl number two because of a ban) doesn't qualify for an at-large bid. Basically the only big, unexpected, money brought in from a bowl is a non-Rose BCS bid.

It won't really hurt that MSU moves up a notch from the Pizza Pizza Bowl to the Ticket City Bowl, and a Sun Belt team goes in their place.

EGD

May 31st, 2011 at 6:38 PM ^

Perhaps the NCAA could order Ohio State to make "not watching the Buckeyes on TV" a condition of membership in "The Brotherhood" about which we keep hearing.

yahwrite

May 31st, 2011 at 6:42 PM ^

I think TV bans were effective when it was rare for games to be televised, like in the 1980's, I don't recall hearing of one being used recently. As someone said, it hurts the opponent as well in this era.

Wave83

May 31st, 2011 at 6:53 PM ^

I agree that a TV ban is not possible in modern times.  In fact, I don't think this would be a possible penalty anytime after the late 70s, when they opened up the airwaves to more games per year.  (Yes, kids, Michigan used to be on TV during the regular season only once per year, usually Ohio State.  It was okay when you had Bob Ufer on the radio.)  With multiple networks carrying games, including the BTN, plus the internet and virtually unlimited cable, it is unimaginable that the games won't be on.  The effect on the opposing team would be unbearable in the modern world where they and their fans would expect coverage.

Somewhere in the last few weeks there was a mention made of the possibility of banning OSU from having home games.  Is this even possible?  Unlike a TV ban, I could see this as a possible, but very severe, penalty.  Does anyone know whether this is on the radar screen, or was this just random speculation by someone?

rockydude

May 31st, 2011 at 6:56 PM ^

BUT, just for the sake of argument, a tv ban would be closer to the death penalty than anything else. You wouldn't have to dock them a single schollie, in fact you could give them double what everyone else gets. Their recruiting would screech to a halt. None of those boys that they sign would ever go to a program where they weren't on tv. 

Also, and I apologize for being a little OT here, I can't help but think that the next few years, their recruiting will suffer as their lifestyle declines. OSU recruits hear all about what a great setup they have: free tattoos, free weed, the PS3 lounge at the tat parlor, the cars, etc etc. Well, pretty clearly, those days are coming to an end. They are going to have to start living a regular college existence instead of the cloud nine setup that they have been enjoying. Let's see them recruit on an even playing field, so to speak . . . 

FrankMurphy

May 31st, 2011 at 7:01 PM ^

Not going to happen. This kind of punishment has pretty much been phased out, due to the increasing amounts of money at stake in huge TV contracts and conferences having their own TV networks (kind of highlights the NCAA's hypocrisy, but that's another discussion).

Scholarship reductions and postseason bans are the worst penalties that OSU will face (which is still pretty bad). Tressel will probably be hit with a lifetime show-cause penalty and perhaps an off-campus recruiting ban, effectively ending his coaching career (if it isn't over already). OSU is not getting the death penalty and they won't be banished from TV. It would take a very extreme case for the NCAA to pull those kinds of sanctions out of the attic.

IMHO, the death penalty and TV bans will never be applied in football again. The worst that the NCAA might do is strip a program of all of its scholarships and force them to field a team consisting entirely of walk-ons. And they would only do that in the most egregious of cases (like if a repeat offender school was found to have been directly responsible for providing improper benefits to players over a prolonged period of time).   

bronxblue

May 31st, 2011 at 7:10 PM ^

As others have commented, you'd never see the TV ban because OSU is such a huge draw and it would screw over competition as well.  And from a logistical standpoint, it would mean messing around with contracts with ABC/ESPN, the B10 network, and the local affiliates as well, which is a legal problem the NCAA, the conference, and the team certainly do not want to delve into.  So yeah, OSU might be hit with a bowl ban and scholarship reductions, but there is no practical scenario in which OSU doesn't get to be on TV.  That said, I guess could see a circumstance in which they are not given featured time for some early-season games outside of the local markets as a slap on the wrist, but even that would be a stretch.

nyc_wolverines

May 31st, 2011 at 7:47 PM ^

They won't ban TV. Too lucrative.

How will Musberger sleep at night if he can't play-by-play the Cons of Columbus?

 

"I would be proud to have my son play for Jim Tressel.". Sure, Brent, sure....

rman247

May 31st, 2011 at 7:47 PM ^

Back, many years ago, when you were only allowed on tv a couple times a year anyways, it was used more.  Nowadays the NCAA makes way too much money to do that to a program like OSU.  This is something much more common in the 60s maybe 70s.

BornInAA

May 31st, 2011 at 8:29 PM ^

allow them on TV - only if they replace the hideous colors.

Oregon has better colors.

They should force them to play in all grey all season.

HouseThatYostBuilt

May 31st, 2011 at 9:16 PM ^

Legally, would a TV ban even be enforceable? Does the NCAA own the rights to all televised games of all member teams? Serious question for those of you who have any insight...

Sambojangles

May 31st, 2011 at 10:23 PM ^

It would never happen, but I would love to see the NCAA do something really creative, like penalizing them by not allowing them to sell tickets to home games. Like when the soccer crowds in Europe get too crazy and FIFA tells the teams to play in front of an empty stadium. Can you imagine what it would be like if Ohio State had to run out into an empty 'shoe? Even if it was for just one game, the revenue hit would be devastating, as would the pride. I would laugh my ass off.

kakusei

May 31st, 2011 at 10:32 PM ^

I work in sports broadcasting for a major international player, and I can tell you that there is absolutely NO WAY this would ever happen.  broadcasters and sponsors would riot, with advertisers pulling their ads, sponsors pulling out of contracts, and broadcasters demanding a renegotiation of the broadcast rights fee were this to actually happen, and they most certainly would be successful.  this would mean lost revenue for all opponant schools, and yeah you get the picture.  too much money is at stake for the NCAA to even consider something like this.  

Happyshooter

June 1st, 2011 at 7:59 AM ^

The appropiate punishment would be a loss of all football scholarship money for 7 years, with a manadatory repurposing of the the funds to graduate scholarships.

And losing every win since Maurice.