[kyp275]

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

Considering that there is no evidence that would stand up in any court of law that he definitely did something bad, I disagree. But, that doesn't mean that I don't think that it's more likely than not that he did something very bad.

NCAA is not a court of law, it doesn't not require a beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard.

That said, to anyone who believes Paterno was not guilty... I've got some bridges I'd like to sell too

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

No, not at all. You can agree to almost anything ("almost" because contracts cannot be for illegal ventures/actions/means/etc.). That consent decree is the only thing that will allow this punishment to stand. The NCAA has absolutely no ground for imposing punishment on a member institution that didn't actually break any NCAA rules.

I'd say lack of institutional control is good enough for the rest of of us.

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

Look at it this way. If a guy pays his taxes like clockwork every year, the IRS is happy. If that same guy runs down a pedestrian in a cross-walk, it's the state that administers punishment, not the IRS, even though the guy is a taxpayer. In this situation, the NCAA is the IRS. Penn State has always complied with NCAA rules, but now Penn State, because it is a member of the NCAA (like our loyal taxpayer above), the NCAA (unlike the IRS) is administering a punishment for crimes (allegedly, remember... no convictions on two people and no charges against two others...) committed that were not even tangential to what the NCAA actually administers.

That's just a strawman and you know it. Penn State didn't cover for Sandusky for the lulz, it covered for Sandusky in order to protect its football program. And again, NCAA is not a government entity nor does is it a court of law, it doesn't need to operate within the same standard.

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

Where did I imply that? I am merely saying that if Penn State gets this kind of punishment without actually having ever violated an NCAA regulation, what kind of punishment should schools who ACTUALLY violate the regulations receive?

You just did again. The failure to see this really shows your bias here. You're saying that schools that breaks even some simple NCAA rules should receive a harsher punishment than Penn State simply because there was no specific statues in NCAA rules about covering up for child rapists

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

That is exactly the kind of attitude I've taken about this whole situation, actually. Until now. Because until now, there have been reasonable bases for the backlash... this, however, has been completed unwarranted.

only to the Penn State apologists

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

I have been very upset with how this situation has been handled (or, rather, bungled) by the Penn State administration. What Jerry Sandusky did was horrible and he deserves to rot in prison (assuming he even survives to die on his own, because child molesters do not fare well in prison). If our administrators really were involved in a cover-up, they deserve to rot, too. But there are ways to handle a crisis like this and there are ways NOT to handle the crisis. The Penn State administration has definitely been in the latter category.

really? I bet you think OJ didn't do it either

Originally Posted by KiRa08o2

Rather than the NCAA, I'd prefer that the US Department of Education or something of the like takes action, since this is not really a case about just football. Child rape and such crime are matters that the court and the government take, not organisations such as NCAA, since this is past issues such with steroids and money, etc.

Because of Penn State covered up those crimes to protect the football program, NCAA really had little choice but to act, else it risks becoming a irrelevant entity. Penn State should consider itself lucky that the NCAA took these steps, if the DOE were forced to sanction Penn State via the Clery Act, it could be far more devastating.