You agree with the article.

And it does have to do with football if football (college athletics) is the crux of what makes some institutions "larger than life." There are certain types of structures and institutions (i.e., religion; highly profitable entities) where such power is most likely to be unquestioned and unchallenged thus breeding such abuse.

Every school has power dynamics and problems whether based on academic rigor or athletic rigor. I know from firsthand experience that the power dynamics at schools celebrated more for athletics tends to be (not always but usually) different than the power dynamics for schools known more for academics. Power dynamics are power dynamics but how it is handled by the schools and the public does differ. People will be angry over an academically well-known school but people will damn near kill you and eat your first born child over an athletically well-known school. That is why it is not only about power but about the specifics of football (college athletics). That topic can be its own GC forum.

I do agree with that part. I'm just saying that since it's probably not going to happen, giving Penn State an SMU-style death penalty is pointless. I'm also saying PSU is more like the Catholic Church scandals than what happened at SMU.

I initially made a Catholic Church comparison but edited it out to avoid potentially derailing the thread.

Great article. I don't know what the solution is. Would turning Sandusky in when they first knew about him have destroyed their program? I don't think it would have. I think with their squeaky clean image, they could have weathered that storm, and I'm puzzled that they made this decision. The risk just seems to great, though hindsight is 20/20.

If destroying their program was the most important thing, that is the problem.

It can be difficult depending on the circumstances but there are people and institutions that make the right decision even when it is not the most popular/easiest/most convenient/most profitable decision.

An opinion piece by Mark Schlabach on ESPN.com on why Penn State should be hit with NCAA sanctions.

Penn State deserves NCAA wrath

Some excerpts…

The article ends with this.

(Bolding mine)

I guess the question is, does sanctioning the entire team of student athletes who had nothing to do with this solve this problem or make it less likely that it would happen again? It certainly doesn't hurt Paterno, Spanier or the other bozo who I won't bother looking to Google to find his wortless name. It hurts the athletes. I'm no fan of Penn State Football, but I think a little creativity is needed to make the punishment fit the crime.

I agree. In the other situations, the players also broke the rules. In this situation, they did not.

But 99.999% of the time, the players who broke the rules are NOT the ones punished by the NCAA actions ... so I'm not sure it's really all that different.

That is to say, when USC/Oregon/OSU/Miami/etc. are punished, it's often years later, and the offenders are already gone. How is this different for those kids?

This situation didn't involve the players period, though.

Exactly. This won't teach them anything either.

I don't necessarily agree with it then either. But if it doesn't involve any players at all, then I see a difference.

I admit - kinda agree with what the article is saying. It's the school that reaps most of the benefits of postseason play, and if the school breaks the rules, then it shouldn't be eligible for those benefits. If the NCAA wants to punish the school, I think that's consistent with past sanctions they've doled out.

Personally, I'd like to see the sanctions be limited to either (1) prohibiting Penn State from receiving financial benefits of postseason play, or (2) allowing Penn State athletes to transfer to another school without penalty, or both (1) and (2).

So, if Penn State performs well enough to be eligible for a bowl, then let the players have the fun of playing in the bowl. But, all the money the school would ordinarily take in from that appearance should be divided among all the other bowl participants. Or, have the school identify a cause to have the money donated to (but not in their name).

I guess I see it like this: If the purpose behind having NCAA sanctions is to punish schools that allow or condone improper behavior (cheating, accepting illegal gifts or funds, etc...), then Penn State is deserving of sanctions. I guess that's why I'd like to see the Penn State players have the option to transfer without penalty.

To me, sanctioning the team sounds like shutting down a Greek system because the Student Affairs Director was involved in a drug ring in his spare time.

That would be roughly comparable only if the school received millions of dollars as a result of covering up said drug ring.

This is much worse than what got SMU the death penalty. Allow the students to transfer and shut down Penn State football for at least a couple years'd be my solution to this. A strong message needs to be sent that bad publicity is a lot better than covering up child molestation.

How did the school receive millions because of what Sandusky did?

The message needs to be sent to the administration, not the students and athletes who had no part in this.

The school didn't receive millions because of what Sandusky did - they received millions as a result of covering up what he did.

I doubt that replacing him would have caused the players to immediately forget what he taught and start losing games.

I doubt that, too. The issue, though, is that the administration knew what he had done and instead of doing the right thing in response, they chose to sweep it under the rug for the sake of their football program. Again, just based on the comparisons presented in the article (schools acting in a way that promoted/condoned improper behavior), sanctions against Penn State seem warranted.

I completely agree that it's unfair for the student athletes to be punished for the actions of their administrators. But that's also consistent with NCAA sanctions. Not all of the Buckeye players got free tattoos, but all of them were punished. Not all the USC players were illegally compensated, but all of them were punished. If the NCAA sanctions were appropriately applied because of those relatively minor infractions, I truly do see how sanctions would be appropriate for such a heinous offense.

But again, in this case, none of the players were involved.

So, as long as one player is participating in something wrong, it's ok for all of them to be punished?

The way I see it is that, in all of these cases, the institutions have done something wrong. Whether one or more players is caught up in the wrong-doing is less important. It seems completely arbitrary to say that if one player is involved, then it's fair for all of them to be punished. But if none are involved, then it's not.

But that's obviously just my opinion. Which is clearly not the popular one here.

Back to DrPhil and her attempt to get this to a point where it's not about Penn State.

I have an easy peasy solution.

Take all the profits the school has made from merchandising for the past 5 (capricious and arbitrary number, you may want to pick one smaller or larger) years, and use it to first pay the victims, and second to help victims of child abuse across the state.

It makes no sense to shut the football program down and screw the athletes, many of whom are there in hopes of making it to a professional career. I haven't heard of a single PSU player who knew about this stuff and covered it up.

No Penn State players got cars because Jerry Sandusky molested children.

No Penn State players got weekly allowances (or if you will, salaries) because Jerry Sandusky molested children.

No Penn State players' parents got condos in State College rent-free because Jerry Sandusky molested children.

:) After I type this:

The artist painted over Paterno's halo. The halo was dumb in the first place. Another life lesson.

As for the current thread topic, it is really a point beyond Penn State that is being made. This is very subjective and with minimal set standards to go by. Student athletes should not be punished for the coaches' and school officials' indiscretions but it will not be the first time that has happened at schools. Perhaps a better but darn near impossible decision would be to fire the coaches and school officials (who are still living) who are proven to have aided or ignored Sandusky's issues and/or taking back some of that hefty salary they received over the years. Some of this stuff may already be happening without the general public's knowledge.

The great and powerful Oz (NCAA) has spoken:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201....ap/index.html

:rolleyes:

(Not at you. At the article.)

Well, it's a very strong penalty - hopefully this will get USC fans to shut up for a bit ... it's probably worse, in a football sense, than a one-year break, in that the team's depth is crippled until about 2018. Unfortunately, that won't be obvious to non-football fans, whereas the "death penalty" is both catchier and more immediately obvious (which is why I assumed the NCAA would take that tack).

Coach O'Brien and the current administration are saying the right things so far - they're being very up-front and accepting of the penalties, and are directing their points toward being good citizens, and not just good at football. Hopefully, that continues, and something good can come out of it yet.

I don't know if this penalty will actually have the intended effect - that kind of sea change would be almost too convenient to believe anyway. It certainly has a smell of "Well, we need to do something..." which does not bode well for precedent-setting or etc.

The first step has been taken. Paterno and every person he put in power at PSU is gone. Hopefully they have learned the lesson that checks and balances are good. Allowing one man to wield too much power (even when he seems to be the benevolent grandfather) can backfire and bring down the whole institution like a house of cards. The next step is for the people of PSU and PA to stop playing the victims and place their anger where it belongs and where it will do some good...at the PSU administration that allowed this culture to thrive.

What about the article? Are you rolling your eyes at the article (it is just reporting what is happening) or the fine? That big fine is setting a big precedent.

Co-sign.

The symbols of Paterno's undying (no pun intended) awesomeness have also been minimized (removing the halo) or removed (the statue). The good that Paterno (athletic and community-based good) and Penn State officials have done over the years is not being ignored but, as with everyone else in the world, the bad can at least temporarily outweigh the good depending on the circumstances. It baffles me that some people cannot grasp this concept. Any institution that benefits from ignoring or seeming to encourage bad deeds will eventually reap what they sew. That is not a new concept and it has happened to athletic and academic bigwigs.

I agree with both of you.

If I understand this fine correctly, the $60 million is to be put into an endowment which will then fund prevention programs and assistance for survivors of child sexual abuse.

While I am not privy to what other charities are doing, this is a truly monumental moment in the history of such programs. I know we can't STOP child sex abuse, but really... we could come really close if these funds are used in meaningful ways. The annual interest on the principal of $60 mil alone makes me happy as a nonprofit professional.

The Paterno family just needs to be quiet:

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/spo...sanctions.html

Interesting that Penn State has to vacate the 1998-2011 wins.

The last 1997 winning game QB - Mike McQueary.

Former Penn State President says he was beaten as a child and therefore would not have ignored the Sandusky allegations had he known about it.

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefoot...-claims-072312

I didn't know Spanier was a sociologist and Family Therapist. That is just really sad and disturbing. Sorry to say that being a victim of child abuse doesn't mean he wouldn't have turned a blind eye to what was going on. We know that the abused end up at all ends of the spectrum including as abusers when they grow up. Using that as a defense is ridiculous, and he should know it. I guess it sounds good, though.

These people need to shut the eff up.

My prediction:

Every cent of scholarship money lost is made up by PSU alums and private scholarships are created (thus opening the door to more chicanery if they get into the wrong peoples' hands).

Take that one to the bank.

They would if they are dumb. That WOULD lead to the death penalty if they were caught. You do something that stupid on probation, and you deserve what you get.

I didn't think there was anything to prevent someone from instituting a privately funded scholarship. I'm not talking under the table. Maybe I'm understanding the "scholarships" that are being removed incorrectly...I thought they meant ones that come straight from the NCAA.

The NCAA isn't taking away scholarship money (that comes from each school's athletic fund - not the NCAA), they are taking away the number of scholarships Penn State can give out to football players. Under NCAA rules, Division 1 schools can only have 85 scholarship players on their roster each season (to keep the playing field even). Penn State will be limited to 65 scholarship players from 2014-2017, so four seasons. The alums could donate $10 million to the athletic fund tomorrow to be put towards scholarships and it wouldn't matter - they will only be able to offer 65.

I think I heard as well that the students on scholarship get to keep them, they just don't get to play football.

I hope that's the case. I mean, sure, if they wanted to play professionally they might not be able to, but at least they're still getting money toward their degree.