It is possible that the NCAAs actions may be their undoing???

[geordi]

http://espn.go.com/college-football...-facing-death-penalty-monday-ncaa-source-says

Reading between the lines of this article, there are certainly some of the folks involved that seem to have significant problem with the NCAA taking on an issue that is not within their realm of responsibility. People who have been involved with the NCAA for many years seem to be concerned at this kind of unilateral action. Emmert is clearly a martinet with immense delusions of grandeur -- just look at his dictatorial style against a number of schools, Connecticut included. But might he now be overstepping his bounds to the point that, focusing on Penn State, which is still a national icon regardless of the cluster duckk they put themselves into? And could it be that this might be an issue that he'll finally be taken to task on and ultimately removed because he took on the wrong folks? It's one thing to punish Cal Tech. It's completely another to take on a major B1G power. More to come...

 

[phillionaire]

I feel like if they go too leniently on PSU there will be a huge media outcry for harsher punishments.

 

[ZooCougar]

Because of the jurisdiction issue they already lack legitimacy. When they go lenient, they just look weak, immoral and Illegitimate.

 

[CTMike]

The NCAA is corrupt and hypocritical. I think you bring up a good point. Tomorrow, almost regardless of what's announced, I think there will be folks that are outraged that the sanctions aren't stronger, and folks that are outraged that the NCAA has "overstepped their bounds". All someone needs to do is present a viable alternative to the NCAA and things would spiral for Emmert quickly.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

Because of the jurisdiction issue they already lack legitimacy. When they go lenient, they just look weak, immoral and Illegitimate.

The problem is, it's not their place to enforce criminal violations. Their jurisdiction is the field of play, not the criminal courts. If the Sandusky case had been handled 100% correct by PSU from the beginning, it's very likely there would have been no difference in result on the playing field.

 

[ZooCougar]

Lack of institutional control is not a criminal violation. The criminal activity continued because of the lack of institutional control.

 

[husky10]

Lack of institutional control is not a criminal violation. The criminal activity continued because of the lack of institutional control.

I agree, clearly the institution didn't have control over the football program because it was staff within the football program that were involved in the cover up. Did Cal Tech gain an advantage on the court because their basketball players weren't registered for classes during the first 2 weeks of the semester? Only recalling what I read in that article their horrendous record makes me believe they didnt.

The trouble I see with the NCAA sanctioning the school for their violations is that they should only be punishing the school for a lack of institutional control and unfortunately I dont think that the punishment the school receives should be based on all the helpless kids that were hurt but only based on the fact that the heads of the school couldnt control the football program. This leads me to believe that the punishment the school receives from the NCAA will be far too light than most think they deserve and there will be public outcry because of that.

 

[CTMike]

If the Sandusky case had been handled 100% correct by PSU from the beginning, it's very likely there would have been no difference in result on the playing field.

I'm not sure I follow?

 

[SubbaBub]

I would fully expect the same level of sanctions for UNC and Miami for gross contempt to undermine the very mission of the NCAA and its member institutions for knowingly covering up academic fraud and payments to athletes.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

I'm not sure I follow?

All I was saying was that say PSU found out about Sandusky and handled it correctly and legally, it was reported up the chain promptly, reported to the authorities, he was banned from campus, arrested, etc., as opposed to what happened, I doubt there wouldn't have been a substantive difference in the results on the field over the time since then.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

I would fully expect the same level of sanctions for UNC and Miami for gross contempt to undermine the very mission of the NCAA and its member institutions for knowingly covering up academic fraud and payments to athletes.

Payment to athletes and academic fraud are NCAA violations. Lying to authorities and failure to report known illegal acts are not necessarily NCAA violations, they're criminal violations.

 

[Santini35]

The problem is, it's not their place to enforce criminal violations. Their jurisdiction is the field of play, not the criminal courts. If the Sandusky case had been handled 100% correct by PSU from the beginning, it's very likely there would have been no difference in result on the playing field.

Just because this went BEYOND being a football problem doesn't means it STOPS being a football problem. PSU didn't handle it correctly from the start, which probably led to indirect benefits on the field, which means its still an NCAA issue, even if they aren't punishing the criminal portions.

 

[upstater]

I'm not sure I follow?

He's saying that if Sandusky were reported to the police in 2001 it wouldn't have hurt PSU on the football field. Hard to rewind that one but the fact is, the whole Sandusky story broke in the Pennsylvania media almost one entire year before it went national, and it went national as soon as PSU admin's were indicted for a cover-up.

That doesn't necessarily mean that it wouldn't have gone national in 2001 absent a cover-up, but clearly, the way the media treated the story in late 2000 shows that it might not have become a national story.

 

[CTMike]

All I was saying was that say PSU found out about Sandusky and handled it correctly and legally, it was reported up the chain promptly, reported to the authorities, he was banned from campus, arrested, etc., as opposed to what happened, I doubt there wouldn't have been a substantive difference in the results on the field over the time since then.

I imagine you are probably right... But the fear that wouldn't be the case, which led to so many repeated cover ups in the name of protecting Penn State, and Football specifically... did benefit Penn State on the field. Essentially, they avoided for 14 plus years exactly what is happening now, and that most certainly benefitted the football program over that time. The NCAA shouldn't need a clause in it's bylaws that says "don't molest kids in your football facilities" to act here. Of course you shouldn't molest children. And you shouldn't ignore child molestation that takes place in your football facilities. And you shouldn't have any current or former staff utilizing your football program to lure new victims. I know that the least significant part of this tragedy is football related, but that doesn't make that insignificant. It's all significant.

 

[CTMike]

It's kind of a circular argument, because they did cover it up, from the first instance that someone had knowledge of Sandusky's actions (which I suspect is well before 1998, but I have no facts to base that on)... and from that moment forward, they benefitted.

 

[Jerry27]

Payment to athletes and academic fraud are NCAA violations. Lying to authorities and failure to report known illegal acts are not necessarily NCAA violations, they're criminal violations.

You're lumping lack of intitutional control, which is a standard in control of the NCAA, with criminal activity. They are not trying the case for the crimes, they are basing their judgement and punishment on the schools lack of institutional control. The administration allowed the athletic department/head coach to run roughshod over the school and cover up the criminal activity that had taken place and continued on for many years after first disclosure. The school was well aware, from all that I have read, that the crimes took place, and that the person who committed them still had access to the school.

Tomorrow will be very interesting to say the least. Does anyone know if the NCAA is enroute to Happy Valley the way they went to SMU to make that announcement?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

"Emmert has been given full reign by the pansy presidents (at other universities) to make his own decision," said the trustee, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "He has been given the authority to impose these unprecedented sanctions. It's horrible."

That quote says that Penn State just doesn't get it. They think taking down a statue of a dead guy is penalty enough.

 

[StoweD210]

"Emmert has been given full reign by the pansy presidents (at other universities) to make his own decision," said the trustee, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "He has been given the authority to impose these unprecedented sanctions. It's horrible."

That quote says that Penn State just doesn't get it. They think taking down a statue of a dead guy is penalty enough.

Statements like that from the trustee remind me of the scene in Jaws when the mayor is trying to justify his decisions and Chief Brody tells him "The summer is over. You're the mayor of shark city! These people think you want the beaches open!"

 

[freescooter]

Word is Penn State won't appeal, or might just ask for some flexibility with the scholarships, like being allowed to keep current players and take fewer freshmen, so this isn't going to backfire on the NCAA. Penn State lacked the fortitude to do what was right on their own, so they were more than willing to let the NCAA "impose" a penalty. They should have taken these steps themselves, at a minimum. Now they can deflect the blame yet again.

 

[minidarren]

Word is Penn State won't appeal, or might just ask for some flexibility with the scholarships, like being allowed to keep current players and take fewer freshmen, so this isn't going to backfire on the NCAA. Penn State lacked the fortitude to do what was right on their own, so they were more than willing to let the NCAA "impose" a penalty. They should have taken these steps themselves, at a minimum. Now they can deflect the blame yet again.

They said multiple times that PSU has consented to the punishments.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2