Talk about the Buckeyes the Wolverines the Hilltoppers the Ducks the Beavers the Chanticleers... or anyone else who isn't BG or an opponent in this forum.
IMO, tOSU was so over-sensitive due to other violations that they jumped the gun on O'brien. Apparently the judge agreed.
They did it because they were treating the kid as a recruit, they petitioned with the NCAA to have the kids eligibility reinstated like 2 or 3 times. they were trying to recruit him.
O'brien lied about the money, he should have told them up front he was going to give him the money and to stop trying to recruit him or gain his eligibility.
Instead he confessed FIVE years later?
Big no no.
Poor Thad had to pay for it.
The judge can only give an opinion and in my opinion it was the wrong one.
But 3.5 mil is not a lot for OSU to pay for this clown to go away
i hope they do not appeal so this can end and let the boys go to work in March
tekekini wrote:What O'Briend did, according to NCAA, was an infraction.
So, How can a judge rule he was unfairly dismissed?
Sounds to me like the NCAA should not count these as infractions if the judge does not count them as reason for termination.
O'Brien had a contract with terms and conditions. I think what the judge is saying is that tOSU did not follow the terms, conditions, agreements, of his contract to terminate him. Just like someone that is found guilty before a trial, O'Brien was fired without following the due process of his contract.
The judge is not making any kind of determination as to whether what he did is an NCAA violation or not.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools."
- Ernest Hemingway
tekekini wrote:What O'Briend did, according to NCAA, was an infraction.
So, How can a judge rule he was unfairly dismissed?
Sounds to me like the NCAA should not count these as infractions if the judge does not count them as reason for termination.
O'Brien had a contract with terms and conditions. I think what the judge is saying is that tOSU did not follow the terms, conditions, agreements, of his contract to terminate him. Just like someone that is found guilty before a trial, O'Brien was fired without following the due process of his contract.
The judge is not making any kind of determination as to whether what he did is an NCAA violation or not.
I know that, he ruled that there was not a "material breach" of contract. But, there was in my opinion, just not the judges i guess?
Correct me if I am wrong but was it not in his contract that he can not violate NCAA recruiting rules? Couldn't a verbal admission of breaking the rules after lying about it for 5 years be enough for immediate dismissal?
I really don't care. OSU got the better end of the deal as I had said. 3.5 Mill is not that much to make this puppet happy and to make him go away.
They will make it up in football season when ticket prices go up anyways.
Yes, it was in his contract that if he violated NCAA rules, he could be terminiated. The issue is that the NCAA has to formally rule on the violation before he could be terminated on those grounds. The NCAA had made no formal ruling on any violations when Geiger fired O'Brien. If he would have waited, let the NCAA rule, then fired O'Brien, everything would have been fine.
"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools."
- Ernest Hemingway
