OT: Likely Big Ten action against PSU, too?

Submitted by MGlobules on July 22nd, 2012 at 10:24 PM

U Iowa President Sally Mason told the Des Moines Register today that the B1G has jurisdiction to punish PSU and will be watching the NCAA's actions closely before considering how to address the Sandusky issue; she's current chair of the conference's presidents and chancellors. 

According to last week's Chronicle For Higher Education "conference bylaws require any member that fails to show complete, accurate information during an investigation to 'show cause why its membership in the conference should not be suspended or terminated.'"

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/19633881

I am in the dark about how the presidents and chancellors may be viewing the crimes and scandal associated with them, and curious how people think or are aware this is being viewed in academic quarters (what is being mumbled by the professoriat and admin around the water cooler?) An associated question is just how PSU was viewed before the scandal--as a member in good standing of the Big Ten?

Would some kind of probationary status for PSU be appropriate?

Comments

Thorin

July 23rd, 2012 at 3:40 AM ^

I wish the University of Chicago would announce tomorrow that they've accepted the transfer of Penn State's entire roster and coaching staff (and not just because it would be funny to have the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania chant WE ARE...MAROONS!).

HELLE

July 23rd, 2012 at 2:19 AM ^

The NCAA should be waiting to see how the BIG handles the situation. If the BIG adds onto the NCAA's punishment, it will just look like they are trying to get their licks in. The BIG is frozen by fear.

neoavatara

July 23rd, 2012 at 7:39 AM ^

Many of these are not going to happen.

A TV ban, for example...that is ludicrous.  So when OSU plays PSU, they won't show it??  Really?  

Now, you want to prevent any TV dollars going to PSU?  Hell, fine by me. 

I think it is going to be a huge schollie ban, a huge financial penalty, and a bowl ban for a few years. 

Feat of Clay

July 23rd, 2012 at 8:09 AM ^

I have a hard time imagining the B1G will act. I suspect the NCAA stuff, plus whatever is self-imposed, will be enough.

I think the B1G naturally has to indicate to the press that it will act if necessary. But if this 9 am business is as harsh as predicted, they won't have to. I'd look for a statement saying they agree with the sanctions as sufficient. What the Big Ten & CIC need to do, then, is quietly help Penn State nurture the non-football attributes of its campus and help it regain a reputation for something other than football (& scandal).

hennesbe

July 23rd, 2012 at 9:27 AM ^

The Big Ten didn't want Penn St from the beginning but at the time the president of Illinois was a PSU grad and fought like crazy to get PSU in the B1G.  He finally found enough buddies to vote them in.  It's time to get rid of them.  They don't belong in the the Big Ten.  It's obvious all they cared about was winning football games at all costs.  Granted those guys are all gone but that's the way it is.

AthensOriginal

July 23rd, 2012 at 10:17 AM ^

You want Penn State in the Big Ten after this? Is that what you are saying? Not only do they have a potentially irremovable stain on them but they reduce the Big Ten's relevancefor the next five years and beyond. What does the Big Ten owe them? They are entirely within their rights to kick them out.

 

French West Indian

July 23rd, 2012 at 10:43 AM ^

I keep posting thoughtful, careful crafted opinions only to see the threads disappear as soon as I post.  I'm sorry that I have to say this but the moderation around here sucks. 

Soulfire21

July 23rd, 2012 at 11:46 AM ^

Recap:

  • B1G censures (i.e. yells at) Penn State
  • Agrees with NCAA penalites
  • 4 year Big Ten Championship game ban, concurrent with bowl ban
  • Loss of revenue share during the bowl ban (~$13 million)