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.
That's not the argument... But OK. If the collateral damages are bad enough (which the state is claiming), and the NCAA didn't follow it's own rules (also what the state is claiming), an antitrust case can be made- and will be.
WE ARE! And we will always be...
ESPN is too busy attempting to clear Manti Te'o's name.
The primary point of the consent decree was to eliminate the possibility of PSU challenging (I.e. suing) the sanctions. It wasn't some minor aspect of it. The NCAA may have wanted to make it seem that way by adding a bunch of fluff to the decree and burying the "you can't sue" line in a clause but they knew they were out of line and that's why they didn't just hand down the sanctions but rather went the consent decree route.
Ummm, I think the sanctions were a pretty big part of the consent decree if Im not mistaken... But yeah, they were smart to bury that clause.
This post was edited by rmj147 18 months ago
Right - but there is still merit with PA suing NCAA and getting sanctions reduced? I even think PSU could sue if they can prove Erickson was threatened or bullied into signing the decree.
You're missing the point. The NCAA could have enacted the sanctions without the consent decree. They just would have been vulnerable to an immediate lawsuit by PSU. The consent decree minimized the chances of said lawsuit.
Or simply mislead. Rod has been on record from the beginning that his options were multiple years of death penalty or sanctions.
I understand that. I am just saying that they way they buried it was very effective. I browsed it and didn't really read it like I would have if I was working, so that's my fault probably. But i shouldn't be surprised. The NCAA has good attys. Too bad the state of PA has good ones too lol @ Emmert.
which is why the state of PA is suing over the detriment the sanctions are going to have towards the state and also that PSU was 'forced' into the consent decree. Not sure where you're going with this but it's down the wrong alley. I do agree that the consent decree might hurt the state's "standing" in the case though but it's not a deal breaker. It's important the state included PSU was forced into signing it in its complaint. We'll see.
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by PSU12 18 months ago
I really am curious what exactly the sanctions were going to be tomorrow for Miami.
I want to compare them to what they will be after the internal investigation takes place.
I am honestly not trying to go down any road except that I am not getting my hopes up that this helps one single bit.
All the lawyers I have talked to since the beginning have said that PSU was doomed from the beginning because of the consent decree.
I am just repeating what they were telling me basically.
I do wonder about other schools that actually got investigated and were penalized how they will react......again there was never an investigation at PSU and thus why a botched investigation elsewhere might not have an effect.
That and this is only the 4th story on ESPN, again part of the hammer came from ESPN running a 24 hour a day Penn State Saga Story, that in turn fired up the nations, and in turn gave an opening to some people that didn't like PSU for one reason or another.
Hell yeah to the last part about TC's attys being smart to include Erickson being forced. Genius. Pure genius. We are in good hands with those attys. Love it.
It's an antitrust case. The lawyers you talked to must be bad ones lol
I guess you've been talking to different lawyers...I've seen a total of 1, anywhere, say this case was 'doomed' and that was ESPN's Roger Cossack....who doesn't know his anus from a hole in the ground.
how does one prove that he was forced to sign and under duress
Circumstantial evidence/witnesses/correspondence. It won't make or break the case, just more evidence showing how the NCAA's conduct was improper and violated antitrust/powerful bully argument. The more you throw out, the more likely your case is made. It's not a frivolous argument, but it's not going to win it for you by itself either. If PSU decided to file its own case, I don't think PSU would file a case with that as the sole claim...
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by rmj147 18 months ago
Is the difference that the hole in the ground doesn't have Emmert's d in it?
"PSU a 3 to 4 win team" - New-era, September 2012
I think it's pretty clear:
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.
Erickson said if Penn State did not agree to the sanctions, a formal investigation would have begun and the university could have faced a multiyear death penalty, as well as "other sanctions," including a financial penalty far greater than $60 million.
This moment didn't feel like the beginning of a negotiation to Marsh. "In federal bankruptcy court," he says, "there is a concept of a cram-down -- a judge tells creditors, 'Here's the deal, this is all you are going to get, a few pennies on the dollar, and you should be happy with that.' You know, take it or leave it, because you don't really have any choice.
"Well, this was the NCAA equivalent of a cram-down."
Inside the secret negotiations that brought Penn State football to the brink of extinction
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.
This is how I see it.....it all seems like a bunch of he said she said bs.....not really what I call circumstantial evidence.
this is why you do discovery. E-mail is gods gift to plaintiffs. You think no one wrote anything down or sent an email to an associate, etc.
How about under oath..."Mr. Emmert, did you threaten President Erickson with more severe penalties if he didnt sign the consent decree?"
yep. Correspondence is always a good thing lol
hahahahaha yes. Then when he lies, charge him with perjury and put him in a cell...
Well if Emmertt really emailed Erickson and threatened him to sign off, and didn't have the cajones to pick up the phone and call like a man, then I hate him even more, if thats still possible.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports