NCAA Sanctions: "DP" for Penn Football, or...?

Should the NCAA give Penn State the "death penalty"?

  • Total voters
    97

New Posts

I disagree on a 'death penalty'. And I ask those who want a 'death penalty', why? At the end of the day, what do you think will be accomplished? Do you believe that giving Penn State the death penalty or disbanding the football program will be a deterrent for sex abuse at other campus'? It won't be. Anyone who knows how the NCAA operates knows that they are very bad when it comes to getting involved with real world issues and penalties. Ask USC how bad that are doing now based on the Reggie Bush infractions. (answer: not bad at all) Not only that, but it hasn't stopped agents from infiltrating campus' (see: Ohio State and UNC).

I disagree with that harsh of a penalty because I don't think there is any penalty you can infract on the football program or even the university that will answer for the horrible tragedy that occurred. The people directly responsible are going to jail (one already there, the others will be there soon). And one of them is already dead. Penn State will have to deal with the demons of this, as well as the damage to it's reputation, not only to the football program but the university as a whole, forever. Some might say that's a pretty damning penalty right there, more harsh then anything to NCAA could do.
 
Pensfan said:
The answer lies with Jer's establishment and position with The Second Mile. Penn State closely associated itself with TSM which at that time and place was as reputable as Special Olympics. Someone made the very flawed assumption that the goodwill toward the TSM's would reflect nicely on PSU. Therefore, Jer was given an office and he wormed his way back into the showers and nobody had the cajones or mercy (for his victims) to stop him.
Click to expand...


SOMEONE


Well even though Joepa was in charge, that doesnt mean he made all the big decisions...of course, he signed off on all the big ones, and used his "president" as his finger man, when he needed to, but who knows who that someone really was? spanier would be my wild guess?
 
heres what the NCAA President had to say about it last night:

"....Reading between the lines of comments by NCAA president Mark Emmert, it appears Penn State has some serious explaining to do if it wants to avoid major sanctions for its handling of sexual abuse claims against Jerry Sandusky.
"I've never seen anything as egregious as this in terms of just overall conduct and behavior inside a university and
hope never to see it again," Emmert said during the interview. "What the appropriate penalties are, if there are determinations of violations, we'll have to decide."

Emmert said the NCAA would wait to hear Penn State's response to the Freeh Report, but wouldn't equivocally take a possible death penalty to the football program off the table.

"We'll hold in abeyance all of those decisions until we've actually decided what we want to do with the actual charges should there be any. And I don't want to take anything off the table."

(more)


http://content.usatoday.com/communi...7/ncaa-mark-emmert-death-penalty-penn-state/1
 
personally i am unconvinced by those who say the transgressions were legal in nature and therefore outside the purview of the NCAA and unassociated with the football program. That is a wrong opinion, imo, and I see from what the President of the NCAA has said that he doesn't agree with the claim either.


The fact is the NCAA can and will do anything it wants. for instance it punished USC severely when a booster bought star Regie Bush's parents a house. otoh just a year or two later, the NCAA created a new rule that allowed the father of Cam Newton to sell his sons services to various colleges, under the innovative and clearly absurd notion that the student MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN his father was selling his services. It was an absurd assertion upon which to base the witholding of sanctions against the player, yet the NCAA did it. They have the power and authority to do whatever they want. They decide. Noone else.

I am also unmoved by the assertions that punishment should not extend to current players and penn state personnel and associated vendors, who are completlely innocent of the transgressions. The NCAA always punishes retroactively, due to many factors, among which, among others, is the turtle like nature of their investigations, and the manner in which almost all institutions attempt to lessen their punishment by self imposing their own sanctions and by summarily firing anyone associated with the rule breaking. The NCAA ALWAYS punishes the innocent. ALways. These many assertions that such a thing would be unfair are completly spurious and completly ignore the reality of the NCAA's history as to institutional sanctions. This is so well known in the sports community that anyone making the assertion is either 1. ignorant of NCAA processes and practices, or 2. engaged in argument rather than discussion. At the very least anyone advancing the argument that the NCAA should not punish the innocent Penn State players and community should acknowledge that their argument is directly invalidated by the manner in which the NCAA has conducted its institutional sanctions in the past. The examples are too many to list. Miami, USC, Alabama, OSU...the list is extensive. The NCAA hasd consistently punished institutions for their violations after the institutions have fired ALL the transgressors and got rid of all the people that were guilty of the rule breaking.

as to the supposedly heart breaking claim that the innocent new players shouldnt be punished because they will then be added Sandusky victims. all the penn state players will have the option to wait out the one or two year shut down if they desire or they will be free to go play at another institution, and they will all be given scholarships to do so, that is certain. if they were good enought to be offered a scholarship to happy valley, other schools will line up to give them scholarships. so at the very least their football career will be interupted if they chose to wait out the shut down or they will have to go play somewhere else. imo they should have considered these possibilities before they signed to play at Penn state. for those who signed prior to the legal problems, that is a sad reality of NCAA sanctions. Current players just never know if a school they play for will be given sanctions for violations that happened before they came on campus. it is a fact of life and it is certainly no reason to withold proper sanctions.
 
here is the definition of "institutional control", which is the statute which the NCAA can use to punish Penn state. many sports commentators SAY "institutuional control" is not an issue in this case because much of the rule breaking was officially outside the "football program" and therefore not an "institutional" problem what they are doing is narrowing the definition of "institutional" to the football department in an attempt to define the sanction so that it doesnt apply here. that is total bs....it is clear "institutional control" referes to the entire administration of the school. and its monitoring of the football program. which is clearly where penn state failred miserably. not surprisingly, the head of the NCAA made this point on Monday in his comments on the tavis smiley show. the real crux is whether or not that man, the President of the nCAA wants to punish Penn State. just now my local sports talk show host is saying the 2A shouldnt punish the ":innocent" players there now, and tony barhart, his guest, a national sports commentator blathered on about fixing the problem...anywys here is the statute. imo most sports enthusiasts do not want the 2A to hurt the penn state football program. http://compliance.pac-12.org/thetools/instctl.pdf
 
In the beginning, maybe the 4 didn't really understand or want to accept the seriousness of the allegations....2012 is a lot different than even 1998 in that regard but subsequently they surely did.
One can't help but wonder, what was the card Sandusky held?...some sort of recruiting, academic etc. violations.......surely this is what the NCAA is looking for in addition to the institutional questions. One can't help but think there has to be something.
 
Penn State begins to address the NCAA demand for answers to its letter. Interestingly Erickson points to a 2.7 million dollar "donation" from the athletic department to a child abuse agency as part of Penn States self imposition of penalty. Colleges do that every time they feel vulnerable to NCAA sanctions. They self impose retsrictions and penalties on themselves, hoping the 2A goes easier on them, and indeed, sometimes the 2A accepts the self imposed sanctions. Erickson indicates Penn State will have to do more. I wonder if he will try and say that the huge civil law suits they will be forced to pay by the legal system should be looked as as if they are penlties that the school should get credit for, which he just did with the "2.6 million" dollar "donation." Talk about self serving.


http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2119811,00.html



lots of info.
 
Concerned Papa said:
I'm an old man now, but I still feel the excitement and pride generated by college football. It played a role in who I am today. No one can fully appreciate the tremendous range of emotion felt when running out of a tunnel onto a field in front of 100,000 screaming fans unless you've suited up for your school.

Because many years ago I ran out of that tunnel on fall afternoons, it hurts me deeply to know of the heinous acts against humanity whose roots were associated with one of the greatest college football programs of all time. It hurts me to so fully understand and relate to the pain that must be felt by all Penn State alumni and fans.

The harshest penalty ever given to a football program by the NCAA was a 2 year "death penalty" to SMU in 1987. Their '87 season was cancelled and all home games for '88. Even though the sanction allowed play at the away games on their schedule for '88, SMU elected not to play those as well.

You know what the infraction was over? Recruiting rules violations including a slush fund that paid players amounts ranging from around $50 up to $700 per month. Pretty tame stuff stacked up next to the Penn State situation.

Was it fair to the tens of thousands of SMU alumni and fans? Absolutely not, but as a result of the NCAA sanctions, SMU emerged as a clean strong athletic program.

I can see no remedy for Penn State other than a "death penalty" period for their football program. A banishment of 2-5 years should ensure that all tentacles of a cancerous air of entitlement allowing a pedophile to run free in their program are removed.
Click to expand...

Well said. Penn State deserves severe penalties.
 
cityslick said:
I disagree on a 'death penalty'. And I ask those who want a 'death penalty', why? At the end of the day, what do you think will be accomplished? Do you believe that giving Penn State the death penalty or disbanding the football program will be a deterrent for sex abuse at other campus'? It won't be. Anyone who knows how the NCAA operates knows that they are very bad when it comes to getting involved with real world issues and penalties. Ask USC how bad that are doing now based on the Reggie Bush infractions. (answer: not bad at all) Not only that, but it hasn't stopped agents from infiltrating campus' (see: Ohio State and UNC).

I disagree with that harsh of a penalty because I don't think there is any penalty you can infract on the football program or even the university that will answer for the horrible tragedy that occurred. The people directly responsible are going to jail (one already there, the others will be there soon). And one of them is already dead. Penn State will have to deal with the demons of this, as well as the damage to it's reputation, not only to the football program but the university as a whole, forever. Some might say that's a pretty damning penalty right there, more harsh then anything to NCAA could do.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you. There should be consequences levied against Penn State. They need to pay a steep price, more so than SMU. Was it unfair to all of SMU?
 
justathought said:
In the beginning, maybe the 4 didn't really understand or want to accept the seriousness of the allegations....2012 is a lot different than even 1998 in that regard but subsequently they surely did.
One can't help but wonder, what was the card Sandusky held?...some sort of recruiting, academic etc. violations.......surely this is what the NCAA is looking for in addition to the institutional questions. One can't help but think there has to be something.
Click to expand...

interesting comment...since, according to the Freeh report, the big four did everything they could do to cover up the allegations in order to protect the program from the damage that would be done due to adverse publicity, it seems they accepted the seriousness at the beginning, as soon as they were told about it. As Joe told McQueary, "You did what you had to do and now I need to figure out what we want to do."

well he figured that out pretty quickly. They wanted to prevent the information that a pedohile was raping children in the showers from getting out. And they did.

the 2A, imo, can do whatever it wants. Erickson knows this. His response so far has been typical. "we gave 2.6 million dollars to our rape center. Football money." He's naturally attempting to self impose to ameliorate the 2A's penalties. But, as Emmertt indicated, there is no precedent for this failure of leadership. If the 2A imposes it doesnt need typical run of the mill violations. and it wont look for them. Complete institutuional oversight failure is enough to shut down the football program as long as the 2A wants. who knows what they will do.
 
"as to the supposedly heart breaking claim that the innocent new players shouldnt be punished because they will then be added Sandusky victims. all the penn state players will have the option to wait out the one or two year shut down if they desire or they will be free to go play at another institution, and they will all be given scholarships to do so, that is certain. if they were good enought to be offered a scholarship to happy valley, other schools will line up to give them scholarships. so at the very least their football career will be interupted if they chose to wait out the shut down or they will have to go play somewhere else. imo they should have considered these possibilities before they signed to play at Penn state. for those who signed prior to the legal problems, that is a sad reality of NCAA sanctions. Current players just never know if a school they play for will be given sanctions for violations that happened before they came on campus. it is a fact of life and it is certainly no reason to withold proper sanctions." per Coastal Pilot

The above portion of the post by Costal Pilot - is what convinces me that the football program at Penn State will be and needs to be punished.

Current players will have the option to wait it out or move -on to another college football program. I see no reason the team needs to be punished but I do see the need for the coaching staff and administration to be held accountable.
 
Here is an example of proper "institutional control" over a football program.

(Keep in mind that the only reason the NCAA (the2A) has ever levied the death penalty against a member institution, it was because of the failure of the institution to maintain control over the football program.)


In 2008 The University of Arkansas hired a new Athletic Director, Jeff Long, and a new head football coach, Bobby Petrino. The football program flourished under Petrino, so much so that Arkansas was the pick of many experts to vie for the National Championship in 2012. Petrino, as the Head Coach, was naturally seen as the reason for the great success, and was rapidly establishing himself as one of the most powerful head coaches in college football. if you dont know it, you need to know that Arkansas plays in the most feared division in college football, the mighty SEC West. A highly successful head coach in the SEC, like Petrino, is properly recognized as one of the most influential and powerful football coaches in the nation, bar none.

Yet in April, 2012, in the summer before Petrino was to lead his highly ranked football team on its quest for the national championship, Petrino was summarily fired by Long, the athletic director who had been hired the same year as the coach.

Many were shocked, but there it was. Petrino had hired what turned out to be his mistress into the football administration staff, and even though she was qualified for the post, when it was discovered, the athletic director fired the hottest new head coach in america. (He had also wrecked his Harley with her on the back and paid her 20,000 for....????)

(Petrino surfaced today, one of his first public appearances since his firing:
http://network.yardbarker.com/colle...die/11239870?refmod=backyard&refsrc=foxsports)

Petrinos' firing is a perfect example of "institutional control" over a football program. many arkansas fans were enraged and shocked, but surprisingly, many accepted the firing as necessary and correct.

and that happened in SEC country, folks. This year. The mighty SEC, whose teams have won the last 7 National Champioships, where football is bigger than anywhere in the country, even in happy valley.

the difference between Arkansas and Penn Sate IS clear: at Arkansas, the University had control of the football program. That is properly recognized as "institutional control."


At Penn State, the football program controlled everything.


If EVER there has been a "lack of institutional control" in college football, it happened at the Penn state university throughout the decades long tenure of Paterno. For many decades, football controlled the penn state university and Paterno controlled football. make no mistake. thats the way it was.
 
ivan maisall is on george lapides show in memphis this am and he acknowledges that "you could make a case, I guess for lack of institutuional control bu that a specific ncaa code wasnt broken"...the latter is a oft quoted reason by sports media types who just dont want psu to suffer 2A violations foir this. lapides is another. but lapides goes with the Lame and ignorant "these players are innocent and shouldnt suffer" lament. Lapides should know better but hes been doing sports for 50 years and just doesnt care about accuracy.

"could make a case fopr instiutional control"..."could"...what world are these people operating in?
 
Tipstaff said:
After reading this LA Times article it seems the NCAA would have to make their recommendation prior to the start of the season IF they select the death penalty. Otherwise what would happen to the players who play in the first game - could they then elect to go to other schools and would they be eligible to play in this current season?
Click to expand...

the 2A has only done the death penalty once. it is hard to believe the 2A would impose the DP after the season has begun.

normally the 2A takes FOREVER to issue rulings, but this is so different a case. in fact the 2A president just last week sent PSU a letter requesting them to respond to its original letter asap and psu responded they would in 7 to 10 days.

i think it would be impossible for the 2A to impose the DP after the season began. the players could not go elsewhere...too late.

i think the 2A breaks all precedent and moves with lighning speed in this case and does whatever it will do within six weeks, b4 the season starts.

keep in mind the president of the 2A made damning statements against psu last week, indicating that the DP is in play. I believe he did this because so many sports media types are DISMISSING the DP as a correct response. the fact is most media types dont want psu to get the DP but Emmerett specifically stated it was on the table. the media types are undaunted. they continue to dismiss it. its running about 85% against the DP and 15% for. some of the larger newspapers are for the DP: orlando, atlanta, chicago...its a crap shoot.
 
Considerations for NCAA Penalties against Penn State

1. PSU is the only truly national power in college football (CFB) in the northeast. It has won two national championships in the modern era and has a stadium that seats 108,000 fans and a international following.
2. As such the DP would negatively impact a MAJOR PLAYER in the NCAA, which is made up of the member institutions . The 2A would be damaging a big player in its membership.
3. The 2A has only imposed the DP once, that was against SMU and it was because SMU continued to pay its players after the 2A warned them to stop. Nevertheless, the mantle the 2A used to impose the DP was “lack of institutional control.”
4. But most experts have felt over the years that the 2A will not impose the DP again,as SMU has never recovered from the penalty. (otoh, SMU would never have been a major player if it hadn’t been paying players and since they cant pay them any longer its not surprising they are no longer that competitive)
5. Most sports media professionals are vociferously against the DP for PSU. Its running about 75% against…these are only opinions, but it’s a fact. Their reasoning is completely flawed. But here it is: 1. The PSU players had nothing to do with it and are innocent…(so are 97% of all the previous CFB players who have been impacted by 2A sanctions. Universities always clean house prior to penalties from the 2A, in hopes that it will lessen the penalties. 2. No NCAA violations were made in this criminal, civil matter (this is absurd and the 2A President Mark Emmert had to make a statement thru the media last week asserting that the DP was most definitely in play) 3. The local economy would be hurt. This is true, but it has nothing to do with proper penalties .
6. Nevertheless a few national media players have called for the DP.
7. Gravity of the offense…as the President of the 2A said last week, the day after he instructed PSU to respond asap to the 2A’s Nov. 2011 letter requesting a response, this has been the most “egregious” failure of institutional control “ in the history of the 2A. The letter the 2A sent to pSU on Nov 17,2011 is POINTED and highly accusatory in its flavor against the transgressions at PSU…I encourage you to read it carefully. …. http://www.ncaa.com/content/ncaa-letter-penn-state
8. Time is pressing. IF the 2A is going to act it must do so with record speed, as the season is less than 60 days away.
9. But given all this, based on what the 2A has said, in its letter, and in the words of President Emmert last week, it would not surprise me if the 2A gives Penn State a 1 to 2 year death penalty. The content of the letter, the gravity of the transgression particularly as they relates to Paterno calling the shots and the University administrators fasilure to maintaini control of football..its the definition of lack of institutional control…its just too much for the 2A to stomache.,,,paternos failure really was the NCAA’s greatest fear. That a rogue football coach could dominate a University and operate independently on his own.
10. I think emmert is going to make Penn state pay, “with extreme prejudice.”
11. I could be wrong…the 2A does what it wants to do and is the final authority. There is no recourse to what the 2A chooses to do or not do. It is just interesting to me that SO MANY sports media types are against the DP for PSU. What are they thinking?


........General Corman: He's out there operating without any decent restraint, totally beyond the pale of any acceptable human conduct. And he is still in the field commanding troops.

Civilian: Terminate with extreme prejudice. ..........
.
 
Wow. I find this following story to be unbelievable, but it comes from the Chronicle of Higher Education, so it must have merit.

Jim Delany Wants the Power to Fire Coaches

http://chronicle.com/blogs/players/jim-delany-wants-the-power-to-fire-coaches/30771

The Big Ten is mulling a proposal that would give its commissioner, already one of the most powerful men in college sports, the authority to fire coaches himself, The Chronicle reports today.

The proposal, part of a plan being circulated among Big Ten leaders, would give James E. Delany, who has overseen the league since 1989, and a powerful committee of conference presidents the ability to penalize individual members of an institution, should their actions significantly harm the league’s reputation.
Click to expand...

This power grab could be the first step in the Big 10 conference penalizing Penn State. This scandal -- and Penn State's lack of action -- is severely harming the Big 10's brand. I wouldn't be surprised if the conference acts before the NCAA to punish PSU.
 
Below is the 2012 game schedule - it is but a mere 6 weeks before the first game and the pressure on to make a decision to impact this season.

The other reason I posted the schedule is because the fate of Penn State football has a large impact on the $$$$ brought to each team they are scheduled to play along with money from the TV rights. (for both Penn State and the teams they play).

Imagine the lobbying by everybody involved at this point.

2012 Penn State Nittany Lions Football Schedule


September 1

Ohio U

Home - Noon





September 8

Virginia

Away - Noon





September 15

Navy

Home - 3:30 PM





September 22

Temple

Home





September 29

Illinois

Away





October 6

Northwestern - Homecoming Game


Home - Noon





October 13

Open







October 20

Iowa

Away - 8PM





October 27

Ohio State

Home - 6PM





November 3

Purdue

Away





November 10

Nebraska

Away





November 17

Indiana

Home





November 24

Wisconsin

Home


Dec. 1 Big Ten Championship Game (Site TBA)
 
costalpilot said:
interesting comment...since, according to the Freeh report, the big four did everything they could do to cover up the allegations in order to protect the program from the damage that would be done due to adverse publicity, it seems they accepted the seriousness at the beginning, as soon as they were told about it. As Joe told McQueary, "You did what you had to do and now I need to figure out what we want to do."

well he figured that out pretty quickly. They wanted to prevent the information that a pedohile was raping children in the showers from getting out. And they did.

the 2A, imo, can do whatever it wants. Erickson knows this. His response so far has been typical. "we gave 2.6 million dollars to our rape center. Football money." He's naturally attempting to self impose to ameliorate the 2A's penalties. But, as Emmertt indicated, there is no precedent for this failure of leadership. If the 2A imposes it doesnt need typical run of the mill violations. and it wont look for them. Complete institutuional oversight failure is enough to shut down the football program as long as the 2A wants. who knows what they will do.
Click to expand...

Penn State can throw all the money it wants and then crow about "doing good." But when it came to the truth, NO ONE stepped up. What's that old adage: A day late and a dollar short!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 129 more.
Total: 2,751 (members: 130, guests: 2,621)

Online statistics

Members online
130
Guests online
2,621
Total visitors
2,751
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,514
Messages
17,970,182
Members
228,791
Latest member
fesmike
Back
Top