Yes, no bowl ban
37% (294 votes)
Yes, only a warning/probation
17% (138 votes)
No, penalties were just right
22% (172 votes)
OSU got off easy
8% (60 votes)
I'll tell you in a few weeks
16% (125 votes)
Total votes: 789
Comments
There was no bowl ban for Tatgate. That came because of the Bobby DiGeronimo stuff, which made Ohio State a repeat violator - and worse, some of those violations happened AFTER Tatgate.
Which means technically the answer "no bowl ban" is the correct one no?
The world is full of kings & queens who'll blind your eyes & steal your dreams - it's heaven & hell - Ronnie James Dio.
Okay, should have been "Ohio State Scandal as a whole"
Either way...OSU would have received some kind of punishment because NCAA was "thirsty for OSU" as my inner city students would say to describe it. OSU would have gotten some kind of punishment...at least scholarship reductions because of the repeat offender thing from B-Ball.
"There's nothing that cleanses your soul like getting the hell kicked out of you."
"I love football. I think it is most wonderful game in world and I despise to lose."
Woody Hayes 1913 - 1987
I believe our self imposed penalties were more than enough. Some dudes sold some of their own property. BFD. Not like their dadies were asking for 60k or whatever it was. Something seems a little off to me. But I digress.
In addition to Ramzy's point, where is the option for "No, the NCAA is never predictable because they have no solid structure for procedure or only follow it when they feel like it."
They should put people like Gene Smith on a committee to design a Magic 8-Ball to determine punishments. It could have answers like "Add a 2 year postseason ban" or "Add 5 to the scholarship reduction" or "'Investigate' until the media largely forgets the infractions" or "Have Sports-by-Brooks cover the story so it appears untrue" and so on.