Updates About Penn State Scandal UPDATED 6/12: PSU has spent $45.9M on scandal

[station19]

Paterno could have faced charges?

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefoo...State-Jerry-Sandusky-sex-abuse-scandal-071312

 

[Go4Broke]

Out of all of the possible rules violations cited by the NCAA in their letter to Penn State the following one really stands out:

"Lastly, it is important to bring to your attention that Bylaw 19.01.2 affirmatively states that "individuals employed by, or associated with member institutions for the administration, the conduct or the coaching of intercollegiate athletics are, in the final analysis, teachers of young people. Their responsibility is an affirmative one, and they must do more than avoid improper conduct or questionable acts. Their own moral values must be so certain and positive that those younger and more pliable will be influenced by a fine example."

"This provision has been cited by [NCAA] enforcement in at least half a dozen major infractions cases in the past. Those who exhibit this behavior are meeting the ethical expectations of NCAA membership. Those who do not, fail us all."

http://www.psu.edu/ur/2011/NCAA.pdf

 

[MrC]

Out of all of the possible rules violations cited by the NCAA in their letter to Penn State the following one really stands out:

"Lastly, it is important to bring to your attention that Bylawy19.01.2 affirmatively states that "individuals employed by, or associated with member institutions for the administration, the conduct or the coaching of intercollegiate athletics are, in the final analysis, teachers of young people. Their responsibility is an affirmative one, and they must do more than avoid improper conduct or questionable acts. Their own moral values must be so certain and positive that those younger and more pliable will be influenced by a fine example."

"This provision has been cited by enforcement in at least half a dozen major infractions cases in the past. This provision has been cited by enforcement in at least half a dozen major infractions cases in the past. Those who exhibit this behavior are meeting the ethical expectations of NCAA membership. Those who do not, fail us all."

http://www.psu.edu/ur/2011/NCAA.pdf

I can think of only one thing to add to this post:

Q.E.D.

 

[wdgold]

Not a sports issue! You really do have problems with cognitive dissonance. You obviously can't handle the scale of Nuremberg and how many of the trials were not about genocide, but simple matters like overlooking acts of pedophilia. Nuremberg is the script for the unwritten rule of law. Not everything needs to be written down to be understood as a crime. Not everything has to be covered under the aegis of sport to be in the jurisdiction of the NCAA when it comes to its body of work and the expectations of the behavior of its members. That idea may be a burden on the feeble minded, but don't worry, those of us that can handle the nuances that guide universal moral certainties don't need your approval to make those connections.

The list of people that understand the connections right now are the head of the NCAA and sports writers all over this country that are calling on the NCAA to do its duty and put the death penalty on Penn State University. That is just the short and obvious list. Others have been Congressmen and women. Ohio State got penalized for kids selling their jerseys. By your logic, that was not football related.

19, we have had our differences and we will continue our differences. You are sadly mistaken if you think the NCAA has no standing in the Sandusky mess. It does. It has a duty to act. It doesn't need to have something written down to act. They fall into that grand category of inalienable rights, the rights that are so numerous, so well known, and so universal as to not need to be written down. If that falls outside of your comfort zone, too effing bad. I feel bad for how shallow your comprehension of the issue remains.

The NCAA needs to impose the death penalty on Penn State U, including penalizing the innocent. Nobody is forcing these football players to remain at PSU. Nobody is forcing PSU fans to not become fans somewhere else. Nobody is truly penalized except an institution that turned its back on the victims of Sandusky. And, for that future player who dreamed of playing for PSU, too effing bad. There are other places to dream about. They are not really paying a price for being denied a dream. They are being handed a good life lesson. Be flexible in how you achieve your dreams. Be resilient.

+1,

I just hope Penn St. gets what it deserves, especially the FB program, whether via the NCAA, the Justice System or self-imposed.

 

[50PoundHead]

Great debate going on here, is it Station "Sixteen Candles," Station "She's Sexy and Seventeen," Station "I'm Eighteen," or Station "Hey 19?"

Seriously, to the matter at hand, I don't particularly have a problem with the NCAA stepping in, but once they do they have set a precedent that is bound to hound them. As I posted earlier, Frank Deford predicted that the NCAA will be kaput by the end of the decade and I think this decision is going to start them down that road, regardless of the decision they make.

 

[Deleted_User]

Great debate going on here, is it Station "Sixteen Candles," Station "She's Sexy and Seventeen," Station "I'm Eighteen," or Station "Hey 19?"

Seriously, to the matter at hand, I don't particularly have a problem with the NCAA stepping in, but once they do they have set a precedent that is bound to hound them. As I posted earlier, Frank Deford predicted that the NCAA will be kaput by the end of the decade and I think this decision is going to start them down that road, regardless of the decision they make.

And, who is going to move to disband them? The members?

 

[Iceland12]

The Woman Who Stood up to Joe Paterno

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/15/us/triponey-paterno-penn-state/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

 

[Deleted_User]

And, who is going to move to disband them? The members?

Let me restate this and get rid of the pronouns.

And, who is going to disband the NCAA? The members of the NCAA.

As for the "lady", just another nail in the institutional control problem. The dirt just keeps coming out.

 

[Deleted_User]

Joe Paterno's wife was tutoring players!!! Conflict of interest?!?!? Jan Ganglehoffesque!!! How deep does the Joe Paterno problem go? Apparently further than first thought. It wasn't just a few emails keeping Sandusky's story from coming out. It was allowing brawling players to have their brawl and football too. There was zero institutional control at Penn State and that is what made Joe Paterno the winningest football coach of all time. He simply cheated his way to the top and then institutionalized that cheating.

Kill's wife better not be tutoring our players.

 

[GoodasGold]

She won't be tutoring, but she said will be baking cookies for the team.

 

[matt]

Kill's wife better not be tutoring our players.

Yeah man, for sure! If someone asks Rebecca for help I hope she tells them to GTFO of her face! Seriously dude, how is this an issue?

 

[popeyoung5]

Bob Costas on "meat the press" today predicted the NCAA will impose the death penalty in a few weeks. Costas had a great analogy as to why this is football related. If a Biology professor did what Sandusky did, the University was aware of it and the head of the Biology department (Paterno) said no, don't alert authorities, does anyone believe they would look the other way for the Biology professor? This was all about protecting the PSU football program and Paterno's ego.

 

[highwayman]

A nice take on the whole question of NCAA involvement (see the end of his post). I tend to agree with him on this:

"The criminal and civil justice system is more than capable of punishing (both criminally and punitively) those responsible for their actions. Penn State is never going to be the same and the repercussions from the civil litigations are going to take years, perhaps a decade, to sort through. This will define their program for a long, long time -- regardless if the NCAA brings the banhammer or not. It seems as if the NCAA has painted itself into a corner by getting involved and making an inquiry in the first place, to which I say is SOP for an organization that people continuously lambast for being bad at what they do.

Unfortunately, the NCAA is left with either two choices: do nothing and face enormous criticism for posturing using ethics and values as a facade, or come down harder on PSU than any previous COI punishment levee to date. Not exactly great options."

 

[50PoundHead]

And, who is going to move to disband them? The members?

In a word, "Yes." My guess is the SEC would just as soon go now.

Again, I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm looking at it from the 30,000 level. The NCAA can do what it wants and justify it in the manner they prefer. It's not like they haven't been in murky waters before. But if they step in on Penn State, it puts them in a gray area that will have them policing a bunch of institutional and individual behaviors where they will likely be both more intrusive and arbitrary. How is that going to work for them?

If the NCAA doesn't step in, they will lose a lot of perceived moral authority. In other words, they lose either way and those who are already disgruntled with the NCAA will either work to radically transform the organization from within or blow it up from without. There's a ton of money in college sports and my guess is a number of the big revenue programs would just as soon shed themselves of any scrutiny. What do they need the NCAA for? Whatever happens in this instance will give them fuel to start their own organization.

 

[popeyoung5]

College sports just like the NFL and NBA would end over night without a governing body to oversee conduct and cheating.

 

[50PoundHead]

College sports just like the NFL and NBA would end over night without a governing body to oversee conduct and cheating.

I don't disagree, but the SEC is almost semi-pro now. I think the mid-tier institutions and below will fight to keep the NCAA alive, but with these big television contracts being ladled out for the high-profile programs, they may be looking for an excuse to simply set up their own system. And you're right. It would be almost totally unregulated and would strike a huge blow for most college football programs.

 

[GoAUpher]

So much fail Go4Broke. You are apparently incapable of understanding the difference between arguments about what can happen and what should happen.

And in the real world the NCAA is going to punish Penn State whether or not their governing rules permit it because that is what a large percentage of the American people are going to demand - and Penn State will not challenge the NCAA penalties because they will not want to go against a large percentage of the American people. The only way Penn State is going to avoid NCAA punishment is to punish themselves. I think that is what will happen.

I've already noted that I think the NCAA is capable of doing what it wants b/c it is already a very unaccountable organization. That wasn't my argument. My point was not about what they COULD do but what they SHOULD do. You are advocating that they should go full banana republic to satiate the mob. Because mob rule is always a good idea.

There are NCAA rules on the books for both infractions and punishments. My point is that the NCAA should only enforce actual rules violations and do so in a manner that is consistent with it's own set rules for punishments. In other words, not the death penalty. Why? Because giving an unaccountable organization the power to make stuff up as it goes (even more than it does now) is a horrible idea. Why write rules if you won't adhere by them?

If you would take your nose out of your law books every once in awhile you would start to understand how the real world operates. In the real world a very conservative Chief Justice twists himself into a pretzel to insure the Supreme Court does not overturn an Act of Congress on a 5-4 partisan vote. In the real world the Minnesota Legislature feels free to interfere with the operation of the U of M whether or not it is legally permitted because they appoint the members of the Board of Regents and Minnesota taxpayers provide a large portion of the U's funding. .

I'm quite aware of how the "real world" operates. But again, because something CAN happen doesn't mean it SHOULD. Rules should mean something. Laws and constitutions should mean something. You're apparently one of those non-thinking persons who would prefer the law and the rules say whatever you want them to say whenever you want them to say it. You know how I know this? Because you just said that the Legislature has the right to break the law/overstep their constitutional authority because of a related yet different part of their own constituational perogatives. That's just plain stupid. I'm a person who thinks people and organizations should be accountable to the law or their own rules.

As for your tangents...I never said the Legislature couldn't do what they did (their move was legally binding until ruled unconstitutional by the MN Supreme Court). I simply pointed out that under a plain reading of the U's constitutional autonomy they overstepped their bounds and that the U had a position to challenge them if they wanted to. I also argued that because they were stepping on the U's constitutional autonomy they should butt out and let the U do what it was always planning to do. On the Supreme Court thing I'm mostly staying clear b/c I hate politics making its way onto this board. I will however note the irony of you calling a conservative Chief Justice writing the majority opinion and joining with the liberal wing of the court to be a partisan decision. In the real world, that is split but still bipartisan decision.

 

[GoAUpher]

Seriously, to the matter at hand, I don't particularly have a problem with the NCAA stepping in, but once they do they have set a precedent that is bound to hound them.

This is the problem though. The NCAA has come right out and said that it doesn't care about precedent in it's decisions. Having an organization that unnaccountable to it's own actions vastly overstep it's own rules is not a good idea.

 

[50PoundHead]

This is the problem though. The NCAA has come right out and said that it doesn't care about precedent in it's decisions. Having an organization that unnaccountable to it's own actions vastly overstep it's own rules is not a good idea.

I guess that's what I'm driving at and should have been more clear. This is totally uncharted territory for the NCAA and if they don't act, they'll be criticized for, if not condoning or endorsing these specific actions, not being more comprehensive in their policies and in the process strengthening the behavioral guidelines for the institutions that deal with student/athletes and in the process protecting the student/athletes.

If they do act, they'll be branded as being, in effect, a law-enforcement agency that has overstepped its bounds and punishing the innocent (again student/athletes). And if they do institute the death penalty, what will be the next set of actions for which the death penalty will be considered? The pressure for more death penalties will likely arise and where does the NCAA draw the line?

I'm no fan of the jockocracy and the two jockocracy camps (the NCAA and the sports programs) will be in an uncomfortable juxtaposition here.

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

The NCAA by-laws precludes the death penalty in Penn States case.

Penn State did not commit their infraction (lack of institutional control) while on probation.

Here is my proposed penalty:

1. 100% loss of scholarships for 5 years (with scholarships stepping up in the following, 10 in Y-6, 15 in Y-7, 20 in Y-8 and finally the max 25 in Y-9)
2. 5 year bowl ban
4. 25 years of probation for the entire athletic program.

 

[popeyoung5]

Just like USC, the penalty imposed came with a automatic transfer out for the athletes with no waiting to play clause. I doubt the death penalty will ever be used again.

 

[matt]

Well said on everything so far GoAUpher.

 

[Lakeville Goldy]

How about Gary Pinkel? He had a DUI. He broke the law. Missouri is fully aware of this, and continues to keep him employed in spite of it. Should they have NCAA sanctions?

There is a very significant difference between Gary Pinkel and the Sandusky situation. It is illegal for anyone in the educational system to not report suspected child molestation. It is not illegal to employ a convicted drunk driver. That has been my argument all along as to why it is an NCAA issue - a conspiracy amongst members of the administration to violate the law in order to benefit the football program.

I know one of your main arguments has been there is no NCAA rule preventing employing pederasts. And that is true. But as soon as there was the first report back in 1998 of possible abuse, the administration had a legal obligation to report those allegations.

 

[GoAUpher]

I know one of your main arguments has been there is no NCAA rule preventing employing pederasts. And that is true. But as soon as there was the first report back in 1998 of possible abuse, the administration had a legal obligation to report those allegations.

The 1998 situation shouldn't be included b/c it was reported (the prosecutor declined to press charges and the social work folks knew about it and closed the case-file). There were no details held by anyone at PSU that should have been revealed. Now, the subsequent evidence shows that the whole situation was probably badly mishandled by the police/prosecutor. But there was not a lack of reporting in 1998. I know that's nitpicky, but I think it's important to be accurate about the facts.

The lack of reporting in 2001 is where the illegalities (and quite likely Clery Act violations) come into play. It's also the only portion of this that could be cited as a rules violation under the current NCAA rules (again, via the ethics language in rule 10.1). That same rule could conceivably be used to cite Missouri, given that you could easily argue that driving under the influence is unethical and how broadly that rule is written.

 

[50PoundHead]

Just to make it clear, I wasn't suggesting the death penalty (like some pundits have). I guess I got caught up in the lingua franca.

This is a very unusual (and hopefully isolated) case and I don't think anyone who questions what the NCAA's limits may be in the matter is defending pederasty. It's a very interesting discussion.

The only point I've been making is that the NCAA is really in a box here. The fallout from not imposing severe penalties could really bring the NCAA under question. Imposing severe penalties sets a precedent that all future situations will be judged against.

 

[Deleted_User]

In a word, "Yes." My guess is the SEC would just as soon go now.

Again, I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm looking at it from the 30,000 level. The NCAA can do what it wants and justify it in the manner they prefer. It's not like they haven't been in murky waters before. But if they step in on Penn State, it puts them in a gray area that will have them policing a bunch of institutional and individual behaviors where they will likely be both more intrusive and arbitrary. How is that going to work for them?

If the NCAA doesn't step in, they will lose a lot of perceived moral authority. In other words, they lose either way and those who are already disgruntled with the NCAA will either work to radically transform the organization from within or blow it up from without. There's a ton of money in college sports and my guess is a number of the big revenue programs would just as soon shed themselves of any scrutiny. What do they need the NCAA for? Whatever happens in this instance will give them fuel to start their own organization.

Thanks for the answer 50PH.

 

[Deleted_User]

Yeah man, for sure! If someone asks Rebecca for help I hope she tells them to GTFO of her face! Seriously dude, how is this an issue?

First, please don't refer to me as dude. Call me Dean.

The problem surfaced yesterday when it became known that Mrs. Paterno tutored college football players outside of the University. Because she has a beneficiary relationship with the football coach, who gets bonuses based on performance, a little assistance in the grade department helps them on the field of play. Another problem with this is there is little legal recourse in finding out if she did write papers for the students. She could have deleted all her electronic files now. At least with Jan Ganglehoff, the U could verify if she created work for students by auditing her electronic records.

 

[station19]

New alleged victims say Sandusky assaulted them in 1970s or 1980s


http://www.whptv.com/news/local/sto...ky-assaulted-them/6jNR15RW5U6x-gyhDABMjQ.cspx

 

[GopherRock]

The 1998 situation shouldn't be included b/c it was reported (the prosecutor declined to press charges and the social work folks knew about it and closed the case-file). There were no details held by anyone at PSU that should have been revealed. Now, the subsequent evidence shows that the whole situation was probably badly mishandled by the police/prosecutor. But there was not a lack of reporting in 1998. I know that's nitpicky, but I think it's important to be accurate about the facts.

The lack of reporting in 2001 is where the illegalities (and quite likely Clery Act violations) come into play. It's also the only portion of this that could be cited as a rules violation under the current NCAA rules (again, via the ethics language in rule 10.1). That same rule could conceivably be used to cite Missouri, given that you could easily argue that driving under the influence is unethical and how broadly that rule is written.

If I were PSU, I'd be far more worried about the US Department of Education slapping down penalties before I'd consider the NCAA. With the NCAA, it's the football program and athletic department at stake. From the DoE, it's every penny of federal student aid the university gets.

Two articles summarize why PSU is in deep doo-doo.

Yahoo Sports: Penn State could pay $100 million in civil damages to Sandusky's victims and lose public funding (And for the record, I think the estimate of $100M is very low)

A Fate Worse Than Death: An examination of the NCAA bylaws that yields the following tidbits:

Bylaw 3.2.5 Loss of Active Membership

3.2.5.1 Termination or Suspension. The membership of any active member failing to maintain the academic or athletics standards required for such membership or failing to meet the conditions and obligations of membership may be suspended, terminated, or otherwise disciplined by a vote of two-thirds of the delegates present and voting at an annual Convention.

The bylaw goes on to define the process for terminating, suspending or disciplining a member school. Specifically, the Board of Directors and the school must be notified of the action by November 1 before the Convention. That notice must state the grounds on which the action is based. The Board of Directors must approve the action to go forward, and it is then published in the Official Notice of the Convention. The vote would occur at a business session during the Convention, which this year is January 16–19 in Dallas.

Under this bylaw, the membership of the NCAA could do virtually anything to Penn State. They could cut scholarships, impose the death penalty, give postseason or TV bans, fine the school, or make up any other punishment. Penn State’s membership could be terminated or suspended, meaning the school loses all rights and privileges of being a member of the NCAA. That effectively means an indefinite death penalty for the entire athletic department.

Using the entire member assembly may be the best move for the NCAA. Sure it's unprecedented, but then again a scandal of this scale is unprecedented.

 

[GoAUpher]

Using the entire member assembly may be the best move for the NCAA. Sure it's unprecedented, but then again a scandal of this scale is unprecedented.

I just heard about this option today and on it's face it sounds like a more reasonable choice. Yes, it opens up the "mob rule" option, but at least the decision would come from peer institutions versus an unaccountable organization with a history of overstepping boundries.