Holy Crap

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP6576856696af4ac1a0d7f7690bc179dc.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Next season, if a player draws an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty during the play, the penalty will wipe away the result of the play. For example, if a player high steps or unnecessarily dives into the end zone, the touchdown will be taken away and a 15-yard penalty will be assessed.

New rule. Don't like it. Did this rule actually pass? The article is poorly written so it is a little ambiguous. But wow. I am okay with the rule, but the subjective way they are enforced makes its a dumb rule in my mind. Can you imagine if locker's touchdown was taken away in our game for the chuck. or even his spiking of the ball in the bowl game against nebraska this year.

I think we should just send a bunch of robots out there instead of humans. I can see trying to keep some of the excessive celebrating at a minimum but this rule gives WAY too much power to ref's. What if they flag a team for chest bumping each other on the sidelines after a score? Anyone heard of Pac 10 ref's? I can see it now. The PAC will never lose another non conference home game again.

The NCAA is the biggest joke of all time. Why are they adding more rules when they can't even police they ones they've got now?

I've always hated that dead-ball personal fouls have any affect on the placement of the ball. Giving team A a first down after team b got a little too excited for stopping them on third down just seems criminal. I'd like to see something similar to hockey. Make the offending player sit the next x number of downs, while his team plays short a player. Give the opposing team an advantage, but don't hand them a gift.

coachK wrote:
I've always hated that dead-ball personal fouls have any affect on the placement of the ball. Giving team A a first down after team b got a little too excited for stopping them on third down just seems criminal. I'd like to see something similar to hockey. Make the offending player sit the next x number of downs, while his team plays short a player. Give the opposing team an advantage, but don't hand them a gift.

Can you imagine playing a few downs on offense with only 1 or 2 lineman because of excessive pushing or talking smack? The QB wouldn't even step onto the field!



What about playing a few downs on defense without any safeties or corners? that would change things. You could almost dictate what the next play would be.



Interesting idea.

Listening to the commentators of the Sugar Bowl last night was pretty comical. They were trying to justify Tressel not manning up and holding his players out of the game saying that it would be 'unfair to the rest of the team and the senior class to not let them play'... What?!! Newsflash morons, that's what cheating does. It hurts you, your teammates, the program, everyone. It's rarely if ever only affects just the guilty party. And I'm sure the guys who would've filled their positions would have been thrilled to play in the Sugar Bowl, regardless of whether they won or they lost. And aren't we always hearing about how much 'depth' the BCS powers have and that's why the non-AQ couldn't compete with them or in their conferences. So where is this depth if you can't even take a hit of 5 players out of 105? But of course we all know that winning and money is more important than integrity and playing by the rules so I don't know why I'm continually shocked by anything these people do or say.

gmj81 wrote:
Listening to the commentators of the Sugar Bowl last night was pretty comical. They were trying to justify Tressel not manning up and holding his players out of the game saying that it would be 'unfair to the rest of the team and the senior class to not let them play'... What?!! Newsflash morons, that's what cheating does. It hurts you, your teammates, the program, everyone. It's rarely if ever only affects just the guilty party. And I'm sure the guys who would've filled their positions would have been thrilled to play in the Sugar Bowl, regardless of whether they won or they lost. And aren't we always hearing about how much 'depth' the BCS powers have and that's why the non-AQ couldn't compete with them or in their conferences. So where is this depth if you can't even take a hit of 5 players out of 105? But of course we all know that winning and money is more important than integrity and playing by the rules so I don't know why I'm continually shocked by anything these people do or say.

The whole ohio state penalty thing was disgusting. to say you can play in the bowl but not the first five games is just ridiculous. ohio state should be ashamed.the ncaa is just being who they are, biased unprincipled morons.

jonnylingo wrote:

Listening to the commentators of the Sugar Bowl last night was pretty comical. They were trying to justify Tressel not manning up and holding his players out of the game saying that it would be 'unfair to the rest of the team and the senior class to not let them play'... What?!! Newsflash morons, that's what cheating does. It hurts you, your teammates, the program, everyone. It's rarely if ever only affects just the guilty party. And I'm sure the guys who would've filled their positions would have been thrilled to play in the Sugar Bowl, regardless of whether they won or they lost. And aren't we always hearing about how much 'depth' the BCS powers have and that's why the non-AQ couldn't compete with them or in their conferences. So where is this depth if you can't even take a hit of 5 players out of 105? But of course we all know that winning and money is more important than integrity and playing by the rules so I don't know why I'm continually shocked by anything these people do or say.

The whole ohio state penalty thing was disgusting. to say you can play in the bowl but not the first five games is just ridiculous. ohio state should be ashamed.the ncaa is just being who they are, biased unprincipled morons.

I think the whole thing is a joke. What did they do? They sold some personal possessions. They were not cheating, they were not stealing, they were not getting money like many Auburn (read SEC) players. They sold their football memorablia. I understand the pay for play problem but saying they can't sell a ring because it was given to them by the NCAA is like the ex-hubby telling his ex-wife she can't pawn her wedding ring because it's his property (btw mr NCAA courts have ruled on this in her favor).

Oh yeah free tatooes. Maybe they should do jailtime. They could watch Newton strutt his stuff while they languish behind bars.

Doman's effectiveness as a recruiter, which was already nationally recognized, just got even better now that he'll be the offensive playcaller and have a much bigger role in deciding team identity and matters.

coachK wrote:
I've always hated that dead-ball personal fouls have any affect on the placement of the ball. Giving team A a first down after team b got a little too excited for stopping them on third down just seems criminal. I'd like to see something similar to hockey. Make the offending player sit the next x number of downs, while his team plays short a player. Give the opposing team an advantage, but don't hand them a gift.

Interesting suggestion. I agree with the Robot comment. Let the kids celebrate, just don't let it get out of hand or drag on for more than a few seconds.

imuakahuku wrote:
I think the whole thing is a joke. What did they do? They sold some personal possessions. They were not cheating, they were not stealing, they were not getting money like many Auburn (read SEC) players. They sold their football memorablia. I understand the pay for play problem but saying they can't sell a ring because it was given to them by the NCAA is like the ex-hubby telling his ex-wife she can't pawn her wedding ring because it's his property (btw mr NCAA courts have ruled on this in her favor).

Exactly... I have no problem with what the OSU players did--selling football memorabilia should be a very light penalty if a penalty at all. What if a player got a PS3 as part of his bowl care package, but he already has a PS3? He should be able to sell it to get a few extra bucks.



In its extreme, I suppose that selling merchandise could be a front for laundering extravagant booster payments to players, but an absolute bar seems to be a little overbroad. There has be a way to allow players to get some benefit of their fame. If the player wants to sell something, make the player document the sale, provide comparable prices of similar memorabilia to ensure the sale was reasonable and arms-length (e.g., if a signed, game-worn Tom Brady jersey sells for $1000, then Terrelle Pryor shouldn't be able sell his for more than that), and also reimburse the provider of the memorabilia for the cost of the good (e.g., play the university back for the cost of the helmet or ring).

pac 12 should fear themselves.

They should be suspended for no more than one or two games, and the only reason it should be that high is because of the tattoos. The other property was personal property, and it doesn't sound like it was sold for a ton of money.



I honestly don't have a problem with them playing in the bowl game either. The NCAA has a policy of letting players play in bowl games or other championship events if they can be suspended later.

Under this rule Locker's TD would not have counted.



I don't particularly like the rule either, however, the college game never was and never will the NFL game. Showboating is for the pros.



Regarding the thread tangent and Ohio St., The problem is that nobody knows the value of the kickbacks these guys got by selling jerseys and memorabilia to auto dealers and restaurants and so on. The tats, free loaner Escalades, dinners, and all that could add up to thousands of dollars. How much did Reggie Bu$h take? How much did the BYU volleyball team take?



The amateur status of college football is what's at stake. Do we want to turn it into another mini-NFL?

imuakahuku wrote:

gmj81 wrote:
Listening to the commentators of the Sugar Bowl last night was pretty comical. They were trying to justify Tressel not manning up and holding his players out of the game saying that it would be 'unfair to the rest of the team and the senior class to not let them play'... What?!! Newsflash morons, that's what cheating does. It hurts you, your teammates, the program, everyone. It's rarely if ever only affects just the guilty party. And I'm sure the guys who would've filled their positions would have been thrilled to play in the Sugar Bowl, regardless of whether they won or they lost. And aren't we always hearing about how much 'depth' the BCS powers have and that's why the non-AQ couldn't compete with them or in their conferences. So where is this depth if you can't even take a hit of 5 players out of 105? But of course we all know that winning and money is more important than integrity and playing by the rules so I don't know why I'm continually shocked by anything these people do or say.

The whole ohio state penalty thing was disgusting. to say you can play in the bowl but not the first five games is just ridiculous. ohio state should be ashamed.the ncaa is just being who they are, biased unprincipled morons.

I think the whole thing is a joke. What did they do? They sold some personal possessions. They were not cheating, they were not stealing, they were not getting money like many Auburn (read SEC) players. They sold their football memorablia. I understand the pay for play problem but saying they can't sell a ring because it was given to them by the NCAA is like the ex-hubby telling his ex-wife she can't pawn her wedding ring because it's his property (btw mr NCAA courts have ruled on this in her favor).

Oh yeah free tatooes. Maybe they should do jailtime. They could watch Newton strutt his stuff while they languish behind bars.

It doesn't matter what you or I think. The NCAA made the rule. Anybody who breaks is a 'cheater'. Why make the rule if you're not going to police it? However the NCAA lacks the balls to enforce the very rules they make when it comes to the biggest of programs, a.k.a the money-makers. The NCAA is the most corrupt governing body ever. Their greed can't even be disguised anymore.



Furthermore, if you think that is all that these kids really did, you're only fooling yourself. There was an article a couple of days ago that laid out a lot of the underhanded stuff that's gone down with this whole mess. I'll see if I can find it again.





Yep. Here it is: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-pryor010311" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;