Penn St sanctions

[Vowelguy]

• $60M to child protection charities
• 4 yr FB postseason ban
• FB schollies cut from 25 to 15 for 4 yrs
• FB players can transfer w/o sitting out
• vacated wins 1998-2011

The postseason ban & scholly cuts are pretty significant and will hurt for a while.

 

[Icebear]

The death penalty would have been easier.

 

[Kibitzer]

I hope these sanctions satisfy those who suggested that, absent the "death penalty," the NCAA would merely "look the other way."

And I personally take some satisfaction in a few features of the NCAA announcement:

• The vacating of PSU football victories from 1998 to 2011;
• Recognition that the DP would do irreperable harm to thousands of innocent people -- unnecessarily.
• The combination of fines, reduction in scholarships and bowl bans.
• The fact that PSU has already accepted the NCAA sanctions, which means that this will not drag on and on.

I refer anyone interested to any or all of my earlier posts on this matter.

 

[JS]

USA Today link

I like where the money is going, assuming this holds up. But to what extent is the source the State, and to what extent does this force cuts in educational programs?

The other stuff at least doesn't severely impact the innocent.

I've argued all along this is beyond NCAA's authority. Apparently past NCAA enforcers agree. But the current pres was under pressure to act after criticism of his organization as ineffectual.

But with Penn State's case, the NCAA confronted a scandal unlike any the association had ever seen. The wrongdoing, while egregious, did not reflect traditional violations of NCAA bylaws. And no obvious competitive advantage was gained by the cover-up of criminal activity.

Former NCAA investigators and infractions committee chairmen argued that the NCAA should leave the Penn State scandal for the criminal and civil courts. But Emmert, who recently said in a PBS interview that the death penalty remained on the table, felt compelled to punish Penn State with sanctions that would severely impact its football program for years.

Will be interested in Penn State's reaction. Maybe this was negotiated in advance. But I think a coalition of plaintiffs (university, the state and others) would have an interesting case for an injunction.

 

[Vowelguy]

I've argued all along this is beyond NCAA's authority.

He rebutted that argument clearly and strongly. I don't recall his exact wording, but basically it was "this is definitely under our jurisdiction."

 

[UConnCat]

USA Today link

I like where the money is going, assuming this holds up. But to what extent is the source the State, and to what extent does this force cuts in educational programs?

The other stuff at least doesn't severely impact the innocent.

I've argued all along this is beyond NCAA's authority. Apparently past NCAA enforcers agree. But the current pres was under pressure to act after criticism of his organization as ineffectual.

But with Penn State's case, the NCAA confronted a scandal unlike any the association had ever seen. The wrongdoing, while egregious, did not reflect traditional violations of NCAA bylaws. And no obvious competitive advantage was gained by the cover-up of criminal activity.

Former NCAA investigators and infractions committee chairmen argued that the NCAA should leave the Penn State scandal for the criminal and civil courts. But Emmert, who recently said in a PBS interview that the death penalty remained on the table, felt compelled to punish Penn State with sanctions that would severely impact its football program for years.

Will be interested in Penn State's reaction. Maybe this was negotiated in advance. But I think a coalition of plaintiffs (university, the state and others) would have an interesting case for an injunction.

According to Emmert, the sanctions are part of a consent decree signed by PSU. At least that's what I think Emmert said.

 

[JS]

He rebutted that argument clearly and strongly. I don't recall his exact wording, but basically it was "this is definitely under our jurisdiction."

Would you expect him to say, "We're not sure we can do this, but . . ."?

 

[JS]

According to Emmert, the sanctions are part of a consent decree signed by PSU. At least that's what I think Emmert said.

Drat. There goes my lawsuit.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

Where is the 60MM coming from? hiking tuition and fees?

 

[Kibitzer]

Drat. There goes my lawsuit.

JS, when you called me out to make my case about what the NCAA could do and would do, my response included the thought that there would be some behind-the-scenes form of plea bargaining as a means of bringing closure to this matter.

I think I also said something about vacating victories, bowl bans, etc.

Honest, I did not write the script for that NCAA guy today.

 

[Kibitzer]

Where is the 60MM coming from? hiking tuition and fees?

Emmert stated very specifically that PSU was NOT to draw the money from other (non-revenue producing) sports programs or from either football scholarship funds or, most important, academic programs.

Bravo! Coquese is still in business!

 

[Vowelguy]

Would you expect him to say, "We're not sure we can do this, but . . ."?

You have long said they had no jurisdiction to do anything. They did.

 

[JS]

You have long said they had no jurisdiction to do anything. They did.

The fact they did it, apparently by mutual consent with Penn State in order to avoid legal bloodshed, doesn't mean they had the authority.

I've long said as you state, and continue to hold that view.

Here's an article from yesterday that I rather agree with.

Thanks for pointing out my past position.

 

[JS]

Where is the 60MM coming from? hiking tuition and fees?

Good question.

 

[JS]

JS, when you called me out to make my case about what the NCAA could do and would do, my response included the thought that there would be some behind-the-scenes form of plea bargaining as a means of bringing closure to this matter.

I think I also said something about vacating victories, bowl bans, etc.

Honest, I did not write the script for that NCAA guy today.

You called it from the beginning, Kibitzer.

My hat's off to you.

 

[alexrgct]

My understanding is that the university agreed to this ahead of time, and Penn State's AD isn't being funded by the state of Pennsylvania. This has no direct impact on education funding. Indirectly, donations to a school's general fund often increase when the big-time athletic programs are doing well.

Penn State is going to suck at football for years. Not sure whether it's worse than the death penality, especially as imposed on SMU, but certainly very damaging.
Time to get behind the WBB program. Excellent coach, promising team.

This is a completely false statement:

And no obvious competitive advantage was gained by the cover-up of criminal activity.

That's exactly what it did. Penn State didn't purge itself of Sandusky and report him to the police in large part because they didn't want to tarnish their brand or hurt their recruiting, their donations, and other sources of CFB-driven revenue. This had to happen, and quickly. Don't cover up vile criminal behavior because you're worried about how it will hurt your program.

 

[DudleyDoRight]

$60 million is the amount the football program took in last year...they should look to pay it with the football program money.

Where is the 60MM coming from? hiking tuition and fees?

 

[trisailin]

Emmert stated very specifically that PSU was NOT to draw the money from other (non-revenue producing) sports programs or from either football scholarship funds or, most important, academic programs.

Since money is fungible, that doesn't mean anything in the real world. Left pocket money vs. right pocket money.

 

[alexrgct]

Penn State's AD was profitable to the tune of $31 million last year. This isn't coming from tax hikes. Big-time college football makes big-time money. That's why Penn State harbored and enabled a sexual predator rather than risk any of it.

 

[Icebear]

The money is the least of the issues for a University with 1.59 Billion in endowment and in the Top 50 nationally and who received 200 million in giving from the largest alumni organization in the world in its most recent drive after the scandal. The 60 million represents less than two years of PSU's revenue from the Big 10 and athletics.

The vacated victories are a joke because one can not undo history. Every time Eddie Robinson or Bobby Bowden's name is mentioned people will remember that is only because of clerical manipulation of the record book that he is being interviewed, not because he won the most games. Every player who played in those games knows exactly who won no matter what the NCAA or anyone else says. Sports are fought on the field and those games were won under under the rules of competition.

I do debate whether this is symantically different from the death penalty because of the expectations of the type of ball players and coaches PSU recruits 4 years of no bowls is a huge disencentive for those players. The present players are allowed to transfer immediately without sitting out which means present talent goes. 25 cut to 15 schoarships per year means it is hard to replace those players even with bodies, let alone 4 star talent. It will now be unlikely that Bill O'Brien or his excellent staff will now remain. So it is likely in effect the death penalty anyway.

My concern at this point is what is getting swept under the rug to do this all so quickly so that we can "move on." Alumni are already furious with President Ericson's failure to act more aggressively to defend the reputation of the university, over against the, specifically, finite and limited actions of less than a handful of people in the university and a similar number in the community including law enforcement and legal authorities who took no definitive action to stop Jerry Sandusky.

Why do the unversity and the NCAA want this to go away so quickly. We have not even gotten to the trials of the two central administrative figures in this whole mess for which PSU is being punished, let alone had any charges against President Spanier or hard direct evidence against Joe Paterno. If this is now considered over and done because of the scope of the penalty against Penn State will there be too much satisfaction to finish the real issues of investigating the culpability of the board of Second Mile and the role of the governor in slow boating the investigation because it wasn't good for his election goals. My point is this should not be the end of holding those personally accountable for the events just because we have punished the university.

Why didn't the NCAA ask for an orderly resignation of all of the members of the Board of Trustees?

The NCAA's actions are essentionally one thing, CYA for themselves and the administration.

 

[UConnChapette]

Glad they are allowing the FB players to transfer without the requirement of sitting out a year. This goes a long way in being as fair as possible to the student athletes while still punishing the program in a way that makes a firm statement.

However, with football camps slated to begin in a couple of weeks, how many players who may choose to transfer will find "room at the inn" without impacting existing scholarship players at another program?

 

[Icebear]

However, with football camps slated to begin in a couple of weeks, how many players who may choose to transfer will find "room at the inn" without impacting existing scholarship players at another program?

That is a pertinent question for controlling the ripple effect.

 

[meyers7]

He rebutted that argument clearly and strongly. I don't recall his exact wording, but basically it was "this is definitely under our jurisdiction."

I believe he is incorrect.

 

[johnnyc]

Why do the unversity and the NCAA want this to go away so quickly. We have not even gotten to the trials of the two central administrative figures in this whole mess for which PSU is being punished, let alone had any charges against President Spanier or hard direct evidence against Joe Paterno. If this is now considered over and done because of the scope of the penalty against Penn State will there be too much satisfaction to finish the real issues of investigating the culpability of the board of Second Mile and the role of the governor in slow boating the investigation because it wasn't good for his election goals. My point is this should not be the end of holding those personally accountable for the events just because we have punished the university

At about the 3:41 mark this is addressed.....


http://espn.go.com/new-york/ncf/sto...million-fine-4-year-bowl-ban-wins-dating-1998

 

[JS]

This is a completely false statement:

And no obvious competitive advantage was gained by the cover-up of criminal activity.

That's exactly what it did. Penn State didn't purge itself of Sandusky and report him to the police in large part because they didn't want to tarnish their brand or hurt their recruiting, their donations, and other sources of CFB-driven revenue.

Disagree it's "completely false." Bit of semantics here, perhaps, but I see what the author is saying.

Avoiding a competitive disadvantage (harm to recruiting, revenues etc.) isn't the same as gaining a competitive advantage, unless you're talking about an advantage vis-a-vis all those other schools that have predatory pedophiles in their midst and turn them in.