The actual NCAA penalties for PSU | Page 5 | The Boneyard

The actual NCAA penalties for PSU

Status
Not open for further replies.
NHUConnfan said:
Innocent people get punished all of the time. When someone's murdered, the victim's family is punished for the rest of their life.
Expand ...

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

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2
 
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.
 
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.
 
businesslawyer said:
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.
Expand ...

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.
 
I'm with Mattp. If they wanted to change the culture, they needed a longer penalty. It could have been less harsh in terms of the fine and the scholarship reductions, but loss of postseason play would have taken the enthusiasm out of football -- it just needed to do that long enough to make a difference in the personnel and attitudes of fans and PSU people.
 
.-.
mattp said:
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.
Expand ...

The reason USC is a top 5 team is because they didn't lose their best recruits. I don't care what people say...yeah they lost recruits, but the moment that Matt Barkley decided to stay on that team, they were able to retain top recruits and still get top recruits during the bowl ban. Had they lost Matt Barkley, I'd say there is a good possibility that USC would not have been able to keep their good recruits and probably future recruiting would have suffered.

And maybe it seems crazy to pin USC's success on one guy, but everyone has to remember he was the #1 recruit in his year and surely will be a top 10, if not top 5 pick in next year's NFL draft. I don't think it's that crazy.

PSU won't be able to do this because they're going to lose a whole generation of recruits. And PSU never could recruit the caliber of player that USC has been able to for years. PSU recruits a lot of very very good players, but USC gets elite players. To draw the comparison between the two schools is crazy IMO.
 
I think PSU and USC are completely different... the penalty for PSU is longer and cuts deeper. You're talking Southern California vs. the middle of no where Pennsylvania, far less severe penalties, and Penn State hasn't been a top 5 or even top 10 program for the last few years. I think this hurts them pretty deeply. I don't think they'll be allowed to recruit right back up to 85 in one year either... this will have ramifications that will hurt them for two or three years after the penalty has ended....
 
PSU won't be USC after their penalty, but they weren't USC before the penalty. i do think PSU football in 6-7 years will look just like PSU football did over the last few on the field, which is a notch below the Ohio State's and USC's of the world
 
USC won the lottery when Matt Barkley decided to go there despite the bowl ban, and decided to stay this year past the bowl ban when he would've been a top 5 pick. The NCAA is not in the business of telling recruits where they can and can't go and how long they're allowed to stay there.
 
brasssbonanzaa said:
USC won the lottery when Matt Barkley decided to go there despite the bowl ban, and decided to stay this year past the bowl ban when he would've been a top 5 pick. The NCAA is not in the business of telling recruits where they can and can't go and how long they're allowed to stay there.
Expand ...

Do you think that Barkley would have stayed if the "violation" had been child molestation and a related cover-up? In the scheme of things, the USC violations were nothing compared to what has gone on at PSU.
 
The actual punishments for PSU are not worse than the death penalty. I'm getting more than a little tired of hearing this narrative being pushed by certain media outlets. On what planet are these sanctions worse than shutting down the entire program?
 
.-.
And by the way, on another side note.....after watching the students' reaction to the sanctions being announced and seeing the countless others still bowing to the empty Paterno statue....I'm feeling a lot less sympathy for all of the "innocents" in all of this.
 
FAIRTIDES said:
Do you think that Barkley would have stayed if the "violation" had been child molestation and a related cover-up? In the scheme of things, the USC violations were nothing compared to what has gone on at PSU.
Expand ...
Highly unlikely he would've ever shown up, in my opinion, though we'll never know.
 
FAIRTIDES said:
Do you think that Barkley would have stayed if the "violation" had been child molestation and a related cover-up? In the scheme of things, the USC violations were nothing compared to what has gone on at PSU.
Expand ...

Wasn't Penn State having a great year in recruiting?
 
brasssbonanzaa said:
Highly unlikely he would've ever shown up, in my opinion, though we'll never know.
Expand ...

From what I have read, two 4*s have backed out already. One to UNC( glutton for punishment?) and the other, probably, to cuse.
 
Timing was also key. USC loaded up i January before the scholarship reductions took effect. Their bowl ban only really affected one recruiting class.

Plus, they are likely still cheating. No, culture change that I can see. Maybe, no more condos for Mom's.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2
 
.-.
The NCAA released this today, making it ridiculously easy for any current PSU player or recruit to transfer: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/20120723/21207234

They decided, among other things, to allow for any school that wants a current PSU player for this year to temporarily go above the scholarship limit, so long as they reduce that scholarship number back to normal for 13-14. Also no restriction on contact, so it's basically a free agency market.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,305
Messages
4,562,308
Members
10,455
Latest member
caw2


Top Bottom