OT: Thursday at 9 a.m., the Freeh Report is available. . .

[Vowelguy]

Are you really arguing that because it had "something to do with football" the NCAA is empowered to act?

(1) Not "something" to do with football. It had _everything_ to do with football.
(2) All I said was that Brennan raised an interesting question about why SMU was given the death penalty, and Penn St wont be.

 

[Icebear]

PSU trustees statement live

 

[JS]

(1) Not "something" to do with football. It had _everything_ to do with football.
(2) All I said was that Brennan raised an interesting question about why SMU was given the death penalty, and Penn St wont be.

You can argue that football -- and JoePa particularly if you believe as I do -- wielded too much clout. And you can argue it's because of the money. Successful big-time football brings it in directly, and indirectly through the bonding effect on alumni.

But these aren't factors the NCAA can "fix." The organization is part and parcel of that whole shebang, and isn't there to lessen football's influence. If people use that influence in misguided ways, NCAA can't fix that either unless it pertains to breaking the rules.

 

[Icebear]

(1) Not "something" to do with football. It had _everything_ to do with football.
(2) All I said was that Brennan raised an interesting question about why SMU was given the death penalty, and Penn St wont be.

You might as well say it had everything to do with sports money and shutdown UConn basketball, too, because money makes everything suspect.

 

[speedoo]

If Sandusky were the assistant field hockey coach, the university's actions would've been MUCH different.
It is football, period.

Exactly. And actions would also have been different if Sandusky had been an assistant in any other program except football.

Why? Because Paterno was the football coach, and he was everything at PSU.

 

[Kibitzer]

I do not completely disagree with JS. It will be a long reach for the NCAA to punish PSU football under the broad "lack of institutional control" justification.

But I believe that they will seize on that and use it to "do something."

Whatever the NCAA does (and it won't be a death penalty), PSU will digest it like bad tasting medicine rather than tarnish its image still more by appearing to be anything but contrite and remorseful in the eyes of the general public.

I do not rule out a bit of discreet plea bargaining between the NCAA and PSU.

 

[SubbaBub]

Exactly. And actions would also have been different if Sandusky had been an assistant in any other program except football.

Why? Because Paterno was the football coach, and he was everything at PSU.

That's like saying Calhoun is everything at UConn. While a very influential larger than life public face of the university, hardly the same as running the place.

Reading only the summary of findings and the timeline (hey I got a job) and perhaps the full report contradicts what Im about to say but, I thought a few things after I read it. While there was a clear conspiracy to cover this up, the 1998 investigation seemed to go as one might expect for a high profile person except that it was kept mostly off the books then buried when the investigation came up short. MISTAKE #1 that sets this whole thing in motion.

The report is not consistent with the suspicion the JS was forced out because of the incident. This gives a very small amount of space for those involved to move on from there, but if they went by the book they wouldn't have been in a position to hang themselves in 2001 incident.

If we try to understand what would make a person turn a blind eye to such horror, t is important to remember the climate in 2001. The football program was in the middle of a multi year slump, there were calls for Paterno to retire. Any scandal would have ended his career and since there was a cover up of the 1998 incident all four would have been tossed. To say this was solely about protecting FB is cliche. They were protecting themselves. Maybe Joe survives it, but the other three? No freaking way.

It's also important to remember that this is a University trying to separate itself from these events. The four administration principles are now fired, dead, or awaiting trial. From the portion I read, Paterno seems clearly in the loop and was consulted but more on periphery on the discussions. The only link ID'd in the summary is an email from Curley intimating that Paterno squashed it, but I see enough other support for this. There is a lot to be gained by dumping this on the four men. I don't believe that the Univ didn't get some influence. I think some things were left out that didn't involve the university.

At the end of the day I see a typical scenario of people cutting corners on the first incident and getting caught trying to CYA on the second surrounded by a barrel full of selfish a unethical decisions slowly and painfully played out over a decade. All in all, a very sad and sorry tale.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[EricSD]

The report said that Paterno, along with officials Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, and former president Graham Spanier, "repeatedly concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky's child abuse from the authorities," and it blamed those four men for failing to stop Sandusky and protect other chidlren from his harm.

The four officials showed a "striking lack of empathy" for the victims of Sandusky's abuse and empowered the former assitant coach to continue abusing, the report said.

I'm sure many smarter people than i can read the report, summarize it, or whatever, but this quote above is from ABC news - not that it's the final word, but if that's the gist of the report, i'm not sure how the NCAA CAN ignore it. They may not have rules in place to deal with this, but if that's the finding, certainly punitive action towards PSU's football program is in order. Let PSU sue the NCAA if they don't like the punishment.

I would also think the government would bring charges against those involved - criminal and/or civil (or perhaps civil charges would have to come from the victims?). either way, it's a huge mess and regardless of the rules in place, I don't see how the NCAA can let this slide.

 

[Icebear]

The government has already brought its charges against Sandusky who was convicted and Tim Curley and Gary Schultz who await trial. The grand jury brought these charges in November. No charges were brought against JoePA or Mike McQueary. Civil suits are in the process of being filed against these individuals and the University, as well as, 2nd Mile.

 

[Vowelguy]

You might as well say it had everything to do with sports money and shutdown UConn basketball, too, because money makes everything suspect.

That of course is a ludicrous comparison.

It's not all sports. It's not all schools. It definitely was Penn St football.

Anyone arguing this was just a few bad apples is ignorant. It was the President and the AD (et al). They placed the FB team above the law because they believed that was their job. They didn't come to that conclusion on their own -- they did that because that's what the school, the alumni, the trustees, and the community wanted, if not demanded. This was a systemic problem. Penn St can't just pay the lawsuits and institute new child protections. It needs to change a culture that valued FB above all else.

 

[Icebear]

That of course is a ludicrous comparison.

It's not all sports. It's not all schools. It definitely was Penn St football.

Anyone arguing this was just a few bad apples is ignorant. It was the President and the AD (et al). They placed the FB team above the law because they believed that was their job. They didn't come to that conclusion on their own -- they did that because that's what the school, the alumni, the trustees, and the community wanted, if not demanded. This was a systemic problem. Penn St can't just pay the lawsuits and institute new child protections. It needs to change a culture that valued FB above all else.

If what you suggest is true the university and the community would not have moved as swiftly once it was known as they have. Sandusky was convicted by a jury with 9 people with ties to PSU in the county seat of the community where the school is found. It was by all accounts of Freeh's report that the community was manipulated by less than a handful of persons. It is systemic in that these few people used their key positions to forward personal goals. It is systemic in a limited sense. It is, also, systemic in the sense that proper training regarding Clery responsibilities were not taught broadly through the structure by HR. It is not systemic in a manner meaning people throughout the university were all conspiring to suppress information about the events.

Freeh's report states that no evidence was found for a number of assertions previously made here and in other places. No evidence was uncovered that Sandusky's retirement was in anyway connected to knowledge of his abuse of kids. The events in 1998 occurred after that decision had been made. The report establishes a number of things that argue against your assertions as well as for a willingness to deal straight on with the problem in the present. None of it is as simplistic as you or Christine Brennan paint it. Some were worried about sullying the program's reputation, some about finances, some about liabilities of taking false steps and false accusations, some about about their jobs, the great crime is that among those who knew no one cared about simply protecting the kids. Freeh's material is detailed and thorough and lays all these variances and subtleties out.

Those kids are probably safer today in State College than anywhere else in the country.

 

[Vowelguy]

If what you suggest is true the university and the community would not have moved as swiftly once it was known as they have.

Deny deny deny.
Exactly Penn St's problem.

 

[OneTrickPony]

If what you suggest is true the university and the community would not have moved as swiftly once it was known as they have. Sandusky was convicted by a jury with 9 people with ties to PSU in the county seat of the community where the school is found. It was by all accounts of Freeh's report that the community was manipulated by less than a handful of persons. Freeh's report states that no evidence was found for a number of assertions previously made here and in other places. No evidence was uncovered that Sandusky's retirement was in anyway connected to knowledge of his abuse of kids. The events in 1998 occurred after that decision had been made. The report establishes a number of things that argue against your assertions as well as for a willingness to deal straight on with the problem in the present. None of it is as simplistic as you or Christine Brennan paint it. Some were worried about sullying the program's reputation, some about finances, some about liabilities of taking false steps and false accusations, some about about their jobs, the great crime is that among those who knew no one cared about simply protecting the kids. Those kids are probably safer today in State College than anywhere else in the country.

Have to agree with Icebear...just as the high school in Littleton, CO now has the best security in the country...the pendulum will swing a long way at Penn State. It's hard to make a case for punishing the students and the community...

The Freeh Report and the Trustees response to it have been a breath of fresh air. Now if they can just keep Paterno's son off the air, the healing can begin...

 

[Icebear]

Deny deny deny.
Exactly Penn St's problem.

Denying nothing, but getting the response right and aimed at the right problems is the only way there will be success.

 

[UCONNfan1]

That is absolutely not the point. PSU should be punished and punished severely. Anything less is a joke and a slap in the face to the entire collegiate sporting program. I get that PSU alums want this to be over as fast as possible and for the world to look the other way, but the UCONN men were banned from the post season for having too low an APR (ie. grades). As most on the men's board agree, a 5 year ban from football sounds about right.

Frankly I'm surprised anyone is arguing to go easy on PSU, regardless of whether rules are in place per NCAA bylaws to cover this or not. It was an aggregious miscarriage of ethics, trust, law, etc. by Paterno, the head of the athletics department, and the university officials. To try to sweep this under the rug and say "the criminal and civil cases will take care of it" doesn't seem to be a right answer...

This predator abused these kids and the people in charge looked the other way and allowed the abuse to continue. There should be a huge public outcry for the University to face the stiffest penalties the NCAA thinks it can get away with.

If the situation were reversed and it were to come out that some female hoops coach were molesting and abusing players, young girls, etc etc. and the head hoops coach looked the other way as did all the administration officials, people would be calling for the permanent disbanning of that WHoops program.

The NCAA has much more than a "legal obligation" based on what "rules" they currently have in place.

 

[Icebear]

That is absolutely not the point. PSU should be punished and punished severely. Anything less is a joke and a slap in the face to the entire collegiate sporting program. I get that PSU alums want this to be over as fast as possible and for the world to look the other way, but the UCONN men were banned from the post season for having too low an APR (ie. grades). As most on the men's board agree, a 5 year ban from football sounds about right.

Frankly I'm surprised anyone is arguing to go easy on PSU, regardless of whether rules are in place per NCAA bylaws to cover this or not. It was an aggregious miscarriage of ethics, trust, law, etc. by Paterno, the head of the athletics department, and the university officials. To try to sweep this under the rug and say "the criminal and civil cases will take care of it" doesn't seem to be a right answer...

This predator abused these kids and the people in charge looked the other way and allowed the abuse to continue. There should be a huge public outcry for the University to face the stiffest penalties the NCAA thinks it can get away with.

If the situation were reversed and it were to come out that some female hoops coach were molesting and abusing players, young girls, etc etc. and the head hoops coach looked the other way as did all the administration officials, people would be calling for the permanent disbanning of that WHoops program.

The NCAA has much more than a "legal obligation" based on what "rules" they currently have in place.

No one is suggesting going easy on PSU. Least of all me. What I am suggesting is that the crimes were not committed by the whole university or the whole community. Freeh's report makes that very clear. Charges have been brought against three and the university will suffer huge losses financially in civil courts and in prestige.

Punishment must be aimed at the right people and done in the right manner if the overarching problem is to be corrected. 40,000 students had nothing to do with it, the vast majority of employees had no part in covering up anything or even awareness of anything, the surrounding community filled with people who have been even more abhorred than anywhere else in the country because it was their kids at risk. All can be impacted by reckless desires to take a Sodom and Gommorah approach to punishment. Even God offered to spare those cities for ten righteous people let alone tens of thousands.

The right goal beyond any civil cases and criminal charges is to make sure a system of training is in place and clear policies with clear consequences are in place to make sure these events can never take place again. Simply punishing does next to nothing to secure the safety of kids in the future. That is the right goal, protecting the kids. The NCAA is the last group that is qualified to deal with any of those things. Leave it to them to manage athletics and to the courts and government to review and ensure that the cancer at PSU has been properly been excised and healthy systems have been put in place.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

No one is suggesting going easy on PSU. Least of all me. What I am suggesting is that the crimes were not committed by the whole university or the whole community. Freeh's report makes that very clear. Charges have been brought against three and the university will suffer huge losses financially in civil courts and in prestige.

Punishment must be aimed at the right people and done in the right manner if the overarching problem is to be corrected. 40,000 students had nothing to do with it, the vast majority of employees had no part in covering up anything or even awareness of anything, the surrounding community filled with people who have been even more abhorred than anywhere else in the country because it was their kids at risk. All can be impacted by reckless desires to take a Sodom and Gommorah approach to punishment. Even God offered to spare those cities for ten righteous people let alone tens of thousands.

The right goal beyond any civil cases and criminal charges is to make sure a system of training is in place and clear policies with clear consequences are in place to make sure these events can never take place again. Simply punishing does next to nothing to secure the safety of kids in the future. That is the right goal, protecting the kids. The NCAA is the last group that is qualified to deal with any of those things. Leave it to them to manage athletics and to the courts and government to review and ensure that the cancer at PSU has been properly been excised and healthy systems have been put in place.

Excellent post, as almost always.

One of the issues in society today is the black / white, punish "and make it hurt" approach to everything.

I read the whole report. Clearly, reforms are already underway. There is no question that the report shows a situation that snowballed from a feeble first investigation to on-going denial in every sense of the word. If you could get into these folks heads, I almost think you would have found that they just didn't quite believe "Jerry" was such a bad guy as he was.

While the football program was clearly at fault for being "above the law" it is equally clear that there was a lack of institutional control (to use the phrase) over the President's office and what these VIP's did. The trustees were never informed and never raised questions either. Clear abuse of power contributing to the rest of the horror.

 

[uconnfan68]

Fine to make a broad point, that two awful things happened, but the awful things are apples and oranges.

What she doesn't seem to understand is that, for the NCAA to act, as she specifically advocates, there has to have been a violation of its rules. They can't just say, "These four guys acted disgracefully and allowed bad things to happen, so we're killing the football program." There has to be something more than a remote connection (reputation-protecting, at most) between what they did or failed to do and the way the school conducted its intercollegiate athletics programs.

I agree with Wbbfan1 on this. Penn State and the accused individuals (if found guilty) will take their lumps in the civil and criminal courts. The NCAA has no apparent reason to be involved.

The NCAA has been known to make rules up after the fact, and apply them whimsically. The NCAA also knows a very large % of the nations grads are PSU grads. No way they get involved. Now if Sandusky made a few extra phone calls...

 

[cardfan]

You can read the entire Freeh report here. There is an executive summary with a timeline that is pretty damning of Paterno.

There is an old saying in the military that it takes justy one "aw " to erase a career full of "atta boys." It applies to Paterno. I think he will rightfully be remembered as the guy that chose to allow a pederast to continue molesting young boys followed by a "didn't he win some football games?" Just what he was trying to avoid.

As for Brennan she has her head up her tookus as usual. Essentially she is condemning an athletic program based on the behavior of individuals that had nothing to do with athletics. While their motives were certainly protection of the program, it was the individuals involved that protected Sandusky and they alone should pay the price.

I agree the individuals were responsible, but they were protecting the football program more than Sandusky.

 

[Icebear]

Excellent post, as almost always.

One of the issues in society today is the black / white, punish "and make it hurt" approach to everything.

I read the whole report. Clearly, reforms are already underway. There is no question that the report shows a situation that snowballed from a feeble first investigation to on-going denial in every sense of the word. If you could get into these folks heads, I almost think you would have found that they just didn't quite believe "Jerry" was such a bad guy as he was.

While the football program was clearly at fault for being "above the law" it is equally clear that there was a lack of institutional control (to use the phrase) over the President's office and what these VIP's did. The trustees were never informed and never raised questions either. Clear abuse of power contributing to the rest of the horror.

I think you are very right about a progression, one of "getting it right" starting with disbelief that "Jerry couldn't." That progression started with the first events reported in the town investigation of a charitable legend and which was inconceivable and led to the fear of false accusations and a investigation that never quite had enough to satisfy those who could take action and ruin a "good" person's reputation to eventually "getting it right" and protecting the university. Along the way those involved were often speaking past each other with different agendas. The situation was rather like one couples facing relational problems find themselves in when a counselor works to make sure they are using language in the same way and truly hearing each other. In the end "getting it right" became about protecting the department and the golden goose whether the goose knew it or not. Sadly "getting it right" never involved "getting it right" for the victims and the broader community at risk. 430 interviews and 3.5 million emails have shed tremendous insight into the greater situation, past, present, and hopefully a far better directed future.

One additional insight that popped into my realization today these events all began within the decade following the chaos of the McMartin Preschool trials which resulted in a horrendously complex mess of accusations involving occult practices, implanted memories, and charges made, charges dropped, and almost every other inconceivable possibility. It was the first situation of its type to completely dominate the national media involving child abuse. Getting it right may have seemed a reasonable start but it led down a path with horrendous consequences on that well paved highway to hell.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ra_mcmar.htm/

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/psychology/mcmartin_daycare/1.html

 

[Icebear]

One of the groups involved and whose role and potential coverup and potential criminal neglect by staff needs to be investigated thoroughly is the Second Mile program. These folks seemed to have taken no action with information passed on to them to completely protect the children in their care and where Sandusky was doing his recruiting and hunting.

 

[diggerfoot]

Some are suggesting the NCAA has moral justification to go as far as the death penalty. Others are pointing out that the NCAA's legal jurisdiction falls short of that. The question goes beyond what the NCAA can do legally to what they can do successfully. Imagine this scenario: the NCAA imposes the death penalty knowing full well it would never stand up legally, yet Penn State does not challenge because they just want to end this thing.

On the other hand, Penn State and the NCAA may arrive at an understanding that "we'll tolerate such and such sanctions that go beyond your legal prerogatives and no more before we present a challenge." Or, Penn State may challenge any sanction they think goes beyond the NCAAs jurisdiction. I'm not suggesting that is how things should or will go down, just that there will likely be a more complicated game played than what is legal or moral with administering sanctions.

 

[JS]

I do not completely disagree with JS. It will be a long reach for the NCAA to punish PSU football under the broad "lack of institutional control" justification.

But I believe that they will seize on that and use it to "do something."

Having read this letter [pdf file] since last night, I'm more inclined to agree with you.

Seems the NCAA has long since done its homework in scouring its By-Laws for provisions on which it might hang its hat. Stretchy for sure, but the willing attitude is there.

 

[Kibitzer]

Some are suggesting the NCAA has moral justification to go as far as the death penalty. Others are pointing out that the NCAA's legal jurisdiction falls short of that. The question goes beyond what the NCAA can do legally to what they can do successfully. Imagine this scenario: the NCAA imposes the death penalty knowing full well it would never stand up legally, yet Penn State does not challenge because they just want to end this thing.

On the other hand, Penn State and the NCAA may arrive at an understanding that "we'll tolerate such and such sanctions that go beyond your legal prerogatives and no more before we present a challenge." Or, Penn State may challenge any sanction they think goes beyond the NCAAs jurisdiction. I'm not suggesting that is how things should or will go down, just that there will likely be a more complicated game played than what is legal or moral with administering sanctions.

Having read this letter [pdf file] since last night, I'm more inclined to agree with you.

Seems the NCAA has long since done its homework in scouring its By-Laws for provisions on which it might hang its hat. Stretchy for sure, but the willing attitude is there.

I mentioned earlier that some form of behind-the-scenes form of plea bargaining could very well occur between the NCAA and PSU.

On the one hand, the NCAA simply cannot bear to hear the howls from the multitudes if they "do nothing." They also are surely reluctant to mete out the "death penalty," for it would punish a couple hundred innocent athletes, thousands of innocent fans, hundreds of innocent people on various payrolls (coaches, security, concessions, event staff, drivers, caterers, vendors, and so on) and basically destroy the future of a football program that has brought joy to many thousands of students, alumni, and regional fans for many years.

So what can they do that will satisfy the general public yet keep the listing ship afloat until repairs are completed? My view is that the NCAA could vacate all PSU football victories between, say, date of first report by McQueary to Paterno and the date Sandusky was arrested. Maybe toss in some recruiting restrictions, some probation, and a severe demand that institional control be tightly re-established.

Paterno and PSU are denied that "most wins" record and claim to a few championships. The Paterno worshippers will whine. The din will mostly die down. And the courtrooms will be busy with civil cases.

I think something like this will work, but it will take at least five years (not counting prison sentences for some that will go on much longer).

 

[boontonbomber]

a step in the right direction for psu might be to self-impose penalties, such as no post-season competition for a period of time,etc. i think it's very important that psu continue to show that they understand how terribly negligent the university was, and to punish themselves , in moving towards restoring the integrity of the university. settling civil suits is not going to do it. for sure, psu is a whole lot more than football. and university leaders need to show that they are not going to let everything else that the school stands for be lessened any further . because of what the leaders of the school did, or did not do, the whole place is under a cloud right now. they need to take serious actions to begin getting out from underneath that cloud. that would be a much more significant approach than waiting for ncaa penalties, which may never happen anyway.

 

[Icebear]

The morality slope is a very risky one for the NCAA to travel down even if as it appears they may be willing to do so. What action might they have rushed to in the Duke men's lacrosse scandal to take a stand on violence against women and how might they have had egg on their face presently if those actions had led to a suspension by them of the team from the post season tournament. What standards can be defined that give the NCAA clarity of action without leaving them to be tossed about by the whims of public opinion. I agree with Kib and JS that the pdf JS links would give ample coverge for the NCAA to choose to act. Whether that action is wise is different thing.

Negotiating with the school and attempting to find a basis for the school's self imposed penalties may well be the best option but will likely be unsatisfactory to some while keeping the NCAA out of the quagmire of moral enforcement issues.

I do disagree with Kib that altering on field records for off field violations is a useful or appropriate penalty because once again it punishes the wrong group the kids and coaches who played without any knowledge of anything involving Jerry Sandusky. Nor does it make any recompense to the victims while furthers the risk of making their lives even more miserable by the irrational and criminal who will misdirect their anger at the victims in an ongoing manner. The goals are to create a penalty through which others who may have been or will be similarly victimized are encouraged and strengthened to come forward.

Our governor still remains unaccountable for his involvement when he was the AG and appeared to slow track this issue with a single investigator during his gubenatorial campaign.

 

[EricSD]

I don't pretend to understand the myriad of complicated issues surrounding the case, but like most, I hope the NCAA comes down on PSU as hard as they possibly can - to deter other schools from promoting a mass cover up to save the reputation of the university at the expense of children. When an institution goes out of its way to protect a child molester, an example needs to be made of them.

 

[SubbaBub]

I don't pretend to understand the myriad of complicated issues surrounding the case, but like most, I hope the NCAA comes down on PSU as hard as they possibly can - to deter other schools from promoting a mass cover up to save the reputation of the university at the expense of children. When an institution goes out of its way to protect a child molester, an example needs to be made of them.

I guarantee every NCAA institution is sufficiently aware of the consequences of something like this happening on their campus. Keeping 100 innocent students off the field will advance this goal zero percent. Whatever punishment the University may receive needs to happen on the administration side of the campus, not the athletic side as that's where the failure occurred.

Some are distracted by the sports tie-in others a strange need for vengeance. Whatever happens needs to assure that four people can't keep a secret like this again. Which to me is the most amazing part. Isn't the thought behind multiple layers of management to prevent the dumb decisions that were made here?

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[EricSD]

I guarantee every NCAA institution is sufficiently aware of the consequences of something like this happening on their campus. Keeping 100 innocent students off the field will advance this goal zero percent. Whatever punishment the University may receive needs to happen on the administration side of the campus, not the athletic side as that's where the failure occurred.

Some are distracted by the sports tie-in others a strange need for vengeance. Whatever happens needs to assure that four people can't keep a secret like this again. Which to me is the most amazing part. Isn't the thought behind multiple layers of management to prevent the dumb decisions that were made here?

I also guarantee you that people also know murder is a really bad thing, and some states have the death penalty and others have life in prison. Those are supposed to be the deterrents for people to commit the crime.

And i'm not sure about the comment that the crimes didn't occur on the athletic side. Paterno knew about it and did nothing and his assistant coach was molesting children. that certainly is on the athletic side.

And strange need for vengeance? Children were molested, and those in the athletic dept and administration who had a chance to put a stop to it looked the other way. there should be outrage and demands for punishment, not excuses, blame shifting, and strange requests for leniency.

Your point about not "punishing the 100 innocent students on the field" is strange. UCONN men's hoops didn't take grades seriously enough and now the current players are paying the price of a low APR and will miss the post season for both the Big East and the NCAA's, if they were eligible. the current group of students are being punished for sins of the coaching staff.

Anyway I get that people will have differing views on this, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion as to how severe the punishment should be. I'm of the opinion it should be the most severe possible...

 

[SubbaBub]

I also guarantee you that people also know murder is a really bad thing, and some states have the death penalty and others have life in prison. Those are supposed to be the deterrents for people to commit the crime.

And i'm not sure about the comment that the crimes didn't occur on the athletic side. Paterno knew about it and did nothing and his assistant coach was molesting children. that certainly is on the athletic side.

And strange need for vengeance? Children were molested, and those in the athletic dept and administration who had a chance to put a stop to it looked the other way. there should be outrage and demands for punishment, not excuses, blame shifting, and strange requests for leniency.

Your point about not "punishing the 100 innocent students on the field" is strange. UCONN men's hoops didn't take grades seriously enough and now the current players are paying the price of a low APR and will miss the post season for both the Big East and the NCAA's, if they were eligible. the current group of students are being punished for sins of the coaching staff.

Anyway I get that people will have differing views on this, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion as to how severe the punishment should be. I'm of the opinion it should be the most severe possible...

Same concept for the MBB team, don't punish the students. Both scandals are a result of poor administration and in both cases, the coach in question is acting as a manager or administrator and not as a participant in an athletic endeavor.

Yes, I believe people have gathered up their torches looking to inflict more damage in areas that do nothing to improve the situation going forward for either PSU or the victims. The responsible parties according to the Freeh report and the DA have been dealt with. Throwing the baby out with the bath water comes to mind.

As for additional action, I'd really like to see investigations of the Police dept, DA's office, and a whole mess of people associated with Second Mile.

The Freeh report lays everything at the feet of the four men who where dismissed, convenient for a whole bunch of people who would like to move on.

As for the NCAA, I suggest two years probation to implement the governance reforms outlined in the Freeh report. If not met, a full ban on NCAA participation until they do. A bit more effective in garnering the change everyone wants than taking down a statue or forfeiting some FB games, don't you think? Why two years? So they don't rush just get something in place.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2