Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 109
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    section 132
    Posts
    2,648
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State



    psu-

    I was more referring to the board, the administrators, the athletic program, etc. They need to clean house. Period. Thats what i was saying. It really sux for the students and the alumni....but this is a disgusting mess...and heads must roll.




  2. #77

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    I don't disagree with any of that, but the BOD is the only thing left to clean (save that Spanier somehow still has tenure there, which I don't get). And the BOD wasn't in on anything, they just didn't have adequate controls. A lot of companies have that problem. When it's discovered, common action is to bring in consultants (or regulators) to figure out what's wrong, and then implement solutions. Common action is not to fire all executives and replace them with new ones. The BOD could have anything between zero attrition and 100% attrition as a result of this, and honestly I wouldn't have an issue with any of that range.

    And FWIW, if that's what you meant, you should have stated it as such. Those five idiots and the BOD are not the institution. And I've heard too many complete and utter morons saying some form of "burn it all down" to think it's not possible for someone to think it's a good idea.

    - C -
    ---------------------------------------------------

    www.oblongspheroid.com

    A blog about any and everything football.

    Twitter: oblong_spheroid




  3. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Catonsville, MD
    Posts
    781

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by psuasskicker View Post
    One of the big problems here with the school taking action right now (or anyone taking action right now) is that there simply is no agreement on what the right decision is for how to punish the football program.
    To me, it is not so much about "punishing the football program" as it is about putting their priorities in the right place. It was the the overwhelming desire to protect the program, and in many aspects, Paterno himself, that led many to make the decisions that were made. And it was not just the 4 named in the report. Remember the janitor that saw one of the crimes and failed to report it because he was afraid "that they would fire us all"? I suspect there were many others that saw something, or felt something wasn't right, that failed to follow-up for fear of going against the program. That is the culture that needs to be changed.

    A simple, "We are not going to play football for a year or two to let us all focus on making sure the priorities of the University are straight." would be suffice.

    The death penalty likely completely kills the program for decades. Not years, decades. SMU still hasn't recovered. And the football program has played a MAJOR role in the school becoming as great as it has. Not "great" as in "great at football"...as in "such a great learning institution."
    Sorry, I am having a hard time squaring the "price" of a lost football program vs. the damage that has been done to young lives. That type of argument is nonsense squared.

    And SMU is ranked #62 in the US News and World Report 2010 ranking of US colleges. Seems like they are doing ok.

    If temporarily removing the football program is going to impact the university to that degree, then that tells me that it truly does need to be shut-down for a while. There are many "great universities" around the world that don't revolve around a "great football team", or a football team at all. How do they manage?
    Last edited by PeterB58; 07-15-2012 at 12:18 PM.




  4. #79
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,911
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Even if they don't formally do anything to the football program I would imagine that they're going to suffer a bit anyway because it is going to be that much harder to recruit players for Penn State's program in the near future.

    For PSU: (See...I can find things on the interwebs too!!!! Imagine that!)

    http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/co...l.html?nav=746
    Holtz is the third player to decommit since Paterno's firing. Four-star Colorado guard Joey O'Connor was the first, followed by Mechanicsburg linebacker Bryton Barr. Barr was coming to Penn State as an invited walk-on but received a scholarship offer from Cincinnati around the time the Sandusky scandal broke.
    http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...g=ycn-10897153
    Given all of the circumstances surrounding the program there wasn't going to be an elite class of major recruits. Penn State had some but lost them.
    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...ost-in-the-mix
    Penn State Nittany Lions had the unimpressive 2012 recruiting class that everyone expected following the turmoil in Happy Valley this season.

    The Nittany Lions managed to sign 19 players, with just one 4-star prospect among them.

    Penn State's new arrivals are projects for the most part, outside of Eugene Lewis.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/9...usting-scandal
    The effects can already be seen in this tweet by prized recruit Noah Spence.

    "@nspence94

    um psu might be a no no for me ewww"


    According to Scout.com, Spence is the No. 1 rated defensive end recruit in the nation.
    Last edited by wickedsolo; 07-15-2012 at 03:18 PM. Reason: So PSU is Happy. Because that's what we're here for. :-)
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  5. #80

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterB58 View Post
    To me, it is not so much about "punishing the football program" as it is about putting their priorities in the right place.

    A simple, "We are not going to play football for a year or two to let us all focus on making sure the priorities of the University are straight." would be suffice.

    Sorry, I am having a hard time squaring the "price" of a lost football program vs. the damage that has been done to young lives. That type of argument is nonsense squared.
    You haven't really made a compelling case for WHY shutting down a program that Forbes estimates to be worth $100MM would allow for the school to completely refocus itself and ensure that the football program is entirely realized to be not all that important. Why is death penalty - self imposed or not - the required step that must be taken in order to ensure something like this doesn't happen again?

    I also don't think you understand just how much such a thing would impact the school. It's hard to describe, but the cost of shutting down the football program for even a year would be dramatically more than simply the lost income for a season. The football program brings in approximately 100k people to the area in the weekends where there is a game. Take out the stuff they buy at football games (tickets, food, beer, etc). If each of these people on average spend $20 per person per weekend they're in town, over seven home games, you're talking about a $14MM hit to the local economy, and that $20 estimate is frankly extremely low. I think the overall economic impact to the university and the surrounding town's economy would be $100MM just next year if they shut down the football program, and would be probably half that ongoing for however many years it would take for the school to fully recover.

    And while SMU isn't terrible right now, they simply aren't what they once were. Big football programs - like it or not - bring a lot more to a school than simply great football. National recognition as a powerful football school brings in students, brings in funding, and brings in a lot more than just general football-related income.

    Take the hospital/clinic piece out of the 2012-2013 income budget for the school, and the $50MM-$75MM that the football program is expected to earn for the university represents 1.6% - 2.5% of the entirety of the school's revenues. That includes all satellite campuses, not just University Park. If you talk just University Park, the football program is about 3%-5% of its revenues. That's a gigantic impact. And that also assumes there are absolutely no other impacts as a result of removal of the football program, which is not a good assumption to make.

    Your suggestion is not so simple as to just put aside football and it won't really have that big an impact on the university. Shutting down the program for a year has a massive impact on the welfare of the school and the community around it. And it is arguable how much of a positive impact it would make to reset peoples' priorities. If it were black and white, such that you could say "If you don't shut the program down, this sort of thing could continue; but if you do shut it down, everyone will realize this can't continue and it will never happen again," then it's a pretty good argument to make.

    But it's NOT that black and white. Why would the solution of shutting the program down work better than, say, eliminating ten scholarships for the program for the next two years, and/or making them ineligible for a bowl game for the next two years, and/or any of some other far less drastic actions would would have nowhere close to the negative impact shutting it down completely would have on the school? How exactly would shutting it down completely ensure that everyone takes your attitude and realizes the football program isn't that important and guarantees nothing like this would ever happen again?

    And so, like I said, this is not such an easy answer, and I don't think anyone should be rushing to come to judgment on what should happen as a result of this situation.

    - C -
    Last edited by psuasskicker; 07-15-2012 at 02:45 PM.
    ---------------------------------------------------

    www.oblongspheroid.com

    A blog about any and everything football.

    Twitter: oblong_spheroid




  6. #81

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Even if they don't formally do anything to the football program, they're going to suffer for a long time anyway because no top recruits are going to want to play there.
    You argued this before. Rivals disagrees. So does Scout. I already pointed that out to you. Come up with a better argument, because yours is completely inaccurate.

    - C -
    ---------------------------------------------------

    www.oblongspheroid.com

    A blog about any and everything football.

    Twitter: oblong_spheroid




  7. #82
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,911
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by psuasskicker View Post
    You argued this before. Rivals disagrees. So does Scout. I already pointed that out to you. Come up with a better argument, because yours is completely inaccurate.

    - C -
    Just my opinion. Not really an argument.


    But here, I'll go ahead and re-word it so you can better understand what I was trying to say.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  8. #83

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Other than Spence, those links you posted mostly didn't say anything that would indicate your point. The guy that decommitted we would have lost anyway because he wasn't a scholarship player and he got offered one elsewhere. The bleacherreport article is stupid...it's either very old or very inaccurate, because all the major scouting sites have PSU having signed a solid number of 4-star recruits, many of whom signed close to commit-day. The Rivals article says they lost a QB, which is far from the first time a big time QB recruit has been lost. With no statement that it's from this problem, that's a stretch to assume, especially since the guy committed to PSU initially AFTER the scandal broke. Spence we never had a shot at anyway, so I don't really care what he said.

    The point is, you're claiming it's having a big negative impact on their football recruiting. But PSU has signed their strongest recruiting class in years, and second strongest I think in the last decade and a half. It's a claim that a lot of people are making, but it doesn't seem to be bearing out.

    - C -
    ---------------------------------------------------

    www.oblongspheroid.com

    A blog about any and everything football.

    Twitter: oblong_spheroid




  9. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,911
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by psuasskicker
    The point is, you're claiming it's having a big negative impact on their football recruiting. But PSU has signed their strongest recruiting class in years, and second strongest I think in the last decade and a half. It's a claim that a lot of people are making, but it doesn't seem to be bearing out.
    For someone who doesn't like to have words put in their mouth, you sure as hell do a lot of that. I never said it is having a "big negative impact". I said that their program will likely suffer (which it already has to a certain degree) and it may be quite some time before they fully recover from this.

    All I'm saying is that as this stuff continues to unfold it isn't exactly an unreasonable expectation or speculation that players will leave the program, ask for release from their scholarship, and guys coming out of high school (due to the uncertainty of the program) may opt to go to other places.

    That is simple psychology 101. I'm not basing it on anything other than my own opinion and some of the things I've read.

    In my opinion it is reasonable to think that Penn State's football recruitment is going to take a hit over the next couple of years. Especially if the NCAA or whoever issues sanctions, takes away scholarships, suspends the program, etc.
    Last edited by wickedsolo; 07-15-2012 at 04:41 PM.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  10. #85

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    It is disgusting that Penn State will be able to profit from having a football program after this. Purely disgusting.




  11. #86

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    For someone who doesn't like to have words put in their mouth, you sure as hell do a lot of that. I never said it is having a "big negative impact". I said that their program will likely suffer (which it already has to a certain degree) and it may be quite some time before they fully recover from this.
    You're going to have to explain to me the difference between those two things.

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensNTerps View Post
    It is disgusting that Penn State will be able to profit from having a football program after this. Purely disgusting.
    No it's not. It would be disgusting if Paterno were still able to coach the football team. It would be disgusting if Curley, Schultz or Spanier were still holding high executive standing in the school such that they could draw advantages from having a football program that makes a profit.

    It is riot-mentality thinking to say what you said, because you're not considering the positive impacts the football program provides to hundreds of thousands of people, nor the negative impacts that shutting the program down would have on hundreds of thousands of people, all of whom are innocent of any wrong-doing or impropriety in this situation.

    - C -
    ---------------------------------------------------

    www.oblongspheroid.com

    A blog about any and everything football.

    Twitter: oblong_spheroid




  12. #87

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by psuasskicker View Post
    You argued this before. Rivals disagrees. So does Scout. I already pointed that out to you. Come up with a better argument, because yours is completely inaccurate.

    - C -
    It will be interesting to see if they can hold on to an excellent class. I think it may prove to be difficult. Other schools are going to go after their recruits hard.




  13. #88

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by psuasskicker View Post
    You're going to have to explain to me the difference between those two things.



    No it's not. It would be disgusting if Paterno were still able to coach the football team. It would be disgusting if Curley, Schultz or Spanier were still holding high executive standing in the school such that they could draw advantages from having a football program that makes a profit.

    It is riot-mentality thinking to say what you said, because you're not considering the positive impacts the football program provides to hundreds of thousands of people, nor the negative impacts that shutting the program down would have on hundreds of thousands of people, all of whom are innocent of any wrong-doing or impropriety in this situation.

    - C -

    Sorry but that is the classic cult mentality. Had Sandusky acted alone, I'd agree with you completely that while disgusting, the program shouldn't be punished for the actions of one awful man. But the ENTIRE INSTITUTION from the molestor, to his boss, to the assistant AD, to the AD, to the president, to the board of trustees was involved in this. You can't just turn your back because 4 specific people are now gone. That's complete and utter horseshit. The problem was clearly at the institutional level. If you let the university to continue to profit after making the institutional-level decisions that they made to enable and cover up a known child molestor that's akin to if Enron was still operating because law enforcement felt bad for the secretaries and the analysts and the janitors that worked for them that had no knowledge of what their superiors were up to.

    Does it suck that there are uninvolved parties who will have to endure the consequences of others? Absolutely. Should that be the primary consideration? Hell no. The entire institution, literally from top to bottom, was broken and corrupt. I don't see how you can just let this slide as "well those parties are gone so you can't punish who is there now!"

    Bullshit. You are punishing the institution that failed probably hundreds of little children by literally turning a blind eye for years from a man they knew was a predator. That institution should not in any way, shape, or form be allowed to benefit financially from the exact program that broke the system in the first place. You can't go back in time and change things retrospectively. Had the institution not failed those victims, then we wouldn't be having this conversation now.

    Years ago an institutional decision was made that the profits generated from the football program was more important than the short term consequences of simply turning in a known predator. You can't ignore that an allow them to continue to profit.
    Last edited by RavensNTerps; 07-16-2012 at 08:29 AM.




  14. #89
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,911
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    I think that is one of the biggest reasons why there are so many who are of the "go get'em" mentality. Had they nipped this in the bud a decade ago when it was first brought to light then it would have been a major issue, but in the long run it would have made Penn State look a lot better.

    This whole thing has really left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths and has left, not only the athletic department, but the entire institution with a major black eye.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  15. #90
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Wilmington, North Carolina
    Posts
    3,294
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Freeh Report and the Future of Penn State

    Quote Originally Posted by RavensNTerps View Post
    The problem was clearly at the institutional level. If you let the university to continue to profit after making the institutional-level decisions that they made to enable and cover up a known child molestor that's akin to if Enron was still operating because law enforcement felt bad for the secretaries and the analysts and the janitors that worked for them that had no knowledge of what their superiors were up to.
    In each case, the individuals at the "institutional level" who knew about it and were responsible for it were investigated and prosecuted. In Enron, the company simply went bankrupt directly because of the actions of those criminals. Nobody "punished" Enron as a whole. It just didn't have the money to pay its debts because its accounting was totally fraudulent. Then the creditors and shareholders came in with lawsuits to recoup the money they'd had stolen from them, essentially.

    The only real comparison here is that PSU does have to deal with the victims and their legal claims, which will be substantial. That is the full extent to which there can be collective punishment of the university.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland