Should the 2011 Penn State Team Pay for a Scandal They Had Nothing to Do With?

Things are piling up at Penn State.

Every time we fire up our computers, open a newspaper or listen to the radio we are deluged with a barrage of new information (many times it’s conflicting) regarding the alleged child sex abuse case at Penn State.

One of the more intriguing storylines (and frankly it’s easier to stomach) is the growing number of associations, awards and institutions that are quickly disassociating themselves with Joe Paterno’s name and/or Penn State football as a whole.

Yes, everybody from academic groups to Big Ten trophy sculptors are rapidly striking the name of the coach who, just days ago, was heralded as the most legendary and respected college football personality in history.

And though it’s easy to see why Paterno is being thrown under the bus, and it’s quite obvious that the case has already been tried in the court of public opinion, it’s more difficult to remember that we still don’t have all the facts regarding who did what in the apparent cover-up.

Indeed, contrary to the mounting momentum, we still don’t know everything.

The total digestion of this point leads me to wonder how much the 2011 Penn State Nittany Lion football team should be made to pay for a scandal that they had zero to do with.

Yes, their institution was allegedly involved to a high and disgusting level in the entire despicable affair that left devastated innocent victims in its wake, but what about the players themselves?

Where should the line be drawn between the people who criminally misrepresented the university and those who didn’t have a thing to do with it?

Should one group have to pay for the sins of the other?

Some sports scribes with high levels of visibility are prematurely calling for Penn State to relinquish a barely conceivable trip to the Rose Bowl, and if that option doesn’t pan out, to take themselves out of the running for any other postseason game based on the reasoning that it’s simply the right thing to do.

But, is it fair to penalize the team, the alumni and the student body for something they had no control over?

Though you could mount a strong argument either way, I would have to answer "no," and would back this up with the following points.

First, we simply don’t have all the facts in this case which makes handing out punishment at the institutional level fraught at best. This argument is made stronger by the fact that the parties with the most alleged involvement have already been swiftly dismissed meaning the wheels of justice have at least begun to turn.

If you want to draw a football comparison, what if the NCAA began handing down sanctions before an investigation was complete?  Yes, what if YOUR football team was slapped with a postseason ban due to serious alleged infractions that hadn’t even been investigated yet?

I realize that its borderline inappropriate to compare a child sex scandal with improper benefits, but it’s the concept I’m trying to get at rather than comparing crimes.

Secondly, how can you justify punishing the guys on a football team for the actions of a sick individual and the cover up that ensued at a high institutional level?

It’s easy to argue that in recent cases like that at USC, Ohio State and Miami FL that indeed the players, program and fan base paid for the institutional waywardness by sacrificing both past, present and future football glory.

But, saying that this means that Penn State should suffer a similar fate may be flawed because we’re simply not comparing apples to apples.

In the instances of USC, Ohio State and Miami FL, the program benefited from the infractions and arguably gained a competitive advantage because of them; therefore, the whole program (the team and  the fan base indirectly) bears the burden of the penalty which rightly makes competing more difficult.

How did Penn State and its on field football team benefit from the actions of a growing circle of administrators who either turned their heads or actively participated in a cover up of a sick man who was determined to damage children?

And therefore, why should they be made to directly pay and be banned from competing?

It’s easy to see the flip side of the argument; playing football, especially a bowl game almost celebrates an institution that has apparently covered up criminal acts and could be seen as disrespectful to the victims, but is that enough to justify penalizing the 115 guys on the field?

Perhaps we should strip the degrees of every person who graduated from Penn State since the cover-up and enabling began?  Or maybe we should call off all athletic participation by the Nittany Lions because the AD was a ringleader in the deception?

Yes, no swimming, no volleyball, no baseball…cancel all of it because somebody has to pay!

And there lies the bigger question…who should have to pay for the inexcusable acts at Penn State and when will it ever be “enough” to cover the disgrace?

There is nothing fair about what allegedly happened in State College, but does that unsettling fact mean that all justice should be thrown out the window in the name of reprisal?

I’m not saying that anything will ever make the events at Penn State acceptable, but I am advocating an evenhanded, metered set of responses that waits for all the facts and then gravely considers who should pay the price for the unthinkable, indefensible acts.