Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Captain Ned
superjawes wrote:Overall, I think the pnishment is fair. Even the reduction in scholarships, hurting the team, makes sense because the "football first" attitude is partly what caused this disaster. An all-inclusive culture will better serve children, the school, and Penn State football better in the long run. Players who lost wins, eh, not that big of a deal, I think, because if they are still good players and people, they could end up with a decent NFL or "real" career. That mark is mainly to remind people of that systematic protection of child abuse.
The only thing I don't agree with is the postseason suspension. I understand it, but if the team can play well enough with a gimped roster, they deserve a shot at a bowl game...IF THEY EARN IT.
Captain Ned wrote:Okay, I can see that and completely agree with bowl money going to charity. I think any players who still choose to play for Penn State deserve the same shot as any other NCAA player, but the team and school have to change focus. Four years or more operating as a nonprofit would be fair. ALL money not going to operating costs, basic salary, or reduced scholarship funds should go to a charity program, even if the NCAA didn't demand it. Penn State should do it because it would be the right thing to do.The bowl ban is all about money, as that's where the really big money is in college football. I could go with bowl attendance if all the $$ go to the same place as the $60MM fine.
derFunkenstein wrote:I don't think former players give a ****. They know what they won. If they do it's time to move on with life.
danny e. wrote:Sure, it gets the Paterno name off the records but it also is meaningless and is more of a punishment to former players.
adampk17 wrote:I agree with everything but the vacated wins. Rewriting the history books is just a dumb idea.
adampk17 wrote:I agree with everything but the vacated wins. Rewriting the history books is just a dumb idea.
Turkina wrote:adampk17 wrote:I agree with everything but the vacated wins. Rewriting the history books is just a dumb idea.
Do you disagree with this policy in general, or just in this case? Its pretty standard for wins (and championships) to be vacated when violations have been found to occur. In this case, I think the intention in this case is clear - they do not want Paterno's name mentioned whenever we talk about all-time wins leaders. The rationale for doing it is certainly a bit thin however.
rogue426 wrote:How are the players being punished? Everyone of them has the option to transfer and not sit out the usual required season before playing again.
tfp wrote:Not a surprise, they need to cover their butts.
Corrado wrote:No one at the University right now had anything to do with what happened. They're punishing the future for mistakes of the past.
Corrado wrote:They're not giving those to any other schools, right? So 45 kids that otherwise would have gotten a college education now may not.