I was one on the forum who said that the NCAA should not get heavily involved and I believed they would not ... because of the precedent it would set and the difficulties the NCAA would have policing this sort of criminal behavior. I was wrong on the "would not" part, obviously. We are now about to see Chapter 1 of the "should not" drama. We'll see just how wrong I was on this as it plays out in the NCAA and in the courts. This could get very, very messy.
What we are seeing is legal wrangling. There are PSU trustees that disagree with the way things were handled. They believe that the PSU president did not have the authority to accept the sanctions without a board vote.
They believe that the Freeh Report contained conclusions that were not correct and that the NCAA using this report as the basis for their actions was flawed.
They are saying that the punishment would affect many, many innocent people.
If this thing gets to State or even Federal Court, there's no telling what could happen. If the NCAA loses badly, then where are we?
I'm not arguing that the sanctions are too lenient, too severe or just right. But when things are done in a panic this is what you get.
I certainly understand your point of view and agree that, at the end of the day, the idea that the NCAA should just absolutely demolish a program for the sins of a previous regime is a bit off base. But, I disagree with you on a few key points.
1. You make the case that this is a dangerous precedent to set -- the NCAA being a moral police of sorts. But I'd say that neglects three pretty important points:
- This is an absolutely unprecedented event. This isn't the coach at Baylor getting involved in that incident with the player shooting another player, which was horrible but a one-time event. This isn't Miami gets kids getting abortions paid for by donors. This isn't kids dealing blow. This isn't cheating, laptop stealing, fighting or, to be perfectly honest, a player or two players or three players involved in a sexual assault/rape. This was much, much, much worse. The point being, I'm not sure other schools, should they come under fire of the NCAA morality police will have much problem saying, "OK, we did some things we're not proud of, but you're going to reduce our schollies for a rash of kids on drugs? Seriously? You're going to compare those two?"
- There is a very clear jurisdictional argument to be made in the sense that this never happens if not for a remarkably powerful football program and head coach. Those are clearly football-related issues and I'm frankly not sure how anyone could make the argument that the program didn't benefit quite a bit from not having to explain why their defensive coordinator was a founding member of NAMBLA.
- There is also a pretty dangerous precedent to be set if the NCAA doesn't intervene. The whole reason all these programs exist -- though we all know it is BS and it's about money -- is the farce that these kids somehow benefit from playing sports. They develop character and leadership and teamwork skills, etc. BS? Yes, without question, but it's the entire basis of the NCAA's member programs. For them to say, "eh, we're not going to get our hands dirty. We're too busy with our new compliance manual." is completely crazy.
As for punishing innocent -- who is
really being punished? I mean, what these kids who get a free education, a chance to make millions in the nfl, an elevated standing on campus, tutors, athletic gear, access to state of the art facilities to train, and the chance to play on TV and in front of 108,000 crazed lunatics (which has certainly been proven in this ped st case)? Really, you feel terrible that they can't go to Orlando for a bowl game? Or that they win 6 games instead of 8? The coaches? Poor Bill O'Brien, who's making 7 figures and took a job at a place where there was a huge scandal going on and who will return to the NFL if it doesn't work out? The assistants who change jobs every three years anyway? The fans who may have to stomach a couple lean years? Seriously that's some huge punitive punishment?
And, finally, the Freeh report -- I see people pointing this out all the time. Let's toss out the entire report and go only on what was proven:
-- PSU coaches not only knew of the allegations but a rape was witnessed by an -ing coach.
-- the venerable head coach said himself he wished he had handled it differently and then said he just didn't know what to do. ... pause ... sorry, I just had to vomit quickly.
-- the guy was arrested in possession of keys to the PSU facilities.
-- The guy retired/was pushed out in '98 for very, very, very fishy reasons.
-- the guy has been convicted of 45 counts of abuse and there are many reports of his obsession with hanging out with boys, something that obviously must have struck a few people as odd.
I mean, they're not all hard evidence, but I'd suggest that the NCAA had plenty of evidence to nail PedSt for, at the very least, not being proactive in stopping a guy they had a very good idea was a serial child molester. That's plenty of cause for levying the sanctions they did as far as I'm concerned.
