Ohio State Won't Satisfy Mob No Matter What
"Tattoo-Gate" has made Ohio State the center of attention the past few months for all the wrong reasons, and no matter what Ohio State does it will never be enough to anyone not involved with the university.
Seemingly, anyone not a part of Buckeye Nation wants the program to crash and burn.
Maybe it's because of the success that head coach Jim Tressel had—or maybe it's because we refer to ourselves as "The Ohio State University"—but I think it's because College Football fans are sick of the success Ohio State has had the past 10 years.
Why else would people want so much for them to fail?
When Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith announced today the entire 2010 season would be vacated, including the Sugar Bowl win over Arkansas, did the media applaud Ohio State? No way. The talk immediately switched to how Ohio State needs to impose postseason bans and the loss of scholarships.
When was the last time a team self-imposed a postseason ban and scholarship losses on itself?
Did USC impose a postseason ban with scholarship losses when it was under the gun for paying recruits to play for the school? No, not at all.
Ohio State took a step in the right direction today. Will the NCAA impose more sanctions? I would have to think so, but the idea that Smith should impose his own postseason ban and scholarship losses is ludicrous.
Let me predict the future here for a minute.
When the calender strikes August and the NCAA announces its ruling on Ohio State—no matter how severe the sanctions are—the same people that are complaining now will be the same ones complaining then.
Ohio State will rebound from this incident, and not to upset anyone further, but it will do so while barely missing a beat. With players like Braxton Miller, Curtis Grant and Devin Smith, the Buckeyes won't be rebuild mode this season, they'll simply reload.
After all, we're The Ohio State University.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?