<p>Pizzagirl - I have no idea if there was concern for the businesses around SMU, but I would be surprised if there wasn’t. But to compare the economic impact to businesses in State College to those in Dallas is ridiculous.</p>
<p>And I am sorry you don’t like my attitude. I think the guilty parties should be severely punished, the BoT run out of town, and the statue of Paterno removed. I also think the football program should be punished, but I don’t think suspension of the program is the answer.</p>
<p>Mini said “You asked how one would best address the “systemic problem”. I think the “problem” is that Penn State is dependent upon football for its image and for its revenue, so I think the death penalty, for a long enough period that this is no longer the case, is the best solution.”</p>
<p>I’m not sure that I necessarily agree that Penn State is dependent upon football for its image and revenue. Does football fund the academics? I’m really asking because we reviewed the University based solely on its academic reputation. Shocking, I know, but football was not a variable in our decision-making process.</p>
<p>I agree that a byproduct of the death penalty is to engender/effect deterrence. That said, I can almost guarantee during the initial salvos of this catastrophic debacle, each and every university/college began to review its checks and balances and chain of command in order to not replicate Penn State’s failures.</p>
<p>And before I hit the road for Austin and a weekend of drum corps shows, let me just add - that when I am in State College next month, I will do my best to support the local businesses. Because if folks on this thread have their way, many may be closing up shop in the near future.</p>
<p>It is a shame local businesses may suffer. But that pales along side the suffering of many CHILDREN for over 14 years. They are not even on the same scale.</p>
<p>Death penalty or other sanctions, if the NCAA does not act they will have little authority to act in the future. The university chose to put the well being of the football program ahead of the well being of children. They allowed/encouraged Sandusky to travel with the team, work in recruiting, etc.</p>
<p>This is an excellent point. Whatever the NCAA does or does not do will be precedent-setting, because it’s never had a case like this before. They thought they had jurisdiction to act when they initiated the inquiry into “lack of institutional control,” and NCAA President Mark Emmert sure sounds like he thinks they have authority to impose sanctions up to and including the death penalty if they find lack of institutional control. It’s hard to see how they could NOT find it. But if they pull their punches now and impose no sanctions or only light sanctions, they’re pretty much sending a signal that even gross lawlessness and utter moral depravity within an athletic program will be tolerated by the NCAA, at least if it’s a financially successful program and there are no recruiting violations or improper benefits to athletes. And I just don’t believe they want to go there. They don’t want to become everyone’s cop on the beat or a moral scold, but they don’t want to look like they’re just hiding their head in the sand when an athletic program goes this badly off the rails, either. That would just cast deep doubt on the integrity of the NCAA itself, and all of intercollegiate athletics. They can’t have that.</p>
<p>Having begun the formal inquiry, they’d now look like complete chickens**t to pull back and say, “Sorry, our jurisdiction is properly confined to recruiting violations and improper benefits. Moral depravity and lawlessness are somebody else’s department.” They opened Pandora’s box. They need to live with it. They need to follow through, make a finding, and impose a sanction that is proportional to the offense, which as NCAA Mark Emmert has said is unprecedented in its enormity and egregiousness. The hammer needs to drop.</p>
<p>Football is not a money maker at the majority of the colleges. For instance at Miami University (OHIO), a MAC school, a portion of the student general fee is used to fund intercollegiate athletics including scholarships. Miami as well as most mid-majors field a full complement of men/women athletic teams. In all probability, Penn State won’t eliminate sports if the death penalty is enacted for football. However, students (parents) could see fee increases to fund athletics that were previously funded by football?</p>
<p>One would hope so. But if Penn State gets away with a relative slap on the wrist, then other schools might not be quite so vigilant; after all, their programs’ existence wouldn’t actually be at stake. Every college in the land must understand that if they’re guilty of this, then they WILL lose their program. Only shutting down Penn State football will send that message.</p>
<p>Oh I’m sure the NCAA will impose a sanction…just maybe not killing the program. I think they will be having the same conversations albeit emotionally and passionately than “our” discussion thread here, about what is just and not just. Post 3573 editorial link lays out four very doable solutions and the reasons why so I’m sure they are examining all angles and there will be some back and forth with the college and perhaps the new athletic staff before anything gets announced. I’d love to be a mouse in the corner and know if they talked to the BOD from 2nd Mile. As I’ve said, I could be totally wrong on my guess, but we’ll know soon enough.</p>
<p>I think the 4 options from the editorial are worth considering–as a package: bowl ban, tv ban, money to charity, scholarship restrictions. As long as the term is reasonable (minimum 5 years–no one currently attending/playing for is at PSU after the ban). Current players can transfer, or continue as scholarship students knowing they won’t get the national exposure–without sitting out a year. </p>
<p>It seems fair to me. Nothing can repair the damage to the victims. At least this would show empathy, send a message that football is less important than children. In some ways, it seems a harsher penalty than a death penalty. Everyone has to acknowledge that football is not of supreme importance. Something like this plan forces the area/admin/university to re-group without football as the center of the university. To me the death penalty just allows a lot of whiney comments about the NCAA not having the authority, small businesses suffering, band, cheer, whatever. The combination of the items above would significantly impact the football program.</p>
<p>I don’t think they will suspend the FB program for multiple years, if at all. Too much of that punishment effects students who did nothing wrong by the standard of NCAA regulations. However, I think they will heavily fine the FB program and take away some # of their FB scholarships for X number of years, which will diminish their FB recruiting and the strength of their FB team.
I think that will be a punishment that will hit the FB program, but will not target current Penn State athletes who have done nothing wrong.</p>
<p>I think I’ve been talked out of the death penalty.</p>
<p>Instead my near-death penalties would be …
Vacate all wins from the time PSU first heard an allegation through 2011
Require all PSU documentation to reflect these games as losses (fyi, in the past the NCAA has vacated wins and some schools then listed them as wins with an asterisk)
Paterno’s record reflects all the vacated wins as loses
No death penalty … but
All profits from football donated to child abuse causes (not associated with PSU) for 5 years
No bowl games for 5 years
No TV games for 5 years … no national games, no Big 10 network, no local channels
Total scholarships reduced by 14 (that is on purpose) for 5 years.
For 14 years EVERY disciplinary issue with the athletic department must be reported to the NCAA for review … a zero tolerance condition … one slip-up and the death penalty is invoked.</p>
<p>I could easily be talked into switching some of the penalties to 14 years.</p>
<p>This allows clears current athletes, students, and local business from being collateral damage to the penalties. The loss of of the football profits puts other sports at risk but PSU would need to cover this $50M/year … in essence fundraising to cover the gap would essentially be fundraising to cover the donation to the child abuse programs).</p>
<p>I think something like this is fair and also hammers PSU pretty severely also.</p>
I agree and even more so because Spanier was not only a member of the NCAA’s Board of Directors but served as its chair. The NCAA has long been known to be unduly harsh on certain programs while giving a mere slap on the wrist to “favored” programs … for the same or similar offenses. Their failure to impose the death penalty on PSU’s football program will appear as the height of hypocrisy. </p>
<p>I agree with barrons that two-year suspension seems reasonable. And Penn State football should be able to bounce back and avoid the boot from B1G as a result. PSU will be forced to self-imposed 1-year suspension and NCAA will add on another year just to make its authoritative statement to the general public. As was the case with tOSU, the school self-imposed vacating all its wins (12-1 record) for the entire season in addition to firing of the all-time winningest coach Jim Tressel, who lied about some of its star players traded autographs for tattoos. Ultimately, NCAA added bowl ban this upcoming season and reduced scholarship offers in addition to the self-imposed sanctions just to make its case. </p>
<p>As a buckeye alum & fan, as much as I was heart broken with all the harsh sanctions against my team, it was done fair and square imho. In fact, I was actually one of the 1st on CC to ask for Tressel’s resignation when the scandal broke out last year. No hypocrite here!! (ok… maybe just a little, since I wanted Urban Myer as our head coach instead!! :p)</p>
<p>Tongue in cheek…that would be fundraising from the future parents of future students at Penn State for the next 14 years? Or are you being sarcastic? They had 72 million in revenue and 20 million in expenses in 2010-11…or roughly 50 million after expenses which you really can’t pass on to students and whatever fan base is left. Now theoretically they won’t “need” 50 million but I’m struggling with what you mean about “fundraising” to cover the gap. I’m guessing you didn’t mean the entire 50 million. I think they should fund donations to 2nd Mile until the end of the world but not sure what would be a fitting amount. </p>
<p>Sports Illustrated just released a pretty good article. I like what it says, but then again I’m one of the ones who took many slings and arrows since Thursday for arguing against eliminating football. Happy reading:</p>
<p>My starting point is PSU should get the death penalty. I can be talked out of that … but if they get to play during the time that they would have been under the death penalty they sure as heck should not make profit off playing. So yes $50M a year donated for 5 years … and yes, PSU would have to figure out how to adjust to the lost revenue … but then over 1/2 of the DI football programs lose money so it can be managed.</p>
<p>I want to see both PSU be penalized and for a deterrent to other schools … and given the crimes committed this seems way short. PSU covers up and enables a pedophile for 14 years … then it keeps the wins and money from that time period, does not get the death penalty, and gets to keep the money while skirting the death penalty. If they let PSU play they can not dock the scholarships, TV, and bowls too severely or they gave them the death penalty under a different name. </p>
<p>If the final penalty just causes a 5 year blip for the PSU football program then it is not nearly severe enough IMO … and my test is pretty simple … if I was the head of NCAA and explaining the penalties to the victims and their families could I explain the penalties while honestly thinking we had done enough for these families. While I empathy of the collateral damage from penalties I am much more concerned about justice for the families … and PSU football moving on pretty much as is is NO WHERE CLOSE to good enough for these families.</p>
<p>1) Look up and histical listing of football wins and PSU is right near the top … current NCAA records indicate it is one of the best programs … vacating the wins removes that highlight.</p>
<p>2) And the real reason … the coach listed with the most wins in NCAA history is Joe Paterno … vacating the wins would be a severe but in my more then fair punishment of Paterno.</p>
<p>Any time a TV show shows a graphic about wins PSU and/or Paterno appears on the the screen getting props … this would go away. In addition, as a deterrent, I think the ultimate leverage on schools is the money and their wins. Frankly, I doubt the USC penalties for the Reggie Bush violations represent much of a deterrent at all … they got a 3-4 year blip of TV/bowls/scholarships … and got to keep the money and won a couple national championships (and almost a 3rd) with Bush.</p>
<p>It’s like taking away the Olympic gold medal from someone who was later shown to be a drug cheat. It doesn’t change what happened in the actual competition, but it erases a tainted win from the record books.</p>
<p>And in this case it would also erase, at least on paper, the point made by Paterno idolators that one of the key ingredients of his divine status is that he won more than 400 games.</p>