HitsRus;1231765 wrote:$60 million fine?...payable to who? The victims families? This is just more NCAA horse ****. If it wants to forfeit wins or ban the people who were associated with the program for 5 years/show cause, that is within it's jurisdiction.(barely). But fining the people of Pennslyvania is absurd ...although not unexpected from an organization that continues to usurp power faster than the federal governmnet.

And the worst part about it, is that people suck this stuff up like the NCAA is this all powerful, benign institution.

I won't be getting any money back from my state taxes anytime soon

This doesn't seem quite as funny as it once did

[video=youtube;hgEkCfpWU0o][/video]

HitsRus;1231765 wrote:$60 million fine?...payable to who? The victims families? This is just more NCAA horse shit. If it wants to forfeit wins or ban the people who were associated with the program for 5 years/show cause, that is within it's jurisdiction.(barely). But fining the people of Pennslyvania is absurd ...although not unexpected from an organization that continues to usurp power faster than the federal governmnet.

And the worst part about it, is that people suck this stuff up like the NCAA is this all powerful, benign institution.

Pretty sure the money has to come from the athletic program, which is it's own entity, and not privy to public funds. Tax money won't be used to pay the fine. Also, the money, as stated in the announcement, will go to charitable organizations outside of PSU that helps protect children.

se-alum;1231803 wrote:Pretty sure the money has to come from the athletic program, which is it's own entity, and not privy to public funds. Tax money won't be used to pay the fine. Also, the money, as stated in the announcement, will go to charitable organizations outside of PSU that helps protect children.

It has to come specifically from football revenue. They aren't even allowed to use money from another sport.

Good rant fail though.

The $60 million is a drop in the bucket for them. In 2010-11, the athletic department had a REVENUE of $116 million. So, that $60 million is almost 50% of one year's revenue.

Yes, I do understand their revenue probably won't reach $116 million the next 4 years...but, it's not like the Penn State athletic department was hurting for money.

WebFire;1231807 wrote:Good rant fail though.

lol--reps

Dejan Kovacevic ‏@Dejan_Kovacevic
#PennState prez says NCAA originally was set to shut down football four years. Would have been DOUBLE death penalty. That’s jurisdiction.

The_Crosby_Show;1231859 wrote:Dejan Kovacevic ‏@Dejan_Kovacevic
#PennState prez says NCAA originally was set to shut down football four years. Would have been DOUBLE death penalty. That’s jurisdiction.

Wow, now THAT is crazy. Talk about a thermonuclear option.

OSH;1231815 wrote:The $60 million is a drop in the bucket for them. In 2010-11, the athletic department had a REVENUE of $116 million. So, that $60 million is almost 50% of one year's revenue.

Yes, I do understand their revenue probably won't reach $116 million the next 4 years...but, it's not like the Penn State athletic department was hurting for money.

I have no problem at all with the sanctions. Fair IMO.

But one thing I want to add is that revenues do not equal profits. So yes, they had that money come to the program, but we'd need to know what expenses there were

My buddy here who's a huge psu fan defended psu and Paterno when allegations first came up. But now, he told me today hed have added to today's punishments. He said they should have had a bowl ban the same amount of years that they hid the crimes.

I still am shaking my head at PSU students. First they rioted when Paterno was fired and then today they all started yelling when the penalties came down. What a joke, have they followed what happened at all? I'm not sure how anybody can in good faith complain about any sanctions that Penn State received.

jordo212000;1231932 wrote:I still am shaking my head at PSU students. First they rioted when Paterno was fired and then today they all started yelling when the penalties came down. What a joke, have they followed what happened at all? I'm not sure how anybody can in good faith complain about any sanctions that Penn State received.

Was reclegend22 leading the way?

Reps

The cover of the next issue of SI....

^^^ouch

vball10set;1231959 wrote:^^^ouch

Yeah, that's a pretty powerful cover, really.

good. fuck them. rec, you are a joke as well.

DeyDurkie5;1231977 wrote:good. fuck them. rec, you are a joke as well.

Look, he's just saying that Joe Pa is innocent if you don't take into account the hours upon hours of investigations that Penn State/Freeh/prosecutors did.

jordo212000;1231894 wrote:
But one thing I want to add is that revenues do not equal profits. So yes, they had that money come to the program, but we'd need to know what expenses there were

No different than someone saying that giving up half of their income for a year wouldn't make a dent. Few are that fortunate.

DeyDurkie5;1231977 wrote:good. **** them. rec, you are a joke as well.

From what I've come to gather, your best attributes are cussing and hurling insults. I guess everybody has a forte.

What I find to be a joke is that you can't seem to wrap your head around the reality that the Freeh Report is not absolute fact, and that the emails presented within it do not actually prove Paterno covered anything up. The report is essentially the "reasonable conclusions" of one man typed into one big-ass document. Nothing more, nothing less. If you feel differently, then show me the exactdocument within the report where it proves implicitly that Paterno directly ordered to cover everything up. And an ambiguous two-sentence email lacking absolutely any context whatsoever does not implicit proof make.

I'm simply choosing to look at all the possibilities and not just the one that I am being told is real.

DeyDurkie5;1231977 wrote:good. **** them. rec, you are a joke as well.

From what I've come to gather, your best attributes are cussing and hurling insults. I guess everybody has a forte.

What I find to be a joke is that you can't seem to wrap your head around the reality that the Freeh Report is not absolute fact, and that the emails presented within it do not actually prove Paterno covered anything up. The report is essentially the "reasonable conclusions" of one man typed into one big-ass document. Nothing more, nothing less. If you feel differently, then show me the exact document within the report where it proves implicitly that Paterno directly ordered to cover everything up. And an ambiguous two-sentence email lacking absolutely any context whatsoever does not implicit proof make.

I'm simply choosing to look at all the possibilities and not jump to rash conclusions based on incomplete information.

reclegend22;1232050 wrote:

From what I've come to gather, your best attributes are cussing and hurling insults. I guess everybody has a forte.

What I find to be a joke is that you can't seem to wrap your head around the reality that the Freeh Report is not absolute fact, and that the emails presented within it do not actually prove Paterno covered anything up. The report is essentially the "reasonable conclusions" of one man typed into one big-ass document. Nothing more, nothing less. If you feel differently, then show me the exact document within the report where it proves implicitly that Paterno directly ordered to cover everything up. And an ambiguous two-sentence email lacking absolutely any context whatsoever does not implicit proof make.

I'm simply choosing to look at all the possibilities and not jump to rash conclusions based on incomplete information.

From what I've read of you, you suck the nuts of accomplished sports figures. Coach K could rape a little boy, and you would find a way to defend him. Paterno knew about the whole thing, and didn't do anything. Not to mention, Sandusky was around the campus years after he knew. Paterno is just as guilty as sandusky. I'll believe someone that researched this thing for hours over someone(you) who sucks the teet of accomplished athletic figures.

jordo212000;1231894 wrote:But one thing I want to add is that revenues do not equal profits. So yes, they had that money come to the program, but we'd need to know what expenses there were

Good call. Their net revenue was $31 million.

But, I will also say, their expenses could probably be A LOT less than $84 million if they wanted...so they could actually profit much more than $31 million.

***These are estimated expenses/revenues, I didn't want to do all the thousands and hundreds and cents.***

They aren't paying out $60 mil all at once. It's $12 mil a year for 5 years.