Penn State?

[gregbroncs]

right, because the students are completely to blame. Don't get me wrong I don't want to sound like I'm sticking up for those in charge and Of course Joe Pa. I assume he is answering for his roll in what happened from beyond the grave. Penn st definitely need to clean house, but to completely close the school is ridiculous. They shouldn't screw the students for others mistakes.

I may have went too far there. But really could you blame the gov. if they pull all funding to that school? Should they? They funded a school that actively covered up a serious crime. If the Gov. pulls funding and the football program is terminated, would the school survive? Couldn't those students find another school that maybe did not participate in an illegal activity like this?

If I went to Penn State I would transfer. I would be embarrased to have my degree associated with this incident or a school with this incident reflecting on it. I would also investigate the legal aspect of having my school tuition reimbursed by sueing the school.

 

[TroutBum]

Nevermind what I think about this whole situation, I just wanna point out how trite and cliché I find the idea of "your kid" morality. Not all of us are governed by base emotions and not all of us think differently just because something happened to someone close to us.

Great post.

All anyone really needs to do is realize that Ogathriller, gregbroncs, and Fick Dace Torbin all agree with each other, which should tell you what's right and wrong. You don't punish thousands of people for the misdeeds of a few. Everything I want to say has already been said, so I won't rehash it, but you guys that think the whole program/university should die are beyond idiotic.

 

[Nate505]

Coaches, ADs, and Presidents need to consider the lives of those business owners too when they hide and protect child rapists.

Just another reason why they SHOULDN'T have hidden and protected Sandusky.

Make an example out of Penn St. Or would you rather slap them on the wrist? The message being sent is that, "this isn't that big of a deal."

I doubt you'll hear anyone saying they did the right thing here. It's obvious the higher ups were either cowards or totally callous and immoral. But I doubt what you might consider "a slap on the wrist" is going to be seen as "this isn't a big deal" to anyone. For one banning them for 5-6 years in Bowls basically makes the program irrelevant on the national stage, but still allows the games to be played and for some of the economic gains that come with it to still be had. Plus the legacy of Penn State/Paterno/etc. has been about as damaged as it can be.

 

[gregbroncs]

Great post.

All anyone really needs to do is realize that Ogathriller, gregbroncs, and Fick Dace Torbin all agree with each other, which should tell you what's right and wrong. You don't punish thousands of people for the misdeeds of a few. Everything I want to say has already been said, so I won't rehash it, but you guys that think the whole program/university should die are beyond idiotic.

Inconvieniencing a few thousand people to potentially save the lives of kids in the future is worth it to me. Letting this go unpunished for the football team especially and University to a lesser degree would be idiotic. This is never allowed to continue if that university is not protecting the football program. So at least the football program should be put in it's place. Getting rid of it for a few years is a good start.

 

[One Brow]

I have no problem with terminating the football program. It's an appropirate response to a serious crime. Humans have a tendency toinvest their identity with a system, such as a college football program (other examples would be political parties, other employers, schools you attendeded, churches, etc.). This investment creates enormous motivations to protect the system, and other members of the system. As long as people feel the system itself is secure, they will try to protect their fellow members. When you raise the ante by showing the very system itself is being threatened, you alter the basis of that rationale. You give people something of direct value to them that they need to protect by coming forward. Paterno and the Penn State administration thought they were protecting the program. If we make it so the best way to protect a program is to root out and reveal abuse, we'll see more abuse rooted out and revealed.

 

[moevillini]

seems to me that far more attention will be called to the problem of pedophiles in kids' sports (or anywhere for that matter) if the football program continues....

abolish the program entirely and the issue will fall off the radar, at least as far as Jerry Sandusky and Penn State is concerned

keep the program with major sanctions so the issue continues to stay in the spotlight, that's my opinion.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Interesting take. It falls in line with what I think should be done but adds another positive element I hadn't yet considered.

 

[green]

seems to me that far more attention will be called to the problem of pedophiles in kids' sports (or anywhere for that matter) if the football program continues....

abolish the program entirely and the issue will fall off the radar, at least as far as Jerry Sandusky and Penn State is concerned

keep the program with major sanctions so the issue continues to stay in the spotlight, that's my opinion.

BUT, if you keep the program with major sanctions, then the program falls (like SMU did) into irrelevancy and no cares either. I think getting rid of the program would have a greater effect, especially when you take into account that this affects the third/fourth largest city in the US (Philly). For once, the NCAA would have taken a stand that actually made a difference.

 

[green]

I have no problem with terminating the football program. It's an appropirate response to a serious crime. Humans have a tendency toinvest their identity with a system, such as a college football program (other examples would be political parties, other employers, schools you attendeded, churches, etc.). This investment creates enormous motivations to protect the system, and other members of the system. As long as people feel the system itself is secure, they will try to protect their fellow members. When you raise the ante by showing the very system itself is being threatened, you alter the basis of that rationale. You give people something of direct value to them that they need to protect by coming forward. Paterno and the Penn State administration thought they were protecting the program. If we make it so the best way to protect a program is to root out and reveal abuse, we'll see more abuse rooted out and revealed.

The absolute, #1, best post so far.

 

[JimLes]

Inconvieniencing a few thousand people to potentially save the lives of kids in the future is worth it to me. Letting this go unpunished for the football team especially and University to a lesser degree would be idiotic. This is never allowed to continue if that university is not protecting the football program. So at least the football program should be put in it's place. Getting rid of it for a few years is a good start.

How will this actually make things better in the future? At least working under the assumption that what we're trying to do has a preventative purpose and not just retributive?

This is not something new. What is new is the scale and the repugnance of what has happened. Scandals involving college sports teams happen annually, and they always involve corruption and cover-up. I'm not sure how shutting down a single school's program will prevent other schools from placing exaggerated emphasis on their sports programs. Not when the system is designed in such a way that educational institutions were given a monopoly over the nation's most popular sport when it comes to 18-22 year olds.

 

[gregbroncs]

How will this actually make things better in the future? At least working under the assumption that what we're trying to do has a preventative purpose and not just retributive?

This is not something new. What is new is the scale and the repugnance of what has happened. Scandals involving college sports teams happen annually, and they always involve corruption and cover-up. I'm not sure how shutting down a single school's program will prevent other schools from placing exaggerated emphasis on their sports programs. Not when the system is designed in such a way that educational institutions were given a monopoly over the nation's most popular sport when it comes to 18-22 year olds.

Because these institutions will be afraid of losing their football programs if they are not seen to be reporting a major crime like this. Would you risk the future of your football program just to save face in the press? Would it be in your best interest to bury a crime like this being committed if you knew that if it was discovered your football program (that you are trying to protect) was in jeopardy of being terminated?

 

[asian_roger]

Tear down the Paterno statue. Its a disgrace!

 

[northeast]

apparently in this case it was

 

[JimLes]

Because these institutions will be afraid of losing their football programs if they are not seen to be reporting a major crime like this. Would you risk the future of your football program just to save face in the press? Would it be in your best interest to bury a crime like this being committed if you knew that if it was discovered your football program (that you are trying to protect) was in jeopardy of being terminated?

This, of course, is assuming that the idea of deterrence works. No one actually thinks they're going to get caught and countless studies have shown that the effectiveness of a deterrent drops quickly over time.

 

[Nate505]

Inconvieniencing a few thousand people to potentially save the lives of kids in the future is worth it to me. Letting this go unpunished for the football team especially and University to a lesser degree would be idiotic. This is never allowed to continue if that university is not protecting the football program. So at least the football program should be put in it's place. Getting rid of it for a few years is a good start.

If it were just the football team that would be one thing. But six times a year tens of thousands of people across the state go to Happy Valley and spend a ton of money in the city. And frankly, they don't come any other time in those amounts. So if the football team is gutted, you're going to gut the town. If that's an acceptable side effect for punishing the football program fine, we just differ in opinion there.

 

[moevillini]

Because these institutions will be afraid of losing their football programs if they are not seen to be reporting a major crime like this. Would you risk the future of your football program just to save face in the press? Would it be in your best interest to bury a crime like this being committed if you knew that if it was discovered your football program (that you are trying to protect) was in jeopardy of being terminated?

or maybe they'll just try to do a better job of covering things up...


seriously, if you think folks are anticipating that they might ever get caught and have to pay a consequence, then you are seriously underestimating the size of some of these egos

 

[green]

If it were just the football team that would be one thing. But six times a year tens of thousands of people across the state go to Happy Valley and spend a ton of money in the city. And frankly, they don't come any other time in those amounts. So if the football team is gutted, you're going to gut the town. If that's an acceptable side effect for punishing the football program fine, we just differ in opinion there.

Risks of doing business. Setting up a business in a town where you can't survive except for six days a year is taking a mighty risk. It is the way it goes. It sucks, but that's life.

 

[PearlWatson]

If it were just the football team that would be one thing. But six times a year tens of thousands of people across the state go to Happy Valley and spend a ton of money in the city. And frankly, they don't come any other time in those amounts. So if the football team is gutted, you're going to gut the town. If that's an acceptable side effect for punishing the football program fine, we just differ in opinion there.

^supportive of trickle down economics

 

[Nate505]

Risks of doing business. Setting up a business in a town where you can't survive except for six days a year is taking a mighty risk. It is the way it goes. It sucks, but that's life.

So they were supposed to take into account some pedo raping children and the higher ups covering it up?

There typically isn't much risk in banking on the home games of a football team, especially when it has been consistent for the past 80 years or whatever.

 

[Nate505]

^supportive of trickle down economics

I don't know if I'm a total supporter of trickle down economics, but I can see that when you bring in thousands of people from out of the town for a 4-5 hour stretch many of them will spend money there.