...They probably would have a good argument unless they've allowed the prez to do something of a similar magnitude (e.g., sign off on a civil suit settlement) without full board approval or unless something like this falls under a specific authority granted the prez under state law or his contract.  I don't think this will jeopardize this season.  If they get a restraining order as a result of the sanctions that have already been levied, they have an even better shot at a restraining order if the NCAA tries anything further without going through the full investigative process.

What they were most upset about  was the vacating of the PSU's wins,particularly  how much it hurts the players who did nothing wrong and now,from a football standpoint, don't exist.
They said it was obvious that this was only done to get at Paterno's record as winningist coach. 

Several people said the same thing that's been said here "If this involved the history department,would you void everyone's history degree ?"

I keep hearing this argument and don't understand it. Former players got fame, fortune and degrees (that's the most important thing here, right?) for their work at Penn State. This ruling impacts that in no great way. 

Their coach, unfortunately, put his own quest for fame in front of the safety of children. So this is the one way they can penalize that coach. His name shouldn't be mentioned among coaching greats and this paperwork move helps ensure that.


Two things.

1.I don't know if you were a Division I athlete in college.
    I recognized  that my primary prupose of going to college was to get my degree,so I could get a job.
    But I was also a Division I athlete in soccer and wrestling.
    I know I would be very upset if  my athletic record was "erased"  through no violation of NCAA rules governing   
    the sports I participated in.

2.I've read most of the Freeh report. (I haven;t had time to finish the whole report yet)
   There is no question that the "culture" at PSU  resulted in Sandusky not being prosecuted  sooner.But from 
    reading the report I don't get the impression that Paterno's actions/inactions were done with a delibrate 
    "quest for fame".

    What I don't understand from reading the Freeh report is why the local (non PSU) authorities didn't persue their 
     investigation in 1998.They seemed to have more then enough "evidence" to move foward.
     
     Several PSU fans I talked to last weekend also said that they expect the names of several high level Pa.  
     politicians to be identified as also  "covering up" the Sandusky situation.

     
  

I hate hearing the phrase "due process" related to this case. The NCAA is a private organization. They can do just about anything to any of its members. If they wanted to fine every team with a blue uniform in its association $60 mill they could.

If Penn State doesn't agree with the NCAA, that's fine. Leave. The only organization keeping Penn State from hanging a banner with all of JoPas wins and putting the statue out front is themselves (granted they'd likely have to leave the NCAA to do that).

Maybe because the NCAA works with schools funded by the government people think they have to operate like the government? Well thats just not true. No precedent is required for the NCAA to do anything. The NCAA did not discriminate against Penn State, and from the government's eyes that's about all they would have the "precedent" to rule on.

Did anyone ever accuse Penn State of being a "History Factory"?  Was the chairman of the Department of History ever more powerful than the president and paid more in salary? Is PSU primarily an academic institution with a football team or a Football Factory with some ancillary academic functions? 

Your first two questions are puzzling...they don't seem to really relate to the original question being asked.  I hope you're not imlying that the crimes commited are bad just because the men in the scandel wielded 'x' amount of power within the university...or made 'y' amount of money per year.

To your last question - I think Penn State is a great academic school, that also happens to have a good football team (most years).  I would put it on par with Stanford.

Please look at rpbobcat's statement about comments he heard recently on a trip to Pennsylvania.  I was sarcastically pointing out that one can't make a comparison between how this type of scandal would be handled if it involved the history department versus the "football department."  It's a non-sequiter. The problem at PSU does not involve a "history department" culture that led high ranking members of the administration (from the prez on down) to coverup the actions of Sandusky.  It involved a corrupt "football culture."  I think that the NCAA -- for the first time in its history -- is trying to send a message that football über alles culture is no longer going to be tolerated.  It's high time!