In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1101
Online now 1364 Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)
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.
Every part of the sanctions has additional impacts to the University and the program. The most important is the bowl ban. Going to a bowl is an important recruiting tool, but there are additional benefits that are even more important.
The additional fifteen practices allowed to prepare for a bowl are important to the team especially with an offense as complex as what OB fields. It would benefit the redshirt freshmen and younger players a lot. It allows more direct coaching contact between the coaches and players to work on future schemes and develop more sets and plays.
Another consideration is the forfeit of the bowl revenue sharing by the Big Ten. The number was stated as being around $13 million a season. Getting back two years of that money would almost match last year’s athletic department profit, and would offset the annual payment to the NCAA slush fund. Sorry, I couldn’t resist taking a passing shot at the evil empire.
Depending on the bowl game, there are intangible benefits for the University and the football program. There is the exposure from the airtime for the game and the chance for our alumni to travel and make favorable impressions on the local community hosting the game.
With all this evidence, this is the one part of the sanction that the evil empire will most likely not reduce. Even though their leadership has shown the propensity to make irrational decisions, they most likely have some semi-intelligent people who have arrived at the same conclusions as stated here, and leadership still feels the need to enforce the most damaging parts of the sanctions.
We can only hope that my pessimistic views are invalidated.
-Bowl ban reduced by two years
-Scholarship reductions cut from 80 to 50, with the scholarships we lost in 2012 and 2013 counted against the penalty
-Wins reinstated (these are the team's and players' wins, not just the "Paternos wins")
The fine is more difficult. $60+ million is excessive, but it is supporting a good cause, though maybe the fine could be spaced out over 10 years and focused on charities in PA only or to setup a leading child abuse research center at PSU or Hershey.
It blows my mind that there should even be a negotiation. I pisses me off the they are blaming the Football program for the failures of adults and assumption. I would understand if a player was involved.
My feelings exactly, meanwhile telling our former players like Clark (for example)....according to our records you never won a game your whole college career...never won 22 wins to 4 losses as a starting QB. Then tell the same sort of story to a few hundred other players.
We're the NCAA we look out for student athletes! Now lets strip some more of their scholarships...
Dominate The State
Success without honor is an unseasoned dish; it will satisfy your hunger, but it won't taste good.
This is exactly what I was thinking!!!!
I've always agreed that the $60M fine will serve the support groups for a good cause. The scholarships, I don't think it's fair to take that away from the athletes, they had nothing to do with this and it's taking a free education at one of the best universities away from the kids.
This also sounds good to me too regarding the scholarships:
2018: full 25/85 (same as now)
See, playing under 65 next year is absurd. It should jump to 20/75 immediately in my opinion.
Good point, I agree with you stig, it'll be hard for the team to compete and stay injury free with only 65 players on schollies.
I love Penn State and will always love them, the players just don't deserve this.
I understand jmmstate that you, and others on this thread, want some sort of "make sense" compromise on sanctions and what you suggest is not unreasonable. But in order to do this we must make the assumption that we, in fact, were guilty of these "crimes" in the first place.
I have not, from day one, ever accepted nor been shown, other than the Freeh report, that the football program in any way is culpable and subject to these sanctions.
If one takes that stance, a more aggressive approach re: softening of the sanctions is merited including the details of the suggested changes to the sanctions. As others have suggested, use of the "exceeding the goals of the Freeh recommendations" approach gives an out to the NCAA. That can only work with the constant, continued and unremitting defense of PSU, whether by bloggers, writers or legal actions.
I would like to know what the PSU football team, did to deserve these sanctions.
I would settle for nothing less than a public square donkey show. 2donkeys, one effemmert.
All wins back. All scholly reductions instantly gone. All back to status quo. We compromise by allowing Emmett to step foot in commonwealth of pa in future.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports