and the people responsible for those things are all suffereing the consequences. legally and with their jobs. should we close every catholic school and fire every teacher because the priests were molesting kids? should we close every high school where teachers have slept with students? punish those responisble and make the necessary changes so it doesn't happen again.
if a church had a priest molesting children and that church was known to have covered it up ... is it unreasonable to expect that church to shut down for some period of time?
and the people responsible for those things are all suffereing the consequences. legally and with their jobs. should we close every catholic school and fire every teacher because the priests were molesting kids? should we close every high school where teachers have slept with students? punish those responisble and make the necessary changes so it doesn't happen again.
if a church had a priest molesting children and that church was known to have covered it up ... is it unreasonable to expect that church to shut down for some period of time?
Yes, it would be unreasonable to close the church if the people responsible were kicked out of the church and charged with crimes. Would you tell the homeless and poor people who receive assistance from the church, "Sorry you have to suffer even though we replaced the priest and everyone who covered up for him, but there have to be consequences for these actions?"
If it was discovered that the CFO of the company you work for had been embezzling money and the CEO knew about it would you find it reasonable to force the company out of business even if the board of directors fired both of them, they were charged with crimes, and your company could still afford to stay in business? I'd be willing to bet that you'd feel like an innocent victim of a needless overreaction.
and the people responsible for those things are all suffereing the consequences. legally and with their jobs. should we close every catholic school and fire every teacher because the priests were molesting kids? should we close every high school where teachers have slept with students? punish those responisble and make the necessary changes so it doesn't happen again.
if a church had a priest molesting children and that church was known to have covered it up ... is it unreasonable to expect that church to shut down for some period of time?
I think it's a pretty ridiculous notion to shut down the whole university, but I've thought since the beginning that they need to suspend the football, if not the whole athletic program. It would be nice to see the NCAA step in and allow transfers without having to sit out a year, which I realize will never happen b/c they have an interest in seeing Penn return to prominence.
I think it's a pretty ridiculous notion to shut down the whole university, but I've thought since the beginning that they need to suspend the football, if not the whole athletic program. It would be nice to see the NCAA step in and allow transfers without having to sit out a year, which I realize will never happen b/c they have an interest in seeing Penn return to prominence.
spanier inviting him to watch joepa's last game in his box makes me sick to my stomach.
apparently spanier and the board knew about this whole thing for months before then. so wouldn't they have to report something like a grand jury investigation to the ncaa? if they did, i'd assume the ncaa would tell them to not let him on campus anymore. there's got to be some kind of ncaa violation pertaining to that part of this situation right?
I think it's a pretty ridiculous notion to shut down the whole university, but I've thought since the beginning that they need to suspend the football, if not the whole athletic program. It would be nice to see the NCAA step in and allow transfers without having to sit out a year, which I realize will never happen b/c they have an interest in seeing Penn return to prominence.
spanier inviting him to watch joepa's last game in his box makes me sick to my stomach.
apparently spanier and the board knew about this whole thing for months before then. so wouldn't they have to report something like a grand jury investigation to the ncaa? if they did, i'd assume the ncaa would tell them to not let him on campus anymore. there's got to be some kind of ncaa violation pertaining to that part of this situation right?
Why would they have to report it to the NCAA? He had nothing to do with the football program at that point.
I think it's a pretty ridiculous notion to shut down the whole university, but I've thought since the beginning that they need to suspend the football, if not the whole athletic program. It would be nice to see the NCAA step in and allow transfers without having to sit out a year, which I realize will never happen b/c they have an interest in seeing Penn return to prominence.
yup because not letting the girls play field hockey would teach 'em. :roll:
I think it's a pretty ridiculous notion to shut down the whole university, but I've thought since the beginning that they need to suspend the football, if not the whole athletic program. It would be nice to see the NCAA step in and allow transfers without having to sit out a year, which I realize will never happen b/c they have an interest in seeing Penn return to prominence.
yup because not letting the girls play field hockey would teach 'em. :roll:
Shit runs down hill.
I'm not saying it would be fair. Just there are bigger things going on at that school now than the girls field hockey team or the basketball team etc, etc. 100% focus needs to be put on making this whole scandal as right as they can make it.
Yes, it would be unreasonable to close the church if the people responsible were kicked out of the church and charged with crimes. Would you tell the homeless and poor people who receive assistance from the church, "Sorry you have to suffer even though we replaced the priest and everyone who covered up for him, but there have to be consequences for these actions?"
If it was discovered that the CFO of the company you work for had been embezzling money and the CEO knew about it would you find it reasonable to force the company out of business even if the board of directors fired both of them, they were charged with crimes, and your company could still afford to stay in business? I'd be willing to bet that you'd feel like an innocent victim of a needless overreaction.
firstly, i said close the church for a period of time ... those homeless and poor (which honestly, i've never tied to the church more homeless shelters) can be serviced in neighbouring churches for the period of closure ...
secondly, i already stated that it isn't necessarily fair to all involved ... but just as your example ... how are the employees of worldcom feeling? ... they got the shaft for sure ...
but at the end of the day ... penn state football chose to protect it's brand because said brand rakes in millions upon millions of dollars for the school ... they chose money over those kids ... you can choose to find the minimum number of scapegoats and say its all good ... but to me that's not good enough ... the football program which is a major revenue source needs to be punished ... maybe take all the proceeds from that year and donate it to some victims of abuse ... i'm not sure but this notion that firing a few people is all that matters is inappropriate ...
edit: if a kid gets illegal gifts from some agent ... the whole program suffers ... it's sort of the same thing ...
I think it's a pretty ridiculous notion to shut down the whole university, but I've thought since the beginning that they need to suspend the football, if not the whole athletic program. It would be nice to see the NCAA step in and allow transfers without having to sit out a year, which I realize will never happen b/c they have an interest in seeing Penn return to prominence.
spanier inviting him to watch joepa's last game in his box makes me sick to my stomach.
apparently spanier and the board knew about this whole thing for months before then. so wouldn't they have to report something like a grand jury investigation to the ncaa? if they did, i'd assume the ncaa would tell them to not let him on campus anymore. there's got to be some kind of ncaa violation pertaining to that part of this situation right?
Why would they have to report it to the NCAA? He had nothing to do with the football program at that point.
well i don't think you or i or anyone here knows what the ncaa's exact parameters are for reporting such things. i'd think a former coach who still has access to their facilities, still attends practices, still attends games, travels with the team to bowl games, goes to team functions etc etc etc that's being investigated for such heinus crimes is something you'd want to inform them of just to be safe.
Sorry, I forgot how good PSU is at hiding/enabling/sweeping things under the rug. In this situation that means about as much as Joe Pa's 409 wins. You know that's not the reason the majority of people would be upset if something happened to the program.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
If this wasn't LACK OF INSTITUTIONAL CONTROL then I don't know what is.
And that, is basically what all these colleges get penalties for. This lack of control seems to be worse than tatoos. A one year "hiatus" allowing the current players to transfer with no delay in play almost seems too little.
Allowing him to be around the program to the day of his arrest and not saying anything is lack of control. End of story.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Churches do help homeless and poor people. Many churches participate in something called IHN, which is an interfaith group that gives homeless families shelter at churches for a short period of time so the families can get back on their feet. The families move from one church in the network to another, so closing the church would remove a piece of that network. Also, man churches will do a free meal. Around here, there are many churches that do this once a month. They try to do them when other churches aren't doing it so that there are as many free meals available as possible each month. Again, removing one church is harming the people who need that service even if it's just for a period of time (a month, a year, whatever).
More to the point of Penn State, who is still at the school that you blame for the mess? Paterno was fired, the other administrators involved are gone and awaiting trial. McQueary can't be fired because of whistleblower laws, but I'd say there's a good chance that the new coach brings in his own staff and replaces most or all of the coaches from Paterno's staff so there may actually be a way to legally get rid of him if they feel he did anything wrong (and since he said under oath that he believed he was talking to the police when he spoke with the University Police, it's a gray area into how much responsibility can be placed on him). If there's nobody left at the school to blame for the cover-up/willful ignorance/whatever you consider it, then how can you punish anyone else? Nothing done to punish innocent students will help Sandusky's victims in any way. Making football players choose between transferring away from their friends and teammates or giving up on football to stay at Penn State won't ease any emotional pain felt by the victims or their families. What good would come from that?
Yes, it would be unreasonable to close the church if the people responsible were kicked out of the church and charged with crimes. Would you tell the homeless and poor people who receive assistance from the church, "Sorry you have to suffer even though we replaced the priest and everyone who covered up for him, but there have to be consequences for these actions?"
If it was discovered that the CFO of the company you work for had been embezzling money and the CEO knew about it would you find it reasonable to force the company out of business even if the board of directors fired both of them, they were charged with crimes, and your company could still afford to stay in business? I'd be willing to bet that you'd feel like an innocent victim of a needless overreaction.
firstly, i said close the church for a period of time ... those homeless and poor (which honestly, i've never tied to the church more homeless shelters) can be serviced in neighbouring churches for the period of closure ...
secondly, i already stated that it isn't necessarily fair to all involved ... but just as your example ... how are the employees of worldcom feeling? ... they got the shaft for sure ...
but at the end of the day ... penn state football chose to protect it's brand because said brand rakes in millions upon millions of dollars for the school ... they chose money over those kids ... you can choose to find the minimum number of scapegoats and say its all good ... but to me that's not good enough ... the football program which is a major revenue source needs to be punished ... maybe take all the proceeds from that year and donate it to some victims of abuse ... i'm not sure but this notion that firing a few people is all that matters is inappropriate ...
edit: if a kid gets illegal gifts from some agent ... the whole program suffers ... it's sort of the same thing ...
well i don't think you or i or anyone here knows what the ncaa's exact parameters are for reporting such things. i'd think a former coach who still has access to their facilities, still attends practices, still attends games, travels with the team to bowl games, goes to team functions etc etc etc that's being investigated for such heinus crimes is something you'd want to inform them of just to be safe.
I get what you are saying, but it's not like you have to report anyone with a criminal record or investigation being around a college team. Granted, his crimes are sickening, but I can't see how the NCAA is involved.
I can't see NCAA sanctions coming down at all. From a legal perspective, this is all outside the football program. The athletic department who was involved and the school in general are in some trouble, obviously, but I can't see it getting the football program anymore than it has.
Sorry, I forgot how good PSU is at hiding/enabling/sweeping things under the rug. In this situation that means about as much as Joe Pa's 409 wins. You know that's not the reason the majority of people would be upset if something happened to the program.
I don't get your point. You trashed the current players and their education when in fact they are getting a great education that will help them whether they play football or not. If you want to talk about everything else, go back 30 pages.
what good? ... it would finally show that penn state is culpable and accountable ... this wasn't the work of a few people ... this was penn state protecting penn state ... again - i feel bad for these athletes but at the end of the day ... it's football ... a game ... most of these kids are not going to play in the NFL ... the school was protecting the football program because the program is a huge money making venture ... which is why they need to suspend it for some time ...
is the opportunity for these kids to play 12 or whatever games of football so important that it supersedes accountability?
If you are being sarcastic about the school - I agree with you. My neice and nephew have participated and been on the board of running the student dance-a-thon that is the largest student based fund raiser in the country. So, I know the good the school and its students do. And the school should most definitely continue.
However, if you are talking about football - you are missing the point. And if it were shut down for a year to ensure as best a clensing as possible - the school would most definitiely continue. That's the point you're missing. Football is nothing in the scheme of things. And greater punishments have been handed out for lesser transgressions.
Hell, a sitting President resigned for a far more benign cover up.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
If you are being sarcastic about the school - I agree with you. My neice and nephew have participated and been on the board of running the student dance-a-thon that is the largest student based fund raiser in the country. So, I know the good the school and its students do. And the school should most definitely continue.
However, if you are talking about football - you are missing the point. And if it were shut down for a year to ensure as best a clensing as possible - the school would most definitiely continue. That's the point you're missing. Football is nothing in the scheme of things. And greater punishments have been handed out for lesser transgressions.
Hell, a sitting President resigned for a far more benign cover up.
A running joke in the thread, there were others that though the school should be closed and no one should hire a penn state grad again. True story. It was amusing.
THON is obviously a great event that has raised millions.
You and I will never see eye to eye on the football program. We haven't since it started. I don't think punishing the current kids and every other student athlete for that matter is the way to go. I don't agree with how the Paterno situation was handled but I think the people responsible for covering it up need to be punished and held accountable and I would also like to see the current board gone, they have done nothing but make horrible decision after horrible decision. I don't think punishing people that are not involved is the right thing to do. I get that the Penn State football image is what they were trying to protect, but that has obviously been shattered and lessons have obviously been learned. Hurting other student athletes by suspending the program will make no more of an impact on a adminstrators decision making process moving forward than what has already happened.
The school is not an entity with a brain that makes decisions. The people running the school made bad decisions and are being punished for it by losing their jobs and facing criminal charges. "The program" didn't do anything wrong, Paterno, Curley, etc. did. The people who protected the program at the expense of children are no longer at the school. If you know of someone in charge at the school who helped cover up this mess and is still running things there, please name him/her. To my knowledge, the board of trustees has dealt with the guilty parties there to the extent that they legally can. The school will be held accountable to the victims shortly when lawsuits are filed and either decided in court or settled out of court.Anything beyond that and the punishments already handed down to those who knew about Sandusky would be nothing more than a way for the rest of us to feel better and has nothing to do with the victims, Sandusky, or the school officials who ignored the situation.
what good? ... it would finally show that penn state is culpable and accountable ... this wasn't the work of a few people ... this was penn state protecting penn state ... again - i feel bad for these athletes but at the end of the day ... it's football ... a game ... most of these kids are not going to play in the NFL ... the school was protecting the football program because the program is a huge money making venture ... which is why they need to suspend it for some time ...
is the opportunity for these kids to play 12 or whatever games of football so important that it supersedes accountability?
[A running joke in the thread, there were others that though the school should be closed and no one should hire a penn state grad again. True story. It was amusing.
THON is obviously a great event that has raised millions.
You and I will never see eye to eye on the football program. We haven't since it started. I don't think punishing the current kids and every other student athlete for that matter is the way to go. I don't agree with how the Paterno situation was handled but I think the people responsible for covering it up need to be punished and held accountable and I would also like to see the current board gone, they have done nothing but make horrible decision after horrible decision. I don't think punishing people that are not involved is the right thing to do. I get that the Penn State football image is what they were trying to protect, but that has obviously been shattered and lessons have obviously been learned. Hurting other student athletes by suspending the program will make no more of an impact on a adminstrators decision making process moving forward than what has already happened.
I got it. It's old. Just like the comparison to the church.
I don't see how it's punishing the athletes any more than the Ohio State players who are stuck without a postseason this year. They couldn't transfer without a year delay. What about the kids that were going to SMU when it got the death penalty? I do agree that it should be just football.
So, yes, there is collateral damage to those that unknowingly selected to play for an uncaring person. That's life. We all misjudge people. Good lesson for the kids. But, it's not like they couldn't still play college football next year on this idea. And, its no different than what goes on at numerous schools every year in a variety of severity. So, your argument is a specious one.
This isn't a punishment to learn a lesson for those involved in this incident (though hopefully, it is to future incidents which seems almost silly since who needs that lesson in morality? Only people like Joe Paterno). It's a punishment to be punitive to the institution that so clearly had no control.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
The difference is that the players at Ohio State still get to play next year and some of the players were the ones breaking the rules. Losing the chance at a bowl game isn't the same as not being able to play at all. SMU is different because the players on the team were involved in the rule-breaking. The players were accepting cash from the school, some of them receiving up to $750/month which was a decent amount of money in the early-'80s, especially for a college student. The whole team was being paid and the star recruits were being paid thousands of dollars just to choose SMU over other schools. There were not innocent players on the SMU team.
[A running joke in the thread, there were others that though the school should be closed and no one should hire a penn state grad again. True story. It was amusing.
THON is obviously a great event that has raised millions.
You and I will never see eye to eye on the football program. We haven't since it started. I don't think punishing the current kids and every other student athlete for that matter is the way to go. I don't agree with how the Paterno situation was handled but I think the people responsible for covering it up need to be punished and held accountable and I would also like to see the current board gone, they have done nothing but make horrible decision after horrible decision. I don't think punishing people that are not involved is the right thing to do. I get that the Penn State football image is what they were trying to protect, but that has obviously been shattered and lessons have obviously been learned. Hurting other student athletes by suspending the program will make no more of an impact on a adminstrators decision making process moving forward than what has already happened.
I got it. It's old. Just like the comparison to the church.
I don't see how it's punishing the athletes any more than the Ohio State players who are stuck without a postseason this year. They couldn't transfer without a year delay. What about the kids that were going to SMU when it got the death penalty? I do agree that it should be just football.
So, yes, there is collateral damage to those that unknowingly selected to play for an uncaring person. That's life. We all misjudge people. Good lesson for the kids. But, it's not like they couldn't still play college football next year on this idea. And, its no different than what goes on at numerous schools every year in a variety of severity. So, your argument is a specious one.
This isn't a punishment to learn a lesson for those involved in this incident (though hopefully, it is to future incidents which seems almost silly since who needs that lesson in morality? Only people like Joe Paterno). It's a punishment to be punitive to the institution that so clearly had no control.
The difference is that the players at Ohio State still get to play next year and some of the players were the ones breaking the rules. Losing the chance at a bowl game isn't the same as not being able to play at all. SMU is different because the players on the team were involved in the rule-breaking. The players were accepting cash from the school, some of them receiving up to $750/month which was a decent amount of money in the early-'80s, especially for a college student. The whole team was being paid and the star recruits were being paid thousands of dollars just to choose SMU over other schools. There were not innocent players on the SMU team.
You're right. Not 100% the same. But, not ALL the players were involved in Ohio State. So, why were they punished at all? The point is in these instances, its not the players that are the intended target. It's the school. So, in that, this would be no different. And I'm suggesting allowing them to transfer without the 1 year wait that is now required. So, they would get to play. And in a much better situation then they are facing next year. One could argue, they are being punished by being forced to stay and play under that cloud with the blue chippers going elsewhere, or transfering and having to wait a year.
And, soon they will be getting stipends (already being discussed - it's going to happen). So, SMU was just ahead of its time.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
well i don't think you or i or anyone here knows what the ncaa's exact parameters are for reporting such things. i'd think a former coach who still has access to their facilities, still attends practices, still attends games, travels with the team to bowl games, goes to team functions etc etc etc that's being investigated for such heinus crimes is something you'd want to inform them of just to be safe.
I get what you are saying, but it's not like you have to report anyone with a criminal record or investigation being around a college team. Granted, his crimes are sickening, but I can't see how the NCAA is involved.
I can't see NCAA sanctions coming down at all. From a legal perspective, this is all outside the football program. The athletic department who was involved and the school in general are in some trouble, obviously, but I can't see it getting the football program anymore than it has.
i can. they're already looking into issues related to institutional control and ethical conduct stemming from this. you can bet that the most minor violation they find will come with some hefty ramifications. i kind of agreed with you, to an extent, until this part of the story came to light.
Comments
if a church had a priest molesting children and that church was known to have covered it up ... is it unreasonable to expect that church to shut down for some period of time?
Um...
If it was discovered that the CFO of the company you work for had been embezzling money and the CEO knew about it would you find it reasonable to force the company out of business even if the board of directors fired both of them, they were charged with crimes, and your company could still afford to stay in business? I'd be willing to bet that you'd feel like an innocent victim of a needless overreaction.
spanier inviting him to watch joepa's last game in his box makes me sick to my stomach.
apparently spanier and the board knew about this whole thing for months before then. so wouldn't they have to report something like a grand jury investigation to the ncaa? if they did, i'd assume the ncaa would tell them to not let him on campus anymore. there's got to be some kind of ncaa violation pertaining to that part of this situation right?
Why would they have to report it to the NCAA? He had nothing to do with the football program at that point.
The sad thing is that PSU will need the revenue from the football games to payoff all of the lawsuits.
It's just a difference of opinion people, so don't get a twisted up over it.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Sarcasm, I assume? Try again
http://higheredwatch.newamerica.net/blo ... king-61200
yup because not letting the girls play field hockey would teach 'em. :roll:
Shit runs down hill.
I'm not saying it would be fair. Just there are bigger things going on at that school now than the girls field hockey team or the basketball team etc, etc. 100% focus needs to be put on making this whole scandal as right as they can make it.
firstly, i said close the church for a period of time ... those homeless and poor (which honestly, i've never tied to the church more homeless shelters) can be serviced in neighbouring churches for the period of closure ...
secondly, i already stated that it isn't necessarily fair to all involved ... but just as your example ... how are the employees of worldcom feeling? ... they got the shaft for sure ...
but at the end of the day ... penn state football chose to protect it's brand because said brand rakes in millions upon millions of dollars for the school ... they chose money over those kids ... you can choose to find the minimum number of scapegoats and say its all good ... but to me that's not good enough ... the football program which is a major revenue source needs to be punished ... maybe take all the proceeds from that year and donate it to some victims of abuse ... i'm not sure but this notion that firing a few people is all that matters is inappropriate ...
edit: if a kid gets illegal gifts from some agent ... the whole program suffers ... it's sort of the same thing ...
well i don't think you or i or anyone here knows what the ncaa's exact parameters are for reporting such things. i'd think a former coach who still has access to their facilities, still attends practices, still attends games, travels with the team to bowl games, goes to team functions etc etc etc that's being investigated for such heinus crimes is something you'd want to inform them of just to be safe.
Sorry, I forgot how good PSU is at hiding/enabling/sweeping things under the rug. In this situation that means about as much as Joe Pa's 409 wins. You know that's not the reason the majority of people would be upset if something happened to the program.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
And that, is basically what all these colleges get penalties for. This lack of control seems to be worse than tatoos. A one year "hiatus" allowing the current players to transfer with no delay in play almost seems too little.
Allowing him to be around the program to the day of his arrest and not saying anything is lack of control. End of story.
More to the point of Penn State, who is still at the school that you blame for the mess? Paterno was fired, the other administrators involved are gone and awaiting trial. McQueary can't be fired because of whistleblower laws, but I'd say there's a good chance that the new coach brings in his own staff and replaces most or all of the coaches from Paterno's staff so there may actually be a way to legally get rid of him if they feel he did anything wrong (and since he said under oath that he believed he was talking to the police when he spoke with the University Police, it's a gray area into how much responsibility can be placed on him). If there's nobody left at the school to blame for the cover-up/willful ignorance/whatever you consider it, then how can you punish anyone else? Nothing done to punish innocent students will help Sandusky's victims in any way. Making football players choose between transferring away from their friends and teammates or giving up on football to stay at Penn State won't ease any emotional pain felt by the victims or their families. What good would come from that?
I get what you are saying, but it's not like you have to report anyone with a criminal record or investigation being around a college team. Granted, his crimes are sickening, but I can't see how the NCAA is involved.
I can't see NCAA sanctions coming down at all. From a legal perspective, this is all outside the football program. The athletic department who was involved and the school in general are in some trouble, obviously, but I can't see it getting the football program anymore than it has.
I don't get your point. You trashed the current players and their education when in fact they are getting a great education that will help them whether they play football or not. If you want to talk about everything else, go back 30 pages.
is the opportunity for these kids to play 12 or whatever games of football so important that it supersedes accountability?
SHUT IT DOWN!!!!!!
If you are being sarcastic about the school - I agree with you. My neice and nephew have participated and been on the board of running the student dance-a-thon that is the largest student based fund raiser in the country. So, I know the good the school and its students do. And the school should most definitely continue.
However, if you are talking about football - you are missing the point. And if it were shut down for a year to ensure as best a clensing as possible - the school would most definitiely continue. That's the point you're missing. Football is nothing in the scheme of things. And greater punishments have been handed out for lesser transgressions.
Hell, a sitting President resigned for a far more benign cover up.
About the NCAA stepping in, will Joe Pa's knowledge of this situation have an effect on their ruling.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
A running joke in the thread, there were others that though the school should be closed and no one should hire a penn state grad again. True story. It was amusing.
THON is obviously a great event that has raised millions.
You and I will never see eye to eye on the football program. We haven't since it started. I don't think punishing the current kids and every other student athlete for that matter is the way to go. I don't agree with how the Paterno situation was handled but I think the people responsible for covering it up need to be punished and held accountable and I would also like to see the current board gone, they have done nothing but make horrible decision after horrible decision. I don't think punishing people that are not involved is the right thing to do. I get that the Penn State football image is what they were trying to protect, but that has obviously been shattered and lessons have obviously been learned. Hurting other student athletes by suspending the program will make no more of an impact on a adminstrators decision making process moving forward than what has already happened.
Nevermind, you didn't offend me. I just didn't get what your point was.
I can't see it. He didn't do enough but he did what was required.
I got it. It's old. Just like the comparison to the church.
I don't see how it's punishing the athletes any more than the Ohio State players who are stuck without a postseason this year. They couldn't transfer without a year delay. What about the kids that were going to SMU when it got the death penalty? I do agree that it should be just football.
So, yes, there is collateral damage to those that unknowingly selected to play for an uncaring person. That's life. We all misjudge people. Good lesson for the kids. But, it's not like they couldn't still play college football next year on this idea. And, its no different than what goes on at numerous schools every year in a variety of severity. So, your argument is a specious one.
This isn't a punishment to learn a lesson for those involved in this incident (though hopefully, it is to future incidents which seems almost silly since who needs that lesson in morality? Only people like Joe Paterno). It's a punishment to be punitive to the institution that so clearly had no control.
You're right. Not 100% the same. But, not ALL the players were involved in Ohio State. So, why were they punished at all? The point is in these instances, its not the players that are the intended target. It's the school. So, in that, this would be no different. And I'm suggesting allowing them to transfer without the 1 year wait that is now required. So, they would get to play. And in a much better situation then they are facing next year. One could argue, they are being punished by being forced to stay and play under that cloud with the blue chippers going elsewhere, or transfering and having to wait a year.
And, soon they will be getting stipends (already being discussed - it's going to happen). So, SMU was just ahead of its time.
i can. they're already looking into issues related to institutional control and ethical conduct stemming from this. you can bet that the most minor violation they find will come with some hefty ramifications. i kind of agreed with you, to an extent, until this part of the story came to light.