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.
I just spoke with him and he told me that he is sending it to over 100 media outlets and 25 specific reporters.. So hopefully it gets attention... I'm pretty sure he's paying for all this out of his own pocket so it is definitely worth taking the time to read!
So does this report coming out tomorrow only focus on 1998?
I hope he sent cliff notes..... his analysis might be a little complex for their simple minds. You literally have to spoon feed them headlines if you want to get the most out of them.
I'm not sure... I know he was debating whether or not to release everything at once or do it in chunks.
If Freeh used any evidence from the state investigation, then the NCAA using that info, wouldnt that be similar to the case with Miami and the NCAA?
Also, if Freeh did use state evidence, would that possibly give PA standing in their lawsuit against NCAA?
"Whoever’s trying to kill me isn’t getting the job done. But one day, I’m going to punch that f___r in the face."
He hired her at UConn when he was the chancellor there. I wonder how that interview went years ago.
Doesn't Corbett still have cards to play if not given standing?
Could he add the title of Trustee? Or use the large number of Gov. Appointed seats to force a review of Erickson's authority to sign the consent decree? Or use his voting block to join the lawsuit.
Suspect that a politician has a backup plan.
To those asking above about whether the judge decides it or the state gets to make its case - the judge will decide it, but PA will have an opportunity to file briefings. The Rule 12 motion will (almost definitely) come by March 3 or whatever the date of filing was, PA will file a response, NCAA will reply. Depending on the judge, PA may get a sur-reply (or not) and there may be a hearing (or not). All this will likely end between late March and mid-April. Then, most courts have internal, unofficial rules saying 90 days for dispositive rulings. Because this would decide the case, I expect it'll bump back to about July. Of course, that rule isn't controlling so it could be longer, or, if the judge or her clerks realize that the case is likely to be settled if it goes forward, they may push it through faster.
I'd also note that July/August is the typical timeframe when judge's clerks are cycling out of chambers, and if the clerk who has this case is leaving, s/he will be under added pressure to get it done and not drop a fully-briefed, quick-turnaround opinion on the new clerk's lap. That may speed things up if Kane puts down a "typical" briefing schedule.
what time is the supposed to come out today?
No idea if he knows what he is talking about, but it makes sense to me.
I am not a lawyer, so I too have no idea if he is right or not, but this article by Matt Hayes seems to suggest the same thing.
From the article...
"Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett must be doing backflips right now. His once longshot plan to sue the NCAA over sanctions imposed on Penn State now looks winnable after this debacle—in a worse-case scenario. "
NCAA college football news, standings, trade rumors, scores, schedules and more 2012-13 coverage on Sporting News.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by getmyjive11 18 months ago
The TIP article is interesting. I'm not sure if he's making one of two (or both) arguments for "did not involve the ncaa," because he doesn't keep it consistent. If he's saying that (1) the NCAA wasn't involved in the investigation (as the 3d to last paragraph suggests), then I think his argument is fairly weak, primarily because of the consent decree*. If he's instead arguing that (2) because the NCAA admitted that bankruptcy proceedings are not within its purview, then we have a stronger, albeit not sure-fire, position. Again, the consent degree sucks fiercely here*, but the fact that the NCAA admitted the weakness in its position is a good thing.
* GOD do I loath the piss-poor leadership of Erickson and Peetz. Their uselessness is an admittedly large part of why I'm campaigning for BoT, though I think there is a lot of other stuff that we can deal with.
1) If the state of PA can show that Penn State was essentially bullied into signing the consent decree, I wouldn't think it's that big of a factor.
2) I didn't realize until the PA lawsuit how incriminating the consent decree actually is for the NCAA. They actually wrote into it that normally this would not be something they could/would punish a school for.
(1) Yes and no. Were they really bullied? When were they bullied? What kind of ultimatum? Did Erickson have to sign on the spot, or did he have time to consult an attorney? I think the bullying part of this case is the "juiciest," in terms of what we may or may not learn.
(2) The decree is, as someone else pointed out, written entirely to protect the NCAA from suit by PSU. If not for the decree, they could have issued the penalties and PSU could have sued. The decree was solely written in an attempt to protect the NCAA.
I don't know all the details, but I think the "better" argument with respect to the consent decree is that Erickson overstepped his power in either one of two ways. First, did the BoT give him authority to enter into it? I can't recall, and don't have time to look it up right now, but I read language that I believe meant that he needed BoT approval to pull something like this. Was he given that approval? If Peetz told him, "hey, go ahead," that doesn't constitute Board approval.
Second, and perhaps more interesting, the President of Penn State is a state employee, or at least, he's given authority over state funds. He had authority to disperse those funds for specified purposes, and you can bet that, while, say, negligence lawsuits would be included in that authority, consent to pay $60M to out of state entities (with no return on investment like you might have in a research agreement) on a whim was well outside his authority. If the PSU Prez's authority is defined by statute, then this particular argument would further bolster standing by saying that all of the damages that have arisen were signed off on by a state employee acting outside the scope of his employment.
This post was edited by psume06 18 months ago
What happens if 1) the freeh report is fully discredited 2) that psubot failed in its fiduciary (and erickson did not have authority to sign) 3) the state of pa passes legislation to reform psubot, which has been filed in the pa house.
In that scenario, the basis of the findings (freeh) would disintegrate and the parties who agreed would be proven to have not been authorized.
To me, there is no way the concent decree could stand if these things happen. That's before discussing whether ncaa violated anti-trust laws.
1) the thought of the NCAA bullying PSU into signing the consent decree (as was told straight out of Erickson's and Gene Marsh's mouth in articles), seems like such a strong possibility now that we just see how deep and strong the corruption is in this organization.
2) someone pointed this out but could the State of PA file obstruction of justice charges against the NCAA based on this info in their consent decree (see attached image)?
The NCAA gave harsh punishments to PSU before the criminal trials even began. Based on this info in the screenshot from the Consent Decree, if a potential witness know the damage this could cause to PSU and/or the individuals, that their testimony could potentially change. Knowledge of this might impact a witness' testimony in the criminal trials.
Plus Emmert is on record saying that the all options were on the table.
"I've never seen anything as egregious as this in terms of just overall conduct and behavior inside a university and hope never to see it again," Emmert said during the interview. "What the appropriate penalties are, if there are determinations of violations, we'll have to decide.
"We'll hold in abeyance all of those decisions until we've actually decided what we want to do with the actual charges should there be any. And I don't want to take anything off the table."
Emmert gave the interview four days after Penn State released the scathing internal report by former FBI director Louis Freeh. ....
Still reeling from the content of the Freeh report, Emmert did not dismiss the notion of issuing the so-called "death penalty" against Penn State, asserting that the unprecedented nature of the Sandusky scandal could warrant extreme punishment."
Ray Blehar's report
This post was edited by PSUFAN63 18 months ago
This Miami thing is going to get very interesting. The lawyer involved is saying she did nothing at all wrong.
And one of the things the NCAA wants to know is exactly what the nature of the agreement between Perez and former investigators was.
"I cannot discuss at this juncture my relationship with the NCAA," said Perez, who added that she has retained her own counsel and plans to release her side of the story in the coming days.
Meanwhile, NCAA President Mark Emmert released a statement Thursday lashing out at reports that the NCAA General Counsel's office approved what he called "the inappropriate use of Nevin Shapiro's attorney to obtain depositions in the Miami case."
I hope this lady throws Emmert under the bus big time.
IIRC, Corbett stated at his press conference that the consent decree was incomplete. I can't remember if he stated why he felt that way but I'm assuming because the BOT failed to vote on it. If I could guess I would imagine this is the argument he will use along with the duress argument.
Dominate The State
IIRC he stated the FREEH REPORT was incomplete, not the consent decree
Interesting commentary on the Commnonwealth's "standing" to sue for injunctive relief against the NCAA.
This post was edited by psufankc63 18 months ago
October 12, 2013. PSU 43 - UM 40 (4 OT). Unfortunately this fan wasn't around long enough to see it!
don't have time to read it, good or bad? and does it have merit?
Nice find. If the info in here is accurate, it is looking pretty positive for the State.
Has merit and is a short read Nittny...a recommended read.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports