This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
What punishment would they have received if Sandusky was just reported to the police and a proper investigation occurred?In 1998 there was a police investigation and no charges brought. There was a police report on file with the department. There was no cover-up then. It was out there with the police, child services, a therapist and investigators not involved with PSU.
Yes...it would, and in one case, did. But family isn't just mom and dad...it's brothers and sisters, cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents. The family I speak of at PSU isn't just Paterno or the AD. It's the fans, the players, the alumni. Those who didn't know shouldn't suffer one iota of punitive damages....not for something like this. We don't need to make an example of PSU because nobody, anywhere, would defend what these few people did. Penn Staters are hurt by what these family members did (those of us who have come to accept that they happened, that Joepa lied...other may need more time to accepot this, they may need the Frey report to be verified, etc.) We don't need people from outside to spank us too. The family is victimized by the actions of one of it's own doing something like this...the families heart bleeds for it. Many Penn Staters were hurt by this BEFORE NCAA sanctions...we don't need you or the NCAA rubbing more salt in wounds we didn't cause.
WTF does that mean, ToughGuy?BURN!~Us college fanboys are what is right with college football and what keeps college football so great. I figured you wouldn't understand. Go back to your ivory tower. I bet you have never played any competitive sport past JV.That's me and I stand by my statements. Just because a bunch of Alabama people think it's important doesn't make it so. You college football fanboys are a big problem with college football.
it means you totally shredded the dude, dude. totally~!WTF does that mean, ToughGuy?BURN!~Us college fanboys are what is right with college football and what keeps college football so great. I figured you wouldn't understand. Go back to your ivory tower. I bet you have never played any competitive sport past JV.
I understand what he's saying, but I really don't think the analogy holds up. Just my opinion.Renesauz is making a compelling argument that has me at least seeing both sides of this intense debate. Thanks for that
Oh. Sorry. I thought you were poking at me.I don't want to come off as being an ### or anything. I was just trying to make a few points that the wins mean alot to the players and fans, who had nothing to do with this horrible tradegy.it means you totally shredded the dude, dude. totally~!WTF does that mean, ToughGuy?BURN!~Us college fanboys are what is right with college football and what keeps college football so great. I figured you wouldn't understand. Go back to your ivory tower. I bet you have never played any competitive sport past JV.
Agree. Also, people need to stop treating their college sports team like family.I understand what he's saying, but I really don't think the analogy holds up. Just my opinion.Renesauz is making a compelling argument that has me at least seeing both sides of this intense debate. Thanks for that
Agree. Also, people need to stop treating their college sports team like family.I understand what he's saying, but I really don't think the analogy holds up. Just my opinion.Renesauz is making a compelling argument that has me at least seeing both sides of this intense debate. Thanks for that
But how is that different from any other time the NCAA imposes penalties?
Agree. Also, people need to stop treating their college sports team like family.I understand what he's saying, but I really don't think the analogy holds up. Just my opinion.Renesauz is making a compelling argument that has me at least seeing both sides of this intense debate. Thanks for that
Why not? Penn St. was in violation of at least two bylaws.
No, it's punishing Penn St.'s athletic program and the institution. As it should.
I dunno... I think it is important to focus on everything. The monsters who did it/enabled it and the victims. It doesnt have to be one or the other. Hopefully the Paterno family suffers through as many years of shame, as they have spent basking in the fraudulant greatness of that scumbag. It's just too bad he croaked before he could share in it.
The guilt by association comes into play here, though. It's unfortunate, but it happens everywhere. You don't go to war with just a country's leaders - you go to war with a country (and most folks you are shooting at are simply cogs in the wheel.)The "entire culture" is guilty here, even the ones standing on the sidelines. And in a larger way, the culture of college football athletics is guilty. The whole system where the program is bigger than any one person/victim/crime. The alumni and the rabid fans are guilty by association, because they help create a culture where things like this are swept under the rug in hopes they will just go away. It's not their fault personally, mind you. It is what it is.
Huh? This is the first year of the sanctions for Southern Cal, but the effects probably won't be felt for another year or two, provided their players all stay healthy.
Sure they did. Articles 2.4 and 10.1 of the NCAA constitution command ethical conduct on behalf of coaches and others associated with athletic programs, and 2.4 expansively states, "These values should be manifest not only in athletics participation, but also in the broad spectrum of activities affecting the athletics program."
This culture IS the problem. Paterno and the program was larger than life to too many people and that's why they covered this up. And that's why it needed to be dismantled.
1. The culture at PSU WAS different in that Paterno was a demigod, who was both a kindly old man and a guy who based on the Freeh report and other information, indicates that this situation may well have been unique to Penn State. He was "too old" to "understand" what McQueary said was a common defense of Paterno in the early going, and then it became "this kind of thing wasn't talked about" in his day. But most importantly, the sanctimonious positioning of the "grand experiment" and this narrative don't go together. Paterno being Paterno and PSU being PSU may well have fostered this coverup.3. A handful of people. I mean, I don't even know how to justify this one, we do have great reason to believe that many people who are molested go on to molest. This is an exponential problem well beyond a handful. You are PRECISELY trying to minimize this. I'm sorry what you've endured but frankly, it sounds like reasoning after the fact to justify the PSU case. Your family member was wrong, but if someone knew, could help, and did not, that is a wrong on par with that in my mind.
He is wrong. And, I find myself agreeing with Christo more often than not on this board.
At least in those other cases there was no other punishments to happen. Without those punishments, those were did wrong would have had NO PUNISHMENT, and other schools would have purposefully turned a blind eye to violations. There was a very real purpose of warning and deterrance involved. Those violators lost their jobs and personal prestige....but so did the officials involved at PSU. Did this case NEED a warning? Do we really need NCAA deterance to other schools not to cover up real crimes? Do schools really need a deterance to keep them form turning a blind eye to something like this? I really don't think so...this is not an institutional thing, it's an individual thing. Those involved are being punished by the law far worse than anything the NCAA can do. They already lost their jobs and prestige. The NCAAs sanctions have no teeth in the area of deterance, and are not remotely punitive to the people who most deserve to be punished. They satisfy a blood lust because society wants more than the heads of those who did this. We want to punish their families too..and that is NOT justice.
Sure they did. Todd McNair, the RB coach, knew about it and knew about Mike Ornstein.
KNOW YOUR ROLE IVORY TOWER NERD!....FOOTBALL!!!!!!Looking back on my responses I think I have been unnecessarily baiting and insulting the passionate fans of college football teams and I apologize for it.Us college fanboys are what is right with college football and what keeps college football so great. I figured you wouldn't understand. Go back to your ivory tower. I bet you have never played any competitive sport past JV.And to the guy that says "taking away Joe Pa's wins are only for stupid people" doesn't know crap about college football. Some people worship these coaches. Go to Alabama and say something about Bear Bryant and you are liable to get shot.
Anyone who concludes before the fact that they know for sure how a legal proceeding (especially a request for injunctive relief) would be resolved is wrong. There's too much that's unknown, and in the case of injunctions there's too much subjectivity built into the standard.With the NCAA in particular there's a lot of soft language in their rules and whatnot, and historically a lot of deference from the courts.
They have a cap of 65 (20 scholarship reduction). They lose 10 scholarships to give out for the next four years (15 max). But, it's worse than that because of the 65 cap. If Penn St. is only losing 12 seniors in a season and it will bring them down to 53 players, then Penn St. has a max of 12 scholarships for that year. They can't use the 3 extra they would have otherwise.
Is it really possible they would only lose 12 scholarship players in a season? That seems unlikely.
Nothing like a lecture on priorities from the guy with 11,000 posts on a fantasy football board.
lulKNOW YOUR ROLE IVORY TOWER NERD!....FOOTBALL!!!!!!Looking back on my responses I think I have been unnecessarily baiting and insulting the passionate fans of college football teams and I apologize for it.Us college fanboys are what is right with college football and what keeps college football so great. I figured you wouldn't understand. Go back to your ivory tower. I bet you have never played any competitive sport past JV.
I remember that time Penn State certainly didn't beat Buffalo back in 2007.
They didn't need to because Penn St signed on. They waived their right to normal process.
It's true whether anyone here agrees or not.
IMO, the NCAA is wrong in all of those cases as well. If it were up to me, the NCAA and all of their rules would be abolished. In this case, there's an added dimension of the NCAA granting some special powers they never had before to apply this punishment.
Why?
I don't think true means what you think it means.
Me too. I'm just saying that you can't make that argument specific to this case. If you support the NCAA (which is getting harder and harder to do, as anyone who's read the Taylor Branch article in the Atlantic last year will tell you), you can't criticize a punishment simply because it harms people other than the wrongdoers. Pretty much every NCAA sanction in its history has harmed people other than the wrongdoers.
Are Paterno fans running out and buying 2012 College Football Almanacs that still list him as having the most wins?
Sure. It happens a lot when you have coaching turnover. Players from one (or two) classes get pushed out who aren't going to see the field. The incoming coach then uses those scholarships to bring in huge recruiting classes in his first two years. Those scholarships had to come from somewhere, so it results in unbalanced classes.Southern Cal, in their first year of scholarship limits this past season, only took 12 (they could have taken 15). They are now using those three scholarships for early entries in this year's class.
I don't know for sure what would have happened with an injunction. You're right. No one does. However, it is crystal clear to me that the NCAA has the power to sanction for these actions. And, I cited at least two of the articles that give them that power above.
They can sign a max. of 15 per class for next four years. They can have a max. of 65 total on 'ship for next four years.
10 scholarships per year are lost (so, they can give out a max of 15 out of 25). They are capped at 20 fewer total scholarships for the next four years (putting them at a team of 65 scholarship players (as opposed to everyone other than Southern Cal having 85).
10 initial scholarships and 20 overall scholarships per year for four years.so 90 total. Complete castration imo.
Jobs, reputations, pride. Many factors. Those claiming this was simply about protecting PSU football are being naive.
Ok, now I understand. Thanks.
That assumes they would have faced punishment 10 years ago. The 1998 incident was investigated by police and prosecutors. The next incident that came to light was 2001. Why would there be sanctions if they reported Sandusky again?
