The actual NCAA penalties for PSU

[nelsonmuntz]

Time for your nap Waylon...you're getting cranky.

The point is, of course innocents will feel pain when an institution is punished. That does not mean we should not punish institutions.

 

[HuskyHawk]

If they make PSU return bowl revenues going back to 1998, that's a huge penalty. Other than that, it's a shot at Paterno, and a way to knock him off as the all-time wins leader.

How can they? What legal right does the NCAA or the B1G have to ask for that money back? None. They don't have any claim to the $60M either, except via a threat to remove Penn St. from NCAA membership. That would be a dicey proposition if they tried it by the way, since there's not a university in the land that doesn't have some baggage. UConn used to have a high rate of rapes on campus (dark, quiet, insufficient lighting, no call boxes). UConn was pretty obviously negligent in that regard during my time, and only addressed it much later.

I think the NCAA and B1G pushed this about as far as they could without having PSU push back. This is a state institution, and has a plausible claim to sovereign immunity.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The point is, of course innocents will feel pain when an institution is punished. That does not mean we should not punish institutions.

No, but it does mean that you exercise maximum discretion in applying the punishment and minimize the damage to those who did nothing wrong. Which, by the way, includes not just the current team, but probably every player on every Penn St. football team. Many of whom were proud of their very real accomplishments that have now been tarnished.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

No, but it does mean that you exercise maximum discretion in applying the punishment and minimize the damage to those who did nothing wrong. Which, by the way, includes not just the current team, but probably every player on every Penn St. football team. Many of whom were proud of their very real accomplishments that have now been tarnished.

Former players aren't going to be a concern when assessing a penalty, because they're not going to experience any direct effect of that penalty. Current players, had the 12-13 season been nixed, would have been severely negatively affected by it, since they wouldn't have been able to transfer and would be forced not to play for a year. That's not acceptable collateral damage.

 

[SubbaBub]

Still, this made me laugh.

NOT SportsCenter, satirical website: Penn State now has 0 wins since 1998, a 4 year bowl ban, 20 fewer scholarships/year next 4 years. The NCAA just turned #PSU into Notre Dame.

 

[Jimdish255]

I still tbink they have 10 fewer schollys each year wbich leaves them a maximum of 60 in year 4. That's. Before transfers injuries or eligibility issues. If they have to get down to 60 in year 1 and graduations plus 15 recruits doesnt get them there, do they need transfers to aviod pulling schollys? Or am I just obsessing?

 

[BlueMAB]

Pot meet kettle.

You obviously missed my apology and explanation. Shocking.

That's my bad. I didn't mean to use the quotes to imply I was quoting you, I meant to use the quotes to say you were implying you expected him to be replaced. Whether you'll admit it or not, your tone and posts clearly imply that you don't expect him to be the starter by the end of the year, and not due to injury. I failed to get that across, and that was my mistake, so I apologize.

That said, you are childish, you were deflecting, and you were playing the victim for no reason. Grow up.

 

[BlueMAB]

The word got out. The last graphic I saw on ESPN changed FBS to D-1 and added Eddie Robinson.

Ok, my bad. I didn't have ESPN on, I was just referring to the posts in the thread.

 

[NHUConnfan]

The point is, of course innocents will feel pain when an institution is punished. That does not mean we should not punish institutions.

Innocent people get punished all of the time. When someone's murdered, the victim's family is punished for the rest of their life.

 

[BlueMAB]

The point is, of course innocents will feel pain when an institution is punished. That does not mean we should not punish institutions.

Indirect collateral damage is inevitable. That's not what you propose. You propose intentionally punishing not only innocent people, but people who aren't even associated with the football program. Intentionally and directly punishing the baseball team for the transgressions of the football program, AD, and president is a joke.

If your logic held, you would keep our women's team out of the NCAA tournament this year because they play the same sport, on the same courts as the men team. It's not enough to punish the innocent players on the current team, let's go after other teams to make sure academics are taken seriously, right?

And once again, NOBODY, has said let's not punish the institution. Do us all a favor and just change your handle to "StrawmanMuntz". That way whenever someone new joins the board they'll already know what to expect.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

Indirect collateral damage is inevitable. That's not what you propose. You propose intentionally punishing not only innocent people, but people who aren't even associated with the football program. Intentionally and directly punishing the baseball team for the transgressions of the football program, AD, and president is a Fecunditying joke.

If your logic held, you would keep our women's team out of the NCAA tournament this year because they play the same sport, on the same courts as the men team. It's not enough to punish the innocent players on the current team, let's go after other teams to make sure academics are taken seriously, right?

And once again, NOBODY, has said let's not punish the institution. Do us all a favor and just change your handle to "StrawmanMuntz". That way whenever someone new joins the board they'll already know what to expect.

This. The penalties issued today were just about the best way to punish the university with the fewest possible innocent bystanders affected while still sending a strong message. How Waylon can say the program will be back up at the top of the B1G 2-3 years after the four year period is absolutely beyond me.

Be careful, you'll now be a PSU fan and apologist and will defend what PSU did.

 

[BlueMAB]

This. The penalties issued today were just about the best way to punish the university with the fewest possible innocent bystanders affected while still sending a strong message. How Waylon can say the program will be back up at the top of the B1G 2-3 years after the four year period is absolutely beyond me.

Be careful, you'll now be a PSU fan and apologist and will defend what PSU did.

Too late. He already claimed I didn't want PSU punished because I had the audacity to question how innocent athletes losing scholarship opportunities provides justice to the victims.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Indirect collateral damage is inevitable. That's not what you propose. You propose intentionally punishing not only innocent people, but people who aren't even associated with the football program. Intentionally and directly punishing the baseball team for the transgressions of the football program, AD, and president is a Fecunditying joke.

If your logic held, you would keep our women's team out of the NCAA tournament this year because they play the same sport, on the same courts as the men team. It's not enough to punish the innocent players on the current team, let's go after other teams to make sure academics are taken seriously, right?

And once again, NOBODY, has said let's not punish the institution. Do us all a favor and just change your handle to "StrawmanMuntz". That way whenever someone new joins the board they'll already know what to expect.

It isn't a strawman when I am repeating what you said. Proposing some outrageous financial penalty on the school also punishes innocents, doesn't it? Any punishment of any part of Penn State will impact innocents, wont it? So that ship has pretty much sailed, unless you don't want to punish the institution.

I am getting worn out pointing out the obvious flaws in your logic. Moving on.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

This. The penalties issued today were just about the best way to punish the university with the fewest possible innocent bystanders affected while still sending a strong message. How Waylon can say the program will be back up at the top of the B1G 2-3 years after the four year period is absolutely beyond me.

Be careful, you'll now be a PSU fan and apologist and will defend what PSU did.

The NCAA should have just said it didn't have jurisdiction and moved on. Penalties today were a joke.

 

[businesslawyer]

How can they? What legal right does the NCAA or the B1G have to ask for that money back? None. They don't have any claim to the $60M either, except via a threat to remove Penn St. from NCAA membership. That would be a dicey proposition if they tried it by the way, since there's not a university in the land that doesn't have some baggage. UConn used to have a high rate of rapes on campus (dark, quiet, insufficient lighting, no call boxes). UConn was pretty obviously negligent in that regard during my time, and only addressed it much later.

I think the NCAA and B1G pushed this about as far as they could without having PSU push back. This is a state institution, and has a plausible claim to sovereign immunity.

Huh? Sovereign immunity would allow you to be an NCAA member over the NCAA's objections?

I wonder why Obama didn't teach that in his Con Law courses.

 

[Dann]

word is breaking that PSU has called Obama and is asking for a bailout to help with the fine the ncaa handed down.

 

[businesslawyer]

This. The penalties issued today were just about the best way to punish the university with the fewest possible innocent bystanders affected while still sending a strong message. How Waylon can say the program will be back up at the top of the B1G 2-3 years after the four year period is absolutely beyond me.

Be careful, you'll now be a PSU fan and apologist and will defend what PSU did.

Well, if I'm now a Syracuse apologist because the PSU situation was different, why shouldn't he be a PSU apologist.

 

[BlueMAB]

It isn't a strawman when I am repeating what you said. Proposing some outrageous financial penalty on the school also punishes innocents, doesn't it? Any punishment of any part of Penn State will impact innocents, wont it? So that ship has pretty much sailed, unless you don't want to punish the institution.

I am getting worn out pointing out the obvious flaws in your logic. Moving on.

I've changed my mind. You aren't pretending, you really are a moron.

I say this because it's not difficult to understand the difference between direct punishment and indirect punishment. Any major fine imposed on the school will eventually negatively impact anyone who attends the school. That's inevitable and unavoidable. It's pretty easy to avoid banning the hockey team from having a season. You just have to let them play. I can live with the loss of scholarships. I'm surprised it wasn't more. I can't understand what type of idiot thinks athletes that aren't even associated with the football program shouldn't be allowed to play. It's so moronic it nauseating.

Again, using your logic, we could take it further and say that all UConn athletic programs should be banned from post season play due to the men's APR scores. Because the innocent will suffer anyway, so why not. It's insulting to the intellgince of a field mouse to make the argument you're making. I'll start caring what you think about my logic when Paterno steps out of the grave and wins another 100+ games.

 

[spsct]

I would say that the NCAA got it about as right as you could. IMO the only innocent bystanders who may get hurt in all of this are the upperclassmen on the football team.

As for them hitting the ground running in 5-6 years, I will be shocked if that happened; I think comparing their situation with that of USC doesn't work.

• If I am correct, the bowl ban at PSU is double that as USC (although I don't know the scholarship reduction comparison).
• USC was and is the shark in the pond over on the west coast; it was USC and then everybody else (but Oregon is making inroads now). PSU is arguably #4 in the pecking order in their own conference. And their recruiting in the Northeast will take a big hit at the worst time possible because of UConn and Rutgers becoming higher profile and other smaller programs perhaps making greater strides.
• USC got nailed for improper benefits. PSU got it for covering up child rape. If I were a self-respecting kid, I would think 2,3,4 times about that before going there. It's a stigma.

Taking the wins since 1998 was just about the only way they could punish Paterno in this hot mess, as if his legacy wasn't tarnished enough (at least for people outside of Happy Valley).

The money is a bit rough, getting fined and losing income. I don't know enough about where the money will come from, so I won't comment on that.

For me the final justice would be seeing a bunch of players leave PSU for someplace like Indiana or Northwestern and watch them curb-stomp PSU for the next 4 years.

 

[Kgun7]

I respectfully disagree. Unlike Nelson, I don't think "Penn State is still Penn State;" at least to those outside Pennsylvania. Parents are going to have a say in the college decision, and many will not wish to pay the highest public school tuition in the country for a tainted institution.

Fair enough. We can revisit this in 10 years and declare the winner - a Ten Penny Ale draft under the scoreboard at halftime at the Rent in 2022.

I won't under estimate the cult mentality of that university anymore ... I've been proven wrong too many times. Did you think kids would line up to get their picture taken in front of Joe Pa's statue? Did you think grown men would cry when Joe Pa's statue came down? How many more former players are going to use the words ... "all because of the actions of one man" ...

As sad as it is to say ... I personally think Penn State has the ability, and will to rebound from this.

 

[Waquoit]

word is breaking that PSU has called Obama and is asking for a bailout to help with the fine the ncaa handed down.

And the answer was no

 

[SubbaBub]

Innocent people get punished all of the time. When someone's murdered, the victim's family is punished for the rest of their life.

They might suffer adversity, but no one is punishing them.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[freescooter]

I don't buy the idea that Penn State will recover quickly from this. It isn't in any way comparable to what USC got. Pretty much beginning next year and going through 2017 season they will be playing with 65 scholarship players. The difference between 65 and 85 is the difference between replacing your top running back if he gets hurt with a true freshman or an experienced junior. You have huge problems with depth, and you almost can't miss on any recruit. You have no leeway. I read some piece that said that Penn State would be able to bring in walk-ons who otherwise would have played in lower D1A programs to fill the gaps, but that assumes A. that there will be no negative fall out, and B. that a guy who was recruited by Ohio is as good as a guy recruited by Ohio State...I doubt that A is true and on the whole I think that B is generally not correct either. And that doesn't even take into consideration the question of whether a kid will turn down a scholarship to UMass to walk on to Penn State. A few might, but the assumption that a whole lot will is a bit of a stretch.

 

[mattp]

i think PSU will stumble for the next few years, but in five years Pennsylvania will still be full of high school kids that want to play football for state U in front of 100k. i think they'll still get decent, albeit smaller recruiting classes for the next few years b/c there's still a lot of kids that want to play there.

many are predicting USC to be a top 5 team this year, so i would call their punishment a hiccup. PSU's will be more than a hiccup, but not much more than a burp. in some ways the school will never be the same, but i don't expect the impact on the field to be anywhere near what some are predicting.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Huh? Sovereign immunity would allow you to be an NCAA member over the NCAA's objections?

I wonder why Obama didn't teach that in his Con Law courses.

I didn't suggest anything of the kind. I merely suggested that the state is immune from many legal actions, and that any effort to recover prior bowl game revenue would likely fail. Which is why membership in the NCAA is the only leverage the NCAA has over the university.