Penn State A Possible Dim Future With the Big Ten?
I am praying to God that these emails are no what I think they are and what I think they are is Joe Pa knew about this longer than he let on and if that's the case my stomach will sink lower than it has since my mother told me about my grandpa's passing this morning. It has not been a good weekend for me so far. With this new light of evidence in sight how do you see Penn State's future with the Big Ten in the coming decades? Will a new administration be enough to patch up what has happened or is the damage so severe they should leave our conference? My good friend who I work with loves PSU so for him this whole situation and yesterday's article is making him considering joining a new fanbase. He hates tOSU so I'm hoping he'll join my side with Wolverine Nation. Your thoughts on Penn State's future in our conference?
Btw a side note my grandfather lived to be 89 played NCAA basketball at Kent State in the 1950s and was a veteran of the US Navy in the Pacific Theatre during WWII. Stan Musial served on the boat he was on also and he always told me Tom Harmon was the toughest runner he ever saw. He met him and his wife also.
double post
Penn State won't be kicked out of the B1G. As tragic as everything around the football program was, I can't imagine any circumstances that would result in an entire university being ousted from the B1G.
1. Sig Pic.
2. Redundancy.
3. Sorry for your loss.
1. Insensitivity.
I disagree about booting Penn State from the conference, but I agree that the Big Ten can't just wait and let this pass (and +1 for you and your grandfather; best wishes to you both).
Unless the NCAA steps up, there has to be some penalty targeted at the football program and probably another targeted at the broader athletic department. For the football program, I think a 3-4 year ban from the BTCG is completely reasonable.
The NCAA wouldn't do anything about simply because there is nothing in the rule book about it. It becomes a sticky a sticky situation when you are banning a team of football players who were at most 7 years old when most of the incidents occured.
Kicking PSU out of the Big Ten is completely unjustified. By doing that, you are punishing the entire PSU community for the actions of a few. Bring those who are responsible to justice, never let them come near the university ever again, but don't punish the players, coaches and the fans who had absolutely nothing to do with what happened. Bill O'Brien and his staff should not be punished for this. The Men's Basketball team, and the Women's Swimming team, for example, should not be punished for this.
Beyond the idea of whether its the right thing to do or not, the Big Ten would lose out on a ton of money by kicking them out. This should be beyond the conference's jurisdiction. This is beyond collegiate athletics. Let the courts handle it.
Are all NCAA sanctions unjustified then?
What if Jim Tressel, Gene Smith and Gordon Gee were discovered to have run a massive hooker dumping/recruit paying scam that lasted 10 years?
Death sentence? Crater the football program? The Athletic Dept.?
What about the poor biology major or truck driver/football fan that had nothing to do with it?
Sometimes innocent people are harmed somewhat in the process of punishing criminals.
It's a price we pay living in our society of laws.
It's a fact that sometimes the children of murderers starve to death.
I somehow think that a free transfer to another school's athletic dept. is a hardship most PSU athletes could survive.
They are quite different since one of them involves football and the other one does not.
Paying players and aiding them in conducting illegal actions is an unfair advantage in football, and thus must be penalized.
Enabling a child predator has nothing to do with football (even though the parties involved did)
"Enabling a child predator has nothing to do with football"
Even in the case of the predator being a celebrated coach with broad based recruiting appeal? If he had been a 1st year assistant, instead of the DC and HC in waiting, I'm pretty sure this whole thing would have been handled differently. Which leads me to the conclusion that in this particular case, enabling a child pedator had everything to do with football.
From a legal standpoint, which is the standpoint the OP is looking through, yes, even if the predator is a celebrated coach with broad based recruiting appeal, he should be fired and get thrown in jail. But it doesn't have anything to do with the players, and so there shouldn't be any action against the players. Also, I'm quite sure that even if Sandusky was just a graduate student, this would have been handled the same. The conflict of interest is not one of embarrasment - that would boil over quite quickly. The conflict of interest is throwing your son (pretty much that's what Sandusky was to Joe) in jail. Paterno couldn't bring himself to do that sadly.
If for example, Denard becomes a graduate student assistant and becomes a serial killer over a 20 year period in which he ascends to the role of offensive coordinator, and Brady Hoke suspects something's up but out of love for Denard doesn't say anything (and doesn't want anyone else to take action on Denard), and then finally they all get caught, they all should get thrown in jail. But that has nothing to do with the football players or for example Borges who is too busy cooking up diabolical schemes to be involved with this.
but you are living in FantasyLand®.
When people in positions of power do bad things, innocent people usually suffer some consequences, that is reality. Its part of the laws of deterrent our society is run on.
If you are part of an administration that represents an institution those are the risks that go along with the job. Thats why they are prestigeous, highly compensated, and have various ethical clauses & contracts. What you do as an academic administrator will affect students, alumni, faculty etc. Their careers, & reputations are directly linked to your actions and the presumed integrity with which you do your job.
No one is charging the girls field hockey team or the philosophy profs with covering up for Sandusky, but when the head of a family commits a crime, the rest of the family suffers in various ways.
I don't think anyone is happy about it.
In a way you have hit upon a big problem at PSU. Who was running the school? There is no damn way that it should have been Paterno's decision. Their identity became too closely intertwined with Paterno and his football program. That was not the fault of only four men, either and it's one more reason that PSU should suffer some punishment for their crimes.
First and foremost, to the OP, very sorry for your loss. It sounds as if your grandfather led a very interesting life, not to mention a long and full one.
As for Penn State, perusing the handbook doesn't provide much in the way of what the NCAA's response might be. Article 6, which is the section on institutional control, more or less says that the responsibility for the behavior of the staff and those who associate with the staff would be with the school, but then this section really only talks about how that works with budgets, evaluations and marketing personnel. Article 10 concerns ethical conduct, and you probably could get them under 10.1 "Unethical Conduct", especially since you are not limited to the examples of "unethical conduct" given on page 45. Still, the focus is mainly on drugs, impermissable benefits and other miscues which Penn State's behavior had made to appear strangely mundane in comparison. The NCAA should, if nothing else, press its own investigation and act as they see fit.
I would be intrigued to know if this is an agenda item for the COPC of the Big Ten in the near future, because I assume that any dismissal from the conference would have to be initiated by the governing board of the conference. It seems to me, however, that they have essentially made themselves effectively irrelevant as a member, with an athletics department mired in disgrace and a school reputation that has been effectively destroyed on many levels. Like others, I am not sure that their dismissal from the conference is likely, but I would hope that the conference investigates further now that the e-mails have come out.
The NCAA and the Big Ten, in my understanding, don't really have any bylaws which are specifically meant to handle a crime of this scope, so I wonder if it is perhaps most fair to see what is, well, left of PSU after all the court cases and then go from there, but again, I certainly hope these bodies also add their names to the long list of entities who at least want insight into this tragedy so that they can act if necessary.
Lack of Institutional Control comes to mind. This situation seems to be the very definition of that phrase, even if it's not in the rulebook as such.
that gets probation survives, it might take time but they survive and move on.
PSU will receive no NCAA punishment whatsoever, their punishment will purely be in the court of public opinion, and shelling out millions which frankly they can more than afford.
If a man so revered and honorable as Joe Paterno committed a cover up like this along with the president and AD to protect their schools reputation and football image, who is to say that Brady Hoke, or DB, or Mary Sue Coleman are not capable of the same thing? Not that I believe they are covering something up now, but who is to say they would not do it to protect the brand name of Michigan?
I guess what I'm saying is we can never fully, 110% trust our coaches and administration after something like this. That sounds terrible to say, but if you think I'm crazy or stupid for saying something like this, ask yourself what programs you would have ranked as having the most class in all of college football this time last year. I bet for most of you, PSU would have been in the top 5.
When Canham took over as athletic director at Michigan in 1968, he had a daunting task ahead of him. The facilities and attendance were substandard, and the flagship of Michigan athletics, the football program, had won only one Big Ten Championship since 1950.
When head football coach Bump Elliott stepped down after the 1968 season to accept a position as an administrator, Canham was faced with his most important hiring decision. “I had spoken to several candidates, and I actually offered the job to Joe Paterno,” Canham explained. “But he had only recently taken over at Penn State and didn’t want to leave. Whenever I would talk to football people, the name of a young coach from Miami of Ohio would keep coming up. When I interviewed Bo, it was obvious that he was the man for the job. He had all the credentials I was looking for. He was a midwest guy, which was essential for recruiting. He had the pedigree by coaching for Woody Hayes and Ara Parseghian, and he was incredibly intense. He didn’t even ask about how much money he would make until after he had accepted the job.”
http://michigan.scout.com/2/376520.html
I agree that this kind of coverup could have gone on at a lot of places (who knows? maybe it has). I do not, however, see that as any kind of a defense of PSU. In fact, I think that is all the more reason to make an example of them, to serve as a deterrent to future schools who might find themselves in this position. I'm not exactly sure what the punishment should be, but there has to be something to it.
For the most part, everyone love their grandpa or father figure. Joe filled that role well. The fact remains that no one knows crap about public figures, and public figures become such by knowing how to present an image. "JoePa", whether or not the real Paterno liked it, became a brand over his years of tenure. Who knows what the motivators were when the moment of truth regarding Sandusky's behavior knocked on JoePa's office door.
It seems like the only options presented are for the Big Ten to do nothing or kick PSU out. Neither seems right to me. I'm angered that PSU has seemingly done absolutely nothing to punish themselves. If they are waiting for their investigation to finish and take some meaningful action afterwards, fine. So far they have hired a new coach and let him retain the assistants he wanted. They have offered to rename the stadium after Paterno and have been accused of not being cooperative by the prosecutor.
If PSU doesn't punish themselves the Big Ten needs to do something. Perhaps something like a two year post season ban with no home games for football and something similar, but lighter for all other sports.
"I am praying to God ..."
-1 (On a blog like this, that amounts to politics. Sorry.)
"... my mother told me about my grandpa's passing this morning ..."
+3 (Or maybe more ... very sorry ... I've had a couple similar experiences lately and it hurts.)
"... is the damage so severe they should leave our conference?"
-1 (Redundant)
-1 (Loaded question)
"My good friend who I work with loves PSU so for him this whole situation and yesterday's article is making him considering joining a new fanbase."
-1 (Mention of a friend whose position is apparently exactly the same as yours ...)
"He hates tOSU so I'm hoping he'll join my side with Wolverine Nation."
-1 (Bolstering friend {and, indirectly, your own position} by mentioning tOSU ...)
"Btw a side note my grandfather lived to be 89 played NCAA basketball at Kent State in the 1950s and was a veteran of the US Navy in the Pacific Theatre during WWII. Stan Musial served on the boat he was on also and he always told me Tom Harmon was the toughest runner he ever saw. He met him and his wife also."
-1 (Amazingly oblique reference of a UMich saint for no apparent reason ...)
Score: -1
I hate to say it, but to echo Desmond Howard.... if this isn't lack of institutional control, I don't know what is.
So it's really fair to punish the coaching staff that is there now? It's really fair to punish the scholarhsip players there now? It's fair to punish the alumni, students, fans that attend the school, the games donate money because of the actions of a few people that are no longer at the school and for something that happend now 10yrs ago?
I really don't get all the kick psu out of the bigten or give the football program the death penalty talk. Why, for what? Tell me the advantage gained on the football field cause that is what ncaa rules are around. Name one advantage in any game gained, name one recruit they got by this or off season/in season advantage? None, ok move on.
Pennst as a university faces some severe trials coming up. US dept of education, fbi, CPS and others are investigating............at stake is 100's of millions in federal funding that could be lost or taken for a period of time that would just be devastating to the university. In the end I don't think much happens here because pennst is a billion dollar business the gov wouldn't want to take down. But I think they open up several avenues in restrictions educators do not want.
Every time the NCAA lays down sanctions, it punishes innocent people. LaVell Blanchard, one of my favorite U-M athletes (a really good player, person and student), was banned from the postseason his senior year because of things that had absolutely nothing to do with him, his coach, or any of his 2003 teammates. That's life.
NCAA/Big Ten punishment is about serving as a deterrent. What PSU did in covering up this man's crimes is just stunning. It's probably the worst scandal in NCAA history when you consider what happened to the victims. If there is no further response - if the NCAA just says "OK, you fired JoePa, it's over, no biggie" - I don't think that would be enough to spur administrators who might find themselves in a similar situation to make the right call.
Explain what happened as rules broken regarding ncaa for punishment of ncaa violations? Cause there isn't any, and no matter how angry we are, there were no football rules broken, no athletic department rules broken. This has nothing to do with cheating and football.
Were laws broken, yes, and several will be dealt with by the courts. Sandusky is gone, locked up and is getting his just deserves now..... The culprits that enabled him further by not reporting are next in line.
So punishing the football program is stupid at this point. I don't mean cause it weakens the bigten, pennst or helps other programs with them being weak, I mean it's plain stupid as you have to make up rules to punish them for something that outside of coaches connection to football nothing in this benefited pennst's football program. What's hard to understand about that?
I have a problem with this legalistic interpretation. The NCAA doesn't have rules against protecting child molesters because it never thought it'd come to that. I bet we'll see them add some kind of "moral violation" clause in the next round of meetings.
After the 1919 Black Sox scandal, Major League Baseball created a new position of commissioner, and gave him extraordinary powers. They completely made up the rules as they went, to restore faith in the sport. I'm fine with the NCAA doing the same.
We are talking about a scandal that is just atrocious on a human level - infinitely worse than a few baseball players gambling on their sport. A serial child molester was shielded from authorities for a good decade by an institution, presumably because it did not want to give the football program a bad name. This is terrible for the sport's image. Already, there have been articles written about this condemming college football as a whole for the "culture of secrecy" it supposedly has. I think the sport needs to make it clear that nothing is worth a program's reputation. No school should ever be "uncomfortable" (the PSU president's words) that coming to the authorities is the right course of action to take.
It depends on whether the child molesters are "boosters" under Bylaw 13.02.11.
And whether any "butter, peanut butter, jelly and/or cream cheese" were utilized in the assault.
I'm astonished that anyone can argue that the coverup didn't benefit Penn State's football program. They were looking at serious damage control if they went forward with Sandusky. Paterno was going to have to explain to recruits and their parents how he kept a sex offender on his staff. By covering it up, he was able to avoid those unpleasant conversations, and keep up the mirage that he was running a program "the right way," for a decade. You're telling me that PSU didn't benefit from that?
Let's not forget that at the time McQueary witnessed the shower incident, PSU was in a downward spiral, posting four losing seasons in five years (2000-04). They managed to turn it around from 2005 onward. Does that turnaround take place if it's discovered in 2002 that a sexual predator had recently been part of their staff (and had molested a kid on school property)?
So sorry for your loss. As a Kent State alum & lifelong wolverine I wish your family well.
This is all you need to know, dated April 23, when the facts coming out now would have been well known to those in charge at Penn State:
"Penn State officials, in an attempt to get the family of Joe Paterno to sign away its right to sue the school, offered to rename Beaver Stadium after the late coach." [ESPN]
Paterno's legacy won't be able to hide behind the fact he didn't use email, which appears to be the family's defense at present. The most damned thing is his hiring of McQueary.
The Big Ten took his name off their championship trophy. For starters, Penn State needs to take his statue down from in front of the stadium.
Regarding ncaa rules and football how is it loic? There are no by-laws for this and you can't make them up midstream to punish pennst because you are angry. What pennst football player did this have to do with? What advantage was gained by pennst in football by this? What recruiting or practice rules were violated by it?
That's the point, none and if the ncaa punishes the fb program it will have to make up rules to do so. Beyond that pennst as a university is going to pay dearly for this, for the actions of a few! They will pay out financially to victims, they will lose 100's of millions in funding and some will go to jail for this. And yet you would destroy an institution for what a few people covered up.
BTW, perhaps every single d1 school should be investigated to see if any program has ever covered for rape by an athlete or professor because the fact is that has happened and everyone knows it and we all know those things have happened not all that long ago in cf where players were protected by schools so the school could win football games......how about brushing under the rug crimes commited by athletes brushed under the rug...................and those were done to win football games and yet I do not see you carrying the banner to investigate every program to find the evidence and burn every program into the ground.
against the NCAA doing anything (although the Big Ten needs to act very harshly, IMO), but they don't need to "make up rules to do so".
Here's a letter written by NCAA President Mark Emmert warning of possible NCAA sanctions coming PSU's way.
Again, I argued against him in this thread, but if you want to hear the case for NCAA sanctions, CRex did an admirable job (I still stand by my statements in that thread, but he undoubtedly did a good job laying out his case).
Here's your answer:
"Once you start hearing that the athletic department isn't responding to the chain of authority properly, that's an institutional control problem, and the NCAA is built around protecting that institutional control," University of Toledo sports law professor Geoffrey Rapp told the The Patriot-News. "The problem is if Paterno was able to tell the school what to do and the school doesn't have in place the right kind of hierarchy from the NCAA's perspective."http://pittsburgh.sbnation.com/penn-st-nittany-lions/2012/6/30/3129268/…
"you would destroy an institution for what a few people covered up" Holy crap, hyperbole much there buddy?
If you think enacting sanctions on a university, specifically it's football program for that program's repeated, knowledgable cover up and protection of a serial child rapist is over the top then I think you need to reevaluate your priorities.
Penn State could abolish it's entire athlectic dept. permanently and it still wouldn't "destroy the institution"! Penn State would survive, it's this football program-as-sacred mentality that got PSU into this mess in the first place.
About your last point:
Let me get this straight; you're arguing that other athletes have committed sex crimes elsewhere and that their administrations covered it up successfully so the PSU case should be "swept under the rug" too? if not, what is your point?
No one is suggesting a nationwide criminal justice fishing campaign to find a sex offender under every rock; but when confronted with serious evidence that a crime has been committed (particularly involving children) I don't think it's too much to ask that the leaders of those institutions exhibit a bare minimum of moral if not legal responsibility.
If 10,000 other case of crimes & cover-ups are discovered then I guess we have 10,000 more investigations to read about, there are no gray areas here.
Damn, I hope you're just playing stupid.
From Article 6 of the handbook for Division I, the general principle of "institutional control" is as follows:
"The control and responsibility for the conduct of intercollegiate athletics shall be exercised by the institution itself and by the conference(s), if any, of which it is a member. Administrative control or faculty control, or a combination of the two, shall constitute institutional control."
It's fairly broad, but this would include a sensible reporting structure and an effective way to deal with problems, even those the size of the one Sandusky created. However, when you have a situation where a subordinate is choosing his superiors and there is a culture which deindividuates people, there is already a lack of control within the organization.
Think about it this way - the e-mails which were released show that Curley went to Paterno to discuss reporting Sandusky to the authorities.That is not an institution that is in control, when the AD is taking direction on such matters from his direct reports. Further, when the decision serves to worsen an already immediate ethical issue (forget that, they were making a conscious decision not to report a felony) and puts people at immediate risk (and fails to help those already violated), then there is a case for Penn State having an utter breakdown of institution control. Essentially, as was pointed out in the quote snarling wolverine posted, the authority at Penn State was bass ackwards. That's not control.
To add, here's 6.4.1:
"An institution’s “responsibility” for the conduct of its intercollegiate athletics program shall include responsibility for the acts of an independent agency, corporate entity (e.g., apparel or equipment manufacturer) or other organization when a member of the institution’s executive or athletics administration, or an athletics department staff member, has knowledge that such agency, corporate entity or other organization is promoting the institution’s intercollegiate athletics program"
So, the program is also responsible for the conduct of those who knowingly represent it, and while the Second Mile organization was not really involved with intercollegiate athletics save for the donated use of PSU facilities, the emeritus status of Jerry Sandusky at that school, in my mind, makes this a promotion of the program, even if for public relations purposes. The university allowed someone whom they knew was committing horrible acts bring those whom his organization was supposedly helping to campus to use the facilities. It seems to me that, in this regard as well, they bear responsibility. Again, this is from the section on Institutional Control. There isn't a lot of control going on here.