Penn State scandal (merged)

[VOLout8]

If Penn St. came out and took everything that had to do with Joe Pa out of their football program (trophies, statues, name on stuff), and vacates all of the wins then I would feel that is enough to penalize their football program. The damage will hit their wallets, and their reputation, and thats where it should. Penn St not playing in the Holiday bowl in 2 years doesn't send any message in my opinion.

 

[BigALWiLson]

i knew there was one but didnt see it my bad I just read the last 5 pages of it.

 

[Vercingetorix]

I would agree with you but for the fact that there is no way to draw a fine line between when the NCAA should get involved and when it shouldn't. The NCAA is already completely arbitrary in its enforcement, this would just be begging for inconsistent application.

You could write up a single paragraph that included the phrases "felony crimes" and "failure to notify authorities" that would draw a fine enough line. The last thing we need to be worried about is that a future football program's ability to cover up other crimes should be impaired.

 

[bamawriter]

You could write up a single paragraph that included the phrases "felony crimes" and "failure to notify authorities" that would draw a fine enough line. The last thing we need to be worried about is that a future football program's ability to cover up other crimes should be impaired.

I think the law is better enforced by those who are charged with enforcing the law. The NCAA isn't a court, nor are they law enforcement. They don't even have subpoena power.

I understand the desire to see the program punished, but this isn't the NCAA's wheelhouse. Penn State needs to do the right thing, not because they're scared of the NCAA, but because it's the right thing to do.

 

[vols4sure]

I think the law is better enforced by those who are charged with enforcing the law. The NCAA isn't a court, nor are they law enforcement. They don't even have subpoena power.

I understand the desire to see the program punished, but this isn't the NCAA's wheelhouse. Penn State needs to do the right thing, not because they're scared of the NCAA, but because it's the right thing to do.

Why does an association not have the right to punish a member institution for breaking laws or unethical/morally corrupt behavior?

 

[voldawgforever]

A criminal matter in which the perps made every calculated move in order to protect the football program. I say prosecute by all means, and administer the death penalty through the NCAA.
And strip all wins possible, remove the statue of the devil himself, Mr. Conspiring Paterno.

 

[Lexvol]

You could write up a single paragraph that included the phrases "felony crimes" and "failure to notify authorities" that would draw a fine enough line. The last thing we need to be worried about is that a future football program's ability to cover up other crimes should be impaired.

I hate the 'AA as much as the next guy....but I think you are on the money.

 

[ukvols]

So the sanctity of a young boy is valued at 1 Million dollars.
I value children a helluva lot more than that.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

The value of a child is priceless. It's not possible to come up with a number that everyone would be happy with. But, $1 million is a lot of money.

EDIT: More than $1 million each may be more appropriate, but there's no perfect number.

 

[ukvols]

No, it isn't. It's much worse than any NCAA rule could possibly deal with.

It did not give PSU a competitive advantage. You could argue that their football program might have suffered if they'd chosen to act, but that's not the same as seeking a leg up by paying a player or allowing agents to run wild. The reality is that PSU will now suffer whatever effect the bad pub would have had back in '01, maybe even worse since the coverup added to the cesspool.

But because of the coverup, the natural effects of bad press aren't enough; I'm sure you'd agree. But that doesn't mean that any of it is an NCAA violation.

Penn State had losing seasons in 2000 and 2001. It's possible that this scandal, combined with the on-field record, would have led to Paterno's departure back then had this all not been covered up. That's the argument that they gained a competitive advantage. They covered up these acts to protect the coach's job.

 

[CountVolcula]

I think the law is better enforced by those who are charged with enforcing the law. The NCAA isn't a court, nor are they law enforcement. They don't even have subpoena power.

I understand the desire to see the program punished, but this isn't the NCAA's wheelhouse. Penn State needs to do the right thing, not because they're scared of the NCAA, but because it's the right thing to do.

They had 14 years to do the right thing, but continued to cover it up

It can no longer be left up to them

 

[Vercingetorix]

I think the law is better enforced by those who are charged with enforcing the law. The NCAA isn't a court, nor are they law enforcement. They don't even have subpoena power.

I understand the desire to see the program punished, but this isn't the NCAA's wheelhouse. Penn State needs to do the right thing, not because they're scared of the NCAA, but because it's the right thing to do.

Eh, this wouldn't have anything to do with enforcing the law themselves. Sandusky has already been found guilty in court. More trials are coming. There's been a massive investigation. The NCAA hasn't had to do any of it. This isn't like recruiting violations, where they have to do all the legwork themselves.

I'm perfectly comfortable with the NCAA deciding that, when evidence surfaces by other means that crimes occurred and were covered up at an institutional level, they have the ability to step in and punish that institution with appropriate competition-related sanctions.

(Another potential/hypothetical example: at some point there were some stories suggesting that investigations into a couple of potential sexual assaults by Notre Dame football players were being stonewalled. Let's say evidence that that was the case came out and Brian Kelly was found guilty of obstruction of justice. The NCAA should be able to sanction Notre Dame football for that, too.)

 

[Lexvol]

Eh, this wouldn't have anything to do with enforcing the law themselves. Sandusky has already been found guilty in court. More trials are coming. There's been a massive investigation. The NCAA hasn't had to do any of it. This isn't like recruiting violations, where they have to do all the legwork themselves.

I'm perfectly comfortable with the NCAA deciding that, when evidence surfaces by other means that crimes occurred and were covered up at an institutional level, they have the ability to step in and punish that institution with appropriate competition-related sanctions.

(Another potential/hypothetical example: at some point there were some stories suggesting that investigations into a couple of potential sexual assaults by Notre Dame football players were being stonewalled. Let's say evidence that that was the case came out and Brian Kelly was found guilty of obstruction of justice. The NCAA should be able to sanction Notre Dame football for that, too.)

Thank God the feds got to this before the AA did.

 

[TrueOrange]

Penn State had losing seasons in 2000 and 2001. It's possible that this scandal, combined with the on-field record, would have led to Paterno's departure back then had this all not been covered up. That's the argument that they gained a competitive advantage. They covered up these acts to protect the coach's job.

But isn't that also, unfortunately, stretching it a bit to make a point, no?

 

[TrueOrange]

They had 14 years to do the right thing, but continued to cover it up

It can no longer be left up to them

They still have to now be given the chance to see what they do, first.

 

[CountVolcula]

They still have to now be given the chance to see what they do, first.

They will.

It will be interesting to see if they have the nuts to hammer their own program and cut the school out of all that revenue.

 

[ukvols]

But isn't that also, unfortunately, stretching it a bit to make a point, no?

They covered it all up for the sole purpose of protecting Paterno and the football program. They may or may not have actually gained a competitive advantage, but the motivation was to keep Paterno on the sideline to win more football games. I don't see where I'm stretching anything there. We don't know if Paterno would have had to depart in 2001, and if so, we don't know how successful the program would have been without him. That said, when a football program buys recruits, the punishment is not based on how many games they won. I think there's room for the NCAA to hand out a punishment, should they choose to do so.

 

[MWR]

They had 14 years to do the right thing, but continued to cover it up

It can no longer be left up to them

Yes, they had their chances to do the right thing, many times over.

 

[bamawriter]

Penn State had losing seasons in 2000 and 2001. It's possible that this scandal, combined with the on-field record, would have led to Paterno's departure back then had this all not been covered up. That's the argument that they gained a competitive advantage. They covered up these acts to protect the coach's job.

If they had acted on Sandusky in '01, I'm not sure how it could have cost Paterno his job. They would have been dealing with the issue, and Paterno would have been a part of that. Paterno didn't want the embarrassment, but he wasn't worried about his job.

 

[zjcvols]

Burn it all.

Burn Penn State football to the mother****ing ground.

 

[OldandStillaVol]

They will.

It will be interesting to see if they have the nuts to hammer their own program and cut the school out of all that revenue.

I would be shocked if Penn State self imposes a death penalty on their football program. No, they'll self impose some reduction in scholarships, ban on bowls, etc., etc. It will be up to the NCAA to decide whether it has the guts to impose a death penalty - which I think the school deserves.

 

[bamawriter]

I would be shocked if Penn State self imposes a death penalty on their football program. No, they'll self impose some reduction in scholarships, ban on bowls, etc., etc. It will be up to the NCAA to decide whether it has the guts to impose a death penalty - which I think the school deserves.

Why do they deserve the death penalty? The people who participated in the cover up are either fired, in prison, heading to prison, dead or any combination of that list. I'm all for erasing Paterno's lingering presence, and his records following his knowledge of the crimes. But I don't see what it accomplishes to destroy the program no one currently employed had even the slightest idea.

Now, if Penn State wanted to go that strict on themselves, more power to them. But why should that be the requirement?

 

[OldandStillaVol]

As many people have already mentioned, I think this is a case of "lack of institutional control". The football program had grown to the point that it dictated to the senior leaders of the university how to handle criminal acts.

The death penalty would destroy the football program - not the university. Move the support staff to other positions. Tell the players they are free to transfer or can stay at the university with their scholarship. Help coaching staff find other jobs while honoring their contracts.

If those fans who would have bought tickets donate the same amount now to the university, more power to them.

 

[bamawriter]

The death penalty would destroy the football program - not the university. Move the support staff to other positions. Tell the players they are free to transfer or can stay at the university with their scholarship. Help coaching staff find other jobs while honoring their contracts.

It would also destroy the other athletic programs who count on football revenue to stay afloat. It would also hurt the other Big 10 members because they'd have to scramble to fix their schedules, and may not be able to find opponents who can bring in the same revenue as Penn State, and would damage their investment in the Big 10 network which counted on Penn State's presence when it was formed. It would also hurt the Big 10's other partners, who bid what they did for the broadcast rights because they counted on being able to show Penn State games.

If Penn State football were the only potential victim, I might be able to see your side. But it's not, so I can't.

 

[CountVolcula]

Why do they deserve the death penalty? The people who participated in the cover up are either fired, in prison, heading to prison, dead or any combination of that list. I'm all for erasing Paterno's lingering presence, and his records following his knowledge of the crimes. But I don't see what it accomplishes to destroy the program no one currently employed had even the slightest idea.

Now, if Penn State wanted to go that strict on themselves, more power to them. But why should that be the requirement?

The accomplishment is to make an example that this sort of behavior will not be tolerated. That you cant simply ignore crimes because you dont want to tarnish your precious football program. That there are consequences for ignoring for 14 years, the horror that these kids had to go through.

 

[Vercingetorix]

It would also destroy the other athletic programs who count on football revenue to stay afloat. It would also hurt the other Big 10 members because they'd have to scramble to fix their schedules, and may not be able to find opponents who can bring in the same revenue as Penn State, and would damage their investment in the Big 10 network which counted on Penn State's presence when it was formed. It would also hurt the Big 10's other partners, who bid what they did for the broadcast rights because they counted on being able to show Penn State games.

If Penn State football were the only potential victim, I might be able to see your side. But it's not, so I can't.

So a program that enabled child rape should escape punishment in part because it might hurt TV networks? Really?