New questions about NCAA decision in Penn State case

In the wake of the Penn State child sex-abuse scandal, there has been much dismay about NCAA President Mark Emmert’s decision to levy such harsh penalties on the school.

Late last week, the decision was further called into question by a source described as being familiar with the Freeh Group investigation. The Freeh team compiled the 267-page report indicating that the complete lack of institutional discipline at Penn State drove more victims into the hands of a serial child molester.

While Emmert cited the document as “vastly more involved and thorough than any investigation we’ve ever conducted,” the unnamed source took issue with the NCAA’s reliance on the report, telling the Chronicle of Higher Education, “That document was not meant to be used as the sole piece, or the large piece, of the NCAA’s decision-making. It was meant to be a mechanism to help Penn State move forward. To be used otherwise creates an obstacle to the institution changing.”

In other words, the document was insufficient grounds for the NCAA’s ruling, this person said.
The long-term impact of Emmert’s ruling was also called into question. “In using this report largely as the basis for their decision, the NCAA could hurt Penn State’s enrollment, recruiting and outside relationships and partnerships. … If you don’t attract good faculty and research dollars, your institution has no stature.”
Nonetheless, the NCAA, of course, decided to move forward.

Its widely reported sanctions included a $60 million fine, to be donated to children’s charities, a four-year ban from post-season play, and most controversially, vacating all wins from 1998-2011.
For the record, a spokesperson for the Freeh Group released a statement saying “no member of its investigative team spoke to The Chronicle of Higher Education for its story. The Freeh Group has no comment on the NCAA’s use of the report.”

on Facebook on LinkedIn