The End of JoePa in Penn State

bruschi

some interesting points (bar the last while about internal or not report).

My own take on it is what others have already voiced, in that this was not a football crime, but the current football set up is being punished when those guilty are all gone. PSU certainly had to be punished, but I'm not sure they have punished the right areas, and have been over zealous in football punishment for what was a non football issue.

And I hope, that it doesnt need to be said that the real victims are those abused. I think everyone agrees on that, so it shouldnt need to be said or be used to try degrade others posts.

Stev_o

In fairness it's impossible to give a deterrent penalty without punishing the innocent, as harsh as it is the NCAA had to do this to wake up *evey* university that the emphasis placed on athletics over student safety is not going to be tolerated, that universities have a duty to look after it's own and not abandon them for "the greater good". The next time a scandal like this happens (sex abuse) you'd hope to think that it will get dealt with appropriately because people have seen what happened to Penn St.

me-skywalker

If this was covered under a Basketball programme would they apply similar strict sanctions? I hope they would. But I still think punishing a programme directly, after all guilty parties have been removed and brought to accountablitly by the law, is the wrong course of action but once they chose that course they had to slam it home.

The law dealt with the guilty parties. Would a 1 year ban on all NCAA sports programmes competing in leagues/competitions be a suitable punishment? It would show their hardline attitude to any crimes, cover-ups, rule breaks in any University, at any level and across all boards. While 1year ban wouldnt affect them in the long run but would send out a message that they mean to back up their power with tough actions. The NCAA need to protect their brand and the image also but they could also show regard to the innocent players and non-related parties who will suffer. I dunno though, there is no real right or wrong punishment as the crime itself is sickening.

Stev_o

me-skywalker wrote: »

If this was covered under a Basketball programme would they apply similar strict sanctions? I hope they would. But I still think punishing a programme directly, after all guilty parties have been removed and brought to accountablitly by the law, is the wrong course of action but once they chose that course they had to slam it home.

The law dealt with the guilty parties. Would a 1 year ban on all NCAA sports programmes competing in leagues/competitions be a suitable punishment? It would show their hardline attitude to any crimes, cover-ups, rule breaks in any University, at any level and across all boards. While 1year ban wouldnt affect them in the long run but would send out a message that they mean to back up their power with tough actions. The NCAA need to protect their brand and the image also but they could also show regard to the innocent players and non-related parties who will suffer. I dunno though, there is no real right or wrong punishment as the crime itself is sickening.

Their brand would of suffered had they imposed any lighter bans. Again it's awful that the innocent suffer but you have to punish the institution in some way and nothing hits home like reputation. Regardless of what they did there was always going to be a backlash.

LuckyLloyd

me-skywalker wrote: »

If this was covered under a Basketball programme would they apply similar strict sanctions? I hope they would. But I still think punishing a programme directly, after all guilty parties have been removed and brought to accountablitly by the law, is the wrong course of action but once they chose that course they had to slam it home.

The law dealt with the guilty parties. Would a 1 year ban on all NCAA sports programmes competing in leagues/competitions be a suitable punishment? It would show their hardline attitude to any crimes, cover-ups, rule breaks in any University, at any level and across all boards. While 1year ban wouldnt affect them in the long run but would send out a message that they mean to back up their power with tough actions. The NCAA need to protect their brand and the image also but they could also show regard to the innocent players and non-related parties who will suffer. I dunno though, there is no real right or wrong punishment as the crime itself is sickening.

Google "Baylor Basketball Death Penalty"

me-skywalker

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Google "Baylor Basketball Death Penalty"

Learn something new every day.

Which is stricter: banning the whole NCAA Penn State programmes for 1 year or what they have done with no bowl appearances for 4years, €60mill penalty, reduction of scholarships(transfers), and wiping their records.

What I'm getting to by thinking around about ways is that surely the Football programme isnt soley responsible? Some of the guys that helped covered it up were not football directors/benefactors. I know some of the answers already would be that its unfair on the Basketball/Baseball/Tennis programmes etc to suffer because of what happened in a football programme... BUT in the same vain its also unfair that hundreds of innocent kids will suffer because of the evil actions of the man responsibile and the corrupt scum who helped cover it up? Its difficult to justify the penalties while accpeting them is easy.

Ill leave this subject because its just too hard to argue for and against the penalties when you consider the real victims of Jerry Sandusky.

bruschi

me-skywalker wrote: »

Learn something new every day.

Which is stricter: banning the whole NCAA Penn State programmes for 1 year or what they have done with no bowl appearances for 4years, €60mill penalty, reduction of scholarships(transfers), and wiping their records.

What I'm getting to by thinking around about ways is that surely the Football programme isnt soley responsible? Some of the guys that helped covered it up were not football directors/benefactors. I know some of the answers already would be that its unfair on the Basketball/Baseball/Tennis programmes etc to suffer because of what happened in a football programme... BUT in the same vain its also unfair that hundreds of innocent kids will suffer because of the evil actions of the man responsibile and the corrupt scum who helped cover it up? Its difficult to justify the penalties while accpeting them is easy.

Ill leave this subject because its just too hard to argue for and against the penalties when you consider the real victims of Jerry Sandusky.

pretty much where I am on it too. Its hard to know what is the mst appropriate punishment, as there certainly has to be one. And there are many different arguments on all sides of it.

LuckyLloyd

We can drop it, but I think the Baylor incident shows that a precedent was already established by the NCAA for imposing crippling sports related sanctions (that did not amount to an SMU type "Death Penalty") for transgressions that did not strictly create a competitive advantage.

The Baylor case is very different mind, but they've come down like a ton of bricks before and will do so again.

Syferus

This is pretty much the death penalty in all but name, though. It'll take Penn State many years to recover from this, SMU are only now a live candidate for addition back into one of the top-tier conferences.

If Penn Sate remain in the Big Ten or whatever becomes of it their recovery may be quicker but it'll be interesting to see how this changes the conference dynamics - the Southwest Conference eventually collapsed, partly aided by the SMU scandal. Alot of the big conferences are in flux right now so who knows what realignments will have taken place by the time Penn State are even approaching relevancy again.

davyjose

Syferus wrote: »

This is pretty much the death penalty in all but name, though. It'll take Penn State many years to recover from this, SMU are only now a live candidate for addition back into one of the top-tier conferences.

If Penn Sate remain in the Big Ten or whatever becomes of it their recovery may be quicker but it'll be interesting to see how this changes the conference dynamics - the Southwest Conference eventually collapsed, partly aided by the SMU scandal. Alot of the big conferences are in flux right now so who knows what realignments will have taken place by the time Penn State are even approaching relevancy again.

People said USC would suffer, but 1st year back and their one of the favourites for National champions.

Penn state will suffer, but if they're playing football, they'll survive. They are a big school and will bounce back.

Syferus

davyjose wrote: »

People said USC would suffer, but 1st year back and their one of the favourites for National champions.

Penn state will suffer, but if they're playing football, they'll survive. They are a big school and will bounce back.

There's a huge difference in image between a program offering up dimes to players and one that'll be seen as Pedo U in peoples' minds for the foreseeable future. It's alot easier to bounce back from a pay-for-play scandal than it is one that involves systematic protection of a child rapist.

The shine that Paterno had applied to the program is long, long gone and recruiting is going to take huge hit when you combine that with the bowl, conference and scholarship sanctions. They'll be starting from a very low base.

If you were a top high school recruit why would you choose Penn State over another school and associate yourself with all that entails? In terms of top-tier recruits, only true believers and opportunists will be accepting Penn State's offers for a good few years.

davyjose

i don't think the Pedo U thing will stick for very long. Nor should it. It's in the past. Of course recruiting will be an issue, but this is a huge University, with huge attendances and a fiercely loyal support. They have the financial clout to stay in the Big 10 until the postseason ban is over. They'll suck, but they'll bounve back

There is a big difference between playing no football (a la SMU), and playing football with what will be a group of players, while not elite, will be determined to take their chance at making a name, where otherwise they might have been a 2nd or 3rd stringer. And a very strong sense of us V them.

But as for the Pedo stigma, I think as Paterno's name gradually disappears off the campus, and Sandusky rots in prison, this will fade into history.

davyjose

Syferus wrote: »

If you were a top high school recruit why would you choose Penn State over another school and associate yourself with all that entails? In terms of top-tier recruits, only true believers and opportunists will be accepting Penn State's offers for a good few years.

Hey, if USC hadn't been sanctioned, Matt Barkley would be a Brown or a Dolphin right now. The guys that stick around will be fiercely loyal.

Itssoeasy

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/10/09/jerry-sandusky-lawyer-says-is-certain-ex-coach-will-address-judge-at-sentencing/

Jerry Sandusky to spend at least thirty years in prison and at 68 years old he aint ever getting out.

Mitch Buchannon

I didnt want to start a new thread about this. Last night I watched a great documentary called Happy Valley about the Penn State / Jerry Sandusky / Joe Paterno scandal. It makes for a great watch.

I, like many, think Joe was treated a little harshly. Penn State really got hit hard with a big fine and past "wins" being taken from them.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2171902/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkQGUtDpcoM

Dodge

Mitch Buchannon wrote: »

I, like many, think Joe was treated a little harshly.

I, like many, think Joe got away pretty lightly