Should Penn State get the death penalty?

• WebFire

  se-alum;1231536 wrote:The only competitive advantage I see is maybe the one year Sandusky coached after the initial investigation in 1998. I've heard some say that players would've transferred or committed to other schools had they known about Sandusky, but there's no way to say definitively that it would've happened. I don't think you can say something is a competitive advantage without being able to actually prove it would've happened.

  You can't prove anything that has to do with competitive advantage.
• LJ

  

  Pick6;1231511 wrote:I disagree. If the problem were reported when it was made aware, I dont see the NCAA doing anything. The cover up is why Penn State is getting this.

  But even then, the cover up is not within the NCAA Bylaws. The cover up ultimately happened at the top.
• WebFire

  LJ;1231548 wrote:But even then, the cover up is not within the NCAA Bylaws. The cover up ultimately happened at the top.

  The cover up involved people in the athletic department and protected an athletic team. Sounds right up the NCAA's alley to me.
• LJ

  

  WebFire;1231551 wrote:The cover up involved people in the athletic department and protected an athletic team. Sounds right up the NCAA's alley to me.

  
  To use a term the NCAA coined, how can this not represent a Lack of Institutional Control? Because it doesn't -- at least not in the NCAA sense. It is a case of a university having too much control. It is a case of a massive abuse of power with horrific consequences, and the perpetrators of that abuse of power deserve jail time. It is not a case of broken NCAA bylaws, though.
  
  Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andy_staples/07/02/penn-state-jerry-sandusky-ncaa/index.html#ixzz21SGVY3hv
  

  2. This is not the NCAA's job.
  
  My friend, colleague and eating machine Andy Staples eloquently pointed this out earlier this month: The NCAA exists to enforce NCAA rules. Often, the NCAA doesn't even do that, either through willful disregard, a good-old-administrators network, understaffing or a lack of subpoena power. But when NCAA rules are broken, it is the NCAA's job to determine a penalty. If the NCAA doesn't do that, nobody will.
  
  This is different. Laws were broken. Most of the key perpetrators are either in jail (Jerry Sandusky); in danger of going to jail (former athletic director Tim Curley, former vice president Gary Schultz, and possibly former president Graham Spanier, though Spanier has not been charged); or dead (Paterno). Former assistant coach Mike McQueary, who witnessed Sandusky assaulting one boy and reported it to his bosses, will probably lose his career. They will all be forever associated with this scandal.
  
  NCAA sanctions are largely symbolic -- they are supposed to embarrass a university. Well, in the public's mind, Penn State will mean "child rape scandal" for many years. I think the school is pretty well covered on the public-embarrassment front.

  
  
  Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/michael_rosenberg/07/19/penn-state-death-penalty/index.html#ixzz21SGK4C8v
  
  
  @schadjoe: NCAA experts keep saying the PSU situation is outside NCAA bylaws and the Emmert doesn't presently have autonomy to level penalties
  
  @schadjoe: The NCAA is exploring all options including unprecedented ones to due uniqueness of PSU case .
• se-alum

  

  WebFire;1231546 wrote:You can't prove anything that has to do with competitive advantage.

  What I mean is, you can make a direct correlation for the most part. Having TP play when he should've been suspended gives OSU a competitive advantage over having to start one of his backups. Had PSU investigated Sandusky, then subsequently fired him, I don't think you could say players would've transferred or decommitted. Maybe they would have, maybe not, there's no way to know. They would've still had Paterno there, and he WAS Penn State football.
• isadore

  gosh maybe you should remember who jerry was, beside Joe he was the face of psu at linebacker u. he was the expected successor. showing someone this important in the program was a child molestor in 1998 would have definitely hurt the program
  And then after that joe and the gang were committed to program, and sandusky being caught would have shown a coverup going back to 98.
• Glassy

  

  Ped State swept this stuff under the rug for 14 years to protect their image. At some point, if it was truly investigated and self reported, it WOULD have had a negative impact on both the school and the football program. Would that have impacted the on field performance through the loss of recruits and blue chip players? Probably so.
  
  Obviously Joe Pa had a tremendous amount of involvement in the cover up over the past 14 years. That is why the NCAA trusted the Freesh report and acted so quickly.
  
  I think Ped State truly thought the "death penalty" was going to be handed down as they completely agreed to this punishment and will not be appealing it.
• BigAppleBuckeye

  

  With Penn State and Ohio State both with bowl bans next season, wow are the New Years Day bowl matchups going to be UGLY. Can you say LSU-Northwestern? Auburn-Minnesota? I guess Nebraska will help a bit ...
• Tiernan

  This is more devastating than the Death Penalty. With the DP you go away for a year, lick your wounds, stay out of the weekly CFB media storm and come back ready to work. I'm loving how this will result in a weekly embarrassmnet for Pedo State as they prepare for every regular season game and the whole mess gets regurgitated every week. Paterno got off easy dying of lung cancer.
• LJ

  

  Had Penn State not wanted to play ball, Emmert was not authorized to unilaterally impose punishments.—
  John Infante (@John_Infante) July 23, 2012
• se-alum

  

  LJ;1231592 wrote:Had Penn State not wanted to play ball, Emmert was not authorized to unilaterally impose punishments.—
  John Infante (@John_Infante) July 23, 2012

  Makes you wonder what PSU's end game was for allowing the NCAA to hand down sanctions? They should've self imposed, and kept the NCAA out of it.
• Fly4Fun

  

  se-alum;1231602 wrote:Makes you wonder what PSU's end game was for allowing the NCAA to hand down sanctions? They should've self imposed, and kept the NCAA out of it.

  Probably to begin the healing process. I'm not well read on the NCAA rule book, but for the purposes of this post let's assume that the NCAA truly had no authority to hand down any punishments in regards to this situation. Penn State does begin to shame itself and accept responsibility for allowing their football program to essentially run the school as the most important asset of the University. By accepting penalties directly related to the football program they are showing those paying attention that they are not trying to dance around this situation because of the letter of the law but are doing the responsible thing. It's likely there would be even worse ill-will towards PSU's future football teams if they were never punished. This helps people potentially put it aside and focus on the sports and not the fact that many believe PSU skated by not receiving any football related punishments.