I think major universities with brand identity (PSU), their presidents, AD's, NCAA, Conference Commish, etc., is one gigantic mutual blow job admiration society. As Frank said nobody in power wants to punish PSU in a significant way. If this happened @UAB then they would be in serious trouble. The NCAA or Delaney don't want to do anything to PSU because they are successful and their football program revenue is massive.
Broad based ongoing pressure from the general public to punish PSU is what will push decision makers to punish PSU.

I could see them suspended from championship play and put on probation by the conference for a significant period. Scholarship cuts, post-season bowl ban, maybe even a tv blackout.

As Frank said nobody in power wants to punish PSU in a significant way. The NCAA or Delaney don't want to do anything to PSU because they are successful and their football program revenue is massive.

Quote:Broad based ongoing pressure from the general public to punish PSU is what will push decision makers to punish PSU.

This is absolutely true. And a big reason that they'll cave to that pressure is:

(07-19-2012 12:44 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  I think major universities with brand identity (PSU), their presidents, AD's, NCAA, Conference Commish, etc., is one gigantic mutual blow job admiration society.

One thing I disagree with is:

Quote:If this happened @UAB then they would be in serious trouble.

I think it's actually the opposite. This can't happen at UAB, because you can't coach for 25 years at UAB without either getting fired, getting hired somewhere better or UAB getting good.

If this happened at (searching for an FCS school with a coach whose tenure goes back 25+ years...) Appalachian State, it would be a curiosity, and it would be a big deal in North CArolina. There would be severe NCAA punishment--no scholarships for a few years? No home games for 2 years? Maybe they get the death penalty for a year.

Maybe App State would have to drop football. But that would be driven as much by the state government and board of education as the NCAA. The larger world wouldn't care much, because they've never heard of App State, and because you wouldn't have campus riots defending the fired coach.

I don't put any stock in it, but there is a rumor out there that PSU has contacted the Big East in the event the Big Ten boots them.

(07-19-2012 12:15 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  B1G research budgets dwarf athletic budgets. The B1G will only remove PSU if this starts cutting into research money. The B1G shares research so any money PSU looses affects all B1G schools. The feds could also say to Wisconsin (example), "You share research money with PSU so we can't give you the funds."

The Big 10 schools share absolutely zero research money between institutions. It is a huge misnomer about how research funding works, and frankly, is straight out illegal.

In fact, the only conference that doles out any money to member institutions is the ACC (a token $12,500 per year per school for undergrad research fellowships) and that comes from the conference office's take from athletic events or other non-research revenues.

(07-19-2012 12:18 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-19-2012 12:11 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  IMO if Penn State gets hammered, it will be the government that does it. I doubt the NCAA has the testicular fortitude...

I've seen you say this before, but I'm not seeing that at all. The stuff about Penn State losing its accreditation and funding as an institution is even more far-fetched than Penn State getting the death penalty and kicked out of the Big Ten. Once again, MANY schools have broken the law at some point. That hasn't caused the government (or NCAA or other conferences) to shut anyone down. This isn't to detract from the gravity and horrific nature of this story, but the process part of doling out justice is an entirely different animal in terms of how things are handled (whether legally or politically). I'll hold my breath about the government shutting down a school with hundreds of thousands of rabid alumni in an electoral vote swing state.

Frank, at the speed the justice system in the country works, I'm not surprised that they have yet to do anything. It will take years for all this to play out...

(07-19-2012 11:32 AM)brista21 Wrote:  

(07-19-2012 11:09 AM)ConanX Wrote:  

(07-19-2012 10:57 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Just remember PSU now has a tainted image and the Big 10 is very much about image. Rutgers could easily replace PSU, and keep the Big 12 in Philly and the Big Apple.

Given the Rutgers is the last of the original BE that hasn't found a new home in one of the "Power Conferences" I could see them working the phones really hard right now trying to make this happen.....

Sure, but we're not going anywhere. If we were desired by anyone in this go around of realignment we'd have been invited already.

Exactly.

Out of all the formerly independent northeastern schools, PennSt was the big prize. Ignoring Miami ('BigEast' but obviously not 'northeast'), the next prize was BC, and then you basicly just run down the line in order of teams leaving the BigEast. Rutgers, Temple, UConn etc are in no way replacements for a school like PennSt.

I nearly choked on my drink when I read "easily replace PSU". Seriously? On what planet? I have no idea what will ultimately come of the PennSt scandal - but there's is a zero percent chance of Rutgers replacing them in the Big10/11/12.

1) Sandusky is the one who should get the death penalty
2) JoPa is already in Hell
3) The AD and University Prez should go to jail
4) The football program should lose one scholarship for each victim for 5 or more years
5) The football program should be banned from post season play and championship games for 5 years

(07-19-2012 11:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I doubt they will kick out Penn State, but you never know.

I think it's also interesting that Delany is asking for power to fire coaches. I think that is whack.

I am far from certain that schools will ever go along with this idea.

But.....

There is the idea of assigning all of a school's TV rights to a conference via a GOR and now the idea of a conference commissioner being able to fire coaches.

Should schools be concerned that they are surrendering too much of their autonomy and freedom of action?

If such ideas take hold, will schools become the vassals of the leadership and bureaucracy of the conference they belong to, especially as conferences expand and become larger and more powerful?

(07-19-2012 12:18 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-19-2012 12:11 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  IMO if Penn State gets hammered, it will be the government that does it. I doubt the NCAA has the testicular fortitude...

I've seen you say this before, but I'm not seeing that at all. The stuff about Penn State losing its accreditation and funding as an institution is even more far-fetched than Penn State getting the death penalty and kicked out of the Big Ten. Once again, MANY schools have broken the law at some point. That hasn't caused the government (or NCAA or other conferences) to shut anyone down. This isn't to detract from the gravity and horrific nature of this story, but the process part of doling out justice is an entirely different animal in terms of how things are handled (whether legally or politically). I'll hold my breath about the government shutting down a school with hundreds of thousands of rabid alumni in an electoral vote swing state.

I think that the Federal government will fine PSU for the Clery Act violations, maybe for a couple of million dollars.

I think that the NCAA will be forced by political pressure and public opinion to sanction PSU heavily, not "Death Penalty" heavy, but....heavy.

(Now, if the NCAA finds out that PSU did something like pay players for years via Second Mile, then all bets are off).

I think that the plaintiffs' civil lawsuits will all be settled for a large but manageable sum. Hopefully, the plaintiffs will hold out long enough to subpoena records and take depositions so that more information will come out.

The Big Ten may also issue some sort of penalty/sanction to PSU, but will not kick them out.

The cumulative effect of all of this will be a fairly heavy punishment to PSU.

That, and all of the negative publicity this has created, will be a big burden on PSU to overcome, as it should be.

(07-19-2012 01:27 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(07-19-2012 11:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I doubt they will kick out Penn State, but you never know.

I think it's also interesting that Delany is asking for power to fire coaches. I think that is whack.

I am far from certain that schools will ever go along with this idea.

But.....

There is the idea of assigning all of a school's TV rights to a conference via a GOR and now the idea of a conference commissioner being able to fire coaches.

Should schools be concerned that they are surrendering too much of their autonomy and freedom of action?

If such ideas take hold, will schools become the vassals of the leadership and bureaucracy of the conference they belong to?

From a legal perspective, I wouldn't *want* that power as a conference. You start getting into issues of whether the conference itself is the employer of the applicable coach as opposed to the school and that opens up tons of potential liability.

As with virtually everything with Delany (whether you're talking about the playoff system, conference realignment or Penn State), he puts out an extreme position in the media so that it makes it look like he's compromising when he moves to the position that he really wanted in the first place. What he's likely doing here is using the prospect of firing coaches as an extreme position when he's probably looking for something short of that which doesn't cause a presumed employer/employee relationship situation, such as having broader authority to suspend coaches and players for violating laws or ethics codes.

(07-19-2012 11:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I think it's also interesting that Delany is asking for power to fire coaches.

Wouldn't the conference then have to pick up the buy out clause if they fired the school's coach? Power and (financial) responsibility - or neither. You can't have one without the other.

There is no way that Penn State is kicked out. I don't know if I could even give it a one and a million chance. Two reasons:

1. The conference doesn't want them out. This is bad, but a short term problem. Penn State is the dominant school in a decent size state, also provides northeastern coverage, and are a name program. The relationship between Penn State and the Big Ten is also 20 years old. The conference and school aren't going to tear everything up over something only a few people had knowledge of and in the process give up millions of dollars.

2. The conference would be very, very hard pressed to do it even if it wanted to. Can anyone think of any full member of a conference (associate membership is structured very differently) who was ever kicked out? Maybe there is an example or two, but I can't come up with one. When there was serious divides out west, the old Pacific Coast Conference didn't kick out members, it dissolved (reformed later a new conference). When the WAC overexpanded, they couldn't just kick out 2-6 members they didn't want. Instead 8 schools decided to leave and start over. The list could go on, but the point is that kicking out full members is almost unprecedented and legally would probably be difficult to do even if the conference wanted to.

(07-19-2012 03:11 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  There is no way that Penn State is kicked out. I don't know if I could even give it a one and a million chance. Two reasons:

1. The conference doesn't want them out. This is bad, but a short term problem. Penn State is the dominant school in a decent size state, also provides northeastern coverage, and are a name program. The relationship between Penn State and the Big Ten is also 20 years old. The conference and school aren't going to tear everything up over something only a few people had knowledge of and in the process give up millions of dollars.

Of course, it is important to note that Sandusky was a powerful employee of PSU athletics at the time that the B1G invited Penn State to join.

If the B1G wants to, they could easily take the perspective that PSU had this problem before joining. It all depends on how morally offended the B1G presidents actually are. The punishment that the B1G doles out to PSU will tell us the answer.

(07-19-2012 03:33 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(07-19-2012 03:11 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  There is no way that Penn State is kicked out. I don't know if I could even give it a one and a million chance. Two reasons:

1. The conference doesn't want them out. This is bad, but a short term problem. Penn State is the dominant school in a decent size state, also provides northeastern coverage, and are a name program. The relationship between Penn State and the Big Ten is also 20 years old. The conference and school aren't going to tear everything up over something only a few people had knowledge of and in the process give up millions of dollars.

Of course, it is important to note that Sandusky was a powerful employee of PSU athletics at the time that the B1G invited Penn State to join.

If the B1G wants to, they could easily take the perspective that PSU had this problem before joining. It all depends on how morally offended the B1G presidents actually are. The punishment that the B1G doles out to PSU will tell us the answer.

Basically will the Big 10 do what's morally right, or will they think about the $ and let PSU off the hook.

While it's clear that many PSU alumni are still clinging as tightly as possible to the old perception of Paterno, ultimately there are very few men who are directly responsible for the reprehensible acts which occurred at PSU. (Admittedly, I may be missing something about what BOT members actually knew - what I've read suggests that they're just responsible for letting JoePa run the show, which was bad in its own right but doesn't necessarily indicate culpability in the Sandusky matters.)

If the surviving members of that group are all appropriately punished, the question is what is an appropriate institutional punishment. I can certainly see heavy sanctions being levied against the football program, but I am skeptical about the likelihood of expulsion from the B1G unless current PSU leadership shows an intractible attitude and an unwillingness to take meaningful steps.

They should suspend them for 1 season. Would prompt PSU to likely shut down for a year and avoid the whole issue with the NCAA not having jurisdiction.

I think if the Big Ten can get a reassurance from the NCAA that they can keep the conference championship game with 11 teams and from their TV partners that they won't lose any money, this has a decent chance of happening.

(07-19-2012 03:52 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:  While it's clear that many PSU alumni are still clinging as tightly as possible to the old perception of Paterno, ultimately there are very few men who are directly responsible for the reprehensible acts which occurred at PSU. (Admittedly, I may be missing something about what BOT members actually knew - what I've read suggests that they're just responsible for letting JoePa run the show, which was bad in its own right but doesn't necessarily indicate culpability in the Sandusky matters.)

If the surviving members of that group are all appropriately punished, the question is what is an appropriate institutional punishment. I can certainly see heavy sanctions being levied against the football program, but I am skeptical about the likelihood of expulsion from the B1G unless current PSU leadership shows an intractible attitude and an unwillingness to take meaningful steps.

How long would you give Penn State to take meaningful steps? What if their board's idea of meaningful steps is appointing a commission to study the matter for 18 months?

(07-19-2012 04:01 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  ... and avoid the whole issue with the NCAA not having jurisdiction.

The NCAA has plenty of jurisdiction. Athletic personnel covered up heinous crimes for more than a decade.

(07-19-2012 03:11 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  There is no way that Penn State is kicked out. I don't know if I could even give it a one and a million chance. Two reasons:

1. The conference doesn't want them out. This is bad, but a short term problem. Penn State is the dominant school in a decent size state, also provides northeastern coverage, and are a name program. The relationship between Penn State and the Big Ten is also 20 years old. The conference and school aren't going to tear everything up over something only a few people had knowledge of and in the process give up millions of dollars.

2. The conference would be very, very hard pressed to do it even if it wanted to. Can anyone think of any full member of a conference (associate membership is structured very differently) who was ever kicked out? Maybe there is an example or two, but I can't come up with one. When there was serious divides out west, the old Pacific Coast Conference didn't kick out members, it dissolved (reformed later a new conference). When the WAC overexpanded, they couldn't just kick out 2-6 members they didn't want. Instead 8 schools decided to leave and start over. The list could go on, but the point is that kicking out full members is almost unprecedented and legally would probably be difficult to do even if the conference wanted to.

There is no precedent for how terrible and horribly inhumane the actions of Penn State were. I think you have to throw everything out based on what conferences have done in the past.