7/24/2012 11:09 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/24/2012 9:12:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/23/2012 9:07:00 PM (view original):
Does anybody here know the protocol that would need to be followed for current PSU players to go to other schools if they wish?  Can other schools coaches/AD's contact players they might be interested in, or is the onus on the players to seek out new schools should they want to transfer away from PSU?

I seem to remember while watching the ESPN documentary on the SMU Death Penalty case that after the DP was handed down that coaches from all around the country descended upon the SMU campus to essentially recruit players.  Granted, this is different as PSU's program is still intact, but I'm just wondering how the process works.
I would imagine coaches would be allowed to contact the kids.  But most colleges have used their 25 scholarships for this season.    I can't imagine a big-time school like USC or Alabama sitting on an unused scholarship. 
I was listening to "Mike and Mike" earlier, and I thought I heard somebody say that a college can basically use one of next season's scholarships to apply to any PSU player they are able pick up now.

Unless I heard wrong.  I was kind of focused on work and was only half-listening.
7/24/2012 11:18 AM
Yes, they are making exceptions of some sort.
7/24/2012 11:20 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/24/2012 11:09:00 AM (view original):
HA!  Just remembered you're a PA guy.    You've got Vick and Rapelisberger as major sports figures in your state.     You guys don't care what people do off the field as long as they produce on it.  You can't be rational when it comes to sports. 
Well, with unassailable logic like that, I guess I'm done here.

 

FWIW, I would have been fine with both of those guys being booted from the NFL forever - something that the NFL has clearly defined as within it's power and has a process for, BTW.  And if someone with actual jurisdiction in the matter shuttered the PSU football program, or the NCAA had gone about what they did with an actual process, you wouldn't here anything from me.  I grew up hating PSU and still root against them most Saturdays - whether they ever win or play a football game again matters not to me.

7/24/2012 11:22 AM
I will, however, cop to anti-NCAA bias.
7/24/2012 11:29 AM
Well, mostly I was just taking a shot at PA.   You happen to be there.

Nonetheless, I find it hard to fathom faulting any punishment of PSU.  The people in charge were putting "the program" ahead of all else.  No, they weren't fudging grades to make players eligible.   No, they were paying players.   No, they didn't make illegal visits to recruits.  Hell, they weren't even letting a Shapiro or Two Live Crew give them illegal benefits right under their nose.   IMO, they were doing much, much worse.   They were allowing a pedophile to rape young boys and to continue raping young boys while they made sure the program wasn't damaged.   Not punishing PSU, whether there are procedures in place or not, is insane.
7/24/2012 11:30 AM
Posted by AlCheez on 7/24/2012 9:27:00 AM (view original):
Posted by jimmystick on 7/23/2012 10:26:00 PM (view original):
I was going to  bump this today; I saw somebody else did already.  Anybody else disapointed the PSU punishment wasn't more severe?  I thought they deserved minimum 4 years with no football games whatsoever.  I'd have given them 10
Since NCAA overstepped their bounds to even do what they did, no.

Penn State just got clobbered by an organization whose jurisidiction in the matter was highly dubious, without anything resembling due process, before all the authorities that did clearly have a place in the matter had completed their due process.

I don't care if Penn State ever wins or even plays a football game again, and they deserve everything that has and will come to them from the authorities that are meant to deal with these kind of situation, but this is just the NCAA grandstanding so they can pretend they are doing something about the way football dominates the culture at schools like Penn State.

I'm not sure how I feel about the NCAA stepping in.  There's definitely a "lack of institutional control" involved, but I'm not really sure if it falls within the spirit of what the NCAA intended for how that phrase was meant to be applied.  It's a gray area, since the coverup was meant to protect the reputation of the school AND the football program.  But the NCAA had the unique "advantage" of being able to move in and issue this beatdown knowing that PSU really wouldn't (or couldn't) challenge any punishments without looking like a bunch of douchebags.

That said, I was good with the $60m fine and probably would have been good if it had been higher ($100m - $120m), provided that the money gets used for what Emmert indicated yesterday.  I'm also good with the vacating of 14 years worth of wins.  And I'm good with the five years probation, though I think that's probably the least damaging sanction that was handed down - this scandal aside, PSU athletics have always been above reproach (as far as I know).

The four years of no post-season and bowls, and the four seasons of reduced scholarships, I'm having some trouble with.  That seems excessive.  It seems that is only punishing those who are left behind, who are completely innocent of any wrongdoing, so I'm not sure what the purpose is.  Some could say that it's punishing the University, but seeing that all those responsible for the wrong-doings are already either dead, convicted, or fired and awating criminal prosecution, I'm not sure why further punishment is necessary.  

I could understand it if the PSU Board of Trustees dragged it's feet in removing those responsible for the coverup, as if they were denying that things really were as bad as they turned out to be.  Then such severe future sanctions could be justified.  But they acted swiftly in removing those involved (Paterno, Spanier, Curley and Shultz) last November; so quickly that I thought it might have been an overreaction, rush-to-judgement at the time (we can see now that it wasn't).

I think two years might have been more appropriate than four.

7/24/2012 11:34 AM
USC is a good example of a short punishment not really working.    I think they got a two year bowl ban for Reggie Bush.   It's over now and it's entirely possible that we'll see USC in the National Championship.  Two years didn't hurt them at all.  Of course, they're in SoCal and not PA but a freshman recruit could look at a redshirt, a freshman year and a bowl game in his sophomore season.    That won't be the case at PSU.
7/24/2012 11:42 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/24/2012 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Well, mostly I was just taking a shot at PA.   You happen to be there.

Nonetheless, I find it hard to fathom faulting any punishment of PSU.  The people in charge were putting "the program" ahead of all else.  No, they weren't fudging grades to make players eligible.   No, they were paying players.   No, they didn't make illegal visits to recruits.  Hell, they weren't even letting a Shapiro or Two Live Crew give them illegal benefits right under their nose.   IMO, they were doing much, much worse.   They were allowing a pedophile to rape young boys and to continue raping young boys while they made sure the program wasn't damaged.   Not punishing PSU, whether there are procedures in place or not, is insane.
I agree everything between the first and last sentence of that paragraph.  So, given that, why wouldn't you use this case to establish a clear, repeatable process so you're not caught with your pants down again the next time something in this lane happens?  Penn State is in no position to do anything but lay down and take whatever is dished out to them now.  I'm quite certain if they were in a position to fight it that they would have a case.  The circumstances of the next situation that comes across the line might not leave the offending school so powerless.

If the NCAA follows on with clear steps for policing and punishing unsavory behavior associated with athletic programs but not attached to eligibility/competition, then I will see this whole thing differently - but I don't see that happening.  But again, I have minimal faith in the organization to begin with.
7/24/2012 11:53 AM
I'm not a NCAA apologist.   I mostly think they're a retarded organization that produces unenforcable rule after unenforcable rule in order to prove they're needed.   That said, establishing guidelines for every situation is impossible.   I would hope we'd never have another coach with a 2nd career in child-rape but, if we do, it's hard to imagine a cover-up of the same magnitude.    Maybe the head coach doesn't say anything to anyone.   Would that be anywhere near the same as PSU?  Should it result in a similar punishment?

I suppose an all-emcompassing rule of "Institutional cover-up, of any kind, of criminal activity will result in NCAA sanctions" could be put in place but that's just another vague rule that can be placed into the book of vague rules.
7/24/2012 1:06 PM (edited)

I don't think you need a specific rule for every situation.  I do, however, think you need to establish somewhere that you're in the business of punishing for athletic program conduct that isn't actually eligibility competition-related when appropriate, and then establish what the process is for doing that, whether it be via your existing enforcement process or something else.   Going back to the NFL point I made earlier, I don't think the personal conduct policy has a ton of detail with regard to specific acts that are punishable and what the appropriate punishment is for each specific act - but it establishes that players can be disciplined for off-the-field conduct and establishes who does that and how it happens - the NCAA needs something similar.  I'm not saying that system is perfect, but the rules are there.

The NCAA didn't actually investigate this themselves, so not only did they not use this as an opportunity to establish a process, they didn't even establish a precedent for dealing with the situation if the offending institutation doesn't effectively self-report the way that Penn State did via the Freeh report.

7/24/2012 1:19 PM
We seem to agree that the NCAA is a bit of a joke.   But are they less of a joke if OSU goes undefeated but can't play in the Rose Bowl because a kid traded jersey tor tats while PSU, destroyed by OSU, goes to the Rose Bowl when their administration covered up child-rape for years while the NCAA tries to set policy and do an independent investigation? 

Not that either team is good enough to do that but you get my point.
7/24/2012 1:37 PM (edited)

I do, and like I said before, if they follow this action up by actually establishing a process and a policy, I'll look at things differently.  Forgive me if I don't hold my breath waiting for them to do so.

7/24/2012 1:55 PM
Seems to me P.A. should of done something in 1998 when it was reported to them. Wonder who the A-G for P.A. was back in 98?
7/24/2012 4:02 PM
I assume from that question that you think you know the answer, but I'm pretty sure you don't...
7/25/2012 8:56 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/24/2012 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Well, mostly I was just taking a shot at PA.   You happen to be there.

Nonetheless, I find it hard to fathom faulting any punishment of PSU.  The people in charge were putting "the program" ahead of all else.  No, they weren't fudging grades to make players eligible.   No, they were paying players.   No, they didn't make illegal visits to recruits.  Hell, they weren't even letting a Shapiro or Two Live Crew give them illegal benefits right under their nose.   IMO, they were doing much, much worse.   They were allowing a pedophile to rape young boys and to continue raping young boys while they made sure the program wasn't damaged.   Not punishing PSU, whether there are procedures in place or not, is insane.
question:  Say Sandusky was bilking seniors of their pensions and utilizing Penn State to do it rather than raping young boys.  Do you still have the same outrage?  Do you still think Penn State should be punished as harshly?  Obviously this assumes the only real change is the crime, but PSU knew of it, let it continue, and let Sandusky continue to use PSU facilities.
of 19

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.