<p>
I would think that is exactly the thought process followed by Spanier et al in 1998 and 2001 and any other year they knew and did nothing.</p>
<p>@bclintonk: I would not change a word in my earlier post. </p>
<p>When the last bed is filled in Penn States dorms, it could be filled by an athlete, a full-paying student, or a student receiving merit-based or need-based aid. In all cases, the revenue that accrues to the housing department cannot be seen as free money because if the current occupant were not there, someone else would be. In other words, there is an opportunity cost. You can engage in all the obscurantism you want, but that does not change the fact that there is an opportunity cost. The earlier poster had missed that point.</p>
<p>A textbook written by a Cornell faculty member recounts a story that is germane. For years, the children of Cornell faculty could attend Cornell tuition-free, but those who went to Yale got no help. Some faculty members argued that the benefit should be extended so that, say, one-third of tuition elsewhere was covered. The university dragged its heels but eventually the benefit was extended. Of course, it saved Cornell money because the faculty children who went to Cornell crowded out other students. How much Cornell saved is an empirical question. After all, some of the students who were crowded out would have received financial aid, but the fact remains that there was a real opportunity cost associated with allowing the children of Cornell faculty to attend tuition-free.</p>
<p>I doubt Second Mile has the money to continue a probe. They have stated they will co-operate with other investigators. I don’t see the benefit, at this point, of Second Mile funding a probe…that money should be going to the victims for counseling, etc.</p>
<p>I think cosmicfish’s point was not that Second Mile was blameless, or that determining criminal charges is not appropriate. I interpret the comment to mean that the charity has already collapsed, already has legal plans to transfer assets to another charity (although that will be on hold until the legal process runs its course), criminal charges are being contemplated and the programming done locally has been transferred --as program ideas, not as staff — to other local social service agencies. An investigation at this point is fairly moot. If they concluded contrary to public opinion, they’ll be branded as conspiratory liars. If they conclude the charity should be dismantled–that’s already happened. Assigning blame is a matter for legal authorities. So the only benefit from a costly report would be to tabloids, bloggers, and ambulance chasers.</p>
<p>From what I read in the articles, the money is going to “another charity” that will still be operating in Pennsylvania. Who will work for them? A bunch of recently unemployed Second Mile workers, perhaps? </p>
<p>Yes, I do feel it’s important to identify who at Second Mile is willing to ignore the most basic ethics. Because those people are not going to evaporate into the ether if Second Mile goes under. They’re going to find a new job, at a new charity.</p>
<p>Second verse, same as as the first.</p>
<p>[Second</a> Mile foundation to close, transfer cash and programs to Texas-based charity | PennLive.com](<a href=“http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/05/the_second_mile_surrenders_to.html]Second”>Second Mile foundation to close, transfer cash and programs to Texas-based charity - pennlive.com)</p>
<p>I believe the asset transfer is on hold, pending court action. They are hoping for a rapid court decision, or they may just shut down.</p>
<p>[Second</a> Mile needs action - AltoonaMirror.com - Altoona, PA | News, Sports, Jobs, Community Information - The Altoona Mirror](<a href=“http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/content.detail/id/563116/Second-Mile-needs-action.html?nav=742]Second”>http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/content.detail/id/563116/Second-Mile-needs-action.html?nav=742)</p>
<p>They want to trAnsfer the money to a Texas religious based child foster care and adoption group who specialize in Christian adoptions.</p>
<p>Interesting choice, they do have a Pennsylvania affiliate but guess they want money to go to Texas. Biblically based parent training. Founder is a minister from pennysylvania.</p>
<p>They have already taken over some aspects of second mile programs, but from what I see, the money won’t be transferred while there are court cases pending. </p>
<p>I wish they would just step up and tell the truth.</p>
<p>For those who are saying that giving the football death penalty to Penn State isn’t necessary because the scholarship reductions and bowl ban are so harsh that the program will be crippled for years don’t have to look any further than USC to see that’s not the case.</p>
<p>USC had its own bowl ban and similar scholarship reductions yet is doing great at recruiting. It is expected to contend for national title. The program was never weakened very much an is quickly back stronger than ever:</p>
<p>[NCAA</a> sanctions haven’t stopped USC recruiting - latimes.com](<a href=“http://www.latimes.com/sports/college/usc/la-sp-0805-usc-football-recruiting-20120805,0,5400308.story]NCAA”>USC is recruiting up a storm)</p>
<p>Excerpt:</p>
<p>"A two-year bowl ban, the loss of 30 scholarships over three years and a roster cap of 75 players – 10 fewer than the standard annual limit — was supposed to handicap USC’s ability to procure an abundance of top talent.</p>
<p>Instead, the Trojans are enjoying a run of success that analyst Mike Farrell calls “one of the top two or three recruiting jobs in the last decade.”</p>
<p>USC opens training camp Monday ranked No. 3 in the USA Today preseason coaches’ poll."</p>
<p>Penn State should have gotten the death penalty. They’ll just carry on like USC did and keep the football worship going just as though nothing ever happened. Scandal? What scandal?</p>
<p>
This, more or less - they are already being finely diced by authorities more capable and ruthless than they could have been to themselves, so an internal investigation would only be a useless expenditure of resources. Internal investigations are of no use to an organization that knows it will soon no longer exist.</p>
<p>
I won’t pretend to understand the thought processes of scum-bags, but there is a difference between deliberately concealing known crimes and shying away from shining a spotlight on honest mistakes. For every conspirator in a case like this, there are a dozen or a hundred individuals who saw something shady and glossed it over because “no one I know could do such a thing”. With criminal and civil penalties looming even the truly innocent ones at this charity should be concerned that despite doing what they thought was right they could still face massive penalties.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And then compare the USC “survival” to SMU’s! Again, and again, by Thanksgiving, nobody at PSU would even remember the impact of the penalties. It will be cast as a rebuilding period as the fans circle the wagons and the fundraising gets rolling. </p>
<p>An empty stadium should have been a reality for a few years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Since PSU avoided the death penalty, it seems that “anything you do” can serve you rather well. Why does anyone still clings to the idea that PSU is a victim in this case.</p>
<p>“I doubt Second Mile has the money to continue a probe. They have stated they will co-operate with other investigators. I don’t see the benefit, at this point, of Second Mile funding a probe…that money should be going to the victims for counseling, etc.”</p>
<p>Among other things, I’d like to know about Second Miles’ political contributions to the former Attorney General, now Governor (supposedly in the hundreds of thousands?) Were they being used as conduit from JoePa? Was there a quid pro quo? I can’t imagine that the Gov is going to investigate. Who is?</p>
<p>
Because many of feel that we are victims, even if the magnitude of our hurt is not nearly equal to that of the abused children. This happened in our house, and we are damaged by it.</p>
<p>Some would say that our blame equals or exceeds our hurt, and this prevents us from being victims, to which I ask - how? As a student, an alumnus, what could I have done to reasonably prevent this? What do you think that I did, different than the students at a hundred other college campuses, that brought this tragedy into existence? I have heard that PSU culture is unique, but I have yet to hear how holding ourselves to a higher standard could reasonably have been expected to yield these results - should we have done as other universities do, and graduated half our athletes, tossed hookers through their windows, and forgave all their excesses? We were betrayed, but how realistic was it to expect that liking how “clean” our football program was could in any way produce results like this?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I don’t mean to belabor the point, but I think you’re being a bit obtuse. If Penn State runs its Housing office the same way other universities do–so that housing charges cover all the Housing office’s costs, no more and no less–then the revenue to the Housing office will be exactly the same whether the occupant is a scholarship athlete, a full-pay, or a student on merit or need-based aid. As will the Housing office’s costs. So that’s just completely revenue-neutral. (In the case of the scholarship athlete, the cost of housing will be paid by the athletic department out of football-generated revenue; that money will likely simply be transferred from the athletic department budget to the Housing office). And since Penn State doesn’t guarantee housing for upperclass students, and since only 37% of Penn State students live on campus, the only possible opportunity cost is that some upperclassman who wants to live in a dorm gets squeezed out and needs to find a house or apartment, just like the overwhelming majority of upperclassmen. But that doesn’t stop that student from attending Penn State, and it doesn’t cost the university one thin dime.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure, I can see the Cornell situation. But it’s not the least bit analogous. Unlike the children of Cornell faculty, scholarship athletes don’t attend their university “for free,” as far as the university’s general fund budget is concerned. They get tuition bills just like everyone else, and those tuition bills get paid, just like everyone else’s. As far as the general fund budget is concerned, scholarship athletes are full-pays. Like their housing charges, their tuition bills get paid by the athletic department, out of revenue the athletic department generates from football. </p>
<p>A better analogy is this: a major employer decides that as an employee benefit, it will pay the full tuition of up to 85 of its employees at any given time to allow them to attend the local university. Great deal for the lucky employees; they get to go to college at their employer’s expense. Great deal for the university; it gets 85 guaranteed full-pays on an ongoing basis, with their tuition paid by a company that is financially sound and always pays its bills on time, so there’s no hassle over late payments and such. That’s the situation here. The athletic department is in effect the employer of the scholarship athletes, whose on-the-field performance generates scads of revenue for their employer. Their employer pays their tuition. The university’s general fund budget is not out one thin dime, because as far as the general fund is concerned, they’re all full-pays. Does that mean someone else doesn’t get to attend? Well, it might at a smaller school where the admissions office puts a hard cap on how many students can be in the entering class. But at a mega-U like Penn State that accepts nearly 23,000 applicants a year, the 25 (or 15) new football recruits annually are well within the margin of error of its admissions target. In admissions terms, they’re a triviality, “de minimis” as the lawyers say. In all likelihood there is no opportunity cost for anyone, and there certainly is no opportunity cost for the university, because unlike the Cornell faculty brats, the scholarship athletes are having every dime of their tuition paid for, out of football revenues they generate for the athletic department.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, that is one way to look at it. Another is to pretend that offenders who are caught and sentenced are victimized by the judicial system.</p>
<p>To everyone who believes that PSU came out lightly, the whining about the penalties and the lack of contrition is rubbing the wrong way. While I can understand that the penalties will have a impact that locals won’t like too much, that IS exactlty what should happen, except that the penalties fell entirely short. Something that makes the whining even more grating!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And you call me obtuse? You have completely and utterly missed the point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m with Xiggi on this one. What happened to “We are Penn State” … that should hold for the good and the bad. The coach, the AD, the president, the head of the trustees, and the trustees are also Penn State. The NCAA let Penn State off lightly IMO … and in response many from Penn State are whining about the penalties given.</p>
<p>In college I had many profs who were very willing to regrade tests/papers but when regraded they could change your grade either direction. I now wish the NCAA would let Penn State appeal … and if the response they are hearing at all mimics what we’re hearing on CC (and from trustees) I hope they reconsider and impose the death penalty. </p>
<p>Before the announcement of penalties I was not in favor of the death penalty … but I am now given the lack contrition from the PSU community.</p>
<p>Mini–I still don’t understand why a children’s charity was making ANY political contributions. It doesn’t take a huge investigation to determine what contributions were made by Second Mile, it takes a review of the financial statements, including the tax return. That might be a Freedom of Information Act issue, but likely some newspaper reporter could dig it out.</p>
<p>I just don’t see PSU as a victim in all this. I can see the individual students who attend as having their college experience brushed with a problem outside their control/experience, but the institution accepted the consequences when it turned over the administration of the school to the head football coach. And that culture is unique to Penn State. The situation is not improved by the lack of contrition and complaining about the sanctions.</p>
<p>Over six hundred thousand from second mile trustees to Corbett, and a three million grant back. Tho grant was stopped.</p>
<p>What I don’t get is the displaced anger or lack there of of Penn state suppoerters. They are mad at the press, the NCAA, but don’t see much anger to paterno, et all…just whining, but no man am I mad at those jerks for what theymdid and didn’t do form the real victims and our school.</p>
<p>I think there are many in the Penn State community that are beyond angry at the administrators and others whose total lack of caring, concern and action allowed this to happen, but they are quietly going about their business (teaching classes, doing research, etc.) because the tide of negative feelings and publicity is so strong that their voices would probably not be heard.</p>