Letter to the Editor - July 28

July 28, 2012

Why should players pay for crimes of others?

To the editor:

With the sanctions against Penn State University, the NCAA punished those with no involvement in any crime, instead of the perpetrators of the child abuse and related cover-up.

Listening to ESPN (TV and radio), other sports, news and commentary programs prior to the announcement of the sanctions, most of the individuals said either:

1. Historically, the NCAA has punished the wrong people.

2. This crime is not an infraction of NCAA rules and is outside the NCAA’s area of involvement.

There are rules of law covering this child abuse and cover-up and they should be followed. They will punish the guilty and not some current or future student athlete.

Why are Penn State student-athletes banned from post season bowl games? If the NCAA wants to financially penalize Penn State, then donate any bowl revenues to child abuse agencies. But don’t deny these young men their dream of playing in a bowl.

There are a finite number of college scholarships among all the colleges and universities. Since that number has been reduced by requiring Penn State to cede a significant number over the next several years, some current high school students will be denied a scholarship.

Saying that the high school student who doesn’t get a scholarship to Penn State can go to another university misses the point. Somewhere down the line, some current high schooler doesn’t get a scholarship. If the high schooler who would have gone to Penn State gets into another university, what happened to the student who otherwise would have gotten the scholarship to the second university?

Is the NCAA searching out these unnamed, unknown high school students to explain why its sanctions against Penn State denied them a scholarship?

It appears that the individual accused of committing the movie theater shooting in Colorado was recently a “highly regarded” medical doctorate student at Colorado, who was receiving federal funding administered by the school.

Should current and future students lose academic scholarships because of someone associated with the university who commits a crime?

No! This is an issue for the legal and judicial systems.

There may have been “administrative oversight” issues related to the shooting at Virginia Tech. Are students being denied access to graduate school or are high school students being denied access to college scholarships?

No! This is an issue for the legal and judicial systems.

If one of the main characters at Penn State “involved in the cover-up” was the dean of the School of Liberal Arts instead of the football coach, what’s the difference? The cover-up is possibly criminal.

Would the NCAA or anyone else deny students from going on to graduate school or to play in a bowl game or to participate in the Olympics or to apply for an Oxford scholarship?

No! This is an issue for the legal and judicial systems.

With Penn State not participating in post-season bowls, what if the Big Ten doesn’t have enough teams qualify for its commitment to post season play? Penn State is already excluded from its share of league bowl revenues, but what of the loss to the other Big Ten schools of their share of post-season revenues when the league is short of its commitment to supply a certain number of teams to the bowls?

How is this loss of post season bowl revenue related to “their involvement in the child abuse”?


Jere Keefer
Greencastle, Pa.

The Herald-Mail Articles