Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

NCAA source: "Unprecedented" penalties against Penn State

Watching someone dig themselves in deeper as part of an internet debate can be VERY entertaining. Especially when that person is completely clueless of where their argument is taking them.

This is not one of those times.
 
bawbie said:
Innocent people are hurt by punishments all the time.

When a murderer is sent to prison for life, his family he provided for are punished as well, but that doesn't mean he gets to go free.


When a company is taken down (say, Enron) thousands of innocent employees were hurt, but that doesn't mean the company and it's executives don't get punished.
.
Click to expand...
I expected better from you.
My post was not about innocent people being harmed by punishment, but innocent people being punished. No one is suggesting those that committed the crimes, Spanier, Joe Pa, etc, not to be punished (murder example). Enron is analogous to the NCAA giving SMU the death penalty, and has little in common with the PSU case.

Removing the huge jurisdiction question, it is about the economics of punishment. Does punishing those left at PSU (punishing the innocent): a.)punish those who did commit crimes b.)prevent future Joe Pa's from acting selfishly? No to the former, and thus no to the latter. The NCAA's punishment, like usual, will be inflicted only on those who had no part in the crimes.
 
swarthmoreCY said:
I expected better from you.
My post was not about innocent people being harmed by punishment, but innocent people being punished. No one is suggesting those that committed the crimes, Spanier, Joe Pa, etc, not to be punished (murder example). Enron is analogous to the NCAA giving SMU the death penalty, and has little in common with the PSU case.

Removing the huge jurisdiction question, it is about the economics of punishment. Does punishing those left at PSU (punishing the innocent): a.)punish those who did commit crimes b.)prevent future Joe Pa's from acting selfishly? No to the former, and thus no to the latter. The NCAA's punishment, like usual, will be inflicted only on those who had no part in the crimes.
Click to expand...
 
bawbie said:
Innocent people are hurt by punishments all the time.

When a murderer is sent to prison for life, his family he provided for are punished as well, but that doesn't mean he gets to go free.

When a company is taken down (say, Enron) thousands of innocent employees were hurt, but that doesn't mean the company and it's executives don't get punished.

You have no clue what you are talking about here, and you are not taking the actions of PSU nearly seriously enough.
Click to expand...


This.

The innocent being affected is part of what makes punishment work.
 
I don't understand the "punishments of innocents" argument, encouraging student athlete's to leave an institution which was so corrupt as to allow child rape should be considered a blessing! The reason they seem to want to stay is because they love their teenage decisions and past (false) prestige on PsU.
 
I cannot say this in strong enough words. But I will try.

Having to watch sub-par football is not a punishment.

Setting up a business to be successful because of the presence of a successful athletics program comes with a certain amount of risk. Among those risks is the fact that the program may no longer be successful in the future. This is part of business. Saying that the businesses that may suffer as a result of this may suffer and that that "isn't fair" is like saying that someone who put all of their money into a Mark McGuire baseball card for their children's education fund shouldn't loose that money if McGuire cards suddenly depreciate because McGuire used a ton of steroids, because it "isn't fair." I'm sorry, it isn't fair, but that's business. A bunch of people lost money on the housing market. Businesses fail because of a hundred and one different reasons. If Penn State football is the only way that your business stays afloat, than you took the risk (that Penn State football may not be able to keep you afloat) with the benefit (that Penn State football brings in a lot of money).

This mindset (the NCAA can't act against the most horrific abuse of power by an athletic institution in memory) is akin to saying that it is ok for ISU to pay players to come play football, because Hickory Park would get more business if Iowa State was better at football.

I'm actually taken aback that I even have to make this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AllBig12Drinker, cyfanatic13, CYlent Bob and 2 others
Gnomeborg said:
I'm actually taken aback that I even have to make this point.
Click to expand...

The only reason you would have to explain something so basic is because some people think disagreeing with the majority, no matter how ridiculous the position, makes them seem smart or important.
 
Gnomeborg said:
I cannot say this in strong enough words. But I will try.

Having to watch sub-par football is not a punishment.

Setting up a business to be successful because of the presence of a successful athletics program comes with a certain amount of risk. Among those risks is the fact that the program may no longer be successful in the future. This is part of business. Saying that the businesses that may suffer as a result of this may suffer and that that "isn't fair" is like saying that someone who put all of their money into a Mark McGuire baseball card for their children's education fund shouldn't loose that money if McGuire cards suddenly depreciate because McGuire used a ton of steroids, because it "isn't fair." I'm sorry, it isn't fair, but that's business. A bunch of people lost money on the housing market. Businesses fail because of a hundred and one different reasons. If Penn State football is the only way that your business stays afloat, than you took the risk (that Penn State football may not be able to keep you afloat) with the benefit (that Penn State football brings in a lot of money).

This mindset (the NCAA can't act against the most horrific abuse of power by an athletic institution in memory) is akin to saying that it is ok for ISU to pay players to come play football, because Hickory Park would get more business if Iowa State was better at football.

I'm actually taken aback that I even have to make this point.
Click to expand...

Thread over.
 
Paterno's family said in a statement that the NCAA sanctions defamed the coach's legacy, and were a panicked response to the sex abuse scandal.
The family also says that punishing "past, present and future" students because of Jerry Sandusky's crimes did not serve justice

Wow - unbelievable. They still don't and will never get it: his legacy has been forever tarnished, with or without sanction
 
cyclone13 said:
Paterno's family said in a statement that the NCAA sanctions defamed the coach's legacy, and were a panicked response to the sex abuse scandal.
The family also says that punishing "past, present and future" students because of Jerry Sandusky's crimes did not serve justice

Wow - unbelievable. They still don't and will never get it: his legacy has been forever tarnished, with or without sanction
Click to expand...

It's just another facet of the Paterno god-culture in place at PSU and in the PSU community. Similar responses from Brandon Noble and Matt Millen. It's all about the Paterno/PSU's legacy.

Sadly, nothing done by the NCAA today will change that. If anything, it will strengthen the resolve of the god-culture to hang on over the sacntion period.
 
HFCS said:
Gnomeborg said:
I'm actually taken aback that I even have to make this point.
Click to expand...
The only reason you would have to explain something so basic is because some people think disagreeing with the majority, no matter how ridiculous the position, makes them seem smart or important.
Click to expand...

This situation is beyond ridiculous though. If they feel they need to defend something so horrific to feel good about themselves, they have other issues they need to look at. It's best just to ignore them.
 
swarthmoreCY said:
I expected better from you.
My post was not about innocent people being harmed by punishment, but innocent people being punished. No one is suggesting those that committed the crimes, Spanier, Joe Pa, etc, not to be punished (murder example). Enron is analogous to the NCAA giving SMU the death penalty, and has little in common with the PSU case.

Removing the huge jurisdiction question, it is about the economics of punishment. Does punishing those left at PSU (punishing the innocent): a.)punish those who did commit crimes b.)prevent future Joe Pa's from acting selfishly? No to the former, and thus no to the latter. The NCAA's punishment, like usual, will be inflicted only on those who had no part in the crimes.
Click to expand...

I have to type this with one hand as the other is implanted into my forehead.

1. There is no jurisdiction question. The coverup violates bylaws.
2. Even if there were a question, who is going to challenge this scenario.
3. Someone has to take the punishment. JoePa is dead so we can't beat him with something hard. The rest will get their's criminally. Sandusky can be wrapped in a Bacon Suit and let lose in Jerry World with a dozen lions. If Jera is reading this, I can plan the event.
4. There has to be something done. What about the USC students? Don't they "deserve" to watch a bowl game this year when they may have the best team? Certainly they do. You know what happened, though? Leadership failed them. Funny thing about leadership; your decisions affect a lot of people when you are in that role. It's tough for the students and I kind of feel bad for them but at the same time, they should be ****** at their AD and Joe, not the NCAA.
 
jbhtexas said:
It's just another facet of the Paterno god-culture in place at PSU and in the PSU community. Similar responses from Brandon Noble and Matt Millen. It's all about the Paterno/PSU's legacy.

Sadly, nothing done by the NCAA today will change that. If anything, it will strengthen the resolve of the god-culture to hang on over the sacntion period.
Click to expand...

I think you are right. They will still cling to the past. HOWEVER, I think younger guys that are impressionable right now(mid-high school/junior high, etc) will think twice about going to PSU down the road. If they are not a relevant football school over the period of the next 5-8 years, they won't be looking to go there. The school has benefited being a national power of tradition. They may still get recruits from their region that are high level, but I bet the kids outside their region who have offers from OSU, Florida, USC, etc. won't consider PSU tops on their list anymore. The problem is, there really isn't any other national power school in the upper NE.
 
Tre4ISU said:
I have to type this with one hand as the other is implanted into my forehead.

1. There is no jurisdiction question. The coverup violates bylaws.
2. Even if there were a question, who is going to challenge this scenario.
3. Someone has to take the punishment. JoePa is dead so we can't beat him with something hard. The rest will get their's criminally. Sandusky can be wrapped in a Bacon Suit and let lose in Jerry World with a dozen lions. If Jera is reading this, I can plan the event.
4. There has to be something done. What about the USC students? Don't they "deserve" to watch a bowl game this year when they may have the best team? Certainly they do. You know what happened, though? Leadership failed them. Funny thing about leadership; your decisions affect a lot of people when you are in that role. It's tough for the students and I kind of feel bad for them but at the same time, they should be ****** at their AD and Joe, not the NCAA.
Click to expand...



One, their activity is not covered in the bylaws that is why the NCAA cited the constitution because the language is more broad.

Two, you are right, it really doesn't matter if they had bylaws because they were going to act regardless. Too much pressure to do so.

3 and 4. I have thought for years that the NCAA's system of punishing is ridiculous, i.e. punishing players and coaches for actions of former players and coaches that weren't there. The problem is that they don't have a good way of punishing effectively the players and/or coaches that were involved. One problem is they don't have subpoena power and they can't make anyone talk that doesn't want to.

One thing they could do more of is punish coaches and not allow them to jump to other teams after their program gets in trouble for recruiting violations. They have done this a few times but I believe the more it is done the better.

It would also be interesting if they could sue the players for the money they received in the form of scholarship for attending, i.e Reggie Bush has to pay for the years he attended USC.
 
The big hurt here is the 65 scholarship limit. Everyone mentions USC. You haven't seen the part that will hurt USC. They lost 6 guys to tranferring which isn't a lot. You will see them hurt when they don't have depth in a couple years. For PSU, you will probably see a 10 year rough period.
 
Tre4ISU said:
I have to type this with one hand as the other is implanted into my forehead.

1. There is no jurisdiction question. The coverup violates bylaws.
2. Even if there were a question, who is going to challenge this scenario.
3. Someone has to take the punishment. JoePa is dead so we can't beat him with something hard. The rest will get their's criminally. Sandusky can be wrapped in a Bacon Suit and let lose in Jerry World with a dozen lions. If Jera is reading this, I can plan the event.
4. There has to be something done. What about the USC students? Don't they "deserve" to watch a bowl game this year when they may have the best team? Certainly they do. You know what happened, though? Leadership failed them. Funny thing about leadership; your decisions affect a lot of people when you are in that role. It's tough for the students and I kind of feel bad for them but at the same time, they should be ****** at their AD and Joe, not the NCAA.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's not going to happen. I have been reading twitter feeds of Penn State fans whining about the sanctions and why Penn State is innocent. They have their heads so far up their ***** it makes me sick.
 
I see Penn St coming out of this stronger than before. The penalties are significant but Penn St has underachieved the last decade or so due to having a figure head as of a head coach. This will be an elite job once the sanctions are in place. The facilities, recruiting location and history won't just disappear. I fully expect the Penn St fan base to rally around the teams the next few years and donations to increase as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back