[Husker] Just an idea for Penn State

[David Strong]

Mike...all very valid points, but addressable.  First off, when you say "announcing 2013 shutdown now" are you thinking that PS would be allowed to play in 2012 but shut down now for 2013?  I really doubt thats going to happen. What a nightmare '12 would be. No, I think if some sort of DP is coming, whether NCAA or self-inflicted, it will come in the next month and will be for the 2012 season (at least). It's a really big IF of course, far more likely the football program will be sanctioned but allowed to continue. For certain some school will to a hit to the wallet. These can be mitigated. That would be where Delaney gets heavily involved. But i disagree that forfeits would not work, they will have to because this is going to happen this year or not at all. Yep, some team may have 12-0 record and will only have played 11games. The BCS, which is still in place this year, will just have to deal with it. The BCS has dealt with worse.

Dave

On Jul 20, 2012, at 1:21 PM, Mike Jaixen <mikejaixen at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Shutting down Penn State football for the 2012 season has lasting effects across college football, including here in Nebraska.  Nebraska has likely sold about 81,000 tickets (assuming PSU's allotment is already sold) for this game, so a forfeit does have a severe impact on Nebraska...and 4 other schools, in all likelihood.  Probably a $4-$5 million hit to the athletic department, and probably another $1 million to the Lincoln economy. And could the B1G championship game still be played if two of the six East divisions (and the two of the bigger names, I might add) aren't available to play?
> 
> Announcing a 2013 shutdown now would allow the B1G to adjust the schedule and mitigate the situation...though would that force a cessation of the Big Ten championship game as well?  
> 
> Forfeits simply won't work in today's poll-driven society.  For sake of argument, what if Nebraska wins their other 11 games.  Sure, they'd be 12-0...but everyone would report it as 12*-0.  Even if they are 8-3 in the other games, that would be reported as 9*-3.
> 
> As a matter of disclosure, I was in favor of cancelling the 2011 game, but that was more because I doubted the game could have been played at that time with all of the uproar and in the wake of the campus reaction.
>  
> Mike Jaixen
> http://huskermike.blogspot.com
> http://www.cornnation.com
> 
> From: David Strong <gobigredlist at gmail.com>
> To: husker at tssi.com 
> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 11:15 AM
> Subject: [Husker] Just an idea for Penn State
> 
> Mark Emmert has made it pretty clear the NCAA is going to bring the hammer
> to Penn State.  Sanctions will be heavy, if not the death penalty.  See
> below:  (this is called a reference link so that others can read the
> article for themselves.  If anyone ever asks you for one, don't be bothered
> by it...it's very common practice and not personal.)
> 
> http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/53285/ncaa-president-mulling-psu-penalties
> 
> What if the PS board of trustees made the decision on their own to put the
> football program in abeyance for a year?  There may be some benefits from
> doing this:
> 
> 1. They may be able to head off the NCAA.  If you do it yourself, rather
> than have the NCAA do it to you, you restore some good will to the
> University, and you have more control of the phase-out and phase-in.
> 2. They may be able to head off more lingering penalties from the NCAA.
> You can claim that you have given yourself the ultimate penalty and
> therefore no need to pile on with loss of scholies, TV, and post-season.
> 3. If they can pull it off for just one year, they *may* be able to keep
> the staff and processes going without too much interruption.
> 4. After the year, you "re-launch" a new and improved football program.
> New safeguards, standards, culture. Tweak the unis a little bit to show a
> difference between the old way of doing things and the new.
> 5. Big 10 can treat all PS games as forfeits and put a win in in the column
> of everyone who played them. Keeps it very easy to manage for one year.  Of
> course, may be some push back from those schools w/o PS on the schedule,
> but you could probably get them in line for the sake of the conference.
> 
> Some keys:
> 1. Try to get the NCAA to buy-in to letting all players who stay keep the
> year of eligibility
> 2. Allow the school to continue to recruit during the off year.
> 
> I'm sure there are a ton of holes in this that I haven't thought of, but on
> a lot of levels it could work.  I think a lot of people want to see the
> Penn State program punished, but not crippled for many years.  This would
> hurt no doubt, but maybe not as bad as other longer term penalties or a
> NCAA imposed dp.
> 
> Dave
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
> 
>