Joe Paterno and Jerry Sandusky WERE the Penn State football program. Paterno ran it. The football program FAILED. IMO, football had everything to do with it. The Freeh report makes it irrefutable that Joe Paterno and top administration officials, aided and abetted the acts of a sexual predator solely because of football. Jerry raped boys in the large shadow that Paterno casted for MANY years..
[Reply]

Shutting down an athletic program makes a very clear statement that life is not athletics, there are bigger things. If anyone tries to flip that, to make athletics bigger....there is a sure way to bring people around. Life is not fair.

The program has no glory.... It's foundation is 45 years of a coach that harbored a child rapist, many of said rapes, happening in that programs facilities. He knew that children were being abused and swept it under the rug for the sake of the glory of said program. This program has won 2 National Championships with a child rapist as their D Coordinator and had him on staff for 33ish years. They knew who he was and let him hang around.....you know, for the glory of the program. Joe Paterno = Penn State Football
[Reply]

Glory or MONEY.. take your pick:-)
[Reply]

This is an emotional issue on many levels, but you said nothing wrong. I suppose you're right, in that the NCAA doesn't have jurisdiction, certainly not to do what I think should be done.

As for work, fortunately, I guard one of the research buildings, but if you're in the hospital, you see it. Our department also often guards the victims, as determined by medical staff, so we learn about the case histories, as well.
[Reply]

Fair enough. :-)
[Reply]

Wow. This thread started off at a limp yesterday, but exploded after that. This alone has convinced me Penn State SHOULD get the death penalty for a few years, for if emotions are running this high, even with people who claim to care nothing about PSU, JoePa, college football, or even NCAA sports altogether, then a cooling-off period in State College is definitely a good idea.
[Reply]

Those of you that are saying PSU didn't break any NCAA rules, are you sure?

I find it hard to believe there is nothing like a "morality clause" that athletes have in their contract, to govern their behaviour and give the owners an out.

I remember a lot of people castigating the PSU Board when this first came out because they fired Joe Paterno. I think it's pretty clear now why they did, they must have known how deep the cover up was, and how liable they were going to be.

I can't imagine how many tens of millions of dollars they are going to get hammered for in civil suits. The death penalty may not be their biggest worry.
[Reply]

As far as almost all the news stories I've read, that is the general consensus. I'm going to read through the rules this weekend to see if I see anything that looks like it may work, although I am in no way any kind of authority on NCAA rules.

However, it's still not above the NCAA to make something up. Many would view that as a good thing in this case, but in general I get bothered by their inconsistent enforcement of rules.
[Reply]

I think this pretty well covers it.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.4 THE PRINCIPLE OF SPORTSMANSHIP AND ETHICAL CONDUCT

"For intercollegiate athletics to promote the character development of participants, to enhance the integrity of higher education and to promote civility in society, student-athletes, coaches, and all others associated with these athletics programs and events should adhere to such fundamental values as respect, fairness, civility, honesty and responsibility. These values should be manifest not only in athletics participation, but also in the broad spectrum of activities affecting the athletics program."

I've bolded the language at the end of this rule, because it is broad enough to allow NCAA action if the organization desired to act under the scope of this rule.

Was is ethical for Penn State coaches, athletic administrators and the president of the institution to cover up child sex abuse? Certainly these unethical acts would fall within "the broad spectrum of activities affecting the athletics program."

The NCAA could enforce penalties under this prong if it so desired.

10.01.1 Honesty and Sportsmanship.

"Individuals employed by (or associated with) a member institution to administer, conduct or coach intercollegiate athletics and all participating student-athletes shall act with honesty and sportsmanship at all times so that intercollegiate athletics as a whole, their institutions and they, as individuals, shall represent the honor and dignity of fair play and the generally recognized high standards associated with wholesome competitive sports."

Again, broad language that I believe the NCAA could cite in choosing to discipline Penn State. They key is that the language includes not just Paterno and other employees, but Sandusky as well. But here comes the provision that is an absolute slam dunk violation.

10:1 Unethical Conduct

Unethical conduct by a prospective or enrolled student-athlete or a current or former institutional staff member, which includes any individual who performs work for the institution or the athletics department even if he or she does not receive compensation for such work, may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(d) Knowingly furnishing or knowingly influencing others to furnish the NCAA or the individual’s institution false or misleading information concerning an individual’s involvement in or knowledge of matters relevant
to a possible violation of an NCAA regulation;

This prong of the NCAA rulebook is a slam dunk which nails down a clear NCAA violation because while Sandusky may not have been a current coach at the time of his acts, he was certainly a representative of the athletic department's interest. That is, Sandusky was bound to comply with the Unethical Conduct provisions of the NCAA rulebook because he was a "former institutional staff member, which includes any individual who performs work for the institution or athletics department even if he or she does not receive compensation for such work."

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/nc...th-penalty.php
[Reply]

I don't know about "slam dunk". Here is the full text of rule 10:1

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.1 UNETHICAL CONDUCT
Unethical conduct by a prospective or enrolled student-athlete or a current or former institutional staff member (e.g., coach, professor, tutor, teaching assistant, student manager, student trainer) may include, but is not limited to, the following:
(a) Refusal to furnish information relevant to an investigation of a possible violation of an NCAA regulation when requested to do so by the NCAA or the individual's institution;
(b) Knowing involvement in arranging for fraudulent academic credit or false transcripts for a prospective or an enrolled student- athlete;
(c) Knowing involvement in offering or providing a prospective or an enrolled student-athlete an improper inducement or extra benefit or improper financial aid;
(d) Knowingly furnishing the NCAA or the individual's institution false or misleading information concerning the individual's involvement in or knowledge of matters relevant to a possible violation of an NCAA regulation;
(e) Receipt of benefits by an institutional staff member for facilitating or arranging a meeting between a student-athlete and an agent, financial advisor or a representative of an agent or advisor (e.g., "runner
(f) Knowing involvement in providing a banned substance or impermissible supplement to student-athletes, or knowingly providing medications to student-athletes contrary to medical licensure, commonly accepted standards of care in sports medicine practice, or state and federal law;
(g) Failure to provide complete and accurate information to the NCAA or institution's admissions office regarding an individual's academic record (e.g., schools attended, completion of coursework, grades and test scores); (Adopted: 4/27/06)
(h) Fraudulence or misconduct in connection with entrance or placement examinations; or
(i) Engaging in any athletics competition under an assumed name or with intent to otherwise deceive.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The rule is not limiting to the list given, but the problem is that this Penn State situation does not fit under any of the prongs, and it is doubtful there is any support for going beyond them.

But you are right that, if the NCAA wants to, they are more than capable of concocting a reason.
[Reply]

If that were the case, Nebraska, FSU, and Miami would've gotten the death penalty 15 years ago and Florida not too long ago... :-)

I looked over the article you posted, and I thought this individual summized my thoughts on this subject nicely:


[Reply]

for what?

See, your getting all defensive about this all.

I am just pointing out that they did in fact break NCAA rules. Rather they deserve the "death penalty", that is up to the NCAA I guess.

The rules I posted, none of them alone really warrant the death penalty. It's all the rules together they have broken that is going to get them the death penalty.

Nebraska has never done anything this serious to deserve a "death penalty".

Your over analyzing all this and it seems your taking it personally.

They broke the rules and the NCAA CAN punish them for it. It is what it is rather you agree with it or not.
[Reply]

See that's where I disagree. In cases like this you have to follow the money. The ones responsible should be punished but so should those who benefited from it. PSU benefited greatly in terms of football revenue. They too should be punished by removing that revenue stream for a period of time. The court could levy a fine agains PSU but if they pay it with continued football revenue, what does PSU care? If PSU looses that revenue for a number of years, that will also significantly decrease their ability to generate that revenue in the future. See, SMU. That's the real penalty they deserve.
[Reply]

I agree.
[Reply]

Some folks have a difficulty recognizing their own theft of intellectual property as an unethical personal conduct. Beyond that, and all chest thumping, self masturbatory, sports "hero" worship culture aside, whether Penn State gets financially "chastised" has absolutely zero impact on the genesis of the cultural problem that pervades the many unfortunates who are unable to function as a Happy Homer automaton without being immersed in it.

Your Mileage May Vary. :-)
[Reply]

Dude, seriously?
Christan Peter
Lawrence Phillips

Ring a bell?

I don't know where you deduct that I'm taking it personally. :-)

Herein lies my uneasiness with NCAA, and have yet to see a credible argument (here or elsewhere) to convince me otherwise: It's arbitrary and capricious. If the NCAA does decide to levy sanctions, they're saying that murder, the raping of women, robbery, drug usage, drug distribution, assault, etc. aren't a violation, but THIS is.
[Reply]

See: Roger Goodell's, "personal conduct policy."
[Reply]

Had difficulty

I suggested wins under Paterno be taken away to remove him from the record books, and that his statue should be torn down

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nice to hear from you too, Pete
[Reply]

That is kind of where I am at too. Its not at all that I think Penn State deserves a break, I hope that they have to pay out their ass in civil court and if any other criminal charges can be brought, those should as well.

My point is that if the NCAA steps in, they are open up a can of worms that aught not be opened by the NCAA. Leave criminal matters to the legal system and the NCAA take care of the issues it was created to take care of.

But as already pointed out numerous times, opinions will be different. Especially on such a hotbed issue.
[Reply]

Can you show me where the NCAA has dealt with any of the above for just half the amount of time that we are talking about with PSU and the cover-up related to that?

You can't say, oh the NCAA didn't do anything when Oregon had a player get a felony bla..bla..bla..., then they had a kid get a DUI, then a theft....and have it compare to what happened at PSU. We are talking about the raping of kids for years and years and years and the school covering that up to save their good name.... That isn't a bunch of single incidents over a period of time, which generally are addressed by the school with suspensions anyway... How the difference doesn't compute with you is beyond me.....
[Reply]