Do you think the NCAA should now be able to prosecute criminal activity or they should have nothing to do with criminal activity not directly involved with the athletics operations?
Did the NCAA overstep their authority?
- Thread starter acoustimac
- Start date
The NCAA did nothing wrong. Penn State is lucky they didn't get the death penalty. IMO, the death penalty will never be given out again, because it can't get much worse than what Penn State did.
Nope. They are punshing the coverup not the crime. The line where the president was going to turn Sandusky in yet said that Joe made him change his mind is pretty much the definition of lack of institutional control.
Disagree. Baylor basketball sets the bar really low.
"It's unprecedented to have this extensive power. This has nothing to do with the purpose of the infractions process..."The purpose of the NCAA is to keep a level playing field among schools and to make sure they use proper methods through scholarships and etcetera," the chair said. "This is not a case that would normally go through the process. It has nothing to do with a level playing field. It has nothing to do with whether Penn State gets advantages over other schools in recruiting or in the number of coaches or things that we normally deal with."
The former chair said as an example the NCAA didn't get involved in the murder of Yeardley Love, a women's lacrosse player at Virginia, by her former boyfriend, a male lacrosse player at Virginia."
-A former NCAA Committee on Infractions chair and current Division I Appeals Committee member who wished to remain anonymous
Penn State's current President signed on to these penalties. Evidently PSU agrees the NCAA did not overstep.
Penn State president Rodney Erickson signed consent agreement to NCAA sanctions | PennLive.com
Penn State president Rodney Erickson signed consent agreement to NCAA sanctions | PennLive.com
The murder wasn't accommodated by the school, sanduskys actions were essentially accommodated by penn state.
D
DistrictCyclone
Guest
They're not prosecuting criminal activity; that's the role of the legal system. They're simply an assoiation imposing a penalty on an institution that voluntarily chooses to be a member. As far as legality goes, this is no different than a country club choosing to fine one of its members for having a dirty locker.
The NCAA is comprised of institutions who voluntarily agree to its terms and conditions in exchange for certain benefits of membership. If a school is unhappy with such an arrangement, it can always withdraw...
The NCAA is comprised of institutions who voluntarily agree to its terms and conditions in exchange for certain benefits of membership. If a school is unhappy with such an arrangement, it can always withdraw...
The thread title should probably be changed. It's the exact opposite of the question asked, so someone could vote yes when they mean no (or vice versa) if they don't read the question and responses closely.
In cases like this (and let's pray this never happens again), what they did was completely justifiable. I am actaully happy with how the NCAA handled this, as this has not been the case before. They were swift and just.
Although, I see your point in the NCAA overstepping their boundaries, this was more or less directly involved with athletic operations. A football coach, both while employed and after, used the program to commit crimes. The football program and the people involved knowingly let this law-breaking activity happen on their watch, in their facilities, and did nothing to stop it. So yes, in this case, the NCAA has complete rights to what they did and I think the punishment is pretty equal to what the crime was.
Obviously, the NCAA cannot hand out legal sentences (jail, community service) but I think they did a good job with the penalties they instilled.
D
DistrictCyclone
Guest
No. The OP should make the responses "yes" or "no"; I would respond "no", but my rationale is not the same as what's listed in the poll response option.
no, they shouldn't oversee criminal offenses, they should make sure that member institutions aren't covering up child rape.
This is exactly right. This wasn't a case of the NCAA "having authority over criminal offenses". It was a case of the NCAA punishing one of their member institutions for an egregious lack of institutional control and covering up horrific criminal offenses.
so, no. The NCAA should not "cover all criminal activity". But they are obligated per their by-laws to ensure their members are behaving per the agreement to be part of the NCAA.
so the only precedent that this sets is potentially looking into cover-ups and lack of institutional control at other schools, which the NCAA would already be doing anyway. It in no way means the NCAA would be investigating every petty criminal charge.
Athletic department employees not reporting a truthful, second-hand report of Sandusky's crimes is less of a criminal or harmful act than murder committed by one of the athletes.
Or Baylor..there you have murder, a coach covering it up, and payments.
Institutional control is in regards to violations for competitive advantages. Competitive advantage was gained when Joe Pa decided not to report what he was told about an ex-assistant and former friend?
Last edited:
