Penn State still trying to find ways to avoid taking THEIR medicine re Sandusky

Donate To GopherHole

This whole situation is a mess. The university absolutely deserves punishment for what went on but at the same time the system is messed up from the standpoint that the people who receive the direct punishment had nothing to do with the actual act. Same thing that happens when a coach breaks rules and then leaves town before the sanctions hit.
 

I like the title of your thread. Frankly, I thought they should have gotten the death penalty but they should at least swallow what they did get. These two Pennsylvania congressmen are asking who are they hurting and then go on to talk about the student-athletes. Did they ever mention the victims of these crimes? No! Did they ever talk to the victims? Probably not.
 


MNVCGUY said:
This whole situation is a mess. The university absolutely deserves punishment for what went on but at the same time the system is messed up from the standpoint that the people who receive the direct punishment had nothing to do with the actual act. Same thing that happens when a coach breaks rules and then leaves town before the sanctions hit.
Click to expand...

There is one HUGE DIFFERENCE though.

In the coach leaving town scenario the school/coach/players broke ncaa rules and therefore the ncaa is the only one that can sanction/punish the offenders. The ncaa also has no power of subpoena or jail time, and once the offenders have left the school they have no jurisdiction. If the ncaa does not punish the school and players and coaches left behind, the there would be no punishment for violations.

In the PSU case the offenders broke laws against society(not against the ncaa) and they are being and will be prosecuted in criminal and civil court. The school itself is going to get killed in civil court.

If you guys want to discuss whether the ncaa should pile on and make themselves look good in the court of public opinion, go ahead, I've made my points in the past.
 


When a school joins the NCAA they agree to be bound by their decisions. Penn St can opt out (but they wont).

The idea that Penn St didn't break any NCAA rules is debatable. Part of being in the NCAA is an agreement to maintain certain standards and practices to not harm the whole. It is no different than any organization that self regulates. The members are required to maintain certain moral standards so as to not damage all the members.

In the case of Penn St., I can't think a single instance where the member institution created more potential harm to all members. If the NCAA hadn't acted against Penn St. the stink would have stuck to every member college. Imagine the headlines, Penn St. covers up decade of child molestation...NCAA does nothing. By levying the penalty, the NCAA is saying we hold our members to a standard and Penn St. failed to meet it. As a member, they have damaged us all and they must be punished. Otherwise they can no longer be a member of the NCAA.

This is reasonable from both a moral and legal stand point of self governed member organizations in my opinion.
 

Coming from congressmen who punish innocent Americans with their incompetence.
 

GopherinPhilly said:
By levying the penalty, the NCAA is saying we hold our members to a standard and Penn St. failed to meet it.
Click to expand...

I'm going to go through every email you sent in the last 10 years and impose damaging sanctions on you based on five of those emails. Nope, you aren't allowed to tell your side of the story. Just going to read them and make my decision.

For the first time in its existence, the NCAA imposed crippling penalties without conducting an investigation....without conducting an investigation.....without conducting an investigation.

It instead used the Freeh Report which was an investigation (paid for by Penn State) that didn't talk to McQueery, didn't talk to Paterno, didn't talk to Schultz, didn't talk to Spanier, didn't talk to Curley, didn't talk to Sandusky.

Of course how can we question the credibility of the NCAA. Oh wait, I mean...prior to last week and the Miami case, how can we question the credibility of the NCAA?

I guess Miami could just fund its own investigation like Penn State and based on precedent, the NCAA could just use that to impose penalties.
 

The NCAA has never been the cradle of integrity.
 




Maximus said:
I'm going to go through every email you sent in the last 10 years and impose damaging sanctions on you based on five of those emails. Nope, you aren't allowed to tell your side of the story. Just going to read them and make my decision.

For the first time in its existence, the NCAA imposed crippling penalties without conducting an investigation....without conducting an investigation.....without conducting an investigation.

It instead used the Freeh Report which was an investigation (paid for by Penn State) that didn't talk to McQueery, didn't talk to Paterno, didn't talk to Schultz, didn't talk to Spanier, didn't talk to Curley, didn't talk to Sandusky.

Of course how can we question the credibility of the NCAA. Oh wait, I mean...prior to last week and the Miami case, how can we question the credibility of the NCAA?

I guess Miami could just fund its own investigation like Penn State and based on precedent, the NCAA could just use that to impose penalties.
Click to expand...

You quoted me in your response but my post had nothing to do with what you are talking about. I, in no way, defended or spoke to the integrity of NCAA investigations....my statements were purely about the right of the NCAA to impose sanctions against Penn St. and why they had to.

I am confused with your outrage...are you saying if the NCAA had done a thorough investigation that they would have found that Penn St. didn't cover it up (which Penn St. admitted they did) or that the kids weren't abused (which they were)?

The NCAA wasn't conducting a criminal investigation and aren't required to follow any laws. Again, they are a member organization and make their own rules. If Penn St. doesn't like them, they can withdraw from the NCAA and join the NAIA. The NCAA is always going to act first and foremost in its own best interest and not place any member above the entirety of its membership.

Whether we think its fair, legal or right is immaterial to what is within their authority. Personally, if I were going to defend a school against NCAA sanctions...it wouldn't be Penn St. for contributing the rape and abuse of over 15 underage boys. Just sayin...if Penn St. wants out there is the fu_cking door and I'll be glad to hold it for them.
 

Many in the Penn State community have a victim complex that doesn't quit, which is quite sad and pathetic. They claim there is no culture problem in regards to their football team, yet will continue to go to extraodinary (and often, laughable) lengths to lift sanctions against their beloved football heroes. Before the scandal broke I had nothing but respect for Penn State as a community. But after watching and reading the utter tripe that many of their supporters have trotted out detailing how victimized they all are in this, I've lost all respect for the entire Penn State brand.
 

If this gets sent to court chances are the sanctions would be over by the time it got settled! Its an ugly situation wish it would go away and Penn St. would just get over the santions are not fair but life isnt and out of repect for the victims to not keep bringing it up.
 



MRJ said:
Many in the Penn State community have a victim complex that doesn't quit, which is quite sad and pathetic. They claim there is no culture problem in regards to their football team, yet will continue to go to extraodinary (and often, laughable) lengths to lift sanctions against their beloved football heroes. Before the scandal broke I had nothing but respect for Penn State as a community. But after watching and reading the utter tripe that many of their supporters have trotted out detailing how victimized they all are in this, I've lost all respect for the entire Penn State brand.
Click to expand...

Many of their fans act like they're bigger victims than the kids who were molested, and that's absolutely pathetic.
 


MRJ said:
Many in the Penn State community have a victim complex that doesn't quit, which is quite sad and pathetic. They claim there is no culture problem in regards to their football team, .
Click to expand...

I agree.
 


GopherinPhilly said:
When a school joins the NCAA they agree to be bound by their decisions. Penn St can opt out (but they wont).
Click to expand...

True to an extent. They agree to be bound by NCAA decisions as long as the NCAA follows their bylaws.

It's just like being in a townhome association. If they have in their bylaws that you can't add on to your house and then you go and add on to your house, they can punish you within the confines of the bylaws. However, if there is nothing in the bylaws about interior color, and the board decides they don't like your dayglo green wall inside your house, they have no authority to punish you and any punishment they did render would be found non-binding in court.

The argument many people are making is that they don't feel the NCAA had the right to punish in this manner based on their bylaws.

However, there are three facts those people are missing:

1. The NCAA has a general ethics clause that states they can punish based on lack of ethics. This had never been imposed by itself to my knowledge before PSU, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. (Just like police almost never give tickets for 1 MPH over the limit but it doesn't mean they wouldn't be legal).

2. The punishment was agreed to by the school. That is going to be the killer for any legal action. Any lawsuit would have to prove illegal coercion by the NCAA to force PSU to agree or show that PSU did not have the legal right to agree to the sanctions without permission from the Pennsylvania state government (Governor, Legislature, Sec of Ed, whatever).

3. The NCAA has another clause that allows punishment for any reason if agreed to at the annual fall meeting. Supposedly the NCAA member schools were nearly 100% behind this punishment (as a minimum) and if PSU fought it likely would have used this clause to punish them even worse.

Maximus said:
It instead used the Freeh Report which was an investigation (paid for by Penn State) that didn't talk to McQueery, didn't talk to Paterno, didn't talk to Schultz, didn't talk to Spanier, didn't talk to Curley, didn't talk to Sandusky.
Click to expand...

From USAToday 7/23/12: "Emmert said the report, which drew upon more than 3 million documents, was more comprehensive than any investigation the NCAA ever could have conducted."
 

Lakeville Goldy said:
Any lawsuit would have to prove illegal coercion by the NCAA to force PSU to agree
Click to expand...

I read somewhere (sorry, can't remember where) that the NCAA's offer to Penn St. included language to the effect of (paraphrasing): "Accept these penalties, or you'll get the death penalty." Blackmail is illegal even in a private organization, but I'm not surprised given that it's the NCAA we're talking about.
 

GophersInIowa said:
Many of their fans act like they're bigger victims than the kids who were molested, and that's absolutely pathetic.
Click to expand...

This is probably what has ticked me off more than anything else. Well, that and the fact that many of those same folks blame the Big Ten Conference for not coming to their defense with both barrels during this sordid affair. As such, the NCAA was exactly correct when they stated there is a culture problem in crappy valley. There is a culture problem at Penn State and there continues to be. All these kinds of actions do is provide more and more evidence of priorities being way out of whack at PSU and amongst many of its supporters.
 

dpodoll68 said:
I read somewhere (sorry, can't remember where) that the NCAA's offer to Penn St. included language to the effect of (paraphrasing): "Accept these penalties, or you'll get the death penalty." Blackmail is illegal even in a private organization, but I'm not surprised given that it's the NCAA we're talking about.
Click to expand...

Understand your point. Don't know whether or not it would meet the legal definition of "blackmail".

I guess going back to the townhome association analogy, say someone started installing a canopy over their deck and the association caught them. The association showed you have to have permission to do this by the bylaws. They then followed up with saying they would almost certainly have granted permission if asked, then gave two options: you can either stop working, submit a request for permission, pay a $25 fee and once approved continue or if you don't we will hire someone to take it down, charge you their cost and a $100 fine. So long as both options are permissible under the association's bylaws, is that blackmail or is it more like a plea bargain, where if you cooperate we give you less punishment?

I'm not saying you are wrong, I just don't know. I believe that angle would be the only shot the legislators have of getting it overturned.

However, since the NCAA can have a vote at the annual fall meeting and punish for "any reason", even if the law suits are successful you have to wonder whether it's in PSU's best interest.

By the way, certainly not saying the NCAA is the bastion of righteousness... :)
 

The NCAA's punishment was more about the NCAA taking a curtain call about how tough they think they are than punishing rule-breakers. If anyone supporting the NCAA's decision could please name for me one individual who bears actual, personal culpability for the atrocities that were committed, who is still at the university and being punished by the sanctions, and tell me specifically what that person did, I might change my stance.
 

When you deposit money at the bank, you expect to still be able to withdraw your money even if the people who where there when you deposited your money no longer worked there. Penn State still owns their football stadium, even though the people who built it are long dead. This is because institutions are responsible for their actions and because institutions can hold property. It would make no more sense to say that Penn State can't be held accountable than to say that your bank doesn't have to let you withdraw your money.
 

Maximus said:
I'm going to go through every email you sent in the last 10 years and impose damaging sanctions on you based on five of those emails. Nope, you aren't allowed to tell your side of the story. Just going to read them and make my decision.

For the first time in its existence, the NCAA imposed crippling penalties without conducting an investigation....without conducting an investigation.....without conducting an investigation.

It instead used the Freeh Report which was an investigation (paid for by Penn State) that didn't talk to McQueery, didn't talk to Paterno, didn't talk to Schultz, didn't talk to Spanier, didn't talk to Curley, didn't talk to Sandusky.Of course how can we question the credibility of the NCAA. Oh wait, I mean...prior to last week and the Miami case, how can we question the credibility of the NCAA?

I guess Miami could just fund its own investigation like Penn State and based on precedent, the NCAA could just use that to impose penalties.
Click to expand...


Huh?

I certainly hope that if I were to ever get into a "difficult" situation that the ruling body would base their punishment on MY investigation. If THEIR investigation was shoddy they have nobody to blame put themselves.

The fact that Penn State don't tell it's defenders to shut up says they really have an F'd up culture and still haven't learned anything from this situation. It's becoming much easier to understand how this happened in the first place.
 

RodentRampage said:
When you deposit money at the bank, you expect to still be able to withdraw your money even if the people who where there when you deposited your money no longer worked there. Penn State still owns their football stadium, even though the people who built it are long dead. This is because institutions are responsible for their actions and because institutions can hold property. It would make no more sense to say that Penn State can't be held accountable than to say that your bank doesn't have to let you withdraw your money.
Click to expand...

The civil courts will hold PSU responsible.
 


bleedsmaroonandgold said:
The NCAA's punishment was more about the NCAA taking a curtain call about how tough they think they are than punishing rule-breakers. If anyone supporting the NCAA's decision could please name for me one individual who bears actual, personal culpability for the atrocities that were committed, who is still at the university and being punished by the sanctions, and tell me specifically what that person did, I might change my stance.
Click to expand...

In virtually every situation where sanctions are handed out, innocent people are punished. The death penalty at SMU back in the day, USC, etc. All situations where the guilty weren't punished much or at all.

But the question is, what else do you do?
 

station19 said:
How can you say this(the bold) when we don't yet know what the punishment/consequences will be?
Click to expand...

Anything less than the death penalty is light, (not saying they should have gotten the death penalty) but they certainly could have.
 

GophersInIowa said:
In virtually every situation where sanctions are handed out, innocent people are punished. The death penalty at SMU back in the day, USC, etc. All situations where the guilty weren't punished much or at all.

But the question is, what else do you do?
Click to expand...

In this case, the guilty have been punished. The most guilty of them is incarcerated, the one most responsible for the cover-up saw his entire world collapse around him, lost his will to live, and died, and many others have lost their job. The fact that the NCAA doesn't like feeling like they are doing nothing doesn't justify punishing the innocent.

I also don't see much of a deterrent effect. I don't see the next Jerry Sandusky saying "well, the fear of a life-time jail sentence doesn't scare me, but I am not going to abuse these children because I don't want to risk my football team not being allowed to play in bowl games while I am in prison. I don't see the next Paterno saying "I don't care if I lose my job, but I am going to launch an investigation and report this behavior because I don't want me successor to have trouble finding recruits." The NCAA's actions was about responding to a horrible thing by feeling like they had to do something drastic, being unable to do anything to those responsible because they were incarcerated, deceased, or unemployed by a school under the NCAA's jurisdiction, and taking it out on those who did not molest children or help to cover it up. It is a natural and understandable response, but not a just one.

Now if we want to talk about a more drastic punishment for Sandusky, there is not much I would not be willing to support doing to him for what he did to those poor kids.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
The NCAA's punishment was more about the NCAA taking a curtain call about how tough they think they are than punishing rule-breakers. If anyone supporting the NCAA's decision could please name for me one individual who bears actual, personal culpability for the atrocities that were committed, who is still at the university and being punished by the sanctions, and tell me specifically what that person did, I might change my stance.
Click to expand...

What that person did was he decided to attend Penn St....or if he was already a student, he decided to stay at Penn State. The NCAA had a "window" in which athletes could transfer out and be immediately eligible at another school. Players knew about the sanctions (possible or handed down) or should have known, yet they still chose to attend a school that was in trouble. The "poor innocent athlete" doesn't hold much water for me. These athletes chose to be there. There had to be lots of recruits that chose not to.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom