Comments on: The NCAA Is About To Make A Big Mistake With Penn State

By: ghghghgh

ghghghgh — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 19:32:32 +0000

Your sarcastic tone in this article really isn’t very convincing. The big business called Penn State is still receiving admissions and will manage. Have you ever heard of setting a precedent? You sound angry and clearly are the one taking things personally. Meanwhile there was a long, protracted cover-up that allowed a predator to commit horrors. The mob has spoken and sometimes, their justice is both swift and correct. Meanwhile, your anger is thinly veiled behind a jacket of legal jargon. Sorry, but you are like a bad lawyer joke.

By: Root_for_the_Cubbies

Root_for_the_Cubbies — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 01:08:45 +0000

@Gomezaaaa @JamieThornton @Joey Jamie, you missed my point. I completely agree that there were massive ethical lapses, but when did the NCAA become the arbiter of wht is or is not ehtical? We have a legal system set up to deal with these types of situations. We do not need a private organization making these types of declarations and judgements. Because if they do, what limits could possibly exist on the NCAA’s authority to penalize almost any behavior. We have courts for this, not the NCAA!

By: Gomezaaaa

Gomezaaaa — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 17:00:14 +0000

@JamieThornton @Root_for_the_Cubbies @Joey So what NCAA ethics bylaws were violated exactly? No one can answer this.

By: JamieThornton

JamieThornton — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 16:24:33 +0000

@Root_for_the_Cubbies @Joey yeah, again it’s not that the acts were being done. If that was the only case, nothing should be done to Penn State. Just the low life that was doing them. But in this case you had all the leaders of a university that was covering them up, to save a reputation of the school. ON top of that, they let him stay on campus and host a kids camp. I mean come on. If you don’t find some ethics problems in that(including what leadership is all about) I have to question the mental stability of anyone.

By: Root_for_the_Cubbies

Root_for_the_Cubbies — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 02:18:00 +0000

@Joey Zaza Wow, ethics huh? That could cover just about anything. What limits are there on the NCAA’s power at all?

By: Joey Zaza

Joey Zaza — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 01:46:43 +0000

@Gomezaaaa @viciousdawg @jimbobfam
Wrong. See NCAA Rule Book. Bylaw Section 10. Ethics.

By: Joey Zaza

Joey Zaza — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 01:45:20 +0000

@Gomezaaaa @TigerinMO @JamieThornton Bylaw Section 10. Ethics.

By: notmyrealname

notmyrealname — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 01:40:51 +0000

A lot of people in this thread seem to think the NCAA should have just stood by and done nothing. Maybe you think the NCAA shouldn’t exist at all, and maybe your right, but if it IS going to exist, it HAD to do something here. How could they stand by and say “not our job” to the single largest scandal in the history of the industry (and I mean industry), when at the same time the are running around suspending kids for selling jerseys or coaches for making too many text messages during the month of whatever.

An argument for the NCAA doing nothing is in my mind an argument for saying they shouldn’t exist at all. All the “slippery slope” fears went out the window when PSU signed the consent order. Which is not to say there won’t be questions down the line. But here the offending party conceded all the facts, admitted liability, and agreed to the punishment beforehand. No school with any leg to stand on will never lay down like that unless they have done something historically heinous.

By: BonzaiB

BonzaiB — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:42:14 +0000

@AllTideUp Right back at you. I have the same faults in posting, only exaggerated. This topic just hits home in so many ways I suspect what I actually read is not what you actually wrote. Will not bore you with the number of cylenders this issue hits with me, but it makes me angry beyond words. Not the NCAA’s actions, what some president and board of a voluntary organization does rarely raises to that level. Thats just what got us talking on this.

While I hate the word “process” as it screams bureaucracy, this topic is so serious that meddling by (wrong term to use, but its all I have at this point in the day) by folks trying to do good as fast as possible by bypassing understood processes, can actually harm the entity they are trying to represent. And I suspect that Penn State, a very good institution overall, is going to get creamed in this. It should be, but as responsible citizens I think we have to recognize that legalistic piling on could seriously harm Penn State’s ability to quickly recover. There is time for exacting all the flesh we need to.

Thanks for being a good egg today. Learned something, and you can’t do that when you think you’re the smartest guy in the room. And today, perhaps I wasn’t.

Cheers. Hope to have another one of these on a less arduous topic.

By: AllTideUp

AllTideUp — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 22:22:55 +0000

@BonzaiB All in all, this whole discussion has been a lot more civil and rational than many of the comments we see on here and certainly than on any other blog for that matter. It’s so serious that I think we are all compelled to look at it that way.

And I do understand the desire to not be a part of the mob. Rushing to judgement usually means making bad judgements and cooler heads always need to prevail.

I didn’t take your comments personally anyway as I figured you misunderstood what I wrote. I get ahead of myself sometimes and obviously I’m wordy(lol). So I’m sorry if I wrote anything earlier that wasn’t clear.

Hopefully, we never have to worry about something this heinous happening again and we can all go back to arguing over stupid stuff…lol.

By: BonzaiB

BonzaiB — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 21:49:59 +0000

@AllTideUp Thanks for the post AllTideUp. Once again I am impressed with the thought you have put into what you have written on this topic. I take to heart your comments about “if this happened at Alabama.” I would hope that if this happened in my neighborhood I would be man enough to get it right for the right reasons.

Very well written sir. Hats off to you for your honorable views on this horrific subject, and for the level headed approach to responding. While I do not concede (yet, and its not important in the big picture of life, the universe and everything) that this was the correct approach for the NCAA to take, I accept your arguments as valid.

Roll Tide and best wishes on an awful day of refection.

By: TigerinMO

TigerinMO — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 20:58:20 +0000

@Gomezaaaa @JamieThornton Can’t tell you, but that’s what Emmert said at the press conference.

By: Gomezaaaa

Gomezaaaa — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 20:56:42 +0000

@TigerinMO @JamieThornton Never heard this. Which NCAA bylaws exactly where violated?

By: TigerinMO

TigerinMO — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 20:50:47 +0000

@Gomezaaaa @JamieThorntonIf you listened to the press conference, the NCAA clearly said it DID find violation of rules, including its ethics rules.

By: AllTideUp

AllTideUp — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 19:46:02 +0000

@BonzaiB You missed my point with those comments. I wasn’t using the phrase “Texas justice” to imply that injustice is often done in Texas…injustice is often done everywhere as you stated. The phrase “Texas justice” refers to the quick, decisive, and merciless brand of justice done in the old West or at least that is how I’ve come to understand it. I’m not referring to the idea of lynch mobs carrying people out of their homes although some people might think the two ideas go hand in hand. Either way though, I wasn’t advocating for “Texas justice.” Read my comments more carefully and you’ll see what I mean.

I was commenting on the very mob mentality you are talking about. The public is angry and while justifiably so, I was saying that people everywhere need to take a step back and look at what actually caused the problems at PSU. It was the culture that allowed that cover-up to take place and it is very possible that this same sort of culture exists at every other college program. I was arguing that while we are all angry, we should not be so arrogant as to think that our favorite program is above reproach in comparison to PSU. I was arguing for a “big picture” approach rather than simply the desire for revenge. With that said, I was and am still in favor of NCAA sanctions in this case for the sake of the “big picture” because the very culture that allowed these things to happen at PSU has to be discouraged elsewhere whenever possible. The only way to do that is to demonstrate to every other program that such a culture will not be tolerated. And the only way the NCAA can do that is through sanctions. It seems people, in general, are a lot more receptive to holding higher standards when you hit them in the wallet.

Also, I was not arguing for PSU to get hammered because Bama has been hit hard in the past. Again, you missed the point of my comments. That section was a general reply to what John wrote earlier about the potential of fans being upset with the NCAA if they came after our favorite program over criminal matters. I was stating that, yes, I have been angry in the past when the NCAA came after “my” program, which just happens to be Alabama, over textbooks scandals or recruiting violations. Any fan of a punished program can probably identify with that. My overarching point though was that while we may get upset when the NCAA investigates our schools, we are getting upset over ultimately trivial matters. Child abuse or any number of violent or criminal behaviors, however, are in no way trivial matters. And if “we,” speaking universally of fans, can ultimately accept punishment for “textbook scandals,” and I was speaking euphemistically here using textbooks as an example, then “we” ought to be able to accept punishments for things that actually matter. That was my point.

If the same things that happened at Penn State had happened at Alabama then I would not be upset with the NCAA. I would be ashamed of my school and community and I would welcome NCAA sanctions if they had the potential of changing the culture. There are many things more important than football and this is one of them.

Also, it’s my understanding that the NCAA does have authority in matters like this due to character-based bylaws. I could be mistaken there as that is what I’ve generally heard or read about it. I haven’t actually looked at the bylaws myself on this matter.

I do agree with all those that said there should have been more due process here. That is a precedent for the NCAA that should not have been made and I forgot to include that in my original post. With that said, I’m not ready to say that the NCAA made a mistake in issuing the penalties. For those who have followed NCAA investigations in the past, you are aware that the NCAA does not have subpoena power and must rely on what the university in question is willing to offer along with anything else they are able to dig up from 3rd parties. The “due process” that the NCAA has always used was never truly rooted in how our real justice system works in the first place. With that said, the Freeh report most likely included as much documentation if not more than the NCAA would have been able to dig up on its own if they performed the investigation themselves. And with the power of law enforcement behind the investigation as a whole, which is never the case in NCAA matters, along with all the public record of the happenings here I would be very surprised if any information emerges that contradicts the Freeh report in any significant way.

By: dee6634

dee6634 — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 19:26:32 +0000

“Football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing and protecting young people,” NCAA President Mark Emmert said at Monday’s press conference.

The culture at PSU needs to change – just like it does at so many other universities across the country.

Good job by the NCAA. For once, they got it right.

By: Gomezaaaa

Gomezaaaa — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 18:50:25 +0000

@JamieThornton The coverup of illegal acts isn’t a violation of NCAA rules. That is a crime for which those four men, including Paterno if he were still alive,should be sent to prison. The NCAA is punishing Penn State when Penn state didn’t violate NCAA rules. That is what is wrong here.

By: JamieThornton

JamieThornton — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 18:35:50 +0000

it wasn’t because a bunch of boys got raped and awful acts were done for a period of decades that caused the ncaa to act. It was because PSU presidents, coaches, exc knew boys were being raped and awful acts were being done, and they decided to cover it up for decades. At that point, the NCAA should come down. If you don’t agree, maybe you would not feel the same if you had a bunch of kids that were all raped and everything was covered up because it might hurt the image of the university and program. Who cares about the image of the kids.

By: Gomezaaaa

Gomezaaaa — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:43:19 +0000

@viciousdawg @jimbobfam But it didn’t break NCAA rules and it is being punished by the NCAA.

By: viciousdawg

viciousdawg — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:34:31 +0000

@Gomezaaaa @jimbobfam PSU did break the law when it covered up what was happening.

By: BonzaiB

BonzaiB — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:30:06 +0000

@John at MrSEC @Bocktean I put this up a little further in the stream, but what’s to stop the NCAA from say, banning a team forever for systemic infractions? Not an expert on NCAA rules through and through, but if they can do this outside of their box “because something has to be done,” then is there anything that would prevent them from either banning a university sports program? Just to take it to the extremes, and have no clue if they already have that authority or not, so might not be a good analogy.

Great peice of journalism Mr Pennington. A serious topic, great responses on both sides of the issue, and a civil discussion. This is the best thread on the topic I have seen on the web so far. And I rarely combine the words “great” and “journalism” in the same paragraph, much less sentence.

By: BonzaiB

BonzaiB — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:24:29 +0000

@TheN8tureBoy Just might be. Interesting post that got this all started. And I have to say the seriousness of the topic, and the quality of John’s article have resulted in a very civil discussion. Thanks to everyone here for keeping it that way. Very good group out there.

By: BonzaiB

BonzaiB — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:18:32 +0000

Interesting. Lets just say your favorite university is caught having a sestemic problem that generates the outrage of the public. The NCAA decides that sense it was a great thing for them to do a one time reaction with PSU, that they will up the ante and ban your university from ever competing in college football again, ever.

One time reactions are not so compelling when they start to become the norm. And once you have upped the ante in the game, the ante gets upped again.

By: JR Clark

JR Clark — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:13:59 +0000

@John at MrSEC @gage
Maybe so, in the future. But in this case, from what I understand, this was a negotiated settlement between the NCAA and Penn State. Penn State’s president signed a consent decree with the NCAA’s sanctions. I can’t see how this extraordinary case will cause problems in the future.

By: Aub62

Aub62 — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:12:24 +0000

I don’t normally comment, but this one I’ll give a shot. Those who think the NCAA over-reached are far outnumbered by those who think that this was a fair, or even, too-little, punishment. But really, this punishment was essentially about the Presidents attempting to regain/take (depends on your point of view) of college athletics, and the enormous amount of money that CFB now generates. MR. SEC (John Pennington) can say this is uncharted territory and a slippery slope, and maybe it is. All precedents are such. But that can’t stop you from acting. When a University cannot fire a coach because he is “too big,” and when a cover-up of such awful crimes is based on letting a coach obtain the most wins in CFB, then that University has crossed a line that most of us cannot stomach. What is to say that in the future similar behaviors are covered-up because of the $$$$? What would you say then? Is this competitive advantage? I think it is. I love this site, and read it often, but you and your like-minded media outside of academia are wrong in your conclusion.

By: Gomezaaaa

Gomezaaaa — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:57:51 +0000

@JR Clark Oh, I don’t know, Penn State fans, Florida state fans, anyone who cares about college football.

By: Gomezaaaa

Gomezaaaa — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:53:21 +0000

@jimbobfam This is a great point, but the NCAA has a rule book for everyone to follow, and if Penn State didn’t violate any of rules, it shouldn’t be punished. How would you like to be thrown in jail when you haven’t broken the law?

By: Tyler B

Tyler B — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:50:31 +0000

@JR Clark

Yes, you are correct in your post. The enormity of it all is mind-blowing and I still can’t get my head around it. Ultimately, I do think the NCAA acted appropriately. It’s just now a matter of what it will do moving forward. The NCAA as a whole has lost it’s way when it comes to football and basketball, and the entire system needs an overhaul. Once the PSU situation loses a bit of steam the NCAA culture in hoops and football will be the next item up on the public chopping block.

By: JR Clark

JR Clark — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:39:19 +0000

@John at MrSEC @KC Tiger Fan
John, the NCAA acts within the parameters of administrative law, much in the same way a university’s student judiciary adjudicates matters that touch upon criminal law. I work in academia, so let me use this example to illustrate. Let’s take a student who commits a criminal act on university property. The student is tried in the city, county, or state criminal courts and is either found guilty or not guilty. The student is also required to attend an administrative hearing with the university’s student judiciary board. I have witnessed several cases in which the student was cleared of criminal charges or the charges were dropped by the DA’s office, yet the student was suspended from the university for the semester. That is because the burden of proof in administrative law is much lower than that in criminal law.

By: viciousdawg

viciousdawg — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:37:00 +0000

@JR Clark I really do feel for Coach O’Brien and the current PSU players that had nothing to do with this. That being said, Coach O’Brien and the current players has a chance to lay a firm foundation for a new PSU program. One with honesty and integrity. I wish Coach O’Brien nothing but luck as he will have a long road ahead of him.

By: JR Clark

JR Clark — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:28:58 +0000

@viciousdawgI agree. Maybe this is part of a new direction for the NCAA. It is apparent that few college football or basketball programs learned anything from the SMU death penalty in the mid-1980s. I also think the NCAA has been influenced by the way NFL commissioner Roger Goodell acted decisively in the wake of the Saints bounty scandal.

By: jimbobfam

jimbobfam — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:26:37 +0000

What about the huge recruiting advantage PSU got by covering up the coach’s behavior. They’re recruiting pitch is built around how perfect they are at PSU. Paterno and PSU were going thru some tough times when this all occurred and this info would have been devastating to both of them. Because they kept it hidden , they were able to continue to recruit on the highest levels and enjoyed all the benefits(financial) from that recruiting. In fact, wasn’t this one of the main driving force behind the cover up? Not seeing how you could possibly not think that connection isn’t extremely relevant..

By: John at MrSEC

John at MrSEC — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:26:20 +0000

@JR Clark @gage

And you miss my point that if Penn State had hired someone else to look at the same facts, I’m guessing some of the conclusions might have been different.

But the point of the post — which people keep trying to cover-up and ignore — is that the NCAA is becoming an “activist judge” at this point, stating that something that was never supposed to be and never has been within its jurisdiction is today, all of a sudden, actually inside its jurisdiction.

That’s why I think the decision to use the Freeh Report and not follow its own due process or conduct its own investigation will lead to many problems down the road for the NCAA.

But we can all just wait and see.

John

By: JR Clark

JR Clark — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:25:24 +0000

Tyler, the NCAA’s sanctions against Penn State involved the institutional coverup, not the crimes committed by Sandusky.

From what I understand, the sanctions were a negotiated settlement between the NCAA and Penn State’s administration.

By: Gust

Gust — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:24:24 +0000

Hi John, thanks for your responses.

I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I don’t see this at all as a dangerous precedent. In fact, just the opposite.

Let’s take the underlying action (with all the emotional response it brings) out of the equation for a moment. Let’s talk about “action x”. So say a player/coach engages in action x. The head coach then learns of action x and decides that if other people find out about action x there will be negative consequences to the entire team/program. As a result, the head coach decides he will do everything in his power to prevent others from learning about action x. But then, word is spread to the AD about action x. The AD then talks with the head coach about action x, also concludes that the team would be negatively impacted, and joins together with the head coach in the cover-up. Now that same process repeats at the university president level (the university president!!!).

Now let’s substitute “action x” with (1) selling a signed jersey, (2) using drugs, and (3) beating your girlfriend. (I originally wrote out for each of those scenarios what happens to the person who actually does the action and what happens to the administration, and therefore entire/program school, by way of the NCAA and then the police. But it got really long, and I thought I’d lose you/everyone else reading. And you can fill in all those blanks yourself anyway).

What that exercise hopefully conveys is that, for NCAA purposes only, committing action x and covering up action x are separate, independent offenses which violate separate, independent bylaws and receive separate, independent punishments. With that as the case, it does not matter whether action x is an NCAA violation itself. The active cover-up by the administration is a stand-alone offense. That is what is being punished. Not action x. Not the perpetrator of action x. Solely the administration covering up action x to gain a competitive advantage (and yes, this gave them a clear competitive advantage – the on field results would undoubtedly have been impacted by the tarnish on the program/school this would have brought – the proof of which is actually that the administration concluded a cover-up was in fact needed.)

All that to say, this is not new ground at all. It would only be new ground if the NCAA were trying to put Jerry Sandusky in jail. They are not. They are punishing an institution that lied to gain a competitive advantage. That’s as basic an NCAA case as there is.

Just my opinion. I understand you, and many others, disagree. Again, love the site and thanks for all the work you do for it.

By: viciousdawg

viciousdawg — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:23:37 +0000

John, you know I have nothing but respect for you and your site. But…… I respectfully disagree with you on this one. There was a coverup from the school president all the way down to the janitor… ok maybe not the janitor but you get my point. The NCAA “HAD” to do something. Just like with President Richard Nixon it’s the coverup that got the school in trouble. There should be more hand outs like this in my opinion. It’s time the NCAA actually started handing out punishment and not just slaps on the hand.

By: John at MrSEC

John at MrSEC — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:21:34 +0000

@gage

To state that different sets of people might look at the same set of facts differently is akin to Holocaust denial?

Wow.

John

By: John at MrSEC

John at MrSEC — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:16:37 +0000

@KC Tiger Fan

Systematic cover-ups of NCAA violations, not illegal activities. The NCAA has now stepped in and said criminal activities are now within their jurisdiction. And the point of the post above — which several people have incorrectly taken as some sort of pro-Penn State defense — is that this opens Pandora’s Box.

You have a former chair of the NCAA’s own committee on infractions stating clearly that the NCAA has never gotten involved in criminal/moral issues before. Now they have. I believe that’s a dangerous precedent to set.

Thanks again for reading,John

By: JR Clark

JR Clark — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:08:17 +0000

@John at MrSEC @gage
Excuse me John, but legally speaking, the Freeh Report is fact, based on a rule of evidence called estoppel. The Penn State Board of Trustees commissioned the Freeh Report and did not deny any of the facts or conclusions included therein. President Spanier, through his lawyers, has disputed a few facts in the Freeh Report, but did not dispute the report’s conclusions.

By: Tyler B

Tyler B — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 15:07:35 +0000

John, once again, congrats on running such a great site where posts are thought out and articulate – a rarity in 2012. I think the Duke and Baylor cases are interesting comparisons, but both those cases to my knowledge were strictly related to the actions of a student-athlete(s) and not that of the athletic department or administration. I agree with your point that while this is a legal issue instead of an NCAA issue, the NCAA stepping in to make a swift, harsh decision is fair. What does that mean moving forward? Now that the NCAA has dipped its toe into this (cess) pool, when will it be asked to return? Why will it be asked to return? What now are the requirements for the NCAA to act on its own? At then end of the day, considering all that has taken place, I have no problem with the NCAA stepping in only if this scorched-earth decision is a one-time action. But now it’s clear that rules need to be put in place of when and why the NCAA would ever step in again to make decision such as this.

Now, the punishment. It should have stopped after the vacated wins and $60M fine. If the NCAA went with a non-traditional route to reach it’s punishment decision, I see no reason why it took a traditional approach in crushing the PSU program. The NCAA went way too far by punishing the program for years to come when at this point nobody in the program was involved with what happened years ago. Because we’ve never seen anything like this in NCAA history I’m OK with this one-time reaction. But it’s clear that rules now need to be written that clearly explain if the NCAA should every get invovled in criminal matters. Rambling…

Great post, John.

By: Homepage | MrSEC

Homepage | MrSEC — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 14:16:48 +0000

[...] John Pennington: ”This is 100% the wrong move by a governing body that so often makes the wrong [...]

By: BonzaiB

BonzaiB — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 14:00:36 +0000

@John at MrSEC @DanHogan Bingo. The NCAA is playing to the mob. That is not justice. The state is responsible for justice, and the two compononents of justice in the US system are 1) the state takes measures to protect the public and 2) the state is responsible for exacting vengence. The NCA is not empowered to exact vengence, but it is sure acting like that is one of their roles here.

By: BonzaiB

BonzaiB — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:56:58 +0000

@AllTideUp ”Texas Justice?” Sorry AllTideUp, but Bama has a history of exacting over the top revenge in its justice system, jjust like Georgia, Florida, the Carolina’s, Louisianna, Illinois, Indiana, and others. And while agree with most of your posts, if any crime justifies circumvention of the rule of law, then every crime does. The fact that a Bama fan insists Penn State gets hammered by the NCAA while it violates its own rules, because Bama got nailed at some point misses the issue. The NCAA is violating its rules. Not good. The NCAA could have levied a fine and vacated wins AFTER following its rules. So why violate your rules? Answer, to play to the mob. The mob is a bad, bad group to play to. Follow the rules, do it right and you are on solid ground. Play to the mob, and you become them. I for one do not and will not belong to a mob.

By: JR Clark

JR Clark — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:55:16 +0000

@Geoff McDormer
WGAS?

By: JR Clark

JR Clark — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:54:41 +0000

@Geoff McDormer
So what do you propose the NCAA should have done? Nothing? What further investigation needed to be done beyond the Freeh Report? Penn State’s president, athletic director, and head football coach repeatedly covered up evidence of sex crimes committed by an assistant coach inside the football operations building on campus!

There is nothing wrong with the NCAA’s decision.

By: BonzaiB

BonzaiB — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:43:51 +0000

@DanHogan Dan, thanks for the response. Terrible issue, but it is precisely the horrific, slam dunk nature of it that mutes the point of Penn State agreeing with the sanctions. Penn State has no ability to refute the piling on. To do so would injure it further in the civil law suits which are going to gut the institutions finances and would enrage the public (and the public is SO often wrong in its rush to judgement on getting justice done). Point is, if you were a Penn State official, you have no choice but to agree with the NCAA publicly. And that in and of itself is an abuse of the system by the NCAA. The public in this country have a very, very bad track record of getting it right during an emotionally charged debate. We have a sad tradition of rushing to over the top decisions.

Penn State is facing civil liabilities that will cost it everything it gained over the years. The courts will make sure of that. The victims will have their day in court, and although that does not make up for the abuse they suffered, we as a nation decided a long time ago that was the route to go. To allow the NCAA to make up rules as it goes, and then to use draconian measures to enforce those new rules is not the proper way to handle this.

Penn State, although guilty of a lot of things in this case, is now being subjected to judgement by the mob (the NCAA acting exactly like a kangaroo court here, taking on authority it does not have to punish a member who cannot mount an effective defense because the public is so enraged). This is what our courts are for.

My point is pretty simple, a rush to judgement is not a good thing in the long run, its not a good thing in the short run. Might make you feel better in the short term, but sets a bad precedent for the future. Almost always the case. The victims are still the victims, and in our system it is the state that has the right to exact vengence, and the NCAA is not the state.

By: Geoff McDormer

Geoff McDormer — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:35:21 +0000

So with all of the vacated wins, the winingest coach in NCAA history is Bobby Bowden.

By: Geoff McDormer

Geoff McDormer — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:29:50 +0000

And lets not forget that for the first time ever the NCAA is handing out penalties without even investigating first.

By: Geoff McDormer

Geoff McDormer — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:24:53 +0000

The NCAA has bylaws that every institution agrees to follow. In all that it did wrong, Penn State DIDN’T violate these bylaws. But the NCAA is punishing Penn State anyway. That is WRONG!

By: The NCAA is a shameful organization. - Page 6 - VolNation

The NCAA is a shameful organization. - Page 6 - VolNation — Mon, 23 Jul 2012 13:04:14 +0000

[...] MRSEC – The NCAA Is About To Make A Big Mistake With Penn State Quote: [...]