State Penn's bowl eligibility has been restored

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,617
4,542
187
44
kraizy.art
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

It's about punishing the organization that allowed this to continue. Or at least was supposed to be.
Exactly, children were put in harms way to protect that football program. I'm still unhappy they didn't get the death penalty, there are some things that make football entirely insignificant and Penn State managed to allow one of those things to continue going on...
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,318
31,033
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

I also think it's funny that anyone believes that fans of Alabama or any other big time team would have had a different reaction than Penn State fans had.
I would be saddened greatly by it.

All of my Alabama gear would be burned or trashed. I may be cynical, but I'm not that far gone.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,318
31,033
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

You would, and a handful would join you. Most would do the same thing most Penn St. fans did. For my part, I would remain an Alabama fan and support whatever was necessary to root out the cancer, but I would not abandon the school.
Well what I'm saying is if we had the kind of reaction Penn State did, that's how I would react. Frankly I'd hope we didn't have anyone in Tuscaloosa that would protect a child rapist because they felt that was necessary to "protect the brand."
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,617
4,542
187
44
kraizy.art
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

They shut the SMU program down dead in the water over cheating.

They spank Penn State's hand over ten years of kids being raped?

Something's off with that. Typical NCAA decision.
The timing is very suspect as well. Less than a week after the Big 10 gets dominated, they decide to take it easy on Penn State (and they already took it easy once, there were some pushing for the death penalty, but I suppose the Big 10 lobbied hard to save their conference championship game, etc...).
 

davefrat

Hall of Fame
Jun 4, 2002
5,234
4,045
282
Hopewell, VA
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

when I did criminal defense, clients would often ask for a sentence reduction based upon their good behavior, to which all the judges I appeared in front of would say "son, you're supposed to behave in jail...you don't get out early because you finally followed the rules."

the ncaa is a total joke.
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
10,610
5,104
287
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

The timing is very suspect as well. Less than a week after the Big 10 gets dominated, they decide to take it easy on Penn State (and they already took it easy once, there were some pushing for the death penalty, but I suppose the Big 10 lobbied hard to save their conference championship game, etc...).
I think BamainBoston might have been on to something when he brought up money.

Money is involved here, but not in the way he suggested. I imagine with the Big Ten down, and the prospects of the Big Ten going without a successful flagship program played a part, and it wouldn't surprise me to learn that there was some money under the table in this decision as well.
 

RTR91

Super Moderator
Nov 23, 2007
39,407
6
0
Prattville
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

It was unfair then, too. The difference is back then everyone on this board agreed with me.
People wanted the NCAA to change its ways then. Now that the NCAA appears to be trying to make things fair, folks aren't happy.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,617
4,542
187
44
kraizy.art
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

It was unfair then, too. The difference is back then everyone on this board agreed with me.
This is without question a completely different situation. With Alabama, who was actually harmed by what someone somehow connected to the program did?

At Penn State, children were raped and it was covered up! I don't see how one can even find a way to compare the two. It seems like a mental defect to somehow view those things as having any commonality.

Here's the worst part, more children were harmed to cover up for the program! That's why the punishment was so important. Who did it hurt when a player signed a deal on a napkin? Who did it hurt when someone got a payment? Now ask who did it hurt when for the sake of a football program, a child rapist was allowed to continue. Seriously, I don't want people getting locked up for smoking weed either, but that doesn't mean I suddenly want the jails emptied of rapists. I don't see how people can't draw such logical distinctions.
 
Last edited:

russtang

All-American
Apr 11, 2007
3,202
537
137
Central Alabama
www.uniquetitanium.com
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

The biggest difference is paying a recruit or player a few dollars to play football is totally different than coaches, staff, university, community, protecting a serial child rapist. Simply no comparison.

edit: krazy types faster than me.
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
10,610
5,104
287
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

If something out of the blue went wrong and we were caught with an NCAA infraction, does anybody believe they would be fair with us? If you think that, then I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you...

I'm just glad Saban runs a clean ship and won't give them another shot at us.
 

Rolltide_PA

1st Team
Jul 31, 2011
918
0
0
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

a bizarre decision from the NCAA on this one and to actually comment they restored the bowl eligibility and scholarships because they are making "impressive progress" and 15+ years of denials, cover-ups, and kids in therapy?

i truly hope this isn't the case but a person who is a nitter fan thought the timing wasn't just a coincidence with the big 10's top programs losing this week (UM, MSU, OSU) as the conference will need all the help they can get to have 1 team in the playoff.

this is just a horrible decision by the NCAA...embarrassing, really
 

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
29,865
35,179
362
Mountainous Northern California
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

So if someone is actually harmed, then it makes sense to punish the innocent. OK...

You still haven't explained why the solution to slam players who were themselves kids when it happened. In fact, it makes it even more idiotic to rely on the same tired and failed punishment when the harm is so much worse. Basically, you are saying that what happened was really bad, so we need to punish somebody who had nothing to do with it. How is that logical? The fact that Penn St. may have even saved money by avoiding the expense of a bowl just adds to it. It is most likely literally the case that the only people harmed by the bowl ban were innocent players and fans, not the university, not the people responsible.

Sandusky is in jail. Paterno's wins have been erased. His statue has been torn down. Penn St paid an $80 million fine. Three high ranking Penn St. officials are currently indicted. And you think the amount of justice meted out depends on whether it's a two year or four year bowl ban?

Absurd.
Don't punish the kids. Let them transfer without penalty and shut that cesspool in "Happy Valley" down for at least 4 years. Problem solved. Local shops going to suffer? Too bad for them. As previously pointed out by CA, good people often suffer when corporations commit crimes. That doesn't mean that we should not punish them when warranted.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,617
4,542
187
44
kraizy.art
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

So if someone is actually harmed, then it makes sense to punish the innocent. OK...

You still haven't explained why the solution to slam players who were themselves kids when it happened. In fact, it makes it even more idiotic to rely on the same tired and failed punishment when the harm is so much worse...
I really don't see why this all has to be explained, but I will indulge you. When an organization of any sort commits harmful acts, you punish the organization. For instance, BP has been fined billions of dollars for their role in oil spill. This impacted shareholders, it impacted employees (they have nearly 100,000) the vast majority of which had nothing whatsoever to do with the oil spill. You still have to hold entities responsible for their acts though, because that is the only way to A: compensate for damages and B: discourage them from doing it again. Your line of thought would be for BP to fire a couple of people, and say ok, we're done. That's not how responsibility works though, if a company puts you in a position of authority, and your action brings great harm, the entire company (including the "innocent") will pay for your actions.

Now, I do believe there's some room to say ok, this was one rogue individual, acting without knowledge or any involvement of anyone else, but that was not the case with Penn State. This became an issue the instant Penn State acted in the interest of the football program instead of the interest of the children!

Who was harmed by the Penn State punishment? The players? The players all were allowed to transfer. Who else? The same people in power that tried to protect the football program? Was their interest harmed? Good. The fans? Oh, sorry, they lost some entertainment value. I really feel bad about that, because we learned from Michael Jackson, good entertainment is way more important than concern for the welfare of children.
Sandusky is in jail. Paterno's wins have been erased. His statue has been torn down. Penn St paid an $80 million fine. Three high ranking Penn St. officials are currently indicted. And you think the amount of justice meted out depends on whether it's a two year or four year bowl ban?
Oh, Paterno lost his wins. Wow, that really makes up for the whole raping children thing he allowed to continue. That's another one of those, not sure what you're thinking comparisons. Lost a statue to, yeah that compensates for the harm he allowed to continue as well. I mean it's a statue! That's got to be worth 2 or 3 rapes right there.

As far as the amount of justice, what I know is that nothing within the means of the NCAA could equal an appropriate amount of punishment. When rape was allowed to continue, on behalf of a football program, there's really no fate too terrible for said football program. It will always stink of that despicable act. Even the death penalty, if not permanent was not enough. What I'm upset about, is the fact that even the inadequate NCAA punishment was lessened. Clearly they didn't do anything to appropriately punish Penn State for what Penn State did. Did Penn State even learn their lesson? Did it set a good enough example for programs like Florida State? I have my doubts they even accomplished that.
 
Last edited:

Rolltide_PA

1st Team
Jul 31, 2011
918
0
0
Re: Penn State's bowl eligibility has been restored

So if someone is actually harmed, then it makes sense to punish the innocent. OK...
how were they punishing the innocent?

kids already in the program were allowed to transfer immediately without penalty

kids in high school could then choose to go to state penn at their own peril but at least knowing the facts

how could you possibly create a scenario where kids in the program today are/were being hurt? they could have left if they wanted to or they joined after the sanctions were already known....

absurd is right...
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.