In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 369
Online now 1209 Record: 6507 (2/14/2012)
The place for Irish fans to engage in hardcore discussion about Notre Dame athletics
Talk with Irish fans from around the globe about college football's most storied program
The spot for anything on your mind outside of Notre Dame athletics
The place for Notre Dame fans to trade and exchange tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Finally you see the light
5 Time POTW--Gringo Mafia Director of Guerrilla Warfare
You on the other hand are assuming it did happen simply because PSU said they would respond in the next few days. You are assuming they have managed to get the response to the NCAA without anyone finding out or leaking it to the media.
The media had OSU's response to allegations the same day.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by dpfenny 21 months ago
Scored 4 touchdowns...in a single game. Polk High!
In this case, the NCAA will mostly have to draw straight line between this action and lack of institutional control. In this case LOIC is the actual institution not just the "institution" of the football program. It can be reasoned that these coverups happened so the team did not lose recruits or status; i.e. were used to maintain a competitive advantage which is a violation. The argument the NCAA is infringing on a criminal case is not entirely true. This isn't strictly criminal, it is also related to the football program and it's culture and actions. Had McQueary, Paterno, Spanier, etc witnessed and withheld information on a
"civilian" molesting children somewhere other than campus it would be criminal and have no bearing on NCAA bylaws. But in this case, the behavior was perpetrated by a football coach, witnessed and covered up by those involved as coaches or admnistrators in the program, and this was done for the sake of the program. They also drug their feet and withheld information subpoenaed by investigators and the NCAA which further demonstrates a systemic issue.
As for the timing and circumventing of the committee, IMO this had to be done due to the timeframe of the situation. To put an investigation together (which was neatly provided by the Freeh report) and take it to a vote would have taken months. It's likely they would have come to the same consensus. Delaying it until midseason or postseason leaves the current players and recruits in limbo and takes away a year of eligibility they could use elsewhere. Doing this before camp starts gives a short amount of time to find and enroll at another university. It also leaves open the possibility of bad press when/if PSU qualifies for a bowl game; it just slows down the speed of that band aid being torn off. The NCAA doesn't want that and PSU shouldn't want that.
This post was edited by bailey_mcirish 21 months ago
I'm just saying don't go off on a tirade about how they didn't have the opportunity to respond after the report came out. They had 10 days they decided to waste fighting over a statue
10 days to respond to an investigation and report that took months to put together? Did OSU or USC only have 10 days to submit their responses? Once again, the end justifies the means.
And apparently you are of the faction that think Paterno and PSU are martyrs who don't deserve any type of punishment whatsoever . Let the criminal courts take care of it right? Put the statue back because he was a good man right? Let's just sweep this all under the rug and continue to live by our corrupt moral code in Happy Valley and pretend none of this ever happened right? As long as we win football games nothing else matters right? You're damn right the end justfies the means.
I do not agree with you.
You, a sport writer, and a former NCAA chief
appear to be of the opinion current NCAA
is wrong regarding jurisdiction and / or process.
Facts proving NCAA has violated it's jurisdiction or
process are not in your responses.
Although opinions aren't an impressive argument,
if after the decision and appeal process,
you can show 90% of the victim's parents
agree NCAA has over stepped it's jurisdiction,
and or were wrong in it's process,
and or were unjust,
people will agree with you.
"What the victims parents think regarding jurisdiction and or process is as irrelevant as your or my opinion. If you have no problem with NOT giving PSU the ability to answer the charges and respond before being punished then so be it. I do not agree with "the end justifies the means" mentality. There is a reason we as a society have rules and laws. Breaking rules for a good cause is still breaking them. I suppose you think criminals that are convicted unjustly is ok so long as they are convicted. To hell with their rights!"
The key problem is attacking the NCAA
to defend the indefensible.
Despite the attorney's (Michael L. Buckner ) objections
would not be surprised should a judge
accept the NCAA position
if NCAA can cite any grounds/justification
with in their rules and bylaws.
Citing a different than usual rule,
is not breaking the rules nor is it an example of
"the end justifies the means"
NCAA can note PSU had the letter
stating the specific rules broken,
advising of an inquiry,
and asking their response,
since 17 November 2011.
If NCAA can show the rules they are enforcing
and show PSU was given opportunity to
answer the questions posed
they may prevail vs the attorney's assertions.
Guess should have not brought up the victim's parents.
"What the victims parents think regarding jurisdiction and or process is as irrelevant as your or my opinion"
The victim's relevance in the "Penn State way"
is how we got to today.
This post was edited by garyfh 21 months ago
Well PSU got hammered.
1)$60 million fine
2)4yr bowl ban
3)15 scholarship deduction over 4yrs
4)PSU players can transfer without penalty.
Do you think ND coaches will poach some of these players?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports