Online Now 2926

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 1438
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 2868
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

State of Pennsylvania suing NCAA UPDATED

  • FL Buckeye said...

    Even if that is the case, that's like saying the person who took a life sentence was facing coercion as otherwise they could have had gotten the death penalty. It's the definition of an agreed to sentence. PSU agreed to penalties, as the other option was less attractive to them.

    Your comparison is not valid. The argument isn't a "could have" it's a "would have."

    Now, I agree that maybe the NCAA can say "we didn't need to do one." Maybe a judge will buy that, maybe he won't. That's not for you or me to decide.

    As for the case being laughable, assuming as you did that the governor has standing, I think you should brush up on your law (or if you are brushed up, read the case as I have suggested 3 times now).

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by shavisimo2 on 1/10/2013 at 10:53 PM

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2

  • I'll explain it like this.

    If a prosecutor says to a prisoner before trial: You can accept a life sentence or take a chance at the DP, there's no coercion. He has a choice - take a shot in court, or forego the DP for a life sentence.

    If a prosecutor says to a prisoner before trial: You can accept a life sentence or you will get the DP, we don't need to do anything else because we are both the prosecution and the judge, it's coercion.

    It's tough to explain because there is no way a prosecutor would ever be a judge (as the NCAA is in this instance - strictly with regard to the sanctions and not the criminal stuff obviously). Your comparison is possible, but you missed a nuance to it.

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2

  • And listen, I understand you don't agree with it and find it laughable. I'm on the fence to be honest (I try to be objective, and there are parts with merit and then parts that are difficult for me to agree with unless they have more information than I do), and it will be interesting to see in court. But neither of us are judges who will see this.

    I don't think it's laughable or a slam dunk when looking at it objectively.

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports