PSU: What's worse? 4yr death or what they got?

[jperg2]

Since the judgement passed onto PSU with regards to the whole "Sandusky thing" a lot of folks have said that what was given to them (and agreed to by PSU) was worse than death.

So I ask, "What is worse?"

( a ) the sanctions (including the $60m fine, 4yr post-season ban, significat loss of scholarships, and the vacating of 14yrs of wins [112 total])

( b ) a flat 4yr death penalty for PSU football

Just curious since some said ( a ) will take time (some said up to 10yrs, other a bit less), where as option ( b ) has not come to light for discussion until now.

ARTICLE (from ESPN): http://espn.go.com/e...r-death-penalty

...this should be interesting.

Edited July 26, 2012 by jperg2

[UNT90]

Death would have been much, much, much, much worse.

This is a bump in the road for State College, nothing more.

They are not SMU.

[untgirl04]

Death would have been much, much, much, much worse.

This is a bump in the road for State College, nothing more.

They are not SMU.

I disagree. Because they are not SMU, I think the longer penalty will have a more lasting effect.

[forevereagle]

I guess it comes down to what's worse, being gone for four years and nobody talking about what happened, or being awful for four years and everyone constantly talking about what happened during that span.

Edited July 26, 2012 by forevereagle

[greenjoe]

As previously said, a bump in the road. There are so many that have such affection for Joe Paterno that they will give over 60 million to make up for this situation. And come fall, they won't feel the difference. They will still load up the family car and head to State College, PA. and cheer when the Nittany Lions take the field. Even if Penn State doesn't win, there will be little difference on Saturdays at Penn State.

If Southern Meth got the "death penalty" for NCAA rules violations, then Penn State should havae gotten the death penalty for criminal behavior and the system wide effort to cover up the crime.

GO MEAN GREEN

[adman]

The article I read last night said something to the effect that the school would not agree to a 4-year death penalty but did agree to the current sanctions. I think that is your answer.

[TIgreen01]

Why was PSU allowed to even negotiate if "a core group of NCAA school presidents had agreed early last week that an appropriate punishment was no Penn State football for four years"? Seems very, very odd. Maybe Emmert was bluffing?...or thought he couldn't get a majority to vote for it even though his "core group" of presidents supported it?

I'm skeptical that this will hurt PSU as much as is generally accepted by most talking head radio hosts and the general print media. The talk is that PSU is dead for 10 years. Exhibit A is USC. They got hit with a 2 year bowl ban and a loss of 30 schollies in 3 years. We've already heard that PSU is mitigating the bowl ban by scheduling Hawaii every year to finish the season and we're already seeing that a truly big time program can straight piss on a scholarship reduction as USC is coming out of this as the nation's top ranked team. No doubt this will hurt PSU more than a USC, but will it make them a doormat? Probably not.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

The problem with a death penalty in a true college city is that it would have had disasterous effects on the local businesses.

The sanctions levied will have a disasterous effect on the football program. But, if 70-80% of the fans still show up, the businesses around the area should stil be good.

Also, for those more concerned about the "innocent players and fans" than the innocent kids raped by Jerry Sandusky and the people who covered for him, the players can still play - at whichever college they choose - and the fans can still go to the games.

[UNT90]

I'm skeptical that this will hurt PSU as much as is generally accepted by most talking head radio hosts and the general print media. The talk is that PSU is dead for 10 years. Exhibit A is USC. They got hit with a 2 year bowl ban and a loss of 30 schollies in 3 years. We've already heard that PSU is mitigating the bowl ban by scheduling Hawaii every year to finish the season and we're already seeing that a truly big time program can straight piss on a scholarship reduction as USC is coming out of this as the nation's top ranked team. No doubt this will hurt PSU more than a USC, but will it make them a doormat? Probably not.

Amen, brother. They will find unique ways to get athletes to that campus, just like the unique way they found to give their followers a "bowl" game every year. This won't have near the affect that many think. I think a lot of people are really trying to convince themselves that it will.

The problem with a death penalty in a true college city is that it would have had disasterous effects on the local businesses.

The sanctions levied will have a disasterous effect on the football program. But, if 70-80% of the fans still show up, the businesses around the area should stil be good.

Also, for those more concerned about the "innocent players and fans" than the innocent kids raped by Jerry Sandusky and the people who covered for him, the players can still play - at whichever college they choose - and the fans can still go to the games.

A culture and a community that made the football coach the defacto university president needs punishment, don't you think?

The message is "we keep our program, circle the wagons, and come back and show everyone that Penn St. WILL be competetive despite what WAS DONE TO US."

[GreenFlag]

The "true death" is the worst.

[SilverEagle]

The problem with a death penalty in a true college city is that it would have had disasterous effects on the local businesses.

The sanctions levied will have a disasterous effect on the football program. But, if 70-80% of the fans still show up, the businesses around the area should stil be good.

Also, for those more concerned about the "innocent players and fans" than the innocent kids raped by Jerry Sandusky and the people who covered for him, the players can still play - at whichever college they choose - and the fans can still go to the games.

This

Plus, what is all the discussion about vacating the wins. Geezz, every former player and fan remembers who really won the game. The school has collected all the money from those games. It's not like they're going to get extra money from the feds for the number of wins they have.

[untjim1995]

I think the 4-year death penalty would have been worse, but what they got hit with is very painful. No one with any talent will go to Penn State for a long time. Back when the Rust Belt wasn't dying, Pennsylvania turned out a lot of HS talent. Now, it has really dropped. Plus, most of the East Coast talent didn't really have a big option closer to home for big-time college football than Penn State. Obviously, Pitt, Syracuse, and Boston College had some great teams here or there, but Penn State was the program for the NE. They haven't been that program, though, for many years, and now, those kids aren't going to Penn State. Future Nittany Lions will not choose PSU over Ohio State, Notre Dame, and Michigan, rather they will be beating out kids from Maryland, Virginia, and Rutgers. In other words, 4-5 star recruits are going to go somewhere else, so PSU will get 2-3 star kids at best. The lifeblood of a program is winning AND recruiting--PSU is not going to build that back in the next 5 years, at a minimum, and probably not for a decade. Literally, Minnesota and Illinois just got a new program to beat up on. This isn't a speed bump--its a freaking highway bridge collapse. Penn State and USC are in two different situations, from demographics to geography to the reasons behind the sanctions. What USC did was awful--but everyone of us will gladly take what they did over anything Penn State has done. So will recruits and future students. I expect enrollment, attendance, and academic/athletic success at Penn State to drop like a rock. No one for the next few years will want to be associated with any of this. For decades ahead, when we hear the name Penn State, the Sandusky child abuse is what we will think of, ala SMU and the Death Penalty.

To me, Pittsburgh and the ACC are the biggest winners in this whole deal. The ACC got a great AAU instituition for a lot less than some have gotten schools to join their conference and that state will send its best recruits that want to stay in-state to play in Pittsburgh. And, in a weird way, the Big XII could benefit, too, since West Virginia is so close to Pittsburgh, and if football is really the big driver of the future for college conference alignment, I could see a scenario play out where Pitt, Clemson, Ga Tech, Florida State, Miami, and probably a team like Louisville would move over to the Big XII. But without question, the Big Ten lost a lot here--Penn State was one of its big boys, with Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, and the recent addition of Nebraska. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the Big Ten change course here and go after those ACC/Big East schools it would like to get one day and make a move now to help mitigate the Penn State problem. I can see Maryland, Rutgers, Boston College, UConn, and the Virginia schools all being possible targets. And I wouldn't rule out the Big Ten going after Kansas, either. Even though they generally suck at football, they have great basketball, are an AAU member, and have a good market in KC to attract added viewers for the Big Ten network. Plus, I think they would have Nebraska's support, as well as Iowa, too.

Lots to still sort out, but I think the dust won't settle in (un)Happy Valley for the next 10 years, IMO.

[UNT90]

Penn St. is able to negotiate it's way out of a full investigation and more severe penalties, including massive fines and a possible 4 year death penalty?

Isn't this like pleading a capital murder case down to an assault?

I understant the NCAA wanting to "appear" (because I think that is all that it is) to handle this swiftly and with authority, but this gives Penn St. a pass on the 2nd mile link, which might (huge might) have uncovered the real reason that the entire Penn St. hierarchy chose to look the other way on Sandusky (payment of players through 2nd mile).

Now, we will never know.

Great job, NCAA. - huge sarcasm tag.

[VideoEagle]

Don't forget, every source has said it would be a death penalty PLUS something else like the fine and the vacated wins.

The death penalty would have been worse overall. It would have hurt their local economy. You can take 50k in people swarming into town at least six times a year without hurting the locals a lot. It also would hurt all the other B1G schools as you can't take PSU out of the TV contract for 4 years without either a cut in revenue or a replacement school.

After the four years, PSU would be staring from scratch with new coaches, staff and new players. No veterans at all, no seniors to motivate the under class men, no nothing!

A four year death penalty would be much more severe.

[Baby Arm!]

People make a lot of the death penalty and it's effect on SMU's program but I dont think it alone is was what killed the SMU program for 20 years. Eventhough I think the penalties are harher than what SMU got, I think PSU will not see the impact on it's football program that SMU did and they will rebound quickly. They are still a member of the B1G and will be in a major conference playing in front of 100,000 at Beaver Stadium. Ticket sales alone is a huge revenue stream that they will keep. In SMU case the dealth penalty effects were aggrivated by the break up of the Southwest Conference. SMU was relagated to the WAC and found itself outside of a major conference and playing in a 20,000 seat refurbished Ownby Stadium which the couldn't fill. SMU alumni had to go from a team contending for a national championship to percieved minor leauge. Also, the city of Dallas has never embraced SMU like western PA embraces Penn State. PSU will retain their local support while SMU lost of what little support they had.

I believe the breakup of the SWC and SMU's internal changes toward athletics had more to do with the programs extended downfall than the death penalty did.

[greenminer]

IMO, Penn State no longer qualifies for an invitation to CUSA. Let them sink in the Big 10.

[UNTexas]

Penn State should have gotten the death penalty. They still have football. They should have no football for years.

Some people are saying invite them to our new conference? Seriously? Some of their staff may be maggots and should go to jail but minus ten scholarships and I tend to see them still easily winning CUSA. I am not saying that as a ill conceived reality and they could still be faced with a mass exodus. However, subtract ten players and they are still stacked pretty well.

Edited July 26, 2012 by UNTexas

[TIgreen01]

In other words, 4-5 star recruits are going to go somewhere else, so PSU will get 2-3 star kids at best. The lifeblood of a program is winning AND recruiting--PSU is not going to build that back in the next 5 years, at a minimum, and probably not for a decade. Literally, Minnesota and Illinois just got a new program to beat up on. This isn't a speed bump--its a freaking highway bridge collapse. Penn State and USC are in two different situations, from demographics to geography to the reasons behind the sanctions. What USC did was awful--but everyone of us will gladly take what they did over anything Penn State has done. So will recruits and future students. I expect enrollment, attendance, and academic/athletic success at Penn State to drop like a rock. No one for the next few years will want to be associated with any of this. For decades ahead, when we hear the name Penn State, the Sandusky child abuse is what we will think of, ala SMU and the Death Penalty.

...and yet, they had the #1 QB recruit in the nation orally committed to them prior to the NCAA penalties being announced. In other words, the horrifying scandal did next to NOTHING to deter the top recruits from wanting to sign there. That little tid bit is the most shocking to me. I can't believe that ANYONE would want to go to Penn State right now, let alone the best QB in the country.

Now, the 4 years of bowl ban might hurt them for the next year or two, but they'll bounce back quicker than you think, impo.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

We'll see. Four years with no bowl and a scholie limit for four as well...we'll see how eager these kids are to play for no reward. I think the NCAA is giving them until the 2013 season to transfer for a reason.

This year's seniors already have plenty invested in their careers. We'll see how those on down the line like sitting around thehouse watching bowl games every December and January...and, not getting championship recognizition if they win the Big Ten...and if that will grow further and further from them as scholarship reduction settles into the depth charts.

Edited July 26, 2012 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[untjim1995]

...and yet, they had the #1 QB recruit in the nation orally committed to them prior to the NCAA penalties being announced. In other words, the horrifying scandal did next to NOTHING to deter the top recruits from wanting to sign there. That little tid bit is the most shocking to me. I can't believe that ANYONE would want to go to Penn State right now, let alone the best QB in the country.

Now, the 4 years of bowl ban might hurt them for the next year or two, but they'll bounce back quicker than you think, impo.

The key word in this is PRIOR. I didn't think that the NCAA would have the cajones they showed to punish Penn State even a little bit, much less as severely as they did. There is no way that a kid that talented will still go there or stay there. There's just too much stigma attached to Penn State University now--its not just football, either, its the whole university.

[golfingomez]

$73 million in penalties right now... then the school will still have to cover all the lawsuits that are coming quickly... not to mention I'm sure that the state of Pennsylvania will also probably have a long look at how much money they are going to receive... I don't think the real punishments from this scandal have even started yet...

[trud1966]

I think alot of people can break it down into different scenarios, what ifs, etc. I'm a simple person.

Is 60 mil in fines going to hurt? Yes, initially, but I think it'll be made up by the fans and alumni who rally around the school, so I think of it more as a slap on the wrist to a program of that size.

Taking away the "wins" from a program... Ehhh, sure it busts their pride, and mostly hurts Joe Pa. Not sure how bad it hurts someone that died...

I wouldve bet the NCAA wouldnt slam the death penalty on them, and this really bothers me that they didnt. Doesnt it sometimes feel like that ever since SMU got sentenced, that the NCAA feels like they made a mistake in doing it? Every couple of years, a school gets busted for paying players, violations, poor behavior and the like and the NCAA just tosses out some random punishment.

So, lets ask the question another way...

What happened at Penn State apparently didnt "derserve" the death penalty....So then, what exactly WOULD a school have to do, nowasdays, to DESERVE the death penalty? Something WORSE THAN JERRY SANDUSKY RAPING BOYS??????

Shame on the NCAA.

[UNT90]

The key word in this is PRIOR. I didn't think that the NCAA would have the cajones they showed to punish Penn State even a little bit, much less as severely as they did. There is no way that a kid that talented will still go there or stay there. There's just too much stigma attached to Penn State University now--its not just football, either, its the whole university.

From the outside of their culture, you are correct. But, if the kid is caught up in what now is so clearly a culture blinded by football (His parents are grads, family members are grads, grew up in the proximity, etc...), that kid will keep his commitment. Look at most of the comments. One ESPN story really struck me. They showed numerous people willing to go on camera and talk about how the statue should have been left up and the sanctions were way too tough, and then they quoted one student as saying the statue needed to come down and the sanctions were appropriate. That student would not go on camera and refused to allow ESPN to use his name. THe reporter stated something to the efect that he didn't blame that student, as that student's opinion was by far in the minority and that emotions were running high.

Really?? They have learned something?

The quotes from regents in the article in this thread are disturbing. They are wanting to fight this because the university president didn't have the authority to make the decision and they don't agree with the sanctions? I fear not one thing has been learned in Happy Valley or by the Penn St. culture.

Edited July 26, 2012 by UNT90

[UNT90]

$73 million in penalties right now... then the school will still have to cover all the lawsuits that are coming quickly... not to mention I'm sure that the state of Pennsylvania will also probably have a long look at how much money they are going to receive... I don't think the real punishments from this scandal have even started yet...

The victims could wait years to receive any compensation from Penn St. By the time all the appeals processes have ran their course, Penn St. may again be a top ten team before the victim's see a dime.

Penn St. has shown through their reaction that they are not willing to accept any blame. If they take that position in civil court, it will be years before the victims see a dime.

[UNTflyer]

No, I reject the argument that what they got was "worse" than the death penalty.

They still get to sell tickets and collect booster money and field a football team and be nationally ranked. And if they field a good team and run through the B1G, they'll claim they are the real champions but couldn't lift the trophy because the NCAA "punished the innocent."

They should all pay the ultimate price... the coaches, the players, and the community. Because really, they ARE the culture that Penn State was trying to protect when they looked the other way. They all created this monster.