Rocco wrote:
I sleep fantastically well at night. I love how outraged you get when people have the nerve to disagree with you. I hope your rage at the fact that people won't just agree with you doesn't keep you up past your bedtime.
I'm sorry that I think rules are important. I wish I shared your ability to simply arrive at a conclusion and not be bound by anything that suggests I should do otherwise.
"You can read the hundreds of pages of the NCAA manual from now until the Nittany Lions run onto the field to play Ohio on Sept. 1, and you won't find a single rule that Penn State violated in this case. If that doesn't mean anything, why have a rulebook?"
BTW, the NCAA did nothing to his enablers. One's dead and beyond the reach of the NCAA, though they kicked his corpse around some for show. The other 3 weren't mentioned or punished at all. But there's a smoking crater where people who had nothing to do with Sandusky used to be. Emmert hand-picked Spanier for a President's Committee but couldn't bring himself to castigate Spanier, who is the person who was supposed to be in charge. Not one person responsible for the mess was punished by the NCAA. You may argue that there was always going to be collateral damage if the NCAA was involved, and I would argue that it's precisely why the NCAA shouldn't get involved and instead leave it to the proper authorities who are best suited to deal with this stuff. Instead we have an amoral agency whose primary concern has been to get paid acting as a moral authority.
You got your panties in a bundle a month ago, when anyone dared question Paterno.
He and the rest of them have been exposed and you don't like.
Just admit it.
Ehh, it's the same view just about every lawyer I've read shares. I think you can tone down the rhetoric.
The NCAA was never meant to deal with something like this. PSU broke no NCAA rules. The NCAA had to break its own sanctions process in order to punish PSU.
I believe the punishment is just, but you can't bury your head in the sand here and think the NCAA is above-board on this. Creating a separate set of rules and giving one man too much power, this is what happened with the NCAA. Sounds like what happened at PSU.
You can say the NCAA will never do this again. But a process to sanction that was unprecedented now has precedent.
DudeMan2766 wrote:Big bad NCAA bullying good ol humble PSU. Some of you are really reaching for any scraps you can to argue PSU was wronged.
Well, Emmert did unilaterally lay down a crushing blow on the program without any due process or hearing. Granted, Erickson signed off on it.
I like how you place blame with one statement, then immediately realize you mistake in the next.
NCAA is a voluntary organization. They don't really require any due process from a legal perspective, and PSU signed off on both the Freeh Report and the sanctions. Rod Erickson signing off saved the program. The worst case was absolutely avoided. PSU alumni, fans and student athletes should be grateful for that rather than continue to blame the NCAA.
DudeMan2766 wrote:Big bad NCAA bullying good ol humble PSU. Some of you are really reaching for any scraps you can to argue PSU was wronged.
Well, Emmert did unilaterally lay down a crushing blow on the program without any due process or hearing. Granted, Erickson signed off on it.
I like how you place blame with one statement, then immediately realize you mistake in the next.
NCAA is a voluntary organization. They don't really require any due process from a legal perspective, and PSU signed off on both the Freeh Report and the sanctions. Rod Erickson signing off saved the program. The worst case was absolutely avoided. PSU alumni, fans and student athletes should be grateful for that rather than continue to blame the NCAA.
Erickson wouldn't have needed to sign off if this was done above-board.
On vacation this week in the Smokey Mountains and it was funny yesterday wearing my PSU hat on hikes. I could hear many people in passing "oh my god... He's wearing a Penn State hat. " I would just laugh a little and keep walking. People cannot separate PSU football from everything else at PSU (understandable, yes. But wrong).
As far as the punishment is concerned, I think the ncaa got it right. Punishment to the football program that doesn't destroy other programs or cause much damage to the community. It will take time to get back to where they were as far as talent over the past few years, but I feel as though they'll recover.
pfim wrote:
Ehh, it's the same view just about every lawyer I've read shares.
It's an internal NCAA matter, so why are you concerned about their opinion?
It's pretty clear that the NCAA actually needs a strong central power, seeing what went on at Penn State.
Because they read the rules? It's not impossible to sue the NCAA.
I realize this is an emotional case, but man, the amount of people who are willing to just throw out the rules to whatever end suits them is kinda scary.
All of the questioning of the sanctions sounds a lot like all the incompetent parenting that is going on right now. "Johnny got an F. It's not his fault. There must be a problem with the grading system or the teacher! My little Johnny didn't do anything wrong.". Why can't people just accept that there are consequences for actions? Penn State screwed up in this entire ordeal and it started with the football program. It wasn't on the field but the man who ran the program was directly involved. I'm sorry that people who had nothing to do with this are having to deal with consequences but that's how things work in the real world. Penn State essentially plea bargained in this situation. If we are going for a court of law comparison, they decided not to take this to "trial" at the NCAA level because thy knew the evidence would damn them. Instead of facing a possible death sentence, PENN STATE opted for these other punishments. They chose to forgoe their NCAA "due process". Penn State could have said we want a chance to defend ourselves and chose not to. Don't blame the NCAA for Penn State surrendering their rights. It was their choice. It was not the NCAA's decision to suspend their option for "due process".
The only people who really suffer are the players, and they have all been given an out. They don't need to suffer for it. It will only impact Penn State's academics if the school truly has no character.
joopen wrote:All of the questioning of the sanctions sounds a lot like all the incompetent parenting that is going on right now. "Johnny got an F. It's not his fault. There must be a problem with the grading system or the teacher! My little Johnny didn't do anything wrong.". Why can't people just accept that there are consequences for actions? Penn State screwed up in this entire ordeal and it started with the football program. It wasn't on the field but the man who ran the program was directly involved. I'm sorry that people who had nothing to do with this are having to deal with consequences but that's how things work in the real world. Penn State essentially plea bargained in this situation. If we are going for a court of law comparison, they decided not to take this to "trial" at the NCAA level because thy knew the evidence would damn them. Instead of facing a possible death sentence, PENN STATE opted for these other punishments. They chose to forgoe their NCAA "due process". Penn State could have said we want a chance to defend ourselves and chose not to. Don't blame the NCAA for Penn State surrendering their rights. It was their choice. It was not the NCAA's decision to suspend their option for "due process".
Ehh, it was definitely the NCAA's decision to suspend due process. There was no plea bargain. That implies there was a negotiation. There was no negotiation. PSU was in no position to defend itself, you know it, the NCAA knew it as well which is why they felt they could ignore their rules and procedures.
The NCAA can't even point to which rule was broken. What kind of precedent does that set?
The punishment was just. Don't understand why people can't separate the punishment and how the punishment was conceived. I don't care about PSU, I care how this affects my school and the rest of the NCAA.
pfim wrote:
Ehh, it's the same view just about every lawyer I've read shares.
It's an internal NCAA matter, so why are you concerned about their opinion?
It's pretty clear that the NCAA actually needs a strong central power, seeing what went on at Penn State.
Because they read the rules? It's not impossible to sue the NCAA.
I realize this is an emotional case, but man, the amount of people who are willing to just throw out the rules to whatever end suits them is kinda scary.
Imagine the following:
The NCAA takes no action and everyone left at Penn State goes on their merry way.
A year from now, a woman is sexually assaulted by a coach at an NCAA member school and someone in the athletic department tries to squelch the investigation.
There's your case study for the NCAA getting sued, because they set a precedent that an employee in an athletic department can do any damn thing they please, with no repercussions to the school.
A grossly permissive environment, if you will.
Isn't it possible that this is a completely unique situation and that's why the NCAA handled it in a completely unique way? I understand people being concerned about precedent, but sometimes you actually do have to go outside the box to do what is right. It seems like most people are saying, "The punishment is fine, but how they got there is crazy." Sometimes the "how they got there" doesn't really matter and the fact that they got it right is the most important thing.
The NCAA takes no action and everyone left at Penn State goes on their merry way.
A year from now, a woman is sexually assaulted by a coach at an NCAA member school and someone in the athletic department tries to squelch the investigation.
There's your case study for the NCAA getting sued, because they set a precedent that an employee in an athletic department can do any damn thing they please, with no repercussions to the school.
A grossly permissive environment, if you will.
How? I'm no lawyer, but that coach is not employed by the NCAA. Again, I'm no lawyer, but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
If anything, the NCAA has set a precedent that these types of issues ARE under their purview, opening up their liability.
I'll defer to someone who actually practices law though.
DudeMan2766 wrote:Big bad NCAA bullying good ol humble PSU. Some of you are really reaching for any scraps you can to argue PSU was wronged.
Well, Emmert did unilaterally lay down a crushing blow on the program without any due process or hearing. Granted, Erickson signed off on it.
I like how you place blame with one statement, then immediately realize you mistake in the next.
NCAA is a voluntary organization. They don't really require any due process from a legal perspective, and PSU signed off on both the Freeh Report and the sanctions. Rod Erickson signing off saved the program. The worst case was absolutely avoided. PSU alumni, fans and student athletes should be grateful for that rather than continue to blame the NCAA.
Erickson wouldn't have needed to sign off if this was done above-board.
I agree; NCAA gets to look big and tough, PSU gets to play football this year. Everyone saves themselves when the remaining skeletons stay in the closet.
Rocco wrote:
I sleep fantastically well at night. I love how outraged you get when people have the nerve to disagree with you. I hope your rage at the fact that people won't just agree with you doesn't keep you up past your bedtime.
I'm sorry that I think rules are important. I wish I shared your ability to simply arrive at a conclusion and not be bound by anything that suggests I should do otherwise.
"You can read the hundreds of pages of the NCAA manual from now until the Nittany Lions run onto the field to play Ohio on Sept. 1, and you won't find a single rule that Penn State violated in this case. If that doesn't mean anything, why have a rulebook?"
BTW, the NCAA did nothing to his enablers. One's dead and beyond the reach of the NCAA, though they kicked his corpse around some for show. The other 3 weren't mentioned or punished at all. But there's a smoking crater where people who had nothing to do with Sandusky used to be. Emmert hand-picked Spanier for a President's Committee but couldn't bring himself to castigate Spanier, who is the person who was supposed to be in charge. Not one person responsible for the mess was punished by the NCAA. You may argue that there was always going to be collateral damage if the NCAA was involved, and I would argue that it's precisely why the NCAA shouldn't get involved and instead leave it to the proper authorities who are best suited to deal with this stuff. Instead we have an amoral agency whose primary concern has been to get paid acting as a moral authority.
You got your panties in a bundle a month ago, when anyone dared question Paterno.
He and the rest of them have been exposed and you don't like.
Just admit it.
No win situation Columbia. Call Joepa out for the bad guy he was people crucify you. Call them out when they have no recourse and all of a sudden they never really defended him. The Joepa death thread makes me sick.
Pavel Bure wrote:
No win situation Columbia. Call Joepa out for the bad guy he was people crucify you. Call them out when they have no recourse and all of a sudden they never really defended him. The Joepa death thread makes me sick.
I think you guys are really barking up the wrong tree with Rocco here.
MWB wrote:Isn't it possible that this is a completely unique situation and that's why the NCAA handled it in a completely unique way? I understand people being concerned about precedent, but sometimes you actually do have to go outside the box to do what is right. It seems like most people are saying, "The punishment is fine, but how they got there is crazy." Sometimes the "how they got there" doesn't really matter and the fact that they got it right is the most important thing.
I've often found that the 'ends justify the means' philosophy to be dangerous...in just about any situation. Rules are in place for a reason. Circumventing the rules to arrive at an 'end' that you want is suddenly okay?
I'm trying to figure out which reaction has been more hilarious/entertaining. The people that refuse to believe the university did anything wrong, or the people that refuse to accept any criticism of how the NCAA has conducted themselves in this matter.
