OT: PSU trustees back president on NCAA action

Submitted by markinmsp on

 Sorry in advance if some are PSU’d out, (Well, not too sorry; Don’t click the link!) but want to share interesting article from this morning concerning PSU/NCAA. It highlights several points that are often debated.

 Article states the vast majority of Penn State trustees voiced support for the university president's acceptance of severe penalties imposed by the NCAA over the school's handling of a child molestation scandal.

 Link:   PSU trustees back president on NCAA action

 To summate; Article confirms several issues about the NCAA/PSU consent decree:

  1. It was signed to avoid much harsher penalties that were favored and in the works by NCAA officials and members.  Most NCAA board members favored the so-called "death penalty" — total shutdown of the football program — for multiple years, and even more sanctions beyond that.
  2. It was essentially forced on the university and was “a take-it-or-leave-it proposition" — and any leak of details would take the deal off the table."
  3. NCAA states the decision is not subject to appeals.
  4. The agreement with the NCAA would allow for changes based on the agreement of both parties.
  5. Trustee Ryan McCombie had agreed to "temporarily suspend" his appeal but had not agreed to withdraw it. ("to allow for sufficient time for full and deliberate review.")

 

Hardware Sushi

August 13th, 2012 at 12:29 PM ^

I finally ventured over to BSD to get their take on it. DO NOT ENTER unless you want to read some crazy opinions. It might be funny if the topic were about free tattoos or Cam Newton's wacky dad. It's sad because the issue isn't even in the same ballpark as those scandals.

It's tough to see the forest from the trees, I guess. I hope I never get that dillusional about something.

snowcrash

August 13th, 2012 at 1:26 PM ^

A lot of posters over there seem to have convinced themselves that PSU would get off on technical grounds because the coverup there didn't fall under any NCAA regulations. They completely miss the bigger point that should have been immediately obvious, which is that the coverup/enabling at PSU was so much worse than anything that happened at any other school that the NCAA would have lost all its credibility forever if they didn't hammer PSU a lot harder than any of the other schools.

Good to see that the board of trustees backed the president, although it would have been nice if they had censured McCombie and those other zombies who backed him.

Urban Warfare

August 13th, 2012 at 9:17 PM ^

Even worse, the BSD mouthbreathers are actively wishing for the probe to discover the BoT and admins were running a child sex ring because it would somehow vindicate the football program.  You know, because it's better to have your school's leadership involved in - I don't know the word for something that despicable, actually - than to lose your streak of no major NCAA violations. 

OverDey

August 14th, 2012 at 9:22 AM ^

 Middle States Issues Warning, Putting Penn State's Accreditation in Jeopardy

statecollege.com reports: penn state has been notified its accreditation is in jeopardy in the wake of the university-commissioned freeh Report and consent decree with the ncaa, the school said Monday. middle states commission on higher education, which accredits degree-granting colleges in the region, issues a warning when an institution is not in compliance with government policies. it is requiring the university to submit a report on issues like governance and financial stability by sept. 30.

1464

August 13th, 2012 at 12:30 PM ^

That's great, but they'll all be out of jobs pretty soon.  Penn State has bigger fish to fry than their athletic department at this point.  The feds are not the NCAA.  There will not be a slap on the wrist if they deem this systemic... and how can they not?

justingoblue

August 13th, 2012 at 1:13 PM ^

that would seriously harm them academically it will be on purpose. There's a halfway decent case to be made that they so perverted the mission of federally funded universities that it would be best to emphasize other institutions rather than pump dollars into State College. I doubt they do much of anything that has long term effects, but the argument is definitely there.

OverDey

August 13th, 2012 at 9:06 PM ^

right, there is more than a halfway decent case and may just use psu as an example. failure to report a crime on or near the campus; school athletic showers sure would constitute a campus facility. can only assume their only hope is whether it was a “proven” crime, the act was, but could they perversely reason “well, it was only allegations”?

WolverineHistorian

August 13th, 2012 at 1:07 PM ^

Fully taken with a grain of salt but it's still weird.  Private planes are not very big.  So why try something so risky when someone could easily walk 40 feet and see what you're doing? 

And I would think even Sandusky wouldn't be stupid enough to send love letters when those boys could take them to the police. 

NoMoPincherBug

August 13th, 2012 at 11:37 PM ^

Where were these witnesses when the actual abuse was taking place?  Talk about gutless.  If you see a kid raped...you turn and walk away? WTF?

BTW I have no faith in the post office to do this investigation...shouldnt it be an FBI issue since it is across state lines?  The post office cant even be trusted to track a package properly.

mGrowOld

August 13th, 2012 at 12:44 PM ^

The upcoming trials promise to make this even more interesting as people will be under oath and forced to answer several interesting questions.  Not the least of which will be "What did JoePa know and when did he know it?'  My guess is that one or more of them is going to roll big-time on St Joe and try and positon their response (or lack thereof) as simply wishing to go along with his directives.  If they do the BSD crowd will truly lose twhat's left of heir collective minds

Yeoman

August 13th, 2012 at 1:29 PM ^

The trial is for perjury, not for the cover up itself. The paper trail makes it well nigh impossible to dispute the latter, so I expect the defense (as so often in a trial for perjury) to be that while testifying before the grand jury the defendants could not accurately remember the events of ten years before. I expect a whole lot of "I don't recall", "I can't remember:, "Yes, I've read the e-mail you're referring to and no I don't remember ever writing or sending it."

They're going to say as little about Joe Pa as they possibly can, because to say anything would be to confess memory of events that need to have been forgotten.

Section 1

August 13th, 2012 at 1:01 PM ^

...over the past months.  I put "Penn State" in quotes, since we've sort of lumped all of PSU together; at least all of "administrative PSU."  I've been part of it; and I'm not terribly sorry for anything I've written.

But it may now be the time, to check ourselves and start standing up for the people there who drove the consent deal with the NCAA.  The entire basis of the deal was Penn State's willing consent, as advised by (Michigan's former counsel) Gene Marsh.  Penn State could have battled with the NCAA, and could have made things even uglier.

It cannot be overstated; the NCAA governs only by the consent of the governed.  Because NCAA governance is purely voluntary with the member institutions, including Penn State's own voluntary participation in the process in this case, anyone pushing for an appeal, or lawsuits challenging the NCAA will likely fail.  All because of the people now in charge at Penn State, at some considerable peril to their own personal futures in State College, cooperated with the NCAA.

NCAA v. Tarkanian, 488 US 179 (1988)

Roachgoblue

August 13th, 2012 at 1:23 PM ^

The school was out of control and kids were raped. Get them out of the big ten. I am embarrassed and the SEC schools rip us constantly here in Florida. Yes, we get lumped in with pedo U. I don't care if Hoke was their lawyer, advisor, whatever. F them!

Mr Miggle

August 13th, 2012 at 9:26 PM ^

Erickson was not some outsider brought in to clean up Penn State. He is a long time senior administrator. I'm not inclined to give any of them the benefit of the doubt that their hands were completely clean, fair or not.

I've seen only one proactive step, hiring Freeh. That was a good move, but the alternatives were probably much worse for them. They just weren't in a position to stonewall multiple investigations.

The statue only came down hours before the NCAA ruling was announced. That could not have been a coincidence. Erickson and PSU have never come out and said the punishments were fair, or even that they deserved any punishment from the NCAA. They certainly took no steps on their own in that direction. They simply say they accepted the penalties they negotiated because they had no choice. This was smart, but I don't see it as particularly laudable.

Yes, Penn State could have battled the NCAA, but that would have been incredibly reckless. They would have been booted out of the Big Ten. While I don't know this for a fact, I would bet they were told just that. Their programs would be hurt while they were fighting and if they lost it would be disastrous. Despite all the message board zealots, I think most people at Penn State realize that and thumbing their noses at the NCAA would not have helped the careers of anyone in charge in Happy Valley.

I'll give Erickson and the board credit for serving at a very difficult time. Beyond that, I'm reserving judgment.

LSAClassOf2000

August 13th, 2012 at 1:29 PM ^

"He criticized the actions of the NCAA and the resources it relied upon, especially the school's internal investigation led by former FBI director Louis Freeh, the findings of which he called "so inconsistent with reality that I find them to be intentionally inflammatory" - summary of Lubrano's comments from the article

Is it just me or does Anthony Lubrano not listen to himself when he speaks? PSU commissions the Freeh Report, makes the findings public, and now he essentially accusses Penn State of lying to itself? Did I read this right? Some of the trustees almost act as if they don't really want to understand the magnitude of what brought their school to this point, but then McCombie wants to take time for "a full and deliberate review", which leads me to believe that a fair portion of this is so the portion of the board in opposition can look like it is doing something (right now, as opposed to when it should have perhaps done something, of course).

I do wonder if they really would go as far as pursuing this in the courts - is the Penn State leadership that out of touch? I would think it would somehow circle back to the NCAA being a private organization that does not require "due process", but I am not an MGoLawyer.

mich_engineer

August 13th, 2012 at 2:35 PM ^

If you take a look at BSD, or *gulp* Blue White Illustrated, its been definitively decided by the fans who post there that the Freeh report was: (1) a set-up by the trustees to frame poor innocent Joe Paterno for the fact that they themselves were actually pedophiles; (2) total lies made to justify the fees charged; (3) some other conspiracy whose end goal was to frame Paterno; (4) not "due process"; and/or (5) nothing more than mere allegations that haven't been proven one iota.

 

So, if you start from the premise that the report is totally wrong/a frame job, then you can see where these trustees are coming from.  That said, they only think it is wrong because it makes a conclusion that they don't like - there is no evidence that the conclusions ARE wrong, but since there isn't an email from Joe saying "Go get'em, Jer!" Paterno must be 100% innocent and in fact a victim of all of this.

 

In short, delusional.

BIGBLUEWORLD

August 13th, 2012 at 1:59 PM ^

We enjoyed kicking you around PSU, when you were in the Big Ten. It will be even better kicking you out.