Penn State sanctions handed down

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I do see it as nothing more than a bump in the road; it's ok if you see it differently. My thoughts on Ramius's post are covered in my response to it.

 

I am certain that any Penn State player has options available to him, but perhaps not the two schools that I used as examples. I'm not sure why that's offensive to you. Actually, it's pretty bizarre if that's offensive to you.

 

I think you are very deliberately confusing the Miami portion of the argument in your quest to "be right." It should be obvious that I do not think that the transgressions are the same, but rather, that I think the penalty imposed upon PSU would be more appropriate for recruiting violations than for the complete tragedy that happened at Penn State.

Deliberately confusing?

 

Quest to be right? I don't even have a dog in this fight. Why would you even think that. I don't care to be right… but I like for opinions to be clear in a discussion… mine and others.

 

I was surprised that you would bring up Miami and recruiting violations.

 

If the Penn State penalties are more appropriate for recruiting violations, I wonder what you think would be appropriate penalties for what happened at Penn State.

Don't feel compelled to respond with an answer if you haven't already but the question begs to be asked.

 

[Offside Number 76]

Deliberately confusing?

 

Quest to be right? I don't even have a dog in this fight. Why would you even think that. I don't care to be right… but I like for opinions to be clear in a discussion… mine and others.

 

I was surprised that you would bring up Miami and recruiting violations.

 

If the Penn State penalties are more appropriate for recruiting violations, I wonder what you think would be appropriate penalties for what happened at Penn State.

Don't feel compelled to respond with an answer if you haven't already but the question begs to be asked.

 

I've already stated what I think would be an appropriate penalty at Penn State. (See post number 33 in this thread.) I believe you've been criticizing that view, which is fine (but the snarky manner you initially chose wasn't).

 

I believe that PSU football should cease, completely, until Penn State demonstrates that it has got its priorities straight.

 

I believe that taking away scholarships and bowl games is appropriate for recruiting violations. (E.g., USC.) Not for this.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I've already stated what I think would be an appropriate penalty at Penn State. (See post number 33 in this thread.) I believe you've been criticizing that view, which is fine (but the snarky manner you initially chose wasn't).

 

I believe that PSU football should cease, completely, until Penn State demonstrates that it has got its priorities straight.

 

I believe that taking away scholarships and bowl games is appropriate for recruiting violations. (E.g., USC.) Not for this.

 

 

Really? Reducing scholarships by 20 and no bowls for four years is harsh?

 

No football at all until they straighten out priorities would have been the appropriate response.

 

I hope the Big "10" does kick them out, but it won't happen.

I had read through the thread but hadn't seen this.

 

Sorry about that.

[Offside Number 76]

I had read through the thread but hadn't seen this.

 

Sorry about that.

 

Ok; fair enough.

 

Suffice it to say that we disagree on what an appropriate penalty would be.

 

Let's see lots of Buffalo wins in 2012!

[Haplo848]

And what was Paterno's role? Have you actually followed this story at all?

 

 

It's very likely that Paterno had the most power in the room when discussing how to deal with this situation. He was the most powerful man at Penn State and people who don't understand that are very naive, IMO.

 

 

No, YOU are very naive. The past few years, Paterno has barely run the football team, let alone the school. After the grad student came to him with a report about Sandusky in the shower with a boy, Paterno did follow up on it. When he was told that they didn't have enough evidence to keep up the investigation, he demanded that Sandusky was banned from the school. They overruled him, saying that as the football coach, he didn't have the authority. When he demanded they ban him from using the football facilities, they agreed, but left him no way to enforce that. He was NOT the most powerful man at Penn State, and to think that is naive

 

So 'victory with integrity'' includes covering up child rape? You are dog****. Go cry your eyes out over your disgraced hero.

 

Really couldn't finish reading a few paragraphs, huh? I said he instituted that culture, the Penn State Way. I also said he didn't follow through on that all the time.

 

Here's a quote I think is very telling: "The Penn State Way commissions a multi-million dollar independent investigation which, in eight months, revealed more than did three years of state criminal investigations. Then, the Penn State Way publishes the painful results for the world to mock, while we admit our mistakes, and resolve to move forward and improve.

 

That's right... the reason you can tear down the Paterno temple; the reason you can claim Joe lied is because Penn State investigated itself more critically than the Commonwealth government. Then, it told all to everyone.

 

Yes, Joe Paterno failed the Penn State Way in the Sandusky scandal. He wasn't alone, nor was he the most culpable. But, over the preceeding 60 years, he also taught and lived the Penn State Way. He is, in large part, precisely why Penn Staters feel that there is a "Penn State Way" at all.

 

That is a great legacy. It's a far sight better than the sportswriters' Paterno temple. And no amount of scorn, contempt, or shouting can change it."

Edited July 24, 2012 by Haplo848

[Heels20X6]

No, YOU are very naive. The past few years, Paterno has barely run the football team, let alone the school. After the grad student came to him with a report about Sandusky in the shower with a boy, Paterno did follow up on it. When he was told that they didn't have enough evidence to keep up the investigation, he demanded that Sandusky was banned from the school. They overruled him, saying that as the football coach, he didn't have the authority. When he demanded they ban him from using the football facilities, they agreed, but left him no way to enforce that. He was NOT the most powerful man at Penn State, and to think that is naive

 

 

 

Really couldn't finish reading a few paragraphs, huh? I said he instituted that culture, the Penn State Way. I also said he didn't follow through on that all the time.

 

Here's a quote I think is very telling: "The Penn State Way commissions a multi-million dollar independent investigation which, in eight months, revealed more than did three years of state criminal investigations. Then, the Penn State Way publishes the painful results for the world to mock, while we admit our mistakes, and resolve to move forward and improve.

 

That's right... the reason you can tear down the Paterno temple; the reason you can claim Joe lied is because Penn State investigated itself more critically than the Commonwealth government. Then, it told all to everyone.

 

Yes, Joe Paterno failed the Penn State Way in the Sandusky scandal. He wasn't alone, nor was he the most culpable. But, over the preceeding 60 years, he also taught and lived the Penn State Way. He is, in large part, precisely why Penn Staters feel that there is a "Penn State Way" at all.

 

That is a great legacy. It's a far sight better than the sportswriters' Paterno temple. And no amount of scorn, contempt, or shouting can change it."

 

Believe that all you want, but outside of Pennsylvania, Joe Pa is nothing more than a child rapist enabler. And it's all because of the very culture he created.

 

His legacy is forever tainted. And so should the all of Penn State for having an administration that enabled it.

 

As a Penn State alum, I'm not surprised that you can't see this. Heck, I'm surprised you're able to string together a coherent thought.

 

Defending the indefensible. You are something else.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

No, YOU are very naive. The past few years, Paterno has barely run the football team, let alone the school. After the grad student came to him with a report about Sandusky in the shower with a boy, Paterno did follow up on it. When he was told that they didn't have enough evidence to keep up the investigation, he demanded that Sandusky was banned from the school. They overruled him, saying that as the football coach, he didn't have the authority. When he demanded they ban him from using the football facilities, they agreed, but left him no way to enforce that. He was NOT the most powerful man at Penn State, and to think that is naive

By saying he was the most powerful man at Penn State does not mean that he ran the school or that he exercised this power at all times. However the accounts I've read of what happened at Penn State suggest to me that Paterno had unchecked power and did what he wanted when he wanted to. His sway with the student body and the alumni is legendary. The guy was a sacred icon who could work as long as he wanted to even after it was clear that he shouldn't be coaching anymore.

 

There are different accounts of his involvement in the cover up. Most of them paint Paterno as willing to go along with what the group suggested which is a crafty way of absolving oneself of responsibility. Paterno let others take the lead in this matter instead of simply reporting it to law enforcement.

 

Penn State President Graham Spanier didn't fire Paterno because he knew he couldn't.

 

Paterno did what he wanted right up until the moment he was fired by the Board of Trustees. The irony is the fact that Paterno chose not to wield his power when he had an opportunity to do so… when doing so would have prevented further abuse of victims.

 

This is all my opinion as your account is your opinion.

 

 

 

Ok; fair enough.

 

Suffice it to say that we disagree on what an appropriate penalty would be.

 

Let's see lots of Buffalo wins in 2012!

Agree we disagree and agree that the Bills whup ass this year.

 

In any scenario mentioned so far in this topic, the players are penalized… to what extent is certainly debatable.

 

I personally feel for them.

 

It's really hard to say what an appropriate penalty is. I do think it had to be severe but ideally only to the institution. Like I said earlier, the collateral damage is a shame.

 

I like someone's earlier suggestion that the perfect (possibly impossible) penalty would be one in which the players aren't punished for something they had no guilt in. I understand your point that nothing in life is guaranteed.

Edited July 24, 2012 by San Jose Bills Fan

[Mark Vader]

He later made reference more than once about the school and the big ten being in a decline and not being powerhouses anymore. Who took that title - the sec. I know the dots weren't explicitly connected but I think it was a pretty easy one to see. The big 10 getting beat up by the sec is a pretty basic story line and talking about the big ten not being premiere is closely related.

 

Not to mention his post that the players won't be getting shots in the SEC.

 

Notice your correcting me, not him.

I do notice.

 

Do you notice that you have been speaking for him and he has not directly responded to any of my posts?

 

Now if he believes that the SEC is the top dog in college football, fine, I am not disputing that. I have said many times that the SEC is the premiere conference in college football.

 

My point is that going to the Rose Bowl is no small feat. While the Big 10 may not be as strong as it used to be it is still a very respectable conference. Wisconsin, Michigan State, Iowa and Penn State have been very good as of late, and while Ohio State had it's issues last year they will come back to being a very tough team soon, and Michigan took a big step towards respectability last season and looks to get even better this season.

 

Let me also say that I do not think that the Big 10 is superior to the SEC, but they are not exactly the WAC either.

[Gordio]

Laughable post. This is crushing to penn st. We'll probably have an 8-team playoff before penn state is relevant again. It'll be at least 5-10 years before they are competitive enough to threaten bowl games, more than (if ever) that for big time bowl games.

 

Consider the following:

 

1. After this season, depending on how many players leave, Penn state is looking at minimum of 3-5 seasons where they will claw and scratch to win 2-3 games. They are going to field a roster of 2 star recruits, with a scattering of 3 star players mixed in. Their talent level will be at that of a MAC team. No player with NFL aspirations is going near that program for the near future.

 

2. They will have no depth. The 20 scholarship ban takes them to a 1-AA scholarship level (in terms of numbers) team. It eliminates an entire tier of scholarship players off of the depth chart. Think of this. If you're a 2-star player, are you going to want to go to a Temple type school where you can start and play and win, or a penn state where you're going to physically get your ass kicked for 8 games per year?

 

3. Even when the bowl ban is lifted, you think big time recruits are all of a sudden going to flock back to happy valley? hell no. You think a 4-star QB is gonna go to a school where he's surrounded by 2-star talent? No way. It'll take years to build up the talent level even when they get past the sanctions.

 

4. Unlike USC, penn state CAN't recruit nationally. USC can grab players from anywhere in the country. Penn st can't. They're limited to PA, the northeast, and some of the mid atlantic. They can't simply walk into FL, CA, or TX and get who they want like USC/UT/florida schools can. Not to mention that other teams in the area are going to expand recruiting lines, especially 'Cuse and Pitt who can now use moving to the ACC to their advantage.

 

This punishment is just as bad as the death penalty, and completely warranted. Penn state isn't going to be relevant anytime soon.

 

 

 

Excellent post, guys that do not think this is a big deal & a harsh punishment just do not understand the dynamics of how major college football works. & don't forget if they don't get the right guy into lead this program(which at first they probably won't) your pushing the recovery process back 3-5 years with every bad hire. This is just like the death penalty imo & your correct sir about Penn St fielding MAC level talent teams for the minimum the next 10 years. People seem to forget before SMU got handed the death penalty they were just like a Texas/Oklahoma is today. They finally made a bowl game in January, 25 years after they were banned from playing & they will never be back to what they were. Penn St is in for a similar recovery process imo.

[boyst]

This whole "sanctioning" by the NCAA still makes me sick. The NCAA makes sure students don't commit academic fraud and makes sure that there is not cheating or payouts to players. That's it. They overstepped their rights. They punished players that had nothing to do with this creating more victims. They spitefully stripped wins away from Paterno. Then force them to pay $60 million for what? Isn't that what the court system is for? There is going to be close to $200mm in lawsuits. Then removing scholarships for 10 years? That's a joke.

 

Three of their top recruits stayed did not decommit; only one has (last I saw). Brent Musburger was very well spoken about this on Mike and Mike. I ended up turning it, but the only thing he missed was that football management and the school administration failed. Those people need to be punished for their cover up, for their mistakes, for their faults but that is it. All of those people are no longer with the program.

 

Also, he said he was ok with USC's punishment. I was not. Reggie Bush should have been stripped of all records and NCAA recognition. If the NCAA took a more proactive approach to their work things would be a lot different, but they are not and they will always be a joke. Putting up posters in locker rooms is their biggest job.

 

To think this is just a "culture" problem at Penn State then it is a mistake. From schools like Bowling Green to the Ohio State University athletic programs rule the school - usually football taking the crown. Other schools, USC, Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas and so many more there is the same "culture." Look at the OTW thread about a guy who won't even wear a tOSU tie at a friends funeral because he likes UM. It is the fault of the public who idolize college athletics over academics. It makes me sick that the NCAA did a knee jerk - public reaction punishment.

 

edit: added later

watching ESPN it seems like other football teams are pretty much contacting Penn State players trying to recruit them away from PSU. how is that right?

Edited July 24, 2012 by jboyst62

[Ramius]

I understand, but just disagree. I think PSU's football program will be in perfect shape as soon as the ban ends. (Well, obviously, I do; I've said it three times now. Sorry for the redundancy.) It will be interesting to resurrect this thread then, I guess.

 

I'd like to hear your reasons why you think penn state will not suffer, when theres an almost unanimous agreement tnat they will be hurting and non-competitive for a long time. I laid out the arguments against them pretty clearly.

 

In other news, the first of the young kids are beginning to leave or decommit. Also, silas redd is being chased heavy by USC.

[Adam]

That would have happened with the penalty PSU should have received, too.

I understand the anger, but the reason that penalty has never been used again, is because it is a mistake.

 

This whole "sanctioning" by the NCAA still makes me sick. The NCAA makes sure students don't commit academic fraud and makes sure that there is not cheating or payouts to players. That's it. They overstepped their rights. They punished players that had nothing to do with this creating more victims. They spitefully stripped wins away from Paterno. Then force them to pay $60 million for what? Isn't that what the court system is for? There is going to be close to $200mm in lawsuits. Then removing scholarships for 10 years? That's a joke.

 

Three of their top recruits stayed did not decommit; only one has (last I saw). Brent Musburger was very well spoken about this on Mike and Mike. I ended up turning it, but the only thing he missed was that football management and the school administration failed. Those people need to be punished for their cover up, for their mistakes, for their faults but that is it. All of those people are no longer with the program.

 

Also, he said he was ok with USC's punishment. I was not. Reggie Bush should have been stripped of all records and NCAA recognition. If the NCAA took a more proactive approach to their work things would be a lot different, but they are not and they will always be a joke. Putting up posters in locker rooms is their biggest job.

 

To think this is just a "culture" problem at Penn State then it is a mistake. From schools like Bowling Green to the Ohio State University athletic programs rule the school - usually football taking the crown. Other schools, USC, Michigan, Virginia, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas and so many more there is the same "culture." Look at the OTW thread about a guy who won't even wear a tOSU tie at a friends funeral because he likes UM. It is the fault of the public who idolize college athletics over academics. It makes me sick that the NCAA did a knee jerk - public reaction punishment.

 

edit: added later

watching ESPN it seems like other football teams are pretty much contacting Penn State players trying to recruit them away from PSU. how is that right?

It is a tough issue- I was angry with the NCAA until I started thinking about it. The athletic department was used to bring in the kids that were to be abused- the institution at some point became aware of this and didn't stop it, despite knowing what was wrong.

Edited July 24, 2012 by Adam

[boyst]

I'd like to hear your reasons why you think penn state will not suffer, when theres an almost unanimous agreement tnat they will be hurting and non-competitive for a long time. I laid out the arguments against them pretty clearly.

 

In other news, the first of the young kids are beginning to leave or decommit. Also, silas redd is being chased heavy by USC.

You know NCAA more then I do, and now I am confused by this. ESPN is reporting that teams are making efforts to contact Penn State players to their school. With the no-sitout year policy in effect this is concerning. It makes these players "free-agents" of sorts. (one decision I do support is letting players leave without penalty) How is it fair that these players can pursued? To me it raises too many worries of ethics violations - paying players, incentives, etc.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Laughable post. This is crushing to penn st. We'll probably have an 8-team playoff before penn state is relevant again. It'll be at least 5-10 years before they are competitive enough to threaten bowl games, more than (if ever) that for big time bowl games.

 

Consider the following:

 

1. After this season, depending on how many players leave, Penn state is looking at minimum of 3-5 seasons where they will claw and scratch to win 2-3 games. They are going to field a roster of 2 star recruits, with a scattering of 3 star players mixed in. Their talent level will be at that of a MAC team. No player with NFL aspirations is going near that program for the near future.

 

2. They will have no depth. The 20 scholarship ban takes them to a 1-AA scholarship level (in terms of numbers) team. It eliminates an entire tier of scholarship players off of the depth chart. Think of this. If you're a 2-star player, are you going to want to go to a Temple type school where you can start and play and win, or a penn state where you're going to physically get your ass kicked for 8 games per year?

 

3. Even when the bowl ban is lifted, you think big time recruits are all of a sudden going to flock back to happy valley? hell no. You think a 4-star QB is gonna go to a school where he's surrounded by 2-star talent? No way. It'll take years to build up the talent level even when they get past the sanctions.

 

4. Unlike USC, penn state CAN't recruit nationally. USC can grab players from anywhere in the country. Penn st can't. They're limited to PA, the northeast, and some of the mid atlantic. They can't simply walk into FL, CA, or TX and get who they want like USC/UT/florida schools can. Not to mention that other teams in the area are going to expand recruiting lines, especially 'Cuse and Pitt who can now use moving to the ACC to their advantage.

 

This punishment is just as bad as the death penalty, and completely warranted. Penn state isn't going to be relevant anytime soon.

Let's not forget the $60 million fine. One entire year of gross revenue. That means every dime spent to put on a football game will have to come out of some other pocket. Considering just the financial argument, the entire university, but especially the athletic department, is going to suffer.

[boyst]

Let's not forget the $60 million fine. One entire year of gross revenue. That means every dime spent to put on a football game will have to come out of some other pocket. Considering just the financial argument, the entire university, but especially the athletic department, is going to suffer.

My biggest argument is that the football program will be the last to suffer. It will come from across the board at the very least - if it effects any program. Teams like PSU track, waterpolo, or cross country might stay at a Red Roof Inn v. a Holiday Inn.

[Offside Number 76]

I'd like to hear your reasons why you think penn state will not suffer, when theres an almost unanimous agreement tnat they will be hurting and non-competitive for a long time. I laid out the arguments against them pretty clearly.

 

In other news, the first of the young kids are beginning to leave or decommit. Also, silas redd is being chased heavy by USC.

 

You did lay out your arguments well, I just don't agree with them. I've seen enough schools go through bowl suspensions, TV suspensions, and reduced scholarships, and they all bounce back.

 

I don't think it's "almost unanimous," either.

 

We'll know in a few years. Until then, it's just competing opinions.

[Adam]

You know NCAA more then I do, and now I am confused by this. ESPN is reporting that teams are making efforts to contact Penn State players to their school. With the no-sitout year policy in effect this is concerning. It makes these players "free-agents" of sorts. (one decision I do support is letting players leave without penalty) How is it fair that these players can pursued? To me it raises too many worries of ethics violations - paying players, incentives, etc.

The big thing to me, is that nobody has to lose a scholarship- the returning players and incoming players are set with what they were expecting. If a player wants to leave and go to an unsanctioned school, they get an unconditional release. That was the best they could do to make it less punitive to those who did no wrong.

[Sisyphean Bills]

I understand the anger, but the reason that penalty has never been used again, is because it is a mistake.

Emmert was pretty clear that he wanted a culture revolution to take place and that the NCAA would be monitoring. Nothing of that sort really could happen if they just shut it all down completely and indefinitely.

[boyst]

Emmert was pretty clear that he wanted a culture revolution to take place and that the NCAA would be monitoring. Nothing of that sort really could happen if they just shut it all down completely and indefinitely.

Shutting it down entirely hurts the players just good enough for Penn State but not good enough for other schools.

The players getting by one last year on the way to graduation, too.

 

Transferring credits is a very hard process the further along you are academically.

[Sisyphean Bills]

My biggest argument is that the football program will be the last to suffer. It will come from across the board at the very least - if it effects any program. Teams like PSU track, waterpolo, or cross country might stay at a Red Roof Inn v. a Holiday Inn.

Sorry, but I find that naive. The football program has already and will continue to suffer. Of that, there is really no question about it.

 

But, yes, I suspect there will be many athletic cuts at Penn St. due to budget. They can't just print their own money.