Larger text
Smaller text
Kovacevic: Death penalty appropriate at PSU
AP
In this Nov. 7, 2009, file photo, Penn State Coach Joe Paterno stands with his players before taking the field for an NCAA college football game against Ohio State in State College, Pa. Paterno and other senior Penn State officials 'concealed critical facts' about Jerry Sandusky's child abuse because they were worried about bad publicity, according to an internal investigation into the scandal released Thursday, July 12, 2012. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)
About Dejan Kovacevic
Dejan Kovacevic 
Sports Columnist
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Dejan Kovacevic is a sports writer for the Tribune-Review.
Contact Us | Video | RSS | Mobile
Daily Photo Galleries
By Dejan Kovacevic
Published: Friday, July 13, 2012, 12:01 a.m.
Updated: Tuesday, February 19, 2013
If football mattered too much then, it shouldn't matter at all now.
In light of the Louis Freeh investigation report that dropped like an anvil Thursday morning, the NCAA no longer has a choice but to aggressively pursue the so-called death penalty for Penn State football.
And the NCAA must do so independent of any other concern, any precedent. Because a case involving serial child rape and its cover-up has no other concern, no precedent.
The 267-page report took a while to download, even longer to absorb, so I started by searching for "Joe Paterno" - probably like most - and found it appeared on 69 pages. Among the references was evidence Paterno knew of the 1998 accusations of Jerry Sandusky molesting a child. That was the polar opposite of Paterno's testimony to the grand jury and what he repeated to the Washington Post's Sally Jenkins in the final interview of his life: "I never heard a thing."
It casts into doubt everything Paterno said on this matter.
Freeh said Paterno "clearly followed" the 1998 case and that the notion he wasn't aware was "completely contradicted by evidence."
Step back a moment.
That was the former director of the FBI accusing Paterno of lying in a court of law.
And being right.
And that was Freeh stressing that Paterno never informed his assistant coaches about Sandusky's behavior, never set up limitations to keep Sandusky away from children or the Lasch Building or dorm rooms during road trips and, most powerfully, never took independent action after Mike McQueary told him of the 2001 shower incident.
In fact, in maybe his most powerful remark, Freeh pinpointed Paterno's Feb. 26, 2001, conversation with three university principals - Graham Spanier, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz - as "critical" in the men's burying of the shower incident.
Freeh fingered Paterno as the main culprit in enabling child rape!
Wow.
All of it.
Spanier, Curley and Schultz should be prosecuted with vigor.
It's too late for Paterno, but he's ruined. Bring down the statue, rename the library, melt the peachy ice cream, the whole deal. Nothing would reflect better on Penn State than if all of that happened right away.
But don't hold your breath.
Jay Paterno, ever the loyal son, sadly downplayed the Freeh report as "just one opinion" and "a piece of the puzzle."
A weepy-eyed Matt Millen, a Penn State alumnus and former NFL general manager, spent several hours on ESPN repeatedly saying "if the Freeh report is accurate," and placing all the blame on Spanier.
The Big Ten Network didn't air Freeh's news conference at all.
Karen Peetz, chair of the Board of Trustees, talked a lot about "accountability," but she never mentioned football. Other than to say, upon questioning, that the university's honoring of Paterno is "something we need to discuss."
Accountability doesn't cross the white lines, I guess.
Only the blindest supporters, blind by choice, can dismiss or diminish this now. But judging from reaction on my blog, emails and Twitter, trust me, they're still out there.
Their common argument was constructed like this:
1. Random point.
2. Second random point.
3. Hence, PLAY FOOTBALL.
Which leads me back to the death penalty.
I also counted no fewer than 11 pages on which the red-flag word "institutional" appears. That flag surely was sent flying by Freeh's investigators to catch the attention of the NCAA, which applies the abstract concept of "loss of institutional control" as its main criteria for the death penalty.
Those 11 references cannot go ignored.
I don't want to hear about loopholes in the bylaws, and I don't care what lawyers were dissecting Thursday. It's just a little safe to say that covering up child rape qualifies as both a loss of institutional control and within the NCAA's ethics clause. If the NCAA believes it's right to impose the penalty, there's no question it can. SMU is still the only school hit with it, and the corruption that drew that punishment looks like a cookie stolen from an open jar compared to Penn State.
If this doesn't qualify for the death penalty, God help us on the day we find out what does.
I also don't want to hear the tired line about how you "can't punish these kids."
When the Enron fraud case came to light, the company didn't get off by simply firing those responsible. Other employees weren't saved. That's not how it works. Corporations, institutions and, yes, universities pay a joint price. There's always collateral damage. Ohio State's punishments for players accepting gifts in 2010, including a postseason ban, weren't wiped away when Jim Tressel walked out. Urban Meyer and his players will still pay that price.
"These kids" at Penn State can play their football elsewhere, if it comes to that. Bill O'Brien and his staff can coach elsewhere. (I'd be stunned, incidentally, if a smart man like O'Brien didn't have some sort of escape clause in his contract if this occurs.) If anyone is really seeking fairness in this situation for the current team - and not just looking to PLAY FOOTBALL - they should appeal to the NCAA that all student-athletes be allowed to transfer without limitations.
Penn Staters want to move on. I understand that. I empathize.
But this thinking that everything will be fine so long as football comes back ... no, it won't. It won't be fine for the next program that loses institutional control and knows it won't face the NCAA's harshest punishment. And it won't be fine for Penn State, which will never fully recover its brand without some form of real retribution.
Look at it this way: This cover-up of horrific crimes was aimed at making sure Penn State could continue to PLAY FOOTBALL. A failure to address football leaves the very goal of the cover-up indefensibly intact.
If the university and the tens of thousands who love it truly want to move on, it's time to show football isn't the priority.
And never should have been.
Dejan Kovacevic is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at dkovacevic@tribweb.com.
Most Popular Sports
You must be signed in to add comments
To comment, click the Sign in or sign up at the very top of this page.
Submitted by:
Matthew
on Friday, July 13, 2012
Gary - You are misunderstanding me. I am for the punishment of those responsible. If it is possible to punish those responsible without harming anymore innocent people, is that not the correct solution? I know life. I met it as I served this country for 4 years. Collateral damage is something that is necessary is some instances, but not this one.Please tell me how collateral damage in this situation would be a benefit. Personally I watch the Steelers and Pens on the weekends in the fall, fly-fishing is an option...sorry, no yoga.
Submitted by: Gary on Friday, July 13, 2012
Matthew, the report was very clear. The cover up was a loss of organizational control. That means the organization needs to be held accountable. Are you sad because there will be collateral damage? You mean when people are punished, it isn't just the accused that are hurt? Welcome to life. The organization lost control. It was football that caused the organization to lose control. So football has to go for at least one year so that the organization can gain perspective. Sorry, you'll need to fill your fall Saturday's with another diversion. Maybe yoga or fly fishing.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
Blue - Your submission makes me feel as if you just crawled out from under a rock, and have zero information that is current. Catch up on what is actually going on, and then maybe you can formulate something meaningful.
Submitted by: Blue on Friday, July 13, 2012
What do some of you blind Paterno follows don't understand? Dude is a monster. Guy covered up one of the worse scandals in NCAA Football History. He allowed some pervert to molest children. Who cares about his legacy or jobs. Kids were getting raped, end of story. The guy is a disgrace. When I look at his face, all I see is a creepy enabler that allowed kids to get RAPED. You know, if another school was accused of doing the same thing that Penn State did, every one of you with a mancrush on Paterno would be saying the same thing that everybody else says about Penn State and what needs to be done. Now on to the NCAA, The right thing for the NCAA to do in this situation is to give harsh punishment to Penn State. The Paterno regime covered up child rape that happened, on campus since 2001. Who knows about the other incidents or how far it goes back since 1998. I do not doubt Sandusky's hideous acts started in 1998. NCAA need to either shut the program down, or just erase Paterno's win from 2001 to 2011. Force the school to give back all the money they won in bowls so that the NCAA can donate the money to a charity that is for child molestation victims. NCAA needs to say, "Never again. If you are caught doing these kinds of acts, we will act accordingly and land harsh punishment". Who cares if some kid is getting $500 handshakes. Kids are getting raped. Bottom line, NCAA needs to step in and do something, and do it now.
Submitted by: Bridget on Friday, July 13, 2012
Excellent article and insight. It seems that the voices of the powerless children were ignored to preserve the "god" of football and the institution of power. This is all so reminiscent of the issue of abuse in the catholic church. The boys club, the power, the players are all protected over the souls of the tortured innocents. Heaven help us all!!!
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
Jared - I would totally agree with you, however, one must look at these types of situations on a case-by-case basis. In this specific case would the death penalty do anything positive? If Paterno were still alive and coaching, if Curley and Schultz still active in the institution, I would agree with you that the death penalty would be appropriate to extract justice from the situation. That's not the case. Paterno is dead, the others have either been locked up or will soon. The death penalty to the football program would not impact those that deserve to be punished. I understand that there are rules in place, I just don't see this as a situation where those rules apply.
Submitted by: Larry on Friday, July 13, 2012
I can't believe that I'm the only one who thinks it's incredible hypocrisy for a man who makes his living from writing about SPORTS to suggest that Penn State fans are placing too much emphasis on a SPORT. I also can't be the only one amused that Kovacevic uses irrational "random points" to make his argument while glibly criticizing the use of "random" points. The Enron comparison is s ridiculous so as to make me wonder if Kovacevic sat around all day watching talk shows and threw this article together at the last minute. Enron employees weren't "punished" as a matter of Association rules, but rather because there was no money left! What would've made more sense would be if senior leadership at Enron were caught molesting children, and other senior leadership covered it up...and then all of the Enron employees who knew nothing about it were punished as well. Of course that's not what happened. You preemptively name the things you don't "care" about or don't want to "hear" about because that is the tactic of someone who can't defend his position. Covering up child rape is a heinous crime, and here are hopes that Paterno died with shame in his heart and that his statue comes down...or at the very least has a blindfold added or is turned to 'look the other way,' but when a fractional percentage of the people at the 'institution' had no knowledge of the issue and don't defend the issue, then it's not rational to say that it's an issue of "institutional control." IC is a term specificallly in reference to the operations of the athletic department; in this case, it would be necessary to point out that micromanagement of the situation, or extreme institutional control, led to the coverup. In comparison, when Morehouse was sanctioned by the NCAA, it was specifically because of a "lack of institutional control" because the athletic dept wasn't even aware that they had a soccer program for a period of time. Smart folks will recognize the difference. OSU, again irrelevant; they violated NCAA rules, and Urban was not forced to take that job. They also didn't shut the program down. Your whole flawed argument depends on an assumption that the school lost institutional control; before you proceed with a penalty, you need to make the case that they lost institutional control. Currently almost your entire argument falls on an unsupported accusation of institutional failure, but you fail to make the argument. Saying that the word "institutional" appears on 11 pages of a 267 page document is irrelevant. None of those references are in reference to a "loss of control," and in fact some of those appearances are in the names or text of DEPARTMENTS or POLICIES, or descriptors such as "institutional property." I've seen better writing and more logical thought come from first graders.
Submitted by: Jared on Friday, July 13, 2012
Matthew - Be careful with that argument. Collateral damage can always be avoided. If we have a single parent who happens to be a murderer,should that person be able to avoid criminal penalties merely because his or her children would suffer collateral damage if they were to be deprived of the only parent and caretaker that they have? I tend to think that almost everyone would say "of course not...if you let that happen, you're creating a whole new means of avoiding responsibility for heinous actions." Should a company that sells a product that they knew to be harmful to human health be able to avoid any civil penaltiesor fines on the grounds that they will (a) result in employee layoffs and (b) raise the prices of the company's other products? I would think that most people would give pretty much the same answer. Rules exist - and have existed for decades - to punish universities for institutional misconduct. Penn State knew about those rules - just as Jerry Sandusky knew about the criminality of his actions - and they opted to proceed anyway. That was a choice that they both made...they knew what they were doing was both wrong and punishable (there'd be no need to cover anything up otherwise) at the outset...and to now argue that one set of rules should be enforced while the other ignored strikes me as completely disingenuous.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
Matt - I, nor anyone using logic has ever agreed that "damage to reputation" is sufficient punishment. I feel that those responsible should be punished to the fullest extent. Joe is dead. Sandusky is behind bars. Spanier, Curley, and Schultz wil soon follow, and I assume that any other remaining individuals will come to justice in due time. That is the correct punishment. You are way off-base with your stance. How will shutting down football spare the victims any more grief. The death penalty woul eventually be lifted therefore ( in your mind) continuing to cause damage. Your punishment would actually do damage to no one that is deserving of damage. Focus your anger towards those individuals responsible and not blindly at an institution that is much more than a handful of people.
Submitted by: Matt on Friday, July 13, 2012
How about game days at Beaver stadium causing collateral damage to the abuse victims? How about that reminding big football programs everywhere that if you just complain enough about "damage to reputation" being sufficient punishment, you can get away with anything? ~~~~~ It seems to me that many Penn State fans would rather give their children to Sandusky than have Penn State miss a single football game. That attitude is the best reason for Penn State to not have a football team for a few years, to help clean that culture out. I stand by my crack addict statement. Just as crack addicts would rather die than give up crack, Penn State apologists would rather die than to have the football program harmed - even temporarily.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
Jared - I simply cannot agree to collateral damage when it can be avoided.
Submitted by: michael on Friday, July 13, 2012
Well stated Matthew. PSU is a fine all-around institution. Not, just football. High academic standards. Most of its athletic programs, men and women. fair well. Punishing current and future students/athletes is not the direction to go here. The arrogance of those involved in the cover-up should be dealt with harshly. No matter, who it is or was. Then, make sure changes are made to ensure this scandal never occurs again. All of this criticism, originates from PSU haters. There are thousands of alumni who feel shame at this time. However, our school needs our support more than ever. Creating awareness and making the necessary corrections are the prudent actions here.
Submitted by: Jared on Friday, July 13, 2012
OK...slow down, kids. Let's first take a look at the "death penalty." It is NOT the complete barring of a school's athletics from NCAA competition, and it is NOT a permanent penalty. It's been invoked a grand total of 5 times, all of which were in relation to a specific sport at one school, and none of which lasted for over 2 years. All of the five prior instances involved scenarios of "just cheating:" (1) Kentucky basketball for the 1952-53 season for point shaving, providing improper financial aid, and allowing ineligible players to compete, (2) Southwestern Louisiana basketball for the 1973-74 and 1974-75 seasons for academic fraud, recruiting violations and improper financial assistance, (3) SMU football for the 1987 and 1988 seasons for a continuing pattern of paying players, (4) Moorehouse soccer for the 2005 and 2006 seasons for signing two players who had previsously played professionally and some other technical violations, and (5) MacMurray College mens tennis for the 2005-06 and 2006-07 seasons for providing scholarships to players (evidently Division III schools cannot do this). In its current incarnation, the "death penalty" rule does have a repeat violator provision, which requires that a school already be on probation for at least one sport when a second violation takes place in order to be suspended. BUT the rule does also still allow the NCAA to ban a school from competing in a sport without any prior conditions being met in cases of particularly egregious violations. Now...look back at the list of offenses for the schools against whom this penalty was previously applied...and tell me with a straight face that Penn State's conscious decision to systematically and institutionally ignore criminal behavior by a football coach on university property isn't particularly egregious in comparison. I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to say that the NCAA has the ability, if it chooses to do so, to bar Penn State football from competing for a season or two. Should it do so? Well, all I'm reading from other commenters below that say "no" is either (a) think of the collateral damage or (b) there are legal remedies for what happened in this instance. The first is a completely specious argument...there will ALWAYS be collateral damage when this rule is applied to a cash-generating sport at a major university. Do you seriously think that losing the men's basketball program for two seasons at Kentucky, of all places (and while Adolf Rupp was still there), didn't hurt local business or the kids in the program?!? If you have the death penalty rule on the books at all, you've already decided that you're willing to live with collateral damage when the behavior is bad enough. As for the other...it again is a specious argument. If you have the death penalty rule on the books, you've concluded that sports programs at universities deserve punishment under some (particularly severe) circumstances involving institutional misconduct. That penalty functions on an institutional level, and is intended at providing an institutional disincentive to behaving badly. The legal remedies that exist have nothing whatsoever to do with institutional misconduct, and exist only to punish individual behavior. Those of you who are advocating this position are, in effect, saying "let Penn State bear no penalty for its institutional misconduct...transfer whatever cuplability the university had to certain specific individuals." And that last portion is telling...it amounts to "let the school go without a penalty, so we can rationalize what happened as merely the actions of a few people." Now...all of this having been said, if I'm the NCAA, I would give Penn State the oppportunity to try to right its own ship. And if they had the good sense to come back with a meaningful alternative to an NCAA-enforced punishment...something like, maybe, voluntary suspension of the football program for at least one season, no bowl participation for at least 5 seasons once the program re-starts, devoting some significant amount of their alumni donations and (again, once the program re-starts) their football-related revenues to child abuse awareness and prevention programs, and a completely transparent review and revision of their internal operating policies and procedures on conduct and behavior of university employees...I might be amenable to letting them do that. I don't remember ever hearing anyone complain when the university got effusive credit for Coach Paterno graduating a comparatively high percentage of his players (which I tend to regard as merely doing his job and meeting the obligations that he has to the students who opted to play football there, but hey, that's apparently just me). Why are we now complaining about the possibility of the university being punished for Coach Paterno and others wilfully ignoring their obligations to other young people?!? Or do we only care about the ones that wear the uniform? Oh...and one last note. For those of you who seem to think that going to Happy Valley to explain whatever penalties are levied would be some huge burden or major problem...I don't see why that should be a problem for anyone. The rules are on the books, and they're being enforced as written, and everyone knew what they said before the university started down this path. What's so tough about explaining that?!? I would, however, not want any part of trying to explain why my business' bottom line is more important than both the honorability of the university to which I've tied by profession and the appalling nature of the crimes that it appears to have wilfully covered up.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
This blanketing accusation of PSU and State College being addicted to football needs to be stopped. The majority of those who actually live and work in State College are not the same rabid JoePa supporters that everyone is upset with. Gary - In what way will punishing the football program help the victims? And who is "paying them off"? The donations are for the university as a whole. If you did a little research you would realize that PSU is much, much more than a football school. Punish those who are responsible, and let those who had nothing/will have nothing to do with the scandal move forward. Simple and logical.
Submitted by: Jim on Friday, July 13, 2012
To michael: What sane person would be jealous of Penn State? I would think only members of NAMBLA would look at Penn State right now with a tear in their eye, longing for the support that deranged cultists in Happy Valley continue to show for their departed Dear Leader.
Submitted by: Jim on Friday, July 13, 2012
The results of the Freeh investigation should not surprise anyone at this point of the Sandusky scandal. If anyone thought Joe Paterno couldn't have known about Sandusky's molestations there is now no doubt they were wrong..... If anyone thought Joe Paterno didn't rule the football program with an iron fist and influence administration decisions, they were wrong..... If anyone thought Joe Paterno encouraged a full investigation of the Sandusky allegations, they were wrong..... If anyone thought the administration of Spanier, and Spanier himself, acted in the best interests of the university, they were wrong...... If anyone thought this horrific scandal could be papered-over and forgotten, they were wrong. But if anyone thinks this scandal was the result of anything but a failure of men to live up to their obligations of honor, they are wrong..... There is not one thing the institution of Penn State can do to excuse the perverted actions of Sandusky and the equally perverted attempts to hide his rapes and molestations. Not one thing! The victims can never be made whole! The stain on the Penn State reputation will never be removed! But the one thing the institution of Penn State can do, is doing, is move forward to insure such perversion can and will never again be repeated. As an alum, I am shamed by the scandal but pleased that the sordid details are now public and those responsible have been, or will be, identified and punished. The judgement and punishment of Joe Paterno is now in the hands of a higher authority. The judgement and punishment of the rest is now in the hands of the justice system. And as an alum, I remain proud of my alma mater and the institution it has become. I am, and shall remain, a Penn Stater! I do not stand alone! I'm just one of hundreds of thousands who proclaim, with pride, WE ARE ~~ PENN STATE!!!
Submitted by: Matt on Friday, July 13, 2012
It seems to me that Penn State football is like Crack, and their supporters are like crack addicts that will fight tooth and nail to get their drug. The pipe needs to be taken away so that the crack addicts can detox and think clearly again. Even your governor is involved in the scandal - surely this should shock at least a few PSU die-hards into at least a moment of reflection. Many college football fans from other schools used to respect Penn State, and root for them as a second team. Not anymore. If Penn State doesn't do the right thing and put their own program on timeout for a few years, they will become the most hated school in college football. Penn State apologists clearly show the need for the death penalty - donations are at a record high! Just like the crack addict needs time away from the drug to heal, Penn State needs time away from their drug of college football for the community to heal and rebuild.
Submitted by: Gary on Friday, July 13, 2012
No one writing an editorial needs to go to College Park and explain to people affected by the massive coverup that there won't be football next year as Matthew suggests. Let Jay and Sue go around and explain. Will every person go and apologize to the victims? No, but they will shell millions in donations to pay them off and keep the football program going. The institution lost its perspective. They need a year away from football to try to gain it back.
Submitted by: Jim on Friday, July 13, 2012
Lost in all the "Down with Paterno" and "Down with PSU" rhetoric is what role local, state and federal law enforcements actions (or lack thereof) played in the perpetuation of Sandusky's abuses. It's my understanding that complaints were lodged by at least one boy's parents sometime back in the 1990's, and that a District Attorney declined to press charges. I think Mr. Freeh's report may, unfortunately, have as much to do with deflecting blame from law enforcement institutions as it does with seeking the truth and punishing those responsible. I'm not defending Paterno or Penn State. Lord knows what transpired there was horrible and preventable. But I've got to think that if some police officers, district attorneys, or some of our vulture-like media types had dug, prodded and picked at scabs HALF as hard back then as they are doing now, all this would have come to light much sooner and in time to save some of the victims from Sandusky.
Submitted by: M on Friday, July 13, 2012
NO, NO, NO, NO! The NCAA is already an overblown bureaucratic sinkhole that does more to damage college athletes than it can ever hope to justify in my mind. This country has criminal and civil courts for the redress of grievances; it does not need a bunch of sanctimonious hand wringers putting their fingers into yet another pie. With support like yours their hand-wringing is surely transforming into rubbing their hands together in their lust for power. Those involved will pay civil and criminal penalties with due process of law. They will be, as a practical matter, beyond the reach of the NCAA. All the NCAA can do is punish the innocent to show just how preciously sensitive its members are. Boo-Hoo. Let the guilty pay and let the innocent pick up the pieces and move on. You should be writing for the P-G, where the policy is to support any and every expansion of bureaucratic power.
Submitted by: William on Friday, July 13, 2012
If a death penalty to the PSU football program means a death penalty to the school then that just underscores how disoriented the culture is at PSU. OK, let's not call on the death penalty and spare ourselves that visit to University Park so we don't have to look to those affected by a death blow to tell them their job is gone or their program isn't there this year. Instead we'll walk up to the door of each victim and hand them season tickets and say, "Sorry you were abused as a child. Here are some football tickets. Go State!" I have one child in college now and one headed there next year. As we continue our college researching and visiting I can assure you that record of the football team is of absolutely no concern to us. Spanier (et al) didn't want to jeopardize the cash cow. Paterno didn't want to jeopardize the "Great Experiment. Here's a concept - how about considering college as a form of higher education and not something about football?
Submitted by: DAvid on Friday, July 13, 2012
Great Article, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Paterno was deified and had absolute power at Penn State. Make no mistake, he controlled the entire affair. SMU got the death penalty from the NCAA for giving Trans Ams to players, contrast this to what happened at Penn State and the decision is clear, the NCAA has to react quickly and divisively or it is complicit in its approval. Next, the statue of Paterno in front of their stadium should be removed or another one of a cowering, naked 10 year old boy placed next to it as a reminder. What a disgrace, Penn Alumni are making all sorts of excuses, there is no excuse!
Submitted by: michael on Friday, July 13, 2012
Just another jealous Penn State hater. You writers should steer clear of Penn State as a topic.
Submitted by: Patrick on Friday, July 13, 2012
Excellent article, Dejan. Anyone who doesn't know think this is a football scandal is still deluding themselves. The NCAA needs to send a clear signal that football coaches and administrators must act in an ethical manner at all times. The death penalty is appropriate in this horrific case.
Submitted by: Lance on Friday, July 13, 2012
There still remains one prominent individual not brought to task. Complicit in MANY ways, Gov.(State Attorney General at the time) Tom Corbett. On the Board of 2nd Mile, recipient of campaign contributions of over $300,000 from 2nd Mile, signed grant to 2nd Mile of $3 MILLION as Gov. and obviously was aware of a problem, Did he quash investigation as Att. Gen.? Let's have some answers about his involvement or non-involvement. I think he's dirty as the day is long.
Submitted by: Francis on Friday, July 13, 2012
I'm not sure it makes sense to kill the program. I am an alumnus and I follow the team, but Penn State football is not a huge deal to me personally. I don't see that this cover-up was to keep the team on the field, I think it was to protect a close friend. The way to really keep the team on the field would have been to do all the right things from the beginning. They removed Sandusky from the program. They could have sought justice and in so doing probably damaged the teams reputation somewhat, but not in a way from which they couldn't recover. Ultimately, I just don't see this as a scandal directly related to football operations. I see it as a scandal that involved several leaders at PSU, including leaders of the football team. In addition to the coaches, we have Graham Spanier, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz to deal with. Do we close the school because the president was involved? Cancel the entire athletic program because of Curley? What do we do with the campus police? These people do not define Penn State. As a Penn State alumnus I refuse to have my alma mater defined by these degenerates. Please seek justice on them, not the entire University. In the end, I don't believe the NCAA will go that far. They will take the most diplomatic route they can surmise. They have to appear stern, but they won't want to go so far as to ruin themselves either. How would they ruin themselves? Well, I'm no reporter -I don't have any inside scoop on this stuff- but I have heard rumors that quite a lot of people outside of Penn State knew about this. From what I heard, this included coaches on other teams. If that's true I'd be surprised if no one at the NCAA or, say, some major TV networks knew about it as well. So, maybe the cover-up continues.
Submitted by: Rick on Friday, July 13, 2012
Ok so lets just ignore all of the NCAA rules and regulations, not to mention authority, and give PSU the death penalty so that the rapid media will be satisfied. NCAA better be ready to deal with every criminal case at every university from that point forward - at least they'll be creating jobs!
Submitted by: Jason on Friday, July 13, 2012
I don't see what this will accomplish. This is not so much an athletics/football issue as it is a criminal matter. These "men", and I use that term loosely, are the ones who need to be held accountable. To tell these guys who, for the most part, aren't even there anymore, that the only punishment given down for their actions is that PSU's football program is being suspended, is not much of a punishment and is a bit of an insult to the boys who were victims of Sandusky. Leave the football program alone and press criminal charges against everyone who knew something about this and did nothing. This happened 10+ years ago, to punish the current program for what happened then is ridiculous and unfair.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
I respect your opinion Dejan, however I would like to see you come to University Park. I would like to see you visit each athletic team and tell them that because of a few horrible senior leaders at PSU, their funding will now be cut. I would like to see you head over to the stadium and talk to those who work there during the football season, and tell them they should start looking for a new job this fall. Then I would like you visit each business in downtown State College, and let them know that the business they depend on each football season just isn't going to be there anymore. And when you explain to them that this is the way it must be, I want you to use that Enron excuse, that's "just how it works." I'm certain that while Joe sits in his grave, and the others responsible rot in a jail cell that they will certainly get the message that the death penalty will send(it won't even phase them). You're not just outlining the destruction of a simple football program, but the destruction of an entire community for the atrocities of a few.
Submitted by: Robert on Friday, July 13, 2012
I can absolutely see this happening. And yes all the football players can transfer to other schools to play football. But you might as well include every other Penn State sport has as well because there won't be hardly any money to support them. Tuition is bound to go up to cover some of the cost of the $75-$100 million that the school will be losing per year. Is that really something the NCAA is really ready to do; this could be a death penalty for the entire school.
Submitted by: Milan on Friday, July 13, 2012
Why just concentrate of the football program? Why not nail the primary culprit: Penn State? You say prosecute Spanier, Curley and Schultz and give the death penalty to the football program but ignore the total institution. Why do my tax dollars support the school? Pull all tax funding for Penn State. The entire university should get the death penalty and not solely the football program. If the football players can play elsewhere, the students can get educated elsewhere.
Submitted by: bob on Friday, July 13, 2012
Great piece! The players should all keep their scholarships or be allowed to transfer the program shut down for 5 years with anyone related to this scandal gone. There is no excuse for covering it up and Jay Paterno needs to shut up.
Submitted by: Dejan on Friday, July 13, 2012
Our passionate, multi-faceted discussion of Penn State that began yesterday continues this morning on the blog. I'll be checking in, as well. http://blog.triblive.com/dejan-kovacevic/2012/07/13/wakeup-call-it-wont-be-the-pirates-fault/ Dejan
Gary - You are misunderstanding me. I am for the punishment of those responsible. If it is possible to punish those responsible without harming anymore innocent people, is that not the correct solution? I know life. I met it as I served this country for 4 years. Collateral damage is something that is necessary is some instances, but not this one.Please tell me how collateral damage in this situation would be a benefit. Personally I watch the Steelers and Pens on the weekends in the fall, fly-fishing is an option...sorry, no yoga.
Submitted by: Gary on Friday, July 13, 2012
Matthew, the report was very clear. The cover up was a loss of organizational control. That means the organization needs to be held accountable. Are you sad because there will be collateral damage? You mean when people are punished, it isn't just the accused that are hurt? Welcome to life. The organization lost control. It was football that caused the organization to lose control. So football has to go for at least one year so that the organization can gain perspective. Sorry, you'll need to fill your fall Saturday's with another diversion. Maybe yoga or fly fishing.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
Blue - Your submission makes me feel as if you just crawled out from under a rock, and have zero information that is current. Catch up on what is actually going on, and then maybe you can formulate something meaningful.
Submitted by: Blue on Friday, July 13, 2012
What do some of you blind Paterno follows don't understand? Dude is a monster. Guy covered up one of the worse scandals in NCAA Football History. He allowed some pervert to molest children. Who cares about his legacy or jobs. Kids were getting raped, end of story. The guy is a disgrace. When I look at his face, all I see is a creepy enabler that allowed kids to get RAPED. You know, if another school was accused of doing the same thing that Penn State did, every one of you with a mancrush on Paterno would be saying the same thing that everybody else says about Penn State and what needs to be done. Now on to the NCAA, The right thing for the NCAA to do in this situation is to give harsh punishment to Penn State. The Paterno regime covered up child rape that happened, on campus since 2001. Who knows about the other incidents or how far it goes back since 1998. I do not doubt Sandusky's hideous acts started in 1998. NCAA need to either shut the program down, or just erase Paterno's win from 2001 to 2011. Force the school to give back all the money they won in bowls so that the NCAA can donate the money to a charity that is for child molestation victims. NCAA needs to say, "Never again. If you are caught doing these kinds of acts, we will act accordingly and land harsh punishment". Who cares if some kid is getting $500 handshakes. Kids are getting raped. Bottom line, NCAA needs to step in and do something, and do it now.
Submitted by: Bridget on Friday, July 13, 2012
Excellent article and insight. It seems that the voices of the powerless children were ignored to preserve the "god" of football and the institution of power. This is all so reminiscent of the issue of abuse in the catholic church. The boys club, the power, the players are all protected over the souls of the tortured innocents. Heaven help us all!!!
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
Jared - I would totally agree with you, however, one must look at these types of situations on a case-by-case basis. In this specific case would the death penalty do anything positive? If Paterno were still alive and coaching, if Curley and Schultz still active in the institution, I would agree with you that the death penalty would be appropriate to extract justice from the situation. That's not the case. Paterno is dead, the others have either been locked up or will soon. The death penalty to the football program would not impact those that deserve to be punished. I understand that there are rules in place, I just don't see this as a situation where those rules apply.
Submitted by: Larry on Friday, July 13, 2012
I can't believe that I'm the only one who thinks it's incredible hypocrisy for a man who makes his living from writing about SPORTS to suggest that Penn State fans are placing too much emphasis on a SPORT. I also can't be the only one amused that Kovacevic uses irrational "random points" to make his argument while glibly criticizing the use of "random" points. The Enron comparison is s ridiculous so as to make me wonder if Kovacevic sat around all day watching talk shows and threw this article together at the last minute. Enron employees weren't "punished" as a matter of Association rules, but rather because there was no money left! What would've made more sense would be if senior leadership at Enron were caught molesting children, and other senior leadership covered it up...and then all of the Enron employees who knew nothing about it were punished as well. Of course that's not what happened. You preemptively name the things you don't "care" about or don't want to "hear" about because that is the tactic of someone who can't defend his position. Covering up child rape is a heinous crime, and here are hopes that Paterno died with shame in his heart and that his statue comes down...or at the very least has a blindfold added or is turned to 'look the other way,' but when a fractional percentage of the people at the 'institution' had no knowledge of the issue and don't defend the issue, then it's not rational to say that it's an issue of "institutional control." IC is a term specificallly in reference to the operations of the athletic department; in this case, it would be necessary to point out that micromanagement of the situation, or extreme institutional control, led to the coverup. In comparison, when Morehouse was sanctioned by the NCAA, it was specifically because of a "lack of institutional control" because the athletic dept wasn't even aware that they had a soccer program for a period of time. Smart folks will recognize the difference. OSU, again irrelevant; they violated NCAA rules, and Urban was not forced to take that job. They also didn't shut the program down. Your whole flawed argument depends on an assumption that the school lost institutional control; before you proceed with a penalty, you need to make the case that they lost institutional control. Currently almost your entire argument falls on an unsupported accusation of institutional failure, but you fail to make the argument. Saying that the word "institutional" appears on 11 pages of a 267 page document is irrelevant. None of those references are in reference to a "loss of control," and in fact some of those appearances are in the names or text of DEPARTMENTS or POLICIES, or descriptors such as "institutional property." I've seen better writing and more logical thought come from first graders.
Submitted by: Jared on Friday, July 13, 2012
Matthew - Be careful with that argument. Collateral damage can always be avoided. If we have a single parent who happens to be a murderer,should that person be able to avoid criminal penalties merely because his or her children would suffer collateral damage if they were to be deprived of the only parent and caretaker that they have? I tend to think that almost everyone would say "of course not...if you let that happen, you're creating a whole new means of avoiding responsibility for heinous actions." Should a company that sells a product that they knew to be harmful to human health be able to avoid any civil penaltiesor fines on the grounds that they will (a) result in employee layoffs and (b) raise the prices of the company's other products? I would think that most people would give pretty much the same answer. Rules exist - and have existed for decades - to punish universities for institutional misconduct. Penn State knew about those rules - just as Jerry Sandusky knew about the criminality of his actions - and they opted to proceed anyway. That was a choice that they both made...they knew what they were doing was both wrong and punishable (there'd be no need to cover anything up otherwise) at the outset...and to now argue that one set of rules should be enforced while the other ignored strikes me as completely disingenuous.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
Matt - I, nor anyone using logic has ever agreed that "damage to reputation" is sufficient punishment. I feel that those responsible should be punished to the fullest extent. Joe is dead. Sandusky is behind bars. Spanier, Curley, and Schultz wil soon follow, and I assume that any other remaining individuals will come to justice in due time. That is the correct punishment. You are way off-base with your stance. How will shutting down football spare the victims any more grief. The death penalty woul eventually be lifted therefore ( in your mind) continuing to cause damage. Your punishment would actually do damage to no one that is deserving of damage. Focus your anger towards those individuals responsible and not blindly at an institution that is much more than a handful of people.
Submitted by: Matt on Friday, July 13, 2012
How about game days at Beaver stadium causing collateral damage to the abuse victims? How about that reminding big football programs everywhere that if you just complain enough about "damage to reputation" being sufficient punishment, you can get away with anything? ~~~~~ It seems to me that many Penn State fans would rather give their children to Sandusky than have Penn State miss a single football game. That attitude is the best reason for Penn State to not have a football team for a few years, to help clean that culture out. I stand by my crack addict statement. Just as crack addicts would rather die than give up crack, Penn State apologists would rather die than to have the football program harmed - even temporarily.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
Jared - I simply cannot agree to collateral damage when it can be avoided.
Submitted by: michael on Friday, July 13, 2012
Well stated Matthew. PSU is a fine all-around institution. Not, just football. High academic standards. Most of its athletic programs, men and women. fair well. Punishing current and future students/athletes is not the direction to go here. The arrogance of those involved in the cover-up should be dealt with harshly. No matter, who it is or was. Then, make sure changes are made to ensure this scandal never occurs again. All of this criticism, originates from PSU haters. There are thousands of alumni who feel shame at this time. However, our school needs our support more than ever. Creating awareness and making the necessary corrections are the prudent actions here.
Submitted by: Jared on Friday, July 13, 2012
OK...slow down, kids. Let's first take a look at the "death penalty." It is NOT the complete barring of a school's athletics from NCAA competition, and it is NOT a permanent penalty. It's been invoked a grand total of 5 times, all of which were in relation to a specific sport at one school, and none of which lasted for over 2 years. All of the five prior instances involved scenarios of "just cheating:" (1) Kentucky basketball for the 1952-53 season for point shaving, providing improper financial aid, and allowing ineligible players to compete, (2) Southwestern Louisiana basketball for the 1973-74 and 1974-75 seasons for academic fraud, recruiting violations and improper financial assistance, (3) SMU football for the 1987 and 1988 seasons for a continuing pattern of paying players, (4) Moorehouse soccer for the 2005 and 2006 seasons for signing two players who had previsously played professionally and some other technical violations, and (5) MacMurray College mens tennis for the 2005-06 and 2006-07 seasons for providing scholarships to players (evidently Division III schools cannot do this). In its current incarnation, the "death penalty" rule does have a repeat violator provision, which requires that a school already be on probation for at least one sport when a second violation takes place in order to be suspended. BUT the rule does also still allow the NCAA to ban a school from competing in a sport without any prior conditions being met in cases of particularly egregious violations. Now...look back at the list of offenses for the schools against whom this penalty was previously applied...and tell me with a straight face that Penn State's conscious decision to systematically and institutionally ignore criminal behavior by a football coach on university property isn't particularly egregious in comparison. I wouldn't hesitate for a moment to say that the NCAA has the ability, if it chooses to do so, to bar Penn State football from competing for a season or two. Should it do so? Well, all I'm reading from other commenters below that say "no" is either (a) think of the collateral damage or (b) there are legal remedies for what happened in this instance. The first is a completely specious argument...there will ALWAYS be collateral damage when this rule is applied to a cash-generating sport at a major university. Do you seriously think that losing the men's basketball program for two seasons at Kentucky, of all places (and while Adolf Rupp was still there), didn't hurt local business or the kids in the program?!? If you have the death penalty rule on the books at all, you've already decided that you're willing to live with collateral damage when the behavior is bad enough. As for the other...it again is a specious argument. If you have the death penalty rule on the books, you've concluded that sports programs at universities deserve punishment under some (particularly severe) circumstances involving institutional misconduct. That penalty functions on an institutional level, and is intended at providing an institutional disincentive to behaving badly. The legal remedies that exist have nothing whatsoever to do with institutional misconduct, and exist only to punish individual behavior. Those of you who are advocating this position are, in effect, saying "let Penn State bear no penalty for its institutional misconduct...transfer whatever cuplability the university had to certain specific individuals." And that last portion is telling...it amounts to "let the school go without a penalty, so we can rationalize what happened as merely the actions of a few people." Now...all of this having been said, if I'm the NCAA, I would give Penn State the oppportunity to try to right its own ship. And if they had the good sense to come back with a meaningful alternative to an NCAA-enforced punishment...something like, maybe, voluntary suspension of the football program for at least one season, no bowl participation for at least 5 seasons once the program re-starts, devoting some significant amount of their alumni donations and (again, once the program re-starts) their football-related revenues to child abuse awareness and prevention programs, and a completely transparent review and revision of their internal operating policies and procedures on conduct and behavior of university employees...I might be amenable to letting them do that. I don't remember ever hearing anyone complain when the university got effusive credit for Coach Paterno graduating a comparatively high percentage of his players (which I tend to regard as merely doing his job and meeting the obligations that he has to the students who opted to play football there, but hey, that's apparently just me). Why are we now complaining about the possibility of the university being punished for Coach Paterno and others wilfully ignoring their obligations to other young people?!? Or do we only care about the ones that wear the uniform? Oh...and one last note. For those of you who seem to think that going to Happy Valley to explain whatever penalties are levied would be some huge burden or major problem...I don't see why that should be a problem for anyone. The rules are on the books, and they're being enforced as written, and everyone knew what they said before the university started down this path. What's so tough about explaining that?!? I would, however, not want any part of trying to explain why my business' bottom line is more important than both the honorability of the university to which I've tied by profession and the appalling nature of the crimes that it appears to have wilfully covered up.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
This blanketing accusation of PSU and State College being addicted to football needs to be stopped. The majority of those who actually live and work in State College are not the same rabid JoePa supporters that everyone is upset with. Gary - In what way will punishing the football program help the victims? And who is "paying them off"? The donations are for the university as a whole. If you did a little research you would realize that PSU is much, much more than a football school. Punish those who are responsible, and let those who had nothing/will have nothing to do with the scandal move forward. Simple and logical.
Submitted by: Jim on Friday, July 13, 2012
To michael: What sane person would be jealous of Penn State? I would think only members of NAMBLA would look at Penn State right now with a tear in their eye, longing for the support that deranged cultists in Happy Valley continue to show for their departed Dear Leader.
Submitted by: Jim on Friday, July 13, 2012
The results of the Freeh investigation should not surprise anyone at this point of the Sandusky scandal. If anyone thought Joe Paterno couldn't have known about Sandusky's molestations there is now no doubt they were wrong..... If anyone thought Joe Paterno didn't rule the football program with an iron fist and influence administration decisions, they were wrong..... If anyone thought Joe Paterno encouraged a full investigation of the Sandusky allegations, they were wrong..... If anyone thought the administration of Spanier, and Spanier himself, acted in the best interests of the university, they were wrong...... If anyone thought this horrific scandal could be papered-over and forgotten, they were wrong. But if anyone thinks this scandal was the result of anything but a failure of men to live up to their obligations of honor, they are wrong..... There is not one thing the institution of Penn State can do to excuse the perverted actions of Sandusky and the equally perverted attempts to hide his rapes and molestations. Not one thing! The victims can never be made whole! The stain on the Penn State reputation will never be removed! But the one thing the institution of Penn State can do, is doing, is move forward to insure such perversion can and will never again be repeated. As an alum, I am shamed by the scandal but pleased that the sordid details are now public and those responsible have been, or will be, identified and punished. The judgement and punishment of Joe Paterno is now in the hands of a higher authority. The judgement and punishment of the rest is now in the hands of the justice system. And as an alum, I remain proud of my alma mater and the institution it has become. I am, and shall remain, a Penn Stater! I do not stand alone! I'm just one of hundreds of thousands who proclaim, with pride, WE ARE ~~ PENN STATE!!!
Submitted by: Matt on Friday, July 13, 2012
It seems to me that Penn State football is like Crack, and their supporters are like crack addicts that will fight tooth and nail to get their drug. The pipe needs to be taken away so that the crack addicts can detox and think clearly again. Even your governor is involved in the scandal - surely this should shock at least a few PSU die-hards into at least a moment of reflection. Many college football fans from other schools used to respect Penn State, and root for them as a second team. Not anymore. If Penn State doesn't do the right thing and put their own program on timeout for a few years, they will become the most hated school in college football. Penn State apologists clearly show the need for the death penalty - donations are at a record high! Just like the crack addict needs time away from the drug to heal, Penn State needs time away from their drug of college football for the community to heal and rebuild.
Submitted by: Gary on Friday, July 13, 2012
No one writing an editorial needs to go to College Park and explain to people affected by the massive coverup that there won't be football next year as Matthew suggests. Let Jay and Sue go around and explain. Will every person go and apologize to the victims? No, but they will shell millions in donations to pay them off and keep the football program going. The institution lost its perspective. They need a year away from football to try to gain it back.
Submitted by: Jim on Friday, July 13, 2012
Lost in all the "Down with Paterno" and "Down with PSU" rhetoric is what role local, state and federal law enforcements actions (or lack thereof) played in the perpetuation of Sandusky's abuses. It's my understanding that complaints were lodged by at least one boy's parents sometime back in the 1990's, and that a District Attorney declined to press charges. I think Mr. Freeh's report may, unfortunately, have as much to do with deflecting blame from law enforcement institutions as it does with seeking the truth and punishing those responsible. I'm not defending Paterno or Penn State. Lord knows what transpired there was horrible and preventable. But I've got to think that if some police officers, district attorneys, or some of our vulture-like media types had dug, prodded and picked at scabs HALF as hard back then as they are doing now, all this would have come to light much sooner and in time to save some of the victims from Sandusky.
Submitted by: M on Friday, July 13, 2012
NO, NO, NO, NO! The NCAA is already an overblown bureaucratic sinkhole that does more to damage college athletes than it can ever hope to justify in my mind. This country has criminal and civil courts for the redress of grievances; it does not need a bunch of sanctimonious hand wringers putting their fingers into yet another pie. With support like yours their hand-wringing is surely transforming into rubbing their hands together in their lust for power. Those involved will pay civil and criminal penalties with due process of law. They will be, as a practical matter, beyond the reach of the NCAA. All the NCAA can do is punish the innocent to show just how preciously sensitive its members are. Boo-Hoo. Let the guilty pay and let the innocent pick up the pieces and move on. You should be writing for the P-G, where the policy is to support any and every expansion of bureaucratic power.
Submitted by: William on Friday, July 13, 2012
If a death penalty to the PSU football program means a death penalty to the school then that just underscores how disoriented the culture is at PSU. OK, let's not call on the death penalty and spare ourselves that visit to University Park so we don't have to look to those affected by a death blow to tell them their job is gone or their program isn't there this year. Instead we'll walk up to the door of each victim and hand them season tickets and say, "Sorry you were abused as a child. Here are some football tickets. Go State!" I have one child in college now and one headed there next year. As we continue our college researching and visiting I can assure you that record of the football team is of absolutely no concern to us. Spanier (et al) didn't want to jeopardize the cash cow. Paterno didn't want to jeopardize the "Great Experiment. Here's a concept - how about considering college as a form of higher education and not something about football?
Submitted by: DAvid on Friday, July 13, 2012
Great Article, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Paterno was deified and had absolute power at Penn State. Make no mistake, he controlled the entire affair. SMU got the death penalty from the NCAA for giving Trans Ams to players, contrast this to what happened at Penn State and the decision is clear, the NCAA has to react quickly and divisively or it is complicit in its approval. Next, the statue of Paterno in front of their stadium should be removed or another one of a cowering, naked 10 year old boy placed next to it as a reminder. What a disgrace, Penn Alumni are making all sorts of excuses, there is no excuse!
Submitted by: michael on Friday, July 13, 2012
Just another jealous Penn State hater. You writers should steer clear of Penn State as a topic.
Submitted by: Patrick on Friday, July 13, 2012
Excellent article, Dejan. Anyone who doesn't know think this is a football scandal is still deluding themselves. The NCAA needs to send a clear signal that football coaches and administrators must act in an ethical manner at all times. The death penalty is appropriate in this horrific case.
Submitted by: Lance on Friday, July 13, 2012
There still remains one prominent individual not brought to task. Complicit in MANY ways, Gov.(State Attorney General at the time) Tom Corbett. On the Board of 2nd Mile, recipient of campaign contributions of over $300,000 from 2nd Mile, signed grant to 2nd Mile of $3 MILLION as Gov. and obviously was aware of a problem, Did he quash investigation as Att. Gen.? Let's have some answers about his involvement or non-involvement. I think he's dirty as the day is long.
Submitted by: Francis on Friday, July 13, 2012
I'm not sure it makes sense to kill the program. I am an alumnus and I follow the team, but Penn State football is not a huge deal to me personally. I don't see that this cover-up was to keep the team on the field, I think it was to protect a close friend. The way to really keep the team on the field would have been to do all the right things from the beginning. They removed Sandusky from the program. They could have sought justice and in so doing probably damaged the teams reputation somewhat, but not in a way from which they couldn't recover. Ultimately, I just don't see this as a scandal directly related to football operations. I see it as a scandal that involved several leaders at PSU, including leaders of the football team. In addition to the coaches, we have Graham Spanier, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz to deal with. Do we close the school because the president was involved? Cancel the entire athletic program because of Curley? What do we do with the campus police? These people do not define Penn State. As a Penn State alumnus I refuse to have my alma mater defined by these degenerates. Please seek justice on them, not the entire University. In the end, I don't believe the NCAA will go that far. They will take the most diplomatic route they can surmise. They have to appear stern, but they won't want to go so far as to ruin themselves either. How would they ruin themselves? Well, I'm no reporter -I don't have any inside scoop on this stuff- but I have heard rumors that quite a lot of people outside of Penn State knew about this. From what I heard, this included coaches on other teams. If that's true I'd be surprised if no one at the NCAA or, say, some major TV networks knew about it as well. So, maybe the cover-up continues.
Submitted by: Rick on Friday, July 13, 2012
Ok so lets just ignore all of the NCAA rules and regulations, not to mention authority, and give PSU the death penalty so that the rapid media will be satisfied. NCAA better be ready to deal with every criminal case at every university from that point forward - at least they'll be creating jobs!
Submitted by: Jason on Friday, July 13, 2012
I don't see what this will accomplish. This is not so much an athletics/football issue as it is a criminal matter. These "men", and I use that term loosely, are the ones who need to be held accountable. To tell these guys who, for the most part, aren't even there anymore, that the only punishment given down for their actions is that PSU's football program is being suspended, is not much of a punishment and is a bit of an insult to the boys who were victims of Sandusky. Leave the football program alone and press criminal charges against everyone who knew something about this and did nothing. This happened 10+ years ago, to punish the current program for what happened then is ridiculous and unfair.
Submitted by: Matthew on Friday, July 13, 2012
I respect your opinion Dejan, however I would like to see you come to University Park. I would like to see you visit each athletic team and tell them that because of a few horrible senior leaders at PSU, their funding will now be cut. I would like to see you head over to the stadium and talk to those who work there during the football season, and tell them they should start looking for a new job this fall. Then I would like you visit each business in downtown State College, and let them know that the business they depend on each football season just isn't going to be there anymore. And when you explain to them that this is the way it must be, I want you to use that Enron excuse, that's "just how it works." I'm certain that while Joe sits in his grave, and the others responsible rot in a jail cell that they will certainly get the message that the death penalty will send(it won't even phase them). You're not just outlining the destruction of a simple football program, but the destruction of an entire community for the atrocities of a few.
Submitted by: Robert on Friday, July 13, 2012
I can absolutely see this happening. And yes all the football players can transfer to other schools to play football. But you might as well include every other Penn State sport has as well because there won't be hardly any money to support them. Tuition is bound to go up to cover some of the cost of the $75-$100 million that the school will be losing per year. Is that really something the NCAA is really ready to do; this could be a death penalty for the entire school.
Submitted by: Milan on Friday, July 13, 2012
Why just concentrate of the football program? Why not nail the primary culprit: Penn State? You say prosecute Spanier, Curley and Schultz and give the death penalty to the football program but ignore the total institution. Why do my tax dollars support the school? Pull all tax funding for Penn State. The entire university should get the death penalty and not solely the football program. If the football players can play elsewhere, the students can get educated elsewhere.
Submitted by: bob on Friday, July 13, 2012
Great piece! The players should all keep their scholarships or be allowed to transfer the program shut down for 5 years with anyone related to this scandal gone. There is no excuse for covering it up and Jay Paterno needs to shut up.
Submitted by: Dejan on Friday, July 13, 2012
Our passionate, multi-faceted discussion of Penn State that began yesterday continues this morning on the blog. I'll be checking in, as well. http://blog.triblive.com/dejan-kovacevic/2012/07/13/wakeup-call-it-wont-be-the-pirates-fault/ Dejan
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.
