The NCAA bylaws don't have anything that directly address the situation. We all agree on that. Its more that when a schools administration is removed from the picture with criminal charges does that somehow render them ineligible for compliance by default, therefore making the school at odds with NCAA compliance. The latest rumors have Sandusky pimping out kids from his orphanage to Penn State football donors so at a minimum I wouldn't say we can totally rule out NCAA involvement as this ugly case proceeds.

http://www.businessinsider.com/jerry-sandusky-donors-2011-11

I'm no expert on NCAA rules and regs, and I don't even play one on TV; however, I'd be surprised if there's not some regulation buried within their thousands of pages of mind-numbing verbiage that's an "elastic clause" that gives them the authority to become involved in situations that while not specifically mentioned in other regulations are sufficiently grave to endanger the integrity of college athletics.  It would be like the Supreme Court in the 1960s digging up Civil Rights laws from the 1860s and 1870s, that hadn't been enforced in the 20th Century, and making them the basis for landmark decisions.  Interestingly, there is such an "elastic clause" in the football rule book (at least it was there when I took athletic officiating from Prof. Rhodes in the 1960s) that basically says that an official can make up a rule on the spot if he witnesses something that's not covered by the rules.  That's, of course, a rough paraphrase.  The idea is, for instance, that if a fan tackles a player who is headed down the sideline for an apparent TD that the official can award the TD even though the player never reached the end zone.  The NCAA is not a court of law; they are not bound by the rules of evidence or my legal precedent.  Within the world of college athletics they are a law unto themselves.  In some ways this is not a good thing at all.   And, as I said earlier in this thread, I'm not personally sure I want the NCAA to go down the road of penalizing PSU in addition to the legal actions that are going to be taken.  However, I don't think one can say that they don't have the power to and/or that they won't -- at least at this juncture.  This is a highly unusually situation, and I think the response of the NCAA might not fit the normal template.

Obviously I read your link very, very differently than you did. I read it as saying that the rumor was that Sandusky pimped out boys to donors to Second Mile, not donors to the football program. It certainly is a very ambiguous link, but it implies a revelation from Second Mile, not one from PSU. I think my interpretation makes more logical sense than yours, since Sandusky was working for Second Mile, and was raising money from donors for Second Mile, and was not affiliated with PSU, nor raising money for PSU. It wouldn't surprise me if there was some overlap in donors, however.

This other link implies what you believe, that he was pimping them to PSU football donors, so I guess we'll stay tuned.

No, I am not taking this personally, and actually, I have never cared much for Paterno. I just don't care much for lynchings, and I'm going to always stand up for allowing the facts to come out, in lieu of a lynching. I think things should be allowed to sort themselves out, and we should reach conclusions after the facts are known, not before.

As for sending you a private message in the past, the only private message I recall sending you was nothing personal - simply a political comment that might have gotten a thread sent to Siberia. That is something I have done with more than one person, and if they care to have a political discussion, I have one, but not on these boards.