Will Joe Paterno AND Penn State Football Both Die in 2012?

[PANK!]

Just trying to do some housekeeping around this shit-for-brains site.

For some sort of continuity's sake.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

I was totally expecting a poll.

[PANK!]

I was totally expecting a poll.

[PANK!]

DPD.

I'm sure everyone involved breathed a big sigh of relief when Jerry decided to take early retirement and focus his energy on his foundation for at-risk youth. But not before they pulled some strings to get the pedo a lump-sum pension payout and unwarranted emeritus status.

And none of that was until after someone likely dropped a few wink-wink-nudge-nudges to let other schools know not to hire him.

Boers and Bernstein, who unsurprisngly have been on this since the beginning, at one point somewhere between the end of the trial and the Freeh Report I'm pretty sure, were discussing some report or supposed situation (totally quick google search didn't help me) wherein Paterno tried strong-arming some small liberal arts college college in PA (Altoona?) into sinking expense in developing  a football program, the idea being that JOEPA was setting up Sandusky--whom he knew was toxic-- to succeed elsewhere (just not around him).

If this were true, then I'd say Paterno's done his homework in acting all Catholic Churchy re: priest child rape.

Get this freak away from me...but, make sure he goes somewhere else nice.  

Not to go all out on a Chip Caray limb, but I'm astounded that the damages to yet-to-be-victimized children apparently never occured to this dead dick.  The more I read and hear, the more awful Joe Paterno sounds as a human being.

[PANK!]

TPD

Bobby Bowden:  TAKE DOWN THIS STATUE!

Really a  non-story otherwise.  Besides the provocative headline, Bowden's as equivocal as the Paterno family et.al.  I predict that soon, all of these people will just figure out to not say anything unless they're ready to totally condemn this man (though part of me--though still disgusted--admits to enjoying what a stupid fucking asshat Matt Millen continues to prove to be).  6 decades of good deeds is not on the "other side of the ledger" from bad deeds like child rape, folks.  Stop talking about what good he did now.

[Eli]

Christ, Paterno was honestly going to let Sandusky KEEP HIS FUCKING JOB as long as JOEPA was still there, I guess because we could all rest easy knowing the Old Man was keeping an eye on Uncle Jer.

Well, according to Bill James, Paterno didn't do anything wrong.

The Freeh reports states quite explicitly and at least six times (a) that the 1998 incident did NOT involve any criminal conduct—on the part of Sandusky or anyone else—and (b) that Paterno had forced the resignation of Sandusky before the 1998 incident occurred.

The 1998 incident was perceived AT THE TIME to involve no criminal conduct. The May 3, 1998 incident was very, very, very thoroughly investigated by at least four different agencies (University police, state police, and two different child welfare agencies), all four of which issued written reports stating that no criminal event had occurred. In retrospect, since the actions were part of a pattern of criminal conduct, it may be said that they were criminal conduct in and of themselves, but no one saw that at the time.

In any case, what EXACTLY is it that Paterno should have done? Fire him again? It is preposterous to argue, in my view, that PATERNO should have taken action after all of the people who were legally charged to take action had thoroughly examined the case and decided that no action was appropriate.

I'm off sabermetrics forever.

[Bort]

There must be some sort of SABR blind spot, because Posnanski was also ready to defend.

[Eli]

There must be some sort of SABR blind spot, because Posnanski was also ready to defend.

That's because he's got a book coming out about Paterno in a few months.

[PANK!]

There must be some sort of SABR blind spot, because Posnanski was also ready to defend.

That's because he's got a book coming out about Paterno in a few months.

I'm going to give James the benefit of the end of the day to radically revise or totally recant this. 

[Slaky]

There must be some sort of SABR blind spot, because Posnanski was also ready to defend.

That's because he's got a book coming out about Paterno in a few months.

I'm going to give James the benefit of the end of the day to radically revise or totally recant this. 

I don't get how anyone can come out in defense of this man let alone two reasonable, intelligent people. This is just baffling.

[Fork]

Back to the original question, the answer is probably no. Under NCAA rules, the DP can only be given to a school that's on probation and commits a violation.

Besides, both the NCAA and Big 10 have too large a vested interest in Penn State.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

Back to the original question, the answer is probably no. Under NCAA rules, the DP can only be given to a school that's on probation and commits a violation.

Once again: I don't think this is true at all...

Plus, I believe a school has to already be on probation to be eligible for it.

As ever, I'm no law-talking guy (and I've only really browsed the NCAA manual for a few minutes), but it doesn't look to me like that's the case...

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D1_2012_01.pdf

Page 335:

19.02.2 types of violations.

19.02.2.1 Violation, Secondary. A secondary violation is a violation that is isolated or inadvertent in nature, provides or is intended to provide only a minimal recruiting, competitive or other advantage and does not include any significant impermissible benefit (including, but not limited to, an extra benefit, recruiting inducement, preferential treatment or financial aid). Multiple secondary violations by a member institution may collectively be considered as a major violation. (Revised: 1/11/94, 10/28/10)

19.02.2.2 Violation, Major. All violations other than secondary violations are major violations, specifically including those that provide an extensive recruiting or competitive advantage. (Revised: 1/11/94)

Page 338:

19.5.2 Penalties for Major violations.  Penalties for a major violation shall be significantly more severe than those for a secondary violation and shall be consistent with the penalty structure and guidelines used by other regulatory committees (e.g., Division I Committee on Academic Performance). The Committee on Infractions may impose one or more of the following penalties: (Revised: 4/28/11 for any institution that receives a notice of inquiry after 4/28/11)

...

(g) Prohibition against specified competition in the sport (including, but not limited to, postseason competition, invitational tournaments and exempt contests or dates of competition, such as foreign tours or contests in Alaska or Hawaii), particularly in cases in which:
    (1) An involved individual remains employed at the institution;
    (2) A significant competitive advantage resulted from the violation;
    (3) The violation reflects a lack of institutional control, failure to monitor a program, or a violation of the cooperative principle set forth in Bylaw 32.1.4;
    (4) The violation includes findings of academic fraud; or
    (5) The institution is a repeat violator (as defined in Bylaw 19.5.2.1).

...

(l) Other penalties as appropriate.

A lot of power there under 'l'.

The repeat violator rule (19.5.2.1) does specifically prescribe "prohibition of some or all outside competition in the sport involved in the latest major violation for a prescribed period" as a possible penalty for a program found in violation within five years of a previous violation.

But it doesn't prevent the NCAA from also serving up a similar penalty in other situations if they deem it appropriate.

That is to say, the repeat violator rule isn't there to limit the use of the "death penalty", but rather to make it more likely in the particular case of a repeat violator.

The NCAA has pretty damn broad authority to determine what schools can participate in what NCAA sports and when.

Yes, it would be an unprecedented use of the punishment in this case. But it's also unprecedented for a sports program to cover up serial child rape for over a decade.

[Fork]

But the main culprits are all either fired, dead, or in jail. They'll get punishment (no bowl games for x years), but not the full SMU.

As i said earlier:

Besides, both the NCAA and Big 10 have too large a vested interest in Penn State.

[Brownie]

But the main culprits are all either fired, dead, or in jail. They'll get punishment (no bowl games for x years), but not the full SMU.

As i said earlier:

Besides, both the NCAA and Big 10 have too large a vested interest in Penn State.

Here's how to effectively kill them: Jim Delaney can call the best lawyers money can buy from their Wacker Drive suites and summon them to Higgins and Dee rds. to look at how to remove PSU from the conference and replace them with a willing suitor (Rutgers, WVU, Louisville, Notre Dame, Iowa State, KSU, KU and Miami Ohio would all consider such a move).

Would Penn State sue? Maybe, but at what point do they just take some kind of settlement and go quietly into the good night knowing that it'll be very difficult to justify legal expenses that make up approx 80% of the GDP of Central PA, especially as litigation against them starts flowing.

I don't think the other Big Ten member schools would mind kicking out Penn State and replacing them with a school closer to the rest of the conference, with a cleaner image. They'd lose access to the Philly market, you say? Replace them with Rutgers, and you have the Philly market and you sacrifice CFiPA's center of the universe to gain a market with a couple dozen million more eyeballs.

Kick Penn State out of the Big Ten and who will take them? The Big East? The Atlantic 10 (they seem happy to have added George Mason, VCU and Butler)? The California Penal League? That's the non-NCAA nuclear option. The Big Ten will be just fine, thank you.

[Chuck to Chuck]

I was totally expecting a poll.