There's not a penalty to harsh for PSU!

[milohimself]

Both PSU and then NCAA were waiting on the Freeh report

It's a classic case of Catch 22

All eyes are on the NCAA to set precedence in this case. I don't envy them

There will also be pressure on PSU from all angles to do something. They are going to make a lot of fans unhappy in Happy Valley

And if the university decides to cancel football they are free to do so.

But if the ncaa does it, aside from being a decision that would be ruinous to central pa, it would also set a very bad precedent and punish thousands who did nothing wrong while having zero effect on the actual criminals.

It couldn't even be counted as collateral damage, as that implies that a death penalty would have some negative effect on the guilty parties. It would have no effect on them.

 

[CountVolcula]

And if the university decides to cancel football they are free to do so.

But if the ncaa does it, aside from being a decision that would be ruinous to central pa, it would also set a very bad precedent and punish thousands who did nothing wrong while having zero effect on the actual criminals.

It couldn't even be counted as collateral damage, as that implies that a death penalty would have some negative effect on the guilty parties. It would have no effect on them.

This happens every time a team is caught cheating. No different

Everyone was hoping Auburn and Oregon were going to get the Death Penalty. There would be millions of dollars lost and millions of people affected if those sanctions had came to pass

 

[knucklehead_vol]

Yes, the crime involved kids. And nobody else has struggled to follow my argument but yourself.

You are using the involvement of children as an argumentative fallacy to drudge emotion and make anyone who argues against you appear as a child-hating heathen. It's embarrassing, yet the same rut people who can't function on a level higher than emotion and instinct frequently fall into. See: the people who gather en masse at many political rallies.

I would beg to differ. But your just a child yourself it seems so I am done with you.

 

[rockytop9808]

I would beg to differ. But your just a child yourself it seems so I am done with you.

Ah, ad hominem. Flawless.

The most basic question here, in my opinion, is not what is best for the victims (who thinks cancelling a football season will bring those victims joy or mitigate their suffering?); it's not really what punishment is appropriate for the NCAA to lay down; the basic question is does the NCAA have a right to suspend an entire program for criminal activity (activity to be addressed by established process in place specifically to address these things) perpetuated by members of said program?

Dragging the fact that the crime involved children only serves the purpose of taking the logic out of an argument by supplanting it with emotions. Again, it's an embarrassing, tired tactic, but I'll consent that it seems to work with a few subsets of the masses.

 

[95 Vol Alum]

Petrino got fired for doing less because of the university being an institution of the state (and I believe their being employees of the state, thus) and certain already lain out rules/law, which as such, his actions involving the hiring violated


(and/or the potential mess it could open)

He was also terminated by the University not at the mandate of the NCAA.

 

[knucklehead_vol]

Ah, ad hominem. Flawless.

The most basic question here, in my opinion, is not what is best for the victims (who thinks cancelling a football season will bring those victims joy or mitigate their suffering?); it's not really what punishment is appropriate for the NCAA to lay down; the basic question is does the NCAA have a right to suspend an entire program for criminal activity (activity to be addressed by established process in place specifically to address these things) perpetuated by members of said program?

Dragging the fact that the crime involved children only serves the purpose of taking the logic out of an argument by supplanting it with emotions. Again, it's an embarrassing, tired tactic, but I'll consent that it seems to work with a few subsets of the masses.

There you go. Now your making sense. We can be friends again.

I agree to a certain extent, but I think the way the NCAA rules are written leaves them open to broad interpretation. Thus they will act I believe. Do I agree? It doesn't really matter. They are gonna do what they want.


As for the people affected by penaltie, I am more worried about that culture being demolished. But I think Penn State should self impose some sort of punishment.

But I have said earlier in this thread I believe the DOE will hit them harder, which may affect the economy even more.

 

[TrueOrange]

He was also terminated by the University not at the mandate of the NCAA.

That too

 

[bamawriter]

SO

If Jerry Sandusky had given 50 dollars to a player, been observed by a grad assistant who reported it to Paterno who then reported it to the AD, and President. The coach, AD, President decide to keep it quiet - this is Lack of Institutional Control

BUT

Jerry Sandusky sexually assaulting a minor, observed by a grad assistant who reported it to Paterno who then reported it to the AD and President. The coach, AD, President decide to keep it quiet - this is not Lack of Institutional Control.

By rule: YES.

 

[vols4sure]

Ah, ad hominem. Flawless.

The most basic question here, in my opinion, is not what is best for the victims (who thinks cancelling a football season will bring those victims joy or mitigate their suffering?); it's not really what punishment is appropriate for the NCAA to lay down; the basic question is does the NCAA have a right to suspend an entire program for criminal activity (activity to be addressed by established process in place specifically to address these things) perpetuated by members of said program?

Dragging the fact that the crime involved children only serves the purpose of taking the logic out of an argument by supplanting it with emotions. Again, it's an embarrassing, tired tactic, but I'll consent that it seems to work with a few subsets of the masses.

Yes. When the criminal activity (failure to report and coverup child abuse) involves multiple people of the highest level within the athletic department/university, and the criminal activity was done to protect the image of the athletic program/department/university, the NCAA should punish said program. Throw in the fact that multiple children were raped because of the criminal activity and the fact that it it should have been obvious that additional children were likely to be raped because of their inaction, it is a no-brainer.

 

[bamawriter]

9808 and Milo keep making the same point, and it is a good one.

If the NCAA were to give PSU the death penalty, it would not serve to punish anyone who was involved in the crime or the coverup. Those people are either headed to prison or dead. Even if you think the BOT failed in their duties, it really wouldn't hurt them, either. Being a trustee isn't a job (I don't know if they even get paid). Every member of the BOT does something else for a living, and they won't be affected other than being able to watch PSU games for however long the sanctions last.

The people who would get hurt are the athletes in the sports that only exist because football essentially foots the bill; local restaurant, hotel, and shop owners whose entire year is made over 7 weekends in the Fall; the players who would have to seek other schools where they can ply their trade work and on their educations; and the coaches who weren't even at PSU when this went down who'd have to go looking for other jobs. That's who the NCAA would be punishing.

 

[vols4sure]

9808 and Milo keep making the same point, and it is a good one.

If the NCAA were to give PSU the death penalty, it would not serve to punish anyone who was involved in the crime or the coverup. Those people are either headed to prison or dead. Even if you think the BOT failed in their duties, it really wouldn't hurt them, either. Being a trustee isn't a job (I don't know if they even get paid). Every member of the BOT does something else for a living, and they won't be affected other than being able to watch PSU games for however long the sanctions last.

The people who would get hurt are the athletes in the sports that only exist because football essentially foots the bill; local restaurant, hotel, and shop owners whose entire year is made over 7 weekends in the Fall; the players who would have to seek other school where they can ply their trade work on their educations; and the coaches who weren't even at PSU when this went down who'd have to go looking for other jobs. That's who the NCAA would be punishing.

And everyone else keeps making the same good points - (1) should no school ever be punished as long as all those who were guilty are flushed from the system; and (2) the BOT are guilty to some extent because they let too much power reside in the hands of a few people they presumably vetted and trusted.

 

[bamawriter]

Yes. When the criminal activity (failure to report and coverup child abuse) involves multiple people of the highest level within the athletic department/university, and the criminal activity was done to protect the image of the athletic program/department.

Where in the bylaws does the NCAA get that authority? And don't point to that completely irrelevant ethics clause because that isn't a violation.

 

[bamawriter]

And everyone else keeps making the same good points - (1) should no school ever be punished as long as all those who were guilty are flushed from the system;

The school will be punished when they have to write checks to the victims. No one is arguing that the institution shouldn't be held accountable, only that the NCAA isn't the appropriate authority in THIS instance.

and (2) the BOT are guilty to some extent because they let too much power reside in the hands of a few people they presumably vetted and trusted.

Like I said before: NCAA actions would not affect the members of the BOT.

 

[knucklehead_vol]

Where in the bylaws does the NCAA get that authority? And don't point to that completely irrelevant ethics clause because that isn't a violation.

I think we'll find out soon what they use for justification of the penalties they hand out.

 

[milohimself]

This happens every time a team is caught cheating. No different

Everyone was hoping Auburn and Oregon were going to get the Death Penalty. There would be millions of dollars lost and millions of people affected if those sanctions had came to pass

I very seriously doubt there will ever be another death penalty.

What people hoped Auburn and Oregon would get busted for would be for actual cheating, though. What happened at Penn State was a heinous crime, but calling it cheating (i.e. anything where the NCAA is concerned) is more than a little bit of a stretch.

I don't even like that model though; I do much prefer show-cause, barring coaches and other cheaters from working for NCAA member programs, rather than laying waste to the actual program itself. How often do we see one program get leveled while a cheating coach skates onto the next job? As for players, not much the NCAA can do besides strip them of all eligibility, which is what they already do.

Regardless of what Emmert said, which IMO contradicted much of earlier things he's said and was mostly bluster, I have yet to see anyone point to an actual NCAA violation that Penn State committed, and no violation ought to mean no punishment.

This will obviously be a cautionary tale of power and sway that college football has in some parts of the country, but I am so far unaware of what the actual ground the NCAA has to stand on to shut it down.

http://compliance.pac-12.org/thetools/instctl.pdf

There is the official Pac-12 document that outlines the NCAA definition of institutional control, and it explicitly states that NCAA violations must have occurred for LOIC to be leveled.

While, as I mentioned, what happened at Penn State is a heinous crime, there is absolutely no way, shape or form that what occurred was in any definition or any plausible sense a violation of NCAA rules.

What would be unprecedented about this case is if Emmert decides to punish a program that did not break a single NCAA rule.

I'm not completely opposed to the suspension of Penn State football (although I think the social and economic cost of that would likely devastate central PA for decades), but if it's going to happen it has to be Penn State that decides, not the NCAA.

 

[vols4sure]

Where in the bylaws does the NCAA get that authority? And don't point to that completely irrelevant ethics clause because that isn't a violation.

That is the only argument against punishment, and I understand the argument. However, in my opinion, the organization (it is not a court of law no matter how much you want to treat it as one) has the ability to punish for gross violations of the General Principles in this instance if they choose to do so. And I think they should as PSU is clearly showing they have no moral backbone.

I also understand the argument against the death penalty, and I am starting to tend to agree. However, I believe they should be severely crippled with significant scholarship reductions and a five year or so bowl ban. The NCAA has to show that their is at least some sanctity left in major athletics. Otherwise, these programs might as well not be tied to universities and should form their own semi-pro league.

 

[rockytop9808]

The school will be punished when they have to write checks to the victims. No one is arguing that the institution shouldn't be held accountable, only that the NCAA isn't the appropriate authority in THIS instance.



Like I said before: NCAA actions would not affect the members of the BOT.

Bingo. The argument that has been made several times is that this should be out of the NCAA's authority, not that nothing should happen.

 

[vols4sure]

The school will be punished when they have to write checks to the victims. No one is arguing that the institution shouldn't be held accountable, only that the NCAA isn't the appropriate authority in THIS instance.



Like I said before: NCAA actions would not affect the members of the BOT.

It will affect how future BOTs handle athletic programs and coaches.

 

[knucklehead_vol]

I very seriously doubt there will ever be another death penalty.

What people hoped Auburn and Oregon would get busted for would be for actual cheating, though. What happened at Penn State was a heinous crime, but calling it cheating (i.e. anything where the NCAA is concerned) is more than a little bit of a stretch.

I don't even like that model though; I do much prefer show-cause, barring coaches and other cheaters from working for NCAA member programs, rather than laying waste to the actual program itself. How often do we see one program get leveled while a cheating coach skates onto the next job? As for players, not much the NCAA can do besides strip them of all eligibility, which is what they already do.

Regardless of what Emmert said, which IMO contradicted much of earlier things he's said and was mostly bluster, I have yet to see anyone point to an actual NCAA violation that Penn State committed, and no violation ought to mean no punishment.

This will obviously be a cautionary tale of power and sway that college football has in some parts of the country, but I am so far unaware of what the actual ground the NCAA has to stand on to shut it down.

http://compliance.pac-12.org/thetools/instctl.pdf

There is the official Pac-12 document that outlines the NCAA definition of institutional control, and it explicitly states that NCAA violations must have occurred for LOIC to be leveled.

While, as I mentioned, what happened at Penn State is a heinous crime, there is absolutely no way, shape or form that what occurred was in any definition or any plausible sense a violation of NCAA rules.

What would be unprecedented about this case is if Emmert decides to punish a program that did not break a single NCAA rule.

I'm not completely opposed to the suspension of Penn State football (although I think the social and economic cost of that would likely devastate central PA for decades), but if it's going to happen it has to be Penn State that decides, not the NCAA.

I agree with this with the exception I think the NCAA will punish if PSU does not self impose. They will read the rules how they see fit.

 

[milohimself]

That is the only argument against punishment, and I understand the argument. However, in my opinion, the organization (it is not a court of law no matter how much you want to treat it as one) has the ability to punish for gross violations of the General Principles in this instance if they choose to do so. And I think they should as PSU is clearly showing they have no moral backbone.

I also understand the argument against the death penalty, and I am starting to tend to agree. However, I believe they should be severely crippled with significant scholarship reductions and a five year or so bowl ban. The NCAA has to show that their is at least some sanctity left in major athletics. Otherwise, these programs might as well not be tied to universities and should form their own semi-pro league.

If this happened in the NFL, then Goodell could do whatever he pleased. But the same is not true of the NCAA.

I know moral backbone is at concern here, but so is precedent.

As for bowl bans or whatever, again, that ought to be left up to the university. If the NCAA loses its mind and decides it can punish Penn State here, I don't see how it could stop anywhere short of the death penalty. If what happened there is a violation of NCAA rules (and it isn't) then it would be far and away the worst in the history of college athletics.

 

[milohimself]

I agree with this with the exception I think the NCAA will punish if PSU does not self impose. They will read the rules how they see fit.

The "exception" part is pretty much the entire point of my post. The NCAA punishing the football program would be a radical re-interpretation of rules that don't even seem to exist, then applied retroactively.

Passion is throwing logic way out of whack with people on this issue. Most people don't even like how the NCAA handles punishment as is, if they take down Penn State here then it will be an entirely brand new world of power and authority the NCAA is allowed to exercise.

 

[vols-1]

And if the university decides to cancel football they are free to do so.

But if the ncaa does it, aside from being a decision that would be ruinous to central pa, it would also set a very bad precedent and punish thousands who did nothing wrong while having zero effect on the actual criminals.

It couldn't even be counted as collateral damage, as that implies that a death penalty would have some negative effect on the guilty parties. It would have no effect on them.

The death penalty is appropriate in this case because like SMU it was a pattern of abuse that continued for more than 10 years even after numerous warnings. If the school is not willing to step in after that much time and stop the abuse, then the NCAA is left with one choice in order to stop the pattern of abuse...and that's discontinue football. It's unfortunate that innocent people will become affected as well, but the death penalty appears to be the only way to stop the program from turning its head the other way every time an incident occurs.

 

[milohimself]

The death penalty is appropriate in this case because like SMU it was a pattern of abuse that continued for more than 10 years even after numerous warnings. If the school is not willing to step in after that much time and stop the abuse, then the NCAA is left with one choice in order to stop the pattern of abuse...and that's discontinue football. It's unfortunate that innocent people will become affected as well, but the death penalty appears to be the only way to stop the program from turning its head the other way every time an incident occurs.

This is nothing like SMU.

SMU repeatedly broke a very specific set of rules that the NCAA had in place, got brazen or dumb when they got caught and got hammered for it.

Penn State did not break one, single, solitary NCAA rule. Did they break laws? Oh hell yes. NCAA rules? No. When that happens, it's 100% in the hands of the authorities and courts, not in the NCAA's.

 

[bamawriter]

That is the only argument against punishment, and I understand the argument. However, in my opinion, the organization (it is not a court of law no matter how much you want to treat it as one) has the ability to punish for gross violations of the General Principles in this instance if they choose to do so. And I think they should as PSU is clearly showing they have no moral backbone.

The "General Principles" are about the ethics of fair play and amateurism, not the ethics of the penal code.

 

[YorkVol]

I heard Emmert is flying the plane in this picture, just sayin...

Ultimatum issued for JoePa statue