I think Penn State would have preferred the death penalty over this. I quit following the Penn State scandal after Joe Paterno died, so I don't know what's been uncovered lately regarding this. Based on the information I know, I agree with all these punishments, but they do seem a bit harsh to me. I don't agree with them taking down the Joe Paterno statue though. In the sports world, they have statues of some legends that were just awful people. Take Ty Cobb for example. He was supposed to be an awful person and a murderer. Ray Lewis killed a guy as well, and you know he will have plenty of statues. Joe Paterno may have helped his assistant coach keep the pedophile incidents in the shower going, but is that worse than actually killing a human being? I think it all depends on your morals really. You could say that they emotionally killed many. Is emotionally killing many worst than actually killing one?
Penn State Penalties
- Thread starter wingnut
- Start date
What do they mean by the death penalty? Would they like "kill" the school?
What do they mean by the death penalty? Would they like "kill" the school?
Yeah, honestly, I'll still always consider him #1 in wins until someone passes the mark he had.
Yeah, honestly, I'll still always consider him #1 in wins until someone passes the mark he had.
The death penalty takes the football away for at least a year and I believe the school has to re-apply with the NCAA to get the program back. Basically its at least a 2year thing. 1year without football at all and then another year to get players and build the program.
Ndamustomp suh
All-Star
The death penalty should never be considered, for any situation. And personally, I think the current penalties are even too strict.
I don't even think that the NCAA should have been involved this much. Firing the men held accountable should have been the limit of the punishments imo.
What advantage did this grant the football program? None at all. So why is it the focus of the punishments?
They're basically saying "Oh, one of the assistant coaches was a sex offender? And the head coach reported it to higher officials in the university? Let's take away all their wins since 1998, ban them from bowls for 4 years, take away 40 scholarships, and allow players to transfer at will. For the university, who should be held mostly accountable, let's put them on a 5-year probation and fine them $60 million. That seems fair."
What advantage did this grant the football program? None at all. So why is it the focus of the punishments?
They're basically saying "Oh, one of the assistant coaches was a sex offender? And the head coach reported it to higher officials in the university? Let's take away all their wins since 1998, ban them from bowls for 4 years, take away 40 scholarships, and allow players to transfer at will. For the university, who should be held mostly accountable, let's put them on a 5-year probation and fine them $60 million. That seems fair."
Ndamustomp suh
All-Star
What advantage did this grant the football program? None at all. So why is it the focus of the punishments?
They're basically saying "Oh, one of the assistant coaches was a sex offender? And the head coach reported it to higher officials in the university? Let's take away all their wins since 1998, ban them from bowls for 4 years, take away 40 scholarships, and allow players to transfer at will. For the university, who should be held mostly accountable, let's put them on a 5-year probation and fine them $60 million. That seems fair."
Pretty much this. If anything, they should have just fined them the 60 million and let it be.