Smith Owes Answers

Please patronize our advertisers to help
keep theOzone.net free for everyone.





The-Ozone.net Mall

Interesting, Fun companies with interesting, quality products - and the-Ozone gets a piece of the action!

Click here to return to the front page.
Established October 31, 1996
Front Page Columns and Features
Last updated: 12/20/2011 7:05 PM
Share |

Opinion
Why Gene Smith Owes Buckeye Nation a Press Conference
By John Porentas

When OSU Director of Athletics Gene Smith demanded and got Jim Tressel's resignation he never bothered to hold a press conference to explain his action. Instead, he treated us all to a wonderful Youtube presentation thereby insulating himself from questions about his action.

This summer, Smith once again at least managed his scrutiny by conducting a press conference and inviting only media members whom he felt he could trust. For that, he earned the wrath of the-Ozone.

Now it has once again gone too far, and Gene Smith owes us some answers.

Smith has said all along that he was sure there would be no post-season ban on Ohio State football. He thought that because his crack team of NCAA experts had researched the situation and found no precedent for that type of NCCA action given the circumstances.

In a Cleveland Plain Dealer report just a few minutes ago by Doug Lesmerises, he now says they only researched recent cases, but there were cases going back to 2002 or 2003 where there was indeed precedent. Below is a copy and paste excerpt from that article, and we urge you to use the link provided to read the article in entirety.

"The NCAA cited two cases from 2002 and 2003 in its decision to impose a bowl ban, factoring the school's failure to monitor to charge in with its status as a repeat violator under NCAA rules, and the fact that suspended players were allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl last year while then-coach Jim Tressel hid his knowledge of NCAA violations.

"Smith said Ohio State's research focused on more recent cases, and the school did not expect cases from eight and nine years ago to be used in the NCAA's reasoning."

What I now want to know is what "precedents" were considered by OSU in doing their "research"? Just failure to monitor, or was there research into cases with failure to monitor combined with being a repeat offender? That is what seems to have drawn the ire of the NCAA. Was that considered?

Others want to know who decided that the earlier cases were not to be considered, certainly a valid concern.

Without a press conference, we can't ask.

I'll watch for the answers on YouTube.

Donate by Check :

Ozone Communications
1380 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio
43212

Help us bring you more Buckeye coverage. Donate to the-Ozone.

Click here to email this the-Ozone feature to a friend...or even a foe.

(c) 2010 The O-Zone, O-Zone Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, rebroadcast,rewritten, or redistributed.

Click here to return to the front page.
Front Page Columns and Features