Of course, this is not about punishing Penn State for the vile acts committed by one person affiliated with the program, this is all about the cover-up. It always is. The power given to the football program at PSU was abused in a vain attempt to put the interests of the football program over the best interest of humanity. I sincerely hope that the justice system finds a way to properly award those who are actually at fault for the acts that went on under their watch.
I'd like to appluad the NCAA on acting promptly - nothing the NCAA does is done with this promptness it has seemed. This will serve as a basis to judge all future NCAA actions in timeliness. Now, lets examine what the NCAA actually accomplished today.
From The Big Lead:
-Penn State has been fined $60 million
-4 year bowl ban
-Vacated wins from 1998-2011
-20 total/10 annual scholarship reduction for 4 yrs
-Any entering or returning players can transfer without penalty
The fine, even if it is not paid by the insurance company (as I read on twitter before the announcement, but have not heard since, so may be untrue), is not very steep. As Forbes is reporting, the football program (at its old pace) was printing cash, and any monetary penalty would have to be much larger to significantly impact the viability of the football program.
The only people that care about the vacated wins are the Penn State fans (maybe) and Paterno's die-hard supporters. We all know who won those games. If this had been a competitive violation, the argument could be made that the wins should be vacated. No one (that I have seen) has suggested that Joe Pa had any significant NCAA violations in that regard. Considering the depth of the Freeh report, maybe this is a real testament to his football integrity.
The competitive penalties are the real, significant, and devastating. No bowl games, a huge loss in scholarships, and an express lane for current players to leave. This mauling of a program, which is more important than any one person, has left me with a bad taste in my mouth. What is the point of it? Why do this?
As I see it, there are three reasons to levy a penalty (from a philosophical perspective):
-Punishment - to remove the advantage gained from having committed the wrongdoing.
-Safety - to ensure that the wrongdoers are not able to continue their acts
-Discouragement - to convince others not to act wrongly in future.
In what ways do the competitive penalties given by the NCAA accomplish this? The only advantage gained by Penn State was that their program's public image remained untainted. I think its safe to say this advantage has been eliminated, organically. The financial penalties are probably fair if not overly lenient - the money going to help victims of child sex abuse.
The individuals that were part of the cover up need to be brought to justice by the court system. The NCAA of course has no part in this, the "safety" aspect. Obviously, the most important individual is already behind bars. Others are going to court for their parts in the cover-up (and lying about it).
Did the NCAA need to destroy the football program to discourage others from doing this? I would hope not. Since we've eliminated the other two aspects, this must be the NCAA's intent. But who is punished by this decision? Mostly, the fans and players. Hundreds of thousands of Penn State fans no longer have a competitive team to cheer for. There is no need to pity them, its just sports - but this isn't how sports should work. The acts of a single individual, and the following enabling acts of a handful of individuals, has lead to an entire program's practical demise.
So, what would be an appropriate discouragement? There was no football advantage - so give the program no football penalties. Education, accountability, oversight, and money. Ensuring the University has to pay for its transgressions. That's how this should have been done.
-4 year bowl ban
-Vacated wins from 1998-2011
-20 total/10 annual scholarship reduction for 4 yrs
-Any entering or returning players can transfer without penalty
The fine, even if it is not paid by the insurance company (as I read on twitter before the announcement, but have not heard since, so may be untrue), is not very steep. As Forbes is reporting, the football program (at its old pace) was printing cash, and any monetary penalty would have to be much larger to significantly impact the viability of the football program.
The only people that care about the vacated wins are the Penn State fans (maybe) and Paterno's die-hard supporters. We all know who won those games. If this had been a competitive violation, the argument could be made that the wins should be vacated. No one (that I have seen) has suggested that Joe Pa had any significant NCAA violations in that regard. Considering the depth of the Freeh report, maybe this is a real testament to his football integrity.
The competitive penalties are the real, significant, and devastating. No bowl games, a huge loss in scholarships, and an express lane for current players to leave. This mauling of a program, which is more important than any one person, has left me with a bad taste in my mouth. What is the point of it? Why do this?
As I see it, there are three reasons to levy a penalty (from a philosophical perspective):
-Punishment - to remove the advantage gained from having committed the wrongdoing.
-Safety - to ensure that the wrongdoers are not able to continue their acts
-Discouragement - to convince others not to act wrongly in future.
In what ways do the competitive penalties given by the NCAA accomplish this? The only advantage gained by Penn State was that their program's public image remained untainted. I think its safe to say this advantage has been eliminated, organically. The financial penalties are probably fair if not overly lenient - the money going to help victims of child sex abuse.
The individuals that were part of the cover up need to be brought to justice by the court system. The NCAA of course has no part in this, the "safety" aspect. Obviously, the most important individual is already behind bars. Others are going to court for their parts in the cover-up (and lying about it).
Did the NCAA need to destroy the football program to discourage others from doing this? I would hope not. Since we've eliminated the other two aspects, this must be the NCAA's intent. But who is punished by this decision? Mostly, the fans and players. Hundreds of thousands of Penn State fans no longer have a competitive team to cheer for. There is no need to pity them, its just sports - but this isn't how sports should work. The acts of a single individual, and the following enabling acts of a handful of individuals, has lead to an entire program's practical demise.
So, what would be an appropriate discouragement? There was no football advantage - so give the program no football penalties. Education, accountability, oversight, and money. Ensuring the University has to pay for its transgressions. That's how this should have been done.
No comments:
Post a Comment