Did the NCAA overstep their authority?

[DistrictCyclone]

I see that the question title has been changed, which makes this entire thread moot; the NCAA does NOT have authority over criminal offenses. Unless the OP can clarify what exactly "authority over criminal offenses" means, this is probably a straw man argument. The NCAA is not a court of law--it's not determining legal culpability, guilt or innocence, sentencing, or any other state action--and none of that is changed after today's announcement.

 

[chuckd4735]

I dont take this as handing out criminal punishments. I take it as, Penn State did not comply with various NCAA policies and principles, let alone human morale's. This is the NCAA's way of saying that sort of action will not fly within its organization. The legal system will show that this sort of action is not acceptable in society.

 

[Dryburn]

I think the NCAA has some rights here because of the fact it is not just one coach that did something wrong, but the entire oversight on the part of other coaches, including the head coach, and the Athletic Department Director, and maybe even the University President broke down. It was not only the problem with a single coach, but with the institution.

The only problem I have with this is that the court case has not taken place yet. I wish the NCAA could have waited until the court case is actually settled. Without doing that, it seems as though they have already judged the coach and Penn State guilty, and that is not the way this country is supposed to work. It seems to me a penalty like this could even influence a jury. I'm not trying to defend the coach or PSU, but it just seems like we are jumping the gun here a bit.

We wouldn't want an ISU player who gets arrested kicked off the team before the legal process has run its course would we?

ISU had a basketball coach arrested on child porn charges. Some of those charges involved activities that took place in his ISU office, iirc. He resigned, and I don't remember the outcome of the charges and trial, but I don't think ISU suffered any penalties from the NCAA for that, especially not before the trial. Maybe the embarrassment was considered enough punishment.

 

[jdoggivjc]

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.

See, I don't see this as "lack of institutional control" - that would imply the coaches and/or boosters were committing violations behind the AD/school's back. Instead, not only did the president and AD know, they were complicit. There was complete institutional control in the wrongdoing, which makes what happened so much worse.

 

[ojoe2317]

I think the NCAA has some rights here because of the fact it is not just one coach that did something wrong, but the entire oversight on the part of other coaches, including the head coach, and the Athletic Department Director, and maybe even the University President broke down. It was not only the problem with a single coach, but with the institution.

This is why the institution itself was punished. During the press conference Emmert refused to name individuals, even when pointedly asked by reporters.

The only problem I have with this is that the court case has not taken place yet.

It is unclear that a court case regarding this will take place or what court case are you anticipating? If you are thinking about a civil trial, remember that "innocent until proven guilty" looks different in a civil case.

IWe wouldn't want an ISU player who gets arrested kicked off the team before the legal process has run its course would we?

Depends on what the ISU player was accused of. I certainly have no problem removing student athletes from programs for legal infractions. Players are suspended all of the time while under investigation. This is not a clear analogy to this situation - the Freeh report is ess

ISU had a basketball coach arrested on child porn charges. Some of those charges involved activities that took place in his ISU office, iirc. He resigned, and I don't remember the outcome of the charges and trial, but I don't think ISU suffered any penalties from the NCAA for that, especially not before the trial. Maybe the embarrassment was considered enough punishment.

This is not the same situation, nor is the LE situation. In neither of those cases did ISU try to cover up or protect the guilty parties from the proper authorities. There is a line between individual actions (which a university or institution cannot completely control) and institutional actions (which the university can control). Neither of these ISU situations crossed this line, while the PSU situation clearly did.

 

[ojoe2317]

I dont take this as handing out criminal punishments. I take it as, Penn State did not comply with various NCAA policies and principles, let alone human morale's. This is the NCAA's way of saying that sort of action will not fly within its organization. The legal system will show that this sort of action is not acceptable in society.

I agree. The NCAA is not a legal institution, nor is it bound to follow the legal process. The NCAA is an association, and they can change rules or punish member institutions as they see fit, especially when the violating member agrees to the punishments, as PSU has done.

 

[Clone_12]

Penn State football has profited the last 15 years with Joe Paterno coaching them, and if the NCAA wouldn't have acted, Penn State would've continued to prosper, and had a smooth transition. If you don't believe that, look at their incoming recruiting class so far for next year.
No way should a school not be punished when they won over 100 games the last 15 years with a coach that should not have been there.

 

[bawbie]

I agree. The NCAA is not a legal institution, nor is it bound to follow the legal process. The NCAA is an association, and they can change rules or punish member institutions as they see fit, especially when the violating member agrees to the punishments, as PSU has done.

Exactly right. If PSU objected to this punishment, they always have the option of withdrawing from the NCAA altogether. While they are voluntarily part of the association, they are subject to its bylaws and its punishments.

 

[TedKumsher]

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

Hah -- like they would say anything else.

 

[HFCS]

I have no idea how the notion that the NCAA should never punish any ethic violations is anywhere near a rational position. It's simple minded contrarianism.

This is the mother of all ethics violations. Are people arguing that every organization should never punish any ethics violations within it as pertains to the activities under that organization's umbrella?

 

[ricochet]

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.

You do realize that the death penalty has been used at least twice since SMU right? Sure you can come back at me with old football is the only thing that matters routine. But, isn't that the whole problem - putting football on pedestal and worshiping it as the thing that matters above all else?

 

[isufbcurt]

Am I the only one who thinks this is a very confusing question looking at the answers?

I voted for the opposite that I wanted to because of it

 

[Tedcyclone]

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?

oops i meant yes the ncaa should have made this decision.. i was answering no to the title of your post,which is different than the actual post answers.

 

[driegner]

The subject of the thread and the question in the poll would lead to opposite answers. Just sayin.

 

[CYlent Bob]

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?

Wrong.

Dave Bliss didn't try to cover up the murder. He tried to keep the fact that he was paying his players from coming out as a result of the murder investigation by instructing his coaches & players to tell investigators that the extra "walking around" money the victim had in his bank account was the result of selling drugs.

If you're going to be a Penn State apologist, at least do your homework. This is just embarrassing.

 

[Ficklone02]

Penn State is just lucky they are rooted in a very stable conference, unlike SMU back in the day who essentially lost out on getting into the Big XII after the SWC disbanded, because of the death penalty they received.

 

[acgclone]

The subject of the thread and the question in the poll would lead to opposite answers. Just sayin.

I noticed that too.

 

[CYlent Bob]

I think the NCAA has some rights here because of the fact it is not just one coach that did something wrong, but the entire oversight on the part of other coaches, including the head coach, and the Athletic Department Director, and maybe even the University President broke down. It was not only the problem with a single coach, but with the institution.

The only problem I have with this is that the court case has not taken place yet. I wish the NCAA could have waited until the court case is actually settled. Without doing that, it seems as though they have already judged the coach and Penn State guilty, and that is not the way this country is supposed to work. It seems to me a penalty like this could even influence a jury. I'm not trying to defend the coach or PSU, but it just seems like we are jumping the gun here a bit.

We wouldn't want an ISU player who gets arrested kicked off the team before the legal process has run its course would we?

ISU had a basketball coach arrested on child porn charges. Some of those charges involved activities that took place in his ISU office, iirc. He resigned, and I don't remember the outcome of the charges and trial, but I don't think ISU suffered any penalties from the NCAA for that, especially not before the trial. Maybe the embarrassment was considered enough punishment.

If only they had something to rely upon when determining the guilt or innocence of the Penn State administration and athletic department. Something along the lines of thousands & thousands of pages of internal communications between the four main players in this scandal. If the NCAA had access to that sort of information (possibly compiled into some sort of report by an outside investigator), then possibly these penalties would be appropriate.

And with Randy Brown, correct me if I'm wrong, but did ISU decide to NOT inform the authorities about Brown's little hobby? Because that would be APPLES compared to Penn State's ORANGES.

 

[ThurgoodMarshal]

Am I the only one who thinks this is a very confusing question looking at the answers?

Agree. It's misleading.

 

[Gnomeborg]

No, they did not overstep their bounds.

In a case like this, everyone who possibly can should issue sanctions against this university.

The Coast Guard should refuse to patrol Penn State's water-ways.

The Government of Costa Rica should officially suspend all classes from their Penn State campus.

The Rolling Stones should refuse to play the Penn State fight song in concert ever again.

I don't care how much or little power you have over Penn State, you should sanction them to the fullest extent of your ability.