Mount Buckmore

11 Warriors had an interesting post on the players on "Mount Buckmore from the 80s.  That got me to thinking about who I'd put on the mountain for the decades of my life.

70s - Archie, Corny, Cousineau, and Pete Johnson

I know there's some good players I'm missing from the early 70s but I really only started understanding the game mid decade.  This list would probably include Gradishar and Hicks if I was born earlier.

80s - Schlitcher, Byars, Carter, and Spielman

Eleven warriors ignores Schlitcher but during his junior and senior seasons there weren't many better in the country.  There's only been a few times the Buckeyes have been able to say that at QB.  They include Marek and he was a great player but for some reason I didn't like him as much as other players.  Their notables include Pepper Johnson, Tim Spencer and John Frank.  Spencer was my #5 pick fwiw.

90s - Orlando Pace, Eddie, Antoine Winfield, and Joe Germaine

Close behind would be Korey Stringer, Robert Smith, Steve Tovar, Shawn Springs, and Mike Vrabel.

00s - Smith, Hawk, Ginn, and Doss

A recent ranking has Holmes replacing Ginn in the top 4 with Beanie, Malcolm Jenkins, Laurinaitis and Chris Gamble right behind.  I can't argue with any of those picks.

It will be interesting to see if they agree with my 90s and 00s picks.

Florida State has set off crazy expansion talk

Reports are that Florida State is a lock to join the Big 12 which has set many people on the internet to assume that the ACC is in play.  The reason is that it appears that the Big 4 (B12, P12, B1G, SEC) are making moves to set up a playoff where they are the only conferences involved.  That has made the teams in the ACC nervous and if that happens all the teams in that conference will be losing millions of dollars of revenue in an already strapped athletic department.  That has lead to a lot of speculation that additional teams will be leaving soon and other conferences will be picking over the scraps.

So what changes are likely?

Big 12 - currently at 10.  Most likely will be adding Louisville and Florida State.

That impacts the Big East because they gave an out to all their new teams if another existing member left which means Boise and San Diego State will most likely go back to the Mountain West.  Houston and SMU are up in the air but seem likely to stay in the Big East if it still exists.

ACC - If FSU leaves they will most likely go for Connecticut as a replacement unless 2 teams leave in which case they might just stay at 12.  12 teams is much easier to work with as a conference.

That is what is likely.  Many people feel there will be a seismic shift and expect the following as well.

- Notre Dame to join a conference.  Most likely the Big 12 but possibly the Big Ten.  I personally think the Irish would be silly to go anywhere but the Big Ten as it is a better fit but their fan base hates the idea and most feel they will raise enough havoc to keep them out of the B1G.

- The SEC will take a few ACC teams.  Everyone seems to think that 16 is the magic number which I dispute but if that happens the most obvious targets are Miami FL and Virginia Tech.  There's a lot of hurdles in the way of that happening.  The biggest are Florida and Virginia along with the state legislatures.  The thing is Miami is a private institution and I'd bet the Virginia legislature would it as a good move to goto the SEC.  Other possibles - Georgia Tech, West Virginia, and the Carolina schools.

- The Big Ten will expand.  I seriously doubt this will happen as very few schools could move the needle in sports but Notre Dame is an exception.  If that happens the new question is who can you pair with them.  

• Missouri was my favorite choice but that ship has sailed (I'd think).  
• You could look to schools like Kansas but the issue there is the schools have signed over their broadcasting rights to the conference for 15 years which makes any move really difficult.  
• There's always the Big East leftovers like Rutgers or Connecticut but I've always thought those were poor choices.

That leaves the ACC for the Big Ten.

• Maryland - too far but a great fit academically.
• Virginia Tech - If they don't goto the SEC it is a really good fit but academics a bit lacking
• Pitt - Not gonna happen
• Syracuse - Not gonna happen
• Boston College - Not gonna happen
• Virginia - Bad football but a great fit academically.

This got me to thinking about my old posts about possibilities when it looked like Delany's plan was to expand to 16.  What we didn't realize at the time is how tough it is going to be to attract a team that wouldn't cost us money.  It also reminded me that Notre Dame is essentially an undergraduate school and the academics in the league won't be happy with another school that doesn't push the needle in terms of research.  Who would do this?  Virginia and Maryland.

This is totally fantasyland and the fan base in the Big Ten would have to accept that we'd essentially become two separate leagues for reasons I've explained in the past (7 division game plus 2 non non-division is not good for cohesion).  Think about the league you'd get:

East
West
Ohio State
Notre Dame
Michigan
Nebraska
Michigan State
Wisconsin
Penn State
Iowa
Indiana
Purdue
Maryland
Illinois
Virginia Tech
Minnesota
Virginia Tech
Northwestern

Virginia Tech would be a great addition for football and Maryland/Virginia are top notch academic institutions (and with decent all around sports).  This would likely be a net loss to the conference (only add Virginia/Maryland/DC on basic) but a home run for the academic consortium.  I doubt it happens but it is fun to think about.

If that happens then the conference championships would essentially be the quarterfinals, the bowls a semi-final, and the BCS will be the 1 game championship.  While teams outside of the Big 4 could qualify for the semi's, it would be doubtful as the strength of schedule and voter bias would make it almost impossible.

That was the unstated goal of the commissioners meeting last month and it seems like they are on track to make it happen.  The only remaining question is what will happen to the teams in the ACC.

Breaking down the proposed NCAA changes

Many people aren't aware that the NCAA is in meetings that will make huge changes to the way it enforces its rules.  In January they released information an Enforcement Working Group was created after last August's presidential retreat and was tasked with "creating a tiered violation structure, new penalty procedures, a reformed process for adjudication and a reformed process that is fair while supporting the collegiate model the organization is looking to uphold."

This is matrix was the result.

• Level I: Most egregious - A violation that seriously undermines or threatens the integrity of any of the NCAA enduring values (student-athlete success, the collegiate model, amateurism as a student model, competitive equity), including any violation that provides or is intended to provide a significant or extensive recruiting, competitive or other advantage, or significant or extensive impermissible benefit. Multiple Level II, III and/or IV violations may collectively be considered a Level I violation. Individual conduct that is unethical may be classified as a Level I violation, even if the underlying institutional violations are not considered Level I.

• Level II: Serious - A violation that provides or is intended to provide a minimal to significant recruiting, competitive or other advantage; or includes a minimal to significant impermissible benefit; or involves a pattern of systemic violations in a particular area. Multiple Level III and/or Level IV violations may collectively be considered a Level II violation. Some limited individual conduct that is unethical or dishonest may be classified as a Level II violation, even if the underlying institutional violations are not considered Level II.

• Level III: Those violations currently categorized as secondary violations - A violation that is isolated or limited in nature; provides no more than a minimal recruiting, competitive or other advantage; and does not include more than a minimal impermissible benefit. Multiple Level IV violations may collectively be considered a Level III violation.

• Level IV: Minor or technical issues that do not rise to the level of a serious violation - An issue that is an action/inaction that is inadvertent and isolated; limited or technical in nature; and results in a negligible, if any, recruiting, competitive or other advantage of negligible, if any, impermissible benefit. Level IV issues will not impact eligibility.

Level 3 and Level 4 violations happen in all organizations and the lack of these is actually evidence of a control system that isn't robust.  For examples you can read this article where Ohio State reported to the NCAA all the secondary violations they incurred since last June.

Level 1 and 2 violations are what everyone is concerned about since that effects a team.  The reason for this change is in the past they really only had a few ill defined categories and they wanted a more defined penalty structure.  They haven't really classified the difference between the two but my guess is that a Level 1 violation is a Loss of Institutional Control/Failure to Monitor while Level 2 would include the lesser violations.  I'm sure this will solidify as they develop the system.

The question that this brings up is how would this effect cases like the ones that happened in the past like North Carolina, South Carolina, LSU, Ohio State, and USC. (I'm really simplifying the summaries - they are all much more complex than my statement)

• North Carolina - Tutors taking tests and numerous coaches/players with illegal contact with an agent.  Failure to Monitor given - Level 1 Presumptive
• NC would have gotten a 1% fine, a 1 year bowl ban, and scholarship reduction of between 11 and 21 players.  They got a 1 year bowl ban and a 9 scholarship reduction taken over 3 years.

• South Carolina - Paying for players to stay at a hotel on campus - Level 2 Aggravation
• South Carolina would have gotten a 0-.5% fine, no bowl ban, and scholarship reduction of between 0 and 11 players.  They received a $18,500 fine and a reduction of 6 scholarships over 2 seasons.

• LSU - Illegal contact with player - Level 2 Presumptive
• LSU would have gotten a fine of 0.-.25%, no bowl ban, and a scholarship reduction of between 0 and  5 players.  They got no bowl ban and a loss of 2 scholarships.

• Ohio State - Players selling awards for cash, coach withholding information, booster giving improper benefits. Failure to Monitor - Level 1 Presumptive
• OSU would have gotten a 1% fine ($300,000), a 1 year bowl ban, and scholarship reduction of between 11 and 21 players.  They got a 1 year bowl ban and a 9 scholarship reduction taken over 3 years.

• USC - Loss of Institutional Control in regards to Reggie Bush and Reggie Mayo. - Level 1 Aggravation
• USC would have gotten hit with a fine of 1-2% of program revenue, a 1-2 year bowl ban, and a reduction of between 21 and 32 scholarships.  They got hit with a 2 year bowl ban and lost 30 scholarships.

• Miami FL - Shapiro = Total loss of control? - Level 1 Significant?
• Miami FL will be interesting as I can't see how they could avoid the highest level.  That would give them a 1.5-2.5% fine, a 2-3+ year bowl ban, and a reduction of between 32 and 42 scholarships.

The biggest difference between these rules and the ones previously is it clearly defines what you can expect for the various levels.  It also gives the NCAA a way to better delineate between penalties as their current system has no metrics.¹  These penalties have been increased though one point of clarification is whether the scholarship reductions are by year or in total.  I'm pretty confident it is in total as you'd need to kick kids out of college to meet a 42 scholarship reduction but some articles seem to feel it is annual.

The NCAA is meeting in May to finalize this but hopefully it will streamline the process and take a lot of the guesswork out of the penalty phase.

¹ - I'm not fond of the significant, aggravation, presumptive, etc. titles.  Give the level a secondary letter grade and it will be easier to understand - For instance, Miami would have a 1A violation while LSU got a 2B. 

The current state of college football TV deals

The ACC just finalized their television deal with ESPN due to the additions of Syracuse and Pitt.  The Big 12 is in the final stages of their negotiations with ESPN/Fox as they lost aTm/Missouri and added of West Virginia/TCU.  The SEC is in initial talks regarding the addition of aTm/Missouri.  I thought it might be a good time to recap the television deals for college football.




The main motivation that got me to write this was was an article I read that stated that Florida State should leave the ACC and join the Big 12 due to their favorable deal.  The key in that article is that Florida State's athletic department is currently running a $2.4 million deficit and in the Big 12 Florida State would have the ability to create a Seminole Network.  The expectation is that this would bring in at least $5 million which would balance the budget.  I really can't believe Florida State would move for something as risky as that proposition but it has gotten traction over the weekend.  My guess is this is merely posturing to get concessions from the other ACC members at the meetings this week as the numbers don't add up.  There are rumors that ESPN and the Big 12 have agreed to a new deal that would give each team an estimated $20 million per season but I don't think it would be worth it for Florida State to leave for the $2.9 in additional television money when you consider the cost of additional travel.  I guess time will tell.

The other interesting thing about the spreadsheet is that most leagues seem to be happy they are getting Big Ten/SEC money and there is no doubt that ESPN stepped up to the plate and gave huge contracts to the Pac 10/ACC/Big 12.  Honestly when you think about television ratings I really don't think these deals can pay for themselves.  Are we really to believe that games in the ACC are worth $2.3 million?  I really think the key is ESPN is protecting its $5 per basic subscriber by making sure that they have long term college football contracts tied down all over the country so they have to be included on the basic tier.

That brings me to the SEC.  If the ACC is worth $2.3 million a game and the Big 12 is worth almost $2.7 million then what is the SEC worth?  That is where the question of subscriber fees vs ratings is interesting as the SEC's ratings are among the best though they are probably down the list when it comes to cable boxes in their area.  The SEC started their current deal in 2009 before prices really jumped and while their deal goes through 2016, I expect ESPN to cave and give them at least as much as the Big 12 for the addition of Texas A&M and Missouri.  If they don't the SEC could sell those home games to Fox/NBC/CBS for a huge sum and with 2016 not that far away they want to keep the SEC happy.  As you might recall, the Big Ten Network started because an ESPN executive dared Delany to find a better deal.  In the end I'd expect the SEC deal to be extended for at least another 10 years at least $3.0 million per game.

That brings us to the Big Ten.  Their deal is up in 2017 and they are biding their time as these deals have gotten increasingly ridiculous.  Looking at the Pac 12/Big 12, I expect the final deal to be a partnership between the ESPN and Fox for the 45 games   ESPN would prefer to have them all but they only really care that 1-2 games a week are on their station so it will be impossible for Midwest  cable companies to remove them from the basic tier.  That's because their main national competitor (DirectTV) will always have ESPN as basic and that combined with a section of the country that loves college football will make it hard to change.  This protects ESPN's $5/month which is the key.

So how much could the Big Ten get when they renew this contract?  Considering the games they are selling are the 3-4 best matchups every week they will get more than the average as their tier 2 games are shown on BTN.  My best guess would be at least $4 million in today's dollars.  That may seem high but if the Pac 10 can get $2.8 for all it's games then $4.0 million/game for the best Big Ten games seems pretty reasonable.  That's a nice bump from the $2.2 million per game they currently get and add an additional $7 million to each school in the league.

If the SEC and Big Ten get numbers like I expect the revenue per team for the next 15 - 20 years in college football would be as follows: Big Ten 27.7, SEC 23.0, Big 12 20.0, Pac 12 20.1, and ACC 17.1.  The Pac 12 numbers could jump a little if they are able to get their web based Pac 12 Network going for their Tier 3 content (games that Fox/ESPN don't want to run).  The same is true for Texas and the Longhorn Network.

A wildcard in the mix is Notre Dame as they will soon be making less than every other school in the top 5 college football conferences.  Their contract is up in 2015 and there are rumors that NBC may walk away as they are losing money on the current deal.  That's another clue that the real money in these college football deals is in subscriber fees as NBC doesn't get those as they are a broadcast company.  If they walk away then Notre Dame will need to negotiate with ESPN/FOX or possibly CBS/NBC's cable counterparts.  The issue for the Irish is one school isn't enough to motivate people to subscribe to a cable network so they will be negotiating from a position of weakness.  That leaves them with two choices - get the best deal they can from the cable companies to be included with the rest or work with one of them to form the Irish network.  There are undoubtedly thousands of Irish fans that would be happy to pay a premium for this channel.  That actually may be their best choice and one of the reasons for the recent talks with Texas and their Longhorn Network.

Unless they want to join a conference....

NCAA ordered to turn over all emails related to USC investigation

   
The McNair vs NCAA case has taken an interesting turn
How's it feel NCAA when the shoe is on the other foot? They fought hard but were just ordered by the court to turn over their internal emails in the Tod McNair case.


Frankly it surprises me that this hasn't happened more often. Why is it that the press has no problem filing a Freedom of Information request from an individual college but I've never heard of any of them doing it against the NCAA? Is it a private institution or are they just afraid of biting the hand that feeds them? My guess is they are a private organization which seems wrong to me since they rely so much on FoI in the press to persecute member organizations.

Speaking of that, I do find it a bit ironic that since USC is a private institution they are exempt from FoI requests and couldn't get the same scrutiny that hit Ohio State. This fact alone saved them from the circus that hit the Buckeyes.

Anyway, here's a C+P from the USC forums that details what is happening in the McNair vs NCAA case (If you've forgotten, McNair was the coach given the Show Cause penalty in the Reggie Bush ruling).

-------------------
Post on the USC Rivals Board:

TrojanJustice

So I checked out the public docket to see what's going on in this case and even paid a few bucks to get a key court order where the judge ruled on recent discovery motions. The big news is that McNair's lawyer filed a motion to obtain a commission to take Paul Dee's deposition in Florida. This is standard practice when you need to depose an uncooperative witness in another state. The court granted this commission on April 24, so very likely at some point this month the most corrupt administrator in the history of college football will be profusely sweating as he is grilled under oath about his breathtaking hypocrisy and abuse of power.

This development comes on the heels of the NCAA being ordered on 4/19/12 to produce all their internal emails about the Reggie Bush investigation. The NCAA vigorously opposed the production of the emails but lost. Not only that, after they failed to prevent the discovery of their emails, the NCAA tried to get a second bite at the apple by objecting to the courts' written ruling with an attempt to limit the production to only emails that specifically mention Tod McNair and were only between members of the infraction committee. So in other words, if there was, for instance, an email between a member of the staff -- not the committee -- and Lake asking Lake to doctor evidence, the NCAA would be able to withhold that evidence.

The court, in shooting down the NCAA yet again, seemed surprised by the NCAA's brazen request and stated in its ruling that "Restriction of the e-mails to only members of the Committee on Infractions is too limited as the contact by investigators and staff with the subject of Mr. McNair surely was not limited to the Committee."

Speaking as a lawyer, this is the kind of stunt you often see when the other side knows they are sitting on highly incriminating evidence and is trying to do all they can to prevent its disclosure short of criminal obstruction of justice.

No trial date set yet, probably about 6 months out based upon the state of the proceedings.
------------------

Here's the related court documents:

Request to depose Paul Dee (lead the NCAA investigation)

http://media.sportsbybrooks.com/2012/05/pauldeedepositionrequest.pdf

Order to turn over emails

http://media.sportsbybrooks.com/2012/05/judgeordersncaatoturnoverreggiebushuscemails.pdf

Who's got the better coaching - Big Ten or Big 12?

The Sporting New is running a series of articles ranking the best coaches in college football by conference.  These are no doubt arbitrary but a comment in the Big 12 article caught me offguard.  Their claim is that the Big 12 has the best coaching in college football.  I've thought for a while that one of the biggest issues in the B1G is coaching I thought I'd take this opportunity to use the Sporting New article on B1G coaching to see how I think the two conferences compare (Sporting News later released overall rankings which I put after each comparison)



#1 - Stoops vs Meyer (B1G) - I question putting Stoops at the top of the Big 12 and I've thought he's gotten a pass for years.  Meyer has coached fewer years but has done more with his talent. (5 vs 2)



#2 - Patterson vs Bielema (B12) - Despite his ability to continually put his foot in his mouth, Bielema is a good coach.  Patterson is better.  It should be interesting to see how his defensive genius works in the Big 12.  If he can continue this success it should enable him to steal a few recruits from Texas and get to the top of the Big 12 list. (7 vs 12)


#3 - Gundy vs Dantonio (B12) - There probably isn't a starker contrast between two coaches on this list. Gundy is one of the best offensive minds in the game.  Dantonio is old school with his hard hitting defenses and tough running game.  Until Dantonio can get MSU to the next level he's a step behind Gundy. (10 vs 13)


#4 - Snyder vs Hoke (B1G) - Snyder has been a miracle worker and his brief absence showed just how much he means to the university.  Hoke on the other hand barely is over .500 in his career.  You'd think that would mean an easy victory for Snyder but Hoke had an amazing run last season and is poised to make Michigan a perennial top 10 team.  That isn't going to happen at Kansas State no matter what the 72 year old Snyder does. (11 vs 24)

#5 - Brown vs Ferentz (B1G) - Both coaches would have been ranked in the top two of their leagues 3 years ago.  Both have slipped but Ferentz at least has the excuse of poor recruiting.  Brown is a great recruiter that has always gotten the least of his team.  In many ways he's the Ron Zook of the Big 12. (16 vs 33)

#6 - Weis vs Pelini (B1G) - I'm not a big fan of Pelini but Weis is a terrible coach. (40 vs 37)

#7 - Briles vs Fitzgerald (B1G) - Both coaches play at small schools with moderate past football success.  Briles has recently done well on the arm of Robert Griffin while Fitzgerald seems to be able to reinvent his team into contenders every year.  If Briles continues his success in the post Griffin era he may pass Fitzgerald but for now I give the edge to the Big Ten. (41 vs 42)

#8 - Holgorsen vs O'Brien (B12) - This is O'Brien's first year at Penn State so it isn't a fair comparison but Holgorsen is seen as one of the best young coaches in the game.  I'd expect both to be ranked higher than 8th next season.  If that doesn't happen quickly in O'Brien's case I'd expect a quick exit. (44 vs 62)

#9 - Rhoades vs Kill (B12) - Iowa State has gotten quite a few upsets under Rhoades while Kill has a big job ahead of him at Minnesota.  I think Kill has a big upside but it's not enough to give him a better rank than Rhoades past success. (48 vs 64)


#10 - Tuberville vs Beckman (B12) - Tuberville once was considered one of the best coaches in the game.  Now he's struggling to achieve the success of his predecessor at Texas Tech.  Beckman has only coached in the MAC and took the job at Illinois in the off season.  For that reason alone you have to give the nod to Tuberville but I suspect it won't take Beckman long to rocket up this list. (50 vs 69)

#11 & #12 - The Big 12 only has ten teams while the Big Ten has 12 so we can't compare Hope and Wilson vs a counterpart.  FWIW I think it is only a matter of time before Hope is fired at Purdue while I think Wilson has a good shot to bring respectability to Indiana. 92 & 111

I'm sure my rankings are a bit jaded by the fact that I'm a fan of the Big Ten but my rankings has the two leagues tied 5 - 5.  That isn't to say I think the Big Ten has the best coaching in the country but rather that the Sporting News statement that the Big 12 is the best is off the mark.  Just like on the field, the best coaching in America is in the SEC (and it should be considering the money they invest).  FWIW, the later Sporting News ranking gave the Big 12 the nod with only Meyer and Pelini rating better than their Big 12 counterpart.

On a positive note, I've complained a lot in the past about the coaching in the B1G but they've recently made great strides.  In the last 2 years the B1G has brought in Meyer, Beckmann, O'Brien, Kill, and Wilson.  Compare that to the Big 12 and Tuberville, Holgorsen, and Weis.  It's obvious to me that the Big Ten is getting better than their opposition and it is only a matter of time before we see the results on the field.

The sad story of Charles Waugh

In today's world of the internet and reality TV it still amazes me how quickly a person can go from totally anonymous to instant fame. This past week was a reminder in the person of Charles Waugh. Monday was the first time I ever heard of him or more to the point, ever heard of his twitter handle of @bdubstriviaguru (note that this name means B-Dub Trivia Guru as he worked at the BW3 in Grandview and allegedly ran their trivia nights). That's when he sent a relatively harmless post to over a hundred people associated with Ohio State athletics including quite a few potential recruits. The post was the same to every single one:

"I hated every minute of training but said to myself, don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion. - M. Ali

It's a fairly innocent quote but as it was sent from someone who weighes over 300 lbs and sent mostly to kids aged 16 - 22 he got a lot of grief from opposing fans.  Landgrant Holyland has a good recap of what happened next on their site.  The gist is Buckeye fans saw his posts to recruits, contacted compliance who then investigated him and found out that Waugh is a registered sex offender.  His sentence carried with it a stipulation that he not contact minors.  Since he was obviously breaking his sentence Ohio State contacted Twitter to let them know and sent an email to their student athletes letting them know to avoid contact with Mr. Waugh.

L to R - Anzalone, Waugh, Bosa, Heurmann

I saw the story on Landgrant first thing this morning and linked the post on the O-Zone with a statement that a registered sex offender had been seen having lunch with Ohio State players and that he had also spent time after the spring game with potential recruits (see picture on the right).  I figured once people read the story from Landgrant it would explode but I was surprised that it only got 4 responses.  Fast forward to about 3pm and it was learned that Alex Anzalone had de-committed from the university.  A few hours later it became clear that he was no longer even considering the school.  Tonight, a paper in Florida gave further clarification with a quote by Anzalone's father.

"You don't want your son to go to a place where there's a potential issue (like this)," Sal Anzalone said. "You expect the (football) staff to have some sort of control on how things are handled with recruits when they visit. This is ridiculous. 

"I was concerned with what recruits do, and with them being allowed to visit these kind of places where it puts kids at risk. That's the issue. You entrust people (at the school) to do the right thing."

While he said he doesn't believe the Buckeyes coaching staff was aware that a sexual predator had access to its recruits and players, Sal Anzalone said he is upset at what transpired. 

"Of course," he said. "Who wouldn't be? I'm outraged."

At this point the Ohio State blogosphere exploded in outrage.  While a sex offender talking to our players is certainly shocking, a player decommitting over it affects the team's chances to win and BuckeyeNation responded negatively to Anzalone's statement.

If you read the whole article I think the reporter carefully worded his article to slightly misrepresent Mr. Anzalone's views, it is easy to tell he's upset and I think he has some valid concerns.  He attended Saturday's game with his son but on Saturday night Alex was chaperoned by current Ohio State players.  My suspicion is that the above picture was taken at that time.  Hidden in Mr. Anzalone's comment is that he seems to be as upset that his son was in a bar as he was about the sex offender.  There is no way the university or the students can know the background of every person a potential recruit might meet however they can take steps to avoid placing them in a compromising situation and I think that is the point.

Buckeye fans on the forums varied in their reaction depending on their nature.  Some fans are mad at the Anzalone's and calling them pathetic for backing out of their commitment.  Others are blaming compliance for doing a poor job.  I'm in the middle of the two extremes.  I think the university did everything it could and reacted promptly when they learned of the issue.  I also think that there might be more to the Anzalone's actions than they are saying.

The real culprit is one of the time honored traditions in college sports.  Every school makes sure that when a recruit visits, they are also shown the night life on campus.  Let's face it, most 18 year olds are more interested in campus parties than they wonder if the school has a good accounting program.  Anyone that has been close to the process knows that Saturday night is where the players take the recruit out on the town and show them a good time.  The chaperon is given an amount equal for a meal at a fancy restaurant with no questions asked.  This can be a key point in the recruiting process as it is a look into the social life the player can expect if they attend the school.  What usually happens is the player takes them to a cheap meal then spends the rest of the night getting them drunk and if everything goes well they find willing female.  This doesn't happen with everyone as the best recruiters put similar minded players with similar recruits.  For instance, I'm sure Urban Meyer had a similarly religious student take Tim Tebow out on his visit.  My guess is they were in bed before 10pm.  On the flipside, a night of drunken debauchery can make quite an impression as I worked with a former Big Ten player who told me he committed to a school immediately after his visit because he lost his virginity on the campus visit.

The Buckeyes had most of the best players in the country on campus for their Spring Game and 2 of the 3 pictured above committed right after their visit.  Take a good look at the picture.  Note that it is dark in the background.  My suspicion is it was taken at BW3s and it was at night.  The raises the question -- how did these three players get in contact with Waugh?

The first way is that he contacted them on Twitter and they met him for dinner but that isn't remotely possible.  The second is the coaches set up the dinner with Waugh but that is even more ridiculous as there are potential NCAA violations all over this.  The third is he was taken there by players that have a previous relationship with Waugh.  I think it is pretty obvious that the last is the most likely case.

Many people are focusing on the sex offender part of the case and while that is important I really don't think Charles Waugh is anything more than an overzealous fan (with an admittedly sordid past).  From an Ohio State point of view Charles Waugh is irrelevant at this point.  The Kentucky police are investigating this and my guess is he will be spending some time in jail in the near future.

The issue from an Ohio State point of view is the relationship that the players had with the Grandview BW3.  Ohio State players are superstars in Columbus and they'd never need to pay for a meal if it wasn't against the rules.  So the question is - why were so many Ohio State players spending so much time with Charles Waugh?  I'm afraid we know the answer to that question which is the real reason Anzalone decommitted and why Ohio State distanced themselves from the whole thing.  Now that the sex offender story has hit the mainstream media I'm sure both sides know that the night Anzalone met Waugh is going to get a lot of scrutiny.  It is better for both sides to part ways now so any rules that were broken by BW3/Waugh had no resulting benefit to OSU.  Considering that Ohio State is on probation for the next 3 years I pray that this is the last we hear of this sad tale.