To be clear, we have our biases here at tBBC. We wear scarlet and gray colored glasses, to be sure, and even with that we’re disappointed by all of the events that have transpired regarding “Tattoogate” or “The Tress Mess” or whatever you want to call it.
We know that Jim Tressel has violated NCAA regulations, and that he should be held accountable for this. We would also not be surprised to see the NCAA extend the five game suspension in addition to other consequences for his decisions, and we will at that time argue whether the sanctions are justified, too lax, or too stringent.
However, to say as the Orlando Sentinel did today, that Jim Tressel’s firing is imminent is speculation based on faulty logic and (in my opinion) lazy journalism.
The line of thinking goes like this: Jim Tressel is currently under investigation for a violation of Rule 10.1 for unethical conduct, and has been suspended for part of the upcoming season. Tennessee basketball coach Bruce Pearl is also under investigation for a 10.1 violation and was also suspended for part of this past season, and was yesterday fired by the University of Tennessee. Therefore, Jim Tressel will also be fired.
I’m sorry, but it’s not that simple.
First, it should be noted that the violations under critique are significantly different based mostly on the magnitude. For Jim Tressel, the investigation and consequences are centering on the following:
- In April, he received notification that several players might be involved in a NCAA violation, selling their property to an outside party, which is an illegal benefit.
- He did not report this potential issue to the Ohio State Compliance office, the Office of General Council, or the Athletic Director at any time from April through September.
- In September, he (like all NCAA employees and student athletes) signed documentation to indicate that he had no knowledge of any violations of NCAA policy, in spite of the knowledge mentioned above.
- Throughout the 2010 season Coach Tressel allows players to play that may have been ineligible due to potential violations that he was aware of.
- In December, the University is made aware of the situation that Tressel was informed about in April, and suspends the players involved. During the University investigation, it’s safe to assume that Coach Tressel did not come forward with his prior knowledge.
- The NCAA suspends the student athletes involved for parts of the 2011 season, after letting them play in the Sugar Bowl.
- In January, the University is made aware of Coach Tressel’s knowledge of the situation and begins working with the NCAA to respond appropriately. The University chooses to suspend Coach Tressel, first for two games and ultimately for five, while the NCAA investigation continues.
- The NCAA has not set a timeline for this matter to be concluded, although many speculate that it will wrap up some time this summer.
Again, these are egregious violations- at surface level, it appears that Coach Tressel is responsible for his a) initial failure to disclose, b) failure to disclose in September, c) allowing participation of ineligible athletes, and d) failure to disclose in December. Whether the NCAA chooses to see these as one violation or several separate ones is yet to be determined.
The facts of the Pearl situation are, as far as I can gather, these:
- Coach Pearl had a gathering for recruits at his house, which is a violation of the NCAA’s recruiting protocol.
- At the gathering, he informed the recruits and their families that he was not going to report that they’d been over to the NCAA, and asked that they keep silent as well.
- In addition, Pearl and his staff made numerous impermissible phone calls to recruits, again in violation of the NCAA’s policy.
- During the NCAA investigation into these concerns, Pearl denied knowledge of the gathering at his house up until the point where he was shown a photo that was taken at the event.
- Pearl is sanctioned by the University ($1.5 million over 5 years, no off campus recruiting) and by the SEC (suspended for 8 conference games). During a press conference, Coach Pearl admitted that he had made a mistake and was sorry.
- In September, following the press conference, Coach Pearl may have made illegal contact with a recruit at Oak Hill Academy, in spite of the fact that he was banned from off campus recruiting.
- This fall, Coach Pearl’s staff made an error with the guest list for the game against the University of Kentucky. While a minor violation, it was yet another strike against the recruiting practices of the Volunteer staff.
Given this, it’s possible to see several differences between the two situations. First, Coach Pearl’s falsehoods were direct lies to NCAA investigators about a situation that he himself facilitated. He broke a rule, encouraged potential student athletes and their families to be dishonest about it, and was not honest to the NCAA staff when asked directly.
This is not an attempt to excuse Jim Tressel’s behavior; but like it or not, there is a difference between breaking a rule and blatantly lying to cover it up and not being forthright. Both are egregious and should be dealt with firmly, particularly if college sports is a part of a University who hopes to shape young adults for the future.
But what should be kept in mind here when thinking about the University of Tennessee’s decision to fire Coach Pearl is that there are a number of other factors at play. First, there are the additional recruiting violations (improper phone calls, improper contact, improper guest priveledges at University events), several of which happened after the University thought they had addressed this issue with Coach Pearl. Second, there might have been concerns about other issues within the basketball program (ESPN alludes to potential substance usage issues, and there was a New Years Eve arrest in 2010). Third, Coach Pearl has a couple of violations in his past- nothing significant, but they are still present.
A final factor, and a significant difference between these two circumstances in my opinion, is the ongoing NCAA investigation into the Tennessee Athletic Department. Former coach Lane Kiffin has already been reprimanded for failure to monitor his staff, and there are questions surrounding the University’s use of hostesses in recruiting that have emerged following a 22 month investigation by the NCAA. It’s quite possible, given this climate and the factors mentioned above, that the University is seeking to “clean house” in order to put their best foot forward for the NCAA. Firing Coach Pearl might have been one additional aspect of that process.
In contrast, The Ohio State University’s athletic department is not currently under investigation by the NCAA. And, while players in Coach Tressel’s programs in the past have been sanctioned, at no time was he.
The situations and circumstances between these two matters are vastly different if you’re willing to move past the easy thoughts of fans and commentators. Again, both men should be held accountable by their institutions and the NCAA for their actions.
But to judge one institution’s response to an incident based on another institution’s decision to act on a longer pattern of behavior is simply a mistake.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
