ZRod

Good thing Monte Ball wasn't an option... and if your referring to Steinkhuler he's from Lincoln, so not necessarily German. Steinkhuler is about as German as it gets! I mean if you were thinking he was actually of German nationality, not that I would question your intelligence or anything... being a badgercock fan and all... that has nothing to do with anything... er that doesn't have anything to do with stuff... but I digress... you can slap me anytime...

And I just found this

Reminds me of this

Good thing Monte Ball wasn't an option... and if your referring to Steinkhuler he's from Lincoln, so not necessarily German.

First money shouldn't matter per se, a violation is a violation is a violation and there needs to be some relative consistency between them. USC violations were MAJOR no doubt and they had the hammer dropped on them for it as they should. I also think OSU self imposed sanctions are pretty reasonable and they probably don't deserve to have much if anything added to them by the NCAA. But if you're going to take away scholarships and affect recruiting then why not just do with out this waiver? It looks better for all involved. Second they may have complied with the initial allegations and the following investigation which is all well and good, but the school has also been slapped with a failure to monitor charge which is a pretty serious one. Like I said the NCAA doesn't show any consistency but the most recent case involving Boise State tennis (obviously a less visible program) resulted in show cause for the former coaches, meaning they had restrictions put on their recruiting at any NCAA program, and a post season ban for the team. Different case and circumstances I know, but just shows that this isn't a violation that can be taken lightly. And the OSU violation isn't something that can be pinned on Tressel alone this involves the atheltic department and how they inform and monitor athletes. Third this isn't about punishing people but punishing the institution. I don't really agree with taking the post season away from kids who are 4 or more years removed from what happened and as a result of the sanctions are now paying for someone else's transgressions. But this really wouldn't be that steep of a punishment and it wouldn't affect any current players who haven't done anything wrong or have already payed restituition. I mean how far back would it be setting OSU and how far would it go in helping the NCAA's reputation?

They are both affiliated with OSU and Urban is there in large part because of what Terrelle Pryor did and didn't do. Explain to me how USC loses scholi's and post season play for something that occurred 4 or 5 years ago while OSU hires a new head coach and he is allowed to have his staff operate for the university while the old staff remains for the post season, after multiple major violations? I get that this is common practice, but this is an uncommon situation. I really don't have an axe to grind against Ohio State it's more of a beef with the NCAA. If they operated with any kind of consistency this wouldn't be happening. But the NCAA operating with consistency is about as likely as GSG finding a girl.

Are you sure about this? Because if it is true, that makes the complaining from Brandon a bit hypocritical. Even if he wasn't the guy there at the time. http://espn.go.com/c...-coaches-waiver But there is a difference between a coach simply being fired and a coach resigning amid scandal. He did not bring that up. According to the email, he says it does not promote a level playing field to allow two coaching staffs. Nothing about this isn't right because the coach got fired on account of a violation. While there very well may be a difference, that is not what Brandon is talking about. I understand that, it was just more of my opinion and I think if he was going to argue against the waiver that is probably what he should have argued. If OSU didn't have any violations I wouldn't have any problem with this, but things what they are it just doesn't seem kosher.

Or lay off the glue

Are you sure about this? Because if it is true, that makes the complaining from Brandon a bit hypocritical. Even if he wasn't the guy there at the time. http://espn.go.com/c...-coaches-waiver But there is a difference between a coach simply being fired and a coach resigning amid scandal.

That's probably the norm form him anyway. He's never seemed to be the brightest knife in the drawer.

Choi redshirted and didn't play his RS freshman year, unless he has an injury in the next 2 years he would never get another year of eligibility. And that's all I care to comment on.

I'm surprised at how many people have A-Rod and Choi as equals next year. I know A-Rod has no where to go but up but Choi was a beast when he got he chances and arguably should have been the starter all year.

Unless he was showing obvious physical signs in his eyes, movement, etc. it's going to be pretty hard to diagnose a concussion if the player knows how to get around the preliminary test, or if he gives the old I'm fine I'm fine I'M FINE!

Better question is who cares?

Anybody ever think about Choi at tackle? I know his killer beast mode attitude is probably better suited on the interior line, but the guy is pretty agile and damn strong. Think about the things we could do off of the edge with the push he gets.

I definitely think you're on to something with a dynamic playoff system. If the BCS has taught us anything it's that each year presents a new and different challenge. And just drawing up a playoff when I was bored one night it seems like there are so many variable that it would be just as complicated to make a static playoff as it would to make a dynamic one. But using all 25 teams from the bowl games would take too long just imagine what would happen to B1G or SEC teams that played a physical schedule like we did this year, they would be decimated if they could even make it to the semifinals or championship. Not to mention you begin encroaching on the Superbowl

Wouldn't know about the buffets, but it seems like they have A LOT of really good restaurants and sports bars with quality food. Well one of the guys in this pick just got the kansas HC job, but it's the one in the back looking like he just spotted an open box of doughnuts. My uncle lives in Lawrence and honestly every time we go down there I think we eat at a new place and we haven't had a bad meal yet, I could see how that would be attractive to a few um... well rounded coaches.

you wouldn't but some people about two states south of here might

Wow.....................shareholders in area buffets must hold a LOT of sway with the athletic department................... Well that didn't take long... (waits till Po finds this thread... )

I went ahead and played them out for you on paper and I came up with LSU vs Alabama in the final. Problem...not solved!! Sure it is solved.............................who gets to the final is not so important as the OPPORTUNITY for legitimate contenders to take a swing. And, those games would undoubtedly generate a TON more interest if played within the confines of a tourney..........even if using the bowls as venues........... Well here's about a third of your "legitimate contenders" right here... # 21 So Miss # 23 West Virginia Unranked Arkansas State Unranked Northern Illinois Unranked Louisiana Tech Meanwhile...not even in the tournament... # 6 Arkansas # 9 South Carolina # 12 Baylor # 13 Michigan # 14 Oklahoma # 16 Georgia # 17 Michigan State # 19 Houston # 20 Nebraska Yeah...problem solved!! Solves more problems than the BCS creates. At least you actually have to win your conference or play tough the whole year in order to have a chance at the Big Game. Besides you shut the smaller conferences up about the whole "we don't get a fair shake".

You could always use the older and more prestigious bowls for the games since most of them are over 60,000 and all of them have at least a 50,000 capacity. And you could have wild cards or lower tier confrence play in those smaller stadiums as a trade off for the wild card

Any video or articles of him explaining it? Just curious to hear what he has to say.

Eat my shorts, dirtbag. Please, please be more civil when speaking with those outside of our fan base! Remember we are the greatest fans in football, we have a reputation to uphold.

A playoff is probably the best way to fix things in all reality. There are currently 11 conferences in the FBS and 4 independents, it doesn't make for nice round numbers but essentially make each conference declare one lone champion and each conference champion is entered into the playoff. You could offer 2 of the independents a spot if they meet a certain record, but since they choose not to be in a conference they should not be allowed to have the Notre Dame rule. A few teams are going to have a bi, but you can fit it into the bowl schedule and even use some of the bowls as playoff games, BCS bowls could be semi finals or championship games something like that. And you can always create more bowls for teams that feel left out like they do already. If they would just sit down to think about this stuff it's not too hard to figure it out keeping a lot of tradition intact and probably making everybody a ton of money again.