Originally posted by Kung Wu
View Post
Why should they do that? (Rhetorical question) Other than medical hardships, is there any precedence for this? If you were another university in the Big 10 or Div. I wouldn't you balk at this?
So you acknowledge that you are punishing a number of innocent people, but that's okay because the seniors will still have a degree? I can get a degree anytime. I can only play my senior year once in a lifetime. I'm not as bothered about those going pro. I'm more bothered about those not going pro.
Again, acknowledging that innocent people get punished, but it's okay because in the long term they'll be just fine. Sure, all these people will be just fine -- but why punish them if they are innocent? The answer can only be: to be sure to stick it to the people that AREN'T innocent. Yet every single one of those that are guilty are gone, and in the shameful manner that they should be gone.
Yes, there most certainly is a way to argue it. Like most Internet chatter on this subject you are ignoring the sequence of events that occurred. Sandusky retired in 1999 after being _cleared of all wrong doing_ of the investigation in 1998. By 2002, 3 years later, when he was actually caught, he would have been just a retired ex-coach. In fact that's a major piece of what is so infuriating about all of this.
The administration could have had his ass properly investigated with only minor damage in reputation to the university or the football program -- completely opposite of your assertion -- yet they sat on it. Context makes a big difference -- and there was just very little at risk in turning over a retired ex-coach with a prior investigation (regardless how clean he turned out on the first incident).
The administration could have had his ass properly investigated with only minor damage in reputation to the university or the football program -- completely opposite of your assertion -- yet they sat on it. Context makes a big difference -- and there was just very little at risk in turning over a retired ex-coach with a prior investigation (regardless how clean he turned out on the first incident).
Yes, I'm very aware of what the public perception is. Regardless of public perception, a pedophile coach sexually assualting a child is a criminal matter WAY, WAY, WAY beyond the jurisdiction of the NCAA (as if NCAA has any jurisdiction at all). And a cheeseburger is a recruiting violation, like it or not, and is clearly in the "jurisdiction" of the NCAA gestapo.
The good knews is, I swim upstream alone on this and all you guys will get your way. I give them a 99.99% chance of getting the one year ban based purely on public pressure alone. Though if they wait until after the court proceedings to make a decision on the one year ban, I doubt the public pressure will be as palpable (because the court system will have taken care of business already).
The good knews is, I swim upstream alone on this and all you guys will get your way. I give them a 99.99% chance of getting the one year ban based purely on public pressure alone. Though if they wait until after the court proceedings to make a decision on the one year ban, I doubt the public pressure will be as palpable (because the court system will have taken care of business already).
Comment