Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Penn St facing unprecedented penalties

wheels002

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Messages
6,416
How could they NOT get the "Lack of institutional control" label? If they don't get it no school ever will.
 
was reading the wikipedia article on the SMU scandal. there was some quote from the NCAA committee stating that the death penalty was too harsh and they'd never use it again; basically, they didn't intend to permanently destroy SMU football.

personally, I don't think the harshness of the result should be a reason NOT to use it again. also, at SMU, the faculty came out and basically forced the administration's hand... basically they forced additional changes to the program that reduced its influence over the school. I.e. the academics won out over athletics. I think that's what really freaked out the NCAA.

doesn't sound like that would necessarily happen at Penn St. I don't see them downsizing Beaver Stadium after this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I still dont think they will get the death penalty but I am curious as to what the NCAA will do. I think when they said they would never use the death penalty again though they never envisioned a scandal like we have see with Penn St. Where a football coach knowingly allowed a pedophile to abuse children without alerting law enforcement for 10 years just so the coach could keep his job and the program could appear to be clean. So could the death penalty happen yes but I think it may be huge scholarship loses and bowl bans for multiple years. This could easily cripple Penn St for decades.
 
Per espnsucks crawl during British Open, no "death penalty" but unprecedented penalty.

I guess this will satisfy Ohio* fans who feel they are in competition with PSU.
 
Yeah I just heard no death penalty but the sanctions may end up being worse because they will last several years.
 
How could they NOT get the "Lack of institutional control" label? If they don't get it no school ever will.

I know I'm in the minority in this view of the situation, but the summaries of what "lack of instituional control" actually is don't apply to the Sandusky crimes and cover up. I think the stuff that's been uncovered about how Paterno kept his players above the law does apply, but penalizing Penn State for the Sandusky crimes and cover up will take an unprecedented change of the rules or new interpretation of them.
 
Things I've heard as possible punishments

-Multi-year bowl ban (2-5 years)
-Loss of Scholarships (50+)
-Players on team are eligible for immediate transfer and can play this season
-Possible TV blackouts
 
I know I'm in the minority in this view of the situation, but the summaries of what "lack of instituional control" actually is don't apply to the Sandusky crimes and cover up. I think the stuff that's been uncovered about how Paterno kept his players above the law does apply, but penalizing Penn State for the Sandusky crimes and cover up will take an unprecedented change of the rules or new interpretation of them.

I look at it this way, why did no one within the football program report what they suspected Sandusky of doing? Why did JoePa not report it? Obviously you can't ask him but you can pretty easily assume it was to protect his football team and protect his own image. It could have hurt recruiting, donations and a bunch of other things that directly impact the performance of the football program. This is why I don't think anyone in the program came out with it. They hid it because they didn't want it to do what it is doing now.
 
I personally felt JoePa was nothing more than a figurehead for the better part of the last decade and stayed around because he transcended the otherwise very average play of the program. To learn he did what he did both sickens me for what he covered up, but also disappoints me because it wasn't even for a competitive advantage, it was just simply for ego.

I loved psu as a kid, had a white helmet, blue jersey and was mislead by JoePa like everyone else.

At this point, I could care less if that school ever fields a football team again and feel no empathy whatsoever for the fans who still defend the former coach or his actions.
 
How about this? Instead to lack of institutional control, there is a section in the NCAA manual on unethical conduct which includes the phrase "may include, but is not limited to". That could open the door to anything (including the behavior that led to that ND student being killed filming practice in a storm - where the NCAA did nothing.)
 
I look at it this way, why did no one within the football program report what they suspected Sandusky of doing? Why did JoePa not report it? Obviously you can't ask him but you can pretty easily assume it was to protect his football team and protect his own image. It could have hurt recruiting, donations and a bunch of other things that directly impact the performance of the football program. This is why I don't think anyone in the program came out with it. They hid it because they didn't want it to do what it is doing now.

I'm talking about the rules. None of what your talking about is addressed specifically in the rules. They're going to have to find some phase (like the one I mentioned above) that works as a catch all. In the past, they haven't done this...that makes any punishment unprecedented.
 
Last edited:
I personally felt JoePa was nothing more than a figurehead for the better part of the last decade and stayed around because he transcended the otherwise very average play of the program. To learn he did what he did both sickens me for what he covered up, but also disappoints me because it wasn't even for a competitive advantage, it was just simply for ego.

I loved psu as a kid, had a white helmet, blue jersey and was mislead by JoePa like everyone else.

At this point, I could care less if that school ever fields a football team again and feel no empathy whatsoever for the fans who still defend the former coach or his actions.

The survey I saw on the Penn St board had 80% of them wanting to tear down the statue (and some that wanted to keep it saw it as a reminder and a mark of shame). Those defending him are vocal, but they are a minority.
 
I personally felt JoePa was nothing more than a figurehead for the better part of the last decade and stayed around because he transcended the otherwise very average play of the program. To learn he did what he did both sickens me for what he covered up, but also disappoints me because it wasn't even for a competitive advantage, it was just simply for ego.

...

read this article last week. not sure if someone posted this here, but it's an article of the former head of student affairs for Penn St. She was forced out (and her career temporarily ruined) because she stood up to Paterno and the rest of the penn state administration.

doesn't sound like Paterno was just a figurehead at that point. he was still firmly in charge.

things came to a head in '07 in the notorious mob incident when a bunch of players beat people senseless in an apartment. supposedly paterno went apeshit on her at a meeting, and Spanier told her she had seen "the dark side of Joe Paterno."

actual quote:
"Well, Vicky, you are one of a handful of people, four or five people, who have seen the dark side of Joe Paterno. We're going to have to do something about it."​
creepy stuff, eh?

the happy ending to the story is that after all the assholes went down at Penn St., people called her up and said she was vindicated, and her career was revived.
 
I think they did the right thing by removing the statue very early in the morning before they even announced they were going to take it down. Had they said they were going to take it down first they may have had more idiots rioting.
 
I think they did the right thing by removing the statue very early in the morning before they even announced they were going to take it down. Had they said they were going to take it down first they may have had more idiots rioting.

well, it is the summer. we'll see what happens when most of the idiots get back in the fall.
 
Back
Top