Yeah not sure why anyone would still be discussing "death penalty" with the Miami case. Not going to happen. An extra bowl ban is, in my mind, a no-brainer and I expect the school to self-impose that at some point in the season (of course it's kind of cheap since the team is going to be terrible this year anyway). I could also see vacated wins, but...it's not like they've won anything in the past ten years, lol. I just don't see a three year bowl ban...I don't think anything Miami did is "3/4" as bad as what happened at Penn State. A two year ban, I'd say, is fairly standard with multiple/ongoing "serious" transgressions (Alabama; USC). And loss of scholarships...sure, but no idea how many.
I really have to ask this questions, could Miami's penalty be any more severe than Penn State's, because there's were directly related to NCAA rules and on the field product.
I think it's perfectly fair to suggest that by allowing Paterno to remain as head coach benefited Penn State on-field for years (even though many felt he should have retired long ago). Further, his presence certainly helped in recruiting, and thus on-field as well. And don't forget that even Sandusky was helping in recruiting efforts even after retirement. If anything, "on-field" benefits received by the players were more with the Penn State situation versus Miami. The difference is Miami players were getting paid to not listen to their coaches. They basically got paid to suck.
But, Penn State received no on-field advantages from the presence of Paterno or Sandusky, while there were no recruiting violations or on the field cheating going on.
How is Paterno being the head coach during games, calling plays NOT an on-field advantage? lol I know, I know, this is devolving into a game of semantics, but Paterno's presence did benefit Penn State financially and their football program on the field. If the argument goes, "well the current Penn State PLAYERS are innocent so why should they have to suffer?" then why wouldn't the same argument apply to current Miami players? It may be unfortunate for those who didn't participate in the transgressions, but punishing Penn State football with these penalties is completely justified. The manner and pace in which it has been doled out is a bit suspect, as I'm surprised the NCAA didn't at least attempt to wait a couple of weeks for additional evidence/rebuttals (or perhaps they did), but it is what it is.
How is it an "unfair" advantage or "unethical advantage" . . . there was no actual advantage Paterno being coach had over any I agree, but was he the only factor in their success or the main factor. Two different, but similar situations . . . but Miami's program violated actual NCAA rules and were involved in recruitment violations that are specifically related to the on-the field product. Penn State came from extenuating circumstances and more of punishment to satisfy an angry mob. I can agree . . .
If Penn St didn't get the death penalty no team should ever get it. Lack of institutional control = LOL= NCAA
I think it's twisted to suggest that violations "directly related to NCAA rules and on the field product" should be more severe. At Penn St, we're talking about real lives that were destroyed from highly regarded figures who probably thought they could get away with what they did due to their status. In fact, in Sandusky's case, power is probably what partially fueled his acts. Anyway, whether or not Paterno's presence gave an advantage is beside the point -- this institution became nothing short of a tool to allow Sandusky to carry out his acts. This is about way more than football.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>University of Miami lacked institutional control resulting in a decade of violations: <a href="http://t.co/Xyl4aQNDUv">http://t.co/Xyl4aQNDUv</a></p>— Inside the NCAA (@InsidetheNCAA) <a href="https://twitter.com/InsidetheNCAA/statuses/392650499964817408">October 22, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Many of Miami’s violations were undetected by the university. They centered on a booster entertaining prospects & student-athletes.</p>— Inside the NCAA (@InsidetheNCAA) <a href="https://twitter.com/InsidetheNCAA/statuses/392650754743611392">October 22, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>DI Committee on Infractions accepted Miami’s significant self-imposed penalties. See additional penalties here: <a href="http://t.co/3ozdsyLdL4">http://t.co/3ozdsyLdL4</a></p>— Inside the NCAA (@InsidetheNCAA) <a href="https://twitter.com/InsidetheNCAA/statuses/392651567243210752">October 22, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Miami&src=hash">#Miami</a> will NOT have to sit out any more post-season games, per NCAA sanctions: loses 9 'ships over next 3 yrs, per source.</p>— Bruce Feldman (@BFeldmanCBS) <a href="https://twitter.com/BFeldmanCBS/statuses/392636916337635328">October 22, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
