Penn st appealing?

B

BergHawk7

Well-Known Member
Did I hear the right? On the sports center update they said penn st board of trustees will be appealing their sanctions. Are they for real? I thought they couldnt appeal this.
 
So does this mean if they agreed to the original sactions that they are now in breach and can be hit with more sanctions?
 
Maybe they can fire Erickson while they're at it. Is it too late to re-hire Spanier, Curley and Schultz? Circle the wagons - they're certainly well practiced at that.
 
So let me get this straight, the higher ups at penn st, coach president, AD and assist. AD all covered up a preditor and a monster for 14 years only to keep their beloved football program from receiveing bad pub. And now they want to appeal the sactions given to them after all thar? If I was the judge listening to their appeal id be like "uhhhhh **** NO I wont grant you your request!!!"
 
The appeal has been brought forward by four members of a 32-person Board of Trustees. It will be denied, they'll sue, and their lawsuit will be dismissed, because they have no standing to sue. It's pretty much a sideshow.
 
BergHawk7 said:
Ncaa has to notice this and just be shocked, are they asking for a four year death penalty?
Click to expand...

I think the NCAA will definitely notice and if the trustees are this dense then, yes, I hope this is the invitation for a 4 year time-out.
 
A prominent lawyer in Los Angeles sent me the following opinion:

"I am one of the very few persons in the U.S. who has downloaded, printed,
and read every word of the Freeh Report. So I have the disadvantage
of knowing what I am talking about.

I think when the case eventually gets into the Federal court, Penn State
will win. The Penn State trustees are asserting that Mr. Erickson did not
have authority to enter into the consent decree. The NCAA response is that
Penn State was looking down the gun barrel at a four year "death penalty"
if Erickson did not sign the consent decree.

In the law, that is called "coercion" which is something we learn about in
our first year of law school.

I think all aspects of the NCAA penalty against Penn State can be affirmed
EXCEPT the $60 million fine. That is a "taking" of property without due
process of law. I am not aware of any other cases in which the NCAA has
imposed anything that even resembles such an enormous and onerous fine.

Penn State's Board of Trustees will have some good, high-priced lawyers who
will assert the arguments I have described above, and a lot more."
 
Penn St is a WILLING member of the ncaa.
They're free to leave whenever they want. lol
They can also be voted out of the ncaa, which is the REAL death penalty.

This issue is just going to go on and on and on. Its an embarrassment for the B1G & if Jim Delany won't remove PSU, he should be removed as commish.
 
This is just all kinds of f'd up. First of all, Erickson was foolish not to meet with a majority of the board before signing. Second, this complaint comes from just 4 trustees out of 32 - only 3 others decided to join McCombie. Per the ESPN article "After that three-hour session in State College, the board issued a statement saying it was standing by Erickson's decision to sign the consent decree" which confirms these 4 don't represent a majority view and really undermines any appeal. Third, although the Freeh report is genuinely flawed (see thread on Big 10 forum), the overall conclusion is not, that PSU harbored and covered up a known child rapist, and they deserve the sanctions.

Finally, even if there's legal merit to overturn the $60 million, PSU ought to freakin' VOLUNTEER spending that amount on anti-abuse charities. McCombie's action does nothing but prolong the pain for PSU and cement a public perception of "they just don't get it". The board and university would be wise to issue a strong statement of disavowal.
 
It's too bad the courts cannot step in and do what the NCAA didn't do, and that is shut the program down for 4-5 years.
 
Without getting into the legality of it, I really have been disappointed with the response of Penn State to the sanctions. It really feels like they missed the point entirely.

The "us against the world" mentality really feels great for the players and coaches and if that is what it takes for them to be motivated then that is fine. However, for the fans, boosters, and donors to take such a stance as well is disturbing. It is almost as if they have forgotten about the kids and have moved on to caring about Penn State football again. Maybe it is unreasonable to expect people to carry the burden who were not directly involved, but lets be honest, it's the football culture that the NCAA is trying to punish, and it isn't working. The people around the university feel wronged by the NCAA, as if they are not responsible, and yet they are. The public at large has thrown all the blame on Paterno, Schultz, Spanier, and co but I'm not confident that we should. Emmert in his speech when the sanctions were announced spoke of "hero worship" as being dangerous in college athletics. Ask yourself who really built up all this pressure on the image of Penn State football and the answer isn't Joe Paterno, its the fans, boosters, donors, and people who hero worshiped someone who clearly was just another guy.
 
olivecourt said:
The appeal has been brought forward by four members of a 32-person Board of Trustees. It will be denied, they'll sue, and their lawsuit will be dismissed, because they have no standing to sue. It's pretty much a sideshow.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt. The Paterno family appealed for nothing but grandstanding, so the cultists could see they were 'fighting' for them...I have not read this, but would guarantee that Lubrano guy is one of them. It's a dog and pony show
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top