PSU Trustees

[Townie72]

If I go buy a car, and my wife says I should have consulted her and that's a rule we have, it doesn't really matter to the car company that sold it to me.

If I broker an agreement at work, and go to the manager of the group I brokered it with, and he signs without consulting anyone else, that's not my problem that he didn't do things the right way on his side.

A representative of Penn State with the power to sign a document, did so. If the BoT is pissed that he did, take it up with him.

If I were the NCAA, I'd say 'ok, we'll accept your appeal'. and then after you talk it over, drop the nuke on them.

But suppose I went to the car company and said I was authorized to sign for you when I wasn't. See, that's the problem. These trustees are saying that the President lacked authority to commit the University without the approval of the full board. If that's true --- and this has yet to be tested in the court --- than what the NCAA has is the equivalent of a bad check.

Then were are off to court.

As far as "dropping the nuke" is concerned, if they cannot make sanctions stick than than how can they drop any nuke?

 

[rrlbees]

Look I know this is complicated and frustrating.

But that's one of this Trustee group's bitches that the PSU President never bothered to get the approval of the whole Board of Trustees when he "signed on" for the University. If that turns out to be a requirement, then this "signing on" needs to be re-done, this time with the approval of the whole BOT.

In the words of lawyer Bill Clinton, "It depends on what the definition of "is" is."

Once again I'll say it. If this group of PSU trustees doesn't sit down and shut up this agreement could all unravel. And the NCAA enforcement power could shrivel.

Supposed ly it was not just Erickson but also the executive board of the BOT. Also, in the very first meeting of the full BOT with Erickson aftyer the penalties came down, the reports and quotes from that meeting was that the right thing had been done by signing off on it. I do not know for sure but this now sounds like a few disgruntled BOT members or did the article say the suit was made by the full board? Either way, this is not an NCAA issue, it is a PedSt issue and if PedSt or the courts don't like the ruling, PedSt can leave the NCAA.

 

[Townie72]

Supposed ly it was not just Erickson but also the executive board of the BOT. Also, in the very first meeting of the full BOT with Erickson aftyer the penalties came down, the reports and quotes from that meeting was that the right thing had been done by signing off on it. I do not know for sure but this now sounds like a few disgruntled BOT members or did the article say the suit was made by the full board? Either way, this is not an NCAA issue, it is a PedSt issue and if PedSt or the courts don't like the ruling, PedSt can leave the NCAA.

Even I am tired of this conversation.

Suffice it to say, we will see what happens. The fat lady has not yet sung.

 

[shandeezy7]

But suppose I went to the car company and said I was authorized to sign for you when I wasn't. See, that's the problem. These trustees are saying that the President lacked authority to commit the University without the approval of the full board. If that's true --- and this has yet to be tested in the court --- than what the NCAA has is the equivalent of a bad check.

Then were are off to court.

As far as "dropping the nuke" is concerned, if they cannot make sanctions stick than than how can they drop any nuke?

Technically the NCAA didn't need PSU to sign off on anything. They basically offered them a plea bargain. If they want to drop a nuke, they can drop a nuke. Whether or not it would hold up in the court of law, idk, but I don't see why it wouldn't.

 

[rrlbees]

Even I am tired of this conversation.

Suffice it to say, we will see what happens. The fat lady has not yet sung.

Btw, last week the full board had a closed door meeting. After the meeting, the chair made a statement that the BOT and the University intends to comply with the sanctions. So it does appear to be a few renegades making the appeal. So they speak for the college when we now have the President, the Executive Board and the full board all saying they will comply??

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[javadoc]

Supposed ly it was not just Erickson but also the executive board of the BOT. Also, in the very first meeting of the full BOT with Erickson aftyer the penalties came down, the reports and quotes from that meeting was that the right thing had been done by signing off on it. I do not know for sure but this now sounds like a few disgruntled BOT members or did the article say the suit was made by the full board? Either way, this is not an NCAA issue, it is a PedSt issue and if PedSt or the courts don't like the ruling, PedSt can leave the NCAA.

Unless there are written procedures clearly defining the chain of command and the authority of the President in dealing with the NCAA, the courts will not - bank on it - step in to decide what the University's internal procedures should be. And if there were such procedures and legal authorities, they would have been cited by now as clear-cut proof of the merits of this suit.

 

[baggerbob]

Great idea but will never happen under the current DOJ. Well...maybe if you can tie it to voter suppression.

In a normal year I would agree the DOJ wouldn't do anything ,but if the BOT keep this in the spotlight until the season starts things change. This happens to be a national election year, and whether right or not, you will have national organizations protesting. Some politician or more then one will get involved, which will force the DOJ to get involved. Its called CYA and then all of congress would get on board. To be honest I'm surprised no-one has jumped on the soapbox already, but they will.

 

[TheOrangeBuddha]

But suppose I went to the car company and said I was authorized to sign for you when I wasn't. See, that's the problem. These trustees are saying that the President lacked authority to commit the University without the approval of the full board. If that's true --- and this has yet to be tested in the court --- than what the NCAA has is the equivalent of a bad check.

Then were are off to court.

As far as "dropping the nuke" is concerned, if they cannot make sanctions stick than than how can they drop any nuke?

I think you are confusing the two issues.

Issue #1: Does the NCAA have the authority to hand down sanctions.
Issue #2: Did the PSU President and a small selection of "others" (BOT members or not) have the authority to agree to the "punishment" on behalf of PSU or not.

I do not believe there is much of an argument with regard to issue #1. The participating members of the NCAA all agree to abide by their rules, regulations and cede power to the NCAA to investigate and punish individual members when those rules and/or regulations are broken. I am sure that there is broad language in the NCAA tome that would provide enough leeway for the NCAA to act in the present case. Hell, the "lack of institutional control" charge is enough to bring in the NCAA punishment power in my opinion.

As for issue #2, there very well might be some arguments here depending on certain contract law provisions with the relevant law of Pennsylvania (or whatever jurisdiction the NCAA requires its contracts be governed by). However, even if issue #2 is decided in favor of the complaining PSU BOT members, that does not result in a finding that the NCAA did not have the power to punish.

Peace.

PS - I'm enjoying the back and forth of ideas and opinions, especially in light of the fact that their is little animosity thrown around at each other - which is a nice change from our political world.

 

[All4SU]

In a normal year I would agree the DOJ wouldn't do anything ,but if the BOT keep this in the spotlight until the season starts things change. This happens to be a national election year, and whether right or not, you will have national organizations protesting. Some politician or more then one will get involved, which will force the DOJ to get involved. Its called CYA and then all of congress would get on board. To be honest I'm surprised no-one has jumped on the soapbox already, but they will.

Good observation. Also, PA is kind of an important state in this election. It would be kind of interesting (in an odd and somewhat appalling way) if both Presidential candidates came out in favor of PSU. I'm sure that the child abuse backlash would be enough to keep that from happening. Still...

 

[Townie72]

I think you are confusing the two issues.

Issue #1: Does the NCAA have the authority to hand down sanctions.
Issue #2: Did the PSU President and a small selection of "others" (BOT members or not) have the authority to agree to the "punishment" on behalf of PSU or not.

I do not believe there is much of an argument with regard to issue #1. The participating members of the NCAA all agree to abide by their rules, regulations and cede power to the NCAA to investigate and punish individual members when those rules and/or regulations are broken. I am sure that there is broad language in the NCAA tome that would provide enough leeway for the NCAA to act in the present case. Hell, the "lack of institutional control" charge is enough to bring in the NCAA punishment power in my opinion.

As for issue #2, there very well might be some arguments here depending on certain contract law provisions with the relevant law of Pennsylvania (or whatever jurisdiction the NCAA requires its contracts be governed by). However, even if issue #2 is decided in favor of the complaining PSU BOT members, that does not result in a finding that the NCAA did not have the power to punish.

Peace.

PS - I'm enjoying the back and forth of ideas and opinions, especially in light of the fact that their is little animosity thrown around at each other - which is a nice change from our political world.

Except that the NCAA did not follow its own established process for this. Instead they substituted the Freeh effort. That might be a good idea. But departing from an established process is a red flag in a legal suit.

 

[SU2NASA]

But suppose I went to the car company and said I was authorized to sign for you when I wasn't. See, that's the problem. These trustees are saying that the President lacked authority to commit the University without the approval of the full board. If that's true --- and this has yet to be tested in the court --- than what the NCAA has is the equivalent of a bad check.

Then were are off to court.

As far as "dropping the nuke" is concerned, if they cannot make sanctions stick than than how can they drop any nuke?

The grounds are that they didn't get due process, not that the sanctions are unfair. They can challenge the sanctions, have an NCAA board deliberate on them. Challenging the lack of due process is different than challenging whether the NCAA can do anything at all.

 

[rrlbees]

Except that the NCAA did not follow its own established process for this. Instead they substituted the Freeh effort. That might be a good idea. But departing from an established process is a red flag in a legal suit.

Personally, I hope it does all get reopened because as OrangeBuddha said and I agree with, the NCAA does have jurisdiction and can levy penalties. If it gets reopened I have no doubt the NCAA will levy even harsher penalties and it will be the death penalty which the NCAA first was going to do and then PedSt was allowed to "negotiate" it down. The NCAA will be none too happy that a few renigade was able to undo what the NCAA and PedSt agreed to and will come down harder as lash back. If PedSt can't control a few renigade BOT members, the NCAA won't allow for any negotiaqtions on the new penalties.

But I am sure that PesSt the institution is thanking their lucky stars that the NCAA didn't go further, because they know just how far, wide and deep this whole thing probably runs.

 

[Townie72]

The grounds are that they didn't get due process, not that the sanctions are unfair. They can challenge the sanctions, have an NCAA board deliberate on them. Challenging the lack of due process is different than challenging whether the NCAA can do anything at all.

The point is, I think, that the NCAA did not use its own process on this. Instead they substituted the Freeh Report which was based on the investigation of the Freeh staff and their conclusions.

These PSU BOT members are saying, "You can't impose sanctions without an NCAA investigation and then a rebuttal by the University as is normally done. There's a whole NCAA process that was shortcutted. And the NCAA can't do that."

 

[rrlbees]

The point is, I think, that the NCAA did not use its own process on this. Instead they substituted the Freeh Report which was based on the investigation of the Freeh staff and their conclusions.

These PSU BOT members are saying, "You can't impose sanctions without an NCAA investigation and then a rebuttal by the University as is normally done. There's a whole NCAA process that was shortcutted. And the NCAA can't do that."

The NCAA has many times in the past sent a letter of inquiry to a school and the school replied mwith its own findings and recommended penalties. The NCAA has then used those "artifacts" tof orm it's opinion and apply sanctions. Who says the Freeh report can't be used as the "artifact". Does the NCAA really have a by-law that says that every inquiry has to be follwed with a full blown investigation conducted by the NCAA itself.

It's akin to the questioning that was done why Emmert was able to make some decisions without going through the full NCAA compliance office and that was responded to by showing that the NCAA by-laws allows with proper approval by the office (which happened) to delagte decisions to Emmert.

 

[SU2NASA]

The NCAA has many times in the past sent a letter of inquiry to a school and the school replied mwith its own findings and recommended penalties. The NCAA has then used those "artifacts" tof orm it's opinion and apply sanctions. Who says the Freeh report can't be used as the "artifact". Does the NCAA really have a by-law that says that every inquiry has to be follwed with a full blown investigation conducted by the NCAA itself.

It's akin to the questioning that was done why Emmert was able to make some decisions without going through the full NCAA compliance office and that was responded to by showing that the NCAA by-laws allows with proper approval by the office (which happened) to delagte decisions to Emmert.

Been always wondering, where the hell did you find that signature? Can't. stop. watching.

 

[RF2044]

Personally, I hope it does all get reopened because as OrangeBuddha said and I agree with, the NCAA does have jurisdiction and can levy penalties. If it gets reopened I have no doubt the NCAA will levy even harsher penalties and it will be the death penalty which the NCAA first was going to do and then PedSt was allowed to "negotiate" it down. The NCAA will be none too happy that a few renigade was able to undo what the NCAA and PedSt agreed to and will come down harder as lash back. If PedSt can't control a few renigade BOT members, the NCAA won't allow for any negotiaqtions on the new penalties.

But I am sure that PesSt the institution is thanking their lucky stars that the NCAA didn't go further, because they know just how far, wide and deep this whole thing probably runs.

The PedSt folks should be thanking their lucky stars that their attorney negotiated their way out of a four year death penalty, and that lesser sanctions were imposed.

The BOT might not be pleased that the President of the University signed off on the lesser sanctions without full board input, but they are losing sight of the bigger picture if that's what they are bitching about. They continue to act like THEY are the victims in this situation, and by doing so are inadvertently tightening the noose around the program's [and by the transitive property, the university's] neck.

And the more they continue to act out--not just the BOT, but also the fan base--the more apparent it will be how this collective was able to culturally to allow decades worth of child sexual abuse to occur. Which may in turn result in far more onerous penalties being imposed to bring about the cultural changes that are needed.

 

[rrlbees]

Been always wondering, where the hell did you find that signature? Can't. stop. watching.

Can't remember where I found it but it is time to change it. Been there for awhile. I too found it funny and almost "mesmerizing".

 

[javadoc]

The BOT might not be pleased that the President of the University signed off on the lesser sanctions without full board input, but they are losing sight of the bigger picture if that's what they are bitching about.

It makes much more sense to regard this as a minority of disgruntled, "out of control" trustees trying to get all sanctions rescinded. The only conceivable end game for procedural arguments is to get the sanctions rescinded. I refuse to believe that these board members are sincerely and philosophically disturbed by the process.

I suppose this could also be a stalling tactic to postpone the sanctions, but that would be more harmful in the long run IMO. With sanctions of this severity, get them over with as soon as possible. Stretching it out extends the period of uncertainty and limbo during which opposing coaches will savage the program in recruiting.

These guys aren't scared of sanctions, because they probably honestly think there should be none. They want their day in court. A proper Athenian ostracism is in order for these blockheads.

 

[Czar]

The point is, I think, that the NCAA did not use its own process on this. Instead they substituted the Freeh Report which was based on the investigation of the Freeh staff and their conclusions.

These PSU BOT members are saying, "You can't impose sanctions without an NCAA investigation and then a rebuttal by the University as is normally done. There's a whole NCAA process that was shortcutted. And the NCAA can't do that."

The NCAA shortcutted it because the Freeh Report was going to sink PSU no matter what. So they told PSU, either you can fall on your sword, accept these sanctions, and we won't kill you, or you can fight these, and we'll bury you. Guess what the NCAA is going to do now?

 

[ImperialOrange]

So if the NCAA agrees to reopen the case and go through the process again, what are the chances Emmert would have to convince the 18 D1 coaches on their board to turn down the death penalty again? It wasn't unanimous the first time around and you'd think a few of those voting members on the NCAA side may change thier minds and eliminate the middle ground that initially was agreed upon by the NCAA and PSU.

 

[RF2044]

So if the NCAA agrees to reopen the case and go through the process again, what are the chances Emmert would have to convince the 18 D1 coaches on their board to turn down the death penalty again? It wasn't unanimous the first time around and you'd think a few of those voting members on the NCAA side may change thier minds and eliminate the middle ground that initially was agreed upon by the NCAA and PSU.

That's the same way I feel--PSU's long term interests would have been better served by being collectively contrite and taking their penalties like men so that they could put the past behind them. Doing so would enable them to limp through these middling next couple of years and position the program to get through the penalties as quickly as possible and be poised to bounce back when they emerge reasonably intact from the other end of the tunnel.

Instead, the BOT are waving rifles over their heads with two hands with the defiance of Charlton Heston at an NRA rally, demanding due process.

They are slitting their own throats taking this approach, IMO. I seriously doubt that anyone out there--and certainly not the NCAA--is going to be sympathetic to either their cause or their current tact. There is no way--NONE--that the NCAA is going to allow their jurisdictional powers to be undermined like this. Because if that precedent is set, the NCAA might as well disband.

 

[StopCoolio]

The thing about 'Due Process' is that the NCAA has already been down that road and won. Jerry Tarkanian tried to sue them and it was ruled by the Supreme Court that the NCAA is not a government agency and didn't have to adhere to it.

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPorta...&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ384177

As for them being able to sign off, isn't it indicative that they could only get 4 of 32 board members to join this? Why would these four take precedent over the other 28?

 

[javadoc]

The thing about 'Due Process' is that the NCAA has already been down that road and won. Jerry Tarkanian tried to sue them and it was ruled by the Supreme Court that the NCAA is not a government agency and didn't have to adhere to it.

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPorta...&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ384177

http://www.volokh.com/2012/08/06/is-the-ncaa-a-state-actor/

 

[oldpinepoint]

Ok I’m going to use the golf analogy here, but what these PSU Trustees should do is take their medicine. It’s like hitting into the woods, instead of chipping out and giving yourself a clear shot, you decide to go for the low probability of hitting a skulled 3-iron through 25 trees from 225 yards away which ends up in more trees. My guess is they should keep their mouths shut, heads down and take their medicine.

 

[Townie72]

The NCAA shortcutted it because the Freeh Report was going to sink PSU no matter what. So they told PSU, either you can fall on your sword, accept these sanctions, and we won't kill you, or you can fight these, and we'll bury you. Guess what the NCAA is going to do now?

If this goes into court, the NCAA will do what the court decides it can do.