Why no talk of death penalty for Penn State?

[upstater]

I know you are an intelligent person, so I know you understand that is not even remotely what I posted.

But, I'm pretty sure I know why you post such crap.

Has this episode done anything to diminish the culture at Penn State that allowed this travesty to be perpetuated? For that matter, has it done anything to impact the insular, win at all cost culture at other college football factories?

We don't share the same starting point in this discussion. You think the culture of football allowed this to be perpetrated. I think it's a bigger cultural problem. Don't know how many times I have to say this but the PSU president is twice guilty when it comes to child abuse on campus. In the other instance, it had nothing to do with football. There's a much bigger picture.

 

[uconndogs]

You accused me in your previous post of being myopic for blaming football for what happened.....and I quote;

"Saying this happened because of football does...(sic...make you myopic)".

Your quote.

Why would I waste any more time than I already have responding to posts like that?

 

[Jimdish255]

You have to establish first that this is just a football thing and not societal. We see it in the Catholic Church, at other schools, and even at PSU when it doesn't deal with football. Someone asked in this thread if the same thing would have happened if it had been a professor rather than a football coach. And the answer is, most probably, since there's a case against a PSU professor that wasn't reported, and which the PSU President responded to with CYA.

Jerry Sandusky was not a professor. And if he was I'll bet certain sanctions might be applicable for the department that allowed/enabled/covered up his activities. But as we all know the institution itself is one of learning and academics at it's core. That's why you don't shut it down due to the actions of one or few men or women. The same reason you don't go burning Bibles or Korans because of the contrary actions of a Priest or Imam.

But football is not the reason for being that academics is. When it rises to the level where protecting it threatens the reputation of the entire University and the ethical functioning of it's leadership, it then becomes expendible. Or at least it becomes a great enough liability that it can be curtailed or even shut down for a period of time. Equating the 2 is off base especially when one seeks to teach kids and the other has become a profit center.

I keep hearing that football should have some sort of immunity from actions taken on their properties with knowledge or implied consent because it might inconvenience a few athletes or piss off their fan base. I don't get it and frankly it's the exact mindset that paved the way for this whole scenario to take place.

 

[upstater]

You accused me in your previous post of being myopic for blaming football for what happened.....and I quote;

"Saying this happened because of football does...(sic...make you myopic)".

Your quote.

Why would I waste any more time than I already have responding to posts like that?

I stand by what I wrote though I think we're having a miscommunication on what the this is. You wrote that the culture of football allowed child assault to happen. That's what I'm referring to.

 

[upstater]

Jerry Sandusky was not a professor. And if he was I'll bet certain sanctions might be applicable for the department that allowed/enabled/covered up his activities. But as we all know the institution itself is one of learning and academics at it's core. That's why you don't shut it down due to the actions of one or few men or women. The same reason you don't go burning Bibles or Korans because of the contrary actions of a Priest or Imam.

But football is not the reason for being that academics is. When it rises to the level where protecting it threatens the reputation of the entire University and the ethical functioning of it's leadership, it then becomes expendible. Or at least it becomes a great enough liability that it can be curtailed or even shut down for a period of time. Equating the 2 is off base especially when one seeks to teach kids and the other has become a profit center.

I keep hearing that football should have some sort of immunity from actions taken on their properties with knowledge or implied consent because it might inconvenience a few athletes or piss off their fan base. I don't get it and frankly it's the exact mindset that paved the way for this whole scenario to take place.

You can't assume that department allowed/enabled/covered up the professor's activities, and if it had, I too question what sanctions you could apply. I can't even imagine it other than firing whoever was derelict in their duties.

Profit center? Too much is made of totally non-existent profits. Practically nothing is transferred to the academic side. I equate the two because someone asked. Someone in the thread said this wouldn't have happened if it was a professor raping children. Unfortunately, at PSU, that's not a hypothetical comparison. Nor is it uncommon in the Big10 as Michigan just had a case this year. The point is, PSU's leadership dropped the ball at least twice in these matters. This is why I'm saying the issue is bigger than simply preserving the reputation of football, especially since Sandusky was reported in 1998 when he was still coach.

As for your last paragraph, you didn't hear that from me, and my objections have been clearly spelled out.
1. I don't think PSU should destroy its facilities and rebuild them.
2. I don't think the NCAA has any business legislating how schools deal with reports of child molestation.
3. I don't think recruits should be denigrated for going to PSU.

 

[uconndogs]

You wrote that the culture of football allowed child assault to happen.

NO I DID NOT! I wrote the culture of college football at Penn State allowed the atrocity to go on. There's a huge difference.

I'm out............

 

[CL82]

I don't see it. I'm all for penalties, but I think in this case, what actually happened is so far beyond that a penalty is not a deterrent. It's like capital punishment. Is it really there to dissuade people from killing?

The capital punishment does two things very well. It prevents recidivism and it fills a societal need for punishment. The death penalty, or some other significant sanction, here would serve the same functions.

I thought Biz Law was spot on in his comment. Sometimes you need to change the economic cost to dissuade people or institutions from undesirable actions. The Ford Pinto gas tank clamps case is an oft cited example of how this can be done. Ford decided that it was more cost effective to periodically pay off on wrongful death suits from a poor design rather than to improve the design, which met federal standards then in place. They lost in court and had to pay huge damages that caused the industry to rethink its approach to safety. If it’s true that university officials put institutional reputation ahead of the well being of children, a similar result is warranted to change the risk/reward calculus of that action.

 

[upstater]

NO I DID NOT! I wrote the culture of college football at Penn State allowed the atrocity to go on. There's a huge difference.

I'm out............

Has this episode done anything to diminish the culture at Penn State that allowed this travesty to be perpetuated? For that matter, has it done anything to impact the insular, win at all cost culture at other college football factories?

Next time maybe if you want to limit this to PSU you should write sentences that limit this to PSU.

 

[upstater]

The capital punishment does two things very well. It prevents recidivism and it fills a societal need for punishment. The death penalty, or some other significant sanction, here would serve the same functions.

I thought Biz Law was spot on in his comment. Sometimes you need to change the economic cost to dissuade people or institutions from undesirable actions. The Ford Pinto gas tank clamps case is an oft cited example of how this can be done. Ford decided that it was more cost effective to periodically pay off on wrongful death suits from a poor design rather than to improve the design, which met federal standards then in place. They lost in court and had to pay huge damages that caused the industry to rethink its approach to safety. If it’s true that university officials put institutional reputation ahead of the well being of children, a similar result is warranted to change the risk/reward calculus of that action.

All these are debatable, and that's what we're doing. Do you agree there are debates about societal need for punishment? This has been a debate since the start of disciplining criminals. But, instead of going off into Foprd Pintos and the history of incarceration/rehab, etc., let's be more specific to PSU. I've objected to about 3 of the proposals made by posters so far. I'm still open to seeing what might be suggested if the emails are found to implicate the 3 PSU administrators. The word "humane" in one of the emails seems to implicate them already, but I'd rather see the whole context.

 

[ZooCougar]

NO I DID NOT! I wrote the culture of college football at Penn State allowed the atrocity to go on. There's a huge difference.

I'm out............

Exactly. If the Track and Field Asst Coach did this or even an Associate Professor, this would have been taken care of ages ago and maybe the number of victims could have been smaller.

I don't think it's fair to damn all of PSU, but there sure does seem to be alot of grown ups who failed to do the responsible thing. PSU may be a big place, but it still is a fish bowl. You can't get me to believe that nobody could have done anything...

The Civil Suits will be telling.

 

[Jimdish255]

1. I don't think PSU should destroy its facilities and rebuild them.
2. I don't think the NCAA has any business legislating how schools deal with reports of child molestation.
3. I don't think recruits should be denigrated for going to PSU.

I don't disagree with any of the three points but on point #2 they sanction football teams for academic performance (further proof that academics are supposed to trump athletics). If they can do that they can sanction for criminal negligence, cover-ups and as I suggested possible knowledge of or implicit consent related to certain activities. "Legislate" is a loaded term but how about "legislating" that they not cover up possible criminal activity done in their football facilities? The mounting evidence, while not all in yet may get to that point. I couldn't care less what they do to the porcelain.

 

[upstater]

Exactly. If the Track and Field Asst Coach did this or even an Associate Professor, this would have been taken care of ages ago and maybe the number of victims could have been smaller.

I don't think it's fair to damn all of PSU, but there sure does seem to be alot of grown ups who failed to do the responsible thing. PSU may be a big place, but it still is a fish bowl. You can't get me to believe that nobody could have done anything...

The Civil Suits will be telling.

I don't know how many times I have to say it, but a Physics professor did even worse, and it wasn't taken care of as you imagine.

 

[ZooCougar]

I don't know how many times I have to say it, but a Physics professor did even worse, and it wasn't taken care of as you imagine.

That doesn't speak well for Penn State then. Maybe it really is cess pool.

 

[upstater]

I don't disagree with any of the three points but on point #2 they sanction football teams for academic performance (further proof that academics are supposed to trump athletics). If they can do that they can sanction for criminal negligence, cover-ups and as I suggested possible knowledge of or implicit consent related to certain activities. "Legislate" is a loaded term but how about "legislating" that they not cover up possible criminal activity done in their football facilities? The mounting evidence, while not all in yet may get to that point. I couldn't care less what they do to the porcelain.

In any university, there should be procedures either through campus police or human resources as to how to deal with this stuff. The idea that the NCAA could somehow establish guidelines for universities nationally seems farfetched. I wouldn't want those bumpkins anywhere near this sort of thing. Let them stick to sports where the damage they cause is limited. If they want to fine them, then OK.

By the way, I don't think the NCAA becomes that involved in academics issues at all. Witness North Carolina. The bans there have nothing to do with the academic scandal, only the money scandal.

 

[upstater]

That doesn't speak well for Penn State then. Maybe it really is cess pool.

The President, Graham Spanier, when presented with an audiotape of the professor emeritus admitting this, told the victim he didn't want the tape. Nothing was done. But, the same thing turned up at Michigan involving a BioMed professor, and as we saw with Syracuse and Fine. I think this has a lot to do with people not wanting to know, being in CYA mode, or not knowing how to handle it.

 

[Palatine]

Take a step back. Sandusky was running a pedophile factory disguised as a youth foundation built on Penn State's reputation. If coaches and administrators didn't know what was happening it was through denial or willful blindness. There is evidence that many folks knew the score. They went along because no one was willing to rock the boat not even JoPa.

The university, and in my opinion the NCAA, needs to show that this snake pit and the tacit compliance of the football program, athletic program and adminstration that went along with it is not acceptable. Forget precedence, there is NONE.

 

[ZooCougar]

No, we are talking about Penn State here. This is the place that let Sandusky keep coming back to campus to use facilities to assault children. There were plenty of indications that that something was amiss. Even if they had no proof, all they had to do was tell him that he was no longer welcome and that his priveleges were revoked.

This is about a bunch of old men with intertwined reputations. When does it seem right to the wrong thing? When it's in their best interests to do so apparently. They chose to leave that stone unturned. It's really not that complicated.

 

[upstater]

No, we are talking about Penn State here. This is the place that let Sandusky keep coming back to campus to use facilities to assault children. There were plenty of indications that that something was amiss. Even if they had no proof, all they had to do was tell him that he was no longer welcome and that his priveleges were revoked.

This is about a bunch of old men with intertwined reputations. When does it seem right to the wrong thing? When it's in their best interests to do so apparently. They chose to leave that stone unturned. It's really not that complicated.

Is someone defending Sandusky and the people in charge here?

 

[upstater]

Take a step back. Sandusky was running a pedophile factory disguised as a youth foundation built on Penn State's reputation. If coaches and administrators didn't know what was happening it was through denial or willful blindness. There is evidence that many folks knew the score. They went along because no one was willing to rock the boat not even JoPa.

The university, and in my opinion the NCAA, needs to show that this snake pit and the tacit compliance of the football program, athletic program and adminstration that went along with it is not acceptable. Forget precedence, there is NONE.

Yes, I'm defending Sandusky's right to run a pedophile factory here.

 

[ZooCougar]

Is someone defending Sandusky and the people in charge here?

Pennstater,

Only you would know...

 

[BlueMAB]

There should be many more people facing prosecution than Sandusky, starting with his wife, and any "executive" administrator at PSU that knew of this and did nothing.

That said, other than out of spite, I don't know why anyone thinks the athletes who had absolutely nothing to do with this should be punished. Not a single player on our men's basketball team was around when the team was getting poor grades, but they all have to sit out the NCAA/Big East tourneys because of mistakes made by others. It would surprise to me to find out that any UConn fan would wish the same "justice" on other student athletes. I'll never understand why the NCAA, or anyone else, would think taking opportunities away (through post season play or even worse, scholarships) from innocent athletes is a just punishment for the behavior of others.

 

[upstater]

Pennstater,

Only you would know...

Good give and take. Learn so much here

 

[noeynox]

Upstater, it really does seem this was kept quiet to protect the football program somehow. The notion that this was kept hush hush by so many adult professionals because it would be "inhumane" to turn Sandusky in to police just doesn't jive. Where was the concern for inhumane treatment for the kids. This Penn State thing is the saddest thing I could think off when it comes to college sports, but even still I don't think it should merit the death penalty of the program.

Im just hoping the victims and their families are made really, really financially whole, and that others besides Sandusky be brought to justice in this.

 

[upstater]

Upstater, it really does seem this was kept quiet to protect the football program somehow. The notion that this was kept hush hush by so many adult professionals because it would be "inhumane" to turn Sandusky in to police just doesn't jive. Where was the concern for inhumane treatment for the kids. This Penn State thing is the saddest thing I could think off when it comes to college sports, but even still I don't think it should merit the death penalty of the program.

Im just hoping the victims and their families are made really, really financially whole, and that others besides Sandusky be brought to justice in this.

No doubt the administrators blew it. But since the admionistrators blew it with regard to non-football incidents as well, and they reported Sandusky in 1998, I would enlarge the scope of concern. Note: I'm not talking about the football people since the football people were not in the 1998 report. But it was the same administrator, Schultz, in 1998 who reported Sandusky. I want to know what the President said to these people in 2001 that made the final decisions so different. It seems we're about to find out the answers.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

There should be many more people facing prosecution than Sandusky, starting with his wife, and any "executive" administrator at PSU that knew of this and did nothing.

That said, other than out of spite, I don't know why anyone thinks the athletes who had absolutely nothing to do with this should be punished. Not a single player on our men's basketball team was around when the team was getting poor grades, but they all have to sit out the NCAA/Big East tourneys because of mistakes made by others. It would surprise to me to find out that any UConn fan would wish the same "justice" on other student athletes. I'll never understand why the NCAA, or anyone else, would think taking opportunities away (through post season play or even worse, scholarships) from innocent athletes is a just punishment for the behavior of others.

Because if they don't do that, there is no incentive for any program to ever abide by any rules. What about the athletes at schools that didn't condone child rape? Why should Penn State get away scot free when all these other programs played by the rules?

The athletes can transfer immediately, without penalty, if a school is hit with severe sanctions, so let them transfer. Likewise, their departure creates opportunities for other athletes who might not have ever gotten the chance to play at Penn State.