Newcastle wrote:I really dont see how they cant give the football program a serious death penalty. Whether through NCAA, Penn. lawmakers, or the University. I mean not just a death penalty of 3-5 years. Something big, something that will stick in the collective conscious of not only the locals but nationwide. I'm talking in the range of 15-20 years. A stark reminder that child abuse WILL NEVER be tolerated. The ban has to be generational in scope.
So that next time someone, somewhere in this country comes across a situation like this will make the right choice. So that they wont think they can hide it. Hopefully they will make the right choice because it is the right choice but at least one of the arguments running in their mind will at least be: "if i dont do the right thing, my University will have their program nuked to the ground."
What will that do for anything that has already been covered up, though? What will be the incentive to come forward if there is something out there? You know your program will be crushed if you do it, so you might as well try to continue the cover-up.
The bigger concern, of course, if preventing any new instances of something like this happening. It's likely to be rare, but not impossible given what we've seen here (and to a much lesser extent, at Syracuse). Will the death penalty, or threat of a death penalty, be any more persuasive than the court of public opinion, the civil court judgments that are likely forthcoming, and the criminal court prosecutions that seem inevitable at this point? You have to weigh the increased incentive to those actors in power from the death penalty (which I would argue is not that great) against the potential damage that this does to those who had no part in the wrongdoing, including people who rely on the PSU football program for their livelihood, either directly or indirectly. I'm not sure that weighs in favor of the death penalty.
LordMortis wrote:I'm curious, if Penn State doesn't give the program the death penalty and the NCAA doesn't give the program the death penalty, do other teams have the right to shun Penn State? To simply say "We won't play them." I'm not saying they should or shouldn't. (though I believe PSU itself would best be served PR wise to shut the program down)
I doubt the Big Ten schools could shun them, although non-conference schools could always not schedule them. Not sure how it would work for postseason - they're probably contractually bound to play, and would pay a steep price for breaking those contracts.
hepcat wrote:I wonder how Paterno's family is going to respond to the Freeh report. They've been quiet since it was released...and this was after a flurry of interviews in which they essentially kept saying the report would exonerate him.
I also wonder what kind of rallies and outbursts we'll see from the hardcore Paterno supporters who've been behind him every step of the way.
They have issued a preliminary statement
on the report.
RLMullen wrote:As much as I want to say that this case has nothing to do with football, as much as I want to focus on the crimes and criminals that are responsible, at the end of the day this case is about college football. It is about the desire for success in college football being so great as to allow a coach to become more powerful than the very people whose job it is to run the university. It is about the millions* of people who so want to have the title, whatever the title and trophy will be this year. It's about the millions who want to cheer for something that they are a part of, and something that is a part of them. It is about these people bestowing god-like qualities on the people who can deliver the title. It is about those who reach the heights of god-hood abusing the power that they are given.
Penn St. alumni and fans are responsible for giving Paterno the adoration and power that he had. As such they should bear some of the brunt of his punishment. Their punishment should be the loss of that which they hold most dear -- the football program and a chance at the title. This is a harsh statement, and one that would have me in fear of my own safety in some parts of the country.
I'm going to double-down. I think that all of us who love college football share a bit of the same responsibility as the Penn St. fans and alums. The fans of Penn St. wouldn't care so much about their college football team if the rest of us didn't care so much about college football. All of us who like college football elevate the sport and its organizations to a pedestal that we are willing to turn a blind eye to the behavior of its participants so long as we can all collectively chase the title. We overlook cheating, drug use, petty and not so petty crime by players and coaches. We accept that scholarships are given to people who haven't earned their way into a given school, and in some cases shouldn't be anywhere near a college campus. When these people are caught, we get caught up in the charade that is an NCAA investigation. This is the environment that creates the "Joe Paternos".
In my view the only real punishment that will do any good is to give college football, all of college football, the death penalty for about five to ten years. Maybe all of us can then put this sport back in its rightful place... as a fucking sport, and nothing but a sport!
* I'm guessing that a school as large as Penn St. has alumni and fans numbering in the millions.
This is more than a little bit overblown, IMO. I've never been a fan of punishing a large group for the transgressions of a few, and this is what it amounts to. The overwhelming majority of college football fans are sickened by what has happened, and the good that can come of this is that we're likely to see fewer "Joe Paternos" with the same type of clout over an entire institution. Combine that with what fell out at Ohio State (where president Gordon Gee stupidly joked that he wouldn't fire Jim Tressel - he only hoped Tressel wouldn't fire him), and there is going to be much less tolerance for coaches as de facto deans of universities.
We had subs. It was crazy