The Valparaiso Beacons Fan Zone Forum

there's a lot of talk right now that penn state's football program should receive the death penalty for the sandusky scandal, especially in light of the report that just came out by louis freeh and his team of investigators. i didn't follow the 2003 baylor scandal as closely, but was there any sort of similar reaction or demand for the death penalty for baylor basketball after the scandal in waco?

Talk of a "death penalty" is silly.  There was no violation of NCAA rules--so how can the NCAA come down on them?  Even moreso, why? That would be like the IRS auditing you because you committed murder.

I'll let Brian Cook take it from here:

QuoteThe NCAA has an enforcement mechanism to maintain its own set of rules for things that the legal system has nothing to say about. Here, the perpetrators are going to jail. That is an appropriate punishment and effective deterrent. The NCAA stepping in is redundant, and the hammer would fall on a completely unrelated set of people. The legal system has a laser-aimed bazooka; the NCAA would be deploying a wonky BB gun with a misaligned sight. Meanwhile, the Department of Education could look into Penn State essentially ignoring the Clery act and PSU is about to be flooded with civil lawsuits that insurance probably won't cover. Deterrence: check.

http://mgoblog.com/content/unverified-voracity-coins-nickname (http://mgoblog.com/content/unverified-voracity-coins-nickname)

The Baylor scandal also incorporated NCAA rules being broken, outside of the murder.  So far, no NCAA rules have been shown to be broken.

To me that seems like saying the IRS should ignore murder as a motivation for Al Capone to commit tax evasion. As long as Mr. Capone didn't break any IRS laws let him commit murder. I realize that by not paying taxes on his ill gotten gain Capone WAS committing tax evasion.

In the NCAA's case they should be finding a way to punish Penn State in any way shape or form because of the loss of institutional control which allowed a staff of a very profitable sports program to cover-up a crime and to actually commit a crime by covering up Sandusky's crime in order for the university to profit from the sports program.

I also think the Joe Paterno statue should come down immediately because it will always remind the victims that Paterno was guilty of a crime against them by covering up Sandusky's crime and perjuring himself to a grand jury. That statue is a true insult to those victims. It really is time for the NCAA to put their foot down. Say "NO MORE" cheating, covering up for the sake of revenue and for the reputation of the sports programs' staff. This lead to crimes against victims that will never recover. The NCAA, I feel, is just as guilty as the Penn State administrators that let this go on if they don't put their foot down now!!!!   The NCAA must do their real job!!!!  The death penalty is needed for Penn State football if only for loss of institutional control. 

I agree that the "lack of institutional control" is the point that most who are calling for the death penalty are using as justification, and that is certainly in the NCAA's wheelhouse.  However, despite a murder and blatant disregard for the rules, Baylor, I believe, lost some scholarships and was denied post-season eligibility but only for a couple of years.  The Tressel case at OSU, that also involved lack of institutional control as well as Tressel's 'misstatements' also fell short of the death penalty. Some analysts point to the SMU case and the fact that the NCAA penalties they received served to put SMU in a position from which it  took 30 years for them to recover.  They state that the NCAA, seeing that, will never impose those penalties again on any school.  They also point out that SMU, at the time, was not quite an elite school and thus easier to clobber. Going back to the IRS, they find it much easier to go after you and me, the middle class, than fight it out with the uber wealthy.

My belief is that there will be institutional control penalties against PSU, but nowhere near a death penalty.  As Apostle points out with the Brian Cook quote, the NCAA will let the other jurisdictions take their heftier cuts first, but I do believe that there was a lack of institutional control and a premeditated cover-up from Paterno all the way up to the PSU president, so some penalties will come down in addition to the criminal and civil punishment.  My belief has been recently reinforced by the NY Times revelation yesterday that Paterno, seeing the writing on the wall way back when the Grand Jury was first investigating Sandusky, initiated negotiations for a sweetened golden parachute.  He knew something was gonna hit the fan and he was planning for the worst even back then.

Oh, I knew, and said, when it first came out in November, that they all knew.  They had to--or why would Paterno's one-time protegé retire a long time before the mentor?  That was all the proof I needed that not only was he guilty, but that his superiors knew, and coerced an early retirement.

Still--the NCAA doesn't have jurisdiction here.  Talk of anything--let alone the "death penalty"--is risible.

Tell you what--if the NCAA does anything to PSU football, then I'll do enough fundraising to have the new football stadium named after me.

Brown Field or Beaver Stadium?    ;)

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 15, 2012, 07:15:08 AMSome analysts point to the SMU case and the fact that the NCAA penalties they received served to put SMU in a position from which it  took 30 years for them to recover.  They state that the NCAA, seeing that, will never impose those penalties again on any school.

I truly believe that 30 years is not enough to make the statement that the NCAA SHOULD make in this case. This went beyond the coaching staff and AD, it went to saving the revenue that this sports program generates and the reputation of the long, long time football coach which was necessary to save the revenue generated. The terrible crime went beyond hiding the nature of a student, it injured the psyche of children. I know it's not good to rate sins but our justice system is predicated on rating the severity of crime. To me this was much much worse and Penn State, the university, not just the football program is guilty and deserves something in this kind of punishment. The NCAA needs to put the foot down so it never happens again and truly clean up collegiate sports. 

Of course this statement and penalty of Penn State would ultimately cut revenue for Valpo's basketball program because the BCS schools would not generate the revenue that Valpo gets from participating in the NCAA tournament. Are we as Valpo fans selling out to the revenue stream too?

Morally and ethically I agree bbtds. 

A rising tide floats all boats, and the way D-I is moving Valpo might easily have to play the game in order to play the game.  ......IF, they want to stay in D-I.  Branding and national recognition that comes with seeing VU on the ESPN crawler and televised BB games aside, the way to avoid being pulled into the flood is to go D-III.   ................OR resolutely fight the battle against everything bad we are seeing across high powered athletics.  But that may be like shoveling sand against the tide.

This afternoon I heard on Boston Sports Talk Radio that in 2011-12 PSU reached its second greatest cash donation influx ($209 +/- million) on record during the Sandusky proceedings.  It appears PSU alumni are in denial and are circling the wagons rather than demanding transparency, justice and recognition that PSU is broken and needs fixing.

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 15, 2012, 01:44:10 PM
This afternoon I heard on Boston Sports Talk Radio that in 2011-12 PSU reached its second greatest cash donation influx ($209 +/- million) on record during the Sandusky proceedings.  It appears PSU alumni are in denial and are circling the wagons rather than demanding transparency, justice and recognition that PSU is broken and needs fixing.

I liked the idea that I heard that any money generated by the PSU football program should go directly to institutions that were created to help prevent child abuse and treat children that have been incredibly hurt by pedifiles.

Everyone of those PSU alumni and friends should have to listen to an abuse victim explain what their abuse has done to their lives. How the glorification of Paterno rubs salt into a very open wound. It would make each and every one of those PSU alumni or friend physically vomit!

I think the name should be changed to Unhappy Valley because it will be forever linked to abuse victims openly suffering because the PSU alumni and friends will be known for defending those that helped create more victims of abuse by turning their heads when it came time to put an end to the abuse. There is NO EXCUSE for this continued festering of the psychological wounds!

http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/8162972/joe-paterno-true-legacy (http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/8162972/joe-paterno-true-legacy)

QuotePaterno let a child molester go when he could've stopped him. He let him go and then lied to cover his sinister tracks. He let a rapist go to save his own recruiting successes and fundraising pitches and big-fish-small-pond hide.

Here's a legacy for you. Paterno's cowardice and ego and fears allowed Sandusky to molest at least eight more boys in the years after that 1998 incident -- Victims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10. Just to recap: By not acting, a grown man failed to protect eight boys from years of molestation, abuse and self-loathing, all to save his program the embarrassment.

QuoteI hope the NCAA gives Penn State the death penalty it most richly deserves. The worst scandal in college football history deserves the worst penalty the NCAA can give. They gave it to SMU for winning without regard for morals. They should give it to Penn State for the same thing. The only difference is, at Penn State they didn't pay for it with Corvettes. They paid for it with lives.

QuoteThis throws a can of black paint on anything anybody tells me about Paterno from here on in. "No NCAA violations in all those years." I believe it. He was great at hiding stuff. "He gave $4 million to the library." In exchange for what? "He cared about kids away from the football field." No, he didn't. Not all of them. Not when it really mattered.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8171574/jerry-sandusky-scandal-ncaa-president-mark-emmert-signals-heavy-sanctions-penn-state (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8171574/jerry-sandusky-scandal-ncaa-president-mark-emmert-signals-heavy-sanctions-penn-state)

QuoteNCAA president Mark Emmert has not ruled out drastically punishing Penn State football in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky scandal.

QuoteStill reeling from the content of the Freeh report, Emmert did not dismiss the notion of issuing the so-called "death penalty" against Penn State, asserting that the unprecedented nature of the Sandusky scandal could warrant extreme punishment.

"This is completely different than an impermissible benefits scandal like happened at SMU, or anything else we've dealt with," Emmert said. "This is as systemic a cultural problem as it is a football problem. There have been people that said this wasn't a football scandal.

"Well it was more than a football scandal, much more than a football scandal. It was that but much more. And we'll have to figure out exactly what the right penalties are. I don't know that past precedent makes particularly good sense in this case, because it's really an unprecedented problem."

I hand delivered a letter to Mark Emmert at the NCAA headquarters in White River State Park on the canal in downtown Indy this morning. Hopefully the guy at the desk with the NCAA jacket didn't put it directly in the trash.

In the letter I stated my view that Penn State football deserved the death penalty. I encourage you to write your own letters to Mark Emmert of the NCAA if you share my views.

Read an interesting opinion piece in favor of leaving the statue up precisely because it means people will never be able to forget what happens when one man has that much power and hero worship.

Quote from: StlVUFan on July 17, 2012, 12:51:38 PM
Read an interesting opinion piece in favor of leaving the statue up precisely because it means people will never be able to forget what happens when one man has that much power and hero worship.

I can only approve of leaving the statue up if the PSU administration also puts a plaque below the statue that states the story behind Paterno's firing and that Penn State wishes that a sports staff person to never acquire that much power again.

http://www.theindychannel.com/sports/31280565/detail.html (http://www.theindychannel.com/sports/31280565/detail.html)

Along with the airplane banner the PSU students have changed the name of the area where they camp out in line for tickets to football games from Paternoville to Nittanyville.

I don't advocate anyone destroying property and breaking the law but their sentiment is very good.

"I'm a Penn State employee that thinks we have failed miserably, and I'm sad for the damage that has been done, but this is just upsetting," Diane Farley, a PSU alumnus who spotted the plane on Tuesday told the Patriot-News of Harrisburg. "It's just stirring up everything."

And until the PSU faculty, staff, alumni, students and friends get the point it should continue to happen.

Brown University in Rhode Island pulled the name of Paterno, an alumnus, from its outstanding male freshman athlete award.

"Since 1991, the Department of Athletics and Physical Education has presented an award to the year's outstanding male freshman athlete. In 1993 the Department of Athletics and Physical Education renamed the award to honor Joe Paterno," a statement from the school said. "In the spring of 2012, the Department of Athletics presented the award as it was originally created, honoring the year's outstanding male freshman athlete without Joe Paterno's name attached. The director of Athletics has now recommended and the University has approved the decision to remove permanently the Paterno name from the award. Past recipients will be informed of the decision to eliminate the name from the award."

Nike announced last week that a child care center at its Beaverton, Oregon, headquarters would no longer bear Paterno's name.

And a mural of Paterno in the gym of a Connecticut middle school will be painted over, the Connecticut Post reported.

"I can't see any other action that shows that great intersection of wanting to do better - introspection, remorse, pain, leadership, humanity, empathy - in its real sense," Dan Lebowitz, executive director of Northeastern University's Sport and Society program, told InsideHigherEd.com. "If they're hoping for football to return to prominence, wouldn't they want it also under a cleansed brand?"

bbttds I understand what you are saying conceptually.  But, what about the kids (not just the FB players)?  I'm talking about the kids who weren't even there when this went on.  Do they pay the price? How do you you punish the "university" for administrative stupidity, negligence and arrogance and still hold true to the values and obligations owed to these kids?  I understand your revulsion.  But to go in and slash and burn regardless of who is maimed and dismembered is just as irresponsible as doing nothing.  As pointed out many times and recently underscored by Emmert, this is not just a FB issue, but a university-wide issue because it went all the way up to the president.  The NCAA is just about athletics -- they can only go so far.   And to punish what could be generations of Pennsylvania kids for this is, in my mind, way over the top.

The athletic program needs to bleed significant cash (IMO - the real pain point) in the next couple of years.  Foundations need to be established and funded by athletic income to offset the lack of integrity.  And, like financial bankruptcy, moral bankruptcy calls for intense auditing over a long period to ensure that this doesn't recurr.  University training programs on ethics need to be mandated and audited. And, maybe, even a visual reminder needs to be established - no post seasons for any NCAA sport for 2012-13.

But we can't punish all the kids, some of whom were in grade school when these atrocities happened.  Universities are about the kids.

What I wrote, is not a death penalty because the kids get to play, but it will cost millions to comply with and sends a firm message.

I guess I wouldn't take it that far '62.  Are the kids really being punished if football is dropped for a few years? (death sentence)  To the contrary, the university will lose millions, and how better to punish the lack of oversight? Fire a few? And the kids?--they can go to one of over 3000 other institutions, many of which play football at the highest level.   Now, if one of those football players wanted to study at Penn State because PSU has some program no one else has, then that may be a different story, but highly unlikely.

It may actually be better for the student to graduate from another school because getting a degree from Penn State will carry lots of baggage and questions etc for quite some time.

This whole thing is gonna be complicated.  Saw this article today in USAToday: NCAA action against Penn State might be limited

Some quick quotes from it relative to jurisdiction:

"Though the NCAA's president says all options will be considered, college sports' governing body may have few options when it comes to punishing Penn State's football program in the wake of its child sex abuse scandal, according to those who have defended and helped sanction NCAA rule breakers.

Former NCAA infractions committee chairmen and investigators condemn what happened at Penn State according to the report by former FBI director Louis Freeh — Penn State senior leaders concealing information that could have stopped Jerry Sandusky from sexually abusing children. But they say one significant challenge looms for the NCAA: finding an NCAA rules violation.

"That's the problem — there isn't one," said David Swank, a former chair of the infractions committee that acts as judge and jury in NCAA investigations."

Of course, there is more discussion in the article.  It's virgin territory. There are no precedents.  Even loss of institutional control, which we posters have hung our opinions for NCAA action on, was always in the past tied to NCAA rules infractions as the article points out. This case does not fit that model.

It's going to be very interesting regardless of which way the NCAA decides to go.

The director of Athletics has now recommended and the University has approved the decision to remove permanently the Paterno name from the award. Past recipients will be informed of the decision to eliminate the name from the award."

Hadn't the Big Ten removed Paterno's name from the football championship trophy even before the first Big Ten football championship took place?

As far as the NCAA punishing PSU in some way, if they can't give PSU the death penalty in football then I feel there must be something done monetarily to punish PSU where it really hurts with money being the real reason behind the cover up and deceit on the part of the administrators.

 >:(     AND SO IT CONTINUES ...........

Boston Globe 7/18 article, Sandusky Fallout Continues, assembled from the wire services:  Selected quotes

"Five days after the former assistant football coach was arrested in November, the US Department of Education launched an investigation into Penn State's compliance with the Clery Act, which requires prompt public alerts of safety threats, annual disclosure of crime statistics, and other steps to protect those on campus."

The Clery Act, signed into law in 1990, was named for Jeanne Clery, who was raped, tortured, and murdered in 1986 in her dorm room at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. The law is upheld by the education department's financial aid office because the ultimate penalty is loss of federal aid funding.

At the heart of the Penn State case is this question: When university officials were alerted to Sandusky's behavior, did they meet legal requirements for documenting those incidents and publicly announcing any threats?"

As of November, Penn State's Clery Act policy was still in draft form [note:  Clery signed into law in 1990!! ] and had not been formally implemented. Although Penn State offered Clery Act training to employees starting in 2007, the athletic department opted not to participate.

''The football program, in particular, opted out of most of the University's Clery Act, sexual abuse awareness and summer camp  [note: when hundreds of underage kids are on campus] procedures training,'' the report read. ''The Athletic Department was perceived by many in the Penn State community as 'an island,' where staff members lived by their own rules.''

Quote from: bbtds on July 18, 2012, 12:08:31 AM
The director of Athletics has now recommended and the University has approved the decision to remove permanently the Paterno name from the award. Past recipients will be informed of the decision to eliminate the name from the award."

Hadn't the Big Ten removed Paterno's name from the football championship trophy even before the first Big Ten football championship took place?

Point of clarification.  The quote cited refers to Brown University (Paterno's alma mater) removing the name from their award to the outstanding freshman male athlete.

But to add to that from the same Boston Globe article quoted below:

"Additionally, Brown University removed Paterno's name from its head football coaching position [note:  apparently at Brown the HFC position is like a named chair ] and a student award and is reviewing whether to remove him from the Brown Athletic Hall of Fame. Paterno graduated from Brown in 1950."

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 18, 2012, 05:08:43 AM

Quote from: bbtds on July 18, 2012, 12:08:31 AM
The director of Athletics has now recommended and the University has approved the decision to remove permanently the Paterno name from the award. Past recipients will be informed of the decision to eliminate the name from the award."

Hadn't the Big Ten removed Paterno's name from the football championship trophy even before the first Big Ten football championship took place?

Point of clarification.  The quote cited refers to Brown University (Paterno's alma mater) removing the name from their award to the outstanding freshman male athlete.

But to add to that from the same Boston Globe article quoted below:

"Additionally, Brown University removed Paterno's name from its head football coaching position [note:  apparently at Brown the HFC position is like a named chair ] and a student award and is reviewing whether to remove him from the Brown Athletic Hall of Fame. Paterno graduated from Brown in 1950."

Sorry about that. The quote was refering to the Brown University decision to remove Paterno's name from their male freshman athlete award. Then I remembered that the Big Ten had removed Paterno's name from the football championship trophy just before the Big Ten football championship game here in Indy.

http://www.nwitimes.com/sports/football/college/penn-state-to-respond-to-ncaa-demand-within-days/article_d18c9e51-0a8c-55d1-839c-81f41fef5e1a.html (http://www.nwitimes.com/sports/football/college/penn-state-to-respond-to-ncaa-demand-within-days/article_d18c9e51-0a8c-55d1-839c-81f41fef5e1a.html)

Although there was some negative reaction to Paterno immediately after Sandusky's arrest — the Big Ten dropped Paterno's name from the conference championship trophy where it had been next to that of Amos Alonzo Stagg, who won almost 100 fewer games — the pace has picked up since the Freeh report was released.

Reading the whole story recaps a lot of what has been documented in early posts.

With respect to the Clery Act, it's pretty clear that the repercussions across the entire university are starting to snowball.  Going back to your earlier comment bbtds,  "As far as the NCAA punishing PSU in some way, if they can't give PSU the death penalty in football then I feel there must be something done monetarily to punish PSU where it really hurts with money being the real reason behind the cover up and deceit on the part of the administrators." this appears to be happening in more than just the NCAA area.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/mizzou/paterno-legacy-remains-valid-pinkel-says/article_852838c5-f379-54da-a301-4957b778ccbe.html (http://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/mizzou/paterno-legacy-remains-valid-pinkel-says/article_852838c5-f379-54da-a301-4957b778ccbe.html)

This is the stuff that must end. This is not the case of another Pete Rose. Pete Rose hurt the integrity of the game of baseball. He didn't help someone physically or psychologically hurt a child permanently. Joe Paterno lied to a grand jury. He committed a crime by covering up a crime which directly led to several more victims of sexual abuse.

People such as Gary Pinkel from Missouri need to receive a direct message from their alumni, faculty, staff, students and friends that defending Paterno is not to be tolerated. Pinkel should be threatened with losing his job and should issue an apology to the victims of this kind of crime in Missouri and across the nation. 

EDIT: I noticed that one of the St.Louis newspaper sports writers seem to indicate that Gary Pinkel may not have understood what was totally included in the Freeh report and may end up retracting what he said about Paterno. I hope a lesson learned about speaking before you know all the facts. That is something that we all do from time to time.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/political-fix/mo-lawmaker-condemns-mizzou-coach-s-comments/article_67ff0f4a-d1c6-11e1-96c9-0019bb30f31a.html (http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/political-fix/mo-lawmaker-condemns-mizzou-coach-s-comments/article_67ff0f4a-d1c6-11e1-96c9-0019bb30f31a.html)

Gary Pinkel, Mizzou football coach, has not recanted yet but at least someone in Missouri, Rep. Sara Lampe of Springfield, is calling him on the carpet for his comments.

"Paterno may have been a great coach, but as a man he failed at what mattered – protecting children from a sexual predator," she said. "As the exhaustive investigation into the Penn State scandal by former FBI Director Louis Freeh proved beyond a shadow of a doubt to all but the most sycophantic of Paterno worshipers, Coach Paterno protected and covered up for a serial child rapist and in doing so enabled him to keep raping children for another decade. A great man never would have done such a foul thing. That a great football coach did should be disturbing to everyone.

"Coach Pinkel's defense of the indefensible indicates that he holds the same attitude that allowed the reprehensible situation at Penn State to occur; the attitude that building a successful football program is more important than everything else, including protecting innocent children from rapists."
Pinkel, who has coached Mizzou since 2001, was asked at media days about his reaction to the Penn State scandal and lessons learned. His remarks have been picked up and reported by media outlets across the country.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20120719/SPORTS/207200312/Could-Big-Ten-commissioner-fire-coaches-Document-floats-possibility?odyssey=mod (http://www.indystar.com/article/20120719/SPORTS/207200312/Could-Big-Ten-commissioner-fire-coaches-Document-floats-possibility?odyssey=mod)|newswell|text|IndyStar.com|s

Big Ten commissioner, Jim Delaney, would like the power to fire coaches. It seems he is also floating around the idea of kicking Penn State out of the conference.  Now that is at least covering your exposure in case there are future problems. You wonder if Delany, on his own, could expel Penn State from the Big Ten.

http://www.freep.com/article/20120719/SPORTS08/120719018/penn-state-big-ten-joe-paterno-jerry-sandusky-sex?odyssey=nav%7Chead (http://www.freep.com/article/20120719/SPORTS08/120719018/penn-state-big-ten-joe-paterno-jerry-sandusky-sex?odyssey=nav%7Chead)

In the Detroit Free Press this story discusses the power that Jim Delany, Commissioner of the Big Ten, could have if the Presidents approve of a certain plan.

I found it extremely interesting the results of a poll about the punishment, if any, that Penn State should receive. Here are the results I saw when I voted.

Bowl ban  5.97%  (268 votes)


TV ban  5.5%  (247 votes)


Death penalty  27.1%  (1,217 votes)


Scholarship losses  7.39%  (332 votes)


Kicked out of Big Ten  9.27%  (416 votes)


All of the above  28.49%  (1,279 votes)


They've been punished enough  16.28%  (731 votes)


Total Votes: 4,490

Quote from: bbtds on July 19, 2012, 09:43:37 PM
http://www.indystar.com/article/20120719/SPORTS/207200312/Could-Big-Ten-commissioner-fire-coaches-Document-floats-possibility?odyssey=mod (http://www.indystar.com/article/20120719/SPORTS/207200312/Could-Big-Ten-commissioner-fire-coaches-Document-floats-possibility?odyssey=mod)|newswell|text|IndyStar.com|s

Big Ten commissioner, Jim Delaney, would like the power to fire coaches. It seems he is also floating around the idea of kicking Penn State out of the conference.  Now that is at least covering your exposure in case there are future problems. You wonder if Delany, on his own, could expel Penn State from the Big Ten.

under the current setup, he does not have that power. that power belongs to the committee of presidents and chancellors, i believe it's called. and i don't see them hurrying to give that power to a sole individual, even in light of what has taken place at penn state.

I have not read the Freeh report, nor do I plan to read the whole thing.  My heart goes out to all of the victims and their families.  Cooler heads need to prevail, but punishment for the sake of making someone pay, doesn't make sense.  I realize that most have very strong feelings on this topic, and rightfully so.  We need to respond from reason, not feeling.  The Big Ten and the Big Ten Commissioner may want firing rights, but unless they also have hiring authority, they shouldn't be able to fire.  Stongly influence a school's decision to fire - yes.  Fire a coach without being in the hiring process - no. 

I think punishing the football program and/or athletic department would be fruitless.  The message has been received to all programs - if you see or think you see, or suspect anything with an adult and minor child, report it immediately.  The only way to hurt the university is the all and mighty pocketbook.  The university is indebted to the football program for bringing much attention and $$ to the university over the last 40+ years.  The current players and coaches should not have to pay for any misguided problems of previous administrations, both football and in the PSU President's office. I don't know if the NCAA can fine a university for what happened off the field here, but if it were me, I would look at the economic impact the death penalty might have, and start there for the fine. 

What really needs to happen is the supporters, alumni, and future alumni of PSU to make an economic effort to remove pledges to the university, and put the funds to use for prevention of pedophiles, and ethics and morality lessons learned.  We need to learn from this scandal - not only to not repeat, but to teach others about ethics, morality, and how each of us does have an impact.  If we choose to hide our head or turn the other way, we could allow another problem like this scandal.   

http://www.indystar.com/article/20120722/SPORTS/207220344/Penn-State-president-orders-Paterno-statue-removal?odyssey=tab (http://www.indystar.com/article/20120722/SPORTS/207220344/Penn-State-president-orders-Paterno-statue-removal?odyssey=tab)|topnews|text|IndyStar.com

Penn State will be removing the Joe Paterno statue.

Interesting that even with Gary Pinkel's help the statue will not stay up.

"I believe that, were it to remain, the statue will be a recurring wound to the multitude of individuals across the nation and beyond who have been the victims of child abuse," Erickson said in a statement released at 7 a.m. Sunday.

He said Paterno's name will remain on the campus library because it "symbolizes the substantial and lasting contributions to the academic life and educational excellence that the Paterno family has made to Penn State University."

But Paterno still has plenty of fans, and Penn State's decision to remove the monument won't sit well with them. One student even vowed to "chain myself to that statue" if there was an attempt to remove it.

The statue, nearly 7 feet tall and weighing more than 900 pounds, was built in 2001 in honor of Paterno's record-setting 324th Division 1 coaching victory and his "contributions to the university."

Quote from: LaPorteAveApostle on July 15, 2012, 07:19:42 AM
Oh, I knew, and said, when it first came out in November, that they all knew.  They had to--or why would Paterno's one-time protegé retire a long time before the mentor?  That was all the proof I needed that not only was he guilty, but that his superiors knew, and coerced an early retirement.

Still--the NCAA doesn't have jurisdiction here.  Talk of anything--let alone the "death penalty"--is risible.

Tell you what--if the NCAA does anything to PSU football, then I'll do enough fundraising to have the new football stadium named after me.

NCAA to announce "unprecedented" penalties against Penn State football tomorrow. 

Let's get this LaPorteAveApostle fundraiser underway!

Ridiculous.  Etc. etc.  Still, the mob wants blood, and they don't care whose.

Nevertheless, I'm going to start fundraising by buying a ton of lottery tix.

Apostle -- raising funds for who?????????  Are you a PSU apologist?  Please be more precise in your replies.

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 22, 2012, 10:29:31 PM
Apostle -- raising funds for who?????????  Are you a PSU apologist?  Please be more precise in your replies.

Earlier in the thread Apostle said

Quote from: LaPorteAveApostle on July 15, 2012, 07:19:42 AM
Tell you what--if the NCAA does anything to PSU football, then I'll do enough fundraising to have the new football stadium named after me.

I believe he meant Beaver Stadium in (Un)Happy Valley.

Well, LaPorte....your thoughts?

:popcorn:

Quote from: valpo04 on July 22, 2012, 09:11:36 AM

Quote from: LaPorteAveApostle on July 15, 2012, 07:19:42 AM
Oh, I knew, and said, when it first came out in November, that they all knew.  They had to--or why would Paterno's one-time protegé retire a long time before the mentor?  That was all the proof I needed that not only was he guilty, but that his superiors knew, and coerced an early retirement.

Still--the NCAA doesn't have jurisdiction here.  Talk of anything--let alone the "death penalty"--is risible.

Tell you what--if the NCAA does anything to PSU football, then I'll do enough fundraising to have the new football stadium named after me.

NCAA to announce "unprecedented" penalties against Penn State football tomorrow. 

Let's get this LaPorteAveApostle fundraiser underway!

Now the sanctions have been released, IMO in reading between the lines, the "death penalty" will never again be used by the NCAA, at least as SMU knew it.

I feel that the only reason PSU didn't get seasons suspended is due to the fact that they haven't really played any games since 1997 now. The donors will punish the team with not coming to games now, and to be honest, the Bill O'Brien era was going to be a slow growth to anything prominent anyway. The suspension of any upcoming seasons wouldn't have been a real punishment under a new coach and young players who weren't there. Allowing current players to transfer and play immediately looks appropriate, if they are incoming freshmen, but players from the last three years shouldn't get such leeway. Plus, the football program gets ZERO revenue from ANY BiG Ten bowl games over those four years, so the program loses millions, on top of the $60M the university has to pay out to child sex abuse programs, and any lawsuits that may come from the true victims of the PSU scandal.

It does seem that you couldn't make it much worse, if any worse, for Penn State even using the death penalty. The punishment is harsh and seems to fit the crime. It was needed to show the public that the NCAA took this loss of institutional control extremely serious and puts notice out that no one is above the law of the NCAA.

I can honestly say that I am stunned.  It's just sad that now people who had no tie to this--hell, kids who weren't even born in 1998 but grow up wanting to be a Lion--have to pay the freight.  Did Jerry Sandusky victimize children, or was it actually Bill O'Brien?

To go back to Brian Cook's astute observation: when making people pay, the legal system has a laser-aimed bazooka, whereas the NCAA has a BB gun with a wonky sight.  Well, that might rather be more like a shotgun loaded with buck with a bent barrel (and a hell of a kick), but still. 

I'm just over the NCAA now.  The mob screaming for blood is one thing, but suits like the NCAA are supposed to be above that--not above such "niceties" like "due process". 

Let's face two facts:  this action proves that this is not nearly so much about the protection of children as it is about seeming to be hard on anyone that has anything to do with abusing children. 

The other fact is we live in a society that today permits (nay, encourages!) absolutely every single kind of sexual perversion known to man--save one.  And so only in applying an absolutely scorched-earth policy of retribution against anyone who violates this final, solitary sexual taboo, is a post-liberal society able to convince itself that it is still moral, and continue to sleep at night.

Quote from: bbtds on July 23, 2012, 04:04:43 PM
It does seem that you couldn't make it much worse, if any worse, for Penn State even using the death penalty. The punishment is harsh and seems to fit the crime. It was needed to show the public that the NCAA took this loss of institutional control extremely serious and puts notice out that no one is above the law of the NCAA.

I suppose time will tell how much of an impact these sanctions will have and whether the death penalty would have been worse or better than what PSU was given today.  Just remember that it took SMU 22 years to reach a bowl game after they were given the death penalty.  In the Mid 90's, Miami was sanctioned pretty severely (although not as severely as PSU) for a major Pell Grant scandal but was not given the death penalty.  Six years later, the 'Canes won the national championship.

jesse palmer was on espn this morning talking about how this is not really a 4 year ban, but essentially an 8 year post-season ban due to the difficulty that it's going to create for o'brien to recruit during this next four year period. and that really is the case - trying to recruit based on a limited opportunity for exposure and success is going to be quite the challenge.

Good point.


Let me spell this out:  10 young men a year, for three years, will not have the opportunity to play D1 FB, that they otherwise would have.  Not because of anything they've done. 


Would love for bbtds or any of the crucify-PSU crowd to justify that one for me.

Quote from: LaPorteAveApostle on July 23, 2012, 07:05:37 PM
Good point.


Let me spell this out:  10 young men a year, for three years, will not have the opportunity to play D1 FB, that they otherwise would have.  Not because of anything they've done. 


Would love for bbtds or any of the crucify-PSU crowd to justify that one for me.

Oh you really asked for it!!!

It's only 10 out of the 300 or so that the NCAA penalizes all NCAA schools who have committed infractions in any given year. If we are so upset with the NCAA taking away legitimate student athlete scholarships due to the infractions of the schools' staff and administrators why weren't you outraged last year or two years before when probably more scholarships were taken away by the NCAA because more schools had committed violations (Ohio State, USC, UCLA, Miami etc.). Why all of a sudden are you so upset by the 10 scholarships taken away from student athletes at PSU that can transfer to another school without sitting out a year. Those 10 student athletes at Penn State actually have a significant advantage over those that lost scholarships at OSU, USC, Miami, etc. There really is no loss at all except for the institution of Penn State. Why do you cry at all for those 10 at Penn State??

No, you're the one asking for it, friend!

I think "loss of scholarships" is silly enough because it penalizes kids that had nothing to do with the situation.  It's ESPECIALLY egregious because there's NO NCAA VIOLATION here (although maybe that justifies not giving them due process?).

What you haven't yet noticed is that this is a ZERO-SUM GAME.  These hypothetical 10 kids can of course go elsewhere--where they will take other kids' scholarships, and so it will trickle down, so that 10 low-level FBS will play FCS, whose 10 displaced will do DII, etc., etc., while the NCAA, which makes billions of dollars off the backs (and arms and legs) off unpaid kids, doesn't see a hit.

So explain:  how does depriving these 10 kids of a free ride punish Jerry Sandusky and the long-gone PSU administration?  In a larger sense, how does a future penalty like loss of scholarships, paid by someone else (not Reggie Bush!), at all prevent people from taking the present chance?

just to throw this in - you can make the argument that a violation did occur, because the ncaa controls punishments for lack of institutional control. clearly that happened here. the institution lost control of members of the football staff and the university administration, with frightening consequences.

also, it's not 10 scholarships. it's 10 initial-year scholarships, dropping penn state's allotment from 25 to 15. they are also dropping 10 others per year for the next 4 years. so all told, it's 80 scholarships that the team will lose. from the espn article:

Quote
Penn State also must reduce 10 initial and 20 total scholarships each year for a four-year period.

PSU football is toasted beyond belief. The death penalty is, IMO, a wrist slap in comparison. PSU might as well forget about wasting FB scholarship on kids who will not be competitive in the Big 10 for the next decade.  After transfers and defecting recruits and the inability of O'Brian to land any quality players, the NCAA has sentenced PSU to a series of games, both at home and on the road, over the next 4-8 years that will make them the laughingstock of FBS football.  And each year it will be like Ground Hog day.  It's kind of like hanging them, then, putting them in the electric chair to make sure they killed them.

Rather, PSU should suspend all future scholarships (honor the present ones, of course -- IF the kids even hang around) and declare for non-scholarship FCS.  Heck the PFL could use a presence in Pennsylvania.  At least they would be able to compete.  Problem for PFL schools is that at PSU home games the echo caused by 99,999 empty seats in Beaver stadium might be an insurmountable home field advantage. 

One could drive a truck through "lack of institutional control".  I don't think that's what happened here.  What happened here was an egregious violation of Clery Act responsibilities, cover-up, and face-saving at the expense of victimized children, etc.--absolutely terrible violation of federal law, and individual rights, surely--but not NCAA statute as written.

At the risk of having the same analogy fail to be understood twice, this is, in the grand scheme, like the IRS going after a mass murderer, post-conviction, because he didn't file his taxes during the years he was luring young men to his Milwaukee apartment.  It's grandstanding, piling-on, chest-puffing, and a number of other participles I don't feel like tacking on.

Let's consider it 20 scholarships all told because they will go from a max of 85 to 65.  It's not really 80 scholarships because PSU, as most of the B1G, now offers 4-year guarantees (as they should), so 20 players will get the ax. (80 schol-years ÷ 4 years = 20 schol, so 20 kids who are now in HS--or haven't even started it yet--will pay for this.)

THIS, my friends, should make everyone notice the hypocrisy of the NCAA.  I admit it always bugged me until today; now it's festered and burst: in all of the "student-athlete" BS, the one thing they claim to make their indentured-servitude worthwhile is the 'gift' of the scholarship (which, as noted, wasn't for longer than a year until THIS year, and only at CERTAIN schools).

What's the major thing they take away from PSU today?  The vacating is nice, as it negates his record, but it can't take away the memory of walking off the field victorious (except vs. UM in non-RichRod years).  The fund is nice, as it makes it look like they're "caring" (remember the big-government dictum, "spending others' $ = caring a lot about things").  But the big-time hurt?  Scholarships to student-athletes.  (the fourth, the post-season ban is, after that, redundant in the worst way.)

As of today, I'm officially on the "pay college athletes" bandwagon.  Either that, or let's let the BCS schools continue to walk away from the NCAA and towards starting over.  When it comes to leeches on the hide of college athletics, the NCAA is just a shade smaller than the preposterous bowl system today.

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 23, 2012, 09:00:45 PM
PSU football is toasted beyond belief. The death penalty is, IMO, a wrist slap in comparison. PSU might as well forget about wasting FB scholarship on kids who will not be competitive in the Big 10 for the next decade.  After transfers and defecting recruits and the inability of O'Brian to land any quality players, the NCAA has sentenced PSU to a series of games, both at home and on the road, over the next 4-8 years that will make them the laughingstock of FBS football.  And each year it will be like Ground Hog day.  It's kind of like hanging them, then, putting them in the electric chair to make sure they killed them.

Rather, PSU should suspend all future scholarships (honor the present ones, of course -- IF the kids even hang around) and declare for non-scholarship FCS.  Heck the PFL could use a presence in Pennsylvania.  At least they would be able to compete.  Problem for PFL schools is that at PSU home games the echo caused by 99,999 empty seats in Beaver stadium might be an insurmountable home field advantage. 

Slap on the wrist?  Tell that to SMU.

The sanctions were meant to significantly hamper PSU over the next four years.  This goes without saying.  Aside from that, IMO, the only thing that Penn State loses once the bowl ban and scholarship reductions have expired will be on field depth.  Depth that, with the right coaching staff, could be replenished to at least competitive levels in shorter time frames than eight years. PSU may not be competing for NC's this decade, but there's no way it will take Penn State 22 years to get to another bowl game.  Hell, Penn State will probably be competitive with Indiana the year after the sanctions expire.

Quote from: crusaderjoe on July 24, 2012, 07:39:31 AMHell, Penn State will probably be competitive with Indiana the year after the sanctions expire.

When the Big Ten predictions were redone due to the penalties levied against Penn State many prognosticators still showed Penn State ahead of Indiana for this coming 2012 season.

Quote from: bbtds on July 24, 2012, 01:56:04 PM

Quote from: crusaderjoe on July 24, 2012, 07:39:31 AMHell, Penn State will probably be competitive with Indiana the year after the sanctions expire.

When the Big Ten predictions were redone due to the penalties levied against Penn State many prognosticators still showed Penn State ahead of Indiana for this coming 2012 season.

boy, goes to show just how much faith they have in iu football... wonder if valpo could run with them.

SMU's penalty was much harsher.  It took until recently for the program to get back on its feet and into a bowl game, after being one of the top teams in their prime (albeit due to paying players). 

We will see how long it takes PSU to get back to prominence, but I don't think it will take nearly as long as SMU.  PSU football deserved what it got after trying to conceal the negative publicity a child molestor on staff would cause for the program.  For those in the media that feel this should not have been an NCAA football matter, they are gravely wrong.  It has come to the forefront that JoePa was a joke of a person, not practicing what he preached in regards to character...burn the statue....

So, let me get this straight....people's outrage at little boys being raped is simply a product of us all wanting to feel moral in an overly-permissive, sexually-charged culture?  It's NOT that it is entirely heinous, repulsive, etc. 

Also, just so I'm tracking with you LaPorte, the football coach of a football power covering up the child rape perpetrated by an assistant football coach in football facilities and on football bowl trips was not a football issue? 

Reading your comments, one might walk away thinking the victims in this whole child-rape thing are a handful of kids who might not get a D1 scholarship (God forbid), not the children who were sexually violated under the watch of Joe Paterno, among others.

Thanks LAA, this really cleared some things up for me.

 

Quote from: SadersofthelostArc on July 24, 2012, 04:50:26 PMSo, let me get this straight....people's outrage at little boys being raped is simply a product of us all wanting to feel moral in an overly-permissive, sexually-charged culture?  It's NOT that it is entirely heinous, repulsive, etc. Also, just so I'm tracking with you LaPorte, the football coach of a football power covering up the child rape perpetrated by an assistant football coach in football facilities and on football bowl trips was not a football issue? Reading your comments, one might walk away thinking the victims in this whole child-rape thing are a handful of kids who might not get a D1 scholarship (God forbid), not the children who were sexually violated under the watch of Joe Paterno, among others. Thanks LAA, this really cleared some things up for me.

I refuse to debate anything with an intellectual lightweight who can't read correctly.

Typical response...but this is one of those times where no debate is needed.  I'm completely fine coming down on the opposite side of this argument as you. 

I'm simply waiting for you to have your latest hissy-fit, quit the board, and leave it to the adults.

You're not very perceptive for an intellectual heavyweight.

Probably not, but perceptive enough to recognize a guy who sits around his parents' basement making avatars all day when I see one.

Oh yeah!  Speaking of, Keith Freeman said to make his say "This Is Raider Country" at the bottom.

Quote from: LaPorteAveApostle on July 24, 2012, 07:35:43 PM
I'm simply waiting for you to have your latest hissy-fit, quit the board, and leave it to the adults.

Quote from: SadersofthelostArc on July 24, 2012, 07:39:41 PM
You're not very perceptive for an intellectual heavyweight.

Quote from: LaPorteAveApostle on July 24, 2012, 08:06:30 PM
Ooh, tough talk from a guy who sits around his parents' basement making avatars all day. 

Btw, Keith Freeman said to make his say "This Is Raider Country" at the bottom.

Can you imagine at one time many of the posters thought these two were the same person.   ;)

You know, that's the most galling part of this whole thing.  I wasn't going to bring that up.

gah.

Meanwhile, now that I've been recalled to the world of adulthood by bbtds (thank you), I'd like to link to Michael Buckner, the nation's most prominent attorney on NCAA cases (1) before and (2) after the sanctions were announced.

1.  http://michaelbucknerlaw.wordpress.com/2012/07/22/michael-l-buckner-law-firm-statement-on-reports-of-ncaa-sanctions-against-penn-state/#comments (http://michaelbucknerlaw.wordpress.com/2012/07/22/michael-l-buckner-law-firm-statement-on-reports-of-ncaa-sanctions-against-penn-state/#comments)

2.  http://michaelbucknerlaw.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/michael-l-buckner-law-firm-response-to-ncaa-penalties-in-penn-state-case/ (http://michaelbucknerlaw.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/michael-l-buckner-law-firm-response-to-ncaa-penalties-in-penn-state-case/)

Once again, I understand the pitchfork-waving, torch-brandishing mob's desire for justice.  I also know that its wrath is misplaced (here, as so often elsewhere).

Alright, let's stop arguing.  I post occasionally a) just to have fun with some of you and b) to talk VU hoops.  While I'm serious about my disagreement with you over Penn State, most of the time I'm simply not serious. 

And for the record, my house (or my parents' house for that matter) doesn't have a basement.

(http://i1073.photobucket.com/albums/w383/SadersofthelostArc/23924779.jpg)

that would make me feel much better.  so thanks!

(even moreso if you don't call them lady 'saders in real life either.)

Getting Penn State where it really hurts. Their advertising sponsors are starting to bail on them.

http://www.nwitimes.com/sports/college/penn-state-loses-one-sponsor-others-could-follow/article_0c226553-c239-5c2e-891d-51bd7ea0163d.html (http://www.nwitimes.com/sports/college/penn-state-loses-one-sponsor-others-could-follow/article_0c226553-c239-5c2e-891d-51bd7ea0163d.html)


Also the impact on businesses in State College, PA

http://www.indystar.com/usatoday/article/56455650&usatref=sportsmod?odyssey=mod (http://www.indystar.com/usatoday/article/56455650&usatref=sportsmod?odyssey=mod)|newswell|text|Indianapolis%20Sports|p

Sorry bbtds, but small businesses around State College getting clobbered is not my idea of a just verdict for PSU (unless you believe they also deserve to go bankrupt as a result of the actions of people they may not even know).  What we are seeing is the ripple effect of a hasty decision that, IMO was arrived at by the NCAA for PR reasons.  Normally an NCAA investigation and the resultant findings take many months and sometimes years.  This was a linching.

Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with you and others calling for strong penalties.  It just bothers me that it is coming so fast and so recklessly.  What documented NCAA investigations have been completed?  What NCAA due process has been followed.  What ramifications have been thoughtfully considered? 

Is PSU guilty of lack of institutional control?  Yes.  But a lot more than the PSU athletic and university administration have been whacked by what I believe to be hastily imposed penalties. When, in our society, do innocent, non-participating bystanders (kids and businesses to name a couple) get penalized for not being involved?  There were plenty of financial penalties and there could have been even more penalties directed at the UNIVERSITY (IMO the the real culprit). 

Force a cleaned house -- new everything and everyone (FB, athletics and key university -- except the players). Force all FB revenue to go to supporting anti-abuse, ....and other similar penalties.  Dedicate any bowl shares to the same for a certain period of time (4 years?).

But screwing the community, the players, and the students is not my idea of justice.

Is there any scenario in which the NCAA should take away scholarships, bowl games, television money, etc?  Did you guys have a problem with the punishments received by OSU, USC, etc?

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 24, 2012, 10:44:09 PM
What NCAA due process has been followed. 

Sorry '62, I don't mean to keep quoting you, but you bring up some interesting topics with your posts.  In regard to your due process concerns, it is unclear whether the NCAA was absolutely required to afford due process in this instance given the holding found in NCAA v. Tarkanian  (NCAA as an organization was deemed to be a private actor and therefore in general not required to afford due process under the 14th amendment).  Plus, as I understand it, Penn State already agreed to whatever sanctions were going to be given by the NCAA, so such an argument regarding PSU and due process concerns is probably moot now anyway. 

See:  http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=488&invol=179 (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=488&invol=179)

In rereading the story in the NWI Times I realized that my own bank was one of the sponsors that is staying with Penn State.

PNC Financial Services Group issued a statement after the July 12 release of the Freeh report that its "ongoing engagement with the university signals our support of the students and traditions of Penn State. ... We believe that the university will learn from this experience and become stronger."

So as of this morning I will be switching my bank to another one in Indy. And I'm officially letting them know that it is because of their sponsorship of Penn State. I encourage other posters that have PNC accounts to do the same.

I can weigh in here, on the ground in State College.   I work as an assistant professor at Penn State, though I don't speak for the university and had no interaction with the athletic department.  First and foremost, the actions of Jerry Sandusky are the main crime here, and everyone feels for those victims.

The NCAA is known for being a rules-based organization, and usually they take a long time to investigate, discuss and ultimately sanction a university that has been found to be in violation of one of the rules.  I have a problem with the speed of their decision-making here, and the obvious lack of due process.  In a criminal proceeding, assuming there is a conviction, the sentencing phase is separated by some time so as not to act in the heat of the moment.  In fact, Sandusky has not been sentenced yet, though everyone agrees he will spend the rest of his life in prison.  The NCAA has chosen to act in haste, and has given no real opportunity for due process in this situation:  There are no new crimes being committed that would require them to have acted on Monday – the sanctions could have been implemented a week from now, or two weeks from now, or two months from now.  The only possible exception is that some of the existing players might wish to transfer before the start of training camp, but none of those players or coaches had anything to do with the crimes.  So, why not let Penn State respond to the NCAA's letter of inquiry, or at least give Penn State a deadline to respond and then go through the normal process?
 
To those who say that due process is not violated because President Erickson signed the consent decree, at the end of last week, Erickson stated that Penn State was working through the Freeh report (that came out a week earlier) and was working on their response to the inquiry.  This Sunday, the Paterno statue was removed, so I can imagine the President was also involved in some deliberations on that subject as well given how strongly some still feel about Coach Paterno.  Erickson reported that the alternative given should he not immediately sign the consent decree was an immediate "death penalty" to the football program, for up to four years.  This doesn't seem like a real choice.

I should also mention that Penn State authorized and paid for the Freeh Report, in order to try and clean up its own issues and find recommendations to improve.  If the NCAA can take these unilateral actions based on the publication of a report, what will happen the next time a university is accused of any kind of impropriety?  Will the university bring in a respected investigative team and publish all of the results, or tell the NCAA to do its own investigation?

Regardless of what they said, the NCAA is opening up a whole new arena for future infractions that are outside of the NCAA rules.  Let's say an assistant volleyball coach has a drinking problem, and the coach and athletic director know about it, but do not dismiss that individual.  He retires, and runs summer volleyball camps at the university.  One day, that coach kills a student in a drunk driving crash, and the authorities figure out that the coach was also involved in a tragic hit and run in a decade earlier. Clearly, there might be civil liability for some of those acts, just like there will be civil liability for the university and its former leaders for what happened in the Sandusky situation.  However, will the NCAA immediately sanction that volleyball program and take away wins?  Will they demand a special fund be set up to promote drunk driving education, a reduction in scholarships and prohibit the volleyball team from competing in the post season for four years?   Admittedly, the analogy is not perfect, and I am not excusing the failure to report suspected abuse that happened at Penn State and the tragic consequences that followed.  But this paragraph is about the new areas that the NCAA might be taking on, and it seems they are anxious to do so.
   
To those who say that this is way worse than SMU, they had been previously investigated, warned and sanctioned by the NCAA and still chose to violate specific rules.  Perhaps the "death penalty" is appropriate for repeat offenders.  Yet no program at Penn State had ever had a hint of an infraction before this, and the University represented much of what was good about both academics and college sports.  In addition, none of the people responsible for this are in positions of power and several are under criminal prosecution.
 
I think everyone expected an appearance before the infractions committee and some meaningful penalties.  Things got out of hand, and people in power failed to do the right thing when they had the chance.    Why the NCAA had to act so quickly, with so little time between the Freeh Report and a sentencing is beyond me.  In the end, the NCAA is taking advantage of this situation to show that they are doing something now, piling on in the language of other observers.  Yet they seem to be using a chainsaw to perform heart surgery, a heart that is already broken for the victims, angry at Sandusky, and saddened by the clear failure of respected leaders to lead when they should have done so. 

Doesn't PSU have lawyers, and probably pretty good ones?  If this was such an untenable situation presented by the NCAA, why didn't the lawyers step in and advise the school not to sign anything yet?

Also, I think PSU lost the right to impose their own sanctions considering that this was such a top-down problem...the BOT, the president, the athletic staff....I think they've lost any trust. 

Yes, PSU hadn't been warned before.  However, 14+ years of a pervasive behavior of knowingly looking the other way (from the top down) while a POS human being abused children in your athletic buildings and on athletic trips, seems to have sped this up quite a bit.  The SMU stuff was over a few short years, and though you can't say it is comparing apples to apples in regards to violations, was dealt with in a manner befitting the crimes.  I feel that is the same with PSU, in that they deserved what was levied on them, perhaps deserving a worse penalty.  Though it is not the textbook rule in regards to 'unfair advantage,' think of how many less top athletes would have attended PSU since at least 1998, had they known the university was complicit to a sexual predator's whims??  How would the football program and public have dealt with knowing about JoePa's looking the other way if this was 8-10 years ago?  Would he have been forced into retirement, thus taking away the recruiting tool of a 'living legend' coaching your child?  God rest his soul, but my grandpa would be rolling over in his grave if he saw the attention PSU was getting right now.  After being a professor there for several years, he had nothing but great things to say about the school and administration.

Been way overworked and heavy into my 1st place White Sox for a week or two, but as I sit here waiting for a build to finish (sometime before the end of the month, please ;) ), I'm catching up on the board.  I must admit that I didn't read every single post here carefully, just kind of skimmed a bit.  I'll try not to skewer anybody because of that.

This scandal has been .... something that I can't quite put the right words to.

As to the punishment that was doled out, I think this is the most compelling assessment I've found (from a Summit League beat writer): http://tvfury.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/fairness-a-fallacy-in-penn-state-case/ (http://tvfury.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/fairness-a-fallacy-in-penn-state-case/)

A fairly common method for judging something to be valid is when half the audience thinks it's too harsh and the other half thinks it's too lenient.  Opinion writers often use this as a measure to see if they are on the right track.  It's a terribly imprecise measure, but it's available here.  For everyone who thinks it was unfair, I can show you someone who thinks it was a slap on the wrist.  For example, it is child's play for wealthy donors to replace every bit of the monetary penalty doled out, and judging by the "us against the world" mentality that is already taking shape there, I wouldn't be a bit surprised.

My own take is that this story is far from over, so I don't lose a lot of sleep over whether the punishment was too harsh or too lenient.  Because the punishment ain't over yet.  Not by a long shot.  It doesn't really matter what's fair.  What's fair punishment isn't going to matter.  Holy hell is coming to town.  What we've seen so far is still the appetizer.  And the voluminous civil suits are the salad.  The main course has already been alluded to: one or more federal investigations.  That's the hammer, right there.  You ain't seen nothing yet.

By the way, "innocent" being punished for the sins of those who came before them is hardly a new concept.  It's as old as the bible.  I wager half the people trapped in captivity in Babylon had little if anything to do with the corruption of the kingdom of Israel that led to its downfall.  Guess what?  The prophets didn't care.  Communities get punished, because communities enable sin, and I feel that is true here.

Sorry, LAA, but I can't go along with you on this.  The culture there was built and fed by *everyone* there, and while new recruits might be unwitting in this, they have signed up for the community that nurtured the "Football is King" environment that enabled Sandusky to operate with impunity for so long.  It's the culture that needs to be cleansed there -- and probably a lot of other places too.  I'll agree that the NCAA is also corrupt and hypocritical.  Nothing about this vindicates them in the least.  But, the businesses in Happy Valley benefited from that culture, and they no doubt contributed to it, this culture that enabled a predator to prosper in his evil.  No one will be left unscathed.  Fair it may not be.  True it will be, and it probably wouldn't matter if the NCAA had stayed out of it.

I was fascinated by the startling trial verdict.  Talk about a home-court advantage that could not withstand a powerful enemy: by the time the jury was ready to deliberate, 9 of the 12 had significant ties to PSU.  Pennsylvania was at the time the only state in the USA to bar expert testimony in child sexual abuse cases (that is scheduled to expire soon), which was widely viewed as a significant impediment to the prosecution, allowing the defense to hammer the victims on why they continued contact with the defendant even after the alleged assault -- a twisted, cruel argument that cleverly leveraged the defendant's ability to groom his disadvantaged victims.

And yet, the defendant was roundly convicted.  For what it's worth, my own interpretation (right or wrong) was that there was no pressure felt by the jury to acquit Sandusky because he was not the only target in the whole affair.  He had become expendable.  If anything, the jury of 3/4ths PSU friends might have felt that convicting him might just defuse the larger investigation.  He was a scapegoat.  I do think the jury objectively assessed the evidence (they did acquit on 3 of the 48 counts).  I think it's interesting that they felt *free* to be objective.

I think this is one of those rare moments when everybody's true colors come out.  I've even seen articles on how the media (national and otherwise) contributed to that same culture, and I would have to agree.  No one's hands are clean.  This is one of those moments in history when there is opportunity for renewal -- just another in a long line of such moments that I suspect will be squandered somehow.

Do you agree that in some way the lust that Valpo has for NCAA tournament money helped perpetuate the need for BCS schools, such as Penn State, to have a giant figure head like Joe Paterno, which helped the money machine which was Penn State football that grew so big that JoePa was "too big to fail," to borrow a phrase from the economic world, and that in some small way Valpo has contributed to this problem?

Quote from: bbtds on July 27, 2012, 04:50:40 AM
Do you agree that in some way the lust that Valpo has for NCAA tournament money helped perpetuate the need for BCS schools, such as Penn State, to have a giant figure head like Joe Paterno, which helped the money machine which was Penn State football that grew so big that JoePa was "too big to fail," to borrow a phrase from the economic world, and that in some small way Valpo has contributed to this problem?

Aspetta un minuto...Valpo has a lust for NCAA tournament money?  Huh?  Please explain.

What's the famous quote that has been bounced around this board from time to time over the last decade on VU message boards regarding the hiring of Homer Drew by Alan Harre in the late 80's?  "You'll never get fired for losing."

While the then acting university President, head basketball coach and acting Athletic Director have all changed since that time, I highly doubt that mindset at Valpo has changed either to the point where coaches would need to act to win at all costs, even with 7 NCAA tournament appearances.  I mean think about it--just on facilities alone, if VU was lusting for NCAA tournament money, wouldn't they have replaced their hot garbage basketball facility by now so that the university could put itself in the best position to make even more NCAA appearances?

Sorry, not following you on this one.  Lust for NCAA tournament money doesn't sound like a VU institutional value to me given the lack of facility commitment and the historic lack of a "win at all costs" mentality.

Have waited a while to tackle this subject.  I find myself wondering about the repercussions affecting the innocents with this NCAA decision.  I feel that the sanctions came down too quickly and attack the symptoms rather than the actual causes (read as greed, TV money, BCS etc.).  Have talked to a friend who works for one of the big sports marketing companies and he says that the sanctions will hurt the non revenue sports (read as the actual student athletes at PSU) very significantly.  He also agrees that the NCAA has acted too quickly and without real precedent. Imagine if the NCAA starts digging into the actions of every former coach from all D1 schools....  Have they opened Pandora's box?

understand that PSU administration capitulated to the NCAA under duress:  i.e., sign off on the letter or the program would be shut down completely for multiple years.    Kind of like " resign or we'll fire you."  Come to think of it, wasn't that the choice Paterno was offered? 

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 27, 2012, 05:37:59 PM
understand that PSU administration capitulated to the NCAA under duress:  i.e., sign off on the letter or the program would be shut down completely for multiple years.    Kind of like " resign or we'll fire you."  Come to think of it, wasn't that the choice Paterno was offered? 

not sure joepa ever got that choice. just the note with the number to call telling him he was gone. i don't care what happened - that was absolutely a terrible way to handle things.

It is not at all out of the question that Valpo and every other mid-major at least contributes to this atmosphere, though primarily as outsiders envying the big time.  I don't know how much we actually fall into this issue, but every time we gush over Dick Vitale at the ARC, every time we covet airtime on the 4-letter network, every time we grouse about losing out on high profile recruits, every time we grew bitter over Brandon Wood wanting to move up to the big time and snubbing us in the process, to give but a few examples, we validate the very culture that allows Sandusky to happen.  It surely flourishes without our measly help, don't get me wrong, but we are not immune from that very same mindset.

As for the other stuff, to be perfectly honest I am having a lot of trouble giving a rip about dangerous precedents and #TeamOutlaw (my God) and so forth.  I'm too busy thinking about the people who are still trying to recover from child rape.  It will take them a life time to get past it.  #TeamOutlaw is getting off easy by comparison.

Quote from: StlVUFan on July 27, 2012, 10:55:23 PM
It is not at all out of the question that Valpo and every other mid-major at least contributes to this atmosphere, though primarily as outsiders envying the big time.  I don't know how much we actually fall into this issue, but every time we gush over Dick Vitale at the ARC, every time we covet airtime on the 4-letter network, every time we grouse about losing out on high profile recruits, every time we grew bitter over Brandon Wood wanting to move up to the big time and snubbing us in the process, to give but a few examples, we validate the very culture that allows Sandusky to happen.  It surely flourishes without our measly help, don't get me wrong, but we are not immune from that very same mindset.

As for the other stuff, to be perfectly honest I am having a lot of trouble giving a rip about dangerous precedents and #TeamOutlaw (my God) and so forth.  I'm too busy thinking about the people who are still trying to recover from child rape.  It will take them a life time to get past it.  #TeamOutlaw is getting off easy by comparison.

That is exactly what I was thinking. Thank you, stlvufan, for putting it in much more elegant language.

As far as precedents, how long did the precedent of giving out the death penalty, as in SMU's case, last?

PSU had a "university problem" regarding priorities...the University needed to be punished, with an emphasis on their football program...let the chips fall where they may.  When one has a "University problem" the entire school gets hit as it should.  It's unfortunate the innocent student athletes , students, and others tied to the school get hurt also, but that is the way it should be...THE UNIVERSITY GETS PUNISHED, including all who may be affiliated with it.

Let's not get a guilt feeling as a member of the NCAA...if our school's priorities are in order, it's NOT OUR PROBLEM!  Let's get over it and move on!!

While I agree that the NCAA has an obligation to do their investigation and determine what penalties under their purview PSU deserves, I also believe that those penalties should be a result of due process.  Here in a recent post on ESPN is the take of one source within the Freeh group on the NCAA's misuse of their document [note: and the denial of due process]:

ESPN 7/28/12

A source familiar with the investigation into Penn State's response to former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky's child sex abuse scandal is speaking out against the NCAA.

According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, a person connected to the Freeh report, which condemned Penn State's handling of Sandusky's abuse, said the NCAA should not have based its harsh sanctions against the university on the investigation.

"That document was not meant to be used as the sole piece, or the large piece, of the NCAA's decision making," the source told The Chronicle on Thursday. "It was meant to be a mechanism to help Penn State move forward. To be used otherwise creates an obstacle to the institution changing."

Further on the article states:

NCAA president Mark Emmert said the organization relied on the Freeh report when coming up with those penalties because it was "vastly more involved and thorough than any investigation we've ever conducted."

The Chronicle's source, however, said that should not have been the case.

"The Freeh team reviewed how Penn State operated, not how they worked within the NCAA's system," the source told The Chronicle. "The NCAA's job is to investigate whether Penn State broke its rules and whether it gained a competitive advantage in doing so."

The source also told The Chronicle that since the Freeh report didn't interview Paterno, Schultz or Curley, the NCAA should have furthered the investigation to see "how far this went."

"The NCAA took this report and ran with it without further exploration," the source said. "If you really wanted to show there was a nexus to cover up, interview the coaches. See their knowledge and culpability ..."

The failure to do so, according to the source, has damaged Penn State.

"The sanctions against Penn State were really overwhelming, and no one imagined the report being used to do that," the person told The Chronicle. "People thought it would help others draw conclusions about what happened and provide a guide for leaders to be able to identify minefields and navigate through them.

"Instead, Emmert took the report and used Penn State's own resources to do them in. The institution is made of people, too. And they don't deserve this."

Here's the link:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8207795/report-freeh-report-source-criticizes-ncaa-penalties-penn-state-nittany-lions (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8207795/report-freeh-report-source-criticizes-ncaa-penalties-penn-state-nittany-lions)

And the Freeh Commission has denied that any of it's people have said that, FWIW.

Another observation I like a lot: a few have chuckled at the standard NCAA charge of "Lack of Institutional Control" being thrown at PSU, when it is patently obvious that evil was allowed to flourish there *precisely* because they had Full Institutional Control to make sure that it could flourish.  True anarchy is amoral.  Full control can be either good OR evil.  Clearly in this case it was the latter.

Old Testament ethos also provides a strong precedent that -- at least in cases like this -- guilt is communal.  The fact that it is usually borne by at most a handful of individual is called scapegoating, but deep down they always understood that it truly belongs to everyone.

Quote from: StlVUFan on July 28, 2012, 12:39:56 PM
And the Freeh Commission has denied that any of it's people have said that, FWIW.

Noted that in the article as well.  It's all politics.  Leak and deny. But it's water over the dam and won't change anything in Happy Valley. However, I believe my observation on the lack of due process, by an organization that is built on micro-processes and documented procedures by the truck-load,  remains valid.  And now we move on.

Agree with your follow-up post also that control can be for the good or for the opposite.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Sorry for my selective skimming on that last post, missed that you had already alluded to that.

Just found a webpage that said what I was trying to say in comic artistic form (and much more poignantly):

http://media.nola.com/opinions_impact/photo/sk072512-colorjpg-fed734a9d2729f57.jpg (http://media.nola.com/opinions_impact/photo/sk072512-colorjpg-fed734a9d2729f57.jpg)

Quote from: valpo64 on July 28, 2012, 10:43:48 AM
PSU had a "university problem" regarding priorities...the University needed to be punished, with an emphasis on their football program...let the chips fall where they may.  When one has a "University problem" the entire school gets hit as it should.  It's unfortunate the innocent student athletes , students, and others tied to the school get hurt also, but that is the way it should be...THE UNIVERSITY GETS PUNISHED, including all who may be affiliated with it.

Let's not get a guilt feeling as a member of the NCAA...if our school's priorities are in order, it's NOT OUR PROBLEM!  Let's get over it and move on!!

Bingo, and give that man a CI-GAR.

I would assume then that those of you who believe that VU contributes or at least has the ability to contribute through its athletic programs to the cultural problem that existed at Penn State will immediately seek the resignation of Bryce Drew.  I mean, after all, the University needs to stop fueling the Drew's "family dynasty status" over Valparaiso basketball. It is too dangerous given what happened in Happy Valley. Penn State allowed Joe Paterno to turn into a figurehead and we all saw what happened.  By having a Drew at the helm of Valparaiso basketball for nearly a quarter century, we're indirectly giving validation to an environment that can help fester the culture that existed at Penn State.

Right?

Who on this board will be the first to write the AD requesting Bryce Drew's dismissal as head basketball coach based on the forgoing?

Still waiting to hear how VU lusts for NCAA tournament money by the way...

It is a temptation, you have to admit.

And, do you really think VU *doesn't* lust after NCAA tourney money??????  Or are you saying "lust" is too strong a word?  Who knows whether it is or it isn't?

You're conflating two different problems into one.  There's the scandal, which led to dismissal (if due process were even possible back then in State College, it would have yielded the same result).  Then there's the culture.  You don't overthrow the culture by lobbing A-bombs at it.  You stand up and tell the truth about the culture and hope that acts as disinfectant.

Actually, I think it's less of a temptation at a school like Valpo than it is at a big-time place like PSU, because the gap between us and "big-time" is so huge it would take so much cheating that it would be too risky.  There's a glass ceiling at work here, culturally, that kind of insulates us from the slimier aspects of that culture.  No one cares enough to shield us from the fallout if we were to go down that road.  The 4-letter network has no huge deal with us that would keep it from being objective.  In the age of Twitter, we'd be breaking news for all the wrong reasons.

But wait... aren't we striving for big-time performance????  Hello!  And we are gaining on it over the past couple of years.  As we get closer to the glass ceiling, thoughts of breaking it linger in our minds.  Hello, temptation my old friend...

Guys, if you can't see how Sandusky's child abuse was a direct result of Homer's bloodlust for tournament money, then I can't help you.  The first victim that came to light was in 1998...anyone else remember something big happening in the sports world in 1998?  Oh, that's right....the Shot.  And who took the Shot?  Bryce Drew.  Well lookey there...turn off the lights, party's over boys. 

The question is...when all is said and done, will Valpo be given the death penalty? 

So, you're saying Valpo is immune from any and all temptation to make the basketball program bigger than the university and the community?

If you'll read carefully, this is the only thing I'm disputing here.

Well, bbtds was more of the catalyst for my comments, but I think the entire conversation in the context of Penn State is fairly absurd.  I think Valpo contributed to this PSU problem exactly 0%.


Any arm of any organization could at some point be tempted to become bigger than the head.  That's human nature. 

Quote from: SadersofthelostArc on July 29, 2012, 10:04:22 PM
Well, bbtds was more of the catalyst for my comments, but I think the entire conversation in the context of Penn State is fairly absurd.  I think Valpo contributed to this PSU problem exactly 0%.


Any arm of any organization could at some point be tempted to become bigger than the head.  That's human nature. 

Yeah, I was going to also point out that I didn't start this angle, but merely responded much less definitively when someone else raised the possibility.

I think the rabid fans among us should at least admit that we covet -- deep down inside -- the kind of exposure and recruiting games that come with being big-time.  I know we most likely want to get there "the right way", not by cutting corners, but remember: so did PSU.  That was part of their whole mystique.

One thing that could be pointed out in favor of your point is that I think we know Homer Drew never "ran" VU the way Paterno "ran" PSU.  Just think back to all the times we heard rumors that the BOT (or whatever it's called) of VU made life a bit difficult for Homer.  We now know that that never happened at PSU.  Here's the thing, though: VU never achieved national recognition to the same degree.  The single thing that you could point to where VU did achieve some national recognition turns out to be the one where apparently the University held the team back from taking full advantage of it.

Honestly, I don't think anyone came close to suggesting here that VU is prime hunting ground for a child predator.  The only point that is being made is that the same culture that values wins over academics and integrity that thrives at big schools like PSU is one that little schools like VU support through membership in the NCAA (whose hands are far from clean in this) and more importantly, through welcoming ESPN into the house, clamoring for more exposure, thrilled everytime our school name gets mentioned there and in the national sports media in general, and of course crave that magical tournament run under the bright lights.

None of that means we are dirty ourselves, but it does mean we are competing with the dirty.  And you can't tell me that fans (being one, I know this myself) and the team don't wish for some way to level the playing field and topple the big boys.  The hard truth is that it is excruciatingly hard to do that without getting a little bit dirty.  I think we underestimate just how tempting it is.

For that matter, you know darn well that PSU is hardly unique.  The particular scandal is perhaps rare (allegedly not unique though), but the underlying culture that enables it is very common at the higher levels and the only thing that keeps Valpo from not giving in to temptation (apart from conscience and commitment to principle) is the fact that cheating just a little bit (discreetly) would not be worth it.  We don't have the power and prestige to make sure it would not be found out.  In fact, VU may well be a good example of sports culture where sports really isn't the number one priority.  But again, PSU set out to be the very same thing.

At the same time, if the NCAA were to truly clean up athletics (for real, not cynically and selectively), VU might well suffer as a result because the only way to clean it up is to blow it up and start over.  There might be no NCAA tournament to even play for.  The mind reels to comprehend the fallout, even at Valpo.  Food for thought.

We aren't competing in a vacuum, here.

This is very much what I'm trying to get across about Valpo contributing to the overall issue of hypocrisy in the NCAA which lead to the scandal and tragedy at Penn State.

I didn't see Valpo as falling into any of the traps that Penn State did. That Valpo would be guilty of running a dirty program or that any of Valpo's coaches be dismissed.

What I see as Valpo contributing to the whole issue in the NCAA is the grab at all the big dollars that the NCAA generates through the big time programs. It's through this greed that Valpo helps perpetuate the need for programs such as Ohio State, USC, UConn, etc to cheat or accept athletes who aren't there to get an education so that the big time programs keep generating the money needed to make Valpo and many other similar type schools desire to grab their portion of the money and set up schools like Penn State to ignore an issue when something that is outrageously wrong is discovered for the sake of the program's need to keep generating the big money.

It's a very small portion of the blame but collectively Valpo and similar schools, contribute to the greed that drives the overall problem in the NCAA that leads to situations such as what happened at Penn State.

Quote from: bbtds on July 31, 2012, 03:01:23 AM
This is very much what I'm trying to get across about Valpo contributing to the overall issue of hypocrisy in the NCAA which lead to the scandal and tragedy at Penn State.

I didn't see Valpo as falling into any of the traps that Penn State did. That Valpo would be guilty of running a dirty program or that any of Valpo's coaches be dismissed.

What I see as Valpo contributing to the whole issue in the NCAA is the grab at all the big dollars that the NCAA generates through the big time programs. It's through this greed that Valpo helps perpetuate the need for programs such as Ohio State, USC, UConn, etc to cheat or accept athletes who aren't there to get an education so that the big time programs keep generating the money needed to make Valpo and many other similar type schools desire to grab their portion of the money and set up schools like Penn State to ignore an issue when something that is outrageously wrong is discovered for the sake of the program's need to keep generating the big money.

It's a very small portion of the blame but collectively Valpo and similar schools, contribute to the greed that drives the overall problem in the NCAA that leads to situations such as what happened at Penn State.

This is a major stretch.  So what the answer?  D3? Well setshot, for the good of all who just want to see Valpo perform at a high level, and yes, suceed at that level too, let's hope not.

Quote from: vu72 on July 31, 2012, 08:03:35 AM
This is a major stretch.  So what the answer?  D3? Well setshot, for the good of all who just want to see Valpo perform at a high level, and yes, suceed at that level too, let's hope not.

I believe the answer is exactly what stlvufan said. Tear the whole of college athletics down and start over. The real problem is that the punishment to Penn State might get some programs to scale back their cheating and abuse of the student athletes but down the road there will be another program that has a situation very similar to Penn State's happen because they will be protecting the all mighty dollars generated by their program and there will be real victims, like the children in the Penn State situation who never recover and suffer greatly.

Quote from: bbtds on July 31, 2012, 08:29:17 AM

Quote from: vu72 on July 31, 2012, 08:03:35 AM
This is a major stretch.  So what the answer?  D3? Well setshot, for the good of all who just want to see Valpo perform at a high level, and yes, suceed at that level too, let's hope not.

I believe the answer is exactly what stlvufan said. Tear the whole of college athletics down and start over. The real problem is that the punishment to Penn State might get some programs to scale back their cheating and abuse of the student athletes but down the road there will be another program that has a situation very similar to Penn State's happen because they will be protecting the all mighty dollars generated by their program and there will be real victims, like the children in the Penn State situation who never recover and suffer greatly.

My problem with this string is that we are mixing two different concerns:  (1) The NCAA big business environment (which VU has no control over) and (2) Valpo's approach to athletics as a private mid-major (which it does have control over).  Theoretically, what Stlvufan and bbtds are saying is doing the right thing the right way.  But VU by itself can't tear down the whole of college athletics and start it over. Does our failure to do that make us hypocrites?  Of course, VU can participate in that process (if it ever gets going), but its clout is only that of a mid-major, and as alluded to earlier, VU will still get clobbered for being a part of the "NCAA hypocrisy" as long as it remains in D-I.  If Valpo wants to disassociate itself from the hypocrisy that some on this forum have linked it to, then what 72 stated is the only immediate solution it has available -- D-III. 

Bottom line IMO is that Valpo can't change the NCAA D-I world, so it has two options:  (1) run the most transparent, squeakiest clean D-I program in the country in the face of the issues elaborated upon below, or (2) remove itself from that platform and participate on a platform where those issues seldom exist because the corruption of money is pretty much taken off the table.  However, I'm not sure many on this forum would like to give up TV exposure on the four letter network, or give up seeing VU scores on crawlers, or give up the bragging rights associated with competing against national BB powers.  So we're left with option 1 -- and I don't see the hypocrisy in that. 

+1 internetz to you, my friend 62.  You win again!

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 31, 2012, 10:31:19 AM

Quote from: bbtds on July 31, 2012, 08:29:17 AM

Quote from: vu72 on July 31, 2012, 08:03:35 AM
This is a major stretch.  So what the answer?  D3? Well setshot, for the good of all who just want to see Valpo perform at a high level, and yes, suceed at that level too, let's hope not.

I believe the answer is exactly what stlvufan said. Tear the whole of college athletics down and start over. The real problem is that the punishment to Penn State might get some programs to scale back their cheating and abuse of the student athletes but down the road there will be another program that has a situation very similar to Penn State's happen because they will be protecting the all mighty dollars generated by their program and there will be real victims, like the children in the Penn State situation who never recover and suffer greatly.

My problem with this string is that we are mixing two different concerns:  (1) The NCAA big business environment (which VU has no control over) and (2) Valpo's approach to athletics as a private mid-major (which it does have control over).  Theoretically, what Stlvufan and bbtds are saying is doing the right thing the right way.  But VU by itself can't tear down the whole of college athletics and start it over. Does our failure to do that make us hypocrites?  Of course, VU can participate in that process (if it ever gets going), but its clout is only that of a mid-major, and as alluded to earlier, VU will still get clobbered for being a part of the "NCAA hypocrisy" as long as it remains in D-I.  If Valpo wants to disassociate itself from the hypocrisy that some on this forum have linked it to, then what 72 stated is the only immediate solution it has available -- D-III. 

Bottom line IMO is that Valpo can't change the NCAA D-I world, so it has two options:  (1) run the most transparent, squeakiest clean D-I program in the country in the face of the issues elaborated upon below, or (2) remove itself from that platform and participate on a platform where those issues seldom exist because the corruption of money is pretty much taken off the table.  However, I'm not sure many on this forum would like to give up TV exposure on the four letter network, or give up seeing VU scores on crawlers, or give up the bragging rights associated with competing against national BB powers.  So we're left with option 1 -- and I don't see the hypocrisy in that. 

Yes Valpo has no control over (1), but it does participate in it.  No, I'm not calling for Valpo to leave D-I, however if they can't reconcile playing it clean with striving to win NCAA tourney games, then maybe they should.  In no sense am I saying they can't or won't successfully negotiate that balance.

I think it's bold to choose option (1) -- as long as you are truly committed to it, and that includes avoiding the cult of personality that enveloped PSU.  So far I believe VU has avoided that.  But having chosen that option, and participating in the big business of Division I collegiate athletics and the Sportz Bubble (http://www.midmajority.com/p/1400) that surrounds it, VU has a burden to bear.  I'm not exactly sure what all its responsibilities are, but I'm sure setting a good example is part of it.

Key to option 1 is being transparent and ever vigilant.  Having just joined this forum in recent months can I assume that prior to this discussion and prior to the PSU scandal that VU has been doing just that?  Hope I can.

Quote from: VULB#62 on July 31, 2012, 02:39:26 PM
Key to option 1 is being transparent and ever vigilant.  Having just joined this forum in recent months can I assume that prior to this discussion and prior to the PSU scandal that VU has been doing just that?  Hope I can.

As far as we know.