2012 NCAA College Football Season - Page 2

Is PSU still going to offer to name the stadium after Paterno?  Because JoePa's family acted like that was the least that they could do to honor his "legacy".

I think the Paterno family will have to make do with his name being on every other building there.

I still haven't heard any compelling argument for McQueary not being charged with some form of criminal negligence or criminal inaction or whatever. Maybe there is no law against not stopping a violent horror being visited on a child or contacting actual law enforcement officials, but I keep having this vision of McQueary in lock-up, being raped by fathers of the sort of at-risk children that sign up for Second Mile, and a guard walks by, makes eye contact with McQueary in mid-assault, and walks off saying, "I should probably tell the Warden about that, after my shift."

Was the guy who ended the Penn State press conference a vampire? 

And Matt Millen trying to cover for Paterno a bit and blame more on the Penn State President.  Fuck Matt Millen and all the Paterno apologists.  Also said Paterno had great character. 

I only heard Millen on the radio, but he is clearly coming to grips with this in real time.  It would be hard for any of us to reconcile what we knew of a person we cared deeply about with a truth so heinous.  He even equated it with Sandusky, saying that he never would have believed it could be true of the man he knew, but it was.  So he's clearly leaving room in his mind to accept that Paterno was responsible for the cover up.  He said at some point you have to believe something, and implied that he trusted Freeh and his team, as well as their findings.  He said Joe should be alive to face these charges, and he would confront him about them.

So will/can the NCAA do anything to Penn State?  This is tangentially an athletic matter -- it's more a legal matter involving members of the athletic department -- but I've heard the argument that a) it's simply too big for the NCAA to ignore and b) covering this up did technically give Penn State a recruiting advantage, as it spared them a black eye when courting prospects.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

I only heard Millen on the radio, but he is clearly coming to grips with this in real time.  

I don't buy it.  There has been enough evidence to know for a while that Paterno knew and covered up.  He wants to stay loyal to Paterno and Penn State but it's time to cut ties to Paterno.  The character he talked about wasn't there.  Paterno's ego got so huge that he didn't want anything to mess up his legacy at Penn State.

Just remembered the Big 10 went to 12 and split conference so they'd have to add a team before they could even consider kicking Penn State out.  Which they should do since it sounds like the NCAA may have no legal authority to sanction them.  The rest of the NCAA will have to by not scheduling them for any games.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anyawatchin Angel 

The character he talked about wasn't there.  

Yes, but when you're reconciling that with first person experiences to the contrary, it's probably quite difficult.

Ultimately Millen doesn't factor in this much one way or the other.  He's just a guy that has to talk about this because he went to Penn State and is on TV, and if he didn't it would seem like he's avoiding it.

I don't know Millen, but from what I've seen (which is admittedly not everything) I have no reason to believe he's a bad person, or to paint him with the same broad brush I would the criminals at Penn State.  He's just a dude processing information that is difficult to believe from where he sat.

Isn't that the root cause of this entire thing though?  Football.  Football was bigger then everything over there, and that was everyones fault.  Even after the allegations came out and Paterno's rep started to be tarnished, a good portion of that same student body protested in favor of Paterno.  Culture at and around Penn State is Football first, and everything else second.  Wasn't that culture, in the end, the reason why Sandusky and his actions were protected?  Can't let this come out, because it's going to hurt the program, the athletes and the legacy of Penn State?  I can't help but feel that if the NCAA doesn't do anything, they are basically doing the same thing we are all shocked bout Penn State doing, that being Football first, everything else second. 

I think there will be severe punishments brought down on Penn State when this is all said and done.  Reason being that Penn State didn't keep with the code of ethics the NCAA requires. 

I just think it comes down to this being too big, for them not to do anything.  The publics eyes are set on them right now, and any move they make will be discussed throughout the world.  Them not doing anything, will cause more of a negative reaction, then if they give Penn State the death penalty. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangy 

I think the Paterno family will have to make do with his name being on every other building there.

Yeah except that Paterno naming of the stadium was supposed to be a sweetener in order to avoid a wrongful termination suit against PSU.  I'm thinking that the Paterno's might dial back their threats of a lawsuit.

I think Penn State's problems are bigger than losing some scholarships and missing out on some bowl appearances.  This goes beyond the football program (not to say the NCAA won't have their say).  Hell, I've heard people calling for them to lose their accreditation.

It's a difficult thing to gauge because you want to discourage this type of cover-up in the future, but if everyone involved is going to prison or dead, then you have to weigh that against punishing people who had nothing to do with it.  There's also the fact that doing something like taking away scholarships as a punitive measure to child molestation seems weirdly incongruous.  This wasn't a competitive advantage thing, nor was it even really anything to do with the football team.  Fine the university, if need be.  Set up a fund to help abuse victims with the money.  Do something productive.  In a way giving the program the death penalty would be kind of adhering to old patterns of sexual abuse.  Sweep it under the rug.  It's too ugly to look at.  Let's just eliminate Penn State so we never have to talk about it.  It should be talked about.  The students and coaches who follow in the footsteps of the criminals should be given the opportunity to rise above and cause some good to come from it.

I think the Freeh report really put it in perspective with this

 However, there is an over-emphasis on 'The Penn State Way' as an approach to decision-making, a resistance to seeking outside perspectives, and an excessive focus on athletics that can, if not recognized, negatively impact the University's reputation as a progressive function.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anyawatchin Angel 

Death Penalty for Penn State Football.  I'd kick them out of the Big 10 too.

 

Though I'd bet the NCAA doesn't do much though.

Are the conferences semi-autonomous from the NCAA?  If so the Big 10 needs to boot them and every other conference needs to let them be free agents like Notre Dame for a few years until this kind of culture has been purged from the school

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

So will/can the NCAA do anything to Penn State?  This is tangentially an athletic matter -- it's more a legal matter involving members of the athletic department -- but I've heard the argument that a) it's simply too big for the NCAA to ignore and b) covering this up did technically give Penn State a recruiting advantage, as it spared them a black eye when courting prospects.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

Isn't that the root cause of this entire thing though?  Football.  Football was bigger then everything over there, and that was everyones fault.  Even after the allegations came out and Paterno's rep started to be tarnished, a good portion of that same student body protested in favor of Paterno.  Culture at and around Penn State is Football first, and everything else second.  Wasn't that culture, in the end, the reason why Sandusky and his actions were protected?  Can't let this come out, because it's going to hurt the program, the athletes and the legacy of Penn State?  I can't help but feel that if the NCAA doesn't do anything, they are basically doing the same thing we are all shocked bout Penn State doing, that being Football first, everything else second. 

 

I think there will be severe punishments brought down on Penn State when this is all said and done.  Reason being that Penn State didn't keep with the code of ethics the NCAA requires. 

If Jerry Sandusky had been using donations from Second Mile to pay athletes and give them cars and bonuses for on field performances the program would have been eviscerated.  There wouldn't even be the hemming and hawing.  But fuck a bunch of children in the showers after lights out and we have to contemplate whether or not the NCAA has the authority to rain down fire and brimstone on the program?

Fuck, Pennsylvania ought to eliminate state funding for a few years and let the school live off whatever they can generate out of the research departments.

*EDIT* The NCAA should have held a press conference the day after the guilty verdict in Sandusky's trial announcing they were looking into sanctions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

It's a difficult thing to gauge because you want to discourage this type of cover-up in the future, but if everyone involved is going to prison or dead, then you have to weigh that against punishing people who had nothing to do with it.  There's also the fact that doing something like taking away scholarships as a punitive measure to child molestation seems weirdly incongruous.  This wasn't a competitive advantage thing, nor was it even really anything to do with the football team.  Fine the university, if need be.  Set up a fund to help abuse victims with the money.  Do something productive.  In a way giving the program the death penalty would be kind of adhering to old patterns of sexual abuse.  Sweep it under the rug.  It's too ugly to look at.  Let's just eliminate Penn State so we never have to talk about it.  It should be talked about.  The students and coaches who follow in the footsteps of the criminals should be given the opportunity to rise above and cause some good to come from it.

 

I don't think giving them the death penalty is a way to sweep this under the rug.  I think it's the exact opposite.  The image of the NCAA and college football is that it's a money first organization.  How many discussions has there been about the billions these schools make off of their football programs.  They bring in these kids, who are limited in every area that involves money, yet are used by the NCAA and the University for their financial gain.  Even when it comes down to bowl games, for years the notion has been that a playoff system won't happen because there is too much money in the bowl system.  So, if the NCAA does little to Penn State, it's going to look like they are going light on them because of the money.  Giving Penn State the death penalty is something that would cost the college football world such a vast amount of money, I won't even try to guess at the amount. 

Truth is, one man can bring down an entire institution.  Was it fair that many people at Enron lost their jobs because of the actions of a few? 

Penn State, and the powers that be, covered up sexual assault by using the power and influence of their football program.  That power needs to be taken away, and there needs to be a deterrent set up that shows that not only will doing this will effect you, but very possibly destroy the entire institution you are trying to protect. 

I shiver thinking that Penn State might come out and use their students as a shield, to prevent on sanctions by the NCAA. 

I don't think it's an issue of the NCAA thinking this was just fine and dandy and that SMU paying some players was a lot worse.  It's that this may not be something under their jurisdiction.  They administer on-field athletics, and this had a tangential impact on that.  Although, like I said, you can bet covering up the fact they had a pedophile working there undoubtedly allowed them to keep bringing in top recruits, which allowed them to remain relevant and competitive.  So there's an argument to be made that this did give them a competitive advantage, by not giving recruits a clear picture of the school, to its benefit and to the detriment of competing schools.

I was under the impression that the NCAA governs all aspects of college athletics.  For me, it comes down that Penn State used their athletic program to commit crimes.  Be it, Sandusky using the Penn State football program and his involvement to bring in kids for him to rape, or Penn State and Paterno using the influence of their athletic program to cover this up. 

When it's all said and done, the power of Penn States football program caused, and allowed this to happen.  It needs to be punished. 

What power does the Big Ten division have?   

Considering it's not contingent upon recruiters to disclose those kind of things to recruits, I don't see how it could be considered a competitive advantage.  Not only do all universities recruit in such a way that shows their universities in the best light possible, but it also would set a potentially dangerous precedent for any university that has criminal activity going on under the noses of recruiters.

I think having your football coach and program under investigation for child rape, might factor in to a recruits decission. 

There's a big difference between not letting on your graduation rate is kind of dicey and that your defensive coordinator is molesting kids while the rest of the department looks away.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

Considering it's not contingent upon recruiters to disclose those kind of things to recruits, I don't see how it could be considered a competitive advantage.  Not only do all universities recruit in such a way that shows their universities in the best light possible, but it also would set a potentially dangerous precedent for any university that has criminal activity going on under the noses of recruiters.

Oftentimes recruits will choose a school based upon the training facilities.  If the rape showers were pointed out they might decide on a different school.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

I think having your football coach and program under investigation for child rape, might factor in to a recruits decission. 

Yep.  I bet if this was going on at Florida and Tebow knew about it he might have played elsewhere.  Other players probably have similar, if not as devotional, thoughts about child rape.

Well, first of all, Sandusky retired, did he not?  And I wasn't aware Paterno was under investigation at that time.  

Nevertheless, I know it could impact a recruit's decision.  But what we're asking here is what constitutes an unfair competitive advantage.  If you can sanction a university because they recruited athletes without disclosing any sort of criminal activity that someone involved in the program might be under to said recruits, then you're opening up a can of worms that could allow for a hell of a lot of penalties under the heading of "unfair competitive advantage" that don't really fit the description.  If your O-Line coach has an improper relationship with a grad assistant, and some people hear about it, and later it's discovered to have been true and the guy gets fired, does that mean that failure to disclose that to recruits at the time constitutes an unfair competitive advantage?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TzuDohNihm 

Yep.  I bet if this was going on at Florida and Tebow knew about it he might have played elsewhere.  Other players probably have similar, if not as devotional, thoughts about child rape.

I'd like to think they'd have told someone instead of shrugging and saying, "Well, on to Plan B."

Did you really compare a coach having an affair ........... to a coach having sex with children?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

Did you really compare a coach having an affair ........... to a coach having sex with children?

No.  You're missing my point.  I'm not talking about the actions.  I'm talking about the definition of "unfair competitive advantage."  If not disclosing potentially damaging/ugly aspects of the university to recruits constitutes an unfair competitive advantage, and is retroactively punishable by the NCAA, then you're basically saying every school where something illegal going on while people are being recruited are potentially getting an unfair competitive advantage.  I don't think that's what that phrase means.

If anything it falls more under the heading of "a lack of institutional control."  If that's the case, and you want to get rid of the football program... then just get rid of the university as a whole.  This connects with the university as an institution to protect and nurture young people much more than it connects to a game on a field.

But a teacher or coach having an affair, is not a crime.   If a program covers up the actions of one of their coaches banging a grad assistant, that's not a crime.  That's something that should be handled within the university.  A program covering up child molestation, both factors in that, the rape and coverup, are crimes.   Both will make the program look bad (one WAY more then the other), but only one is going to affect the long term standing of that program.  A coach having sex with an adult won't have any legal ramifications, a coach raping children will. 

Lack of institutional control is a better tack, but again, this isn't really anything to do with the athletics other than it being done by a member of the athletic department.  If anything, this is too big for the NCAA.  It would be like asking the Blockbuster you just got sentenced to 20 years for robbing if they plan on taking away your membership.

pretty good article. Quoting Breaking Bad too...

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefootball/story/penn-state-should-lose-football-privileges-dealth-penalty-in-wake-of-freeh-report-child-sex-abuse-071212

From reporter Charles Robinson of Yahoo Sports:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

But a teacher or coach having an affair, is not a crime.   If a program covers up the actions of one of their coaches banging a grad assistant, that's not a crime.  That's something that should be handled within the university.  A program covering up child molestation, both factors in that, the rape and coverup, are crimes.   Both will make the program look bad (one WAY more then the other), but only one is going to affect the long term standing of that program.  A coach having sex with an adult won't have any legal ramifications, a coach raping children will. 

The NCAA isn't a court of law.  They're not dealing with this as a crime.  They'd be dealing with if it broke NCAA regulations.  And if the regulation it fell under was an unfair competitive advantage, then you'd have to define why it was.  If you say why it was was because it denied recruits information that potentially could have changed their minds, then that opens the door to wondering what you need to disclose to recruits during the recruiting process.  Now, perhaps it already does.  I dunno.  Maybe there is a stipulation that you have to tell recruits about all ongoing criminal investigations.  (If there even was an official one going on, that's something else I don't know.)  And if that's the case, then fine.  But if you're saying recruits should have known, but the NCAA has no specific regulations that universities need to disclose that when people are suspected of criminal activity, then, again, you're opening a potential Pandora's box of recruiting violations that really isn't even necessary.  This is way beyond football.  People want justice, and they want to punish somebody, so they say give the football program the death penalty.  But that's a misdirection of justified outrage, in my opinion.  If you want to, as someone said, stop state funding of the university as a whole, then do that.  But the NCAA itself shouldn't just find a way to punish Penn State in any way they can, unless they broke specific, definable, rules.

The NCAA is a joke if they'd don't give the death penalty at this point.

They can't just gang up on the punishment if Penn State didn't break an actual NCAA rule though.  Besides, you want the death penalty to the football program, the criminal and civil penalties will take care of that without the NCAA's relative slap on the wrist.

Nice.

They can make what every rule they want.  If the NCAA came out right now and said "if a coach rapes a child, and the University covers it up to protect the football program, your program will get the death penalty", no one would, or could do anything about that.  The NCAA makes up their own rules.... we aren't talking the Ten Comandments or the Bill of Rights here, they can do whatever they want in the end. 

Look at Rodger Goodell, the NFL has no set rules for offenses.  He looks at each cases as it is, and decides the punishment.  Way it should be. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clarence Boddicker 

The NCAA is a joke if they'd don't give the death penalty at this point.

The NCAA is a joke regardless and that's why I think the Big 10 will have to be the heavy.  I don't know all the rules, but I do know teams have to be voted in so I would assume the Big 10 can vote people out.   Then once they are out of the Big 10 they get blacklisted.  The program will go bye bye.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

They can make what every rule they want.  If the NCAA came out right now and said "if a coach rapes a child, and the University covers it up to protect the football program, your program will get the death penalty", no one would, or could do anything about that.  The NCAA makes up their own rules.... we aren't talking the Ten Comandments or the Bill of Rights here, they can do whatever they want in the end. 

 

Look at Rodger Goodell, the NFL has no set rules for offenses.  He looks at each cases as it is, and decides the punishment.  Way it should be. 

So you're saying just make up new rules to fit what happened so that you can join in on the punishment?  Sorry, that doesn't sound like a good idea to me.  When you make up rules on a case by case basis, you're subject to that precedent biting you in the ass down the line if you don't think it through clearly.  And if you just make up something else to counteract that precedent if need be, then there's no point to having a set of rules at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

They can make what every rule they want.  If the NCAA came out right now and said "if a coach rapes a child, and the University covers it up to protect the football program, your program will get the death penalty", no one would, or could do anything about that.  The NCAA makes up their own rules.... we aren't talking the Ten Comandments or the Bill of Rights here, they can do whatever they want in the end. 

 

Look at Rodger Goodell, the NFL has no set rules for offenses.  He looks at each cases as it is, and decides the punishment.  Way it should be. 

You really don't understand how the NCAA works. There are different committees and new things have to be ok'd by certain numbers of school presidents or some such thing. The common mistake people make with the NCAA is that it only deals with football. It doesn't. I certainly think the NCAA does stupid things and isn't always efficient but no body that is responsible for the student athletes at basically every major college could ever be perfect. The B1G has more power in this situation and I'm not sure what it takes for them to boot a school. Rules don't just appear because something horrible happens. It takes time and effort to change things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

 

So you're saying just make up new rules to fit what happened so that you can join in on the punishment?  Sorry, that doesn't sound like a good idea to me.  When you make up rules on a case by case basis, you're subject to that precedent biting you in the ass down the line if you don't think it through clearly.  And if you just make up something else to counteract that precedent if need be, then there's no point to having a set of rules at all.

Why is the NCAA adopting a rule that will prevent cover ups to sexual assualts within the atheletic program, a bad idea?  Why shouldn't the NCAA finally act like a governing body, instead of a money hungry virus?  This isn't a case of a coach screwing a cheerleader, or a student getting free tattoos, this is an athletic program, under the NCAA, that used it's power and money to protect a man who raped children.  This program, is a sham, a perfect example of what happens when there are no checks and balances in the college world of athletics.  NCAA should hand this organization the stiffest penalty they can.  The Big Ten should do the same.  Doesn't matter if it's a slap on the wrist or not, it's all about doing the right thing.  The NCAA has the duty to protect future atheletes and students by setting up a strong deterent, showing that if you abuse your powers, punihsment will be dealth.  

If this program is allowed to continue, that is a big fuck you to all the victims.  This program allowed those children to be harmed.  This program allowed Sandusky to be protected.  This program needs to be taken down. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

 

Why is the NCAA adopting a rule that will prevent cover ups to sexual assualts within the atheletic program, a bad idea? 

Whoever said it was?  It's about HOW they do it.  You can't just make up a rule that specifically applies to not disclosing details of a criminal investigation into sexual assaults to recruits (which might not even be, y'know, legal) and say that falls under the banner of "unfair competitive advantage" because it sounds good because you want to look for any and all ways to punish them after the fact.

I don't understand the mad-on to get the NCAA in on the action.  It's like demanding a couple of shots with a paintball gun before the firing squad opens up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

I don't understand the mad-on to get the NCAA in on the action.  It's like demanding a couple of shots with a paintball gun before the firing squad opens up.

maybe if this was UNLV, but we are talking Penn State, the entire institution runs of the blood of the football program. 

http://compliance.pac-12.org/thetools/instctl.pdf

Lack of Institutional Control.... how doesn't this fall under that?

Because it's not lack of institutional control when it comes to things that actual affect athletics.  That's one of the A's in NCAA, you know.  This is so monstrously bigger than the NCAA, I don't see what else they could possibly bring to the table.  Sure, they could implement the death penalty, but you don't think whatever criminal and civil penalties that come down will have the same effect?  Who's going to want to waste their four years of eligibility at Pedophile State?  And who would need NCAA sanctions on top of everything else to make that decision?  You're asking the NCAA to take action on something that's not theirs to take action on, just for the sake of taking action on it.  And however justified the anger, that's not a good precedent.

How is it not?   Athletics isn't just what happens on the fieild.  This isn't some coach who got a DUI after an all night bender.  These are kids that were raped inside the locker room of Penn State University, that was promply covered up by the head of the ATHLETIC department.  If this was the math club, or robotics, I'd agree with you.  The entire thing happened, because of it being associated with athletics. 

How is not reporting rape inside your own lockeroom, not a prime example of "lack of instituational control"?.

NCAA doesn't have rules that relate to this, because this has never happened before.  NCAA "slapping them on the wrist" isn't the point, it's adding another deterent that will help prevent something like this from ever happening again. 

Okay, fine.  What can the NCAA do in this case that would be commensurate with what the federal and state governments are going to do?  I mean, the main thrust of my argument isn't necessarily that the NCAA shouldn't get involved, it's that it would be inconsequential for them to do so.

Besides, I'm not sure I want a group who's biggest decision is which 64 teams get to play basketball in March ruling on something this important.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

Okay, fine.  What can the NCAA do in this case that would be commensurate with what the federal and state governments are going to do?  I mean, the main thrust of my argument isn't necessarily that the NCAA shouldn't get involved, it's that it would be inconsequential for them to do so.

Because if they don't do anything it's possible the program will still go on.  A kid sells his Big 10 championship ring and they get involved.  A coach and AD cover up abuse and nothing?

I doubt Penn State will have the balls to self impose sanctions or give up football altogether.  And they should consider getting rid of football after this.   

I doubt the Big 10 will do much because of money. 

That leaves the NCAA.  It may be a kangaroo court but it's the only thing we have to punish the football program which needs punishment.  Matt Millen said nothing should happen because nobody is left from he scandal. 

Wish there wasa btter option but I don't see it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

Okay, fine.  What can the NCAA do in this case that would be commensurate with what the federal and state governments are going to do?  I mean, the main thrust of my argument isn't necessarily that the NCAA shouldn't get involved, it's that it would be inconsequential for them to do so.

I see what you are saying, and I can see how it might seem like the NCAA doing anything, is like kicking a dead horse.  But for me, I equate it to the likes of a man who killed someone, getting multiple charges including disorderly conducts and assualt.  Compared to the murder 1 charge, those other charges are inconsequential, but there's a reason they are charged with them.

NCAA needs to operate like there are no other forces involved.  No police charges, no legal ramifications, no FBI.  They need to punish Penn State like they are the only ones.  By them "passing the buck", it's almost a direct reflection of what happened at Penn State.   NCAA does have the power to punish Penn State, and by not doing so, it makes them look like I said above, more worried about money and image, then doing the right thing.