21
   

I predict - Sandusky will never go to trial and never see a jail cell.

 
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 02:08 pm
@IRFRANK,
and===there is the fact that a majr NCAA rule, that of required "Institutional control" was really stomped on.
Self Policing at Penn State wasnt apparently gonna work with that last crew
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 02:10 pm
@ehBeth,
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/colleges/163319246.html?cmpid=15585797

Quote:

Freeh Report investigators interviewed her, Triponey said, although Triponey said she didn't have any knowledge of issues related to Jerry Sandusky. The questions were about the general culture of Penn State, which she described as "insular and secretive," a culture she said extended far beyond the athletic department. She's also talked to questioners from several other investigations, although not the NCAA, she said.

"I do believe Penn State ought be held accountable for some of what's happened here, but I don't know what that means in terms of a sanction," Triponey said. "I do believe the NCAA has to take some leadership here, and that's not just about Penn State. This is a wake-up call that we all need to pay attention to."

Most important, she said of Penn State, "You've got to change the culture, and the culture is deep. It's not just the leaders. It permeates the place. I think they have an interconnectiveness in their passion for their football program. But I'm not sure that's a genuine sense of community. It's a sense of pride. It's a sense of prestige."
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 02:31 pm
@ehBeth,
Debilitating the patient is not a very effective method of installing a cure. At some point Americans are going to have to wise up and realize that retribution has very limited productive uses.

I shall not be foolish enough to hold my breath.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 06:39 pm
The NCAA's Sanctimonious Sanctions Against Penn State


Emily Bazelon
Quote:
Does anyone else have mixed feelings about the NCAA sanctions against Penn State football? On the one hand, I’m persuaded that the university’s leaders tacitly allowed Jerry Sandusky’s abuse of children to go on for years because they were blinded by a “culture of reverence for the football program.” Josh Levin argued last week that this calls for sidelining the Nittany Lions for a season or two. I see the argument for that, as long as the players can transfer to other schools without having to sit out a season.

The NCAA did provide for transfers without penalty today. But I’m still queasy about how it went about grabbing the moral high ground. The $60 million fine Penn State will pay is supposed to go to “an endowment for external programs preventing child sexual abuse or assisting victims.” That sounds unassailable—except why is the NCAA setting up such an endowment? Shouldn’t this be part of the settlement the university will surely have to reach with Sandusky’s victims? I’m not sure what the NCAA is doing in preempting that process. It makes more sense for a judge overseeing all this litigation to approve one global resolution, after the parties have hammered it out. I’m all for setting aside money for prevention along with compensation. But I don’t see why the governing body of college sports should butt in to the judicial system here.

That’s especially the case given the NCAA’s suspect history and continuing questionable treatment of individual athletes. If you’ve been reading Joe Nocera’s work on this in the New York Times, you know what I’m talking about. The governing body of college sports has a lot to answer for, and all too often seems to put sports ahead of education. So it’s galling to hear NCAA president Mark Emmert now intone, invoking the Penn State sanctions, that “football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing and protecting young people.” Please. Of course it will, every other day of the year.

It’s also odd that the NCAA acted without the usual process of a hearing in front of its Committee on Infractions. Emmert decided that Louis Freeh’s damning report about the university, which Penn State’s own trustees ordered, would take the place of further examination. Why bypass the usual process— what’s the rush?

I also don’t quite understand the idea of “vacating” all of those wins going back to 1998. Maybe the problem is that vacate is such an odd word here. But I’m also not sure what I think about penalizing all the players and coaches who made those victories happen. It just doesn’t seem like the right way to rectify the wrongs.

The NCAA also banned Penn State from postseason play and reduced the team’s annual scholarship allotment from 25 to 15, with each penalty in effect for four years. I see the point: Make the university itself suffer, by crippling what has been one of its greatest assets. And yet, once more, I’m not even sure how much I can get behind this. Why penalize the current and future athletic department, which is no longer led by the people who failed to stop Sandusky? I’d rather see former Penn State President Graham Spanier prosecuted.

The NCAA is coming down not on the individual wrongdoers, but on every Penn State fan. I know some of them are acting crazy in their slavish adoration of JoePa. But many more are surely already punishing the university and themselves. That, plus the civil lawsuits, should be enough.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/07/23/the_ncaa_s_sanctimonious_sanctions_against_penn_state_football.html

I think this is the second time in a month where I find myself quoting Emily Bazelon "nailing it"....I am going to have to pay more attention to her.
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 07:01 pm
@hawkeye10,
rememeber, as a blogger, she's apparently oblivious to the rule that allows the NCAA to insert domain (in the chain of domains).
Its not an "either or" condition of culpability. There are PA laws and, if my memory serves right, a little fact that Sandusky took some of his boys into other states and even foreign countrie. The Des will have an overlapping jurisdiction on top of the state. If the state is overfiled by the FEds, Sandusky and whoever else was guilty f the "after the fact" coverup, will be serving different , and possibly much longer, time.

Shes a blogger, her opinion is worth about what her blog is worth. She doesnt have any responsibility to get anything " right" she merely has to provide gainsay of anything that was decided.



hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 23 Jul, 2012 07:07 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
Shes a blogger, her opinion is worth about what her blog is worth. She doesnt have any responsibility to get anything " right" she merely has to provide gainsay of anything that was decided.


Her opinion is for damn sure worth more than yours is

Quote:
Bazelon is a writer and senior editor of Slate.[1] She has written articles about controversial subjects, such as the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld trial[2] and post-abortion syndrome.[3] Bazelon edits Slate's legal columns, "Jurisprudence", and is co-editor of its blog on women's issues, XX Factor (also known as DoubleX),[4] and regularly appears on The Political Gabfest, a weekly Slate podcast with David Plotz and John Dickerson.
She is also a contributing writer to The New York Times Magazine.[4] Before joining Slate, Bazelon was a senior editor of Legal Affairs.[4] Her writing has also appeared in The Atlantic, Mother Jones, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, The New Republic, as well as other publications.[4] She has worked as a reporter in the San Francisco Bay Area and, in 1993 and 1994, as a freelance journalist in Israel.[5]
Bazelon is also a Senior Research Scholar in Law and Truman Capote Fellow for Creative Writing and Law at Yale Law School.[1] Bazelon and former New York Times legal correspondent Linda Greenhouse are affiliated with the Law and Media Program of Yale Law School.[6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Bazelon

Is it too much to expect you to take a few seconds to check out the credentials of those who voice opinions you dont like before you slam them as worthless?

Apparently it is.

Come on FARMERDUDE! You are a man of science for Cripes Sake, Truth is supposed to mean something to you.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 Jul, 2012 12:39 am
Quote:
As long as players don't practice or play games with Penn State between now and the start of the 2013 season, they can jump schools without penalty, the NCAA said. Incoming freshmen also are released from their national letters of intent so they can play for and receive athletic scholarships from other schools.

Coaches from other schools will be allowed to contact and recruit Penn State players until classes start at Penn State on August 27. For the 2012 season only, schools not facing sanctions of their own will be allowed extra scholarships to make room for players they pick up from Penn State.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/24/ncaa-clarifies-transfer-rules-for-penn-state-football-players/?hpt=hp_t2

An inventive turn of the knife by the NCAA, one of many designed to make sure Penn St Football sucks for a very very long time. I am betting that the leaders of the school are now sorry that they were so eager to make a deal, because not only did they get no credit for doing so but they got royally fucked.

This will be a lesson learned by schools who get in trouble down the line.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Wed 25 Jul, 2012 12:58 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Although the sanctions will make it tough for the Nittany Lions to compete at the highest levels of college football for the foreseeable future, it could be a good thing for the students of Penn State.

“The school meekly accepted its punishment,” writes Levy et al, “pledging to hold itself to high standards of honesty and integrity.”

There is no doubt that this will be painful for the Penn State football program, painful for the school and painful for the businesses in College Station. Although there are many who bemoan the decision of the NCAA (including Paterno’s family), I’m convinced that the manner in which the university accepts these sanctions could prove valuable to the students who will soon leave the school to become the captains of industry tasked with eventually leading organizations around the country.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tykiisel/2012/07/24/success-with-honor-paternos-legacy-expunged/

The lesson here is that those who roll ever and play dead become roadkill.....full stop.

Actually strike that....another lesson here is that the new leadership of Penn St is no better than were the old leaders of Penn St at protecting the university and those connected to it.
engineer
 
  3  
Reply Wed 25 Jul, 2012 07:00 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Actually strike that....another lesson here is that the new leadership of Penn St is no better than were the old leaders of Penn St at protecting the university and those connected to it.

So how is not playing in bowl games failure to protect the university? These penalties allow Penn State to play ball, allow the students to go to the games, allow the community to make money from the games and allow those football players with pro aspirations to move to other teams penalty free. Where in there does the leadership at Penn State fail to protect the university? Compare that to the damage the university would suffer in the court of public opinion for continuing to support those who covered up child abuse and it looks like they made the best overall call.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Jul, 2012 07:34 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
This will be a lesson learned by schools who get in trouble down the line.


how about a lesson for schools to prevent them from getting into trouble? I think that's how it could/should be taken.

Lots of colleges and universities thought they were special institutions. They're gradually learning that they are not above the law. Hopefully the pace on learning that lesson will increase now.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jul, 2012 10:07 pm
Quote:
Combined, those two factors have created a scenario that might be even worse than the loss of scholarships and bowls themselves: Penn State may struggle to find anyone willing to take the remaining scholarships that they held on to.
As reported by the Philadelphia Inquirer and other sources, the prized members of Penn State's recruiting class of 2013 -- prospects who would be college seniors in 2017 -- have almost universally softened their commitments to the school and program. While plenty remained loyal to the school throughout the Sandusky trial and subsequent Freeh Report, the NCAA's decision to essentially cripple the program without killing it outright appears to have been a step too far for some top recruits.
Most prominent among those prospects is Christian Hackenberg, a Fort Union (Va.) Academy superstar who is universally considered one of — if not the — top quarterback prospect in the Class of 2013. Hackenberg had long been considered a solid Penn State commit, but immediately appeared to back off that commitment after participating at the Elite 11 quarterback camp, where he starred. According to Rivals.com national recruiting analyst Mike Farrell, Hackenberg is now considering Auburn and South Carolina. More ominously for Penn State, the passer told Farrell that he "wants to play in a bowl game."
That in itself would rule Penn State out.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/filling-remaining-penn-state-scholarships-may-even-bigger-185751399.html

The NCAA set out to humiliate the alumni as retribution for what the NCAA considers their roll in the sports culture at PSU .... making sure that the team sucks for a decade, making sure that the football program does not get tv money to support it and is deemed no longer worthy of national telecast. The true believers will try to keep the pride and the spirit alive, but it will not be possible. There will however be not a word about the NCAA's part in promoting the power of athletics on University Campuses.

The University leaders were chumps here, they got sucker punched. It will be a quarter of a century or more before this team and this university can come back to what it was....and probably not even then.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jul, 2012 10:29 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Penn State faced the threat of a four-year ban on playing football before the NCAA imposed sanctions this week over the school's handling of the Jerry Sandusky child molestation scandal, a university spokesman said Wednesday.
David La Torre said the potential for the multiyear "death penalty" was floated during discussions between Penn State President Rodney Erickson and NCAA officials before Penn State was hit Monday with a $60 million fine, a four-year bowl game ban, reduced football scholarships and the forfeiture of 112 wins.
The school trustees met with Erickson on the subject at a State College hotel Wednesday and afterward issued a statement calling the NCAA punishment "unfortunate" but better than the alternative - the so-called "death penalty."
The penalty hasn't been used since the NCAA suspended Southern Methodist University for the 1987 season. SMU then sat out the `88 season on its own and has never fully recovered its status in college football


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/ncaa/07/26/penn-state-death-penalty.ap/index.html#ixzz21hQdpKoZ


Four years was way out of line and never would have happened if PSU had demanded due process. The first major error was accepting the Freeh report as fact but even after that by fighting the university could have stalled the NCAA long enough to see were the facts really are.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jul, 2012 11:53 pm
Gary Alan Fine: George Orwell and the N.C.A.A.

Quote:


On Monday, the National Collegiate Athletic Association made a remarkable — and disturbing — decision. As one of the sanctions against Pennsylvania State University, it determined that all of Penn State’s football victories from 1998 to 2011 were to be “vacated.” Whoosh! As a result, Joe Paterno no longer holds the major college coaching record for career wins. Someone else now has that honor. George Orwell would be amused.

In his magnificent dystopia, “1984,” Orwell understood well the dangers of “history clerks.” Those given authority to write history can change the past. Those sweat-and-mud victories of the Nittany Lions — more points on the scoreboard — no longer exist. The winners are now the losers.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/opinion/penn-states-vacated-victories.html?gwh=D18CE9F9A0555084B58155C34D00F03D

Gary Alan Fine is a professor of sociology at Northwestern University and the author of “Difficult Reputations: Collective Memories of the Evil, Inept and Controversial.”

In volunteering to be the ax man for the mob the NCAA has monumentally discredited itself, particularly given its own culpability in what went wrong at Penn St.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2012 12:23 am
@hawkeye10,
Joe Nocera: PSU case won’t change college sports

Quote:
What was most galling about Emmert’s press conference was its sanctimony. He kept talking about the “values” that athletics was supposed to embody, about how college sports is supposed to be an integral part of academic life and how it should never overwhelm the mission of the university. “Football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing and protecting young people,” he said.

But at big-time sports schools, football is always placed ahead of everything else. The essential hypocrisy of college sports is that too many athletes are not real students — and no one cares.

Coaches make millions and lose their jobs if they fail to win. Universities reap millions by filling stadiums and making attractive television deals. They serve as the minor leagues for the pros. Everybody knows this — including the NCAA.

The notion that the Penn State case is going to change all of college sports is absurd. College football almost can’t help but corrode academic values. Nothing that happened Monday is going to change any of that

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120726/NEWS0802/707269953/1677
IRFRANK
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2012 10:07 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
The essential hypocrisy of college sports is that too many athletes are not real students — and no one cares.


Not true. There are many rules governing student athletes. The NCAA does care. I would never say you can't find examples of abuse, but student athletes do go to school. Their grad rates are higher than the average student population.

I would agree it's gotten too big, but this blanket statement is not accurate.

The PSU case did not have anything to do with student athletes. It had to do with the leaders not living up to their responsibilities.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2012 10:55 am
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
Four years was way out of line and never would have happened if PSU had demanded due process. The first major error was accepting the Freeh report as fact but even after that by fighting the university could have stalled the NCAA long enough to see were the facts really are.


given the other investigations that are still ongoing, I wonder if they were trying to get ahead of some of the other fines/damages Penn State could still face ... but LOOK we already did this and accepted that and paid this ...
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2012 11:27 am
@IRFRANK,
Penn State was tthe leader in developing "Ath;ete scholars" . One thing PAterno's influence rang heavy in the NCAA was to develop various programs with his model in mind.

It was always amazing to see the number of PSU football players who followed grad programs in Engineering, medicine, and finance.

Now if NCAA could pressure schools to do the same with basketball scholarships, well then, itd be a fuller boat.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2012 01:26 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

The NCAA set out to humiliate the alumni as retribution for what the NCAA considers their roll in the sports culture at PSU ....

The alumni will be humiliated because the football team "sucks"? I can pretty much guarantee that Penn State will win more football games and go to the same number of bowl games in the next four years as my alma mater and I don't feel particularly humiliated. What would be humiliating is if my alma mater was synonomous with child molestation and if the board fought tooth and nail to avoid taking responsibility for the actions of its officials.

I'm not really sure where you are coming from on this topic other than an instinctive rebellion against authority. I get the history revision part of your argument. Penn State won those games and now you say they didn't? The NCAA has done this before (see Ohio State) and no one screamed but I still get it. But the other part of your argument about how the death penalty would hurt the community was avoided by the NCAA sanctions and your "rushing to judgement" argument depends on Penn State claiming innocence. Penn State is pleading guilty in this case. When someone pleads guilty you don't need a huge trial, you just go to the sentencing phase. As for the report, they commissioned the report and they are standing by it. You suggest they should refuse to accept it but what basis would they use for questioning it, just because it painted Penn State in a bad light? No one is refuting the facts presented in the report. Likewise, asking to take their lumps quickly instead of dragging it out over months or years seems smart as well. Far from wringing their hands over how guilty they are by association, it sounds like the Penn State board is making cold hearted moves to limit the damage to the students and alumni and is getting on with business. I can see why you would want them to fight just for the purpose of fighting the Man, but I can't see why you think that would be a good idea for the Penn State community.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2012 01:32 pm
@engineer,
The ex pres has refuted multiple claims fron the Freeh report.

Where I am coming from: the reaction and punishment is neither just, or wise, and this never should have been a matter for the NCAA to handle other than to take some leadership on the cultural problem of athletics becoming the tail that wags the dog at our university. I am not instinctively jamming the NCAA, I am doing it because they deserve it.
Joe Nation
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Jul, 2012 02:22 pm
Wow.
The question that we've arrived at now is will the alumni be or/ not be humiliated because their university doesn't have a great football team.

JesusGod, would you think about that?

Who wants to be an alumnus of a school whose greatest achievements lie in the students' abilities to run across a pasture with a fake pumpkin under their arm?

Pride in such plebeian things is what led to the cover-up of the rape of children.

Again, that Pride led to the cover-up of the rape of children.

Close the ******* program down flat. Do science and math and urge some of the liberal arts students to write something worthy to be sold as literature.

Penn State would be on its way to re-becoming a University.

Joe(all the rest is ashes)Nation
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 02:16:13