[Husker] Penn State's Penalties

[Scott Stewart]

Sorry for reposting to my post, but

The part of the penalty I like the best is the forfeiture of games and what
that does to JoPa's Legacy and record book. That one cut straight to the
bone and wounded them terribly. I have some PSU alum friends and how this
reflects on JoPa is really a sore subject.

Scott
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Scott Stewart <fourtwophd at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think the next "lack of institutional control" is already in the
> pipeline. I don't recall that Miami's penalty has been handed down for 8+
> years of infractions (money, drugs, girls, and abortions).
>
> This was one of my concerns about the NCAA action on PSU. I think they
> chose the wrong stage to display their muscle. On the other hand, nobody is
> going to appeal or argue with them right now. So maybe it was the right
> place.
>
> I really don't mind PSU getting the boot, they deserved every bit of what
> they get. However, their infractions were not really related to putting
> players on the field. So now what kind of sanctions do they need to give
> Miami? As someone said in an earlier post, "School X's penalty
> is equivalent to raping three children." I think this is a very dangerous
> road to go down for them if they want to be seen as relevant.
>
> Also, I see this as essentially taking the "Death Penalty" off the table.
> Because if you decide to give out a penalty for child abuse and don't use
> it...What kind of infraction deserves it? Paying a player....Really?
> (Personally, I think the "death penalty" could be appropriate for JS...but
> not figuratively).
>
> I don't know, I have a lot of mixed feelings about it.
>
> Scott
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Nick Chevance <nickchevance at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> > On the other hand, the NCAA has now set some dangerous precedents.
>>  Hopefully there will never
>> > be another case this bad, but precedents, once set, tend to be used
>> again.  Call it the law of
>> > unintended consequences, if you will.
>> > --
>> > Mike Nolan
>>
>> I agree, though remember one of the issues the NCAA is addressing here
>> is their perceived lack of strong action in recent cases.  By
>> comparison, it was pretty safe for the NCAA to issue these sanctions
>> against PSU, because few seem to want to argue them now.  The
>> situation is bad, and the University is loathed to seem anything but
>> humbled by it.
>>
>> My concern is that I think some of the more recent issues (USC and
>> OSU) may have called for more than what the school's got, but the NCAA
>> failed to dish out greater punishment for fear of threatening the
>> stability of these time-honored institutions (they all remember what
>> happened to SMU).  They did what they are now saying they can't do,
>> caved to the king that is football.  Now they're saying, the king is
>> dead.  Or severely crippled, at least.  I'm hoping that when the next
>> case of  "lack of institutional control" pops up, they nail them good.
>>  As I think they should have been doing all along.  Anyone see any
>> evidence that USC or OSU have been hurt by their sanctions?  I thought
>> that was the point.
>>
>> Nick
>> --
>> “I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said,
>> but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I
>> meant.”
>> Robert McCloskey, State Department spokesman
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> husker site list
>> husker at tssi.com
>> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>>
>
>