<p>
</p>
<p>This is far too narrow and technical a reading of what the NCAA has authority to do, based probably on wishful thinking. The most serious charge in the NCAA book is “lack of institutional control.” This is, of course, vague, but when you have a runaway football program that places itself above the law and knowingly harbors a pedophile, allowing him to continue to prey on young boys using the pedophile’s long and very public and ongoing association with Penn State football and access to Penn State players, coaches, and facilities as his lure to groom his victims, I don’t think many people would have difficulty concluding this crosses the line into “lack of institutional control.” Not that Joe Paterno didn’t have control; he had total control, that was part of the problem, but the institution lacked control over him and his football program and allowed him to cross the line into what with hindsight looks an awful lot like a criminal conspiracy, dragging other key Penn State personnel into that moral morass alongside him. So I don’t think the NCAA would have the least difficulty determining there was “lack of institutional control,” the most serious NCAA offense. And in fact, the NCAA has already sent a letter to Penn State, basically asking it to explain why the mess there shouldn’t be considered “lack of institutional control.” That was also the tenor of the NCAA President’s remarks in recent interviews. Having gone down that road, I think the NCAA will now find it extremely difficult NOT to conclude there was lack of institutional control in the Penn State football program.</p>
<p>So then the question becomes, what is the punishment that best fits the offense, given that the NCAA President has already said, in so many words, that this is the worst offense the NCAA has ever been confronted with? The ultimate sanction, I suppose, would be expulsion from the NCAA. That would leave Penn State no one to play with. I don’t think that will happen. The next most severe sanction would be the so-called “death penalty,” a silly name because it’s really just a suspension for one or more seasons; it doesn’t have anywhere near the same finality as death. That’s what SMU got (a one-year “death penalty,” only to rise Lazarus-like after a year) for rampant recruiting violations. I think most people, including apparently NCAA President Mark Emmert (judging by his recent comments), would think the Penn State scandal far worse than a bunch of recruiting violations. Short of the “death penalty,” the NCAA could prohibit Penn State television appearances, banish them from bowl games, and limit their football scholarships for a period of years. But these latter sanctions would look like a mild slap on the wrist, inappropriate to the truly horrific things that happened at Penn State. So I’m beginning to think the “death penalty” is the likeliest outcome–either imposed by the NCAA, or self-imposed by Penn State with the NCAA’s blessing.</p>
<p>Of course I could be wrong. NCAA sanctions are highly unpredictable, and I’ve often been surprised by the light sanctions they sometimes impose for what seem to me to be serious offenses, and the heavy sanctions they impose in other cases for what seem to me to be trivial offenses. </p>
<p>Working in Penn State football’s favor here is money. Penn State isn’t the only party that would be hurt financially. The entire Big Ten Conference would take a financial hit. So would the television networks that broadcast Penn State and Big Ten games. Penn State’s non-conference opponents would probably be OK financially, because Penn State would probably need to pay their guarantee for cancelled games scheduled to be played at Penn State, and would probably be required to pay pretty stiff penalties for pulling out of away games. It might create scheduling difficulties for those teams, leaving a hole in their non-conference schedules, but financially they should be no worse off (unless they signed really stupid contracts). But you’d hear a lot of howls from other Big Ten schools, and maybe even some growling about kicking Penn State out of the conference, though I doubt that would go anywhere because the Pennsylvania market is so big, and it even extends into NJ, territory the conference covets. </p>
<p>My prediction, for what it’s worth: one-year “death penalty,” followed by 2 or 3 years of no bowl games, no television appearances, and restrictions on football scholarships. That would leave Penn State football in a pretty deep hole for the better part of a decade. Anything less that that would leave the impression that the NCAA doesn’t take what happened at Penn State seriously, and I think they want to avoid that impression.</p>