Quote:
Originally Posted by 9dreizig
One simple question.. Isn't everyone involved either a)dead b) awaiting trail c) in jail or d) no longer at the university ?? If the answer is yes, then why punish the U ? if no,, punish away
|
Why punish the U?
The U is not being punished, the
sports program of the U is being punished. If many segments of the U that are not part of that sports program are hurt by the sanctions, that is because the
U chose to wed itself so closely with said program. Every department, student, employee or local business that is negatively impacted by the sanctions are
collateral damage from the NCAA actions, not the target. The sports program is not essential to a U but if they choose to have one, they must follow the regulations set by the NCAA and the more the U integrates that program into its daily workings, the greater will be the impact of any NCAA regulations. If the sports program
is essential to a U, then a decision has been made to tie the future of the U to the
success or failure of a program that can be destroyed, overnight, by an authority outside the U's control--the NCAA. In short, the U has abdicated its
sole position of power over its future. If that's the decision of the U, then it is incumbent upon the U to
oversee and regulate the program itself so as not to waken the sleeping NCAA giant.
Did the NCAA realize their actions would also negatively affect the workings of the entire U? Was the NCAA aware of the collateral damage to innocent individuals? Of course. The U is responsible for the ethical/moral operation of its sports programs and the only way to
force the U to take responsibility for their failure is for the NCAA to use its (NCAA)constitutional powers to sanction the program. If the U has wrapped itself so tightly around the program that innocents will be harmed from sanctions, that was the choice of the U. Those innocents who may be harmed should look to the party responsible for their fate--the U, not the NCAA.
The sanctions imposed by the NCAA are a punishment for failure of the U to live up to its responsibilities. Like all punishment, it serves two purposes--to correct behavior and to
deter future misbehavior. When dealing with groups, be they students in a classroom, business organizations, or university sports associations, the
deterrence aspect of punishment is much more important than the correction of a violator's behavior. In these circumstances, the punishment is designed primarily for the audience, not the violator. This does not mean the punishment must be more severe. It means the punishment must be fitting, fair, and exemplary of a violation of standards set by the organization. If the NCAA did not punish the U because innocents would be harmed, what message would that send to the "audience" of other big-money sports schools? How long before the NCAA became nothing more than an Old Boys organization with level 1A schools doing what they will with no fear of consequences?