Penn State Sanctions: Poll

[GophersInIowa]

The timing of Joe Pa's death may have been the key to making him the sacrificial lamb. Make it look like he covered it up and accept your punishment to get people to look the other way. Its just way too convenient for me to believe the school ordered the investigation and the investigator places most of the blame on the dead guy. Pretty hard to defend yourself from the grave.

Then again, this could be just a conspiracy theory and a wild one at that. There are just too many connections and wierd coincidences throughout that piece that make you wonder how deep this could go. I can't think of one reason why Sandusky would have been allowed access to the facilities and the perks he got if Joe Pa really wanted him out of there other than the obvious

To add fuel to this fire, some have questioned the motivation of Joe Pa negotiating a $3M buy-out in early 2011, right after the grand jury. Some would suggest that Joe knew the fire was coming, but I am going to stand by my judgement that JoePa was a figure head in the football program and within in the Paterno household. I could see someone behind the scenes in the Paterno family negotiating a deal that would secure the financial security of the family... I think its also interesting that JoePa's cancer was diagnosed about a week after all this stuff hit the fan and that he died two months later. Coincidence?

Type of cancer is unusual in non-smokers...

http://articles.philly.com/2012-01-24/news/30659574_1_small-cell-lung-cancer-aggressive-cancer

I don't think "most" of the blame has been put on him. It's just that of all those involved, he is by far the most well known.

 

[50PoundHead]

Important thoughts. The NCAA clearly over-reacted because of public outcry. And that, itself, is a huuuuuuuge problem. It suggests they are no longer capable af acting in a regulatory capacity. An organization that is tasked with creating and enforcing rules cannot base its "enforcement" on public opinion. They become immediately irrelevant as soon as they do.

One could argue that, since this did not create a competetive advantage on the field for PSU (ie. it wasn't "cheating"), it falls outside of the NCAA's jurisdiction entirely.

As the BCS partnerships grow stronger, the NCAA is losing its reason for existance in major football. They capitalized on the talk-radio knee-jerk reactions to extend the scope of their power. The only valuable service they still served is to create and enforce rules that prevent "cheating". Now that they have demonstrated that they cannot do this, there is no longer a reason for college football to keep them on the payroll.

The primary benefactor of the sanctions, so far, appears to be Lane Kiffin and USC. Nothing could highlight the ineffectiveness of the NCAA in regulating college football more than this fact.

A lot of my thoughts fall along this same line of reasoning. I don't subscribe to the Spencer Hall school, but, as you, I can't help but think this is going to be the beginning of the end for the NCAA. There's no data to make that a straight-line certainty; just this vague sense I have.

 

[mplsbadger]

Important thoughts. The NCAA clearly over-reacted because of public outcry. And that, itself, is a huuuuuuuge problem. It suggests they are no longer capable af acting in a regulatory capacity. An organization that is tasked with creating and enforcing rules cannot base its "enforcement" on public opinion. They become immediately irrelevant as soon as they do.

From the NCAA:
The Executive Committee acts on behalf of the entire Association and implements policies to resolve core issues, pursuant to its authority under the NCAA Constitution and Bylaw Provision 4.1.2(e). The Executive Committee along with the Division I Board, a body of presidents representing all of Division I, directed President Emmert to examine the circumstances surrounding the Penn State tragedy and, if appropriate, make recommendations regarding punitive and corrective measures.

If they acted based on public outcry it was at the direction of their members.

One could argue that, since this did not create a competetive advantage on the field for PSU (ie. it wasn't "cheating"), it falls outside of the NCAA's jurisdiction entirely.

That argument is only valid until the Executive Comittee grants the aforementioned power, directing the president to act, which they did. This is not like our government where a separate body, the congress, defines the jurisdiction of the executive and the courts. The jurisdiction of the NCAA with respect to the athletic operations of its members is what it's members say it is when they say it is.

As the BCS partnerships grow stronger, the NCAA is losing its reason for existance in major football. They capitalized on the talk-radio knee-jerk reactions to extend the scope of their power. The only valuable service they still served is to create and enforce rules that prevent "cheating". Now that they have demonstrated that they cannot do this, there is no longer a reason for college football to keep them on the payroll.

When you say 'They' capitalized on knee jerk reactions... are you referring to the NCAA executive, or the membership. It would seem that it is in fact the membership who directed the response. If the members directed the response are you suggesting that the members would be disgusted with the response that they directed and thus disband the organization? To be replaced with a new one...that they direct?

 

[GopherInPittsburgh]

"This was our 9/11. I just saw planes crashing into towers."

http://deadspin.com/5928585/?utm_ca...source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

Unbelievable.

 

[GoAUpher]

When you say 'They' capitalized on knee jerk reactions... are you referring to the NCAA executive, or the membership. It would seem that it is in fact the membership who directed the response. If the members directed the response are you suggesting that the members would be disgusted with the response that they directed and thus disband the organization? To be replaced with a new one...that they direct?

One thing to note, if it really is the membership driving this then I doubt there was anything stopping the NCAA from calling an emergency meeting of the membership and asking for a vote. There's nothing inherent in the decision that was made by the board that suggests the wider membership pushed for anything. That's just speculation.

 

[GoAUpher]

"This was our 9/11. I just saw planes crashing into towers."

http://deadspin.com/5928585/?utm_ca...source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

Unbelievable.

Just...no.

You Mr. PSU fan, are a bucket of fail disguised as a human being.

 

[Parski1]

"This was our 9/11. I just saw planes crashing into towers."

http://deadspin.com/5928585/?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

Unbelievable.

What he said was pretty stupid, but I have to agree with the Deadspin guy - the press was out just waiting for some emotional chump to open his\her mouth so they could slay them. They also had a bunch of Penn St. kids sitting in front of the TV during the announcement of the NCAA penalties for reaction. Naturally they started crying with head in heads and some played to the cameras....it was really irritating to watch.

 

[GoAUpher]

What he said was pretty stupid, but I have to agree with the Deadspin guy - the press was out just waiting for some emotional chump to open his\her mouth so they could slay them. They also had a bunch of Penn St. kids sitting in front of the TV during the announcement of the NCAA penalties for reaction. Naturally they started crying with head in heads and some played to the cameras....it was really irritating to watch.

For reals. Why do any of these people bother to get on camera? It's not like there haven't already been a huge number of examples of this kind of stupid to learn from already. This dude was even worse. It wasn't even off the cuff. He let them come over to his home and then after inviting them in compared penalties stemming from the cover up of child rape to 9/11. Thats...how do you even come up with that as a comparison? And even if you did, why would you ever say it out loud? You'd be better off with "This ucky. Me no like NCAA. I sad now." You'd come off as more intelligent and reserved by comparison.

 

[GopherInPittsburgh]

For reals. Why do any of these people bother to get on camera? It's not like there haven't already been a huge number of examples of this kind of stupid to learn from already. This dude was even worse. It wasn't even off the cuff. He let them come over to his home and then after inviting them in compared penalties stemming from the cover up of child rape to 9/11. Thats...how do you even come up with that as a comparison? And even if you did, why would you ever say it out loud? You'd be better off with "This ucky. Me no like NCAA. I sad now." You'd come off as more intelligent and reserved by comparison.

Right? This wasn't a 20 year old on campus with an immediate overreaction. This was a grown man who had time to think "should I really say this?"

 

[Go4Broke]

One thing to note, if it really is the membership driving this then I doubt there was anything stopping the NCAA from calling an emergency meeting of the membership and asking for a vote. There's nothing inherent in the decision that was made by the board that suggests the wider membership pushed for anything. That's just speculation.

If the wider membership of college presidents are unhappy with the the actions of Mark Emmert and the NCAA Executive Committee then presumably they will let them know about it. And if enough of them are unhappy we can further presume that Emmert and the Executive Committee will take that message into account during the next scandal. If they don't then sooner or later they will be putting their jobs at risk. That is the way large organizations are supposed to work.

Our guy President Kaler seems to be satisfied with what happened to Penn State (at least publicly). And why wouldn't he be? If the NCAA hadn't imposed significant sanctions on Penn State it would not only become a public relations nightmare for every NCAA member, it would also very likely result in Congressional hearings and interference with intercollegiate sports generally (the very thing you despise about the Minnesota Legislature's relationship with the U).

The NCAA isn't going anywhere regardless of the antipathy so many college sports fans and sports writers have for it. The name may change but the organization (in whatever form) will be around as long as intercollegiate sports are around.

 

[50PoundHead]

Didn't catch the whole conversation and I don't know if Mike & Mike have a podcast, but the great Frank Deford was on their show this morning discussing the whole affair. Agree or disagree with Frank Deford, the guy is a great thinker and writer whose viewpoint I always respect.

As for how university presidents feel or what they believe should have been done, the NCAA's actions kept it off their plate, for which I think they should be extremely thankful.

 

[GoAUpher]

If the wider membership of college presidents are unhappy with the the actions of Mark Emmert and the NCAA Executive Committee then presumably they will let them know about it. And if enough of them are unhappy we can further presume that Emmert and the Executive Committee will take that message into account during the next scandal. If they don't then sooner or later they will be putting their jobs at risk. That is the way large organizations are supposed to work.

What % of that constitutes "hearing from the membership?" Most of the large school presidents were in favor of paying athletes $2000 a year in stipend money but that idea died in front of the whole membership. All I'm saying is that pretending to "know" what your membership wants when you're talking about multiple hundreds of institutions seems like a bit of a stretch.

 

[station19]

Didn't catch the whole conversation and I don't know if Mike & Mike have a podcast, but the great Frank Deford was on their show this morning discussing the whole affair. Agree or disagree with Frank Deford, the guy is a great thinker and writer whose viewpoint I always respect.

As for how university presidents feel or what they believe should have been done, the NCAA's actions kept it off their plate, for which I think they should be extremely thankful.

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=8198272

 

[Texas-Gopher]

Important thoughts. The NCAA clearly over-reacted because of public outcry. And that, itself, is a huuuuuuuge problem. It suggests they are no longer capable af acting in a regulatory capacity. An organization that is tasked with creating and enforcing rules cannot base its "enforcement" on public opinion. They become immediately irrelevant as soon as they do.

One could argue that, since this did not create a competetive advantage on the field for PSU (ie. it wasn't "cheating"), it falls outside of the NCAA's jurisdiction entirely.

As the BCS partnerships grow stronger, the NCAA is losing its reason for existance in major football. They capitalized on the talk-radio knee-jerk reactions to extend the scope of their power. The only valuable service they still served is to create and enforce rules that prevent "cheating". Now that they have demonstrated that they cannot do this, there is no longer a reason for college football to keep them on the payroll.

The primary benefactor of the sanctions, so far, appears to be Lane Kiffin and USC. Nothing could highlight the ineffectiveness of the NCAA in regulating college football more than this fact.

+1

 

[Governor Sibley]

Did Penn State cheat in football? Because that's the NCAA's sole concern.

This is beyond ridiculous.

 

[mplsbadger]

Did Penn State cheat in football? Because that's the NCAA's sole concern.

This is beyond ridiculous.

Who says cheating in football is their only concern? They just said otherwise didn't they?

 

[GophersInIowa]

Did Penn State cheat in football? Because that's the NCAA's sole concern.

This is beyond ridiculous.

They're non-action was to protect the football program. Obviously Paterno and others felt that if the Sandusky thing came out, it would have hurt the football program. So even though it wasn't cheating necessarily, it was most definitely football related.

 

[Deleted_User]

They're non-action was to protect the football program. Obviously Paterno and others felt that if the Sandusky thing came out, it would have hurt the football program. So even though it wasn't cheating necessarily, it was most definitely football related.

+1

 

[station19]

They're non-action was to protect the football program. Obviously Paterno and others felt that if the Sandusky thing came out, it would have hurt the football program. So even though it wasn't cheating necessarily, it was most definitely football related.

I sometimes wonder if Paterno's actions were to help protect his buddy Sandusky. I don't think the football program would be affected much if Sandusky had been ousted and reported right away. In the end it was the same result.

I've been uncomfortable with the NCAA being involved here from the beginning. Having said that, from what I have read and heard, I get the feeling the NCAA is not so much 'ruling' on the abuse and cover-up, but more so on the fact that the football program had become more important and powerful than the entire University. The University and those who ran it had lost sight of what is more important and what is right and wrong.

Were the sanctions by the NCAA fair? That is open for debate.

 

[Texas-Gopher]

They're non-action was to protect the football program. Obviously Paterno and others felt that if the Sandusky thing came out, it would have hurt the football program. So even though it wasn't cheating necessarily, it was most definitely football related.

Serious question: is this fact, or the latest mass opinion?

 

[GopherGod]

Serious question: is this fact, or the latest mass opinion?

We will never know for sure one way or the other because they did cover it up rather than being forthright with the info back in 1998/2001. It might have hurt the program(likely IMO) or it might not, cannot be proven either way.

 

[Coolew01]

Isn't that the case in most situations though? What happened to USC and Ohio St. punished many people who had nothing to do with it.

Maybe something needs to be changed in how schools are punished. But I don't know how it is done when most of the time, the people who did the wrong things are no longer there.

In the case of Ohio State they could of punished the people involved(Prior etc...) but because of sponsor money with the bowl game chose not to. Unfortunately I think the NCAA is about money first and everthing else second.

 

[Texas-Gopher]

http://www.powerlineblog.com/a...rent-record.php

Got this from a PSU board.

The whole Paterno thing has never made sense to me, and that often means we're not getting the truth. I've never been able to understand how a guy that made such a point of being an honorable person would miss an easy layup such as condemning a child molester. This article, IMO, is likely much closer to the truth.

I could definitely see someone with law enforcement or the PSU legal department telling Paterno "you've done your part, now keep your mouth shut or you will taint the case or make yourself or the university vulnerable to a slander lawsuit, should Sandusky sue".

Then fast forward 10 years to an 86(?) year old man, that likely hasn't slept for a couple days, sitting on the witness stand unable to convince people of his actions being honorable.

IMO the guy got jobbed.

 

[station19]

Hard to imagine anyone telling Paterno to shut up. Hell, the president tried to fire him and Joe said no.

 

[Deleted_User]

One thing to note, if it really is the membership driving this then I doubt there was anything stopping the NCAA from calling an emergency meeting of the membership and asking for a vote. There's nothing inherent in the decision that was made by the board that suggests the wider membership pushed for anything. That's just speculation.

There is no need to call a general plebiscite when you have a representative system. We don't ask Congress to do national referendums on big issues like war, so in this puny little subject, there certainly is not cause to have a plebiscite.

 

[Texas-Gopher]

Hard to imagine anyone telling Paterno to shut up. Hell, the president tried to fire him and Joe said no.

You know what I mean, he was likely advised by counsel that if he spoke about the incident he could put himself or the university in a vulnerable position, should Sandusky sue for slander. Better?

Even if he wasn't, I would say it's safe to assume that he was well coached through the years (as we all are by HR) about how to not talk about anyone for that very reason, be it players, coaches, civil servants, etc.

I'm just saying that there are better explanations for Joe's silence than a conspiracy. But the path of least resistance for our knee-jerk society is to assume the worst (and write about it in the media).

 

[station19]

You know what I mean, he was likely advised by counsel that if he spoke about the incident he could put himself or the university in a vulnerable position, should Sandusky sue for slander. Better?

Even if he wasn't, I would say it's safe to assume that he was well coached through the years (as we all are by HR) about how to not talk about anyone for that very reason, be it players, coaches, civil servants, etc.

I'm just saying that there are better explanations for Joe's silence than a conspiracy. But the path of least resistance for our knee-jerk society is to assume the worst (and write about it in the media).

I wasn't directing my comment to you are anyone else in particular....just general statement.

All in all I agree with what you are saying. There is one hell of a lot we will now never know with Paterno passing.

As I've said before, if Paterno were still alive this would be very interesting.

 

[Maximus]

Five days after the Freeh report is released, the NCAA levies the second harshest penalties in college football history??? THE NCAA DIDN'T INVESTIGATE THIS....no interview of Joe Paterno (who was never charged)...no interview athletic director Tim Curley or vice president Gary Schultz. The Freeh report had nothing to do with the NCAA or its authority, it was an internal investigation (and one they have made corrections to already just a couple days later).

It would be like the NCAA giving Miami the death penalty a couple of days after they saw Yahoo's Charles Robinson's article on the Hurricanes and Al Golden come across their twitter feed.

Flashback 1999...Pioneer Press article comes out about Clem's cheating. Darn, that sure looks thorough. Before the Sweet Sixteen a week later, the Gophers are leveled by the NCAA. Zero difference.

 

[Go4Broke]

Five days after the Freeh report is released, the NCAA levies the second harshest penalties in college football history??? THE NCAA DIDN'T INVESTIGATE THIS....no interview of Joe Paterno (who was never charged)...no interview athletic director Tim Curley or vice president Gary Schultz. The Freeh report had nothing to do with the NCAA or its authority, it was an internal investigation (and one they have made corrections to already just a couple days later).

It would be like the NCAA giving Miami the death penalty a couple of days after they saw Yahoo's Charles Robinson's article on the Hurricanes and Al Golden come across their twitter feed.

Flashback 1999...Pioneer Press article comes out about Clem's cheating. Darn, that sure looks thorough. Before the Sweet Sixteen a week later, the Gophers are leveled by the NCAA. Zero difference.

You have it wrong, Maximus. If you go back and read all nine threads on this topic containing almost nine hundred posts you will understand why the large majority of Holers think the NCAA did the right thing.

 

[station19]

You have it wrong, Maximus. If you go back and read all nine threads on this topic containing almost nine hundred posts you will understand why the large majority of Holers think the NCAA did the right thing.

Which doesn't mean it was right.