Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: roo_ster on July 23, 2012, 12:15:40 PM
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8191027/penn-state-hit-60-million-fine-4-year-bowl-ban-wins-dating-1998
The NCAA has hit Penn State with a $60 million sanction, a four-year football postseason ban and a vacation of all wins dating to 1998, the organization said Monday morning. The career record of Joe Paterno will reflect these vacated records, the NCAA said.
Penn State also must reduce 10 initial and 20 total scholarships each year for a four-year period.
I am still partial to the "plow the athletic fields under and plant corn" response, but the above will do in a pinch.
SMU still hasn't recovered and that was nigh 30 years ago.
-
Well, to quote the immortal words of the Simpsons' Nelson Muntz;
HA-HA!
-
The last quarterback to win a game for PSU was Mike McQueary in 1997
-
Works for me.
The consensus on the talk-radio this AM was that Penn State deserved something, but they're all aghast at voiding the wins for all those years.
I stand up and give props to the NCAA, what they're reminding everyone, universities, alumni, students, fans, coaches, and players is that FOOTBALL IS JUST A GAME. IT'S NOT IMPORTANT. Especially when compared against the rape/molestation of children...
The NCAA does try pretty hard to do what it can to ensure that universities aren't just life support systems for sports programs, even if it's a Sysaphean task, and akin to beating back the tide with a spoon. However this takes the cake.
[golfclap]
-
I was hoping they'd get the SMU death penalty treatment. But this is more than I feared would happen, and strikes directly at the hero worship of that vile and pathetic excuse for a human Paterno so I'll take it without too much complaint.
-
I was hoping they'd get the SMU death penalty treatment. But this is more than I feared would happen, and strikes directly at the hero worship of that vile and pathetic excuse for a human Paterno so I'll take it without too much complaint.
No, it doesn't. Hero worship is quite strong, and a lot of Pennsylvanians are highly pissed at any sanctions whatsoever. Think of anything you could say to trivialize the situation, and I hear it on a daily basis.
-
They should have taken away ALL scholarships, disallowed bowl games, prohibited playing for Big 10 championships for 14 years, 1998 when this travesty began to seep out from under a rock.
-
No, it doesn't. Hero worship is quite strong, and a lot of Pennsylvanians are highly pissed at any sanctions whatsoever. Think of anything you could say to trivialize the situation, and I hear it on a daily basis.
Sure, you'll never convince the cultists that Paterno wasn't a demi-god. But it does strike at his reputation amongst the non-brainwashed.
-
Personally, I don't think the got half of what they deserved... But what they deserve isn't fittin' to be posted...
Needless to say, I'm glad that it also sounds like a couple more of the admin types are facing charges for their complicity in this monster's actions.
-
I agree with AD.
I would call this a good "first step". I would have completely shut down PSU athletics for 14 years, at a minimum.
But I hope that those who knew and did nothing, are sent to prison for the rest of their natural lives, and that Joe Paterno is being slow roasted on a spit in hell.
-
Disagree.
I think they missed the mark here.
The wrong people are being penalized.
Identify the responsible parties in the school administration, then ban the school from the relevant sports conference until every one of them is no longer employed at the school.
What they've done will cost their donors and the taxpayer a bunch of money, and may result in the loss of a couple of administrative jobs, but the people who colluded on this will, by and large, still be there. And this penalty isn't coming out of their pockets.
So we levy a huge fine -- not to be paid by those responsible -- and we void victories of games played by people who weren't involved, and we leave the bulk of the jerks responsible in their positions.
The NCAA can't criminally prosecute anyone, but they could certainly turn up the heat on the actual individuals responsible by simply shutting the school out of conference athletics until all of them were gone.
Punishing "the school" is absurd. A "school" is not someone who colluded in a crime.
The idea of "collective punishment" is symbolic but can't really be called justice.
Yes, if you gut the administration, there's going to be some collateral damage, but the approach they've taken results in even greater collateral damage.
Target the actual people rather than "the institution."
-
Two things that don't sit right with me....
1. No mandatory firing of all athletic personnel in the football program with inelligiabity for hire in NCAA schools. This sends a strong message to anyone participating or knowing about the cover-up & not saying anything.
2. The way the NCAA levied the punishment by not going through its established procedure opens up the possibility that Penn sues & gets the sanctions overturned. Intentional?.....
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8191027/penn-state-hit-60-million-fine-4-year-bowl-ban-wins-dating-1998
-
I'd just like to state that I completely and totally disagree with ArfinGreebly.
-
They shoulda tried to recreate the Saddam statue scene while pulling down Joe Pa's. I pretty shocked the NCAA didn't close down all the athletic program.
-
I'd just like to state that I completely and totally disagree with ArfinGreebly.
Oh, good.
I was worried that I might be subjected to waves of fawning adoration.
-
AG, I see your point, and I'll agree that the collateral damage is unfortunate. However, punishing the "institution" is what creates the opening to change the culture which enabled the failures. I'm certain the individuals involved rationalized protecting the "institution", the tradition and mythic stature of Penn State football. Bursting that cultural bubble, and letting it be seen to burst, is the best shot at preventing a repetition of this disgrace. That non-offenders will suffer is regrettable, but at least it should reinforce the lesson.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.googlepixel.com%2Fimages%2Fpsuspeaksnoevil.png&hash=31cedbba51aa4314138be6cb758ff117e09ac3e9)
-
I'd just like to state that I completely and totally disagree with ArfinGreebly.
Same.
We absolutely do have a long and storied history of punishing institutions, or even destroying them.
If we didn't, there'd still be an Enron, (once it came out of receivership) just with other folks at the helm.
There would still be a Nazi party of Germany...
We fight wars with plenty of "collateral damage" in terms of "innocents" too.
Something needed to be done about all those football fan lunkheads who protested on behalf of Penn State and Paterno in this mess. So now Penn State gets to be the Cubs of college football for a few decades while they "rebuild". They got off lighter than many think they should have.
And most of us who are happy with this determination are only so because while it's not enough, it was at least more than we were expecting.
-
And the "kids" are not harmed.
Athletes can transfer to other schools without penalty (the "sit out a year" rule).
Students can go back to doing what they are supposed to being doing: studying and learning. Not so wrapped up in a sport that the aforementioned gets forgotten.
They should have gotten the death penalty, permanently.
-
Ultimately, I think PSU got off easy. While I agree on some level that innocent people are being punished, that was inevitable. It was just a matter of which innocent people, and how badly they suffered. But their ire should not be directed at the NCAA. It should be directed at Sandusky, Paterno, the exec's that colluded with Paterno in the cover-up and the board of trustees. A severe punishment had to happen. To not level a severe sanction would have been to just further participate in the victimization of those boys.
-
Students can go back to doing what they are supposed to being doing: studying and learning. Not so wrapped up in a sport that the aforementioned gets forgotten.
This. In spades.
I had no idea how BIG big college football has become. 85 scholarship players -- just on a football team? I didn't know a college football team had anywhere near 85 players, let alone 85 on "scholarships." In that respect, the 20-scholarship penalty means Penn State is going to have a football team that's only the size of the entire senior class of some small colleges, rather than the size of the entire student body.
I don't pay attention to big college football, for the same reason I ignore both college (mens) basketball and professional basketball. They simply don't carry any resemblance to the way the respective sports were designed and intended to be played.
I think the penalty is appropriate. And I think the message was intended for a much wider audience than State College, PA. Allowing college football to act as the de facto minor league for the pro teams is bad enough, but for senior administrators to intentionally conceal serious criminal activity for a period of fourteen freakin' YEARS is (or was) inconceivable.
-
When you consider offense, defense, special teams, second strings/backups/etc...it adds up pretty quickly I suppose.
As to innocent kids getting a shitty deal, it sucks but it's not the NCAA's fault. It's the fault of the morons that thought the program was best served by hiding it.
Would they be better off NCAA just killed the program, temporarily or permanently? Would it be worth all that much if they tossed the entire coaching staff (or at least all the ones that matter)? Great opportunity there. If anything the ability to switch schools without penalty is the best deal the athletes are going to get out of this mess.
-
Same.
We absolutely do have a long and storied history of punishing institutions, or even destroying them.
If we didn't, there'd still be an Enron, (once it came out of receivership) just with other folks at the helm.
There would still be a Nazi party of Germany...
We fight wars with plenty of "collateral damage" in terms of "innocents" too.
Something needed to be done about all those football fan lunkheads who protested on behalf of Penn State and Paterno in this mess. So now Penn State gets to be the Cubs of college football for a few decades while they "rebuild". They got off lighter than many think they should have.
And most of us who are happy with this determination are only so because while it's not enough, it was at least more than we were expecting.
My objection is not to "punishing institutions" per se, because there are such things as evil institutions.
My objection is to punishing an institution -- made up largely of people who are not culpable -- while failing to punish those who are culpable.
Sixty million bucks? Who's paying that? The people who committed these crimes? Not likely. Who suffers when the university is stripped of its victories and banned from bowl games? The perpetrators? Well, no.
You want to punish the "institution?" I have no beef with that so long as your punishment reaches the actual perpetrators.
Everyone is dancing around and cheering this decision as though it constitutes justice.
I'd really like to see a list of the people who actually committed this atrocity, along with a list of how the punishment directly affects each of them.
I can accept a certain level of collateral damage, but the collateral damage without an actual hit on target is kinda pointless, wouldn't you think?
-
My objection is not to "punishing institutions" per se, because there are such things as evil institutions.
My objection is to punishing an institution -- made up largely of people who are not culpable -- while failing to punish those who are culpable.
Sixty million bucks? Who's paying that? The people who committed these crimes? Not likely. Who suffers when the university is stripped of its victories and banned from bowl games? The perpetrators? Well, no.
You want to punish the "institution?" I have no beef with that so long as your punishment reaches the actual perpetrators.
Everyone is dancing around and cheering this decision as though it constitutes justice.
I'd really like to see a list of the people who actually committed this atrocity, along with a list of how the punishment directly affects each of them.
I can accept a certain level of collateral damage, but the collateral damage without an actual hit on target is kinda pointless, wouldn't you think?
Can i steal this word for word for another forum?
-
I mostly agree with ArfinGreebly...lot's of valid points. However, it does send a message to every institution that crap like this will result in severe penalties to the whole institution, and that the whole institution (every/any institution) will pay a price for turning a blind eye to moral, ethical, and legal issues.
-
I mostly agree with ArfinGreebly...lot's of valid points. However, it does send a message to every institution that crap like this will result in severe penalties to the whole institution, and that the whole institution (every/any institution) will pay a price for turning a blind eye to moral, ethical, and legal issues.
I agree, but I wonder how many innocent folks will be adversely affected by the punishment.
I think it'll work. I think it sends a message.
I guess the crux of my feelings on the issue is that I simply feel bad for those who didn't do anything wrong :-S
-
Can i steal this word for word for another forum?
Sure.
If you feel it has value, by all means use it.
Attribution would be nice, but I'm not a big stickler for that.
-
Sure.
If you feel it has value, by all means use it.
Attribution would be nice, but I'm not a big stickler for that.
I'd prefer to be vague (i.e., a guy from another board I frequent) because there's a good contingent of antis on this particular board and I don't want them snooping around.
However you'd like it attributed though, let me know. It's a pretty good summation of how I feel on it.
-
I'd prefer to be vague (i.e., a guy from another board I frequent) because there's a good contingent of antis on this particular board and I don't want them snooping around.
However you'd like it attributed though, let me know. It's a pretty good summation of how I feel on it.
Nah. Don't need to draw in the trolls.
Your take is just fine.
-
It might even be the case that an abused child will lose a scholarship because of this, or that the trauma of having the whole program attacked will only make things worse for many of the victims.
Way to go - scorched earth makes us feel good, and that's what matters most ;/
-
Scorched earth? Hyperbole much? They got off light and if they had done the right thibg coulda avoided it all.
-
In my opinion, every last individual who knew about the child molesting but failed to call the police ought to be criminally prosecuted as an accessory - part of a cover-up, with possible conspiracy charges thrown in - and face serious fines and jail time. This is a matter for law enforcement, and ought to be prosecuted vigorously.
The administrators who hired & managed such people ought to be gone - fired, with no golden parachute - and banned from all other academic positions. THIS is where the NCAA should be playing; go after the people involved, and see to it that they NEVER have a position at another NCAA institution again.
Fining the institution, removing more than a decade's worth of victories, imposing additional sanctions without following the usual procedures . . . that just seems a bit "off" to me. (Hmmm - when removing the victories, does that mean that the QB's who won those games now have to update their college ball stats to show nothing but losses?)
-
It might even be the case that an abused child will lose a scholarship because of this, or that the trauma of having the whole program attacked will only make things worse for many of the victims.
Way to go - scorched earth makes us feel good, and that's what matters most ;/
I thought your first sentence was sarcastic, and I was like :lol:
Then I realized you were serious and I was like :O ;/ :facepalm:
-
My objection is not to "punishing institutions" per se, because there are such things as evil institutions.
My objection is to punishing an institution -- made up largely of people who are not culpable -- while failing to punish those who are culpable.
Sixty million bucks? Who's paying that? The people who committed these crimes? Not likely. Who suffers when the university is stripped of its victories and banned from bowl games? The perpetrators? Well, no.
You want to punish the "institution?" I have no beef with that so long as your punishment reaches the actual perpetrators.
Everyone is dancing around and cheering this decision as though it constitutes justice.
I'd really like to see a list of the people who actually committed this atrocity, along with a list of how the punishment directly affects each of them.
I can accept a certain level of collateral damage, but the collateral damage without an actual hit on target is kinda pointless, wouldn't you think?
The perps are already getting slowly put in front of the legal system. PA has been rocked by a good number of scandals relating to inappropriate conduct by our legal system, so this will be interesting.
PSU has been fostering an environment of sports trumping the legal system for a very long time. It's far from the only place. Even my podunk university tried to do the same thing. Even my HS looked the other way, and after Columbine was terrified that sports players could possibly be given retribution for their actions. Personally, I could always care less if the masses view sports as being even more important than religion. Tis their right to worship as they please. Until they believe their worship trumps the rule of law and other folks' rights.
The institution promoted the climate of absolute right of the sports programs. The institution promoted a high level of unaccountability in their sports programs. The institution certainly did not turn down the checks from the sports programs. The institution directly profited from this, everyone up and down the line knowing to STFU. Even janitors knew, and knew not to say anything because at a minimum they'd be fired.
Also, more than a couple people heard of Ray Gricar and thought best to leave some stones unturned.
-
I agree, but I wonder how many innocent folks will be adversely affected by the punishment.
I think it'll work. I think it sends a message.
I guess the crux of my feelings on the issue is that I simply feel bad for those who didn't do anything wrong :-S
There are always "innocents" affected by these punishments, but that is nothing new. I have no problem with the punishment. IMO, the school should go a bit further with the athletic program management and school management who may have known about it.
When I was a student at A&M, we got punished with scholarship reductions and no TV for a year because one rich booster in Dallas who hired athletes for summer jobs was paying them for days they didn't show up. No one at the school even knew it was going on. That didn't stop the NCAA from slapping penalties on that affected everyone.
-
I agree, but I wonder how many innocent folks will be adversely affected by the punishment.
I think it'll work. I think it sends a message.
I guess the crux of my feelings on the issue is that I simply feel bad for those who didn't do anything wrong :-S
I can feel bad for them, but that's on the school not the NCAA.
-
The perps are already getting slowly put in front of the legal system. PA has been rocked by a good number of scandals relating to inappropriate conduct by our legal system, so this will be interesting.
PSU has been fostering an environment of sports trumping the legal system for a very long time. It's far from the only place. Even my podunk university tried to do the same thing. Even my HS looked the other way, and after Columbine was terrified that sports players could possibly be given retribution for their actions. Personally, I could always care less if the masses view sports as being even more important than religion. Tis their right to worship as they please. Until they believe their worship trumps the rule of law and other folks' rights.
The institution promoted the climate of absolute right of the sports programs. The institution promoted a high level of unaccountability in their sports programs. The institution certainly did not turn down the checks from the sports programs. The institution directly profited from this, everyone up and down the line knowing to STFU. Even janitors knew, and knew not to say anything because at a minimum they'd be fired.
Also, more than a couple people heard of Ray Gricar and thought best to leave some stones unturned.
Well put Rev, and I think that holds true for a lot of other "Institutes of Higher Learning".
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/24/tom-price-penn-state-sanctions-september-11_n_1699775.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
In case anyone was thinking that I was kidding that plenty of folks believe ANY form of punishment is abhorrent and intolerable.
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/24/tom-price-penn-state-sanctions-september-11_n_1699775.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
In case anyone was thinking that I was kidding that plenty of folks believe ANY form of punishment is abhorrent and intolerable.
Sandusky's in jail and Paterno died -- what's yer problem?
Nothing to see here, move along now ...
-
But it's FOOTBALL, Rev! Don't you understand how important that is?
Yet another reason I despise sports
-
Sandusky's in jail and Paterno died -- what's yer problem?
Why are we letting Paterno off so easy?....
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/24/tom-price-penn-state-sanctions-september-11_n_1699775.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
In case anyone was thinking that I was kidding that plenty of folks believe ANY form of punishment is abhorrent and intolerable.
[Gobsmacked] Any word on when he's going to apologize to the 9/11 victims' families?
-
But it's FOOTBALL, Rev! Don't you understand how important that is?
Yet another reason I despise sports fandom.
I like sports plenty. It is the yahoos in the bleachers that make me wanna knock heads.
-
It's not what they have coming, but it's a start.
-
[Gobsmacked] Any word on when he's going to apologize to the 9/11 victims' families?
He isn't. And his words may have been considered impolitic by other PSU fans, but not the sentiment. FB is lighting up with "You can't change history!", "WE ARE PENN STATE", etc etc.
I have always loathed sports fandom. Might you, I say this being fond of MMA. But hell would freeze over before I support a sports program over an entity that actively assisted a pedophile.
-
I was amazed at some of the twitter reactions posted here:
Some NSFW language:
http://deadspin.com/5928385/
But, as other have stated, football is a religion for many.
-
He isn't. And his words may have been considered impolitic by other PSU fans, but not the sentiment. FB is lighting up with "You can't change history!", "WE ARE PENN STATE", etc etc.
I have always loathed sports fandom. Might you, I say this being fond of MMA. But hell would freeze over before I support a sports program over an entity that actively assisted a pedophile.
Their own reactions prove why the institution had to be "punished" too.
-
AJ hit the nail on the head.
And honestly, I think the death penalty on the program SHOULD have been used
-
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/25/us/pennsylvania-penn-state-insurer/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn
An interesting but not unexpected development in my area of risk management. This is not unusual, and this has happened most frequently in recent years in the clergy sex abuse cases. It all has to do with the wording of the insurance policies that were in effect when the acts occurred. Eventually, a court will decide if the insurers are on the hook or not based on an interpretation of the policy language.
Because of these sort of cases, the commercial insurance policies in recent years generally have specific exclusions that clearly state that there is no insurance coverage for these cases. It is similar to your homeowners' insurance policy that now have an exclusion for sexual abuse, intended or not.
So if there is no insurance coverage, the University and ultimately the tax payers of the state (since this is a state school if I recall correctly) will be paying legal fees, costs, settlements and awards out of the University budget. If the Court finds under the policy language that there is a duty to defend but not indemnify (unlikely), then the insurance company would have to pay the costs of defense but not any verdicts or settlements. In most cases, courts are reluctant to have insurers pay for criminal activity such as sexual abuse, since this is against public policy and the insurance is supposed to cover accidental exposures, not deliberate or criminal acts by the insured.
-
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/25/us/pennsylvania-penn-state-insurer/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn
An interesting but not unexpected development in my area of risk management. This is not unusual, and this has happened most frequently in recent years in the clergy sex abuse cases. It all has to do with the wording of the insurance policies that were in effect when the acts occurred. Eventually, a court will decide if the insurers are on the hook or not based on an interpretation of the policy language.
Because of these sort of cases, the commercial insurance policies in recent years generally have specific exclusions that clearly state that there is no insurance coverage for these cases. It is similar to your homeowners' insurance policy that now have an exclusion for sexual abuse, intended or not.
So if there is no insurance coverage, the University and ultimately the tax payers of the state (since this is a state school if I recall correctly) will be paying legal fees, costs, settlements and awards out of the University budget. If the Court finds under the policy language that there is a duty to defend but not indemnify (unlikely), then the insurance company would have to pay the costs of defense but not any verdicts or settlements. In most cases, courts are reluctant to have insurers pay for criminal activity such as sexual abuse, since this is against public policy and the insurance is supposed to cover accidental exposures, not deliberate or criminal acts by the insured.
Short answer, no, it is not a state school.
Long answer, yes and no. It's a state school when it is convenient and it is not a state school when it is inconvenient. It's a "state-related" university, and a land grant university. It's part of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education, gets state funding but is independent. OTOH, it has 32 board members. Governor, six governor appointees, three department Secretaries means the State has 10 board members. Rest are elected by alumni or agriculture societies. It's intentionally convoluted.
The PA Legislature is making it clear that PSU had better not be charging the state for their fines. Technically, PA Legislature cannot demand to see PSU's financial and budget information. OTOH, they can stop the checks. If PSU withholds information or spends state money, they will see those checks stop coming until information is provided or the state is reimbursed. I do wonder who put that to folks in the State government.
-
I was amazed at some of the twitter reactions posted here:
Some NSFW language:
http://deadspin.com/5928385/
But, as other have stated, football is a religion for many.
I have now changed my position on border enforcement. I want those people deported first - preferably beyond atmo.
-
^^^ Geez Louise on roller skates! And do these people drive on our highways, serve on our juries, and vote? Oh yeah, they do. :facepalm:
-
I was amazed at some of the twitter reactions posted here:
Some NSFW language:
http://deadspin.com/5928385/
But, as other have stated, football is a religion for many.
Good golly Miss Molly. What an erudite bunch they aren't.
Perhaps Penn State should eschew being a pro football farm team for awhile and get back to teaching readin', writin' and 'rithmatic.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.googlepixel.com%2Fimages%2Fderpshirt.png&hash=acb5943e902b7568ebac2e1160e0e20360f59784)