In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 614
Online now 154 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.
It's just noise. They are grasping and people are paying less and less attention.
It will continue to fade from the public's collective memory. You won't hear much more about it until the other trials start and conclude, and on the anniversary of the incident and vague mentions during game time by announcers.
The public will begin to gravitate to other things, and interest will continue to drop except for those hardcore haters who thought we were dead in the water and wanted to tear down our university. And they are not worth the air they breathe.
I just don't understand the line of thought involved in the NYT argument. Perhaps many of the people who see PSU giving BOB a raise in this light are not sports fans, but I am also sure a large group of them are, and many of us will have to combat this same argument over the next few months when asked if we are okay with our university giving our coach a raise, given everything that has happened over the past year (of which, they will choose to selectively remember only the scandal and sanctions, not the still-high graduation rate, positive recent evaluation of the athletic department upon inspection, etc.)
I would challenge any of those critics who are also sports fans to imagine that their favorite NFL team had a scandal and cover-up of similar proportions occur. The coach and related individuals are now under trial for their crimes and completely removed from the team. The NFL then decides to impose a penalty where they severely reduce their favorite team's salary cap and bans them from participating in the playoffs for the next 4 years. Then, the public wants their favorite team to also abstain from paying their new coach a salary comparable to their peers of the same quality. Would they be okay with that? Would that make ANY sense at all? Would we hold that entire fanbase accountable for the die-hard "culture" that exists amongst many NFL fanbases that could easily lead to crimes similar to those that happened at PSU?
The logic is aburd. If people such as the author argue that it is "too soon" to give a coach a pay raise because of the "culture problem" at PSU, I'd like to know WHEN it will be okay, in these peoples' eyes, to give a raise to a coach at PSU? To cheer for the team? To follow PSU football? I honestly don't think those such as the other have given much thought to questions like this or have at all tried to put themselves in others' shoes before making this argument.
I personally know I was in the same boat as the author in the views I held toward the USC and OSU sanctions, so maybe it takes being on this side of it to understand. Sorry for the rant.
Couple points here.
1) I read the article. Now i feel like I need to take a shower.
2) With respect to the number of perpetrators and victims, Boy Scouts, RC Church, Nebraska Boys Town, and USA swimming are the biggest pedophile scandals that I can think of; all far outnumber Sandusky. 3 of these 4 involve homosexual behaviour. Draw your own conclusions.
3) Culture: Yes, like any BCS football and basketball teams, as well as many pro sports leagues, PSU football is given deferential treatment. That means that strangers might buy them a drink in a bar. Does that mean the law winks at their transgressions? NO--I'll bet more PSU football players have been cited for trivial stuff--public urination--than other large schools. Carmen Prestia (?sp), SC magistrate, wrote that no one at PSU, during his 20+ year tenure, ever asked him for leniency in judging an athlete. And consider this. There were 1200 sportswriters at SEC media days this fall. It was held over 3 days. Listen to Bama sportstalk radio, and people will say, "Waalll, the SEC conference is so good, cause football is a RELIGION down here". Hmmm.... Let that sink in. Culture and all.
4) NY Times is populated by elitist know-it-alls. Don't believe me? Here is a link to an email written by a NYT VP, to his "elite circle" customers.
To save you from reading the entire letter, here is the final paragraph:
"In closing, it's been a wild and exhausting two weeks. Tips have led to breakthroughs and more tips. Just how insular a community like State College is -- full of strong emotions and multiple conflicts -- became astoundingly clear. One of our reporters was chased off by dogs; another was threatened by a tow truck driver. Many conversations took place both in trailer parks and in the hallways of academia. More than boys had been violated it seemed. A proud university's sense of superiority and privilege and arrogance had been blown up, too."
Cliff notes version: "I'm elite and important. PSU is populated by pond scum."
Holy crap. Did you move out of that area?
What a ridiculous email that was from a pompous monkey ass. I had forgotten all about it. You're spot on with the characterization of the NYT.
Ha! Hell yes. We didn't find out about any of this until a good 10 years after HS. Effing creepy to say the least.
Doesn't matter what the NYT says or anybody else thinks. The problem is that the NCAA is an organization whose membership is voluntary. The NCAA is not a legal body such as the IRS. Additionally, PSU accepted the punishment handed down from the NCAA so it would appear to a court that this administrative body did have authority and that PSU acknowledged that authority. That is the mountain that your Governor must climb and it will be almost impossible to do that. I don't know Corbett but, since he is a politician, I suspect this whole thing is sound and fury that is designed to help him get re-elected.
Deleted as a duplicate
This post was edited by CarpeDiem 15 months ago
The NY Times is mostly opinion now, very little actual unbiases news. At one point in their history they were all news.
I will never buy into the notion of "the NCAA is a club and therefore, PSU can leave". That is such a watered down argument. Using this logic, a million different clubs across the country could do whatever they want to their members without punishment, and it would be ok. You want to sanction a member, fine a member, etc. Where do you draw the line? What if the NCAA decided they should fine PSU $500,000,000. You need to draw a line in the sand somewhere. Would that be ok simply because of structure? The "we will do this to PSU because we can" is the attitude that created the problem. As far as PSU agreeing to it, if it is demonstrated that the NCAA went against everything, did not follow their own protocol, how much weight does agreeing to it carry if they violated their own rules and said "sign this or else". I guess time will tell. We should get these answers soon enough.
The days of the NY Times being a credible source for accurate news reporting have long since past.
"I like your head, it's a good look." - James Franklin, to a bald reporter asking a question.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports