99BlownYellowGT Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Its a shame OSU is going through its own problems because i imagine the floodgate would have opened for their best players to come here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hahn Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Who cares about by laws on an issue this big. I agree with everything the NCAA is doing, including ruining JoePas "legacy". He brought this on himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Who cares about by laws on an issue this big. I agree with everything the NCAA is doing, including ruining JoePas "legacy". He brought this on himself. I care because it is setting a new precedent on future sanctions by the NCAA for actions not covered in the bylaws. Just wait till a team goes on probation because they had a few guys get DUIs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 faculty/staff lying, hiding, and manipulating information isn't against NCAA bylaws? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 faculty/staff lying, hiding, and manipulating information isn't against NCAA bylaws? it is when they are hiding something against the bylaws Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsey Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 The NCAA shouldnt have to have laws against child rape and the following cover-ups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 The NCAA shouldnt have to have laws against child rape and the following cover-ups. That's right, because the state has laws on that, as well as the DoE. The NCAA's job is to oversee competitive programs and the bylaws that go with that, not solve crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsey Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 That's right, because the state has laws on that, as well as the DoE. The NCAA's job is to oversee competitive programs and the bylaws that go with that, not solve crimes. This may be a dumb question; but can the state make rulings on the college program like the NCAA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 This may be a dumb question; but can the state make rulings on the college program like the NCAA? The DoE can cut all federal funding to PSU and disallow use of federal loans for PSU tuition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I have to agree with LJ on this. I do not like the precedent set by this decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsey Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 The DoE can cut all federal funding to PSU and disallow use of federal loans for PSU tuition But no Vacation of wins or bowl bans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 the rule that is referred to is 10.1, which the only precedent in the Penn State case is that the violations are not attached to another violation. In the same article you posted, it did state the actions of the staff not reporting the violation does fall under 10.1. I understand that you are upset the the NCAA put the hammer down on your program. In order to publicly move on for the university they allowed themselves to be hammered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 This may be a dumb question; but can the state make rulings on the college program like the NCAA? There are also national/state certifications that universities have in order to prove their academic standard and can ultimately be taken away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 the rule that is referred to is 10.1, which the only precedent in the Penn State case is that the violations are not attached to another violation. In the same article you posted, it did state the actions of the staff not reporting the violation does fall under 10.1. It WOULD be a 10.1, but they had no duty to report those to the NCAA, nor does the NCAA have the authority to enforce LAWS broken, only their own bylaws. Had Penn State not wanted to play ball, Emmert was not authorized to unilaterally impose punishments.— That means that the NCAA could not act because they did not have any direct violations to penalize for I understand that you are upset the the NCAA put the hammer down on your program. In order to publicly move on for the university they allowed themselves to be hammered. LOL WTF? Dumbest fucking statement of the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 But no Vacation of wins or bowl bans? That does what kind of good when ultimately the cover up was at the top and many many LAWS were broken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bicranium Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 I care because it is setting a new precedent on future sanctions by the NCAA for actions not covered in the bylaws. Just wait till a team goes on probation because they had a few guys get DUIs lol... like I said, I don't think this power is going to be used very often if ever again. And certainly not for something as low-level as a few DUI's. Maybe if about 20 kids have DUI's over a 10 year period and 8 of them killed people and it was all covered up by the head coach/administration for a decade... then they can bust the power out again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 lol... like I said, I don't think this power is going to be used very often if ever again. And certainly not for something as low-level as a few DUI's. Maybe if about 20 kids have DUI's over a 10 year period and 8 of them killed people and it was all covered up by the head coach/administration for a decade... then they can bust the power out again. Maybe Emmert won't use it, but it sets a bad precedent. They would have never gotten away with these punishments had PSU not blindly signed off, and that is a problem. It makes it so much harder for other schools to appeal punishments and so on. It broadens the scope of the NCAA so much that basically, that can no longer be used as a defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10phone2 Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 since the articles you posted are not enough. Here is the exact 10.1 from the NCAA: https://admin.xosn.com/fls/600/academics/PDFs/NCAAAcceptance.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=600 you will find in the first sentence it states: "may include, but is not limited to" which basically gives the NCAA the greyarea in order to reach such conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 since the articles you posted are not enough. Here is the exact 10.1 from the NCAA: https://admin.xosn.com/fls/600/academics/PDFs/NCAAAcceptance.pdf?DB_OEM_ID=600 you will find in the first sentence it states: "may include, but is not limited to" which basically gives the NCAA the greyarea in order to reach such conclusions. No it doesn't Had Penn State not wanted to play ball, Emmert was not authorized to unilaterally impose punishments.— Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Every opinion I have read from lawyers that deal with this kind of stuff say that PSU would have destroyed the NCAA in an appeal had they not blindly signed off on this beforehand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bicranium Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 So again, the precedent is set that the school will have to agree beforehand to not appealing for this kind of thing to happen. Unless it's something so shameful such as what happened at PSU, no school will be doing that. This power will not be abused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinisterSS Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 But no Vacation of wins or bowl bans? they said they're vacating 111 wins plus a 4 year bowl ban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinisterSS Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 Every opinion I have read from lawyers that deal with this kind of stuff say that PSU would have destroyed the NCAA in an appeal had they not blindly signed off on this beforehand. see that's why I thought there would be a lawsuit, I didn't know they agreed to not appeal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 So again, the precedent is set that the school will have to agree beforehand to not appealing for this kind of thing to happen. No, the precedent is set that the NCAA can impose sanctions outside of their bylaws. Them agreeing to not appeal does not change that, it changes the way appeals will be looked at in the future. Unless it's something so shameful such as what happened at PSU, no school will be doing that. This power will not be abused. I disagree. I think the NCAA will use it as a case to justify any and all sanctions from here on out, making appeals that much harder, and not just in cases of sanctions outside of bylaws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2highpsi Posted July 23, 2012 Report Share Posted July 23, 2012 That's right, because the state has laws on that, as well as the DoE. The NCAA's job is to oversee competitive programs and the bylaws that go with that, not solve crimes. I have to agree with LJ on this. I do not like the precedent set by this decision. Are you guys serious? Who gives a shit about the precedent. We are talking about a santioning body punishing an organization who CHOOSES to be part of the said system. We aren't talking about constitutional infringments here. If PSU (or any school) doesn't like what is imposed on them, then they can secede. The fact that we (as a country) have all but abandoned common sense, in lieu of a bunch of contract toting lawers looking for loopholes and technicalities to justify stupidity sickens me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.