Did NCAA Overstep its Authority?
- Thread starter JonDMiller
- Start date
eyekwah
Well-Known Member
The NCAA actions are a stretch, but obviously the punishments handed down are not unusual, except the $60M penalty. I do not remember any cases where a University has had to pay a monetary penalty to the NCAA. I'm in the camp with those that believe PSU is just trying to put this thing to rest and move on rather than argue.
As far as the NCAA this PSU punishment has done nothing to correct the environment in which Universities are competing. Frankly the NCAA is a powerless group because it depends on colleges and universities joining and being members. The NCAA officials are beholding to the most powerful members. The FBS schools could easily form their own association, but that wouldn't solve the problems of putting winning at all cost ahead of the primary mission of a University. The BCS just adds fuel to the fire. Something is very wrong when Universities with built in advantages are violating the rules.
As far as the NCAA this PSU punishment has done nothing to correct the environment in which Universities are competing. Frankly the NCAA is a powerless group because it depends on colleges and universities joining and being members. The NCAA officials are beholding to the most powerful members. The FBS schools could easily form their own association, but that wouldn't solve the problems of putting winning at all cost ahead of the primary mission of a University. The BCS just adds fuel to the fire. Something is very wrong when Universities with built in advantages are violating the rules.
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
Then if "lack of compliance" or "lack of oversight" is what they are citing, then let's see the other first-time offense penalties for "lack of compliance". And if it is the "heinous" nature of the crimes...then it WAS about the crimes. See a circle forming?
TreyChase, in one post, cites that the rapes were not what the NCAA used. In another, the cites the rapes as "multiple offenses". Can't have it both ways...
Again, I don't think ANYone has a problem with PSU receiving punishment. I am amused, though, by those who think they, personally, are the final authority on punishment or morality.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Umm, they are the final authority on punishment. Hence why PSU is going to be serving a 4 year suspension followed by a 5 year probation.
By the way, your "first time offender" stuff doesn't fly when the facts are that there was an obvious lack of control for 14 years?
Please, think before you write. Thanks in advance!
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
No. The Freeh report was Penn State's own report. They didn't dispute it, essentially pleading guilty to the findings.
the non-compliance opened the door.
Everything from that point forward is fair game for the ncaa to investigate.
The multiple, repeating offenses of the actual rapes is law enforcement. The noncompliance in allowing it to happen, hiding it, etc is what the ncaa dealt with.
There were multiple repeating occurrences of this behavior. PSU knew this & that is why they agreed to the sanctions yesterday & avoided the death penalty, even tho some think this is worse, (LOLOLOLOL).
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
How dense are you? The NCAA often times DOESN'T do their own investigation, but instead relies on the member institutions findings and self-reporting of violations. Did you not listen to a single word that Emmert said? He specifically stated that the Freeh report, with their interviews of 435 witnesses and review of over 3.5 million documents, was more thorough than the NCAA would have ever done. And in the end, PSU agreed with the findings. So if the guilty party conducts their own investigation, the findings make the guilty party look even worse than before the investigation, and the guilty party agrees with the findings....what more can you ask for?
Goodness!
olivecourt
Well-Known Member
The NCAA is always knocked for being too slow to act. Finally, they move with some speed and clarity, and now we want them to be a big lumbering bureaucracy instead.
I'm curious as to what an NCAA investigation would have discovered that a former assistant US attorney general and director of the FBI (who was hired by Penn State) didn't. Sounds like an expensive waste of time.
http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools...misc_non_event/1112ncaa-compliance-manual.pdf
2.1.2 Scope of Responsibility. The institution’s responsibility for the conduct of its intercollegiate athletics program includes responsibility for the actions of its staff members and for the actions of any other individual or organization engaged in activities promoting the athletics interests of the institution.
If you don't see any difference between the former head of the FBI-- who was hired by Penn State, and whose findings were accepted by the university as fact-- and Dan Wetzel, then I don't know what to tell you.
"Sorry, Penn State-- we appreciate the fact that you spent seven months and tens of thousands of dollars cooperating with the former head of the FBI, who in turn produced a 250+ page report. We'd like to do that all over again."
I guess I missed the part when Auburn commissioned a report by the former director of the FBI arguing that Cam Newton should have been ineligible. And by the way, if what comes out of this is that the NCAA moves faster and with greater authority in situations like the Cam Newton saga-- I'm all for it. Is that supposed to be a bad thing?
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
It IS worse than the "death penalty" in many ways. I really don't see them being competitive--or even relevant--in football for at least 10 years.
Then again, as the promoter of Greg Brady-as-Johnny Bravo said, "Hey, mama, you seen 'im, you dug 'im". They created/perpetuated the mess.
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
<<Please think before you write>>
Self-advice, sport.
Under previous NCAA cases, this type of incident would be treated as "one offense". Like it or not, that's the fact.
BTW, there is only ONE "eyewitnessed" case (2001). That victim never stepped forward. The other, 1998, was never prosecuted.
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
I cite two occurences directly involving PSU: 1998 (never prosecuted) and 2001 (one eyewitness). The victim from 2001 allegedly never came forward for purposes of prosecution.
Length of time? That it lingered for 14 years is despicable. But there is only "proof" on those. And "length of time" assumes there are more cases that DEFINITIVELY, CONCLUSIVELY occurred at PSU.
Again, the whole thing is despicable. But given the conclusive facts? Unless you want to cite "covering up" one event for 14 years as "multiple offenses"?
This is not worse than the death penalty.
Penn St agreed to these penalties to AVOID the death penalty.
Do people agree to penalties that are WORSE than an alternative.
If THIS is worse than the death penalty, why isn't this penalty the death penalty.
See how moronic it is.
This is the perfect example of media shaping opinions.
Some media dorks think its "clever" to say..whoa, whoa, this is worse than the death penalty and people run with it.
Its simply not. That notion is ridiculous.
LOLOLOLOL
S
