|
Replies: 33
| visibility 1
|
110%er [8015]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7922
Joined: 5/27/08
|
So the PSU trustees plan on SUING the NCAA.
Aug 8, 2012, 12:39 AM
|
|
Are you kidding? Do you not know when to leave well enough alone?
They're questioning the Freeh report. Didn't they HIRE Freeh to do the report? To bring in an outsider to do a thorough investigation? What are these people smoking?
I only really see this playing out one way. PSU sues, the sanctions go out the window. Then PSU loses, and the NCAA nukes the he!! out of their program. They're only gonna make this worse on themselves.
I hope at the end of this PSU truly has the program it deserves. That is, no program. This is really showing where their true priorities lie.
Message was edited by: 6317forever®
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [3769]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5333
Joined: 11/9/08
|
They said that they,,.....
Aug 8, 2012, 12:52 AM
|
|
Came very close to having the program shut down for 4 years. It just may happen now
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8015]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7922
Joined: 5/27/08
|
They may get it worse than that now.
Aug 8, 2012, 12:53 AM
|
|
If I was the NCAA, I'd pimp-slap their program into oblivion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1723]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 1842
Joined: 12/22/11
|
That's the point of the suit...NCAA overstepping its bounds
Aug 8, 2012, 8:27 AM
|
|
A reactionary decision, such as the one made by the NCAA, is just the type of thing that the legal system and due process are in place to prevent.
Even child rapists (Sandusky) are not taken out and hanged even though there may be enough public support for it. They get their day in court. Our entire justice system falss apart without due process.
I don't even need to say that I am appalled by what happend at Penn St. I have three kids 5 and under, so I am as disgusted as anyone, but the NCAA was wrong in this case. They knew they had the public on their side and that no one would want to take the side of child abusers, so they did what they wanted without a fair chance for a defense. Penn St. may well deserve everything the NCAA sla[pped them with, but they at least deserve a chance to have their day in "court".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20945]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10175
Joined: 9/9/04
|
Penn State has no one to blame but their
Aug 8, 2012, 10:01 AM
|
|
President for not having Due Process. He made the deal with the NCAA without getting anyone else involved. All decisions should have the trustees involved. They're gonna get embarrassed here I have a feeling.
Sorry, I have no sympathy for them, they did this to themselves, every last bit of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8008]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7958
Joined: 6/30/00
|
Before the president accepted the deal he did get the Chair
Aug 8, 2012, 11:48 AM
|
|
of the BOT involved. She chose not to include the entire board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: Before the president accepted the deal he did get the Chair
Aug 8, 2012, 11:57 AM
|
|
If the President of the US Senate talks to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, they cannot come to an agreement without a vote on the floor of both chambers and a signature by the President. Just because they agree on something, they can say what they want, they just don't have they authority to make it binding.
We have the same situation here. The School President spoke with the Chair of the BOT. They agreed to do something. The problem is, they did not have the power or the authority to make the agreement. In order to get that authority, they needed to get authorization by a full vote from the BOT.
This is what the BOT is claiming. I have no idea what their bylaws are or what their process is, all I can go on is what has been reported.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [626]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 9/2/03
|
Re: Before the president accepted the deal he did get the Chair
Aug 8, 2012, 12:16 PM
|
|
with the BOT appeals and past players appealing the vacated wins, it tells they still put football above everything else, including the past child abuse.
but does the BOT of trustees really have to agree on the punishment? The NCAA is going to dish out the punishemnt regardless of who accepts it right? Accept the punishment, get your priorities straight and rebuild a positive image for your university. I hope they get the death penalty now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [323]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 302
Joined: 8/1/12
|
Re: So the PSU trustees plan on SUING the NCAA.
Aug 8, 2012, 1:40 AM
|
|
the rest of the football nation a chance to nail you're tail ends to the wall and make those sanctions much closer to the "death penalty" for an athletic department such as your "fail to be leaders" deserve, as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
They chose to accept the sanctions
Aug 8, 2012, 1:58 AM
|
|
now they are just going to make it worse for themselves, and rightfully so. I do feel sorry for everyone that was not involved but it's very ###### up what sandusky/paterno/rest of PSU admin did and something has too happen. People can say that it's not about football but it really is, success on the football drove the cover up to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
Just to clarify, they claim they did not accept the
Aug 8, 2012, 2:10 AM
|
|
penalties. They said that President Rodney Erickson did on his own accord which "acted outside of the charter and bylaws of the university when he accepted the sanctions on the day they were announced without consulting the board, the “final repository of all legal responsibility and authority governing the affairs of the university."
I agree they are fighting a losing battle though. The NCAA has already said these sanctions are not subject to appeal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
Re: Just to clarify, they claim they did not accept the
Aug 8, 2012, 2:15 AM
|
|
Then they should be doing something to the President, it's not the NCAA's fault the pres. acted outside the bylaws
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
no, but the problem is it's a legal contract and if the
Aug 8, 2012, 2:17 AM
|
|
president had no authority to act as psu's agent in this case, then the contract is null n void.
it will end up in the courts if they're seriously going to carry this through to the end.
probably and injunction eventually and a ruling on the nc2a's purview in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67820]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115460
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re:Just to clarify, they claim they did not accept the- Pres
Aug 8, 2012, 7:58 AM
[ in reply to Re: Just to clarify, they claim they did not accept the ] |
|
is the guy who ok'd Sandusky keeping his access when he "retired". So the place is still run by boneheads and has not turnedover this new leaf they want you to think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19586]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 17257
Joined: 7/25/07
|
Re:Just to clarify, they claim they did not accept the- Pres
Aug 8, 2012, 9:24 AM
|
|
Spanier and Erikson are two diffent people....
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67820]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115460
Joined: 11/30/98
|
and Erickson was the VP that signed off on
Aug 8, 2012, 9:44 AM
|
|
Sandusky keeping his access years ago. Duh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: and Erickson was the VP that signed off on
Aug 8, 2012, 9:48 AM
|
|
But didn't he have some reservations about it and was told that it was all on the up and up or something? I don't think he had any part of the cover up or any knowledge of the problems.
I do seem to remember one article saying that he thought the retirement package given to Sandusky was weird and that he felt it was dangerous as it set a precedent for giving all kinds of access and special privileges to other retirees in the future that he didn't think was in the best interest of PSU.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67820]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115460
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: and Erickson was the VP that signed off on- Link
Aug 8, 2012, 9:58 AM
|
|
“Let’s go ahead and grant it if Graham has already promised it. We can hope that not too many others take that careful notice.”
Isn't that basically what I just said?
We obviously look at the situation differently, but the article I read was much more in depth, and I am not going to bother finding it, probably on deadspin or espn somewhere. Just taking that one statement is a little excessive to condemn a guy as part of the PSU culture that was going on in this whole mess.
The hope others dont take notice wasn't about Sandusky being a molester. It was about granting emeritus status to a non professor, and giving him things that other emeritus professors did not have access to. The Sandusky retirement package basically said, if you retire from PSU, we'll let you use all the facilities you had available here as a professor, but you don't have to deal with any of that "doing your job" junk. This could cost PSU untold amounts of money in research grants or from monetary gains made on any discoveries by professors/researchers on campus.
At some point, when your boss tells you to do something, you have two choices, do it, or get another job. And without knowing about Sandusky's crimes, I see him not making any fouls in this area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
That guy is spot on about the culture problems at Penn St
Aug 8, 2012, 10:07 AM
[ in reply to Re: and Erickson was the VP that signed off on- Link ] |
|
and exactly why someone needed to step in and punish the school itself for the culture it created and the people they supported. They try and take this "whoa is me" attitude but fans, students, and alumni knew d@mn well how things were run up there and no one did a thing about it.
Now something bad happened. What a surprise! You reap what you sew Penn St peeps. Now take your punishment like a man!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14090]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 25448
Joined: 7/28/05
|
Child Molester U just needs to give it up***
Aug 8, 2012, 2:05 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8244]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7565
Joined: 1/1/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: Links
Aug 8, 2012, 7:23 AM
|
|
The problem there is the board didn't have an official vote on the sanctions, they briefly discussed it and moved onto other scheduled matters at the meeting. In the link below has the full information about the board vote and the process that was or was not followed.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8240385/penn-state-nittany-lions-trustees-file-appeal-federal-lawsuit-denial
I don't know if I buy the due process argument, there is a a decent argument to be made that PSU has a property or a liberty interest in running the football program, but under the 5th, is the NCAA a government program? Or under the 14th, is PSU being treated differently? Big questions. Even the liberty/property interest is interesting, I don't know how the process works, but I would like to see how it plays out.
For example, a tenured teacher has a property interest in a job for the following school year, you can't fire them without due process. A non-tenured teacher does NOT have the same property interest in continued employment, and therefore you can fire them whenever, even if the contract is auto-renewing (as long as it is before a renewal date in the contract and in the prescribed manner). So, it depends on how the agreement between PSU and NCAA works.
Where does the due process occur as well? Is it the NCAA because they didn't give a hearing? Hearings don't have to be held, they just have to be offered. Seems that argument can be made here. There is a written response with the reasons, done here as well. Notice, hearing and response, boom, due process.
From a legal standpoint, I am very interested in these question, but in all honesty, if this appeal moves forward, PSU very well might get a victory on the "technicality" (lack of a better term), that the board hasn't officially voted, thereby accepting the sanctions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3794]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6026
Joined: 3/16/03
|
I am very torn on this and have gone back and forth.........
Aug 8, 2012, 7:44 AM
|
|
On one hand I feel the NCAA overstepped its boundary as this was a criminal issue and not their juristiction. If they can come in like that with no investigation of their own and just tell Penn State what to do, who is to stop them in the future from doing that to any other school? On the other hand I really do feel for these famalies that were hurt and these kids. However the legal system will take care of that but neither will make it right for them. If the NCAA did their job and enforced the things they were supposed to this tough it would be great. These teams like Miami, UNC and others would get what they deserve. I am beginning to wonder if Yahoo Sports should now be the governing body of College Football because they uncover more than the NCAA ever has. You never hear of the NCAA uncovering anything and they only investigate after the fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: I am very torn on this and have gone back and forth.........
Aug 8, 2012, 7:51 AM
|
|
I don't think the NCAA has overstepped their bounds at all. There are plenty of catch-all phrases in the NCAA guidelines that deal with being ethical, as well as reporting crimes. PSU recruited players by being one of the "good" programs that didn't have any problems, while actively covering up the problems. Competitive advantage for sure.
The sanctions weren't about the crimes of Sandusky, or the failure to report child abuse or the lying to a grand jury crimes of Spanier, Curley and Shultz (I'm not going to argue any criminal liability on the part of Paterno). The NCAA penalties are about Paterno, Spanier, Curley and Shultz conspiring together and covering up Sandusky's crimes in order to gain a competitive advantage, failing to notify the NCAA through mandated reports of (any) crimes on campus and not acting in an ethical manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8244]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7565
Joined: 1/1/11
|
Re: Links
Aug 8, 2012, 8:52 AM
[ in reply to Re: Links ] |
|
johnnyscarecrow
I understand your point, but the NCAA is not nor do they answer to PSU BOT.
Don't think PSU Admin would have signed with out talking with someone on PSU BOT.
ESPN reported from a statement that the NCAA Board of
Directors & the PSU President with approval of PSU BOT
had accepted the penalty.
The question is has or if the Admin ever signed a binding contract with out the PSU BOT voting on it.
Most of the NCAA members who over see the infractions are Law Professors this is one case I would think that everyone had been advised and were on board with the decision.
If all else fails the NCAA can revoke PSU membership with the NCAA, if that happens no court has jurisdiction
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: Links
Aug 8, 2012, 9:29 AM
|
|
I'm not really clear on what you are saying. The Due Process stuff in my post was mostly me just pondering on the question out loud, not responding to you.
The BOT did make a statement saying that they accepted the penalties. The BOT did not have a vote to formally accept the penalties. The statement has no meaning if the people making the statement did not have the authority or power to make that statement.
The BOT did not, in fact, have a full vote on the sanctions. The sanctions were signed by the President. He may have had some members of the board approving of this, but he did not have a full vote. When the sanctions were signed, a contract was formed. A contract cannot be formed if the person signing the contract does not have the authority to sign the contract. In this case, it seems pretty clear that PSU Pres did not have the authority to sign the contract without the full approval of the BOT. But that does not mean an argument can be made otherwise, and a judge could decide either way. Contract law is especially cumbersome when it comes to cases of this magnitude and when one side is seeking to nullify and the other specific performance rather than monetary compensation.
It seems that the NCAA was acting behind having the PSU President's approval. In fact, the PSU President did give the NCAA approval, however, he may not have had (at the time) the power to do so, or did not go far enough to obtain that power. He definitely spoke with some members of the BOT, but the BOT did not act on this matter. The BOT is saying that the organization of PSU is that the BOT has to vote on all these things, and though they made a statement that they accept the sanctions, they did not actually vote on the sanctions, or give the President the approval to accept on behalf of PSU.
Is this just semantics? Yes, welcome to contract law.
Is this possibly an amazing legal move by the BOT to get an injunction so they can play this season and then prepare for the hammer that is coming, or just put a pause on the sanctions so they can milk one more season out and get themselves in a better position to deal with the penalties and fines? Conspiracy yes, but these guys are all very bright and this is a viable angle.
Did the BOT not act on this matter because they were ok with giving the President some leeway? Did the BOT not act on this matter as a method to stall the NCAA? Did the BOT not act on this matter because they didn't realize they needed to approve giving the President the power to make this agreement? All of these need to be found out in the matter of the contract. Both sides.
The NCAA handing out the penalties came so fast, and was so swift, neither side really had the time to sit down and organize their thoughts and tactics. Both were responding to immense public pressure to do SOMETHING.
This is what I meant about the "technicality". Technically, there might not be a contract that was accepted by the board. Therefore, since there was no proper acceptance, the sanctions are null and void, and the contract has lapsed, since the NCAA sanctions had a timetable on them. The offer of those sanctions is now unavailable, and the NCAA now can go forward with their full investigation, or whatever the next steps they reserved if the agreement wasn't accepted.
Your last point is the biggest argument the NCAA has in denying due process. It is a volunteer organization, membership can be continued or denied at any point, therefore no continuing property/liberty interest in being a member, therefore we can do what we want. I would really like to see the due process issue here hammered out in a court. I think the NCAA is fine, on multiple angles, but I can see the argument for the other side, and if I can see both sides, then I would really like to see what some of the high courts in the US have to say about such a matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8244]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7565
Joined: 1/1/11
|
Re: Links
Aug 8, 2012, 11:00 AM
|
|
I was agreeing with you
other than the fact the NCAA is bigger than PSU
how could anyone think that just in a few days something that went on for years could be corrected
If PSU keeps pushing, talking about taking this to any courts all the NCAA has to do is say well PSU you are no longer a member in good standing with the NCAA
Not the same I know but years ago a few teams tried the same thing with NASCAR who also said its our way or no way.
Sometimes the courts are not the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [356]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 879
Joined: 6/3/08
|
Re: Links
Aug 8, 2012, 11:25 AM
|
|
my bad
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amateur [42]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 98
Joined: 12/4/11
|
Re: Links
Aug 8, 2012, 11:09 AM
[ in reply to Re: Links ] |
|
I agree with you. Really clever tactic by the PSU BOT here, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if the board intentionally never took action concerning the sanctions specifically to allow this scenario.
Generally, for a valid contract to have been formed between the NCAA and the BOT, a quorum of the board would need to have officially moved to accept the sanctions, and this would need to be noted in the minutes of a BOT special meeting. At least that's how the process has worked in the bylaws of the BOTs I've been involved with.
Admittedly, it's a painful process, and this is definitely a "technicality", but they may have a valid argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8244]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7565
Joined: 1/1/11
|
Re: Links
Aug 8, 2012, 12:17 PM
|
|
If at any time the president of PSU was allowed/authorized to enter in to a/any binding contract as a controlling representive of on behalf of PSU with out the full or majority vote of the PSU BOT, they now are trying to build a barn after all the livestock have left the pasture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1357]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 2671
Joined: 8/24/04
|
Re: So the PSU trustees plan on SUING the NCAA.
Aug 8, 2012, 7:48 AM
|
|
Death penalty please. I'm sick of hearing about them lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [508]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 757
Joined: 3/30/12
|
Re: So the PSU trustees plan on SUING the NCAA.
Aug 8, 2012, 8:17 AM
|
|
I agree, sick of hearing about them and the NCAA gave them a break. Take your punishment, go sit down and shut up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [626]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1750
Joined: 9/2/03
|
Re: So the PSU trustees plan on SUING the NCAA.
Aug 8, 2012, 11:57 AM
|
|
wouldn't be surprised if the PSU board had something to do with the coverup as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 33
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
COLLEGE: A three-year starter at strong safety for Clemson, finished his career with 234 tackles and 11 interceptions.