Recent Comments
I love how everyone is now a legal scholar :) Yes, the NCAA does not have jurisdiction here in the true legal sense. They technically don't have any jurisdiction whatsoever in the legal sense because they are not a legal/gov't agency.
However, they have the ability to monitor their members and discipline them within the bounds of their organization's rules. That's the question here... not whether or not the NCAA should do anything legally but should they punish within the framework of the NCAA.
Again, if the NCAA doesn't have the ability to punish its members (within its own system, not in a criminal sense) for non-football violations, then VT has no "jurisdiction" to suspend guys like Cody Journell and Dadi Nicholas.
I just think people look silly when they talk about this and things like "jurisdiction". The NCAA is a self-governing body when it comes to their rules (and for the record they suck at it.) But if they have rules that apply to this situation then its not a question of whether or not they can punish PSU but should they.
No one is saying the NCAA should be able to lock PSU officials up in jail. They are asking if the NCAA should enforce some set of rules to punish the program within the NCAAs operations.
As strange as it sounds that the NCAA could punish USC and Ohio State but not do anything here, that's what should happen. It's best left to the courts unless something else comes about from it that shows the football team or players received a tangible benefit.
I love South Beach...especially in January, but I HATE paying out the ass for everything in Miami. I wish all the bowl games were in NOLA, especially since you can get 3 for 1 drinks
I understand what people are saying in terms of this being a legal issue not a football one. And I get that. But isn't that kind of like saying a company can't reprimand an employee if they get busted for stealing a car? Or maybe more appropriately, a football program can't punish/suspend a player for committing a crime off the field (like stealing a bike or breaking into someone's house with an air gun?)
I understand that the NCAA governs the athletic activities of its members. But, like an individual program or any company, it can still have a set of minimum standards for its members/players/employees to abide by off the field, can it not? I don't think anyone is saying the NCAA should be the lead prosecutor in the Sandusky case (so Andy Staples' comment that the IRS doesn't prosecute murderers is well taken but I think a little misguided.) I think what people are saying is that if you run your program cleanly in terms of football but it is despicable outside the day to day athletic operations (like PSU appears to have been) then the NCAA should have the right to discipline you. Again, it would be similar to someone getting fired for stealing a car or Cody Journell being dismissed from the team for his B&E charge. It's not directly related to the scope of work but your actions bring discredit to your organization.
I can see the argument that punishing PSU's football program now doesn't really do much to affect the violators. Joe Pa is gone and Sandusky is being prosecuted accordingly. So punishing PSU only hurts the current players/students/fans who aren't to blame. And in fact, it may cause more harm as it could prevent the good people PSU from moving on. I can understand those points. But I do think the NCAA could make a case for doing something in situations like this. Should they here? Probably not, but if it were closer to the time that the horrific acts actually occurred, I would be all for it.
And his legacy after this weekend (after the CNN story broke, and well after your initial comment), in addition to whatever he did on the football field, will include that he helped cover-up a pedophile.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/30/justice/penn-state-emails/index.html
He gives the most compelling argument I've read for why the NCAA shouldn't get involved at PSU.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andy_staples/07/02/penn-st...
i did misread it ... and i didn't realize until i read it that there will be six bowls in the rotation ... but hell yeah -- atlanta much better option
Is it perfect? No. Is it a step in the right direction? Yes.
This is just the beginning, we will get to 8 and 16 will be on the horizon; but that will take decades. As far as the selection process goes, there is no perfect answer. Polls, computers, a comittee, they all have drawbacks and positives so I think it should all be part of the final decision.
Whoever #5 is will complain, and will likely have solid arguments, but that is unavoidable.
But just think of it, national semifinals played at the biggest bowls. Six huge games in 48 hours on Dec 31 and Jan 1, here's to a seriously hungover Jan 2!
This is a great day for college football.
He's saying that the ACC will be assured a spot in one of the 5 remaining bowls if the Orange is a semi and the ACC champ doesnt qualify for the 4 team tournament. Tell these "most" who think the Orange will never be a semi that its already been decided that the 4 BCS games will be in the rotation, its the two remaining games that have yet to be decided. Most are just assuming it will be the Cotton and the Peach.
But yeah, I'm with you that the Peach is preferable to the Orange. Miami is just such a long drive and whats our record in that game? 1-4? That sucks. If the Peach does get elevated and the payouts are the same hell yeah I'd take it over the Orange.
|
14 years 1 week
# | A Look Back to the famed Hokie Wide Tackle Six Defense and How It Influenced The Current Hokie Scheme Never forget Aaron Rodgers literally laughing at our defense. . .
That would be one more debacle ala Swofford .. The Orange Bowl? How about the Peach Bowl?? Travelling is better and closer to the just about all of the ACC .. and who are they going to play?? Notre Dame? Give me a break. And the ACC champ is guaranteed to be a semifinalist on the years that the Orange is a semifinal?? hahaha -- weak assumption that the orange bowl will ever be a semifinal bowl game .. most think not
I'll let Mr. CFB explain better than I can.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19431546/playing-selectio...
2: If I was in charge of a bowl game, any bowl game, I would be very, very nervous right now. With this move the commissioners are basically telling the bowls: We are not going to outsource our product to you anymore. You can host the game and sell some local sponsorships to help pay your bills. But we control everything else: TV, tickets, hotels etc. That's what the SEC/Big 12 Champions Game is all about. The Big Ten/Pac-12 have been doing that at the Rose Bowl forever. It will be the new financial model between conferences and bowls. And if the bowls want to be part of the New World Order and remain relevant, they will go along.
One step at a time.
When ACC inks deal w Orange Bowl its champ is guaranteed "BCS" game spot even if the Orange is a semifinal and champ is rated below 12— Joe Schad (@schadjoe) June 29, 2012
Swofford is making moves.
It is bat shit crazy that schools are going to continue to give away money to third party bowls and organizers. This is marginally better for fans but doesn't come close to fixing the structural issues that plague college football. Steger should be ashamed of himself for participating in this plan. Does he also get steak dinners and all expenses paid cruises from the Orange Bowl commissioner? Did he forget what selection committees have done to our basketball team? What is he going to say when 8-4 Notre Dame gets into the playoff instead of us?
Get rid of this dumb ass plan, create four superconferences, hold an 8 team playoff with games at the schools and keep ALL the money where it belongs, with the schools. I can't believe this system is going to be any more sustainable than the last.
I love the playoff...
..now just keep it at 4 forever.
Essentially what I was saying about adding new commentators. They need more variety... But I agree, they could just keep Nessler and Herbstriet and give them newer fresher lines that vary with each game's intro, but let's be honest... We don't really care for those two.
If they actually used real-life commentary pairings/teams (Thursday night crew on ESPN, CBS crew, ABC Saturday night w/ Musberger and Herbie, Todd Blackledge and Nessler... you get the picture) I would be more invested in the game. However, until that variety is in place, I will continue to be dissatisfied.
but isn't point 3 part of the reason that they want to leave?
I do think that this is a good ploy and rally for 4 superconferences. What I do not see, however, is how this will motivate FSU to jump ship.
1. The ACC's position has not changed because of this decision
2. I still haven't heard confirmation FSU has gotten any offers
3. The one loss scenario you are talking about happens with the BCS championship now anyways
Who is the Pac-12 taking to get to 16?
I feel like this is the real first step towards the 4 super conferences..maybe I'm wrong but think about it. I think this is the decision that FSU was waiting on before they jumped ship. The thought of a CHANCE for a 1 loss non-conference champion SEC team being selected over a 1 loss ACC champ along with the tv deal that they hate is enough for FSU to take off.
Of course if that happens the rest of the ACC football schools will be raided. The good part about that? We may end up in the SEC? You will technically have a 8 team play off since each conference will have a conference championship game (quarterfinals) and the winners go on to the 4 team format that has just been voted in, making the "selection committee" a non-issue.
Maybe I'm just dreaming, but would love to see it happen..
The hoos have to have someplace to play!
The best part of the comeback was the dagger INT return for TD by Banks with no time left.
I agree. I hope all the baby bowl games that have been popping up will disappear soon...who wants to watch Mr. Dave's Windsheild Wiper's Bowl or the Jerry's Lawn Service Bowl?
VT has jurisdiction to suspend players because the scholarship VT gave those players gives the school the ability to suspend players. I'm also assuming that VT has a code of conduct which applies to the students that the students agreed to accept upon enrollment which covers legal violations. It's apples and oranges. For the NCAA to punish PSU under their rules, they have to find an NCAA rule that PSU violated. There really isn't a rule they violated currently on the NCAA's books, unless you want to strain the reading of the current rules and create an awful precedent. Seriously, point me to an existing rule that applies here. The closest argument anyone has made is the general "lack of institutional control", which fails IMO b/c a) that usually ties into another existing rule, and b) you can't say PSU wasn't in control- they were controlling everything and that's the problem.
If the NCAA sucks at everything they do, why would you want them to go outside their jurisdiction to do something else? I'd think you wouldn't want them to make things worse. They just aren't designed to handle legal violations. They enforce rules related to amateurism, boosters, etc. They just don't have anything to cover criminal conspiracies, and grafting their already ill-fitting rules onto a situation they most certainly were not written for is a terrible idea. Nothing PSU did as far as we know at this point affected player eligibility. So yes, it is a matter of jurisdiction, no matter how much you may hate people using that word. The NCAA can't cover areas that it is not prescribed to cover.
PSU is looking at writing huge checks. The people involved are likely going to jail. The Department of Education and the feds are sniffing around. Why exactly does the NCAA need to do something when it's not completely clear they can? And again, if the rules say that the death penalty can only apply to repeat violators, and PSU isn't a repeat violator, how can the death penalty apply?