Anybody besides me think Emert is secretly happy he's allowed to Levy something like this to show how much of a badass he is?
I'm a bit biased here. I was just shocked to see PSU fans react to this whole situation and their weird take on Paterno the whole time. I would like to see the hammer - a big hammer - just to see their reaction. The rallying around Paterno because there was no way he could have known, etc. etc. Bull. I know - that's a crappy reason to want to see this kind of precedent set.
Penn St. people have had a weird cult around Paterno for decades, it was/is truly creepy. So, I'm not surprised he is still venerated by his followers in Happy Valley.
Big difference between a coach getting fired when it comes to light, and covering up. No? Is that not "principled" enough?
Do we know that the NCAA didn't visit Happy Valley about this and that they weren't lied to about it?
There is a big difference, but it is irrelevant here because neither situation falls under the purview of the NCAA. So, if the NCAA gets involved in the PSU situation, it isn't doing so in accordance with any rules or precedent from the agency itself...it is essentially just saying: bad stuff went on there, so we're getting involved. My point is that, going forward, nobody is going to have any idea what constitutes "bad stuff". So there is no principled approach to be taken. There are no distinctions to be drawn. It could be that KidB is on the tennis team, and he gives a girl the ole dirty sanchez. And it turns out that Dirty Sanchez giving is illegal in Tennessee, will the NCAA consider the giving of a dirty sanchez "unethical conduct" and step in? They might. Who knows. And as ridiculous as that example is, it is appropriate in that it illustrates that the NCAA is just making this up as it goes along. They aren't in accordance with anything other than public outrage at rhythmic slapping in the showers.
They've overstepped boundaries before, but in a different way. They were too harsh on USC, but there was no question USC was doing the type of stuff that the NCAA was created to control. There was at least a cognizable underlying basis for what they did.
Portion of article from CNN.com Note that it sounds like players may be able to walk from the bolded part...
I put this in another place, but I'll put it here too (plus add a little): Maybe this isn't the thread for this, but I haven't commented on it elsewhere: I have mixed feelings about this, obviously the program needs to be punished severely somehow but it seems like most of the things they're going to do (like schollys and bowl bans) will mainly hit the current team too hard. These guys didn't have anything to do with it all. I'm really more in line with TarVolon's post. The revenue is where they need to pay the price. Forfeit their TV revenue and their share of the B10's bowl revenue and donate their gate money or something. Just seems like schollys and bowl bans are more in line with more traditional violations of NCAA rules. But maybe there's just no way to avoid the collateral damage. Even if they allow players to walk (which I think that has to happen), it's still unfortunate for kids who wanted to go there, who've spent 2 or 3 years there, it's probably not all that easy for some of them to move. It's just a bad situation.
Per Charles Robinson - Sources: NCAA president to hit Penn State with 'staggering' penalties from Sandusky scandal - Yahoo! Sports