in town for free camps
PSU gets ltr from NCAA
Really? "Letter" was too hard to spell all the way out?
LAUGH OUT LOUD
Sorry, that's how we abbreviate it at work, habit I guess.
is work a kindergarden classroom?
just saw you're an osu fan, give my regards to the other professors in Columbus.
Ok, until you editted it, this was the lamest of all the jabs so far. But you totally redeemed yourself. I will pass along your regards.
Come on guys.
post is one that is shared with intent of poking poke fun at grammar while having its own grammatical miscues.
what you did there. You corrected your post. I'm too lazy to imbed the pelican photo though.
Edit fail: It's "kindergarten"
Edit response fail: It's "edited"
We all fail: For reading this
Kindergarten -- I was thinking the same thing myself but phil beat me to it. I hope you don't send emails out like that to clients.
Lke the answr is ys. Wrds r lng.
Oh like this blog isn't famous for abbreviating and acronyming the crap out of everything. Besides I do think some of the post titles on this forum as too long.
We r jst givin u a hrd time.
Faq re: thrd ttls.
It's one thing to have an acronym for "You may remember me from such players as", it's another things to abbreviate a six letter word.
Some of the thread titles may be too long, but "PSU gets letter from NCAA" is not too long. That's two acronymns and three words, none of which are more than two syllables. That did not need shortening.
Too many ltrs ;)
Don't display a ton of institutional control when you have to get rid of the entire reporting structure from the head coach to the president of the university.
PS gts ltr frm NC
Damn dirty evil vowels . . . .
PSU does not produce revenue for the NCAA, nor does the B1G. The NCAA gets almost all its revenue from championship tournaments, and almost all of that is from running the basketball tournament.
The football revenues of individual universities do NOT go to the NCAA at all... This is a common but completely false assumption.
I am with you on this. I am consistently annoyed by the frequent comment that goes "The NCAA will not punish Institution X for its recent offenses because Institution X is a big name and it's all about the money."
These comments are never accompanied by any explanation of (i) whose money, (ii) in what amount, (iii) to whom the money is paid, (iv) how that money flow would be disrupted by NCAA sanctions, or (v) why the money associated with Institution X would not be replaced by new money associated with Institution Y in the event of NCAA sanctions pertaining to Institution X.
NCAA exists b/c U. presidents and ADs want it to. NCAA's priorities -- maximizing revenues from college sports and aggressive legal challenges to the rights of "student athletes" governed by the NCAA -- are those of the U. presidents themselves; otherwise, the schools could easily duplicate all the NCAA functions themselves. The NCAA is the embodiment of the financial and other desires of the "member (ie "controlling")" institutions; therefor it stands to reason that the NCAA does not have the power to make life truly difficult for any of them. All it can do is instruct them in the proper charades to act out for the TV cameras when bad publicity requires it.
What does that have to do with the (false) meme that PSU generates revenue for the NCAA??
PSU is at the point where they have:
2. A child development professor who raped young children
3. A geochem professor whose raping of children they covered up. He got busted after he went to Yale and Yale didn't cover for his rear.
Their worst one was regarding the child development professor. The prof was indicted in Maryland on 5 counts of child molestation. Yet Spanier told one victim he still didn't have the credible proof needed to open an internal probe on the prof. Maryland police had enough evidence to indict but it wasn't enough for Spanier. PSU is looking like a shoe-in for a LOIC at this point. Although I'm sure they're more worried about what the DoJ is going to do than the NCAA at this point.
I do want Sandusky to rot in a prison somewhere (well not exactly sit in prison, but I don't want to get into that here), Paterno didn't deserve to be in a position of trust, the president and AD didn't either, but I don't know how I feel about the NCAA making this an NCAA issue.
Well I think if you have a grad assistant reporting to the head coach, who sends him to the AD and VP of police operations, and still nothing happens for 10yrs, cops were never called, and it was not the first time it had happened == cover-up. And if they were covering up something like this, what else is there out there? It's a fair question and the NCAA has the right to get the answers.
I'm with you. However, I know from my job at least, I'm always told that I'm a representation of the company regardless of if I'm actually 'on the job'. That said, perhaps the NCAA is making this an issue because PSU turning a blind eye to alleged child molestation for a number of years is a poor representation of the NCAA. [Insert joke about NCAA being their own punchline for poor representation here].
I see what you're saying, but the NCAA didn't employ Spainer, Curley or Paterno. They already faced the harshest penalty their employer could level for their conduct. I think this would be more like a scandal in administration at a hospital and having the AMA hammer the hospital itself as if it was a medical issue. I just don't see the clear link between Sandusky's crimes, the coverup, and NCAA compliance.
The majority of NCAA violations are victimless. In the sense that "Oh Reggie Bush got 20k from an agent" or "The Newton family got a few hundred thousand" damage the competitive balance but do not hurt anyone.
If schools get punished for that but covering up an athletic staff member's child rape does not draw the wrath of the NCAA, then the NCAA is a joke. I think the NCAA President said it best awhile back. Basically the NCAA is going to let the police/FBI/DoJ/etc do their thing and then they'll hit PSU. Basically stay out of the way of law enforcement but PSU will play.
I'm honestly rooting to see the B10 take some kind of action against PSU as well. It would likely be symbolic, but still it would be nice to see.
But the NCAA is a body set up to oversee athletes. I don't think they exist to regulate an athletic department beyond making sure that each athlete is following their rules. Texas just recently settled a sexual harassment suit against their director of football operations (or something like that), so if that was handled improperly by the university administration, should the Texas football team be hit with scholarship reductions?
I think this opens the door for the NCAA stepping into a lot of issues where it doesn't belong.
I really have no issue with the NCAA saying: "Hey the DOJ just ran you on RICO charges and covering up child rape, you're banned from sports for awhile". The NCAA isn't acting as judge, jury, and executioner here. They're saying "Holy shit, you guys provoked almost every federal agency out there to investigate you. You're not allowed in our club anymore."
It's basically conduct unbecoming. Every intelligent organization in the world has something like that in their charter and uses it when they need to distance themselves from someone.
I think the procedures for kicking a school out of the NCAA are pretty different than finding 10.1 violations. If they want to kick PSU out of "our club" I think that's a much more clear discussion than this.
I didn't mean kicked out of the NCAA. More of something between the SMU death penalty and the USC sanctions.
Keep in mind the NCAA can also use the threat of the death penalty to make the PSU back away from the coverup. Make it clear that if PSU gets convicted of RICO charges or fights the DoJ probe, the NCAA will deliver a death penalty for conduct unbecoming. It gives PSU a really strong incentive to come clean with the feds and plea bargain. For all we know the Feds mentioned they'd love to see the NCAA put some additional heat on PSU. This could be the polite way of telling PSU: "Hey, come clean to the feds and we'll slap you with a bowl ban so we look like we did something and move on. Ride this thing down in flames, keep the terms 'college football' and 'child rape' joined together in the news cycle and we'll nuke you like we nuked SMU.".
I'm not aware of any NCAA bylaw that states the possibility for competitive penalties for "conduct unbecoming" from an athletic department. I'd have to think that PSU and the Big Ten would sue the shit out of the NCAA for what you suggest.
Further, they would have to find exactly what was "unbecoming". It looks like Paterno covered his legal responsibilities, so is the NCAA bar higher? Does it become an AD-wide issue where their women's volleyball team gets hit with a post-season ban for this?
11.1.1: Individuals employed by or associated with a member institution to administer, conduct or coach intercollegiate athletics shall act with honesty and sportsmanship at all times so that intercollegiate athletics as a whole, their institutions and they, as individuals, represent the honor and dignity of fair play and the generally recognized high standards associated with wholesome competitive sports.
Sandusky broke the wholesome and dignity parts while raping kids as a PSU employee. The honesty and honor part were broken by any employee who failed to report this to the police. PSU can definitely be investigated on these charges right now. The atmosphere of wholesome competitive sports should definitely include reporting felonies to the police.
For section 10.1 (see: http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D110.pdf), unethical conduct is not limited to the examples provided. If you really need a bullet point like: "Covering up the rape of children in the locker room is unethical" there isn't anything I can do for you. Unless you want to argue child rape and its coverup is ethical, then 10.1 clearly applies.
Like you said below, we're going to have to agree to disagree, here. You make a reasonable, intelligent argument, but I still feel I'm right (and obviously you feel you're right).
There are a ton of things that the NCAA could start finding unethical about coaches and charging them with that have nothing to do with NCAA compliance, and that's what I see this turning into.
Agreed, if the NCAA takes action, where does it end? Is Pinkel not "wholesome" because of the DWI?
Geeze, some of you are dissecting this way too much. A top University covered up a fucking child rape case for several years!! Simple as that. Stop trying to find ways for the NCAA not to punish them.
discussion of the issues involved in the Penn State situation lacks perspective. I am of the belief that Penn State may in deed have its athletic program shut down for a period of time. Your mention of drunk driving, disorderly conduct, etc. is apples and oranges. The truth, the very sad sick truth, is that it truly appears that Penn State, the institution, was not only aware, but may have been to a certain degree harboring a serious, serious criminal, guilty of very serious crimes the likes of which the NCAA has yet to deal with, and thus has not protocol for. It is hard to believe we are seeing this take place, but we are. There is another shoe here, and I think it is a heavy one. True, this is not tat-gate, and it is not stretching time, it is not something where a competitive advantage was gained for a specific team or a specific program, but it was far deeper and more troublesome than any such infraction could be and evidenced an actual lack of institution control in the literal sense. This may be an act first, ask questions later issue for the NCAA.
It's a fine line, for sure.
I agree completely. Is the NCAA going to investigate if a coach is arested for domestic assault? Drunk driving? Disorderly conduct? Public urination? Where is the line? Don't get me wrong--if there is a line, covering up child rape is obviously over it--but once we say that there is a line, all of the public pressure will be to bring the line closer and closer to where the NCAA is involving themselves in what should be personnel issues.
At some point, a coach will do something very bad but not quite this bad, and there will be an outcry for the NCAA to investigate that as well. The line will be moved, and the NCAA will start involving themselves in ordinary criminal matters.
I mean, if universities are punished because players were overpaid for summer jobs, is it a bad thing to punish universities when their players are running around in ski masks beating the crap out of people?
Not to mention that in the examples you give, there's usually not a coverup. I think if the institution participates in hiding the crime, they should get hammered.
The problem is that the NCAA already can't enforce its typical rules (against recruiting violations, etc.) very well. It's stretched too thin. Trying to duplicate the work of law enforcement will leave it with few resources to carry out its mission.
I also think that NCAA policing of law enforcement issues is redundant and somewhat pointless. Who is going to care that they're facing NCAA sanctions when they're also facing 50 years in jail?
I'm confident that no one here is saying that Sandusky and others shouldn't be punished if guilty (as they appear to be). People are just saying that the NCAA isn't the institution to do that punishing, just as you wouldn't have a security guard try to track down a drug-smuggling ring.