Quote:
Originally Posted by jonumberone
I'm not in favor of any punishment for Penn State!
While it was a heinous crime, and the cover-up is reprehensible, those involved are no longer involved with the program.
Punishing Penn State football will only hurt the students and slow the rebuilding of a program, that is desperate to heal.
|
I've heard that argument a LOT in the last week or so, and am pretty tired of it. I heard one guy on Sirius radio use this reasoning, saying that it's not right to further hurt the school, hurt the students who love the school, hurt the fans who love the school and program and would have to miss out on games lost, hurt the people who make a living from the program in some way (think vendors who sell at games, etc). Yeah, that would hurt them SO much more than Sandusky was allowed to hurt those poor kids
Give me a break!!!
Using that line of reasoning, almost NO programs should ever receive NCAA punishment then. I'm a UK Wildcat B'Ball fan from way back. When Eddie Sutton's program got in big trouble in the late '80's, the program lost big time. Eddie and his son Sean (who was the one who was supposedly taking tests for Erik Manuel), in the meantime got to move on to OK State to continue coaching/playing with no such punishment. I believe Manuel finished college at a NAIA school, while UK lost scholarships and tournament opportunities. This punished the athletes, fans, students, and all those connected with the UK program that made money from it (vendors, etc). And it SHOULD have been punished. The program was doing wrong, got caught, and had to be punished. Those who ran the program, coach included, were part of a culture that felt it was above it all. Harsh punishment was needed, as much as I hated to feel the repercussions as a fan.
The issue at Penn State may not have been one where improper activity was knowingly conducted by those in the program and/or running the program to directly and improperly help student athletes/staff personally or give the program a competitive advantage. But the way those at the top (including Paterno) handled things with Sandusky allowed him continued access to all things Penn State Football, which he used to continue his evil, and the covering up of his activities by the CULTURE of Penn State leadership (if the Freeh report is correct) kept the Penn State Way untarnished to the public view, which kept the recruits coming in, along with student, alumni, and corporate support. This IS a program issue on this side of it, and would be one area where the NCAA should be looking to level sanctions to the football program because of the way Sandusky was handled by Penn State. Because Penn State leadership covered this issue up, they received improper benefits in recruiting and support of the program. Think that's a weak argument? I'd say they had much more benefit from covering this up (while it stayed covered up) than those OSU kids got from trading for tattoos. Did the NCAA let THAT coverup go unpunished???
I realize that the student athletes were nowhere involved in this, and it sucks for them. But this became all about the program leadership doing anything they could to cover the evil up to protect The Penn State Way. There was more concern shown for Sandusky than for any of his victims. The program has to be punished for this, whether those responsible are still there or not. The culture HAS to change, especially in light of what that culture did in the face of such horrible evil. Given what I'm still hearing and reading since the Freeh report broke, the culture is still fully in place.