APIAD wrote:

I dont care but I find it hard to believe that so much punishment was handed down to so many that were uninvolved.

That's the way the NCAA works AP.  Because of the turnover among athletes due to graduation or other reasons, it's rare that the offending parties are around by the time the NCAA takes action.

Alz, I disagree that the NCAA wasn't impressed.  These are very significant sanctions.  No post-season for the next four seasons means every single kid currently in that program knows that he won't be playing for anything for the rest of his career.  Each of those kids is also free to see if another school will take him.  If you were on that team, wouldn't you at least consider other options.  And if you were considering Penn State, why would you go to a situation where you wouldn't ever play in a bowl game?

The reduced scholarships is another really big deal.  Not only is the NCAA giving the current talent the option to leave, it limited Penn State's ability to replace the talent.  20 fewer scholarships is a significant problem.

Not to mention the $65M fine which has to come from the football program without any impact on other sports or academics.

I'm not saying Penn State never recovers, but I think there's pretty good chance that the program completely sucks for 10-15 years.  The way college football works, that's a long time.  I'm not suggesting that they will become Utah State, but Penn State will be less relevant than Notre Dame is currently.  That isn't a disaster, but compared to where they are now, that's a pretty big deal.

Maybe, but there's a difference between Penn State and SMU in that football has a much greater tradition at PSU.  Penn State Will place a greater emphasis on football. also, as you point out Penn State plays a much better football conference than did SMU when it resumed football operations.  Once the sanctions are over, I think the football players and money flow into Happy Valley faster than they did at SMU.

Fors, my tone on that was mistaken, my bad. I meant the NCAA wasn't amused. The punishment levied on Penn State is all but crippling. Offering students a free transfer pass is possibly the most devastating. Recruiting will be garbage without scholarships to offer, and nobody will want to spend a majority of their college career playing for a college with no post season possibilities.

I think their running back got calls from every ranked college in the nation according to Mike and Mike, including USC, offering to transfer him. The NCAA basically just turned Penn State into chum bait for every major shark team in the country to poach players from.

Anyone want to take a long term betting pool on how long it is before Penn State lands a 5 star recruit? I'm betting I will be dead before it happens...

Not to defend the terrible judgment exercised at PSU, but the NCAA is hardly a law enforcement body and I'm skeptical of its motives. Like many of the programs under its jurisdiction, it may be at least as corrupt as the one at Penn State and I hope this is more than just making a show by cynically squashing low-hanging fruit. Are they now truly concerned that sports are emphasized to the detriment of the students? Is this the start of a new era of leveraging the clout of football money to rein in athletic departments that appear to have overstepped their boundaries? We'll see.

"The critical role of our football program is clear: it is of vital importance to the entire community - our students, our fans and alumni worldwide and the state of Louisiana. Simply put, success in LSU football is essential for the success of Louisiana State University." - Mark Emmert Nov. 1999

“We cannot look to NCAA history to determine how to handle circumstances so disturbing, shocking and disappointing,† said Emmert. “As the individuals charged with governing college sports, we have a responsibility to act. These events should serve as a call to every single school and athletics department to take an honest look at its campus environment and eradicate the ‘sports are king' mindset that can so dramatically cloud the judgment of educators.† From his Penn State ruling.

If we agree the above is a mindset to be encouraged, and that PSU clearly took it too far, I wonder if and when we'll see other examples to clarify where the line really is.

Last edited by JV (7/26/2012 9:15 am)

forsberg_us wrote:

I think it would be incredibly naive to think that the NCAA has suddenly become a beacon for student well-being.  But in this case, its response was correct regardless of its motivation.

I edited my original post to add Emmert's statements about wanting to encourage institutions to eliminate the "sports are king" mentality. The desire to punish is understandable, but I think it can only have the stated desired effect on other schools if it's followed up by real efforts to diminish the overemphasis on athletics in higher education. And that's something I doubt the NCAA will ever do.

JV wrote:

forsberg_us wrote:

I think it would be incredibly naive to think that the NCAA has suddenly become a beacon for student well-being.  But in this case, its response was correct regardless of its motivation.

I edited my original post to add Emmert's statements about wanting to encourage institutions to eliminate the "sports are king" mentality. The desire to punish is understandable, but I think it can only have the stated desired effect on other schools if it's followed up by real efforts to diminish the overemphasis on athletics in higher education. And that's something I doubt the NCAA will ever do.

It isnt that "Sports are King".  It is that "Money is King".

"What did the Sandusky case have to do with Penn State or college football?"

If I remember correctly, Sandusky's connection with the football program was touted in the Second Chance program or whatever it was called. I'm not sure if the connection was official or not, but Sandusky was granted access to the facilities at Penn State.

Last edited by artie_fufkin (7/26/2012 10:24 am)

artie_fufkin wrote:

"What did the Sandusky case have to do with Penn State or college football?"

If I remember correctly, Sandusky's connection with the football program was touted in the Second Chance program or whatever it was called. I'm not sure if the connection was official or not, but Sandusky was granted access to the facilities at Penn State.

My knowledge of that part of it isnt great either but it was my understanding is that he was able to keep an office at the facility when he wasnt employed for the purpose of his "program".  Clearly he had the kids around the college.  So he used his position while employed and unemployed to do his evil.  It isnt like Penn State hire him for that purpose.  I dont really know what I am saying.  I guess I am just having a hard time believing that it really matters that a college is punished because of the seperate acts of Sandusky and the legacy/arrogance of Paterno.  Those people made criminal mistakes.

"What did the Sandusky case have to do with Penn State or college football?"

Penn State football became the lure Sandusky used to attract his victims. 

I'm not sure how much you've followed the story or whether you read the Freeh report, but the short version is that in 1998, when Sandusky still worked for Penn State, a mother reported that Sandusky had showered in the football locker room with her son.  It was later discovered that Sandusky had also showered with a second boy.  Following an investigation, it was determined that Sandusky may have acted inappropriately, but that no criminal conduct occurred. 

After 1998, and even after he resigned from Penn State, Sandusky continued to invite young boys to football games, to stand on the sidelines during practice, to hang out in the locker room.  Pateno and other University leaders knew about the allegations from 1998, but still allowed Sandusky full access to all parts of the facility, including private areas.  At a minimum, his access should have been restricted to public areas or restricted access areas when others were present.

Then in 2001, McQueary reports the incident he witnessed in the shower and Paterno and the school leaders go into full blown PR mode.  According to the Freeh Report, they intended to report the incident to the authorities, but the plan changed after the AD had a conversation with Paterno and they decided the "humane" thing to do was to simply talk to Sandusky and ignore the matter.  Sandusky would continue to rape boys until finally caught.

The cult-like persona of Penn State football certainly contributed.  And the unwillingness of Paterno and others to tarnish the pristine image of the program caused them to conceal Sandusky's behavior for more than a decade.

Sandusky gets 30-60 years.  Given that he's currently 68 years old, it's pretty much assured that he leaves prison in a body bag.

I can only hope the guards allow the other inmates a little unsupervised shower time with him.  Maybe Sandusky can teach them the "tickle game."

APIAD wrote:

I hope he lives a very long life in prison.

I remember when Richard Speck confessed to Roger Simon of the The Sun Times  (back when it was, before Rupert Murdoch bought it) after years of professing his innocence.  I hope Sandusky lives long enough to get to that point.  Speck revealed some details that had been completely unknown (he had an accomplice whom he killed).  There are some reasons to suspect that the child molestation issue might have been wider than is yet known.