NCAA sends PSU notification of investigation | Syracusefan.com

NCAA sends PSU notification of investigation

for lack of institutional control.
But lack of control over... what? None of the NCAA bylaws apply to criminal conduct like this, outside a very general "integrity and honor" type of catch-all.
 
for lack of institutional control.

Are they now sending the "we've concluded our investigation and come to the conclusion that you had absolutely no control whatsoever" letter?
 
But lack of control over... what? None of the NCAA bylaws apply to criminal conduct like this, outside a very general "integrity and honor" type of catch-all.

Bylaws in question include: 19.01.2, 10.1, and Institutional control which is found in (2.1, 6.01.1 and 6.4)
 
it isn't a like of institutional control if one of your coaches commit a crime. It becomes one when the school covers up the crime.
 
Bylaws in question include: 19.01.2, 10.1, and Institutional control which is found in (2.1, 6.01.1 and 6.4)
Well there you go. 19.01.2 is the catch-all "you are teaching impressionable youngsters and your morals must be exemplary." 10.1 is the "ethical conduct" section which at least includes a bulleted list of actual transgressions. They have to be going for (a) and/or (d), which relate to withholding information from the NCAA or the school when an investigation is occurring.

The institutional control one could be easy. From the manual:

"6.01 GENERAL PRINCIPLE
6.01.1 Institutional Control. The control and responsibility for the conduct of intercollegiate athletics shall
be exercised by the institution itself and by the conference(s), if any, of which it is a member. Administrative control
or faculty control, or a combination of the two, shall constitute institutional control.
6.1 INSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE
6.1.1 President or Chancellor. A member institution’s president or chancellor has ultimate responsibility
and final authority for the conduct of the intercollegiate athletics program and the actions of any board in control
of that program. (Revised: 3/8/06)"

By 6.1.1, since the Board had to remove the president, you have instant loss of institutional control right there. If that is not enough, then an indictment for perjury against your AD should suffice.

Penn State is gonna get it.
 
Here is the thing... the NCAA, knowing that they will have public support, will come in all guns blazing. Nothing is going to be off limits, so you can bet that they will find some violations of some sort (pretty much impossible to not have violations if you're running a BCS program). Any guess on how many years they get shut down? 1, or 2?
 
I know they are going for lack of institutional control, but I just have the feeling they won't get shut down. Severely crippled by schollie and recruiting limits, yes. They are going to get hit hard. But I think the NCAA is going to be hesitant to impose the death penalty. Will the force of public opinion be able to outweigh backroom politicking? I don't know.
 
Any guess on how many years they get shut down? 1, or 2?

More bad information needs to come to light for Penn State to get the death penalty. Based on the recent precedents I expect they'll end up losing some schollies and get a stern warning that they may be sent to stand in the corner in timeout for a minute next time.
 
I know they are going for lack of institutional control, but I just have the feeling they won't get shut down. Severely crippled by schollie and recruiting limits, yes. They are going to get hit hard. But I think the NCAA is going to be hesitant to impose the death penalty. Will the force of public opinion be able to outweigh backroom politicking? I don't know.

Things have gotten so bad with violations that the NCAA has to do something. They didn't want to ever give the death penalty again. But things were heading toward them HAVING to do it to someone BEFORE this PSU stuff came out. So if they have to act, what better school than Penn St? The public really won't blame the NCAA. Since there won't be any criticism, why not pull the trigger? This will scare off the other schools from acting the way they have the last 5 years and clean things up. Then when things get out of control again in 20 years someone else will get hit.

Now this will also effect the B1G. So to keep them happy I would just ban PSU from offering schollies for 2 years. And a reduction of schollies the 2 years after that. Not a complete death penalty. PSU can still field a FB team but it would all be current players plus walk ons, which keeps the B1G happy as they do not need a replacement for a CCG. Current players would be allowed to transfer without having to sit out. PSU would likely not have a full 85 again until 2017. Which means they will take a 5 year hit.
 
Now this will also effect the B1G. So to keep them happy I would just ban PSU from offering schollies for 2 years. And a reduction of schollies the 2 years after that. Not a complete death penalty. PSU can still field a FB team but it would all be current players plus walk ons, which keeps the B1G happy as they do not need a replacement for a CCG. Current players would be allowed to transfer without having to sit out. PSU would likely not have a full 85 again until 2017. Which means they will take a 5 year hit.

Nevr happen, creates a major player safety issue. I'm sure that they wouldn't have a problem finding kids to walk-on, but they aren't going to be able to play against DI talent without getting injured. My high school football team was one of the best in the state (back in the 80's), with several kids that went to play college ball. But we had one guy that was a high-level DI recruit that we used to hold out of practice, because he was so freakin' big and fast he would injure guys.

You cannot talk about player safety, and then force a BCS conference program to field a DII team and maintain your credibility on the issue.
 
Now this will also effect the B1G.
This is what I was getting at when I mentioned backroom politicking. The B1G won't want their entire scheduling process to be screwed up by this, so I can see them 'suggesting' something like you talk about - severe sanctions coming short of the actual death penalty.
 
Nevr happen, creates a major player safety issue. I'm sure that they wouldn't have a problem finding kids to walk-on, but they aren't going to be able to play against DI talent without getting injured. My high school football team was one of the best in the state (back in the 80's), with several kids that went to play college ball. But we had one guy that was a high-level DI recruit that we used to hold out of practice, because he was so freakin' big and fast he would injure guys.

You cannot talk about player safety, and then force a BCS conference program to field a DII team and maintain your credibility on the issue.

Why do you assume they will have a bunch of DII type kids. That is silly. I am sure a bunch of in state kids would still go to PSU instead of a school like UConn and then get a scholly their JR and SR years. Also kids who would be D1AA players rather play at PSU then a school like Rhode Island. On top of that current kids can stay and keep their scholarship. If you are a current Freshman you know that you will get a ton of PT if you stay at PSU. So why leave? PSU would be like Akron not Kutztown.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
170,426
Messages
4,890,975
Members
5,996
Latest member
meierscreek

Online statistics

Members online
282
Guests online
1,319
Total visitors
1,601


...
Top Bottom