Should Penn State Suspend Its Football Program?

[FCollinsBuckeye]

Larry Johnson chewed tobacco during practices and games.

Srs bsns

[no smiley]

 

[AKAK]

Unless I'm wrong (and I may well be) don't most of these surround the general promotion of sportsmanship and fair play. (At least taken as a whole). If that's not the case, I'd be curious as to what else they might cover.

Edit: Forgot about the 10.1 stuff, but, again, I think that has to do with another violation taking place that was lied about/concealed, etc.

 

[AJHawkfan]

but, gets to the point that they should get LOIC because you "just know" something is rotten at OSU. (or Miami, or USC, or wherever)

Sandusky being convicted is the something rotten. It don't have to be based it on any kind of intuition or gut feeling. He was abusing little boys in the University's facilities and using university functions as a means to abuse them. On those grounds alone, they are guilty of a lack of control - of their employees, their facilities, their events.

The cover up just makes the crimes that much worse.

Nevermind the fact that Paterno was the puppet master who controlled every decision made by the AD, VP and at least half of the BoT......

 

[AKAK]

Sandusky being convicted is the something rotten. It don't have to be based it on any kind of intuition or gut feeling. He was abusing little boys in the University's facilities and using university functions as a means to abuse them. On those grounds alone, they are guilty of a lack of control - of their employees, their facilities, their events.

The cover up just makes the crimes that much worse.

Nevermind the fact that Paterno was the puppet master who controlled every decision made by the AD, VP and at least half of the BoT......

See bold...

Yes, but not NCAA bylaws.

 

[FCollinsBuckeye]

Sandusky being convicted is the something rotten...

I think AKAK's point is that what Sandusky was convicted for is not against NCAA rules.

FWIW.

 

[AKAK]

I think AKAK's point is that what Sandusky was convicted for is not against NCAA rules.

FWIW.

Wait, wut?

Oh, yeah.. that was it.

 

[Muck]

Sorry, I will re-phrase it.

Luckily, Ohio State isn't run by a bunch of cult driven, kool-aid sippin' goons. :tongue2:

 

[Woody1968]

I think AKAK's point is that what Sandusky was convicted for is not against NCAA rules.

FWIW.

But if the Freeh report shows that NCAA violations ocurred at Penn State, I see no reason why the NCAA should ignore them.

I'm not advocating for the NCAA to give the death penalty over Sandusky, I am trying to point out that Sandusky's acts, as horrible as they are, are not the only thing that is wrong at PSU.

Either way, I think the Death Penalty will not come into play.

 

[Saw31]

See bold...

Yes, but not NCAA bylaws.

Hypothetical.

Freeh finds numerous NCAA violations, but they took place outside the NCAA's statute of limitations (since Freeh is most likely investigating a time frame that would put them out of the NCAA's reach). Does this change anything in your mind with regards to the NCAA?

Just asking.

I am of the opinion that for nothing more than common decency their program should be shut down at least long enough to power wash the shit off of it. I tend to agree that it's not necessarily the NCAA that I want doing the shutting down though...

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

I voted no, because I haven't seen the evidence that the entire football program tried to cover up evidence. I haven't seen the evidence that Paterno tried to cover it up. I BELIEVE that he did, but not strongly enough to warrant putting the football team to death. I'd need more proof for that. And I really am not interested in it enough to go searching, myself.

You don't think e-mail #2 is proof enough that JoePed was not only part of the cover up but rather the primary catalyst for it? As for the entire football program, you had the head coach, the athletic director, a key university v-p and the university president. If that's not the most classic case of tail wagging the dog LOIC, I don't know what could possibly satisfy the requirement.

Now, that all being said, I'm not sure that the ncaa can enforce the death penalty under the statute as written. Was there a competitive advantage? Perhaps but that's trying to argue a negative in this case. Were they repeat offenders within the proscribed timeframe? Shouldn't other Ped Aggy programs needed to have been on probation.

Like I said, the ncaa death penalty statute is not the best mechanism for this. The CIC, AAU, AAUP and accrediting agencies need to step in make a clean sweep of the place. The university needs to be threatened with expulsion from the AAU and CIC, censure from the AAUP and loss of their accreditation. Bring in true outsiders to run the place who will vshut down the football program.

If Ped Aggy refuses, then they get all of the sanctions above and the one thing that the ncaa can do: expulsion. If they're not in the ncaa and can't play any ncaa teams, their program ceases to exist.

 

[AJHawkfan]

See bold...

Yes, but not NCAA bylaws.

Right. At this point, PSU has not been found to have violated any NCAA bylaws. Maybe (hopefully) that will change with the investigations that are being conducted.

This is why I asked about the similarities between LOIC and law enforcement's use of disorderly conduct.

 

[AKAK]

But if the Freeh report shows that NCAA violations ocurred at Penn State, I see no reason why the NCAA should ignore them.

No one has said otherwise. But, maybe, if that happens we should see what they are instead of sounding like the assholes calling for our heads after the MoC investigation in '04 and the more recent tat-gate one.

Hypothetical.

Freeh finds numerous NCAA violations, but they took place outside the NCAA's statute of limitations (since Freeh is most likely investigating a time frame that would put them out of the NCAA's reach). Does this change anything in your mind with regards to the NCAA?

Just asking.

If it's some kind of systemic ongoing thing, like academic fraud to keep various players eligible over time, that took complicity from Faculty, etc... yeah, otherwise, if it's one or two kind of stupid things that are out of the statute of limitations, probably not.

Right. At this point, PSU has not been found to have violated any NCAA bylaws. Maybe (hopefully) that will change with the investigations that are being conducted.

This is why I asked about the similarities between LOIC and law enforcement's use of disorderly conduct.

Yeah, I just don't think it works (or should work) that way.

 

[Woody1968]

No one has said otherwise. But, maybe, if that happens we should see what they are instead of sounding like the assholes calling for our heads after the MoC investigation in '04 and the more recent tat-gate one.



If it's some kind of systemic ongoing thing, like academic fraud to keep various players eligible over time, that took complicity from Faculty, etc... yeah, otherwise, if it's one or two kind of stupid things that are out of the statute of limitations, probably not.



Yeah, I just don't think it works (or should work) that way.

I am not an expert in NCAA bylaws, so maybe someone else can answer this: When does the Statute of Limitations begin for NCAA purposes? Would it be matter if the school willfully concealed the information and refused to report?

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

I am not an expert in NCAA bylaws, so maybe someone else can answer this: When does the Statute of Limitations begin for NCAA purposes? Would it be matter if the school willfully concealed the information and refused to report?

I've thought about the statute of limitations question, and it's a good one. I would assume that 1998 and 2001 are beyond the limit. I, however, think that any transgressions stemming from 98 and 01 would arguably continue right up until the last day of employment for those involved. In essence, they were covering it up until the day the board fired them, so last November/December. That's obviously well within any statue of limitations.

 

[BB73]

NCAA.org

Is there a statute of limitations for making allegations?

Yes. Allegations generally are based on violations that have occurred four or fewer years before the time an institution is notified of an investigation or an institution notifies the enforcement staff of violations. However, the enforcement staff may allege violations that have occurred beyond the four-year period if they involve (1) the eligibility of a current student-athlete, (2) a pattern of willful violations that began before the four-year window but continue into the four-year window or (3) a blatant disregard for certain fundamental rules (recruiting, extra benefits, academics, ethical conduct) or (4) an effort to conceal violations.

#3 is interesting.