How do you figure that? Not every university has a robust engineering dept. so I think it’s a stretch to say it’s essential to their mission. As much as people take issue with it, they need to accept that sports, at Penn State’s level, are as integral to the mission of the university as are most academic subjects. And I don’t say that with any particular glee. But saying, “fuck football, it’s non-essential, and not what a university should be doing”, is foolish at this point. Just as foolish as saying they shouldn’t teach divinity, anthropology, or art. The definition of a broad, liberal arts education has evolved. Right or wrong, it now often includes sports.
Let’s assume for a second that it was. And that is not much of a stretch at a school like MIT. Would you be for them shutting down the dept.?
Regardless, the popularity of football was not the cause, Jerry Sandusky was the cause. Let’s be clear here. Sandusky is a scumbag of the highest order. Do you really think absent football, he would not have molested kids? That he would have been caught sooner? Given that he allegedly molested his own adopted kid, I don’t think football popularity is what enabled this guy. If he wasn’t Jerry Sandusky the famed football coach, he would have been Father Sandusky, or Sandusky the accountant who also rapes kids. And if his accounting partner had failed to report him, nobody would be saying the nature or popularity of limited liability corporations leads to people enabling rapists.
Even if that is the backdrop in this particular case, it’s not the NCAA’s job to police these situations that have little to do with the actual program. The are not the morality police, nor are they image consultants; they enforce rules regarding sports conduct. Why is that a bad thing?
Just saw a news article about about the Penn State Board of Trustees. They’re going to form some new committees – good for them!
And in the aftermath of a report that thoroughly trashes their oversight of the institution? According to the chair of the board, no members plan to resign. And they have boldly decided to shorten the term of board members – from 15 years to 12.
Football, organized extramural football games played against other schools, is a privilege. It is not the school’s raison d’être. At most, a robust football program gives a school a competitive advantage in attracting students. Schools are not owed the opportunity to have that competitive advantage.
Yes, football may have turned a second rate state school into a powerhouse, but it does not exist to play football, it exists for academics.
Lose the program, the school suffers? Well, that’s quite the bummer for State College, PA, and folks who work for Penn State. They had the bad luck to hitch their wagon to a horse that chose to shield a child molester from prosecution.
So I see a lot about academics in there. I’m not seeing much about football or about child sexual abuse.
Claiming that football is as integral to their mission as academics makes me ragey and makes me want to shut down the entire university. Fortunately, it’s just 100% inaccurate.
Not janitors, for Christ’s sake. The school administrators. You know, the ones you said had already been punished so why punish them further?
No, the football program motivated them, as stated earlier and evidenced by their drastic change of course after talking to Paterno regarding the reporting of Sandusky to proper authorities.
Wasn’t your contention earlier that because the individuals had resigned already, and had been punished (presumably you meant Sandusky), that the death penalty was unnecessary overkill since those involved had already been punished?
The athletic program is not an integral part of the school’s goal. If there is no football team, students will still leave Penn State with a degree. No matter how much you trumpet on about how important and necessary football is at “Penn State’s level”, it is not the purpose of a university. It’s a money generating perk. Trying to create this analogy where in some theoretical way it’s an engineering department instead of a football team is failing miserably, you have to see that, right? The mere fact that you are arguing about how inextricable it is to the school goes to show that it’s gotten too powerful. This isn’t a bank bailout, Penn State is not too big to fail without a football program. You can keep pretending that the football program wasn’t the reason, but I don’t think anyone besides you is really buying that.
Why would I care how long it took SMU to recover from the death penalty? Is there some clause in there that says “In the case of rules violations you must take 2 seasons off from the football program and have limited eligibility for bowl games *except if this is going to hurt you too much or cause any long-lasting damage in which case fuck it do what you want, we’re sorry for mentioning it”.
What is this, a clinic on failed analogies? Soup kitchens literally feed starving people. Are you claiming that the feeding of the hungry is analogous to the football program at a high profile university? How about removing the church’s tax breaks for covering up pedophiles? Would you say that’s a better analogy?
Then you haven’t read anything about the case, obviously. Before talking to Paterno the plan was to inform Second Mile directly of the allegations and then contact the authorities. You’re the one that keeps saying “football was not a motivating factor”, but somehow I’m not permitted to discuss the motivations of PSU officials. Ooookay.
Sorry but you are flat out wrong. The janitor who witnessed abuse reported the incident to the other janitors, who all ultimately concluded that if they reported it, the university would close ranks and punish them in order to protect their football program. How can you still argue that the football program wasn’t the reason for the coverup? I mean, you can argue that you believe the death penalty to be unwarranted or unnecessary, but it’s just ridiculous to claim that this had nothing to do with football.
Destroy the team and the football program. Unbelievable that people think it should stay, for any reason. Maybe we can re-address it in a few years, but honestly it’s just football and obviously the priorities are completely fucked up.
Exactly. Brickbacon, you’ve made me realize our language lacks a proper antonym for “persuasive”: the arguments you’ve made in favor of a lighter punishment for PSU are persuading me that exactly the opposite course of action is in order.
If I’m not mistaken, everybody from the old football regime is gone. The AD is gone. The president is gone. Now if they just replace the trustees, then all the guilty parties are gone. So why punish the current coaches and players? Have the new guard install strict accountability and reporting requirements so this doesn’t happen again.
What’s fair in my opinion is to suspend the program for one year, release all of the current players to sign with other schools without penalty, have PSU recruit a limited number of scholarship players for the 2013 season, and ban the team from television and bowl games for one season. Alsim remove the Paterno statue and remove his name from any building on campus.
Why did Paterno have so much power over the administration? It was because of the power and influence of the alumni. Why did Paterno and the administration take the steps they did? To please the alumni. The alumni also have to face the consequences, and that means eliminating Penn State football, at the very least the level of punishment that Southern Methodist got.
No, it’s not. “Dissuasive” means that something persuades against a particular course of action. I’m looking for a word that means to persuade someone of the opposite of what you intend to persuade them of.
And I’ve made multiple meaningful contributions to the thread, so you’re quite welcome! Perhaps, if you’re concerned about meaningful contributions, instead of giving faulty definitions, you could respond to post 48 (an easy response would be to admit that you were totally wrong about PSU’s mission, for example).
And in what universe do you think the alumni, collectively or individually, said to themselves, “boy I hope if there’s a child sex scandal they cover it up so I can keep watchin’ them footballs!”
“The Alumni” continued to support Joe’s increasingly autocratic control over discipline in the athletic department because it appeared from the outside to be working well.
Look, I live here–the demonstrations to support the victims were easily twice as large as the relatively minor pro-JoePa stuff, media overblowing aside. The alumni and students aren’t the ones who need to be punished here.
Agreed. And I attended Penn State…and I don’t think that would be “unfair to the Class of 2016” at all. Students who aren’t complete boneheads will be relieved not to have the distraction of this whole mess hanging over their heads, and they can get on with academics and the fun and beauty of Happy Valley with the whole stupid football program a thing of the past. (In a way, I am reminded of Costa Rica’s abolition of its army a few decades ago.)
The smartest, most eloquent, most generous person I’ve ever known was a Penn State professor. I am very sorry he passed away a few years ago, but at least he didn’t have to live through this awful period in the school’s history. Although it would have been interesting to hear his take on the matter. I’m pretty sure it would have resembled the previous poster who finished his/her pithy post with “…And then we can start thinking about how to punish them.”
If the NCAA fails to give Penn State the death penalty, the message that will be sent will be, “It’s OK, we’re down with covering up child rape to protect a football program, child rape is nothing compared to a big important thing like college football! Besides, it’s outside our jurisdiction. Nothing to see here or anywhere, lalalalalalalalala …”
As I see it the NCAA has no choice, if they don’t pull the trigger on Penn State they get tainted with the scandal as well. And I am so completely OK with that.
It’s an antonym for a persuasive, which is what you asked for. Furthermore, dissuasive means, “The act or an instance of dissuading”. There needn’t be intent there, hence the “instance” part. So if you think what I said dissuaded you, then it was dissuasive.
That was not one of them.
There mission statement says nothing about football, nor does it say anything about engineering. There is nothing essential about engineering, or any other singular academic discipline that a university could not exist without it. Times have changed. Sports programs are just as big a part of the college experience and culture as most other aspects of education, esp. at Penn State’s level. You can quote mission statements all you want. I think a better indication of what people feel is important is where they spend their money. University presidents and trustee boards, those who are charged with living up to their mission, make their preferences known when they budget their money. There is a reason these top programs spend millions on sports, and it’s not because they consider them non-essential. It’s because they feel it is in part of their mission. That’s why big-time football coached usually make more than the university president, and, of course, more than the dean of engineering. Saying it shouldn’t be that way doesn’t actually address reality. In reality, people care.
The point was nobody would ever suggest getting rid of a physics department, or a classics department, or a graduate school because the administrators covered up illegal activity. It’s only because you assume football is not important that you think it’s okay to take wildly inappropriate, unprecedented, and punitive actions. Even leaving aside the fact that most people disagree with you (as evidenced by the poll in the other thread), the NCAA is not charged with sanctioning programs for those types of actions.
Just be honest, the bottom line is that you guys hate football. Or at the very least don’t respect it, or what it provides for people. You are entitled to feel that way, but you can’t punish people who do care, or rely on football, because of the actions of officials that have nothing to do with the actual football product.
That people are even debating this is incredibly stupid. This is not in the NCAA’s purview, they have never punished a school because of action that did not directly affect the team, nor would they. If you think PSU football is bad, don’t go to their games, and tell all your friends not to either. Don’t fuck with a bunch of innocent people’s livelihoods and futures because you think a dead guy is not worthy of praise.