Anybody else think the Penn St. sanctions were too light?

[General20]

Am I the only one?

The way I see it, the $60 Million dollar fine will do no real damage. And just by way of being on a down trend anyway, along with losing their coach, and being a toxic name their recruiting/ on the field play was going to take a major down turn anyway.

The real life implications of that sanction was that it took Penn St. from a team that would be around the 40th best team in the country, and made sure they would end up around the 70th best.

Is that such a big deal?

I think the loss of scholarships and wins was fine, but I would have liked to see a 10 year bowl ban, or something like that which would have a real lasing effect.

 

[upperdeck]

i'm not sure the scholie limit has really shown to be tough on schools.. USC sure didnt get hurt as much as the limit was supposed to.. the money is not that big a deal either. no bowl may hinder them a bit, but it also clear the culture in the state needs to change or kids will still want to go there and probably they still play at close to the same level as before unless they have other issues such as poor coaching and a rash of injuries.

 

[retro44]

there is so many ways to get grant-in-aid. i think syracuse goes that route first then makes up the difference.

 

[SUfanNC]

Am I the only one?

The way I see it, the $60 Million dollar fine will do no real damage. And just by way of being on a down trend anyway, along with losing their coach, and being a toxic name their recruiting/ on the field play was going to take a major down turn anyway.

The real life implications of that sanction was that it took Penn St. from a team that would be around the 40th best team in the country, and made sure they would end up around the 70th best.

Is that such a big deal?

I think the loss of scholarships and wins was fine, but I would have liked to see a 10 year bowl ban, or something like that which would have a real lasing effect.

Maybe but I would have to think there will be lawsuits against Penn St as well. Civil court

 

[TDTOrange]

i'm not sure the scholie limit has really shown to be tough on schools.. USC sure didnt get hurt as much as the limit was supposed to.. the money is not that big a deal either. no bowl may hinder them a bit, but it also clear the culture in the state needs to change or kids will still want to go there and probably they still play at close to the same level as before unless they have other issues such as poor coaching and a rash of injuries.

This is a longer term than U$C's scholarship reductions and more overall. And due to appeal, USC's reductions didn't start until last year, so the full effect may have not been seen yet.

This is a very significant penalty. Penn St. basically has to play a B1G schedule with a FCS roster (at least numbers wise) for at least 4 years. It may take them a year or 2 before getting down to the 65 maximum, thus not starting the 4-year clock, and then it'll take another 2 years to get back up to 85 due to roster and initial scholarship limitations. Going forward, I don't expect them to pull in too many "Penn St." level prospects either, so the roster will be thinned out that way as well. Pete Thamel had a good take on this earlier...http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/23/penn-state-faces-a-grim-football-future/

 

[Blaster]

I think they are fine.

 

[Rocco]

The problem is that this will affect alot of people who are completely innocent and had no knowledge of any of this.

In my mind, I think that the football program should have been suspended for as many years as Sandusky abused these kids. That kind of punishment would've never happened and didn't happen, but that is just my pissed off opinion.

 

[mountaincuse]

The problem is that this will affect alot of people who are completely innocent and had no knowledge of any of this.

Such is life, that's what happens when people in charge .

As the head of my household, when I mess up everyone has to suffer the consequences. Thing is, I try to take that into consideration when I make decisions - and I also have some semblance of morals too.

 

[Louie&Bouie]

I didn't think they were too light in terms of severity.

But I really disagree with the length. Thought sanctions would/should last a minimum of 5 years, possibly as long as 7 years.

And to all the rednecks on the BWI board who keep flapping their gums about Bernie Fine, please stop. There really is no comparing those incidents.

 

[billsin01]

Am I the only one?

The way I see it, the $60 Million dollar fine will do no real damage. And just by way of being on a down trend anyway, along with losing their coach, and being a toxic name their recruiting/ on the field play was going to take a major down turn anyway.

The real life implications of that sanction was that it took Penn St. from a team that would be around the 40th best team in the country, and made sure they would end up around the 70th best.

Is that such a big deal?

I think the loss of scholarships and wins was fine, but I would have liked to see a 10 year bowl ban, or something like that which would have a real lasing effect.

I can see your point but I think there are limits as to what the NCAA wanted to do. A couple counter-points to that end:

1) The fine is largely show but it really would have been tough to levy a fine that makes all that much sense. The real financial damage will be done in the civil courts.

2) The penalties to the program (schollies, bowl ban, etc.) are not as harsh as they could have been but I doubt the NCAA really thought "let's kill this program!" I mean, the responsible parties are gone, the kids didn't do anything wrong, and the complete and utter dissolution of the program punishes a huge swath of innocent parties and doesn't exactly make things right with the victims.

3) The stripping JoePa of his wins is largely show but for a family and football program that takes itself sooooooooooo seriously, this may be the harshest of the penalties. The official record books will forever let folks know that joe pa was the 8th winningest coach of all time. That's awesome given the ego and hubris that atrocious family continues to show at every turn.

All in all, I would have supported harsher penalties but ultimately the true punishment was always going to have to come from the university and its own supporters. Will they take true action as an administration and severely tighten the reins in all aspects? Will donors realize, "hey, you know, maybe there's a better use for that $15M I have lying around than a new whirlpool for my favorite football team." How likely is that? Pretty slim, but I'm not sure the NCAA is strong enough to counteract those forces anyway.

 

[General20]

I can see your point but I think there are limits as to what the NCAA wanted to do. A couple counter-points to that end:

1) The fine is largely show but it really would have been tough to levy a fine that makes all that much sense. The real financial damage will be done in the civil courts.

2) The penalties to the program (schollies, bowl ban, etc.) are not as harsh as they could have been but I doubt the NCAA really thought "let's kill this program!" I mean, the responsible parties are gone, the kids didn't do anything wrong, and the complete and utter dissolution of the program punishes a huge swath of innocent parties and doesn't exactly make things right with the victims.

3) The stripping JoePa of his wins is largely show but for a family and football program that takes itself sooooooooooo seriously, this may be the harshest of the penalties. The official record books will forever let folks know that joe pa was the 8th winningest coach of all time. That's awesome given the ego and hubris that atrocious family continues to show at every turn.

All in all, I would have supported harsher penalties but ultimately the true punishment was always going to have to come from the university and its own supporters. Will they take true action as an administration and severely tighten the reins in all aspects? Will donors realize, "hey, you know, maybe there's a better use for that $15M I have lying around than a new whirlpool for my favorite football team." How likely is that? Pretty slim, but I'm not sure the NCAA is strong enough to counteract those forces anyway.

I agree with most everything you said with the exception that I would have liked to have seen the bowl ban be longer. That is all.

The program got to a point where people actively covered for a child molester and allowed him to continue doing it so that the football program would not be interrupted. Our court system can punish the people in power, but it cant do anything about the football program that got so out of control. The NCAA is the only organization with the power to do something about that. What they chose to do was take a team that was already going to be bad and make them slightly worse. The NCAA ban will be up before they are able to recover any shred of their past glory.

A ten year bowl ban, would have kept the program down long enough (hopefully) to give some new values time to be installed.

 

[Scooch]

The NCAA is the only organization with the power to do something about that.

Nope, Penn State had the power to do something, and they punted.

Because deep down they still think they're being treated unfairly by everyone. "Why cant we just let Jerry go to jail and continue on like nothing happened?" is seemingly how a good chunk of the student body, alumni and administration feel.

 

[Bortukal]

I think the sanctions are extremely harsh and definitely more punitive in nature than corrective. I have no problem with them in that regard.

But if the NCAA's goal was to destroy the demigod culture surrounding PSU football that allowed Sandusky's abuses to continue unfettered -- which, I think, should have been the goal -- then I think they fell short.

Emmert and co., I'm sure, are betting on players leaving PSU in droves. But what if that doesn't happen? This year and next, PSU could very well field competitive, otherwise bowl eligible teams. It's certainly likely that PSU will suffer some lean years after that, but with crafty management there's no reason why PSU couldn't field teams that produce a decent product on the field. If that happens, the PSU community is going to rally behind the program more loyally and fiercely than ever.

Even if that doesn't happen, the worst case scenario probably has them experiencing a period of time similar to our G-Rob years. While that certainly drove away thousands of our more fair-weathered fans, I wouldn't say that it resulted in the absolute death of football culture at SU (although some would debate me on that, I'm sure).

I really feel that the only way to demolish the culture that led to the PSU situation would have been to suspend the program for 2 years and then gradually bring it back to life. Every program goes through lean years and rebounds from them. PSU will be no different. But complete suspension of a program would completely unhinge the culture. No Saturday home games, tailgates, homecoming, etc. That's really the only remedy powerful enough to destroy the pervasive culture at State College.

 

[obliterata]

The penalties were too light, they should've been banned from bowl games and TV for at least a decade. You can't change that culture with a four-year ban, they'll be back to glory in 7 or 8 years.

 

[liljoe]

Am I the only one?

The way I see it, the $60 Million dollar fine will do no real damage. And just by way of being on a down trend anyway, along with losing their coach, and being a toxic name their recruiting/ on the field play was going to take a major down turn anyway.

The real life implications of that sanction was that it took Penn St. from a team that would be around the 40th best team in the country, and made sure they would end up around the 70th best.

Is that such a big deal?

I think the loss of scholarships and wins was fine, but I would have liked to see a 10 year bowl ban, or something like that which would have a real lasing effect.

A "lasting effect" does nobody any good. What you seem to want is for the whole community to be destroyed. If the program were completely dismantled, the economic impact would be far reaching, to the point where chances are you go beyond hurting those involved.

Don't forget, the victims and their families and friends are part of the community you want to see destroyed. And I'm not just talking the football fandom, but vendors, parking attendants, police officers... The list is endless.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

I think they should have been given death penalty for 4 years, force the program to go dark for an extended period of time, I believe PSU will find ways to get aroundthe scholie stuff witha lot of in state kids, sure they will take a hit but they will still be playing and fans will be there in droves and the 60 mil is no real issue, the fans still have a program, etc etc. I think 4 years drak would have been much better

 

[General20]

A "lasting effect" does nobody any good. What you seem to want is for the whole community to be destroyed. If the program were completely dismantled, the economic impact would be far reaching, to the point where chances are you go beyond hurting those involved.

Don't forget, the victims and their families and friends are part of the community you want to see destroyed. And I'm not just talking the football fandom, but vendors, parking attendants, police officers... The list is endless.

I dont want the program to be dismantled. If I wanted that I would be saying they should have gotten the death penalty.

I want the program to be taken down a notch, not for a few years but for the long term. I dont want this out of a sense of vengeance. I want it because the culture got so football-centric that they allowed god knows how many children to be raped rather than suffer a black eye for the football team. A culture that allows that kind of thinking has to be stopped. You can stop it by taking away football, but I dont think that is necessary. It can also be stopped by forcing mediocrity on the team. If they cant make a bowl some of the passion goes away.

In this case the NCAA sanctions do nothing to hurt the football team. They were going to be down for these four years anyway because the recruits who are in high school now are very aware of the scandal, plus they have a new coach.

By the time Penn St can turn it around the NCAA sanctions will be gone. The sanctions did nothing but perhaps make an already mediocre team a win or two worse. Some of the sanctions are fine, but the bowl ban should have gone 10 years or so. That may have had some kind of lasting affect.

 

[orangenirvana]

3) The stripping JoePa of his wins is largely show but for a family and football program that takes itself sooooooooooo seriously, this may be the harshest of the penalties. The official record books will forever let folks know that joe pa was the 8th winningest coach of all time. That's awesome given the ego and hubris that atrocious family continues to show at every turn.

"Attrocious" family? Really? Easy on the hyperbolic judgment.

 

[dollarbill44]

My wife does. I haven't made up my mind yet.

That's what I typically do with topics that don't directly impact me. I reserve judgment until people lose interest and move on to other things.

 

[billsin01]

A ten year bowl ban, would have kept the program down long enough (hopefully) to give some new values time to be installed.

I think a 10-year bowl ban could have certainly been warranted but I'm not sure new values will ever really permeate programs that are playing big boy football. I think the best we can hope for is that in the true mission statement of the program there's a line added so it reads more like, "We will do what we need to do to win a lot of games and become as powerful and profitable as humanly possible ... and preferably do so without trampling the lives of dozens of disadvantaged youths."

 

[billsin01]

"Attrocious" family? Really? Easy on the hyperbolic judgment.

I reserve 'atrocious' for those families that waste time defending the legacy (a completely irrelevant issue in the face of what's gone on here) of an old guy who essentially sanctioned the serial abuse of disadvantaged children.

 

[billsin01]

I think they should have been given death penalty for 4 years, force the program to go dark for an extended period of time, I believe PSU will find ways to get aroundthe scholie stuff witha lot of in state kids, sure they will take a hit but they will still be playing and fans will be there in droves and the 60 mil is no real issue, the fans still have a program, etc etc. I think 4 years drak would have been much better

That money was never going away. PSU's status within the state of PA, assuming they would have been allowed to play 'ball again at some point, was never going away. The only folks who really had the power to send a severe message that PSU would be hard-pressed to work around are the administration and the donors. Unlikely that happens. For the record, I wouldn't have had a problem at all with the death penalty.

 

[billsin01]

I think the sanctions are extremely harsh and definitely more punitive in nature than corrective. I have no problem with them in that regard.

But if the NCAA's goal was to destroy the demigod culture surrounding PSU football that allowed Sandusky's abuses to continue unfettered -- which, I think, should have been the goal -- then I think they fell short.

Emmert and co., I'm sure, are betting on players leaving PSU in droves. But what if that doesn't happen? This year and next, PSU could very well field competitive, otherwise bowl eligible teams. It's certainly likely that PSU will suffer some lean years after that, but with crafty management there's no reason why PSU couldn't field teams that produce a decent product on the field. If that happens, the PSU community is going to rally behind the program more loyally and fiercely than ever.

Even if that doesn't happen, the worst case scenario probably has them experiencing a period of time similar to our G-Rob years. While that certainly drove away thousands of our more fair-weathered fans, I wouldn't say that it resulted in the absolute death of football culture at SU (although some would debate me on that, I'm sure).

I really feel that the only way to demolish the culture that led to the PSU situation would have been to suspend the program for 2 years and then gradually bring it back to life. Every program goes through lean years and rebounds from them. PSU will be no different. But complete suspension of a program would completely unhinge the culture. No Saturday home games, tailgates, homecoming, etc. That's really the only remedy powerful enough to destroy the pervasive culture at State College.

You make a solid case for the death penalty but I'd argue that with sooooooo much money involved in college athletics, the only culture change we see is one where schools are a bit more mindful of their P's and Q's regarding coaches and players involved in seriously delinquent behavior. I"m sure they'll still bury DUIs and such but if a school was faced with the bernie fine allegations, for example, I bet they'll fire him and make a statement about how they defend the rights of children, etc. Now is that the right culture change? Not necessarily in that I'm sure it'll be more for show than actually trying to get to the bottom of the allegations, but that's really the best we can hope for, IMO.

 

[orangenirvana]

I reserve 'atrocious' for those families that waste time defending the legacy (a completely irrelevant issue in the face of what's gone on here) of an old guy who essentially sanctioned the serial abuse of disadvantaged children.

The last nine months or so have been brutal on them. Calling the entire family "atrocious" for defending their late husband/father is a bit absurd.

 

[billsin01]

The last nine months or so have been brutal on them. Calling the entire family "atrocious" for defending their late husband/father is a bit absurd.

Probably true. I'm sticking with it, however, until they stop making thoroughly misguided and insensitive public statements. It's putting football records ahead of human suffering (I mean, it's not as if the abuse is alleged -- it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt at this point). Go grieve in private and speak later when you can be more measured and careful with your words.