Skip to content

NCAA announces Penn State to get some football scholarships back early

Sep 24, 2013, 12:44 PM EDT

source: APIt’s been little more than a year since the NCAA handed down one of its stiffest penalties of all-time, but it seems college athletics’ governing body is finally ready to ease up on Penn State. On Tuesday it was announced the sanction the program’s football scholarships will be gradually restored over the next few years—earlier than originally planned.

Per CollegeFootballTalk:

 

The original sanctions called for a cap of 15 scholarships beginning in 2013 and running through 2016; the NCAA limit at the FBS level is 15.  Additionally, whereas FBS programs are permitted 85 scholarship players, the Nittany Lions would be allowed just 65.

The new directive from the NCAA, however, will allow Penn State to increase by five its scholarships in 2014, increasing to the full allotment of 25 the following year.  The program will be back up to its full allotment of 85 scholarship players beginning in 2016 — at least two full years ahead of what the original sanctions had called for — after moving to 75 in 2014 and 80 in 2015.

Other penalties included a $60 million fine and four-year bowl ban, but those will remain in place for now with no specific plan in place to reduce either. However, the NCAA said in its press release that it may consider lessening the bowl ban at some point as well. The original sanctions were a result of the Jerry Sandusky scandal that sent shockwaves throughout the country.

>> NCAA to reduce scholarship sanctions on Penn State [CFT]

  1. Scott B - Sep 24, 2013 at 1:44 PM

    Call me a troll or whatever but this is stupid. I get its a touchy (ha!) subject but innocent children were being raped for years and school officials, including JoePa knew it.

    How is the NCAA going to go lenient on something like that? I’d get it if it was something stupid like kids taking money but this is children and rape.

    Reply
    • Andrew Kulp - Sep 24, 2013 at 2:23 PM

      Not to take sides, but one could hypothetically argue the NCAA didn’t have the authority to sanction Penn State in the first place. Which of the governing body’s rules were broken? Where was a competitive advantage gained?

      Obviously the crimes committed at PSU were far worse than kids taking money, but “buying” or paying student-athletes puts other schools (that theoretically play by the rules) at a competitive disadvantage and the NCAA has rules expressly prohibiting that. This was a criminal matter that just happened to involve members of the athletic department.

      Reply
      • OneManWolfpack - Sep 24, 2013 at 2:29 PM

        Well said sir. My arguments exactly.

      • nahroots - Sep 24, 2013 at 2:45 PM

        “…a competitive disadvantage”

        Schools are ALWAYS at a competitive disadvantage in college football- it’s the nature of the suckfest that is NCAAF.

        The NCAA is back-pedalling because of $$$ – the one and only thing that their decisions are based upon. They’re just a giant cash cow now. Gotta protect that revenue stream.

      • psudrozz - Sep 24, 2013 at 7:46 PM

        i think its the “lack of institutional control”, which is in this case is a BS catch-all.

        all the NCAA did was kick a corpse to make themselves look serious.

  2. Scott B - Sep 24, 2013 at 2:49 PM

    Point taken Kulp. If only half your articles were as good as that response.

    I kid, I kid.

    “This was a criminal matter that just happened to involve members of the athletic department.”

    I just cant get past that statement. The organization, even in a criminal context is held to a higher standard. No matter if its kids taking money and gaining a competitive advantage or when its adults knowing about sexual violence but turning a blind eye. You need a NCAA rules that expressly prohits that.

    Under Rule 42.4, in no way should a member of the athletic department have sex with a student, player or child. If so they will give up millions and lose scholarships.

    Come on man. You cant be serious

    Reply
    • nahroots - Sep 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM

      Thank you.

      Poor Kulp just can’t wrap his head around the definition of collateral damage. Not that we should be shocked at that revelation or anything.

      Once a pin head, always a pin head.

      Reply
    • Andrew Kulp - Sep 24, 2013 at 3:21 PM

      Again, I’m not taking sides, Scott. It’s simply a question of what the NCAA’s function is and what authority its members grant the governing body.

      The NCAA’s role in penalizing institutions typically has been directly related to issues of competitive balance to the best of my knowledge. This did not fall under those parameters.

      I wasn’t necessarily opposed to sanctions for Penn State, but if they didn’t violate any rules–even in the broadest sense–what gives the NCAA the authority to hand down punishment? It’s a valid question.

      Reply
      • Scott B - Sep 24, 2013 at 3:44 PM

        Valid question and looks like the NCAA cant even answer it if they’re going to hand down severe punishment and simply a year later pull back on it.

        Makes them look bad in an era when positive PR for the acting body couldnt get worse. Most likely, long term the NCAA probably saw a financial advantage to loosening the reigns on State and decided to do it. Because money is tight for the old rich white men.

        The whole thing is screwed.

  3. BenE. - Sep 25, 2013 at 12:06 AM

    Looks like me and everyone else who made this exact argument in November 2011 weren’t so bat-shit crazy after all.

    Reply
    • Scott B - Sep 25, 2013 at 9:05 AM

      That’s because you’re so incredibly knowledgeable about everything related to everything BenE.

      Reply

(email will not be published)