All Penn State Sanctions Dropped

[HoopsFan21]

Breaking news for our PA board members.

 

[ktuck911]

 

[CL82]

Perfect.

Please let me know when they rerun the 2013 tourney to let the men play.

 

[HoopsFan21]

NCAA had no business getting involved. It was the right thing to do in my opinion.

 

[j66kicker]

JoPa gets 111 wins back, becomes winningest coach again. No mention of putting the statue back up though

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12179571/joe-paterno-111-wins-were-vacated-restored

 

[ktuck911]

NCAA had no business getting involved. It was the right thing to do in my opinion.

I'm not really too bothered by that part... I just don't have any love for PSU going fwd witht he sanctions being dropped when they were accused of employing a pervert pedofile getting his jollies off young boys in the facility shower... They kept him employed and a part of the football program in some capacity before the * hit the fan... They should've kept the lost scholly sanctions... there should've been no immediate end to the sanctions... I might've been a little less bothered if they said sanctions lifted for 2016 season...

 

[JS]

NCAA had no business getting involved. It was the right thing to do in my opinion.

Absolutely agree. I think individuals and the University can properly be held accountable under the law according to their actions/inactions, but the NCAA duress was beyond its charter and amounted to blackmail, with harmful impact way beyond the culpable parties.

 

[Icebear]

The NCAA and the university board of trustees has been on the run ever since things were handed down. The Freeh report they leaned on for their actions was a disaster. Many have argued the conclusions were bought and paid. There still remains no evidence that Joe or anyone beyond Curley and Schultz had any awareness of the actions of Sandusky. The real culprits and hunting ground of Sandusky shutdown long ago when The Second Mile program closed. In PA we tossed former governor Tom Corbett out of office and still wait for the trial of the key people with real charges against them for their horrendous acts protecting Sandusky and the damage they did to the university. Soon the $60 million in penalties may, also, fall and will certainly be restored to use only in PA.

Needless to say few in PA except maybe some Pitt fans are surprised by how this has fallen apart. The anger and distrust aimed at ESPN for its shoddy media coverage blatant speculation without supporting facts that helped to lay track for the runaway train that the story became made Mike and Mike laughing stocks in Central PA.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Absolutely agree. I think individuals and the University can properly be held accountable under the law according to their actions/inactions, but the NCAA duress was beyond its charter and amounted to blackmail, with harmful impact way beyond the culpable parties.

You mean the NCAA regulates such things as University meals (at the time), but has no rules about child molestation in U sports facilities! Sure, the punishment was maybe excessive, but the NCAA was pretty POed about what looked like a pretty sustained cover up and substantial (let's call it) fibbing.

 

[Icebear]

You mean the NCAA regulates such things as University meals (at the time), but has no rules about child molestation in U sports facilities! Sure, the punishment was maybe excessive, but the NCAA was pretty POed about what looked like a pretty sustained cover up and substantial (let's call it) fibbing.

Yes, "looked like." That was the media created myth and disinformation.

 

[stamfordhusky]

You mean the NCAA regulates such things as University meals (at the time), but has no rules about child molestation in U sports facilities! Sure, the punishment was maybe excessive, but the NCAA was pretty POed about what looked like a pretty sustained cover up and substantial (let's call it) fibbing.

Internal NCAA emails from that time show that they thought they did not have the authority to punish Penn State with sanctions. Their emails called the proposed punishment a "bluff" used used to pressure the PSU president to agree. Others have called it extortion.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Internal NCAA emails from that time show that they thought they did not have the authority to punish Penn State with sanctions. Their emails called the proposed punishment a "bluff" used used to pressure the PSU president to agree. Others have called it extortion.

Ah, did not know that. The old e-mail oopsie. Seems the NCAA should have consulted Lois Lerner about how to have computer problems. 'Course, there is the pesky problem of the backup files and how bad it looks to lose both.

 

[HoopsFan21]

Ah, did not know that. The old e-mail oopsie. Seems the NCAA should have consulted Lois Lerner about how to have computer problems. 'Course, there is the pesky problem of the backup files and how bad it looks to lose both.

I suspect there's a lot more stuff the NCAA doesn't want released which is why they've folded like a lawn chair. Penn State's board also seems pretty shady and not very transparent, so they've probably got some skeletons in the closet they want to keep hidden. The NCAA emails that were released a month ago put them in a pretty bad light, and there's apparently a whole treasure trove the NCAA is fighting to keep private. Two years ago the NCAA acted like the Gezpatcho. Now they're trying to make it go away before they are the ones in handcuffs. And there is still the matter of the Paterno Estate lawsuit which is separate from this settlement, so they may not be out of the woods just yet. As for Mark Emmert, I'm guessing the letters he received on U.S. Congress letterhead made him think long and hard about how much political capital he was willing to spend on the Penn State issue.

 

[jsloanjr]

Finally..........

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I suspect there's a lot more stuff the NCAA doesn't want released which is why they've folded like a lawn chair. Penn State's board also seems pretty shady and not very transparent, so they've probably got some skeletons in the closet they want to keep hidden. The NCAA emails that were released a month ago put them in a pretty bad light, and there's apparently a whole treasure trove the NCAA is fighting to keep private. Two years ago the NCAA acted like the Gezpatcho. Now they're trying to make it go away before they are the ones in handcuffs. And there is still the matter of the Paterno Estate lawsuit which is separate from this settlement, so they may not be out of the woods just yet. As for Mark Emmert, I'm guessing the letters he received on U.S. Congress letterhead made him think long and hard about how much political capital he was willing to spend on the Penn State issue.

Gezpatcho? Was that the Italian equivalent of the SS in WWII? Sorry, Hoops, couldn't help myself. I am with you in wishing nothing but the worst to the benighted NCAA - a hypocritical, biased and money captivated "governing body."

 

[CL82]

Absolutely agree. I think individuals and the University can properly be held accountable under the law according to their actions/inactions, but the NCAA duress was beyond its charter and amounted to blackmail, with harmful impact way beyond the culpable parties.

I'm no fan of what happened at Penn State. I believe that two administraters actively involved in the cover up ought to be held liable criminally and civilly.
While I also believe that the NCAA sanctions were what amounted to a shake down of a bad publicity weary entity, didn't Penn State agree to them? If so, seem disengenous for them to argue overreach and renegotiate the deal now that they no longer need the PR.

 

[CL82]

Gezpatcho? Was that the Italian equivalent of the SS in WWII? Sorry, Hoops, couldn't help myself. I am with you in wishing nothing but the worst to the benighted NCAA - a hypocritical, biased and money captivated "governing body."

They acted like soup...

...and not even hot soup at that.

Mr. Emmert, above all things a soup ought to warm. Sir, you sicken me.

 

[Wally East]

Two years ago the NCAA acted like the Gezpatcho.

Unless an organization is actively murdering people, maybe find something else to compare to? Because when an organization actually is murdering people and should be compared to the Gezpatcho, it won't mean anything. By using the term too frequently, you weaken the term and are left with nothing when you actually need to use it.

See: Godwin's Law.

 

[HoopsFan21]

I'm no fan of what happened at Penn State. I believe that two administraters actively involved in the cover up ought to be held liable criminally and civilly.
While I also believe that the NCAA sanctions were what amounted to a shake down of a bad publicity weary entity, didn't Penn State agree to them? If so, seem disengenous for them to argue overreach and renegotiate the deal now that they no longer need the PR.

Penn State was a (nominal) defendant in the lawsuit, for the record. In other words, the school was on the side of the NCAA.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

I can't stand Penn State, but the NCAA overstepped their bounds. This was a legal issue that had nothing to do with the field of play or recruiting, so it should have been left to the court system.

 

[HoopsFan21]

I can't stand Penn State, but the NCAA overstepped their bounds. This was a legal issue that had nothing to do with the field of play or recruiting, so it should have been left to the court system.

You're from Jersey, right? So it's true that everyone there hates Penn State for some crazy reason?

 

[JS]

While I also believe that the NCAA sanctions were what amounted to a shake down of a bad publicity weary entity, didn't Penn State agree to them? If so, seem disengenous for them to argue overreach and renegotiate the deal now that they no longer need the PR.

I haven't looked at the lawsuit in a long time, but there are things that come to mind that excuse someone from having to follow through on a deal that he's made. (You know we lawyers pay no attention to whether we're being disingenuous or not, unless it's in order to be that way on purpose.)

• One argument being made in this case was, as I recall, that the former Prez who signed off on the deal on behalf of the University wasn't properly authorized to do so. Don't recall the details, but it had to do with him, in the face of a challenge, claiming he had the inherent power to enter into the deal without getting the Board behind it. That's a question of corporate governance.
  
• Another argument IIRC was constitutional. In a nutshell, the state constitution doesn't allow an organ of the state to soak up taxpayer dollars for a certain purpose and then spend those dollars outside the state for some other (however worthy) purpose as the settlement proposed to do.
• Just in general, there are legal arguments that excuse someone from a contract made under duress -- for example as a result of threats made by the other party to do some harm the other party isn't legally entitled to do -- that is to say threats in the nature of extortion or blackmail.

On that last point, it was interesting that one of the pieces of evidence in the case was a statement by an NCAA official (paraphrasing) that "It was a bluff -- to say we had the power [to carry out our threats] was a stretch." Some of us made that very contention on this board at the time.

Whether any of these arguments would've succeeded is beyond my rusty recollection of the case to judge, but the NCAA evidently thought there was enough to them that it had best settle.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

You're from Jersey, right? So it's true that everyone there hates Penn State for some crazy reason?

Yes, I'm originally from Jersey and the Penn State fans I knew growing up were all obnoxious and arrogant. When I moved to Columbia, the Clemson fans reminded me of Penn State fans so I became a Gamecock fan.

 

[Icebear]

I'm no fan of what happened at Penn State. I believe that two administraters actively involved in the cover up ought to be held liable criminally and civilly.
While I also believe that the NCAA sanctions were what amounted to a shake down of a bad publicity weary entity, didn't Penn State agree to them? If so, seem disengenous for them to argue overreach and renegotiate the deal now that they no longer need the PR.

It is not the Penn State board as currently constituted that agreed and the suits were brought by others not the board of trustees. All of PA and PSU alumni want the proper people prosecuted.

 

[Icebear]

Penn State's board also seems pretty shady and not very transparent, so they've probably got some skeletons in the closet they want to keep hidden.

There has been significant change in the Board of Trustees at PSU.