Tressel "Sabaned" a Player to Make Roster Room

Submitted by umhero on June 25th, 2011 at 6:40 PM

It sounds like Tressel chased away players just like Saban.  I guess once you're in "The Brotherhood", you can be asked to leave by the coach.


Jackson, a wide receiver, says he was asked to transfer after last season, two years into his college career.

"They had an oversigning issue," Jackson said. "They had to free up a few scholarships, and coach (Jim) Tressel told me I probably wouldn't play and maybe Ohio State wasn't the place for me."


Schweddy Balls

June 25th, 2011 at 6:52 PM ^

Jackson is just another disgruntaled ex OSU player who didn't get free tatts, a sweet ride and who saw $500 handshakes turn into weak pats on his shoulder. Tressel was a father figure to all of them and would never hurt one of his players. Just ask TP. He speak truth to power! :P


June 25th, 2011 at 6:51 PM ^

I feel like if he wanted to stay he could have, unlike the saban/miles situations where they literally yank the scholarship. The coaches just "highly suggested" leaving cause he wouldn't play. 


June 25th, 2011 at 7:03 PM ^

I tend to agree here. I think that's an issue of going over the depth chart and letting him know his chances of PT and continuing his athletic career are better elsewhere. Same thing probably happened w/ Justin Turner, Cullen Christian, and the speedy, 2-star WR we had.


June 25th, 2011 at 7:00 PM ^

Sounds like Tressel didn't do a very good job of it.  Saban gets the players to think they decided to transfer, instead of having the decision made for them.


June 26th, 2011 at 8:59 AM ^

that the reality was probably a combination. The coaches probably did lay out a breaker assessment than the player wanted to hear, AND combine that with discomfort with the coaching change: you have a player deciding it is in his best interest to start over in a more comfortable situation.

That said, I have no problem with telling a player where they stand, and let them decide. As long as they meet their obligations on and off the field, then four years. If they don't, then kick them off the team.


June 25th, 2011 at 7:21 PM ^

Both players were told they weren't going to play a lot and as a result they left.  I am not saying Hoke forced them out, I am saying that being told that they weren't going to play is THE EXACT SAME THING that we did.  I think it is ludicrous that we accuse them of "Sabaning" a player, because if this is "Sabaning" than we just did the same thing.  Sorry I wasn't specific enough in my first post.


June 25th, 2011 at 8:07 PM ^

I don't think that's accurate.  

I remember hearing an interview with Mattison where he said that they met with each player after Spring practice, told them where they stood, and gave them a plan for what they could do over the summer to improve their role on the team.

I don't think they told anyone that they should look somewhere else, or that they had no chance to contribute.


June 25th, 2011 at 7:04 PM ^

I don't see a problem in telling a kid the truth. If he really isn't going to play, let him know. If he wants to leave to go find playing time, more power to him. It's more the using medical waivers without players wanting to that makes Saban a bastard, to me at least.

skunk bear

June 25th, 2011 at 7:16 PM ^

I think a coach has a responsiblity to tell a kid who is never going to see  the field, that they aren't going to see the field. To just give a pat on the shoulder and a " stick with it, kid" to someone who is doing everything possible to see the field, when they are never going to, is unfair.


June 25th, 2011 at 7:58 PM ^

If it's the same Jackson I am thinking of (from Michigan), then he should have been good enough to play, unless he just came to the program and just did not have a determination to develop himself.  He had scholarship offers from LSU, Miami-FL, Alabama and Florida and was a top 4 star top 30 WR coming out of high school.  I think to persuade him to go to OSU he may have been offered the tats, fancy cars, etc. 


June 25th, 2011 at 8:46 PM ^

who has little chance of playing. Doing that is not the same thing as yanking the scholarship. If the kid is giving appropriate effort but simply isn't as talented as he needs to be in order to play, then I think all coaches are honor-bound to keep the kid on scholarship regardless. If the kid wants to leave, then the coaching staff should not put any road blocks in the way.

If the player is not giving the necessary effort either on the practice field or in the classroom, that is a different matter entirely; withdrawing the scholarship in that case is perfectly ethical in my opinion.



June 25th, 2011 at 9:38 PM ^

If Brady Hoke ever told any recruit that "Michigan wasn't the place for them" after they had been on campus for 2 years, I would be very disappointed. Unless someone comes out and says this, I don't know why we think it happened with any of our recruits.

skunk bear

June 25th, 2011 at 9:59 PM ^

with the exception that some of our guys were recruited to play the spread and may not fit our schemes

. I think they should be given the option to stay, if they are in good standing, but also the option to go somewhere their talent is better suited for, if they would prefer to get playing time.

Class of 1817

June 25th, 2011 at 11:48 PM ^

I would like to think Hoke would realize that some kids have stuck it out and maintained their commitment to the program regardless of how much they had or were going to see the field.

Especially after being a student-athlete for 2 years, I hope there wasn't any questioning of their dedication with a slight nudging out the door...


June 25th, 2011 at 11:21 PM ^

Gene Smith is a giant douchebag using the excuse that there was no "evidence" Tressel told Jackson to GTFO.  Do you want a secret tape recording?  I don't think Jackson would be saying any of this if he left on his own accord.

I Blue Myself

June 26th, 2011 at 12:16 AM ^

As long as there's a limit to the number of scholarship players you can have on a team, this will always be a problem.  Maybe Tressel was being honest that the kid would never play at OSU, but because of the 85-player limit, he had an incentive to encourage him to leave.

The solution is to give every team a fixed number of scholarships per year -- probably somewhere in the range of 20-24 -- but not have a maximum number of scholarship players you could have on the team at any given time.  If that system were in place, coaches wouldn't have a conflict of interest.  If they thought a player wasn't going to play, they could be honest about it without having a reason to try to kick underperforming players off the team.