NCAA Exec Committee to gradually restore Penn State football scholarships

Submitted by Dilla Dude on

NCAA Exec Committee to gradually restore Penn State football scholarships

Link?

 

Link:http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2013/september/executive+committee+to+gradually+restore+penn+state+scholarships


How great is this for Penn State? Better late than never.

 

Edit: The NCAA Executive Committee may also consider additional mitigation of the postseason ban in the future depending upon Penn State’s progress.

NittanyFan

September 24th, 2013 at 11:32 AM ^

I always thought something like this would occur (a partial sanction reduction), to credit Penn State for the good things that have been done since November 2011.

 

What was done before then cannot be undone, but we can work toward rehabilitation.

bubblelevel

September 24th, 2013 at 12:08 PM ^

The individuals who were involved are all gone.  The players and new staff have been punished for a horrible thing that happened outside of the football program (meaning nothing to do with players, gaining competitive advantage, etc).  They are doing everything right now at PSU and should have some of the penalties lessoned.  By the way - NCAA had no reason to impart its own penalties - this was a criminal case.

Zone Left

September 24th, 2013 at 12:31 PM ^

We have no idea Penn State is doing anything right, just like we have no idea about any other school. The NCAA is by its nature opaque.

Second, I totally disagree that the NCAA had no business here. The coverup was conducted entirely to spare the football program from a massive scandal. It wasn't done to obtain an advantage, but rather to maintain its advantage in the form of its good name and Joe Paterno. The NCAA had every reason to come down on Penn State.

Zone Left

September 24th, 2013 at 2:33 PM ^

When the NCAA punishes schools, it punishes two groups of people: players/coaches and hangers-on. You can punish the people who are there easily. The NCAA has rules to get rid of players and coaches caught violating its rules. 

Under your scenario, we stop there and the incentive structure becomes something along the lines of: cheat as much as possible and disavow knowledge afterwards. Boosters could cheat forever, as much as possible, because there would only be short-term punishment in the form of player and coach removal.

The NCAA is structured such that the schools police themselves and need incentive to do so. The only realistic option is to punish the entity for their failure to maintain compliance along with the people responsible for the actual actions. 

SysMark

September 24th, 2013 at 5:42 PM ^

...the non-financial penalties are punishing people who were not even around, much less responsibile.

By that logic there would be no punishment since once everything blows up the people responsible are out.  That's the way it goes - you are associated with, employed by or a student at an institution that covered up a massive scandal in which children were badly hurt, so there's punishment that endures.  If you don't want to be associated with it leave.

Tater

September 24th, 2013 at 1:47 PM ^

There is still no proof that anyone at PSU believed that Sandusky was the POS he turned out to be.  If anyone at PSU had knowledge of inappropriate behavior, or believed that he did it and perpetuated his crimes, they would be guilty of a cover-up and should be punished.  

But what if they just believed Sandusky was a decent guy who was having his character assassinated with bogus accusations?  Child molesters are successful because they are great at convincing the rest of the world that nothing is out of the ordinary.  

I really think that Sandusky fooled everyone here, but that what he did was so terrible that "anyone with a badge and a gun" has over-reacted by scapegoating anyone with position or money or the chance of peripheral involvement.

Until there is proof that anyone actually believed or knew that Sandusky was guilty of his crimes and helped cover them up, the only things that are appropriate are to punish Sandusky and do everything possible to help his victims heal and have a chance of living well the rest of their lives.

That does not include making current students and athletes pay for the actions of one rogue child molester.

MGlobules

September 24th, 2013 at 1:58 PM ^

Sandusky's behavior, check. But no one needed to "believe. . . that Sandusky was the POS he turned out to be" to have a coverup. All they needed to know was that what they DID know would screw up the program. 

ChasingRabbits

September 24th, 2013 at 2:34 PM ^

In this make believe world of yours, why did Sandusky "step down" in the middle of his career?  Also, several people including the head football coach, Athletic Director and the President were told of horrid acts that he had committed by what should have been viewed as reputable sources. 

SysMark

September 24th, 2013 at 5:51 PM ^

Another way of looking at it is the entire institution's image and reputation were based on a cult of personality surrounding one aging football coach.  That's what kept the heinous acts from the light of day and that's the real heart of the problem.  It was institutional failure on on epic scale and that institution has to fundamentally change.

This was never about just one perverted monster.

Everyone Murders

September 24th, 2013 at 6:58 PM ^

 

There is still no proof that anyone at PSU believed that Sandusky was the POS he turned out to be.

I disagree with this.  Mike McCreary saw Sandusky raping a kid in the shower and testified about it.  So it seems that McCreary - then a PSU employee - believed Sandusky was a POS.  LINK.  And Independent Investigator Louis Freeh seemed to think that folks at PSU were somewhat aware of Sandusky's behavior.  LINK.  So it seems to me that there was a hell of a lot of evidence that some folks around the PSU football program believed that Sandusky was a predatory POS.  

The sanctions and general opprobrium are a raw deal for many of those associated with PSU (especially the student body and non-football faculty).  They are victims here too.  But with respect to Sandusky and his trail of victims, the institution writ large conducted itself very poorly and bears a portion of the blame for the latter instances of Sandusky's preying on young boys.

Now whether the Sandusky scandal and PSU's treatment of it really constitutes an NCAA violation is a much-more-debatable kettle o' fish. 

Wolverines Dominate

September 24th, 2013 at 12:54 PM ^

I completely agree with bubblelevel. I am by no means a PSU fan, but the fact that the NCAA butted in and gave sanctions to the school/program was ridiculous. They didn't break any NCAA by-laws, rather there were federal crimes broken by one sick, perverted man. He has been dealt with by the government. Why the hell did the NCAA feel a need to place sanctions on the football program? That was so stupid.

turd ferguson

September 24th, 2013 at 1:21 PM ^

I'm kind of blown away by how often and how completely I disagree with you on things.  In a way, I actually think it's cool, since most people I interact with (especially in person) tend to have views and dispositions that are similar to mine.  Being a fan of a school like Michigan offers a big, broad tent.

You'll probably disagree with this assessment.

GoBlueInNYC

September 24th, 2013 at 2:07 PM ^

You're completely missing his point. Things like giving money to players is not a crime, but is against the NCAA rules. What happened at PSU is the inverse; there was no violation of NCAA rules that took place, instead it was criminal.

You can argue about competitive advantage and football culture, but as far as I know there were no NCAA rules violated.

bluebyyou

September 24th, 2013 at 7:19 PM ^

Couple of points....

When a program takes a hit from the NCAA, the individuals involved are often gone and beyond the reach of the NCAA.  That's the way this works.  Ever hear of Reggie Bush? Without the ability to sanction prospectively, the NCAA would be neutered, not that on occasion that wouldn't be an improvement.

What in the NCAA's charter disallows them from sanctioning member schools when they do something wrong, regardless of whether the infraction is criminal or not?  There is no due process requirement that governs the conduct betwen the NCAA and its members.  There is a good SCOTUS decision on this point if you care to read it.  

http://lawhighereducation.org/93-national-collegiate-athletic-associati…

NittanyFan

September 24th, 2013 at 11:46 AM ^

commisioned the Freeh Report on our own (something that didn't have to be done after all), worked to install almost all of its recommendations.  

 

New PSU leadership has been publically contrite and accepted responsibility for what has happened.

 

PSU leadership is NOT involved in any of the current lawsuits against the NCAA.

 

Don't confuse current Penn State leadership with the Paterno family and some the crazies in our fanbase.  I'll leave it at that.

NittanyFan

September 24th, 2013 at 11:58 AM ^

If people want to hang the Scarlet Letter on Penn State forever because of what happened, fair enough.  That is their right.

 

I honestly don't think anyone in the NCAA or the B1G was interested in that.  They punished on 23-July-2012, and rightfully so.  Today's just a step in the process of making sure this isn't how Penn State is defined forever.

 

Note that if Penn State doesn't continue along the same line of the last several months, things can be changed back.

Mabel Pines

September 24th, 2013 at 5:30 PM ^

We cut out Ed Martin, got rid of Steve Fisher and got nothing back.  I'm not saying it's wrong to give them back scholarships, I just think the NCAA is a hot mess of contradictions.  PSU harbored a pedophile to protect a bigger than life football program.  And the hero worship can happen anywhere.  Think Nick Saban or how about Tom Izzo?  The students wouldn't leave the football stadium for a severe Thunderstorm until he told them to????  Bizarre.   These problems can never be solved by sanctions, but I'm not sure about handing down sanctions and then relaxing them a year later. 

highestman

September 24th, 2013 at 11:51 AM ^

There was an independent assessment performed by George Mitchel, an ex-senator and "Athletics Integrity Monitor". His report is linked in the article above. I don't have the time to look to deeply into it, but it does say:

As a result of the University’s continuous efforts throughout the course of the first year of the

Consent Decree, Penn State has completed or substantially completed 83 of the 119

recommendations. Work on an additional 32 recommendations is complete or largely complete,

but because of the nature of the reforms called for in those recommendations they have been

designated “ongoing and continuous.”

 

I'm not completely sure what these things are, but apparently there are 119 of them, but at least one is enhancing the security and access protocols at their athletic facilities.

 

 

jblaze

September 24th, 2013 at 1:33 PM ^

“The university has substantially completed the initial implementation of all the Freeh Report recommendations and its obligations to the Athletics Integrity Agreement, so relief from the scholarship reductions is warranted and deserved.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/ncaa-restores-penn-state-scholarships-163029431--ncaaf.html

Soulfire21

September 24th, 2013 at 11:50 AM ^

Cleaning house from top to bottom:  New coach, new AD, new president.  

Commissioning the Freeh report, which they didn't have to, and implementing most of the recommendations.  

Receiving good marks from their third-party monitor.

Not appealing the sanctions and in general new leadership has cooperated wholeheartedly which the requirements of their Athletic Integrity Agreement from the NCAA.

Hannibal.

September 24th, 2013 at 11:55 AM ^

Not appealing the sanctions?  Weren't they about to sue the NCAA because of lost revenue?  And since when does not formally protesting a punishment mean that you are rewarded with not getting the punishment or drastically reduced punishment? 

Soulfire21

September 24th, 2013 at 11:58 AM ^

Penn State has not appealed their sanctions, signing a consent decree.  I think you're confusing the Paterno family and others associated with Penn State who are pursuing lawsuits against the NCAA.

Of course, nowhere did I say Penn State should not be punished, you're arguing with a straw man there.  They're talking about lifting some the scholarship bans which I think is a great idea because they only serve to punish current players who have no connection whatsoever to the scandal.  The rest of the punishments (fine, bowl bans, probation, third-party monitor) are still there.

Hannibal.

September 24th, 2013 at 11:59 AM ^

They didn't appeal the sanctions that the voluntarily accepted as part of a compromise deal that kep the university away from a long, embarrassing investigation that would have had the death penalty on the table?  Wow.  Noble bunch, those Penn Staters.  We should have made this argument with our football practice time punishment. 

Soulfire21

September 24th, 2013 at 12:11 PM ^

You and I disagree over what is drastic then.  I do not feel the current coach nor current players ought to bear the brunt of the punishment, as they are unassociated with the scandal.  We can certainly disagree.

And, even though in 2 years they can take 25 kids, their roster is still limited to 80 scholarship players until the 2016-2017 year, so despite being able to take a full class a year earlier they still have a loss of 5 scholarships overall.

FreddieMercuryHayes

September 24th, 2013 at 12:24 PM ^

How can you punish PSU, or any school for that matter, without the current players and coaches bearing the brunt of the penalties?  If that's your philosophy, then there just shouldn't be any rules at all.  Just hire a guy who you know cheats, let him cheat, then when he gets caught, fire him and hire the next guy who cheats.  Keep the cycle going.

And besides, the whole point of the punishment in the first freaking place was the make PSU, from the administration to the fans, step away from football and the need for a successful program that made the whole cover up neccssary in the first place.  It was supposed to prevent the program from being succesful and FORCE PSU to realize football isn't that important. 

And obviously, that did not happen.  That entire culture is still there.  Otherwise you wouldn't be hearing from everybody that the sanctions should be reduced.  They would have taken the punishment, found something else to focus on, and not worried about the football program.  Instead, they will now not miss a beat, and PSU football will be back to most important thing on campus.  No lessons learned.  No one learned a damn thing from this now except that the NCAA will do nothing if you yell enough.

gwkrlghl

September 24th, 2013 at 1:03 PM ^

That entire culture is still there. Otherwise you wouldn't be hearing from everybody that the sanctions should be reduced. They would have taken the punishment, found something else to focus on, and not worried about the football program. Instead, they will now not miss a beat, and PSU football will be back to most important thing on campus. No lessons learned. No one learned a damn thing from this now except that the NCAA will do nothing if you yell enough.

Hit the nail on the head. Nothing was learned except that the NCAA will cave if you whine enough

Soulfire21

September 24th, 2013 at 2:08 PM ^

How can you punish PSU, or any school for that matter, without the current players and coaches bearing the brunt of the penalties?

Things like fines, probation, and the third-party monitor.

The distinction is this:  are you trying to punish the current football program, or Penn State as an institution?  I lean a bit to the latter, though other peoples' comments here have been very insightful.  And you're right, the football program is going to bear the brunt of the penalties, and while I agree there is no way around that I don't think slightly decreasing one part of the 8 parts of the penalty is worth much uproar, especially considering they're receiving praise from their compliance monitor -- whose word I would take over speculation about Penn State's culture from fellow MGoBloggers.

ChasingRabbits

September 24th, 2013 at 2:53 PM ^

No current coach or player NEEDED to be punished at all...  they CHOSE to be punished.  The NCAA said they could all transfer free and clear and no new kid had to sign up to go there.  it was their choice to stay, their choice to go, the coach's choice to go...  They all knew what the deal was when they signed up.  

And now you just have a new crop of people (same fans) in Happy Valley that view their football program as above punishment, and are crying to get it reduced or thrown out. 

I have to agree with the keep the sactions folks. No punishment is too stiff against a university, program and culture that allowed THAT to happen. 

Edit: I see Wahoo pointed this out below.. damn smart UVA peeps.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

September 24th, 2013 at 12:30 PM ^

Bill O'Brien knew what he was getting into, any of the players who signed with that program in 2012 or 2013 knew what they were getting into, and all of the players who were already there were given a Get Out Of Jail Free card.

They may not be associated with the scandal but everyone there now made a fully informed decision to be at Penn State despite the scandal.  More power to them if they find that motivational, but their non-association, to me, isn't a factor.

Edit: I agree that collateral damage should be minimized, which is why I always found the "kick them out of the B1G" stuff to be hysterical and way off base, but the current punishments were designed to make PSU football suck for a long time in exchange for them covering up child molestation in the interest of their football program.  If it works, that's a good thing, not a bad thing.

Soulfire21

September 24th, 2013 at 2:14 PM ^

The penalites were not "cut in half".  That is asinine.

The penalties were:

  • $60 million fine
  • Third-party compliance monitor
  • All wins vacated from 1998-2011
  • Four year bowl ban
  • Four year conference championship ban
  • Five years of probation
  • Scholarship reduction
  • No bowl revenue from the B1G

We are talking about half of one part of the penalties.  Given that the rest of the penalties remain in tact, so roughly 6% of the penalties were reduced (assuming a 50% reduction of the scholarship portion of the penalty).

Edit: Thanks for the spirited debate everyone, I rarely get to interact with many MGoBloggers so in that respect it's been a very nice dialogue.

Mr Miggle

September 24th, 2013 at 1:26 PM ^

I don't think so. They replaced the absolute bare minimum of people they could. I can't see how anyone would give them much credit for replacing three administrators facing criminal indictments. What school in the country wouldn't have done the same thing, whether they were concerned about the NCAA or not? If you want to give them credit for firing Paterno and hiring Freeh, fine. But what alternatives did they have? They were in no position to do a credible investigation on their own. Keeping Paterno with that hanging over his head may well have been worse for the program than the sanctions.  In any case, those moves were made well before the NCAA sanctions, so they were factored in to the penalties. I think your other points are valid, but it's only been one year.  That just seems too soon to start reducing the penalties.

Zone Left

September 24th, 2013 at 11:54 AM ^

The good thing would have been to walk away from college sports for a few years the way SMU did. Everything about the Jerry Sandusky scandal was done to protect the football program, so the school's priorities were clearly out of whack. Penn State needs to recalibrate its moral compass. All I've seen since the scandal broke was minimum CYA to reduce lawsuits and appear recalcitrant enough to bring football back to the big-time.

Frankly, I'm upset the Big 10 didn't kick Penn State out of the league and that the NCAA didn't do the same.

CooperLily21

September 24th, 2013 at 1:10 PM ^

I'm generally not a nuclear reaction kind of guy but I have to agree.  What happened at PSU has to be THE worst thing to ever happen in college football, at least morally and socially.  Paying players? LOL.  Drugs?  LOL.  Crimes against children are one of the worst criminal acts in society and to not have at least levied the death penalty on PSU in my mind was the final straw in a long line of impotent acts by the NCAA.  I appreciate the huge loss it would be to PSU and its university and fans, but f-ck it all.  And now to get scholarships reinstated such that the program could arguably built itself back up even stronger than it was under the late Paterno years?  That's a slap in the face to all parents out there, IMO.