What's new
By:

Are the sanctions that Penn State is receiving enough?

I think it was way too harsh in some areas, and not harsh enough in others:

-I think the $60 mil in fines is not nearly enough. I guess that's the revenue that PSU football pulls in for 1 year. I would have increased the amount which would have put even more money in the hands of orginizations that work with sexually abused children.

-The vacating of Paterno's wins was about right IMO.

-Don't mind the 5 year probabtion the school was put on.

-I do think the massive amount of scholorships lost and 4 year bowl ban was a bit too much. The biggest problem with this is that you're punishing a new group of people from the AD on down who didn't have a single thing to do with what went on. These are players and coaches who were not part of what Sandusky was doing in any way, shape, or form, yet in the end, they are the ones paying the biggest price. Doesn't seem equitable to me.
 
jazzman12 said:
I think it was way too harsh in some areas, and not harsh enough in others:

-I think the $60 mil in fines is not nearly enough. I guess that's the revenue that PSU football pulls in for 1 year. I would have increased the amount which would have put even more money in the hands of orginizations that work with sexually abused children.

-The vacating of Paterno's wins was about right IMO.

-Don't mind the 5 year probabtion the school was put on.

-I do think the massive amount of scholorships lost and 4 year bowl ban was a bit too much. The biggest problem with this is that you're punishing a new group of people from the AD on down who didn't have a single thing to do with what went on. These are players and coaches who were not part of what Sandusky was doing in any way, shape, or form, yet in the end, they are the ones paying the biggest price. Doesn't seem equitable to me.
Click to expand...

Like I said in the other thread. They had to punish the football program. Without the football program's reputation being the top of the priority list at Penn state this is not allowed to continue. The football program had to be put in it's place. Increasing the fine would punish the school but do nothing to punish the football program itself. I think they should have eliminated all football sholorships for the next 4 years. If they had to play all walkons for 4 years it really would put the football program in it's place.

This AD and coaches had to know when he took the job that their was going to be a punishment coming. The players were given an out. They can transfer punishment free. Or leave the team and continue their education on the football scholorship.

The losing of these scholorships seems to me to be a happy medium. I really did prefer the death penalty for football. This seems to punish the footbal team and school without as harshly punishing the city and businesses that rely on football days for income.
 
The one question I'd have is the wins from 98-2011 thing... I'm not saying that I disagree with it or anything... But what exactly does that do?
 
The Thriller said:
The one question I'd have is the wins from 98-2011 thing... I'm not saying that I disagree with it or anything... But what exactly does that do?
Click to expand...

It basically tarnishes Joe Paterno's legacy even more by moving him way down from the number 1 spot. It's also just another blemish on the football program as a whole.
 
Put this in the other thread but I think the penalties would've been less had Penn State showed more remorse when this first came out. They were pretty defiant from the get-go and I think that was a factor.

I'm not sure about the penalties. As far as deterrents I think the big ones will be the lawsuits against Penn State and the time that the AD and President will have to do (they probably will get off but the message will be sent). As for punitive I like the idea of starting from the first incidents (1998). Money isn't a big deal but definitely should be a bunch put toward charity.

They should have a probation conference in college football. A conference for any school on any level that is on probation or whatever. Let them play each other.
 
There will still be a team but they will hardly be competing for the next 10 year. It screws the football team over and, for the most part, spares those who weren't involved.
 
Almost the biggest tragedy in all of this is that Sandusky prolly has a cell all to himself. He can sit there and laugh all he wants, when of course he should be in general population - getting fed to the dogs....
 
U Gotta Love It Baby said:
byu probably couldn't get in to that conference either. Nice try though.
Click to expand...
For sure. The U would've definitely been invited though.

cheater_cheater_pumpkin_eater_poster-p228177878489909559t5ta_400.jpg
 
gregbroncs said:
Like I said in the other thread. They had to punish the football program. Without the football program's reputation being the top of the priority list at Penn state this is not allowed to continue. The football program had to be put in it's place. Increasing the fine would punish the school but do nothing to punish the football program itself. I think they should have eliminated all football sholorships for the next 4 years. If they had to play all walkons for 4 years it really would put the football program in it's place.

This AD and coaches had to know when he took the job that their was going to be a punishment coming. The players were given an out. They can transfer punishment free. Or leave the team and continue their education on the football scholorship.

The losing of these scholorships seems to me to be a happy medium. I really did prefer the death penalty for football. This seems to punish the footbal team and school without as harshly punishing the city and businesses that rely on football days for income.
Click to expand...

If there's an out provided to all of the players, then it's a little more fair, but most of those guys are still going to have a hard time securing scholarships to other D1 schools. It's not as if all of these players can opt out and then pick and choose between other schools of similar caliber. Scholarships for the upcoming season are pretty much already filled up at most schools. We can talk about an opt-out being a viable option for these kids, but most of them would still be forced down to FCS schools if they want to play right away. It's hard to argue with your point of view on punishing the football program, but I still can't shake the idea that all of these kids are the ones getting the rawest part of the deal.
 
I'm really not a huge fan of the Orwellian record scrubbing. Give it a huge asterisk or whatever it needs to highlight the problems surrounding those years, but let's not pretend something never happened. The other stuff seems adequate.
 
jazzman12 said:
but I still can't shake the idea that all of these kids are the ones getting the rawest part of the deal.
Click to expand...


In terms of the punishment the NCAA handed down, I agree. But the ones who got the worst punishment in the whole thing are the abuse victims. They weren't able to just "transfer out" of that situation.
 
nightmare3983 said:
In terms of the punishment the NCAA handed down, I agree. But the ones who got the worst punishment in the whole thing are the abuse victims. They weren't able to just "transfer out" of that situation.
Click to expand...

If this were a conversation about who got the "worst" punishment, your post would be dead on. However, we're talking about a punishment on kids who had absolutely nothing to do with the crime itself. Its a tough situation. I cant even really give a good answer as to what the NCAA could have done differently while still sending a strong message to PSU. It's been horriffic to see just how much damage has been caused by a pedophile and a handful of men who could have stopped him.
 
Duck Rodgers said:
What are the rules on that type of thing? Do the players have to reach out first or is it just a free for all?
Click to expand...
I believe the regular rules count. Usually players reach out through their former high school coach. For example, a player could ask his high school coach to contact other schools about him playing there. This mostly affects only top-end players as they are concerned about the exposure of bowls.

Incoming recruits have been or can be released from their letters of intent. The key here is Elite 11 QB Hackenberg. If he stays it will help a ton. He's actually been talking a lot with former USC QB Barkley who took USC through similar circumstances. Hackenberg would essentially have zero competition for QB.

Put it his way, if you are incoming and you redshirt you might have a shot at a bowl game your senior year. And that's if Penn State recovers enough by then to be good enough for a bowl (and probably not a very good one). But the silver lining (and USC and Miami know this well) is that Penn State will be very selective about who they give scholarships to. So borderline players (low-end 4star maybe) may go to Penn State because they will start right away and not get much competition.

And keep in mind any current Penn State player has this option for the rest of their career at Penn State. They can transfer anytime they want.

Penn State will probably not be relevant til 2020.
 
The strongest message will be sent by the jail time given to the former AD and president. There are others being mentioned. Not sure any time will actually be given out but I think that's the big deterrent for other administration out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top