• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Penn State Cult (Joe Knew)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
If this has been posted please forgive.

Mad-Magazine-Blind-Eye.jpg
 
Upvote 0
Ryan36_1;2190544; said:
Please please let this happen:

-NCAA grants appeal

-BOT has no grounds to take this to court since appeal was granted

-Emmert personally shows up in Happy Valley (think POTUS flying into Middle East warzone middle of the night, not announced until he has left type visit)

-He hands the BOT a four year death penalty sanction and says 'If this isn't approved by majority vote and accepted, than EVERYTHING is on the table as far as punishment after the NCAA, Dept. of Ed, FBI, IRS, DEA, CIA, B1G, Happy Valley Library Overdue Books Enforcement, etc complete their investigations.


Like a Boss
Click to expand...


I'm trying to work out how this will likely play out.
- NCAA rejects appeal
- Some on BOT file federal lawsuit
- Lawsuit will get thrown out.

What will trigger the NCAA to revisit the sanctions? BOT can't really think that an appeal will lessen the sanctions. They have to know that the NCAA could consider revisiting the death penalty. Is that what they want? What will motivate Emmert to oblige?
:popcorn:
 
Upvote 0
4skers89;2190590; said:
I'm trying to work out how this will likely play out.
- NCAA rejects appeal
- Some on BOT file federal lawsuit
- Lawsuit will get thrown out.

What will trigger the NCAA to revisit the sanctions? BOT can't really think that an appeal will lessen the sanctions. They have to know that the NCAA could consider revisiting the death penalty. Is that what they want? What will motivate Emmert to oblige?
:popcorn:
Click to expand...

Here's how I think this plays out legally.

McCombie and his merry band of imbeciles still have NO STANDING. The board as a whole has decided to back Erickson's signing of the consent decree--whether they did it prior (and the board's executive committee did) or retroactively (which the entire board did at Lubrano's grandstanding meeting), the official Penn State entity has still agreed to the consent decree.

Which means, that the ncaa will smack this appeal down (probably run it by lawyers just because it is coming from board members) as firmly as they did that of the Paterno spawn.

So, what now? Do the rogue board members team up with the Paternos (or file independently) and hope to get in front of a sympathetic court that will somehow grant them legitimate standing to at least get a restraining order against the sanctions? Regardless of how far they can take this, I have to imagine that Emmert, Ray and those 18 university presidents are absolutely [censored]ing fuming at what they thought was a settled matter.

Penn State is essentially spiraling into some bizarre civil war pitting the Paterno Cult against those hoping to take their lumps and move on as a university. Does Emmert call Erickson and say, "that's it; deal's off the table and it's the death penalty or even complete banishment from the ncaa?"
 
Upvote 0
So the courtroom dialog will go something like this:

JUDGE: Who asked for the Freeh report?

PENN STATE: We did.

JUDGE: Who accepted the Freeh report?

PENN STATE: We did.

JUDGE: Who agreed to the NCAA sanctions?

PENN STATE: We did.

JUDGE: And what is your complaint?

PENN STATE: We don't agree with the Freeh report or the sanctions.
 
Upvote 0
As we all know the new board members believe that the PSU acting president acted beyond his authority when entering into the consent decree with the NCAA. Assuming the new board members who are upset with the sanctions receive proper authority to challenge the NCAA, the beauty of the first argument in support of overturning the sanctions is the PSU acting president misrepresented his authority to the NCAA while acting on behalf of the member school during a NCAA compliance investigation. That argument will certainly amuse the NCAA leadership.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top