Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials

[DontToewsMeBro]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

[Rocco]

Let me adjust that analogy a little. Suppose the prosecuting attorney in Anthony's case did something inappropriate. Something that could possibly effect the outcome of the trial. However, even with that, Anthony decided to plea bargain with the prosecution and faced life in prison. Would you be arguing for her or would you say that the punishment was appropriate. Would the ends justify the means?

That's not 'ends justifying the means', though. Anthony would've made her own mind up, given the circumstances surrounding the case...including, if she had decent counsel, the inappropriate behavior of the prosecution. It's not an 'ends justify the means' unless Anthony wasn't aware of the prosecution's lapse. In that case, given the 'rules' of our legal system, I would argue for her release...even if I hated it.

The most ironic thing of your post is that given your scenario, the prosecuting attorney, if it came to light acted inappropriately (like, say, threatening the Death Penalty when they had no legal course to seek it), they would be disbarred and most likely face charges.

You kind of missed the general point of the analogy, but no matter. I'm just trying to figure out where people stand on this. It seems that some are arguing the principle of the matter (Rocco has basically said that), while others are harping on the NCAA as a way of justifying thoughts that PSU got punished too severely.

I think I would argue both to some degree, seeing as how no one who actually committed the sins at PSU was punished (with the exception of Paterno's ghost) and the NCAA was largely silent on Spanier. I'm with Spencer Hall and Jay Bilas on the matter that this was grandstanding by the NCAA.

[malkinshair]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

I agree, to some extent. I would add that the reason the NCAA acted now was the combination of those two things. In other words, they couldn't 'afford' to wait because of the media reaction, and the subsequent erosion of their relevance via the media and public scrutiny, if they didn't act...or even went thru their due diligence before levying sanctions.

[ulf]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

I agree, to some extent. I would add that the reason the NCAA acted now was the combination of those two things. In other words, they couldn't 'afford' to wait because of the media reaction, and the subsequent erosion of their relevance via the media and public scrutiny, if they didn't act...or even went thru their due diligence before levying sanctions.

Or maybe because football season starts in like 5 weeks.

[MWB]

I think it was appropriate to punish the institution as they did. There is a culture (for lack of a better word) that was exposed and needed to change. I don't think the vacation of wins was needed. I agree that the NCAA looks stupid in not mentioning Spanier. However, I don't think it is yet relevant how the punishment came about, and I'm not convinced it ever will be relevant.

[Rocco]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

I agree, to some extent. I would add that the reason the NCAA acted now was the combination of those two things. In other words, they couldn't 'afford' to wait because of the media reaction, and the subsequent erosion of their relevance via the media and public scrutiny, if they didn't act...or even went thru their due diligence before levying sanctions.

Or maybe because football season starts in like 5 weeks.

I dunno, they seem to be doing plenty of waiting on Miami. UNC played 2 full seasons under the NCAA cloud.

[ulf]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

I agree, to some extent. I would add that the reason the NCAA acted now was the combination of those two things. In other words, they couldn't 'afford' to wait because of the media reaction, and the subsequent erosion of their relevance via the media and public scrutiny, if they didn't act...or even went thru their due diligence before levying sanctions.

Or maybe because football season starts in like 5 weeks.

I dunno, they seem to be doing plenty of waiting on Miami. UNC played 2 full seasons under the NCAA cloud.

Miami didn't have a Freeh report.

[viva la ben]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

Meh, moar lamestream media panacea.

[Rocco]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

I agree, to some extent. I would add that the reason the NCAA acted now was the combination of those two things. In other words, they couldn't 'afford' to wait because of the media reaction, and the subsequent erosion of their relevance via the media and public scrutiny, if they didn't act...or even went thru their due diligence before levying sanctions.

Or maybe because football season starts in like 5 weeks.

I dunno, they seem to be doing plenty of waiting on Miami. UNC played 2 full seasons under the NCAA cloud.

Miami didn't have a Freeh report.

No, just Charles Robinson doing all the work for the NCAA.

[MWB]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

I agree, to some extent. I would add that the reason the NCAA acted now was the combination of those two things. In other words, they couldn't 'afford' to wait because of the media reaction, and the subsequent erosion of their relevance via the media and public scrutiny, if they didn't act...or even went thru their due diligence before levying sanctions.

Or maybe because football season starts in like 5 weeks.

I dunno, they seem to be doing plenty of waiting on Miami. UNC played 2 full seasons under the NCAA cloud.

And UNC was worse off for the wait. PSU is better served by having sanctions start ASAP.

[Rocco]

ESPN saying the reasons for actions by the NCAA is:

1. The media
2. Saving the NCAAs relevance

good.

I agree, to some extent. I would add that the reason the NCAA acted now was the combination of those two things. In other words, they couldn't 'afford' to wait because of the media reaction, and the subsequent erosion of their relevance via the media and public scrutiny, if they didn't act...or even went thru their due diligence before levying sanctions.

Or maybe because football season starts in like 5 weeks.

I dunno, they seem to be doing plenty of waiting on Miami. UNC played 2 full seasons under the NCAA cloud.

And UNC was worse off for the wait. PSU is better served by having sanctions start ASAP.

If you assume that sanctions from the NCAA were valid, proper and necessary, yes. Because nothing will get the message across to schools that covering up pedophilia is bad unless the football team is nuked like sanctions. No, the massive Clery Act fines, possible loss of accreditation, loss of sponsorship, nor the civil lawsuits, nor having your leadership decapitated and name sullied and reputation ruined will be absolutely impotent unless the NCAA, under the guise of "culture change" smokes people who weren't involved and ignores people who were involved. Evil can only be derailed by an NCAA bowl ban.

"[F]or everyone suggesting that football was at the core of this, for everyone suggesting for an instant that something could have predicted this, and that a precedent could be set, you literally do not understand humanity or the rare horror of something truly evil. People will sell themselves to authorities far cheaper and less impressive than a corrupt, morally bankrupt football legend."- Spencer Hall

[columbia]

If Sandusky had been a math professor, he would have been in jail long ago.

This was a football issue.

[MWB]

If you assume that sanctions from the NCAA were valid, proper and necessary, yes.

And I do.

[Rocco]

If Sandusky had been a math professor, he would have been in jail long ago.

This was a football issue.

And if the math department heads had covered for him, would we call for the math department to be shuttered?

[columbia]

If Sandusky had been a math professor, he would have been in jail long ago.

This was a football issue.

And if the math department heads had covered for him, would we call for the math department to be shuttered?

Ask me that again if it happens.

However, the university would probably lose its accreditation.

So...in effect, yes.

[DontToewsMeBro]

Yes, force a culture change that promoted athletics to the point where they had one of the highest graduation rates among NCAA Division I schools and the highest total rank in the Academic Bowl, above every single school including Stanford. Honestly, I don't care if the program doesn't get to play in the Meineke Car Care Bowl for four years. I don't care about the wins, that was ****ing on the bones of a dead man. Who cares. Take away scholarships so those who might have been recruited by Penn State can pursue their degrees at football programs with less than 50% graduation rates. That's the culture that champions winning over academic values if I've ever seen one. They are taking away the one thing they've actually been doing right this whole time just so they lose more games in the long run, and I don't agree with that.

[MWB]

If Sandusky had been a math professor, he would have been in jail long ago.

This was a football issue.

And if the math department heads had covered for him, would we call for the math department to be shuttered?

Shuttered? No. The football program hasn't been either.
Investigated and punished? Certainly.

[tifosi77]

I'm just trying to figure out where people stand on this. It seems that some are arguing the principle of the matter (Rocco has basically said that), while others are harping on the NCAA as a way of justifying thoughts that PSU got punished too severely.

The severity of the sanctions isn't an issue for me, altho I do confess to not really understanding the point of vacating wins. (It's a silly concept to me, and I'm not exactly sure what it accomplishes.) I just question the NCAA's authority to levy them.

[MWB]

Yes, force a culture change that promoted athletics to the point where they had one of the highest graduation rates among NCAA Division I schools and the highest total rank in the Academic Bowl, above every single school including Stanford. Honestly, I don't care if the program doesn't get to play in the Meineke Car Care Bowl for four years. I don't care about the wins, that was ****ing on the bones of a dead man. Who cares. Take away scholarships so those who might have been recruited by Penn State can pursue their degrees at football programs with less than 50% graduation rates. That's the culture that champions winning over academic values if I've ever seen one. They are taking away the one thing they've actually been doing right this whole time just so they lose more games in the long run, and I don't agree with that.

Can't have it both ways. The corruption was part of the culture too. So the good goes with the bad. Of course, any athlete is more than welcome to stay at PSU if their biggest concern is the graduation rate.

[MWB]

The severity of the sanctions isn't an issue for me, altho I do confess to not really understanding the point of vacating wins. (It's a silly concept to me, and I'm not exactly sure what it accomplishes.) I just question the NCAA's authority to levy them.

Again, that seems like a logical stance. To me, it's irrelevant if the NCAA has the authority because I think it was just, but I can see others questioning it.

[Rocco]

The severity of the sanctions isn't an issue for me, altho I do confess to not really understanding the point of vacating wins. (It's a silly concept to me, and I'm not exactly sure what it accomplishes.) I just question the NCAA's authority to levy them.

Again, that seems like a logical stance. To me, it's irrelevant if the NCAA has the authority because I think it was just, but I can see others questioning it.

There's an inherent danger in disregarding authority and limitations to get the preferred outcome.

[MWB]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. However, the "inherent danger" when speaking about college athletics is quite relative.

[DontToewsMeBro]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. However, the "inherent danger" when speaking about college athletics is quite relative.

So in this case, you're willing to take that gamble? Emmert said that the powers "weren't on his toolbelt" so-to-speak. We will see.

Maybe soon.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/ ... 3G20120502" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[MWB]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. However, the "inherent danger" when speaking about college athletics is quite relative.

So in this case, you're willing to take that gamble? Emmert said that the powers "weren't on his toolbelt" so-to-speak. We will see.

Maybe soon.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/ ... 3G20120502" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What gamble am I taking?

[Rocco]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. However, the "inherent danger" when speaking about college athletics is quite relative.

So in this case, you're willing to take that gamble? Emmert said that the powers "weren't on his toolbelt" so-to-speak. We will see.

Maybe soon.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/ ... 3G20120502" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For those who don't follow 1-A football, Montana football is huge at that level.