In partnership with CBSSports.com
Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game
Buy, sell and swap tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
We should ask for our money back from Gene Marsh too. That guy is supposed to be an NCAA expert. He was basically worthless.
Don't forget Big Rod is on the BOT. Our prez has a seat on the board (which is wrong) By the time the consent decree came about he was a trustee.
So Erickson is a little bit more than just a puppet. If he wasn't a problem he could join with Lubrano, Clemens, Taliaferro, and McCombie on opening up a public dialogue about this mess.
But he still doesn't have any balls to say anything against the almighty NCAA or his cronies on the BOT (albeit the board could fire him).
Just to clarify, my "he's not the problem" comment was for the consent decree only. The guy is a plug-in... his real calling is as a provost, not a president. I think everyone knows that.
That's a poor analogy because:
1) He could just fold in a poker game and live to fight another day.
2) A decision in a poker game only would affect him and his wallet. In this (just as in my example) there are other people's lives to consider.
Just like with a government contract, a misstep could cost people their jobs and cause irrepairable harm to the company (univeresity). There is a lot of bravado when talking about Erickson's decision... I seriously doubt that even 10% would have done things differently.
This guy gets it.
Sorry jive -- Figured you were familiar with poker.
Not calling a bet is the same as folding. The point of the analogy is that Erickson chose not to challenge, even though the other player telegraphed their hand as not good.
I can tell you, with 100% certainty, unless there is information that nobody except for Erickson has (i.e. something even worse that could be uncovered in the event of an NCAA investigation -- unlikely IMO given no subpena power for NCAA), I would not have taken the same course of action as that POS Rod Erickson. If the BOT would have given me the choice "make a clearly incorrect decision" or resign (as you essentially claim), I would have resigned.
My point with your poker analogy is that there is no risk involved in folding. If you fold, you just lose whatever you already committed. However, if PSU passes, that sets them up for the death penalty. You can say "oh, he was bluffing", but what exactly are you basing that on? The NCAA wanted blood. The members of the executive committee were fully supporting the death penalty. The only way to 100% be sure that we didn't get that was to take the deal.
You can forget about what's right and what's wrong... the NCAA has shown that they don't follow their own rules and procedures. So, we turn down the offer and they do a 1 week investigation and find that we are still guilty of whatever morality clause they referenced, and we get a 4 year death penalty. Could we sue then? Sure... and we would likely win... after YEARS of the NCAA delay. At which point, maybe we end it in year 3 instead of year four... now we have to build up the program from scratch. That's a very real possibility of what could have happened.
FItting to all of this is is the $85k raise the BoT gave Erickson back in December. Not a bad way to live just playing possum.
Do you have a link quoting anyone from the executive committee as "fully supporting the DP" -- let alone something showing that the executive committee AS A WHOLE supported the DP?
And if the executive committee as a whole supported the DP, as you say, why did they do something else? Why didn't they just say "Death Penalty for PSU?"
Also remember Dr. Ray said the DP wasn't seriously discussed. I believe Erickson is the only one insists on that, right?
Correct. Ray has explained quite well why there are what appears to be two different stories out there.
No one knows for sure if Emmert would have given us the DP.........but the way he's been acting I honestly think he would have. We forget at that time the amount of anger there was at PSU and how many people wanted that. It looks kind of crazy now, but I think we all can say that Emmert is an awful and arrogant leader. I fully believe Emmert could have shut the program down, and smiled while doing so.
My biggest sticking point when people say that he never could do that, yes he could. He was given power to do whatever he wanted and to act on unilaterally. No due process, no infractions committee, no response by PSU. Nothing at all was there to help us. Emmert had all the "power" he needed to do whatever he wanted.
Erickson is not a leader, just isn't. Maybe Spanky stands up to the NCAA if he wasn't embroiled in this mess, I don't know. Either way I do believe Emmert could have shut it down if he wanted to.
This post was edited by PSU17 17 months ago
He did? Where is this?
Of course I don't have a direct quote. No one would ever offer that up. But here is an excerpt on what happened...
"That same morning, NCAA President Mark A. Emmert called Penn State President Rodney A. Erickson and told him the majority of the NCAA's Division I board of directors -- 18 university presidents -- had coalesced around a decision: Shut down Penn State's football program for four years. "
The reason they didn't just hand down the death penalty, per the article I have posted is that PSU's lawyer negotiated (more like pleaded) the sanctions down to what they are. Even after it seemed that PSU got the NCAA to reconsider, this happened:
"By late Thursday, back in his home office in Tuscaloosa, Marsh and his fellow lawyers began talking about Penn State's willingness to accept a package of severe sanctions that would not include the death penalty. He felt cautiously optimistic. Then at 6:30 p.m., Marsh's office phone rang, and he was told again that a majority of the university presidents on the board still favored a multiple-year death penalty. After all of Penn State's arguments, he was stunned by the board's continued stance. "
Even after the sanctions were agreed upon without the death penalty, the NCAA was still strong arming PSU:
"That weekend, only Peetz and her executive committee were told about the consent decree or that sanctions were imminent. Those trustees did not tell their colleagues. This was by necessity, university officials say. The NCAA had warned Penn State that if there was a leak about proposed sanctions to the media, the discussions would end and the death penalty would be all but certain. "
So I ask you again, putting yourself in that situation, what would you have done?
Inside the secret negotiations that brought Penn State football to the brink of extinction
This post was edited by getmyjive11 17 months ago
I actually had someone tell me that he had an affair with Triponey while they were both at UConn. I heard this months ago but never heard it from another person. Were you being sarcastic or did you hear the same thing?
The NCAA has to save face. They are being hit from so many sides at this point that they can't decend all their exposed flanks. Emmert is the captain on a sinking ship and the only way to save it is to toss him overboard.
"I tell guys, 'Would you rather go to a Volkswagen dealership to get a Cadillac, or do you go to Cadillac?' "
-- LJ, Sr.
I think mine was more wishful thinking than anything I ever actually heard.
In the end as with the whole other messy situation I would just love for someone to come out and tell the truth for once. It is really starting to make me sick of how these powerful almighty people can just sit around on their high horse and do whatever they want and say whatever they want. Think about all of the things that have been said about the situation with the ncaa.
It is a pretty big deal for someone to say the Death penalty was on the table and then someone come right back and say no it wasn't. I just don't understand why people continue to lie. Either it was or it wasn't, it can't be both ways.
You don't buy the account from Ed Ray. I don't buy this account from Gene Marsh.
There's always the chance I'm wrong, but Ed Ray's account, to me, is WAAAAAAY more likely.
Emmert confirmed that the 4 year ban was on the table.
"In a separate interview, NCAA president Mark Emmert confirmed that a core group of NCAA school presidents had agreed early last week that an appropriate punishment was no Penn State football for four years."
That is how it went down. PSU was strong armed and had no choice. Ed Ray was lying and has since not refuted Emmert's, Erickson's or Gene Marsh's claim that a 4 year death penalty was on the table. Neither have the 18 members on the board of the NCAA.
Erickson is not to blame for this at all.
If Penn State had not accepted the package of NCAA sanctions announced Monday, the Nittany Lions faced a historic death penalty of four years, university president Rodney Erickson told Outside the Lines.
RMJ went from king of the college nightlife, to Attorney. Maybe we should let him chime in on this.....
I'm with jive here. Rod made, what appears today, a poor decision when confronted with a no win situation.
Let's play a "what-if" game.
Rod tells emmert to pound sand.
Emmert and his puppet committee investigate for a couple weeks, and gives PSU a 2 year death penalty, administered by emmert under thew superhuman powers clause of the ncaa charter.
PSU requests, and is granted a temp injunction.
Here is the key problem--given the uncertainty surrouinding the program, all the top recruits -- hack, brenneman' sickels, etc go elsewhere.
OB says he didn't sign on for this uncertainty, chaos and goes to coach the Iggles.
Would things have worked out this way? I don't know. But they certainly could have.
Sometimes, the devil you know is not as bad as the devil you don't know.
If, and its still a big if, PA wins the suit against the ncaa, rod comes out of this looking pretty good.
Again, my problem is now. If PSU stands up and says we were strong armed, our prez didn't have the authority, BOT never ratified the consent decree, and would stand up now. I can't believe the NCAA would have the credibility to make a DP stick.
I may be wrong.
If you are correct Jive we were blackmailed/coerced into excepting this penalty. In what world is that just or even legal?
IMO here is the order to blame for this mess:
2) Gricar/DPW/CYS/whoever "lost" Dr. Chambers report in 1998
3) Raykowitz for being a trained and mandatory reporter who didn't report in 2001
4) Select members of the BOT (of which Erickson is one)
8) Vicky Triponey/Emmert
Even with my hatred for Emmert and the NCAA they are still pretty far down the list. Everyone who is higher on the list gave Emmert the ammo he needed and yes Erickson is one of them.
Jive, I still don't see why you think Erickson is totally blameless. There are people who are more to blame (see last post) but he is not totally blameless either.
I agree he was coerced/blackmailed into agreeing to this. But he was part of the BOT who let it get this far in the first place. The BOT allowed Freeh to grandstand and produce a flawed/incomplete report and slam our university leaders and just blindly accepting it.
True leaders have to make hard decisions not just bow to public opinion.
This post was edited by BKHPSU 17 months ago
Wasn't it Ed Ray the one that leaked the information that after what is going to be announced Penn State would wish for the Death Penalty. Why would all negotiations be off the table if someone from PSU leaked information the NCAA Board was forcing the DP on PSU. This just doesn't sound right why the secrecy? What was the NCAA hiding behind?
Every time Ed Ray's name is mentioned I just want to punch something, I don't wish ill will on anyone except for Ed and Mark.
This post was edited by PSUGeddy 17 months ago
It's murky now as to what we can do after the fact. We are adhearing to the consent decree guidelines right now, so I think a court would see that as a valid contract despite our approval process. But yeah, I'm not sure what the realistic options are for us right now.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports