Notice your use of the world unfair. It did give them an advantage to cover up for Sandusky raping children and that's exactly what they did. Someone else posted they don't know why Paterno didn't do something about it, that's the entire point, he didn't because it would have harmed his football team!
What Sandusky was doing came to light when Penn State was worried about football. They kept him on until after the season!!! They had a child rapist, coaching, and they were like ok we'll wait until the football season is over! That's what annoys me so much, people want to act like that didn't happen but it did, they employed someone that they had reason to believe was raping children through the season, then otherwise inexplicably dismissed him. They knew what was up... then once a coach actually witnessed him raping a child (the first known account), they still didn't do anything. Why? Once again, it would have been bad for their football team.
That's what this is all about, Penn State covered up for a child rapist, employed a child rapist, allowed a child rapist to continue, for the sake of their football program. Joe Paterno took no action against a known child rapist, for the sake of their football program. And, virtually everyone in control of said football program participated as an accessory to what Sandusky was doing, by covering up for his actions. This did create an advantage vs. dealing with this properly, and it did set a precedent. It told FSU they can cover up for Winston, it told any institution that letting a rapist go on raping is something that might be worth the risk (let's not mention the moral implications).
Even people here are defending the NCAA's actions with no doubt, the same justifications Penn State used. Why should an entire town pay because Sandusky was raping children? So, using justification used here, Penn State said an entire town shouldn't, and they covered it up, and instead children paid the price. Bravo