You're right, not everyone at the school knew nor were involved in this, but very high ranking people did. The school president and vice president knew about it, the AD, and a coach with a major name all knew. How do you not punish a school when arguably 4 of the most recognizable people at it played major roles? But what really gets me is that there are probably more people involved, and while those 4 mentioned were undoubtedly involved, they were most likely used as scapegoats to protect whoever else knows about this. Hell, a janitor, his boss, an engineer, and the campus police knew about it, and I seriously doubt they didn't pass along any information to people.wheaton4prez wrote:In what way is the comparison of justifications off at all?squintsdd wrote:We're hardly throwing anybody into any camps in this case. Your comparison is way off
Both are cases of negatively affecting innocent people for crimes they didn't commit in order to theoretically punish someone who is guilty.
True. However, punishing people (the entire program) for crimes they did not commit is not an example of due justice.lukeyrid13 wrote:I liken it to when someone goes to jail. A father could commit a crime and his kids who were not involved in any way are going to be affected by his sentence but just because it hurts those kids doesn't mean due justice should not be served against their father
Exactly. This is a job for the police. The sport of football has nothing to do with it. Apart from a few individuals, Penn State has nothing to do with it.greenyellow wrote:Everything that you've posted as punishment has been an overreaction. Let the authorities do their job in handing out punishment to those involved in the coverup and make the NCAA stay out it for the most part. There's no real need for the death penalty. Penn State should pay, in perpetuity, any bowl revenue and a percentage of football revenue to organizations that help those affected by child abuse.
Banning football at Penn State over this makes as little sense as closing a freeway because some guy drove drunk on it.
If Penn State wants to address their image issue by donating proceeds to anti child abuse organizations, I think that would be a noble and worthwhile gesture. However, it becomes meaningless if they are forced to do it.
Yes. An overreaction would be acting as if the entire program had something to do with it and punishing innocent people for crimes that they did not commit.squintsdd wrote:You really think there's an overreaction to a program that knowingly allowed a grown man to rape innocent kids?
Do you really think that not being able to watch Penn State football is an appropriate punishment for the crime that was committed?
Since the entire school did not commit this crime, why should they all be punished? What is wrong with punishing those involved as we do in every other criminal prosecution?Duck07 wrote:What does a school have to do in order to receive a football moratorium?
And why is this a football issue? The crime wasn't committed to gain a football advantage.
How do you say this is not a football issue? While there are no rules within the NCAA rule book for this type of thing, probably because noone would think it would need to be mentioned that this a major f*** up, the whole coverup happened because the school was trying to protect it's football program and image. This is directly related to Sandusky's connection to the football program and an attempt to protect it. The image of a prestigious school and football program were deemed more important by these people than the well being of children.
We are going to have to agree to disagree. Everyone will have their opinions on what is justifiable punishment, but nobody will get it perfect. The victims will always feel that not enough was done, and rightfully so, while the people who get punished but weren't invovled will feel that they were unfairly included, and righfully so. In the end I'm going to side with the victims and their familes, because those who get punished that weren't involved are only being punished by the NCAA and not the law.