While the respect people have for the victims is being called into question. I do think it was a little disrespectful the way the NCAA got involved. It's not that they stepped in and levied sanctions (I'm fine with that), but how the main guy mugged for the camera and spoke about integrity, morals and academics. I just feel that is really disingenuous coming from the NCAA (given how they really operate) and I felt that was a bit insulting to the victims and the gravity of the situation. I also didn't like how he reserved the right to conduct an NCAA investigation after the criminal one. This was a violent, evil CRIME (and then cover up/obstruction of justice). It should be treated as a criminal investigation. I don't really like the NCAA butting in like it's a football rules violation.
And as for "What would have been a more fair punishment for you?":
I don't know, it's not my job and I won't pretend that I'm any good at coming up with this stuff but I would have done something like swapped the 4 year bowl ban for a tv ban (maybe just a 1 yr bowl ban as well).
I would have dropped the scholarship cuts because I truly don't see the point in it. I don't feel like it's a deterrent because people as twisted as Sandusky don't care about school spirit or costing the team some schollies. I feel like it hurts the current coaching staff and current players, none of whom had anything at all to do with what happened (all new coaching staff & athletic director, right?).
I think fining the school and donating it to the victims and/or organizations to help abused children is perfectly reasonable. And if they wanted to make it more than a 1 year fine (which I believe it currently is), then I would be ok with that too. Maybe you do fine them for all 4 years of the punishments (I believe that's the life span of the scholarship reductions and bowl ban?). Perhaps you fine them for every year that we know the abuse/cover up took place (the 10 years you mentioned earlier).
I would suggest something like that. If I'm wrong and there is a better punishment then that's fine. The point is, I don't think this has any bearing on how I feel about the children/victims. I'm just trying not to punish people that didn't do anything wrong (even if you can't 100% do that) just so that we can have more punishment.
Probably nothing. I just thought it was pompous of him to talk about his own investigation when the justice system is investigating a violent crime. I think that guy just likes to feel important.
Then, trying to really understand you (and possibly CL, Jim others) they should have stayed out of it and let the criminal and civil suits move forward w/o the NCAA doing anything?
Edit: nevermind, reading your suggestions at top of page now
Then, trying to really understand you (and possibly CL, Jim others) they should have stayed out of it and let the criminal and civil suits move forward w/o the NCAA doing anything?
I think the best way to punish those truly responsible is with termination of employment, jail time and civil suits. I think there should be a lot of that. No excuse for what Sandusky did or those who covered it up.
If the NCAA had said, "We are going to support the victims the best way that we can (funds, foundations, etc) but this is a criminal matter and those responsible will be treated as criminals" and decided to stay out of it until the justice system had run its course; I would have be fine with that. I would also assume that the school would administer sanctions upon itself.
But I'm fine with the NCAA stepping in with punishments, since that's the route they decided to take.
What I didn't like and frankly found insulting, was the way that Mark Emmert & by extension, the NCAA, got on camera and grandstanded about morals, honesty, honor and academics. The NCAA rarely exhibits any of these traits themselves. They are pompous, greedy and dishonest and the way he spoke about his own possible investigation made me roll my eyes. This is a criminal investigation, not some freshman QB driving a Ferrari. Is this really their place to be investigating? I feel like this is so much bigger than the NCAA but they don't seem to think that way.
I am a little surprised that more people didn't find Mark Emmert talking about an NCAA investigation more insulting, but in the grand scheme of things it's not that big of a deal. It did make me roll my eyes and shake my head though.
If I were a PSU fan, I would just quietly accept the punishment, not complain, and look forward to trying to rebound in no sooner than 8-10 years. What happened there was so heinous, you just have to take your punishment and move on.
Its not about the kids. I am pretty sure all the kids were and are penn state fans. Hurting the program is probably hurting those kids again.
But any institution that allows a sandusky to use the institution's facilities despite leadership knowing what he was doing there has to have the hammer brought down. Its an institutional problem.
I hope there is more punishment for the football program and school on the way, but I doubt it.
__________________
I didn't come from no damn monkey!
If I were a PSU fan, I would just quietly accept the punishment, not complain, and look forward to trying to rebound in no sooner than 8-10 years. What happened there was so heinous, you just have to take your punishment and move on.
Agreed. This is certainly not the time for anyone associated with Penn St (even students/fans) to complain. And even those people who still think Paterno was a good, caring man...keep it to yourselves.
Punish those who are guilty many says but WHO is guilty ? Who could have stopped this before countless more young boys were victimized ?
Paterno, the University President and his associates clearly but who else ?
The assistant coach who walked into one of the attacks ? His father ? The janitor who witnessed another ? The other janitors that he told ? The police who investigated the first reported incident in 1998 ? The missing DA and his underlings ???. More people must have known or heard rumours and yet kept their mouth shut either due to fear or to protect the prestige and money associated with the revered football team.
It is so easy to say - it is not the student atheletes but even after the story broke, students rioted in support of their team and Paterno. The fanatic support of the students were also one reason why Paterno had almost unprecedented powers at PSU. When the football team/Culture becomes more important on campus than protecting young people from abuse, then that football culture will have accept a share of the guilt. That is why stripping scholarships and bowl game participation was necessary.
If they had only fined the university and not punished the team, there is a danger that the mentality of putting football before everything else, would continue and who knows what crime would be the next to be swept under the table in order to protect said team.
Punish those who are guilty many says but WHO is guilty ? Who could have stopped this before countless more young boys were victimized ?
Paterno, the University President and his associates clearly but who else ?
The assistant coach who walked into one of the attacks ? His father ? The janitor who witnessed another ? The other janitors that he told ? The police who investigated the first reported incident in 1998 ? The missing DA and his underlings ???. More people must have known or heard rumours and yet kept their mouth shut either due to fear or to protect the prestige and money associated with the revered football team.
It is so easy to say - it is not the student atheletes but even after the story broke, students rioted in support of their team and Paterno. The fanatic support of the students were also one reason why Paterno had almost unprecedented powers at PSU. When the football team/Culture becomes more important on campus than protecting young people from abuse, then that football culture will have accept a share of the guilt. That is why stripping scholarships and bowl game participation was necessary.
If they had only fined the university and not punished the team, there is a danger that the mentality of putting football before everything else, would continue and who knows what crime would be the next to be swept under the table in order to protect said team.
I see what you're saying and it's a good point. That's why I said I wouldn't appose a tv ban, 1 year bowl ban (perhaps make the school re-apply for bowl eligibility by passing an administrative/athletic audit?), etc.
I still think the NCAA's stance on the football fans and culture is hypocritical and a bit misguided. I think history has shown that if the NCAA can sit back and let the dollars roll in without a huge public outcry, then they will look the other way on dropping the hammer.
I'll say again that the "fanatic support of the students" is a good point. But I think I stop a little shorter than you (and others) on it. These students are young people who were being lied to and misled just like the rest of us. They were fanatic about football, but so are millions of other college students at big football schools. They were being lied to and bought it hook, line and sinker. But as young, tuition paying students, did they have any responsibilities other than to meet grade requirements and not break rules? As long as they were doing that, weren't they entitled to enjoy their football team as much as they wanted (again, as long as they weren't vandalizing stuff or breaking rules)?
I mean everyone who followed sports propped up Joe Paterno as the greatest guy in the world and the man who deserved our trust and did things the right way. Were those students really that different? We didn't know what was going on and neither did they.
The reaction after Paterno was fired looks bad and it was wrong. Those students should be embarrassed. But again, they are young and impulsive and were probably wasted. Perhaps they had rose-colored glasses on and hadn't read up on the facts? It was foolish and makes them look bad, but I'm not sure I can commit to them sharing in the guilt.
Having said all that, you do raise a good point. Not 100% sure where I stand on it, these are just some of my thoughts on the subject.
I see what you're saying and it's a good point. That's why I said I wouldn't appose a tv ban, 1 year bowl ban (perhaps make the school re-apply for bowl eligibility by passing an administrative/athletic audit?), etc.
I still think the NCAA's stance on the football fans and culture is hypocritical and a bit misguided. I think history has shown that if the NCAA can sit back and let the dollars roll in without a huge public outcry, then they will look the other way on dropping the hammer.
I'll say again that the "fanatic support of the students" is a good point. But I think I stop a little shorter than you (and others) on it. These students are young people who were being lied to and misled just like the rest of us. They were fanatic about football, but so are millions of other college students at big football schools. They were being lied to and bought it hook, line and sinker. But as young, tuition paying students, did they have any responsibilities other than to meet grade requirements and not break rules? As long as they were doing that, weren't they entitled to enjoy their football team as much as they wanted (again, as long as they weren't vandalizing stuff or breaking rules)?
I mean everyone who followed sports propped up Joe Paterno as the greatest guy in the world and the man who deserved our trust and did things the right way. Were those students really that different? We didn't know what was going on and neither did they.
The reaction after Paterno was fired looks bad and it was wrong. Those students should be embarrassed. But again, they are young and impulsive and were probably wasted. Perhaps they had rose-colored glasses on and hadn't read up on the facts? It was foolish and makes them look bad, but I'm not sure I can commit to them sharing in the guilt.
Having said all that, you do raise a good point. Not 100% sure where I stand on it, these are just some of my thoughts on the subject.
Loco, here is where you and I disagree. You are still trying to make provisions within the Penn State organization for the student athletes. I, wholeheartedly, disagree with that, and apparently, the NCAA and the new PSU 'powers that be' disagree as well (the latter maybe with some coersion). The students that you are concerned about, and the rest of us agree with you, had nothing to do with this mess. In fact, some of them were in the 2nd grade or something like that.
So, they made provisions for these students. The NCAA has went overboard to give them an advantage to make up for being collateral damage in this mess (will list them at the bottom of this message and link to them). What I think you are missing from most here and probably around the country is that the PROGRAM does not deserve, nor should it receive, any passes. The fact that they still get to have football on Saturdays has some upset, and I can see why. But, we have no recourse for the non-athlete students and surrounding businesses (Not to mention the schedule for opposing teams that could be a nightmare for them). Those guys cannot take a restriction free scholarship with them to USC, LSU, Notre Dame, Arkansas, Alabama etc. They are there, smack dab in Happy Valley and depend on that education and money respectively. So, for that reason only, I think most will agree (I know that I do, and its the only reason that I do) that PSU should be able to field something on Saturdays for those innocent bystanders. Im not talking about the governor and all the other people who need to be questioned more though.
Now, making the athletes on the campus all FREE AGENTS and giving them the freedom of choice to stay or go wherever, with a scholarship in hand, helps the players as well. [Again, if you are thinking that that is unfair to PSU...thats the flawed concept im targeting here] Keep in mind, you are focusing on the kids right? This helps them, as long as you don't fall back into the epic-failed rutt of wanting it in PSU organization. I dont think anyone wanted the students, businesses or those current player to be affected, but, at the price a punishing the PROGRAM, it had to be done. Hey, the new coaches and admin are collateral damage as well, but (as the new coach stated) he new it would be tough when he took the job.
So, if you are concerned about kids, unprecedented efforts have been established to make sure they can (in many cases) have a better year with another team than they otherwise would have had (up for debate). let me try and curtail your thinking here, if its going to areas such as: They are losing out bc PSU...; PSU is going to lose their top starting QB...; The kid may have wanted to be a Nittany (he shouldn't have left);...and any other argument that keeps those kids on campus and help the Football PROGRAM, besides their own choosing, is flawed thinking.
The PROGRAM had to be hit, and hit hard...the below helps do just that:
Quote:
Penn State football student-athletes allowed easier transfers
Due to the unprecedented nature of the Penn State sanctions, the NCAA will provide appropriate and immediate relief of some NCAA rules for all eligible football student-athletes who wish to transfer to another school.
Several Division I rules will be set aside to allow those students a simpler transfer process, an open opportunity to be recruited, and the chance to participate immediately....READ MORE: Penn State - NCAA.org
Quote:
Transfers
Football student-athletes who transfer will not have to sit out a year of competition. Any current football student-athletes who transfer to any NCAA school (all divisions) during the 2012-13 academic year will be immediately eligible, provided they are admitted through the normal process and are otherwise eligible.
Any current football student-athletes who begin preseason practice or enroll in classes at another school for the fall term of 2013 (begin preseason practice or enroll in classes at another institution) will be immediately eligible, provided they are admitted through the normal process and are otherwise eligible.
Penn State football student-athletes can decide to transfer from now until the 2013 season (before participating in preseason practice with Penn State) and play immediately at the new school.
Penn State will release any incoming student-athletes from the National Letter of Intent. Such individuals are not considered transfer student-athletes and can compete immediately at another school as long as they are otherwise eligible.
Student-athletes who transfer during the 2012 season and have not competed for Penn State during that season will be immediately eligible for competition upon transfer, provided they are admitted under the normal process and are otherwise eligible per NCAA regulations. Student-athletes who transfer during the 2012 season after having competed for Penn State will not be eligible for competition during the same season at the next institution.
Penn State will be responsible for notifying the NCAA regarding the status of all transfer student-athletes.
Permission to contact
Permission-to-contact rules are suspended. Penn State cannot restrict in any way a student-athlete from pursuing a possible transfer. Student-athletes must simply inform Penn State of their interest in discussing transfer options with other schools. Before communicating with student-athletes, interested schools also must inform Penn State of their intention to open discussions with the student-athlete.
Recruiting considerations
Off-campus and telephone recruiting rules are suspended, effective immediately, until the first day of classes for Penn State (August 27).
Official visit rules have been loosened. Any incoming or currently enrolled football student-athletes interested in taking an official visit will be permitted to do so during the 2012-13 academic year, effective immediately. The “clock” for official visits will be re-set at this time. The post-high school limits of five total visits to Division I institutions and one visit per institution continue to apply; however, student-athletes may begin taking such visits immediately.
Financial Aid limitations
If a student-athlete transfers for the fall of 2012 to a school that has reached its scholarship limits, the school may exceed these numbers for the 2012-13 academic year, provided it reduces such limits proportionately in the 2013-14 academic year. For example, if one student-athlete transfers to a Division I school already at the legislated limits of 25 initial counters and 85 overall counters for 2012-13, the school will be limited to 24 initial counters and 84 overall counters in 2013-14.
If a student-athlete transfers after the fall 2012 term, the standard financial aid rules governing counter status still apply, including the midyear replacement exception. If extenuating circumstances arise that may warrant a waiver of the standard application of financial aid rules governing counters, waiver requests will be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
A school subject to scholarship limits due to an infractions case is allowed to accept transfers from Penn State but cannot exceed the scholarship limits specified in its infractions report. Athletically-related financial aid may not be canceled during the period of the award and these schools are not permitted the same exception allowed to schools not under Committee on Infractions sanctions.
Preseason practice considerations
Prior to the first day of classes at the school a student-athlete wishes to attend, a Penn State transfer student-athlete may participate in preseason practice and receive expenses to participate without being officially admitted.
A Penn State transfer student-athlete will not count toward the limit of 105 student-athletes who may engage in preseason practice prior to the institution's first day of classes or first contest, whichever occurs earlier.
Looks like they did what you are calling for, take care of those kids (just leave PSU out of the conversation...unless they choose that).
Loco, here is where you and I disagree. You are still trying to make provisions within the Penn State organization for the student athletes. I, wholeheartedly, disagree with that, and apparently, the NCAA and the new PSU 'powers that be' disagree as well (the latter maybe with some coersion). The students that you are concerned about, and the rest of us agree with you, had nothing to do with this mess. In fact, some of them were in the 2nd grade or something like that.
So, they made provisions for these students. The NCAA has went overboard to give them an advantage to make up for being collateral damage in this mess (will list them at the bottom of this message and link to them). What I think you are missing from most here and probably around the country is that the PROGRAM does not deserve, nor should it receive, any passes. The fact that they still get to have football on Saturdays has some upset, and I can see why. But, we have no recourse for the non-athlete students and surrounding businesses (Not to mention the schedule for opposing teams that could be a nightmare for them). Those guys cannot take a restriction free scholarship with them to USC, LSU, Notre Dame, Arkansas, Alabama etc. They are there, smack dab in Happy Valley and depend on that education and money respectively. So, for that reason only, I think most will agree (I know that I do, and its the only reason that I do) that PSU should be able to field something on Saturdays for those innocent bystanders. Im not talking about the governor and all the other people who need to be questioned more though.
Now, making the athletes on the campus all FREE AGENTS and giving them the freedom of choice to stay or go wherever, with a scholarship in hand, helps the players as well. [Again, if you are thinking that that is unfair to PSU...thats the flawed concept im targeting here] Keep in mind, you are focusing on the kids right? This helps them, as long as you don't fall back into the epic-failed rutt of wanting it in PSU organization. I dont think anyone wanted the students, businesses or those current player to be affected, but, at the price a punishing the PROGRAM, it had to be done. Hey, the new coaches and admin are collateral damage as well, but (as the new coach stated) he new it would be tough when he took the job.
So, if you are concerned about kids, unprecedented efforts have been established to make sure they can (in many cases) have a better year with another team than they otherwise would have had (up for debate). let me try and curtail your thinking here, if its going to areas such as: They are losing out bc PSU...; PSU is going to lose their top starting QB...; The kid may have wanted to be a Nittany (he shouldn't have left);...and any other argument that keeps those kids on campus and help the Football PROGRAM, besides their own choosing, is flawed thinking.
The PROGRAM had to be hit, and hit hard...the below helps do just that:
Looks like they did what you are calling for, take care of those kids (just leave PSU out of the conversation...unless they choose that).
I'm not saying I disagree with any of that. I've already listed many punishments that I would be on board with (tv bans, having to re-apply for bowl eligibility, fines donated to victims/charities for x number of years, etc). I also want the appropriate people to be fired, sent to jail and hit with civil suits. I don't feel like I'm advocating letting anyone off easy.
My last post was mainly responding to the thought that the students and football culture "share some of the guilt". I see the reasoning behind it, but I disagree with that statement. I'm not saying not to lay down punishments. I've never said that.
The only issue I've raised about the NCAA is that they are hypocrites and grandstanders. They have fostered this "football above all" culture and sat back, reaping the benefits for years. Even when programs show they are too powerful and exemptions are being made due to football (Florida St, Miami, almost every powerhouse school), if they can get away with being silent, then they will be silent (and collect the money).
But now that the public is (rightly) outraged, they get in front of the camera and scold Penn St for their "football culture" and throw out words like "honor", "integrity" and "academics". The NCAA probably had to look those words up in the dictionary. I'm not defending Penn St here, I'm just saying that I think the NCAA is slimy.
Linear Mode
