Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials

[cheesesteakwithegg]

I think about 99% of PSU alums think the punishment was unjust, and 99% of everyone else thinks the punishment were fair or not harsh enough.

[shafnutz05]

I think about 99% of PSU alums think the punishment was unjust, and 99% of everyone else thinks the punishment were fair or not harsh enough.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/poll/co ... id/3821483

[cheesesteakwithegg]

I think about 99% of PSU alums think the punishment was unjust, and 99% of everyone else thinks the punishment were fair or not harsh enough.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/poll/co ... id/3821483

That's pretty shocking to me. Though my polling comes from the 300+ people I follow on twitter. Seems to me that everyone associated with Penn State thinks the punishments were too harsh, and everyone else is fine with them. I did lol at all the midwest states that voted no. Big shocker.

[Idoit40fans]

I can't believe that result.

[shafnutz05]

Yeah, the geographical distribution is always interesting.

I think most people pretty much gave the NCAA free rein at the time because of the visceral nature of the story, but as time goes on, and people get more emotionally distanced from the horrific things that Sandusky did, it's easier to look at it through a more neutral eye.

[Crankshaft]

I guess I am more turned off by the whole "protecting Patrno" aspect of it. If you want to lift some of the scholarship or bowl bans, because of the affect it has on the current student body and student athletes, then I would be more sympathetic. But when you have Franco Harris carrying around a cardboard cutout of Joe Paterno, then to me it's just ridiculous.

[count2infinity]

Even in the states that said no, the poll was relatively close. Wisconsin had the largest no and even that was only 59/41. Like I said, those unassociated with Penn State it's about a 50/50 split.

[Factorial]

The universe of respondents are football fans so this is worthless.

[count2infinity]

football fans aren't allowed to have opinions just because they're football fans? wat?

[Idoit40fans]

They're allowed to have opinions, they're just obviously extremely biased.

[skullman80]

They're allowed to have opinions, they're just obviously extremely biased.

This.

I mean by no means would that be an accurate poll no matter which way it was showing.

[shafnutz05]

They're allowed to have opinions, they're just obviously extremely biased.

This.

I mean by no means would that be an accurate poll no matter which way it was showing.

Oh please. If that survey showed that 90% of college football fans agreed with the rulings, you would be touting it as proof that the football world is unified behind the sanctions against Penn State.

One would argue that the respondents of this poll are probably more tied into the details surrounding the story and sanctions, no? As opposed to just asking a random selection of people on the street?

[Factorial]

Plus the most likely to respond to this are PSU fans as they are the "aggrieved" party.

[Factorial]

I don't have time to look it up but there must be a legitimate poll on this out there.

[skullman80]

They're allowed to have opinions, they're just obviously extremely biased.

This.

I mean by no means would that be an accurate poll no matter which way it was showing.

Oh please. If that survey showed that 90% of college football fans agreed with the rulings, you would be touting it as proof that the football world is unified behind the sanctions against Penn State.

One would argue that the respondents of this poll are probably more tied into the details surrounding the story and sanctions, no? As opposed to just asking a random selection of people on the street?

Touchy today are we? Yeesh.

[shafnutz05]

Plus the most likely to respond to this are PSU fans as they are the "aggrieved" party.

There are sizable majorities in most US states. Is the poll 100% accurate? Of course not. I would even go as far to say that it doesn't prove that a majority of people oppose the sanctions.

But I think it's reasonable to say that the general US population is split fairly evenly on whether or not they still approve of the sanctions.

[count2infinity]

legitimate meaning one that backs up your side of the argument?

[Factorial]

How many people voted more than once? I have 5 browsers on my computer and could vote 5 times. I could clear my cache/cookies and vote again or spoof my ip and vote again.

[Idoit40fans]

legitimate meaning one that backs up your side of the argument?

I would assume legitimate means not posed to a population of people that visit ESPN's college football page.

[shafnutz05]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... for-change

In an unofficial, unscientific straw poll that started the day the sanctions were announced (July 23, 2012), the overwhelming majority agrees -- the NCAA went too far on that hot July morning in Indianapolis a year ago.

I'm injecting myself into the story because those results were amazing: Almost every college source I've spoken to in the last year -- they usually raised the issue -- said the NCAA overstepped its boundaries with Penn State.

A national consensus has formed -- at least with me. That makes me -- and should make you -- wonder how those sanctions were allowed to happen. And how they could happen again. The folks I spoke to represent a significant cross-section -- former NCAA officials, faculty athletic representatives, coaches, ADs, consultants.

Emmert's mandate to bring down Penn State came from somewhere. Meanwhile, Penn State did itself no favors with lack of oversight, essentially inviting the NCAA into the process.

Once on the case, Emmert, executive committee and board of directors made the call based on an interpretation of the NCAA Constitution.

[Factorial]

legitimate meaning one that backs up your side of the argument?

As a man of science you know this is not legit.

[count2infinity]

okay okay... no one is saying this poll shows you that the majority of people in the nation think it was unfair. I'm just saying it's not the 99/1 split you were talking about, I believe it to be much closer to 50/50

[shafnutz05]

I am admittedly having a difficult time understanding why the fact most of the respondents are college football fans somehow makes the poll less legitimate.

Who do you think could better answer the question:

1) A CFB fan (not necessarily of Penn State) that has followed the story for the last two years, is somewhat familiar with NCAA rules/regulations and their stances in other cases, and has formulated an opinion on the story.

2) Some random 57-year old person that is called by Gallup and asked "Do you still approve of the sanctions against Penn State?". The person, who knows little about college football, just remembers PSU molested children and says "Hell yes!"

There are fair criticisms of an ESPN poll, like multi-voting and more PSU fans being likely to respond. But opinions on the sanctions are a far, far cry from the national consensus a lot of people wish it was.

[Factorial]

okay okay... no one is saying this poll shows you that the majority of people in the nation think it was unfair. I'm just saying it's not the 99/1 split you were talking about, I believe it to be much closer to 50/50

I didn't say it was a 99/1 split. My guess is in a random poll, it would be 80/20.

[Bioshock]

The people who defend this are sick. If Paterno was alive, he would be going to court and then prison.

No, the NCAA will never lift their sanctions and i say good. Drive home the fact that every time you place entertainment above all else, you get burned.