(09-10-2013 05:25 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  Last time I'll say this to avoid repeating myself --- but there's an "appeal mechanism" of sorts explicitly stated right in the consent decree. The line "This consent decree may be modified or clarified at any time by mutual written consent of both parties."

That's not an appeal mechanism. That's boilerplate. Any written legal agreement can be modified by written agreement of the parties. The existence of that clause simply precludes one party from arguing there is an oral modification.

(09-10-2013 06:00 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I just think that everyone around here has lost sight of the picture here - especially a lot of sports fans, including everyone at Penn State...

There were numerous KIDS, whose lives were ruined by a homosexual pedophile that Penn State gave free reign on campus for decades. These kids lives were forever warped, and their potential diminished, if not completely snuffed out. There's no way you can make up for that, or erase that memory from those kid's heads. You can't reduce their mental problems. So why should Penn State fans have their problems eased...

I have little sympathy for Penn State, or Penn State fans. How long these activities were going on is still open to question too, since I seriously doubt that everyone has come forward. But what sticks out to me is that when this came to light, everyone in State College, PA jumped up to defend JoePa and company, while the kids who were molested by a Penn State employee were harassed, in the hope that they'd shut up and go away. Nobody up there thought about the kids that were molested. All they considered was the damage to the football program, which they've been trying to mitigate ever since. There were a couple of lawsuits, and now this...

IMO any discussion of easing up on Penn State is premature. They should have to suffer as long as the youngest person who was molested on the campus lives. Since that stands no chance of happening, they need to stick with the penalties they accepted. Trying to get out of a negotiated settlement shows a distinct lack of character. Although at Penn State that's nothing new...

I have never heard of the kids being harassed (other than by Sandusky).

I have no problem with the idea of parole or "time off for good behavior" but I think it was way too soon to even bring the topic up. Maybe, just MAYBE, some of the sanctions can be reduced the last year or two if Penn State becomes a model program. Perhaps give them back 5 scholarships each of the last two years, etc. But I would never advocate simply dropping them all, particularly the bowl ban and the ineligibility for the B1G championship.

(09-10-2013 05:30 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 05:21 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 04:28 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 04:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 04:10 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  You may disagree with Wojo --- but disagreeing by saying you thought the penalties should have been different isn't a valid argument.


The debate as to what the penalties should be ended on 23-July-2012. That has long been decided.


The debate now is whether there should be a "parole hearing", and if so, whether "parole" should be given.


To disagree, you need to argue either (1) PSU shouldn't be eligible for "parole", or (2) PSU should be eligible, but doesn't deserve it as of the moment.

You seem to be making distinctions without a difference: If a criminal is sentenced to 5 years and is eligible for a parole hearing after 3 years, and I think they should have originally been sentenced to 10 years without parole, then obviously I think they should be denied parole at that 3 year hearing.

Any parole board member who thinks that way is simply not doing his job.

By the time a criminal reaches his parole hearing, he should be judged based on the sentence he actually received, not based on what sentence some individual thinks he should have been received.

Again, that time is passed, that debate is over.

Just be glad I'm not in charge of the Dept. of Education. I'd have had people crawling all over the campus in no time flat, and at the first hint of any impropriety on the part of Penn State their accreditation would have been revoked immediately, and everyone in State College, PA would have been looking for work or another school to attend...

The school failed to protect children under their care for over 2 decades. A couple of years of contrition won't change that, or improve those kids lives. Their lives have been forever warped by a pervert that Penn State allowed to roam on campus for decades. IMO the school should be demolished, and the ground salted so that nothing ever grows there again - especially perverts or their ideas...

Obviously, you are a fan of the "Old Testament God", ha ha.

All vengeance, no belief in ANY sense of rehabilitation or redemption for anybody associated in anyway with Penn State University.

Fair enough. No chance of me changing your mind, so I'll stop trying.

How can a fan base that still claims its football program shouldn't have been penalized be redeemed? If what happened there doesn't reflect a complete lack of institutional control, then SMU in the 80's was a boy scout jamboree.

(09-10-2013 07:25 PM)Cardinals Wrote:  How can a fan base that still claims its football program shouldn't have been penalized be redeemed? If what happened there doesn't reflect a complete lack of institutional control, then SMU in the 80's was a boy scout jamboree.

Penalties shouldn't be fueled by the goal of "correcting fan base behavior." As they shouldn't be --- because that is impossible.


I live in Kentucky, and you are obviously a Cardinals fan, so we both get to witness Big Blue Nation. We both know a certain percentage of their fans: The penalties were undeserved, Eddie Sutton was framed, it's Chris Mills' father's fault, et cetera et cetera et cetera.


Replace Kentucky with some other school once penalized, you'll get the same thing.


If your goal is every Penn State fan accepting the penalties, well, that's unreachable.


No doubt there's a significant percentage of our fans who have a "martyr complex" and refuse to admit any fault by Penn State, but I honestly don't think that percentage is any higher than what I've seen with Ohio State (recent football Probation) fans or fans of any other once penalized school.

One thing that I think should be looked at is the scholarship restrictions. PSU's overall limit of 65 officially starts next season, but since they are at 65 already this season, maybe they can start the clock on that punishment early.

(09-10-2013 07:12 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 06:00 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I just think that everyone around here has lost sight of the picture here - especially a lot of sports fans, including everyone at Penn State...

There were numerous KIDS, whose lives were ruined by a homosexual pedophile that Penn State gave free reign on campus for decades. These kids lives were forever warped, and their potential diminished, if not completely snuffed out. There's no way you can make up for that, or erase that memory from those kid's heads. You can't reduce their mental problems. So why should Penn State fans have their problems eased...

I have little sympathy for Penn State, or Penn State fans. How long these activities were going on is still open to question too, since I seriously doubt that everyone has come forward. But what sticks out to me is that when this came to light, everyone in State College, PA jumped up to defend JoePa and company, while the kids who were molested by a Penn State employee were harassed, in the hope that they'd shut up and go away. Nobody up there thought about the kids that were molested. All they considered was the damage to the football program, which they've been trying to mitigate ever since. There were a couple of lawsuits, and now this...

IMO any discussion of easing up on Penn State is premature. They should have to suffer as long as the youngest person who was molested on the campus lives. Since that stands no chance of happening, they need to stick with the penalties they accepted. Trying to get out of a negotiated settlement shows a distinct lack of character. Although at Penn State that's nothing new...

I have never heard of the kids being harassed (other than by Sandusky).

http://abcnews.go.com/US/victim-penn-sta...d=14960575

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/22...08979.html


Only scratches the surface. The problems there run very deep.

They needed to have the program shut down, for the good of the university, and it is a shame the cult continues on, unabated.

(09-10-2013 09:41 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 07:12 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 06:00 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I just think that everyone around here has lost sight of the picture here - especially a lot of sports fans, including everyone at Penn State...

There were numerous KIDS, whose lives were ruined by a homosexual pedophile that Penn State gave free reign on campus for decades. These kids lives were forever warped, and their potential diminished, if not completely snuffed out. There's no way you can make up for that, or erase that memory from those kid's heads. You can't reduce their mental problems. So why should Penn State fans have their problems eased...

I have little sympathy for Penn State, or Penn State fans. How long these activities were going on is still open to question too, since I seriously doubt that everyone has come forward. But what sticks out to me is that when this came to light, everyone in State College, PA jumped up to defend JoePa and company, while the kids who were molested by a Penn State employee were harassed, in the hope that they'd shut up and go away. Nobody up there thought about the kids that were molested. All they considered was the damage to the football program, which they've been trying to mitigate ever since. There were a couple of lawsuits, and now this...

IMO any discussion of easing up on Penn State is premature. They should have to suffer as long as the youngest person who was molested on the campus lives. Since that stands no chance of happening, they need to stick with the penalties they accepted. Trying to get out of a negotiated settlement shows a distinct lack of character. Although at Penn State that's nothing new...

I have never heard of the kids being harassed (other than by Sandusky).

http://abcnews.go.com/US/victim-penn-sta...d=14960575

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/22...08979.html


Only scratches the surface. The problems there run very deep.

They needed to have the program shut down, for the good of the university, and it is a shame the cult continues on, unabated.

Disturbing, but your first example has nothing to do with Sandusky. And the person claiming the abuse was ignored, not harassed. The second has to do with a Sandusky victim at a high school and the high school's reaction. Bitcruncher, as I read him, implied that Penn St. harassed Sandusky's victims once their claims became public. I still haven't seen anything related to that.

What happened at Penn State was 10x worse than what happened at SMU in the 1980's. And it doesn't appear the Penn State penalties are anywhere near as severe as the death penalty was for SMU.

Put this together with the situations at Miami & UNC ... the NCAA is a joke.

(09-10-2013 10:35 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  What happened at Penn State was 10x worse than what happened at SMU in the 1980's. And it doesn't appear the Penn State penalties are anywhere near as severe as the death penalty was for SMU.

Put this together with the situations at Miami & UNC ... the NCAA is a joke.

The death penalty penalizes everyone in the conference and on the school's schedule. That's why they are reluctant to use it. It would have harmed everyone in the Big 10 just as SMU's death penalty hastened the end of the SWC.

(09-10-2013 09:13 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  One thing that I think should be looked at is the scholarship restrictions. PSU's overall limit of 65 officially starts next season, but since they are at 65 already this season, maybe they can start the clock on that punishment early.

Penn State is actually at 67 this year --- there was a lot of talk in the spring that PSU would be at 65 this season, but there was basically no attrition from April-onwards.

That 67 number does count 2 one-time scholarship athletes who have quit the team entirely but are remaining at Penn State to complete their academic degree. (such was their right via the consent decree).

Then, right before the Syracuse game, scholarships were given to 5 one-time walk-ons, thus pushing the total to 72.

The Freeh Report is like Sherman's March to the Sea. If the objective was to get some sense of accountability and explanation from the University, it served its purpose. Just don't question the methods. And the University freed itself from the perceived cabal. How it stands the test of time (both perception or legally), well, we'll see.

The only thing the NCAA should budge on is the transfer thing. It's the least they could do. If they aren't going to ease up on the bans or scholarship thing, then let them walk. O'Brien's probably gone after this season anyway, and the real "pain" begins next season.

It doesn't help the NCAA any when one of their own makes a statement like "we'd do things differently." It makes them look as weak were they to completely back down and grant PSU "parole." When they crap the bed on virtually every other matter, including the scope of this one, they should have run on the mantra of "talk is cheap" with the subtitle "less is more."

(09-10-2013 07:12 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-10-2013 06:00 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I just think that everyone around here has lost sight of the picture here - especially a lot of sports fans, including everyone at Penn State...

There were numerous KIDS, whose lives were ruined by a homosexual pedophile that Penn State gave free reign on campus for decades. These kids lives were forever warped, and their potential diminished, if not completely snuffed out. There's no way you can make up for that, or erase that memory from those kid's heads. You can't reduce their mental problems. So why should Penn State fans have their problems eased...

I have little sympathy for Penn State, or Penn State fans. How long these activities were going on is still open to question too, since I seriously doubt that everyone has come forward. But what sticks out to me is that when this came to light, everyone in State College, PA jumped up to defend JoePa and company, while the kids who were molested by a Penn State employee were harassed, in the hope that they'd shut up and go away. Nobody up there thought about the kids that were molested. All they considered was the damage to the football program, which they've been trying to mitigate ever since. There were a couple of lawsuits, and now this...

IMO any discussion of easing up on Penn State is premature. They should have to suffer as long as the youngest person who was molested on the campus lives. Since that stands no chance of happening, they need to stick with the penalties they accepted. Trying to get out of a negotiated settlement shows a distinct lack of character. Although at Penn State that's nothing new...

I have never heard of the kids being harassed (other than by Sandusky).

Very few stories about the abuse the accusers took from Penn State fans made it into the news. That doesn't mean it didn't happen...

http://larrybrownsports.com/college-foot...hool/99282

(09-10-2013 10:35 PM)bullet Wrote:  Bitcruncher, as I read him, implied that Penn St. harassed Sandusky's victims once their claims became public. I still haven't seen anything related to that.

It was Penn State fans I was talking about. I guess you missed that when reading my post. The word fans was there, right after the words Penn State...