http://chronicle.com/blogs/players/jim-d...ches/30771

Excerpts:

Big Ten officials are still in the early stages of debating how to handle fallout from the scandal. Among other ideas, the league’s presidents and chancellors could consider removing Penn State from the conference, one Big Ten leader told The Chronicle.

The Big Ten Conference Handbook, which governs the league’s operations, does not contain language addressing a situation as egregious as what happened at Penn State.

But the conference’s bylaws prescribe potentially severe penalties for member institutions that break lesser rules. Any Big Ten university that employs or retains workers who intentionally falsify or deliberately fail to provide complete and accurate information during an investigation may be required to “show cause why its membership in the conference should not be suspended or terminated,” the Big Ten’s 2011-12 handbook says.

The Big Ten’s 12-member Council of Presidents and Chancellors must approve any decision to suspend, expel, or place on probation any member of the conference. According to the conference handbook, expulsion requires a vote of not less than 60 percent of the full council (a Big Ten spokesman said that figure is actually 70 percent, or eight members, which will be reflected in the 2012-13 handbook).

The Big Ten does not have a contingency scheduling plan should Penn State’s football team be banned from playing this or any season, a senior league official told The Chronicle. But fallout from the scandal has many Big Ten leaders on edge.

“This whole situation is unprecedented,” said Sally Mason, president of the University of Iowa and chair of the Council of Presidents and Chancellors. “It’s sports-related, but there were very significant moral, legal, and institutional failures.”

She and her colleagues plan to discuss those problems in coming weeks, but she has no early sign of what they may decide. “Until all of our presidents and chancellors sit down and talk in depth,” she said, “I have no idea of what the outcome is likely to be, and I wouldn’t want to predict.”


to me i would rather they give them the death penalty. and let the players transfer anywhere they want without sitting out. and the school should have to pay their tuition/R&B for the year.

There's one for the WAC.

The players already have the luxury to transfer anywhere without sitting out.

Penn State can't receive the death penalty because the NCAA rules for applying the penalty do not cover this kind of situation.

Wow, is it really possible for Penn State to be FORCED into temporary independence for a few years? That would be...wow.

(07-23-2012 05:39 PM)TampaKnight Wrote:  Wow, is it really possible for Penn State to be FORCED into temporary independence for a few years? That would be...appropriate.

Fify

Will never happen. Penn State is like the 2nd or 3rd most profitable athletics program in the country and at the end of the day, these decisions are all made with the economic impact in mind.

That is why the death penalty was never really on the table, not because the NCAA couldn't do it because "NCAA rules didn't apply" they wouldn't have levied the death penalty because of the economic repercussions to the Big Ten, the city of Happy Valley, and every other sport at Penn State which is funded largely by the profits of football. There would be a lot of 100% innocent victims if Penn State were to have received the death penalty i.e. other student athletes, local business owners, other members of the Big Ten. I'm sure some will respond what about the victims of Sandusky, were they not 100% innocent? yes of course they were, but you still have to ask yourself who you're actually punishing with the death penalty and is it really appropriate to create more innocent victims? The death penalty was not a real option and likely never will be again strictly because of the economic fall out.

(07-24-2012 01:09 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  Will never happen. Penn State is like the 2nd or 3rd most profitable athletics program in the country and at the end of the day, these decisions are all made with the economic impact in mind.

That is why the death penalty was never really on the table, not because the NCAA couldn't do it because "NCAA rules didn't apply" they wouldn't have levied the death penalty because of the economic repercussions to the Big Ten, the city of Happy Valley, and every other sport at Penn State which is funded largely by the profits of football. There would be a lot of 100% innocent victims if Penn State were to have received the death penalty i.e. other student athletes, local business owners, other members of the Big Ten. I'm sure some will respond what about the victims of Sandusky, were they not 100% innocent? yes of course they were, but you still have to ask yourself who you're actually punishing with the death penalty and is it really appropriate to create more innocent victims? The death penalty was not a real option and likely never will be again strictly because of the economic fall out.

Well said. The death penalty or removing Penn State from the Big Ten would have harmed a lot more people than needed and I don't think the victims really want to see that happen either. PSU is one of the few that actually makes a profit, and the football program supports the 30 other varsity sports, all their scholarships, all their coaches, their budgets, etc...the athletic department is entirely self supporting. To take football away completely for any length of time would cut scholarships or programs from the 700 other student-athletes...not necessary or needed.

For example....Holmes just opened fire in a movie theatre in Colorado...should the theatre be closed? Is it the owners fault? Should he be sued? No, No, and No. Punishing more innocent people is not the answer. You take football away and quite a few hard working Americans lose their jobs in State College (the actual town is State College, not Happy Valley, Happy Valley can't be found on a map, it is just a nickname given to the State College area).

(07-23-2012 05:27 PM)SOT1977 Wrote:  The players already have the luxury to transfer anywhere without sitting out.

Penn State can't receive the death penalty because the NCAA rules for applying the penalty do not cover this kind of situation.

this post was made before sanctions were announced....

Quote:For example....Holmes just opened fire in a movie theatre in Colorado...should the theatre be closed? Is it the owners fault? Should he be sued? No, No, and No.

This is a poor example. PSU isn't being punished because child rape happened at their school, they're being punished because they covered it up.

It would be more like the theater taking the bodies and dumping them in a ditch after the shooting and bleaching out the blood so no one thought the theater was unsafe.

(07-27-2012 08:57 AM)Tiguar Wrote:  

Quote:For example....Holmes just opened fire in a movie theatre in Colorado...should the theatre be closed? Is it the owners fault? Should he be sued? No, No, and No.

This is a poor example. PSU isn't being punished because child rape happened at their school, they're being punished because they covered it up.

It would be more like the theater taking the bodies and dumping them in a ditch after the shooting and bleaching out the blood so no one thought the theater was unsafe.

I think you make a valid counterpoint, but I'll take one step further because I don't think your point is completely well made either, if Penn State had received the death penalty for what they did, it would be more like if the movie theater in question had attempted to cover up the attack as you said but it was a decision made by the longstanding general manager of that particular theater and in response the theater was closed permanently and not allowed to be reopened even with a whole new staff and if surrounding restaurants and retail stores who had nothing to do with the shooting were going to see a significant drop in revenue due to decreased foot traffic to the complex and if that theater's profits were so great that it helped subsidize other smaller theaters in the same company that would take a significant hit without the profits generated by that big theater and the people in the surrounding area that were "fans" of the movie theater were no longer allowed to see their favorite movies at their favorite movie theater.

The general manager of the theater should absolutely be punished, but is it really fair to all the innocent victims who depend on that theater in one way or another to close the theater permanently?

Again, I think it all boils down to taking a good long hard look at who is actually being punished by the death penalty. Pretty much everyone who ever had anything to do with the cover up has been fired and is facing legal action, the death penalty would be punishing an innumerable amount of people and businesses who had nothing to do with the the heinous crimes or the subsequent cover up.

Big10 loses PSU, invites WVU, Big East invites ECU, CUSA replaces with MTSU, SunBelt adds App State.

Yeah mt, but then it gets into subjectivity and philosophical stuff. Imo, there is a culture at psu that needs addressing and i think the ncaa got it right this time.

(07-27-2012 11:20 AM)Tiguar Wrote:  Yeah mt, but then it gets into subjectivity and philosophical stuff. Imo, there is a culture at psu that needs addressing and i think the ncaa got it right this time.

Oh, I never once suggested or implied that the NCAA got this wrong, I think they knocked it out of the park. My position is that the death penalty would be an unjust punishment for a ton of people.

Sandusky Says NCAA Ruling "Unjust": http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/f...56656094/1