LANCASTER NEW ERA
Editorial “Name Game at Penn State” opines:
“What’s the justification for stitching the names of players on the backs of jerseys, other than to satisfy the individual player’s desire to be more easily noticed?
“So much for the team, eh?
“Penn State officials, understandably, are anxious to get the Sandusky horror behind them. But in their haste, they trampled on a worthy football tradition that embodied what collegiate sports should be all about — the team, not the individual.”
WATCHDOG: The New Era is commendable for focusing on this minor aspect of the Penn State ‘witch trial’. But when will the editors find the courage to speak out about the NCAA excesses as have their letter contributors?
For example, Jerri E. Stumpf today in “CAA penalties against PSU are overkill”:
“ …1. Why didn’t the NCAA follow its own rules for investigating activities for which they may impose penalties? It may take longer but, for obvious reasons, including allowing “due process” for all involved in order to ensure “the ultimate penalty they impose fits the crime.” It also allows their decisions to be appealed. A fundamental right in America!
“2. How can the penalty imposed by the NCAA be fair/legal considering: The threat of a four-year “death penalty” was offered to the acting president in return for Penn State accepting the lesser penalties imposed without the right of appeal. Sounds like extortion to me. One person, not the full board, being able to give away Penn State’s right of appeal of the penalties (due process)?
“Just as a jury decided Jerry Sandusky’s fate, juries will decide the fate of others involved. I feel a court should decide if the penalties imposed by the NCAA, in this case against existing and future Penn State football players who had nothing to do with the scandal, are equitable and legal or “overkill” and excessive (illegal)…”