First off, and i know this is a bit outside your point but i feel its worth pointing out: any student that was there when Paterno got busted for being an absolute horrible person had the ability transfer with no penalty. The NCAA wouldnt have slapped them down with their arbitrary, and often ridiculous, rules. They had a free pass. I wanted to make that clear just to show they did try to throw the students a bone.
Now that thats out of the way, i cant think of a business that doesn't have a behavioral and morality clause. I
know the NCAA has those clauses as the players get busted for academic impropriety all the time. The players understand that if they sign up with a coach who is doing underhanded things, they might "suffer". Look no further then all the coaches and programs that have been busted for "pay for play" schemes. Regardless of that, the players agreed to sign the legal work and play football for Penn State and, more to the point, the NCAA.
And how much did they suffer from this by the way? The NCAA voided a record book, a record specifically targeted to the school's and coaches records. They snatched some trophies(and i dont recall them doing it in this case). I just did a quick google search and couldnt find a situation in which the league took the athletes rings(i am a bit drunk, so i might have missed it). The athletes "harm" is fairly minor...especially compared to the stomach turning disgust the victims must be feeling at the reversal of these rulings.
And voiding wins is a relatively
standard NCAA penalty. I brought up FSU to point that out. Its not my rule, its not a rule they made up, its relatively standard procedure. Pete Carroll, USC, and Reggie Bush is another example. If a coach gets wins voided because of academic cheating(which, theoretically, is on the teachers and faculty), why shouldnt a coach get them voided for intentionally covering up violent child rape that happened repeatedly on campus?
What your arguing is that off the field actions shouldnt effect on the field results. That unless it directly effects what happens in a game it shouldnt count towards the results. And we both know that is wrong. Cam Newton went to the University of Florida, but can you remember him in a Gators jersey? I tend to doubt it, as he was suspended for stealing laptops. Off the field behavior can directly effect the in-game scenarios. Had Penn State really wanted those wins(and wanted to remain human beings and not monsters) they would have called the cops.
LaVar Arrington, a Penn State alum who had some of his wins voided, wrote an article during the trial of Jerry Sundusky(Arrington joined the media after his career ended). Like many, his immediately reaction was to defend Paterno...until the trial started:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ung-mans-pain/2012/06/12/gJQAkgviXV_blog.html
Theres more in the link, but while these athletes might want the wins, they are still human beings. If Paterno walked up to them and asked if they wanted wins at the expense of children being raped i doubt many would have agreed. Granted im being generous there, as ive seen the reaction of the Penn State athletes and alum...but im still choosing to believe they wouldnt intentionally play as kids were being raped(...right?).
Joe Paterno preached about doing the right thing. Obviously, he couldnt practice that. But his players could. Fighting for some wins in a records book kept by a corrupt institution seems like a very minor thing in the grand scheme of things. And, by and large, it seems like the former Penn State players agreed with that. The only people ive seen fighting are Penn State, the fans, school/state officials, and the scumbag's family. I suspect athletes will be fine, is it too much to ask that we worry about the actual victims?
