The Lions' Pride

In this country, due process is a constitutional right.

The NCAA will claim the Freeh report was the due process they needed, and the Paterno's will respond that none of them were interviewed by that investigation. They will also claim that there's no evidece in the Freeh Report that Coach Paterno was involved in an active cover up of Sandusky, or was involved in the decision making to not report the matter to the police, and was not legally required to do so by any state or federal law or NCAA by-law. Since the NCAA only decided that 1998 and onwards is relevant, they don't even have a convicted criminal that was an active member of the football program. No charges were brought upon Sandusky in 98, an he was retired in 2001.

Given those two things above, what right does the NCAA have to punish the football program?

It would appear that the school agreed to it under duress, which could also play into it.

First off, the Paterno family is not as involed as the University in all of this. The Paterno family did not own the university. The Paterno family was not on the BOT. There is not a member of the Parterno family that is still empoyed by the University. PSU is honoring Joe's contract and the estate got everything per that contract. I know they took away his wins, but PSU did agree to this and everything else and what harm can the estate claim? I know the brand is hurt but they are going to have a tough time proving any of thise in court, even if it makes it to court, which I doubt. I am telling all of you right now that the NCAA does not hear it. Even if they can get a court to hear the case, what are they going to win from it? Do you think PSU is going to put up the statue again? Are they going to allow Peachy Paterno to be made again?

PSU signed off on the sanctions. The NCAA rules are crazy and they will have their team of lawyers argue that they wre within their rights and PSU will come into court and say the same thing. It sucks but it is the turth. The Paterno's will lose here.

I think the only people that actually have a case and might win is the current football players. If some of the current kids go to court, they are the only ones that might, might have a chance of having a case heard on all of this.

It would have to be curent players because they are the ones that can say they were unfairly harmed by all of this. The NCAA would counter by saying that the current players are not harmed because they can leave now and they have no restrictions. However, I think the current players still could have a case. They are the only ones that might have a shot at getting it heard. You would also want younger players, kids that have four years left because the NCAA would try and hold it up and delay so you want the younger kids that will be there for four years that still can say that they are harmed and were harmed if it is heard three years from now.