Was the Penn State Penalty Harsh Enough?
We've all seen the sanctions that the NCAA levied on the Penn State Football program (from NCAA.com). They are some of the stiffest penalties to come down the chute, and the governing body of collegiate athletics made their point pretty clear: Penn State must pay. They are going to be paying both literally (with five-year, $12 million sums) and figuratively, as their program absorbs a massive setback.
However, are the penalties too harsh?
We are looking at a complex issue that has multiple angles. As a football program, head coach Bill O'Brien is most certainly looking at an uphill fight. Players who were interested in going to Penn State, perhaps lifelong Penn State fans from Pennsylvania, are now going to have to go elsewhere because the program cannot surpass the 65-scholarship limit.
The prospect of trying to win Big Ten games while operating at the level of an FCS school, is daunting in and of itself. Throw in the idea of not having the reward of a bowl game, and too harsh might come to mind.
On the flip side, this is a real life issue, not just a football problem.
So while the Penn State football team absorbs this protracted experience, the fact of the matter is the NCAA cannot truly fix things with their small scope of punishment. With the civil litigation, Department of Education and perjury trials still to come, we will see a true toll be taken out on Penn State.
Are the penalties too harsh? Not harsh enough? We take a look at both sides of the coin.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?