View Single Post
Old 07-25-2012   #624
GlassHalfFull 
Subscribed Contributor
 
GlassHalfFull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Section 353
Posts: 7,177
Rep Power: 54609 GlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respectedGlassHalfFull is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: Penn State Child Molestation Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake View Post
I still think these Penn State sanctions are weak ass ****. I hear Herbstreit talking about Penn State is going to be a weak football team for years to come even after the 4 years. But when I look at USC, I see them still winning a PAC10 title, and next year looking to contend for a NC and a heisman QB.

Yeah, those sanctions are really hurting USC. /sarcasm
USC had a 2 year bowl ban, Penn State has a 4 year bowl ban. In my mind, that is way more powerful. They won't be able to effectively recruit for at least 2 years with a 4 year post season ban. With a 2 year ban, you still are able to recruit, most players expect to be redshirted anyway their first year. With a 4 year ban, you have nothing to offer. Not to mention most current players who can, will more than likely jump ship. 2 other factors will come into play, the scholarship hit was bigger and the shame factor cannot be discounted.

I think this penalty will have much harder sting than USC had. Dead team walking.
__________________
GlassHalfFull is offline   Reply With Quote