By Not Kowtowing to Columnist Blowhards, Penn State is Finally Moving On

Black Shoes Diary ^ | 1-10-14 | Devon Edwards

[Colofornian]

PSU is the only division 1 football program that has never had a major ncaa violation. Of any kind. Still to this day.

Penn State has LONG agreed to adhere to NCAA bylaw 2.4, has it not?

Where do you think Penn State steered clear of violating this bylaw?

Here I'll repost it for you:

The Principles of Sportsmanship Ethical Conduct. For intercollegiate athletics to promote the character development of participants, to enhance the integrity of higher education and to promote civility in society, student-athletes, coaches, and all others associated with these athletics programs and events should adhere to such fundamental values as respect, fairness, civility, HONESTY AND RESPONSIBILITY. These values should be manifest not only in athletics participation but also in the broad spectrum of activities affecting the athletics program."

Are you now claiming that athletic director Tim Curley was totally forthcoming to the authorities? ("honesty and responsibility...of activities affecting the athletics program"). (I won't ask you the same question re: Joe Paterno; it'd be a waste of time soliciting a response on that question)

ALL: Please note, too, that Penn State apparently didn't see ANY PROBLEM AT ALL in keeping close-mouthed Curley on the payroll thru June of 2013 (and even then, it didn't fire Curley; just didn't extend his contract). So it could fire Paterno, but not Curley? (What hypocrisy!)

[Fledermaus]

And now we get the double news of who’s the new coach for Vandy/Titans.

I’m with you, why punish the current players for what Sandusky and Joe did?

Make the school pay, not the kids.

[Fledermaus]

The NCAA could have fined the school to the hilt without hurting the players who did nothing.

It kills opportunity for a future for the players.

[Colofornian]

The NCAA could have fined the school to the hilt without hurting the players who did nothing.

OK, I'd like to hear this idea of yours out a bit more.

But in order to take it truly seriously, you need to...
...(1) provide several precedents where the NCAA has done this re: other programs with serious ethical breeches...
...and (2) show cause for them to treat Penn State distinctly than what the normal NCAA response might be.

It kills opportunity for a future for the players

Not really...plenty of schools competing for those kids worth starting or playing 2nd team.

Penn State's roster size winds up being about the same.

Yeah, more walk-ons...which, in turns, means even more opportunity for such kids to rise to the surface.

There's been THOUSANDS of good Div I football athletes who were walk-ons thru the decades.

[Fledermaus]

The kids were victims. Unlike those getting paid at SMU or getting benefits from alumni like other programs in the past.

This was a cover up by the administration and they should be held responsible and not the players.

The problem with precedent is that it tends to ignore the specific issue and just lumps everything into “violations”. Arguing precedent could be used to uphold slavery today since it once was “the law of the land”.

My opinion is punish the school in this case and not the program. How is being denied bowl games punishing a child molestor?

[Colofornian]

This was a cover up by the administration and they should be held responsible and not the players.

I already addressed this in post #72:

So, I'll repeat it & comment a little more:

I said: ...let's hit the rewind button a year and a half ago when the NCAA came out with its sanctions vs. Penn State. I can recall a FREEPER who asked then the question, "What did those [then-current] Penn State players do?" -- to be saddled with such penalties?

My response then was to say: "as if you didn't know, college rosters turn over every 4 yrs...and practically are new teams starter-wise every 3 yrs...under this new standard you propose, the ncaa statute of limitations for punishing teams for violations would be about 3 yrs...perhaps every 2 yrs if a given roster could be proven to have 'enough' turnover."

Sorry, but the NCAA -- no matter what college scandal we're discussing -- always has to penalize the given school's PROGRAM involved...

Anybody saying that starters can't be impacted by decisions made before they got on campus isn't living in a real world.

ADDITIONAL COMMENT: For you to offer some consistency on this as "policy," you would need to advocate that the NCAA establish a statute of limitation of about 2-3 years post-violation.

As I said above, college rosters turn over every 4 years...and starters about every three years (or less)...Hence, ANY penalties coming down about 4+ years or so -- after the fact -- wind up hurting players who had NOTHING to do with the violations.

So is this what you're advocating?

And if so, why such sudden advocacy??? Can you show me ONE post or ONE place where you've called for such an NCAA statute of limitations prior to this Penn State penalty?

If not, I detect some selective outrage or selective accountability here.

************************

My opinion is punish the school in this case and not the program. How is being denied bowl games punishing a child molestor?

I just addressed this in post #101, plus the last part of post #99. In post #101, I showed that the Penn State athletic program DID violate NCAA bylaw 2.4; and that both athletic director Tim Curley and Joe Paterno -- both culprits by glaring omission -- were paid by the athletic budget of Penn State.

In post #99, I also mentioned that oversight of its showers on campus is likewise an athletic budget item; and that it's not enough to claim than the educator who knows about a sexual assault, "Well, since the sexual assault didn't have ANYTHING to do with classroom management, it's not my issue" (see Steubenville rape case example I use there).

You claim that the "program" shouldn't be penalized...

Well, if that's the case then there wasn't ANY reason for...
...Paterno to be fired...
...or to not bring recruiting head McQueery back...
...or for Penn State athletic director Tim Curley to be placed on admin leave...
...or for Penn State to choose not to extend Curley's athletic budget contract last June...

After all, your apparent claim here is that the athletic department program was run squeaky clean!

It's quite curious that we see so many posters try to make some delineation 'tween the school budget + accompanying school admins on the payroll...
vs. the athletic dept budget -- which includes the football program -- + accompanying A.D.s. and football coaches on the payroll...

(Quite frankly, it's a silly distinction for which there's no need to parse such compartmentalization...unless, of course, you've become a Penn State apologist and advocate for what the athletic department people failed to do...which I cover in the last part of post #99 as to those failings)

[Fledermaus]

After all, your apparent claim here is that the athletic department program was run squeaky clean!

I didn't even get close to making that point.

It's my OPINION that to me it's like blaming a rape victim for they way she dressed. And let's face it, their is no precedent for this kind of crime in a sports program.

Personally, I don't give a rats you-know-what about Penn St.! Thanks for your views.

[IrishBrigade]

Make the school pay, not the kids.

...you are aware that many of the players who were death penaltied at SMU were not even on the team when the pay for play shenanigans were going on...

...how do you separate the players from the program...it is a symbiotic relationship...without the one, the other doesn’t exist...if the program gets nailed, its essential ingredient, the players, by definition get nailed as well...

[IrishBrigade]

Cite me one case similar to this one where wins were vacated. There were no athletes involved, recruiting violations, etc,

...quite frankly, this situation is unique unto itself...and I suspect that any future occurrences that would be similar will be dealt with far more harshly, now that precedent and punishment has been established...

We all know this was about making sure Paterno would not be the winningest coach in history.

...I suspect that you’re really not naive enough to actually believe that statement..

[Colofornian]

Me: After all, your apparent claim here is that the athletic department program was run squeaky clean!

You: "I didn't even get close to making that point."

Then perhaps you can explain this one line in post #105: "My opinion is punish the school in this case and not the program."

You essentially said no accountability is to be brought to bear on the Penn State program. (Just the broader school)

And now you're attempting to revise what you posted?

Sorry, it doesn't work that way...

[Fledermaus]

Nice try. YOU added “ran squeaky clean” and I never insuated that.

It’s clear we have a different defintion of what “the program” means.

[Fledermaus]

You argue my point. SMU got the death penalty for all around abuse by all. Those future players could have gone elsewhere knowing the program was dead.

Kids at Penn State didn’t do anything wrong by getting abused by some jerk.

All I’m saying is there is quite a difference here. If you advocate the death penalty for Penn St. then fine. So be it. I think it’s cruel to let them play for nothing.

Again, my opinion. Seems to be a waste now of FR to state one.