Penn State & Syracuse Scandals

[kairparavel]

For the NCAA it'll boil down to money or ethics. And for a governing body with a book of rules for it's ADs so thick you could start a home foundation with it, well, I hope they choose correctly.

You know, the time to make a choice between what is right and what is easy. PSU made the apparently easy choice.

[TerraPrime]

Honestly, if the other schools in the conference are inconvenienced or end up losing some money, I am not that heartbroken. They, too, are contributors to a culture that values football, or sports prestige, over other items.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

A decade without football really would change the campus dynamic. Since part of the problem was the campus attitude of 'king football' that led to the riots, it'd be really great. You'd cycle through undergrad and grad students that remember football and get through several classes of undergrad that wouldn't have football at all. You could use the stadium for concerts and benefits.

Sanctions along the lines of a 14 years without football, and 14 years without any athletic scholarships and 14 years without any athletic post season play in any sport (since the whole athletic department was involved in the coverup, they shouldn't have an athletic department while under sanctions) would probably also result in a lot of turnover on the board, would change the behind the scenes dynamics of the moneyed power players of the important donors/alumni etc etc. It really would be enough time for the amount of turnover that needs to happen at Penn State to in fact happen.

I say all this as a huge fan of college football. The scale of these violations is so much more vast than anything else the NCAA has ever dealt with that the punishment should be commensurately vast.

Really, they should just close the entire university, academics and all, as a lesson to everyone else, and to ensure justice. The kids can all transfer their credits to a different school.

[Kalbear]

Believe it or not that is an option on the table via the DOE. There is no specific right that confirms the continued existence of psu, certainly not in their current form.

But since we're stabbing straw men, I suppose your counter argument is that we should just let everyone - including Sandusky - go, and maybe go for some nice shower rooms?

[Kalbear]

Also, another solution springs to mind. 1 year ban from football, 5 year ban of scholarships. All of them. The ivy league schools seem to get by without paying their kids. Let psu do the same for a while.

[S John]

Believe it or not that is an option on the table via the DOE. There is no specific right that confirms the continued existence of psu, certainly not in their current form.

But since we're stabbing straw men, I suppose your counter argument is that we should just let everyone - including Sandusky - go, and maybe go for some nice shower rooms?

You're talking about the Cleary (sp?) Act? I haven't had a chance to wrap my head around that, but I've seen it mentioned in college football message board land.

[Kalbear]

Yea, the clery act. It basically says that universities must act in a not completely shithead way. Among other things they must have transparency in email and other communications and they must report ALL cases of sex abuse and child abuse. Or they can have penalties and restrictions, including the DOE death penalty: removal of financial aid for the college.

[S John]

Yea, the clery act. It basically says that universities must act in a not completely shithead way. Among other things they must have transparency in email and other communications and they must report ALL cases of sex abuse and child abuse. Or they can have penalties and restrictions, including the DOE death penalty: removal of financial aid for the college.

Huh. I have my doubts about the federal gov. withholding financial aid to the flagship university of the state of Pennsylvania, but the existence of such a thing oughtta be damn troubling for them. That makes NCAA suspensions look like peanuts.

[Altherion]

All this concern for football.

No. It's concern for tens (or maybe even hundreds) of millions of dollars. There are some people who think that this should not be more important than the fates of the children, but this is simply not true, at least not in the eyes of anyone who matters. I suspect that PSU will be punished, but not in a way that has such a dramatic impact on revenue.

[Lightning Lord]

I may be misunderstanding...are you saying that tens of millions of dollars are more important than the fates of the children (those fates including having been sexually assaulted)? I really hope I'm misinterpreting your statement, because if not, that's an awful thing to say/believe.

[Antonius Pius]

I think he means that that's the position the powers that be will take.

I'm with Kairparavel on this one, btw.

[Lightning Lord]

I see. I was a bit hung up on "this is simply not true," which seems/ed to indicate that it is untrue that the abuse of children is more important than money. At least, that much money. There are people who think that, of course, but I couldn't tell where Altherion was on that issue.

[Antonius Pius]

Even then, I doubt that many people would actually put it that bluntly. It would seem exrtaordinarily callous.

Sadly, money and prestige have a way of making ethics and principles seem less important. If anything, that's exatly what the PSU powers that be have demonstrated.

[Bronn Stone]

When SMU got the "Death Penalty", all the NCAA required was one season of no football program. All players on scholarship could transfer if they chose to or sit the year out with their scholarships but without football games and without practices. All significant players left. The school then decided they could not compete the following season without their experienced players and made it a two-year gap without games (huge mistake - they were just as overmatched after a two-year gap as after one, maybe moreso).

I think the same penalty is appropriate. One year of no program. Free transfers for all upperclassmen. Sophomores and Freshmen can transfer under normal rules (sit out a year if they go out of conference, two if they go in). If Western Pennsylvania rallies behind PSU, the program will be back. If not, blame Joe, not the NCAA.

ETA: I can see the NCAA has a problem. By their rules, the "Death Penalty" can only be applied if a program has been formally warned in the past. Were I them, I would offer a draconian penalty and give them the option of taking a year of basic "Death" in its place.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Believe it or not that is an option on the table via the DOE. There is no specific right that confirms the continued existence of psu, certainly not in their current form.

But since we're stabbing straw men, I suppose your counter argument is that we should just let everyone - including Sandusky - go, and maybe go for some nice shower rooms?

No. I'm saying that if the NCAA is going to draw lines, it needs to be consistent about it. If the problem exists at a level higher than the football team, then what is the logic for limiting the remedy to just that team? Because in any case, the reality is that if you kill the football program, and the revenue stream it produces, you may to kill the rest of the athletic program as well. Which means the track athletes, volleyball teams, etc., may all go down the tubes as well.

My view on this is that the assaults and cover-up were crimes under Pennsylvania state law, and the crimes were committed against Pennsylvanian children. It does not relate in any way to issues of competition that are the NCAA's legitimate purview. I don't see why the NCAA should be more involved in resolving this case involving criminal child abuse than it is in all the other horrible cases that happen around the country. Shit, suppose it had been some professor rather than a coach? Do you think the VP of business and finance would have been willing to make that public, and let PSU get a terrible rep for that? The problem was above the level of just football.

So, my view is that to the extent we are talking about actions that go beyond the criminal prosecution of individuals responsible, that should be an issue left up to the people of Pennsylvania, because Penn State is a state-supported school. The state government is perfectly capable of balancing the different issues here, and as the elected representatives of the residents of that state, it should be their decision. Personally, if I were in the state, I'd want the program shut down.

But I don't see the dividing line for the NCAA if it chooses to do something. I think we'd start getting in this whole weird area where off the field misconduct by anyone affiliated with a program, that has nothing to do with competition between schools, becomes subject to some form of decision by a body that is supposed to regulate competition. And if you are really going the "institutional control" route, then the "institutional control" at PSU failed at above the football program level, and the punishment logically should be above that level as well.

[Bronn Stone]

The lack of institutional control at PSU existed for the benefit of, the protection of and at the behest of the football program. Period. Joe ran the show, above his own pay grade.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

The lack of institutional control at PSU existed for the benefit of, the protection of and at the behest of the football program. Period. Joe ran the show, above his own pay grade.

I agree the program should be punished. I just don't think the NCAA is the appropriate body to be dealing with issues of pedophilia.

[Bronn Stone]

I agree the program should be punished. I just don't think the NCAA is the appropriate body to be dealing with issues of pedophilia.

They aren't dealing with pedophilia. They are dealing with a program covering up pedophilia because telling the truth would hurt the program. They should not punish Penn State for Sandusky's actions. They should punish Penn State because of Paterno and the Administration's actions.

Nixon did not deserve to be impeached because his underlings authorized and executed a break-in at the Watergate. He deserved impeachment because once he found out about it, he attempted to cover it up.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

They aren't dealing with pedophilia.

Yes they are. That's the underlying act, and it bears no inherent relationship to sports. What about if a coach gets busted for soliciting prostitution, and the school covered it up? NCAA sanctions appropriate? I mean, think of it this way. Suppose you had a non-football related underlying offense that was less severe than what happened, so the possible "death penalty" isn't the punishment that would be imposed. What do you do, take away scholarships because the coach was involved in an securities fraud scheme? I think there needs to be a legitimate link between the crime and competition for the NCAA to get involved.

They are dealing with a program covering up pedophilia because telling the truth would hurt the program. They should not punish Penn State for Sandusky's actions. They should punish Penn State because of Paterno and the Administration's actions.

I do think Penn State should be punished. I don't see why it is the NCAA's job to do so for actions unrelated to competition.

Nixon did not deserve to be impeached because his underlings authorized and executed a break-in at the Watergate. He deserved impeachment because once he found out about it, he attempted to cover it up.

It was Congress that was going to vote on impeachment, not the NCAA. Tressel and OSU got nailed not by the NCAA not because because of a "coverup", but because they were covering up violations of NCAA rules that affected competition. Suppose a coach was involved in mortgage fraud, and the school hushed it up. Punish the program? I think when you get to underlying offenses that have nothing to do with sports, the responsiiblity for punishment should lie with elected civil bodies, not the NCAA.

[Gold Storm]

There are some NCAA rules that Penn State could be found guilty of breaking:

Emmert reported specific concern about several possible violations of NCAA bylaws, including "lack of institutional control."

Per the letter, Penn State will be required to answer several questions – outlined below – once the NCAA has received responses, according to the letter, it will decide on what actions, if any, to take next.

• How has Penn State and/or its employees complied with the Articles of the Constitution and bylaws that are cited in this letter?
  

• How has Penn State exercised institutional control over the issues identified in and related to the grand-jury report?
  

• Were there procedures in place that were or were not followed?
  

• What are the institution's expectations and policies to address the conduct that has been alleged in this matter upon discovery by any party?
  

• Has each of the people alleged to have been involved or to have had notice of the issues identified in and related to the grand-jury report behaved consistently with principles and requirements governing ethical conduct and honesty? If so, how? If not, how?
  

• What policies and procedures does Penn State have in place to monitor, prevent and detect the issues identified in and related to the grand-jury report or to take disciplinary or corrective action if such behaviors are found?
  
• 
  

More specifically, the bylaws and articles stated in the letter to Penn State include the following:

Article 2.1: "It is the responsibility of each member institution to control its intercollegiate athletics program in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Association. The institution's president or chancellor is responsible for the administration of all aspects of the athletics program. These principles of institutional control are further elaborated on in Articles 6.01.1 and 6.4 of the NCAA constitution. "

Article 2.4: "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.

Bylaw 10.1 requires that individuals "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."

Emmert commented on Bylaw 10.1 in some detail, stating that "while admittedly, the actions alleged to have occurred in this instance are not specifically listed in the bylaw, it is clear that deceitful and dishonest behavior can be found to be unethical conduct. Surely, the spirit of the bylaw also constrains behavior that endangers young people."

Bylaw 19.01.2 states that "individuals employed by or associated with member institutions for the administration, the conduct or the coaching of intercollegiate athletics are, in the final analysis, teachers of young people. Their responsibility is an affirmative one, and they must do more than avoid improper conduct or questionable acts. Their own moral values must be so certain and positive that those younger and more pliable will be influenced by a fine example. Much more is expected of them than of the less critically placed citizen."

Also, maybe Penn State did not violate any NCAA rule sin this specific indecent, but if they go looking and digging into the Athletic Department at Penn State they will find something.