Mark Emmert discusses ruling
Examining Penalties Imposed Against Penn State
In punishing the Penn State football program with an unprecedented series of sanctions, president Mark Emmert said he hopes the NCAA has served notice that a win-at-all-costs mentality in major college football won't be tolerated.
More on NCAA sanctions
Penn State created a new class of misconduct during its handling of the Jerry Sandusky scandal. The NCAA responded to its deceit, inaction and arrogance with a new class of punishment, writes Gene Wojciechowski. Story
On one of the darkest days in Penn State history, the devastating sanctions levied against the Nittany Lions were met with mostly silence, writes Mark Schlabach. Story
Mark Emmert and the NCAA chancellors and presidents dealt with an unprecedented situation with unprecedented speed. Let's hope that their impatience doesn't get in the way of their intentions, writes Ivan Maisel. Story
The financial penalties are huge. But the scholarship reductions Penn State is facing could cripple its football program for years to come, writes Adam Rittenberg. Story
This has been a theme for the former University of Washington president since he got the job in October 2010 and scandal after scandal hit the headlines, from Auburn, to Miami, and now State College, Pa.
Yet the NCAA does not plan to overhaul its procedures for handling potential infractions. Emmert made it clear the $60 million fine, four-year bowl ban, scholarship reductions and more were put together largely by himself and a handful of NCAA leaders because Penn State and serial child molester Jerry Sandusky presented a unique situation.
"This is unlike any other case we've ever dealt with," Emmert said in an interview with ESPN's Bob Ley. "This is so public, so shocking, so disturbing that it called for a very different approach.
There was no need for the NCAA to investigate what rules were broken, a process that can take months or years. Penn State handed over the results of its investigation by former FBI director Louis Freeh and didn't dispute the facts.
Emmert said the decision to bypass the infractions committee and let the NCAA executive committee and its Division I Board of Directors decide on the penalties was not a sign of a change in the way future proceedings will go, but a sign that no investigation was necessary.
"What we're trying to do with these sanctions isn't just penalize and punish the school, but help them reshape that culture so that they never say the culture of hero worship or the culture of sport is ever going to overwhelm our values again so that we don't make the right choice at the right time," Emmert told Ley.
Joe Paterno's family criticized the NCAA and Penn State after the sanctions were announced.
"The NCAA has now become the latest party to accept the report as the final word on the Sandusky scandal," the family said. "That the president, the athletic director and the Board of Trustees accepted this unprecedented action by the NCAA without requiring a full due process hearing before the Committee on Infractions is an abdication of their responsibilities and a breach of their fiduciary duties to the University and the 500,000 alumni."
NCAA Sanctions Against Penn State
• $60 million fine
• Vacating of wins from 1998-2011 (112 wins)*
• Four-year postseason ban
• Four-year scholarship reduction (10 initial; 20 total)
• Players may transfer and play immediately at other schools
• Athletic department on probation for five years
* Joe Paterno record now 298-136-3; fifth on FBS all-time list
• Big Ten blog: Reaction, analysis
Emmert said the NCAA executive committee has taken action on its own previously when it decided it wouldn't award predetermined championships such as basketball regionals to South Carolina because of an NAACP boycott over a Confederate flag on the statehouse grounds and when it decided it would ban schools with American Indian mascots and images it considered "hostile and abusive" from postseason play pending name changes.
"The death penalty was unequivocally on the table," Emmert told Ley. "It was widely discussed. There was a lot of sentiment that that ought to be one of the variables in a package of penalties. It was never a consideration that it'd be by itself."
Emmert said in an interview with The Associated Press that he doesn't think any comparisons can be made between the penalties Penn State received and what any other schools might face in the future. Yet he said he hopes the case will serve as a warning to other NCAA members.
"One of the grave dangers stemming from our love of sports is that the sports themselves can become too big to fail, indeed, too big to even challenge," Emmert said. "The result can be an erosion of academic values that are replaced by the value of hero worship and winning at all costs. All involved in intercollegiate athletics must be watchful that programs and individuals do not overwhelm the values of higher education."
Emmert told Ley he saw multiple media reports labeling the NCAA's ruling as the darkest day in Penn State history. Emmert disagreed with that sentiment.
"(Monday) was a very, very bad day for Penn State University, but it wasn't as dark as the day boys were being abused on their campus," Emmert told Ley. "It wasn't as dark a day as when their former assistant coach was convicted. It wasn't as dark a day as any number of tragedies that they may have endured on that campus."
What did Penn State sign?
When Penn State president Rodney Erickson signed the consent decree imposed by the NCAA, he and the school agreed not only to the punishments but also to the monitoring, the supervision and to an enforcement process. This is not just a settlement contract. It is the document that governs enforcement and provides for penalties if Penn State screws up.
These agreements are typically negotiated by two organizations in the middle of a dispute. There is no indication of a negotiation or even a minimal role by Penn State or its president and his lawyers. A typical decree would say that Penn State neither admits nor denies wrongdoing. This decree is all about wrongdoing with Penn State admitting everything.
Consent decrees are ordinarily sterile legal documents, but this one expresses outrage. The decree states the evidence against Penn State "presents an unprecedented failure of institutional integrity leading to a culture in which a football program was held in higher esteem than the values of the institution, the values of the NCAA, the values of higher education, and, most disturbingly, the values of human decency."
Penn State did not negotiate this document. Penn State surrendered to the terms of this document.
It is possible for a wealthy alumnus, a season-ticket holder, a coach, a taxpayer or even a student-athlete to file a lawsuit challenging the sanctions and the consent decree. But any lawsuits are doomed to failure. Erickson's signature on the consent decree means that the university has agreed to the sanctions and to be bound by them for five years.
No one has the standing or the authority to challenge what Erickson and the university have agreed to do. Penn State expressly agrees that it cannot be challenged with "judicial process." Anyone who files a lawsuit would face not only an early dismissal of the case but also the payment of the legal fees incurred by the NCAA and Penn State as they obtain the dismissal. The lawsuit would be an expensive failure.
-- Lester Munson
In Dallas, former Stanford athletic director and new Big 12 Conference commissioner Bob Bowlsby also wondered about whether the college sports governing body should be stepping into a criminal matter.
"I don't know that it is absolutely clear on what basis this becomes an NCAA issue," he said at football media days. "Having said that, there are certainly elements of our constitution and bylaws that go right to the heart of ethics, and clearly there are some ethical issues here. Perhaps the lesson that will be taken away from it is that things can get pretty far afield when there are people running the show that don't ever get frank feedback and don't ever have anybody push back against them in terms of re-centering their decision processes."
North Carolina State coach Tom O'Brien said the NCAA had effectively made Penn State a "I-AA school" by reducing the number of scholarships.
"We're in a new era, obviously, and a new stage," he said of the NCAA. "One of the things the NCAA did when they came to our meetings was that they showed what penalties in the past were and what penalties were going to be in the future, and the penalties in the future were multiple times what the penalties in the past were."
Too much so, according to some Penn State alumni.
"It's ludicrous. It's punishing all the wrong people," said Brad Benson, a former Penn State and New York Giants player.""The NCAA is way out of line with this. It's an overreaction. It's a knee-jerk reaction. I think the statue should have come down. I'm for it. They can take the games, take the wins away. That's fine. There's no future in the past anyway. But to punish the university now? How does this work for the new coach? What's fair about this for him? It's absolutely crazy."
He added: "This is the problem when the NCAA tries to become part of the judicial system. This should have been handled by the courts."
Ed Ray, the executive committee chair and Oregon State president, said university presidents and chancellors let the NCAA know at a meeting a year ago that a change in the culture of college athletics is needed.
"They said, 'We've had enough. This has to stop. We have to reassert our responsibilities and charge to oversee intercollegiate athletics,'" Ray said. "So the first question you asked is, 'Does this send a message?' The message is, the presidents and the chancellors are in charge."
David Berst, the NCAA's vice president for Division I, said the Penn State penalties conjured up memories of 1987, when he was the organization's enforcement director and SMU was banned from playing football for a season -- the so-called death penalty.
Berst believes the penalties handed down show the NCAA is re-emphasizing stronger punishment, particularly in the area of institutional control.
"If you find yourself in a situation where the athletic culture is taking precedence over the academic culture," Emmert added, "then a variety of bad things can occur."
Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.