Gordon Gee: Bowl Ban was Coming 'no matter what'

February 20, 2012 at 11:24a    by Jason Priestas    
29 Comments

Comments

ThirdLegLouie's picture

I hope Urban doesn't fire him..

If you ain't a Silver Bullet, you're a target

 
LABuckeye's picture

I don't think he said anything blatantly stupid this time, but I cringe every time Gee talks about athletics.

funky123's picture

Couldn't agree more.

What I don't get, if it is true, if the players voted not to play in a bowl why was that vote not respected?

buckeyedude's picture

I don't worship this guy like many students and alums seem to. I guess I just don't get it. But on this one, I feel Gee is right. Period. Exclamation point.

 

 

NC_Buckeye's picture

I kind of agree with Gee here. Given the media furor, the NCAA needed to make a statement and it didn't matter what we self-imposed. That was my chief argument for not firing Tressel. (ie. They're going to come down hard on us no matter what we do.)

Poison nuts's picture

Gotta say - without knowing too much about the NCAAs disiplinary process, I do believe that tOSU was going to be made an example of no matter what. I don't think it helped a whole lot that the AD was spouting off every chance he got how confident he was that they weren't getting the ban. That's almost like daring them to do it. Still - IMHO - I think the ban was coming so that an example could be made. I could be wrong...

"Do not pass me, just slow down - I can move right through you" Superchunk - Precision Auto.

Denny's picture

I bet Gordon Gee weighs as much as a duck. 

Taquitos.

Poison nuts's picture

A duck and small dog. Shitzu possibly.

"Do not pass me, just slow down - I can move right through you" Superchunk - Precision Auto.

Leanenaud's picture

I would say turducken.

Nappy's picture

A Rum Ham

Fan of bacon since 1981

Denny's picture

Thank you.

Taquitos.

Poison nuts's picture

I missed something huh?

"Do not pass me, just slow down - I can move right through you" Superchunk - Precision Auto.

Poison nuts's picture

Yeah - right over my head it went. Which makes my comment on your comment way un-smart. I was somewhere else. However - I do see it all now. Well played sir.

"Do not pass me, just slow down - I can move right through you" Superchunk - Precision Auto.

RBuck's picture

When the NCAA refused to take into account Larry James' "evidence" that might have cleared Posey in the Bobby G. mess, I knew the NCAA was going to tie us to the whipping post

"It's just another case of there you are". ~ Doc (1918-2012)

Scott K's picture

cue the Allman Brothers...

"There's a fine line between stupid, and....clever.  David St. Hubbins/Nigel Tufnel

Urbstache's picture

Some of you guys disappoint me greatly. Being a student at OSU, it is quite easy to see all the good Gee does. He's freaking killing it as our prez.

After the crapstorm year that our University went through, on the heels of the politically correct, and often cowardly Tressel regime, I am psyched to see a coach who doesn't take any crap, and a president who talks some of it. For those of you that believe the world is out to get OSU, YOU'RE RIGHT. The amount of outright hatred out there for us is hilariously massive.

I liked the Little Sisters of the Poor, the Bielema comments, and now this. Wasn't this the first bowl ban that went with a FTM charge? NCAA just trying to throw their weight around, as usual. Gordon was right again. 

Gee is on no sort of "hot seat"; his future is pretty secure. If you pay attention to how OSU has done academically under him, which is the most important aspect of his job, there is no real chance of him being replaced. Gene Smith, on the other hand....

/rant over

//back to studying

Urban Warfare

NW Buckeye's picture

Have to agree with you here.  Gee gets heat for speaking what many of us think and say. And consequently gets crucified for it.  His record speaks for itself - one of the best University Presidents out there.  We all know that he may not know a lot about football (there are many academics who don't have the foggiest clue, Gee at least gives it an effort).  But, he does know law and university proceedings.  Sure beats the heck out of Karen Holbrook at the helm. 

cronimi's picture

As an alumnus who was a student during Gee's first term as President, I fully agree that he is a great university president who OSU is lucky to have. He just needs to keep quiet about the athletic department. There have been too many instances of "open mouth, insert foot", and Gee knows better. It's bad enough we have the future-former AD Big Gene Smith making idiotic comments in the press, we don't need our university president doing the same thing.

Run_Fido_Run's picture

Ohio State could not have any confidence that a self-imposed bowl ban would have been seen as sufficient to the NCAA Infractions Committee.

If Ohio State had self-imposed a 2011 bowl ban before the 2011 season even started, they might have avoided a 2012 ban (then, again, maybe not). The idea that they could have avoided a 2012 bowl ban by self-imposing in November or December 2011 seems far-fetched to me.

RBuck's picture

I agree. Especially after a 6-6 season.

"It's just another case of there you are". ~ Doc (1918-2012)

btalbert25's picture

What I want to know is, if it was so clear to Gee that a ban was coming, how come Gene Smith was surprised by the outcome?  I doubt a bowl ban happens if the Bobby G "repeat offender" stuff didn't come out.  Even at that, though, for actual sanctions, probations, 3 schollies per year, and a 1 year bowl ban are not too bad.  Ohio State got off pretty easy in terms of sanctions.  Lord knows it was not an easy year.  It sounds like if a couple of witnesses/sources would've come forward with more info Ohio State could've really been look at USC type sanctions.  So, I'm not happy about losing those schollies and a bowl, but part of me thought SHOOOO WEEEEEE it could've been much much worse.

 

NW Buckeye's picture

Gee's comments were just made.  Prior to the NCAA ruling, he did not believe that a bowl ban was merited based on precedent:

"I'm a lawyer," Gee said. "I take a look at precedent. There's no precedent for a bowl ban for us."

He stated his new found belief that regardless of what was self imposed there would most definitely be a one year added bowl ban based upon how the NCAA acted when they sent down the penalties (stated that if we imposed a 5 year bowl ban they would have added 1 year).  This was not foresight, it was after sight.  Even Urban believed from his research (and his research went far beyond anything Gene Smith could have told him) that there was no bowl ban merited - based on precedent.  

Yet, I do agree with you - shoooo weeee!  However, my relief is that OSU did not self impose more sanctions as I feel those would have been added to by the NCAA.  And, it appears I am not alone in that thought. 

ShowThemOhiosHere's picture

I think Gee is spot on.  It's what I've been saying all along - outside influences.  I think the NCAA felt pressure to send a message because of all of the issues with college football and corruption today.  I don't think it was so much "Oh Ohio State is this rogue program that needs to be hammered" or "People want to see Ohio State get hammered so we're going to do it to make that majority happy".  Certainly the media exposure was a key factor, making our scandal the poster child of what's wrong with college football today.  So, they figure they hit us hard, make an example of the poster child, and it serves as a strong deterrent to any other program that wants to break the rules.  That's not right.  You don't make examples - you examine what happened and you punish appropriately, based on previous punishments handed down for similar crimes in the past. 

Precedent was mentioned in this article - the NCAA certainly set a strong one.  What will really be infuriating is if in the future, they ignore the precedent set here when examining the next program that ends up in our position. 

The only thing that I question is if we would've for sure been handed the 2012 postseason ban regardless of what we did with the 2011 postseason.  I do agree that after the regular season was finished at 6-6, self-imposing a ban at the point wouldn't have done much for us, as it would've been well-known that the bowl we would've ended up in would be crap, and we could've avoided a losing season by not playing in it.  But what if we had self-imposed a bowl ban right away?  After all, expectations were pretty high before the season began, compared to what ended up being reality.  Or say we self-imposed after beating Indiana to become bowl eligible like Miami did?  At that point, we were 6-3, still in the Big Ten hunt, and flirting with re-entering the top 25.  Gee may still probably be right in that it wouldn't have mattered, but I'm not 100% convinced.

 

Class of 2010.

buckeyedude's picture

I hate loiyas.

 

 

Is it Saturday Yet's picture

I agree with what he said.......this time.