Ohio State Could Still Be Under Investigation

Last Friday, August 12, the NCAA met with Ohio State representatives—university president Gordon Gee, athletic director Gene Smith, former Buckeye head coach Jim Tressel, and their respective attorneys—for the hearing on infractions that cost Jim Tressel his job as head coach.

We will learn of the NCAA's ruling sometime in the coming months.

However, Ohio State might not be out of the storm just yet. ESPN writer Pat Forde reported Thursday that Ohio State received a letter from the NCAA saying that it plans to continue investigating "other issues involving the program." The letter did not include a second notice of allegations.

The letter itself, provided publicly courtesy of ESPN, did indicate that "additional issues remained for investigation" but that "at this point in the inquiry, the available evidence does not warrant additional allegations; however, the investigation remains open."

There was apparently an error in Pat Forde's article when he said that the letter was sent August 3, but Jim Lynch, an Ohio State spokesperson, said that "OSU President E. Gordon Gee received a letter from the NCAA on Aug. 3, but it concerned only procedural matters about the appearance of OSU officials before the Infractions Committee on Friday," according to the Columbus Dispatch.

This led to a complete denial of Pat Forde's report by Ohio State. However, Forde apparently realized that he reported the letter as having been sent August 3, when the letter in question had actually been sent July 13. (The August 3 letter is a different letter entirely, and it concerns what Gee should expect when he comes to the infractions committee.) Forde has since made the correction; if you look at the letter itself, you can see that the date is July 13, 2011, not August 3.

There is little we can know or deduce from the letter, but Ohio State (even after Forde corrected the mistake) is adamant that it will face no other allegations pertaining to Jim Tressel. It is probably more accurate to say that, specifically concerning the incident of the six Buckeyes who sold memorabilia for benefits (tattoos, cash) and Tressel covering it up in December 2010, there will be no more allegations. That matter seems to have been fully investigated, and all the evidence found.

What the misunderstanding appears to be is that Forde was reporting that Ohio State might face allegations of incidents completely unrelated to "Tattoo-gate." The letter certainly indicates this, but during the time it was sent, it presents no specific evidence and thus cannot make any direct allegations. Instead, the letter is at worst an ominous warning of things to come:

The staff and institution agreed not to postpone the currently scheduled hearing date of August 12 while we finalize the investigation of the remaining open issues. The institution understands and agrees that additional allegations may result from the ongoing inquiry and that the violations set forth in the current notice of allegations may form the partial basis for a failure to monitor or lack of institutional control when viewed in light of any additional violations. The institution also understands that if new violations are discovered, a second hearing may be necessary.

Although the letter doesn't indicate that there are any new allegations, it does explicitly state that the investigation is still open. So, despite Jim Lynch's denial, Ohio State is still being investigated. Basically it says that "We are still looking into some issues, and if we find anything, Ohio State may face Failure to Monitor or Lack of Institutional Control, and they understand this." If that doesn't make the Buckeyes nervous, nothing will.

Like in most legal matters, it's easy to get lost in all the jargon. What we have to understand is that the violations involving Jim Tressel lying to the NCAA specifically about the six players involved with the tattoo parlor is, for the most part, over. The evidence has been collected, the testimonies heard, and all that's left is for the NCAA to make its decision on whether it agrees with Ohio State's self-imposed sanctions or should add more.

What Pat Forde was essentially reporting is that the letter goes beyond that, and there may be more allegations during the NCAA's ongoing investigation. There is still the matter, for instance, of Terrelle Pryor supposedly taking thousands of dollars in exchange for giving autographs—a likely violation of NCAA rules. This is not directly related to the six players getting tattoos and Jim Tressel later lying about it. Forde alleges that Pryor's misdeeds, reported in ESPN's "Outside the Lines" story, are a separate incident.

That, of course, would doom the Buckeyes. Any additional violations the NCAA finds or any allegations they make would most certainly indicate that the problems at Ohio State are systemic, not isolated. Furthermore, regardless of what the NCAA decides about "Tattoo-gate," Ohio State would likely be on probation at the time new allegations arise, which would be even more damning to the program.

No institution has committed violations while on probation.

It doesn't look good for Ohio State. Still, some claim that the evidence is not there. Unfortunately for those nay-sayers, it is. All the NCAA has to do is include the documented testimony of former Ohio State wide receiver Ray Small ("Everybody was doing it") and they'll have all the evidence they need. They could also include the testimony of former Buckeye Maurice Clarett, who alleged that violations went on at Ohio State for years. (It's also been rumored that "Ellis" from George Dohrmann's Sports Illustrated article has talked to the NCAA. If that's true, then Ohio State is screwed.) A Failure to Monitor or Lack of Instutional Control allegation will then become a reality.

It really all depends on where the NCAA chooses to look. Personally, I think that when former players like Ray Small expose Ohio State publicly, the evidence doesn't get more concrete. The NCAA has yet to rule on the Jim Tressel case or send an additional notice of allegations, but if they do (and at this point it's still a big IF), then Ohio State could be in for another rough year, as they'd most certainly have to go through another hearing.

Andy Staples at Sports Illustrated wrote an editorial about how Ohio State has already received its greatest punishment in having to let Tressel go. Staples contends that, even if Ohio State isn't hit with worse sanctions, they'll never be the same because Tressel is no longer their head coach. However, I doubt that. If Ohio State is not hit with additional sanctions, their recovery will be relatively quick. Still, Staples point is valid: how do you replace someone as successful as Jim Tressel? His argument is that you don't: in terms of bringing success, Tressel was one in a million. He brought wins, but he also brought really bad press.

Despite what Ohio State spokespeople and fans will have you believe, I don't think Tressel was acting alone. He was allowed to thrive in Columbus because of the culture that says that wins are okay no matter how you get them. Unlike rational people, Buckeye fans don't feel the victories are sullied.

There are hopes in the Buckeye Nation that Urban Meyer will be the next coach at Ohio State after Luke Fickell stumbles his way through this year. Meyer taking the coaching job would be a death sentence. It would be more demanding than Florida, where he retired because of the stress. Will it be any less stressful at Ohio State?

I suppose it doesn't matter. Whoever Ohio State brings in will be in a tough position. Buckeye fans have shown that they don't mind it when people break rules to get the players on the field to win games, and they'll be demanding a lot of wins. What's a coach to do? Coach the right way and lose? John Cooper will tell you how that worked out. Even if I liked Ohio State, I wouldn't want to coach there.

Given how things have gone down, I don't know how anyone would.

The Problem is Ohio State, Not Just Tressel

Last Friday, July 22, the NCAA apparently bought Ohio State's weak defense that former coach Jim Tressel was solely responsible for the incident that cost him his career. They thus concluded that this case does not warrant either "failure to monitor" or "lack of institutional control," two charges that are considered the worst to receive for a college football program.

This is surprising to anyone who has followed the Jim Tressel scandal, where he lied deliberately and directly to the NCAA when he signed a compliance form saying that he didn't know five of his football players had committed violations while an email conversation with Chris Cicero later showed that he clearly did. When news broke of Tressel's knowledge, Ohio State Athletic Director Gene Smith initially and firmly stated that Jim Tressel would not be fired because "this case, in [Gene Smith's] view, does not warrant it." Media outcry and pressure from the scandal showed that perhaps it did, and Tressel was forced to resign. (His resignation was later changed to retirement.)

Anyone who is a fan of integrity was furious by Gene Smith's initial response ("at the end of the day Jim Tressel is football our coach"), and now Ohio State's actions, because it shows their interest lies not in following the rules—as the NCAA should recognize—but in protecting their assets, their ability to win, and their ability to beat Michigan. They threw Tressel under the bus while at the same time waiving his initial fine of $250,000 and paying him the rest of his salary as a retirement benefit. It's the sort of hypocrisy that one would think the NCAA, as college football's self-proclaimed watchdog, would loathe. Instead, the NCAA bought it.

Buckeye fans will say that my hatred of Ohio State in this case comes solely from my bias as a Michigan fan. While to some degree this is true, I didn't always hate Ohio State with the fervor that I do today. In fact, for many years I respected Ohio State and thought they had a solid program. I found it really hard to speak ill about a team when the coach, Jim Tressel, beat Michigan with such humility and respect. 

There were Michigan fans I talked to who spoke about a grand conspiracy perpetrated by Tressel, Gene Smith, Gordon Gee, boosters, and Ohio State fans everywhere, where they did whatever it took to beat Michigan because they were obsessed with it, because nothing else mattered—not rules, not honor, nothing. The rumors were that Tressel and Ohio State regularly looked the other way when their players committed infractions, and anytime Tressel said he had no idea what was going on, that was a lie. The man was secretly scum, and his choirboy senator demeanor was just a front to make everyone believe otherwise.

Of course, I didn't care much for conspiracy theories, and that's exactly what I thought my friends were spewing—confusing and overly complex conspiracy theories because Ohio State was your rival and that's what you do. Or maybe it was because Tressel kept beating Michigan and they just couldn't deal with it, and this was their way of rationalizing the losses. So, for a while, I didn't pay much attention to what those Michigan fans were saying; it was just senseless drivel. Then, when it came out that Tressel had not only known about his players selling memorabilia for cash/tattoos but also lied about it, everything changed. If Tressel was really an upstanding guy, why would he so obviously cover something up? Wouldn't the honorable thing be to punish those young men because bad decisions have consequences?

It finally became clear to me that Tressel didn't really care about honor or integrity. The reason: he had pushed so hard for the NCAA to allow those players to participate in the Sugar Bowl. Originally it was seen as something admirable because Tressel said he wanted those players to get their degrees, but it was actually an action that was just self-serving: he wanted those players to play in the Sugar Bowl so he could win, and he wanted them back so that he could have another successful year, another opportunity to beat Michigan. He knew they were ineligible, so that's why he did it. It was sick. The man really was scum. I knew right when I saw Tressel admit it and Gene Smith respond that he would not be fired and Gordon Gee just laugh it off. That was it. That was the moment all the conspiracy theories, everything my friends had said and I didn't believe, became real. I felt somewhat betrayed, because I had defended Tressel to these people, and they had been right all along.

And what was worse: Ohio State fans didn't care. They would have preferred if nothing had ever been discovered. To them, it wasn't tragic that the crime was committed in the first place; rather, it was tragic that Tressel had gotten caught. John Cooper ran a tight ship at Ohio State, but nobody cares that he had winning seasons or never brought NCAA sanctions against the Buckeyes, because he didn't beat Michigan. Tressel beat Michigan, so Tressel's okay. It didn't matter that he lied. It didn't matter that he played ineligible players. It didn't matter that he broke rules and broke them deliberately. He did it to beat Michigan, and that means he did it for Ohio State, and so ultimately he did the right thing. That's how they see it.

The NCAA has made a grievous error in taking the bait that Ohio State has given them, which only adds the college football world's cynicism that the system is broken. Sure, Ohio State fans are exhaling a huge sigh of relief because the NCAA won't hit them with the two most feared charges, because it means that the punishments might not be all that severe. But to the rest of us, not just Michigan fans, but anyone who's separate from Ohio State, it's like we're watching Al Capone get away with murder. We all know what's going on there. The evidence is clear if you open your eyes and see it.

The slap on the wrist that Ohio State's administration gave Tressel is enough to show that they didn't want to see him go. Their slow "investigation" that reveals nothing more than what has already been proven is enough to show that they aren't really complying with the NCAA. Changing Tressel's resignation to retirement is enough to show that the punishment he got is really not a punishment at all: he gets to go out on a good note—or, at least, that's how Ohio State's history books will show it. Vacating wins is necessary but not sufficient: it does nothing to deter future violations. Bowl bans and scholarship reductions do. Those are real, palpable negative effects on the program to heavily and steadily remind them they did something wrong, they lied about it, and now they're going to pay. (This was the NCAA's rationale with USC.)

Ohio State maintains that it is Tressel's fault alone and the university did everything it could to oust him, thus they claim that "fail to monitor" and "lack of institutional control" are not warranted. This is an obvious lie. Had Smith and Gee immediately fired Tressel, then it would be an easier point to argue. Yet because they didn't, because they thought that this wasn't a big deal, because it wasn't a major violation in their eyes, because their punishments were so lax in the beginning, they did not show true, swift compliance with the NCAA as they claim. Their response was slow and drawn out, like a chess match, waiting to see what the NCAA says. This makes them out to look like good strategists but really bad liars.

It is their attitude that makes Gee and Smith responsible, their attitude that "We have no intention of firing the almighty Tressel and let's just hope he doesn't fire us because we're not the ones beating Michigan at the end of the day." This is what leads me and so many others to believe that somehow Smith and Gee knew about the violations as well. There's just no paper trail to prove it, like there was with Tressel. So it's like it didn't happen.

My point is this: the problem is Ohio State, not just Jim Tressel. Tressel was not one man acting alone. Given the reasons why he did it, he could not have been. Tressel is the product of an environment that promotes winning at all costs, putting the talented players on the field even when they're ineligible because that's what wins games. Tressel is just a cog in the machine, surrounded by people who routinely look the other way and excuse bad behavior because that's what it takes to beat Michigan seven times in a row. Tressel wanted Pryor. Pryor wanted cars, praise, and adulation, so Tressel fed him a line that was confirmed by Eleven Warriors: "The two most important people in the state of Ohio are the governor and the quarterback for Ohio State. And the quarterback for Ohio State is number one." To Ohio State fans, that's pretty cool, because there's some truth to it. To the rest of us, it's sick and kind of demented. Are you so obsessed with one team that the quarterback, a college kid, is the most revered person in the state?

Tressel had to have known what he was getting when he recruited Pryor, but it wasn't a problem, because Ohio State, its fan base, and its shameless boosters would give him everything he wanted. As long as he produced on the field, nothing else mattered. Ohio State is the worst case of corruption in the history of college football. Until the NCAA realizes that, nothing's going to change. If the NCAA really wants Ohio State and other teams like them to follow the rules and follow them ethically, they must show that they mean business.

In a previous article, I cited a section of George Dohrmann's Sports Illustrated article that described an incident where Tressel, as an OSU assistant back in the 1980s, rigged a raffle at the Ohio State football camp. Dohrmann writes that most kids who attended the camp would never play a college football game, but they had probably saved up money from mowing lawns just to play once in Ohio Stadium and maybe, just maybe buy enough tickets for the raffle to win cleats and a Buckeye jersey. Instead, Tressel made sure that the elite prospects won the raffle.

While most people would see this as a despicable act by Tressel, and it certainly is, one must approach it from his perspective and see what he was attempting to achieve. It's unlikely that Tressel was a cackling villain who wanted to see hapless kids who'd never play lose the raffle. No, what Tressel wanted was to rig the raffle so that, if the elite prospects won the prizes, they'd have a memorable experience at the camp and maybe that would be enough to make them want to play for Ohio State. Rigging the raffle meant that poor kids would lose, yes, but it also meant that highly-touted recruits might commit to Ohio State because of it. Did it work? It's possible that sometimes it did. But what about those other times, the times when the elite prospect would win the cleats and the jersey and still wouldn't commit to Ohio State? That's when it's the most despicable.

The last two paragraphs are not meant to simply rehash why Tressel is a horrible person, they are meant to illustrate the overall point of why he was hired. While his rigging of the raffles may not have worked in all cases, it must have worked in some, which meant that Tressel successfully recruited great players, albeit through unethical means. Tressel fit in too well at Ohio State. Because he did whatever it took to win in Columbus, and because most of the time he won, Tressel was allowed to function. That's the point. That's why the problem is Ohio State and not just him. In Columbus there is a culture that surrounds the program of vile and unethical conduct that has been bred and fostered ever since Woody Hayes had his "Frontliners" booster club, who Dohrmann writes scouted and courted recruits, and they didn't do so ethically.

The most infuriating thing about Ohio State, and why I've come to hate them so much, is that it doesn't even occur to them to do things with integrity, the right way, the ethical way. They claim that Ohio State football is about a Sacred Brotherhood, but really it's just about winning. It's like they're saying, "What's the point of being ethical when you don't win? If you win ethically, great. If you don't—well, at least you won. Let's not speak out how we won; let's just enjoy it."

When it comes to violations that Tressel and Ohio State have committed, there are generally two modes of thought. The first is that he looked the other way accidentally. This is what Tressel himself claims. The assertion is that, in any other situation, Tressel would have realized that this was wrong and would have reported it. His mistake was that he simply didn't. Something didn't register in his mind. It was largely an accident, a brain fart, and he's still a good person. The second mode of the thought is that he looked the other way deliberately. This is my belief and what I extend to all of Ohio State. It doesn't matter the situation, Tressel and anyone else at Ohio State looked the other way because they thought they could get away with it. Why? Two reasons. One, reporting it is not to their benefit. If the players involved are crucial components to the game, then exposing them runs the risk of punishment, and it's better to seek forgiveness later. Two, no one can do anything if they don't find out. Let them prove that we've done something wrong, and then we'll admit it.

Normally, I tend to give someone the benefit of the doubt, and if this was just a one time thing, I would be in the boat with other people (mostly Buckeyes) who argue that Tressel overall is a good guy and he made one mistake once and we're all human. However, it is Tressel's track record and the fact that his credibility has been destroyed that puts me in the second mode of thought. There are too many coincidences that point to corruption at Ohio State. Maurice Clarett, Troy Smith, everything; this has been going on for years. The problem is not that one coach went rogue. The problem is that the culture in Columbus encouraged and practically demanded that he do whatever it takes to win.

I don't see that culture changing anytime soon. Probation notwithstanding, the Buckeyes will continue to do things unethically. I used to think that this was one big wake up call for Ohio State to get their act together, so that we can respect them as a rival. Now it's just another blip in their file. 

Mark my words, Ohio State will commit violations again, and they will get caught. Until the NCAA forces them to follow the rules, they'll have no reason to do so.

And with that, we all grow a little more cynical.

Ohio State Self-Vacates 2010 Season, Changes Tressel's Resignation to Retirement

Just when it seems like there's nothing to talk about in the offseason, Ohio State is at it again.

The Associated Press reported today that Ohio State, in an attempt to appease the NCAA allegation committee for lenient punishments, has decided to vacate all of its wins from the 2010 season. 

Ohio State University released a statement yesterday detailing why they think this self-imposed punishment is sufficient and that the NCAA "take no further action." The university has also decided to waive Jim Tressel's fine of $250,000 and is changing his resignation to retirement.

This is odd considering that the university is placing most of the blame on Tressel. It places the rest on the student-athletes and tattoo parlor owner, Ed Rife, who was involved in a federal drug investigation and participated in the Buckeyes selling memorabilia for cash and tattoos.

The university insists that no one in the athletic department or administration beyond Tressel had any knowledge of the NCAA rule violations. They claim that since it "sought and accepted Tressel's resignation," further punishments on the football program are not warranted. It also feels that suspending the four remaining Buckeye players who broke the rules (Terrelle Pryor left Ohio State) is an adequate enough reduction of competitive edge. The players' suspension is for the first five games, not the entire 2011 season.

Ohio State University's attempt at honesty and compliance with the NCAA is littered with contradictions. Probably the biggest fallacy out of OSU's statement is that it "discovered and self-reported violations." This is false. The discovery of Jim Tressel's knowledge that his players were ineligible came from Yahoo! Sports writers Dan Wetzel and Charles Robinson, who reported the information publicly on March 7, 2011 that Tressel had first learned in April 2010 that his players were illegally trading Ohio State memorabilia for benefits. (Wetzel and Robinson reportedly gave Ohio State three hours to respond before they went public; Ohio State made no comment.)

Tressel's smoking gun was that he had an email trail with Christopher Cicero, an Ohio State alumnus working for the U.S. attorney general and who had stumbled across the investigation of Ed Rife, that revealed he was aware that his players were involved in selling memorabilia to Rife. Tressel said he would "get on it asap," but he didn't. Instead, he signed a compliance form in December 2010 stating that he had no knowledge that his players had committed infractions. When Wetzel and Robinson broke the news in March 2011, after Tressel had convinced the NCAA to allow the ineligible players to participate in the Sugar Bowl against Arkansas, which Ohio State won, Tressel admitted guilt. Despite Tressel claiming that he withheld information to protect the players, it didn't change the fact that he lied directly to the NCAA. It is more appropriate to say that he withheld information to protect Ohio State from losing games.

Ohio State's statement that it discovered Tressel's violations of NCAA rules is false because of one clear reason: if Wetzel and Robinson had not conducted a journalistic investigation and released the story, no discovery would have been made. Tressel was a highly successful and very much beloved member of Ohio State's football program, and self-reporting any rule violations that he had made was not in the football program's best interest (i.e. to win games, defeat Michigan, etc.) Anyone within the athletic department who blew the whistle on Tressel would have most certainly been terminated, discredited, and ostracized by the community for attempting to bring down Tressel, a "man of honor." Thus, Ohio State could not have discovered or "self-reported" the violations because it (and its fanbase) would have demanded proof, which they wouldn't dare to seek out, let alone provide to the public. Instead, Wetzel and Robinson had to provide the proof of their own accord, and the proof was indisputable. Ohio State and Tressel had no choice but to admit guilt.

The second biggest contradiction within Ohio State's response to the Notice of Allegations is that it actively sought out Tressel's resignation. When Ohio State responded to the Yahoo! Sports article's release, essentially admitting guilt, athletic director Gene Smith said that Tressel would be suspended for two games (later increased to five) and would pay a fine of $250,000, but Smith was quick to discount rumors that Tressel would be fired. "Wherever we end up, at the end of the day Jim Tressel is our football coach," he said. "All the speculation about him being terminated is pure speculation and this case, in my view, does not warrant it." Ohio State University president Gordon Gee also laughed off suggestions that Tressel would be dismissed. "No, are you kidding? Let me just be very clear: I'm just hopeful the coach doesn't dismiss me," Gee said.

If Ohio State actively sought out Jim Tressel's resignation, Smith and Gee would not have said that Tressel was always going to be their football coach. Tressel's resignation came eventually because of increasing media coverage over the issue, as well as numerous Ohio State alumni (e.g. Kirk Herbstreit, Chris Spielman) who called for Jim Tressel to step down. In the end, he did. Tressel announced his resignation on May 30, 2011. It is also possible that Tressel resigned as a preemptive measure because Sports Illustrated was releasing an article detailing Tressel's corruption throughout his entire college coaching career.

The article holds that Tressel used ignorance of his players' infractions as a means of distancing himself from the crimes they committed, just as he did when five Buckeyes got involved with Ed Rife. If it seems strange that Tressel was ignorant of his players' improper or illegal actions all the time, it's because it is. Tressel could not be both entirely ignorant of what his players did while at the same time being so close to them that he was frequently considered more of a father than a coach. The full, objective reality can never really be known, either because Tressel will take those secrets to his grave or because those who do know will not dare reveal the truth. (See: Sacred Brotherhood.) The article reports that Tressel was more aware than he let on, but he chose to look the other way because he needed those players to win games. 

Perhaps the most damaging revelation of Tressel's corruption is this:

The [Maurice Clarett] and [Buckeye booster Robert Q. Baker] scandals were further evidence that Tressel was, at best, woefully ignorant of questionable behavior by his players and not aggressive enough in preventing it. At worst, he was a conduit for improper benefits, as Clarett alleged. The latter interpretation is suggested by a story that has long circulated among college coaches and was confirmed to [Sports Illustrated] by a former colleague of Tressel's from Earle Bruce's staff at Ohio State in the mid-1980s. One of Tressel's duties then was to organize and run the Buckeyes' summer camp. Most of the young players who attended it would never play college football, but a few were top prospects whom Ohio State was recruiting.

At the end of camp, attendees bought tickets to a raffle with prizes such as cleats and a jersey. According to his fellow assistant, Tressel rigged the raffle so that the elite prospects won—a potential violation of NCAA rules. Says the former colleague, who asked not to be identified because he still has ties to the Ohio State community, "In the morning he would read the Bible with another coach. Then, in the afternoon, he would go out and cheat kids who had probably saved up money from mowing lawns to buy those raffle tickets. That's Jim Tressel."

Because the allegation is so damaging, Ohio State fans question the credibility of the source. While problematic, the presupposition that the source not be identified is necessary because of backlash that would arise from the Buckeye nation. Wetzel and Robinson of Yahoo! Sports did not initially reveal that Christopher Cicero was their source. After his identity was revealed, Cicero received and continues to receive numerous death threats from Buckeye fans—enough to the point where he publicly regrets informing Tressel of the players' rule violations. The fear and intimidation imposed on Cicero alone is enough reason for Sports Illustrated to keep the source anonymous. Predictably, however, the result from Buckeye fans is to say that Sports Illustrated is and perhaps never was a credible news outlet, despite previously saying that George Dohrmann, who wrote the article on Tressel, was "the real deal."

In any case, Tressel's resignation was seen by some as the honorable thing to do. Others see it as an attempt, much like Ohio State's response today, to placate the NCAA from instilling harsher punishments, when it is actually more like Tressel flying the coop before the chickens come home to roost. Like Terrelle Pryor, Tressel left Ohio State before the NCAA had even ruled, which means that he leaves the university to face any punishments they receive alone.

Still, despite Tressel's numerous transgressions and wrongdoing, and putting the university in a position where it could suffer for years to come, several Buckeye fans see Tressel as a man who can do no wrong. They showed up at Tressel's house to show their support, and later they held a parade in his honor. The reason: they don't see Jim Tressel's rule violations as a bad thing, but as him "doing what's best for the state of Ohio." What does that mean? It means that anything Tressel did to win championships and beat Michigan is all right in their book. Tressel's response to their adulation was not to apologize for letting them down. Instead, he promised that Michigan would lose to them again. It was exactly what they wanted to hear.

Reports indicate that Gene Smith admitted asking Jim Tressel to resign. So, which is it: was it Tressel's idea to resign, or was it Smith's? If it is the former, then the notion that Ohio State actively sought Tressel's resignation cannot be true, and Ohio State's athletic department had no intention of letting Tressel go. If it is the latter, then it contradicts Smith's earlier statement that Tressel was and forever would be Ohio State's coach, and Tressel could not make "the honorable decision" to step down because he was asked. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle: pressure mounted from the media and Ohio State alumni saying that Tressel was a toxic asset, and the decision for Tressel to leave was a collective one.

In terms of appealing to the NCAA for mercy, this creates another problem. If Ohio State sought Tressel's resignation and places the majority of the blame on him, why would they change his resignation to retirement? (There is an interesting parallel with Michigan's Lloyd Carr, who officially retired but in reality was asked to resign because he had failed to defeat Ohio State consistently. Tressel's retirement/resignation, in contrast, resulted not from losing games, but from breaking NCAA rules.) Furthermore, if Ohio State intends to paint Tressel as a culpable figure, and no one beyond him knew of the players' actions, then why would they waive his fine of $250,000? In what now appears to be an obvious and blatant contradiction, Gene Smith had explicitly said a month ago that Ohio State will hold Tressel to his punishment and that Tressel "will pay the fine."

It is more likely that Smith and the athletic department are thinking about Ohio State's fans and less about the implications of what they're doing has towards the NCAA. Not surprisingly, Ohio State still wants the fans to see Tressel as a lovable figure, and so they have softened the blow of his departure. While this is understandable for the Buckeye faithful, it hardly makes sense to the rest of us: fans quickly forgave Woody Hayes after Ohio State fired him for punching a player from Clemson on national television. Hayes has buildings and streets named after him. It stands to reason that Tressel will have them too someday. So, if the Buckeyes will still love and forgive Tressel regardless of what he did, the changing of his resignation to retirement is meaningless. It won't change history. The rest of the world will remember Tressel for his scandal.

As mentioned previously, Ohio State's response to the NCAA's Notice of Allegations is an attempt at honesty, or at least appearing honest. However, Smith and Gee's earlier comments either mean that it is an obvious statement of dishonesty or that they genuinely (perhaps deliberately) underestimated the implications of Tressel's and the players' major NCAA violations. The latter easily explains why Ohio State has gradually increased the severity of its self-imposed sanctions. Tressel's suspension was increased from two games to five to his full-on departure. Ohio State has also vacated all of its wins from 2010, including the Sugar Bowl victory won on January 1, 2011.

Finally, Ohio State has installed a two year probation period. This, however, is relatively light. When the NCAA found that Rich Rodriguez's staff and players had exceeded practice time by roughly an extra twenty minutes per week, Michigan self-imposed a probation period of three years. Today, those practice violations look pale in comparison to what Ohio State has done.

Despite Ohio State claiming that Tressel's departure and the players' five-game suspension means that the team will be significantly less competitive, there's something missing. Ohio State has not imposed any bowl ban restrictions or scholarship reductions. Doing so would most certainly damage recruiting in any capacity. But do the punishments of bowl bans and scholarship reductions relate to the rule violations that took place?

Ohio State clearly feels that they don't. Yet Tressel's transgressions were a direct result of his interaction with players, as he himself claims that he wanted to handle the situation internally. (As it turned out, handling the situation internally meant not handling it at all.) Bowl bans are appropriate because Tressel had convinced the NCAA to let the players participate in the Sugar Bowl, when he had known all along that they had been ineligible for that season. His statement that he didn't know was proven to be a lie.

The NCAA had decided to open an independent, unrelated investigation on Terrelle Pryor because he was taking illegal benefits from Ohio State boosters. There is plenty of photographic evidence that Pryor was driving cars he could not afford—an unmistakable violation of NCAA rules. However, following his lawyer's advice, Pryor left before NCAA could rule against him. (Had he stayed at Ohio State, he most likely would have been suspended from the entire 2011 season.) As such, and because these infractions relate directly to benefits for players, the NCAA should reduce Ohio State's capacity for scholarships, as it did for USC because of Reggie Bush.

If the NCAA wishes to impose punishments that act as a deterrent and prevent future violations, then these must be included. Ohio State doesn't want to do anything that would reduce their chance at winning the Big Ten or, perhaps more importantly, defeating Michigan every year. This is why bowl bans and scholarship reductions were not included, but the vacating of wins was. Those games have already happened, and Ohio State has enough past victories to outshine them. A truly harsh (and perhaps appropriate) punishment would be to vacate every game that Tressel has coached at Ohio State. This would mean that Ohio State would lose its 2002 national championship and several Rose Bowl victories, a crushing blow to the Buckeye faithful.

However, such a punishment can only happen if the NCAA sees Ohio State as a repeat offender, possibly taking Dohrmann's Sports Illustrated article into consideration. Not surprisingly, Ohio State claims that the incidents involving Jim Tressel and the five Buckeye players were isolated, and thus only 2010 should be vacated. Dohrmann's article clearly shows that Tressel has a history of corruption at Ohio State.

Interestingly enough, among all the allegations against Ohio State, the one that the NCAA did not include is that Ohio State has presented a "lack of institutional control." This is typically considered the most severe. In its response to the NCAA's Notice of Allegations, Ohio State might have unwittingly admitted that it had a lack of institutional control. Evidence for this exists in the fact that Ohio State has now imposed stricter "corrective actions" that will increase monitoring of where student-athletes go, where they eat, what they receive or can do, etc. It also will increase education of staff and student-athletes in the requirements of compliance. 

In the strictest sense of the definition, if Ohio State had institutional control, it would not need to crack down now simply because one of its staff members (Tressel) committed a major violation. Furthermore, Gene Smith has said that Ohio State will overhaul the compliance department. Why would that be necessary if Ohio State had institutional control? The fact that it is making these sweeping changes now suggests that it did not have institutional control previously.

Buckeye fans are not surprised that the 2010 wins were vacated but, like Ohio State's athletic department and university officials, they are hoping that the NCAA finds the current self-imposed sanctions to be sufficient. "This is pretty huge as I imagine most of us were bracing for something much worse," writes Jason of Eleven Warriors, an Ohio State fan blog. "Of course, the NCAA could come back and say the punishment is not enough, but given athletic director Gene Smith's relationship with the organization and the close level of cooperation between the school and the NCAA, there's a chance that the two sides are somewhere in the vicinity of each other on the punishment side of things."

Meanwhile, Brian Bennett of ESPN's Big Ten blog feels that Ohio State's self-imposed sanctions are far too lenient, and calls into question the university's decision to change Jim Tressel's resignation into a retirement:

Vacating wins was already an automatic outcome from the NCAA, which would have surely erased the Buckeyes' 2010 victories because of those ineligible players. The best way to appease the infractions committee, as USC learned, is to appear as contrite as possible and get out ahead of the sanctions by imposing your own harsh conditions.

Instead, Ohio State has tried to half-step it, again, just as it did in its 10-day sham investigation last December, and just as it did when it originally announced that Tressel would be suspended for only two nonconference games. The school's response, predictably, tried to lay all the blame at the feet of the departed and disgraced coach.

"The responsibility is upon Tressel," the response says. "The institution is embarrassed by the actions of Tressel."

Yes, Ohio State is so mad at Tressel that it waived the $250,000 fine it levied at the coach when it became aware he lied to his superiors about the NCAA scandal. You remember that fine, the one Gee assured the Columbus Dispatch in June that "he will pay it." Well, instead, now the school will pay Tressel $52,250 as part of what now will be known as a "retirement," rather than a resignation. That will surely show him!

Even with these sanctions, there's little to suggest that Ohio State has seen the end of the storm. The period of uncertainty before the NCAA hearing in August has already hurt Ohio State's 2012 recruiting, and most recruits would be wise to commit elsewhere. Bowl bans and scholarship reductions would only solidify the pain that Ohio State is feeling now.

The Buckeyes are facing a stern evaluation of conscience in the coming days. Ohio State will soon learn what it means to put winning and beating Michigan above anything else. Until then, it will not do anything to jeopardize that. If the NCAA is not as weak as colleges, sports analysts, and readers across the country believe them to be, then they will teach Ohio State a lesson. They will make the Buckeyes pay the price for dishonesty.

After all, if you can't enforce rules, then there's no point in having them.