Originally Posted by Blake
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
Really? (Not being a smartass here) but how can you compare the two situations? Recruits (albeit less scholarships) would go to SC becuase the infractions that SC ware penalized for are far less then the stigma of a program that one that covered up pedophilia (By the one of the most powerful people in the state of Pennsylvania) in a conference where a lot of teams are on equal playing ground
Conversely, SC will continue to draw great recuits with or without bowl sanctions because they are the "cream and crop" of the PAC 37. *EDIT* Also SC plays in a conference where sometimes OSU, Stanford or anyone else once in a while stands up and makes a play... The Big 10??? Way more comp...
In a novel called, 'Oklahoma Vs Texas: When Football Becomes War'
by Robert Heard there are way more egregious NCAA infractions than USC or even many years later SMU..
At PSU, I think their penalty is far harsher (as it should be) than SMU's "Death Penalty". Why?? Again, that program will have such a long lasting negative stigma that they will lose a lot, let me say this again, A LOT of PA kids that wanted to play there.
I also think it's a harsher penalty in the sense that while they continue to play football (and remain in the minds of college football fans) that their legacy will falter and their indiscrentions will be recognized..
SMU on the other hand has their program under control and even built a beautiful Gerald Ford Stadium... (no dumbasses, not
that Gerald Ford)