Penn State Football Takes a Hard Hit

Pennsylvania State University students, alumni, football players, and coaches wake up on a Saturday morning and prepare themselves for game day. Penn State fans support our Nittany Lions a great deal. We wake up at odd hours of the night to secure our student season tickets. We support our Nittany Lions in the sweltering heat, the frigid cold, and the torrential rain. Penn State fans cheer on our team every Saturday in Beaver Stadium, on the radio, or on the Big Ten television network. Our student section takes pride in the “We are…Penn State” chant. Players, coaches, and fans sing the alma mater together before the start of every game to unite as one team. Penn State football plays a large role in the social life of students at the Pennsylvania State University; consequently, students and fans respect our team and look up to the players and coaches. Penn State football succeeded an uncountable number of times in the past; however, one event, the Sandusky Scandal, remains embedded in the minds of millions of individuals.

Penn State’s former football assistant coach, Jerry Sandusky, molested ten children on forty-five counts in 2011. Sandusky molested these innocent children on university property, in his car, and on nearby off-campus locations. Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, Joe Paterno, and Graham Spanier covered up Sandusky’s mistakes and failed to report suspected child abuse in fear of penalties brought to the school and our football team (Chappell). In the Washington Post article, Steve Yanda states, “The NCAA slammed Penn State with an unprecedented series of penalties in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal” (Yanda). In my opinion, the NCAA blamed former, present, and future Penn State football players for the nauseating crime committed by Jerry Sandusky. The NCAA fined the school and the Penn State football team severely and unfairly. Were the school and the Penn State football team responsible for Sandusky’s actions? No. Sandusky and the university officials who knew of the heinous acts should have been the only subjects of investigation who received severe consequences.

Evidently, those who knew of the acts committed by Jerry Sandusky over the past fifteen years deserve harsh punishments. Jerry Sandusky coached at Penn State for thirty-two years. Due to his actions, Sandusky’s sentence consisted of thirty years in prison, which is not nearly enough time for the physical and emotional pain as well as discomfort he put ten children through. As a subject of investigation, Joe Paterno said, “I wish I had done more” (Chappell). JoePa cared more about the consequences his beloved football team would acquire. It is unfathomable how a football coach of sixty years risked everything he worked so hard for to protect one of his coaches. Responsible officials at Penn State took appropriate actions against the former university officials involved in the Sandusky Scandal. The university officials deserved their punishments because their failure to report Sandusky’s illegal actions individually brings about disgust.

The NCAA announced the penalties and corrective actions against Penn State University and the football team on July 23, 2012. One sanction involved the payment of sixty million dollars over the course of five years. The sixty million dollars will fund programs that prevent child sexual abuse. The NCAA “imposed a four-year postseason ban on Penn State football, significantly reduced the number of scholarship players the team can field over the next four years, and placed the program on probation for five years” (Yanda). The penalties brought upon Penn State punish the wrong individuals. Sandusky and the university officials no longer possess ties with Penn State so placing the sanctions on the school and the football team will certainly not erase the situation. The sanctions only punish the school, players, and coaches not involved in the scandal.

On game day, the Penn State football team runs onto the field anxious for a win. It is important for our team to win games so we can increase our rankings. The team’s ranking significantly decreased when one of the sanctions imposed vacated 112 wins from Penn State football. Steve Yanda states, “The most significant individual sanction in the context of college football history is that all of Penn State’s wins from 1998 to 2011 have been vacated” (Yanda). The most significant individual sanction, in my opinion, is not the vacated wins. Although my heart breaks to see the players hard work stripped from them, not Joe Paterno’s number of wins as a coach, the only significance of the imposed sanctions involves how Penn State acts and responds in the future. The NCAA hopes these sanctions will deter the environment of many Division I athletic departments (Yanda).

The NCAA is egotistical and used their power to punish the wrong people. Why does the NCAA believe that they have the right to control four years of Penn State football? The NCAA is full of themselves and tried to solve the problem in the best way to make themselves look good (Ryan). PolicyMic’s Christopher Ryan states, “The NCAA’s punishments may make the NCAA look good, but they do little to serve justice” (Ryan). The sanctions imposed by the NCAA only remind Penn State students, alumni, and fans about the abject failure of their so-called leaders (Greenstein). The sanctions cap the number of athletes who can get a free ride to college. They put current Penn State football players under the microscope. The NCAA is arrogant and should not be the organization punishing the University. In order to truthfully serve justice, “we should look not to the NCAA, but to civil and criminal courts” (Ryan).

The sanctions imposed by the NCAA brought about powerful responses from the public. Melanie Rognstad of the College of Lake County articulated, “I understand that this is a very sad situation but I don’t think the NCAA should punish the students and athletes” (Prisbell). The NCAA is penalizing “a whole school for a very few bad apples” as said by Kevin Pierson (Prisbell). Janet Mayo believes that Penn State allowed itself to be part of a horrendous crime; however, Tom Witner strongly disagrees when he states, “Individuals at Penn State allowed a horrendous crime to occur” (Prisbell). Penn State University as a whole is certainly not responsible for the heinous acts of the scandal.

The purpose of the sanctions was to lessen the power that Penn State football possesses. The NCAA wanted to impose sanctions that would, “ensure that Penn State will rebuild an athletic culture that went horribly awry” (Yanda). The sanctions imposed will not rebuild the athletic culture of Penn State because the sanctions impact football athletes, many of whom were not even part of Penn State football while the scandal took place. The idea that the sanctions will lessen the superiority of Penn State football exhibits absurdity. Penn State football is associated with the University and a sanction will not be able to bring down our team or school. The NCAA believes the sanctions imposed will reflect the magnitude of these terrible acts (Yanda). ESPN disputes the reports made in the Washington Post article. As ESPN states “No price the NCAA can levy will repair the grievous damage inflicted by Jerry Sandusky on his victims” (Katz). No matter if the NCAA placed the sanctions on the school or the football team, no punishment will erase the horror Jerry Sandusky imposed.

Responsible Penn State officials were left with no choice but to accept the penalties committed by a few sickening individuals. Current Pennsylvania State University president, Rodney Erickson, declared that the entire Penn State culture was involved in the Sandusky scandal, not just Jerry Sandusky and the four university officials. Erickson “accepted the penalties and corrective actions announced by the NCAA” (Yanda). By accepted the penalties, Erickson demonstrates his belief that the entire Penn State culture was involved. Accorded to victim number one of ten, Aaron Fisher articulated, “Do I blame Penn State? No. Do I blame Penn State students? No, not at all. Their students had nothing to with this” (Beckler). Aaron Fisher believes the sanctions imposed on the University and its students are unjust because they penalize the wrong people. Aaron Fisher expressed his belief, which opposes that of Erickson, that the entire Penn State culture was not involved in Jerry Sandusky’s actions.

Jerry Sandusky, an abominable man, changed Penn State forever. Sandusky’s appalling actions toward ten innocent children cannot be undone and will forever linger over Penn State culture. Pennsylvania State University remains unashamed of who WE ARE. Penn State believes in world-class academics and success with honor. Nick Elia depicts Penn State’s culture when he articulates, “Penn Staters have a passion for success with honor in every discipline – academic, athletic, and philanthropic. We’re proud to make athletics a part of our lives and student athletes are proud to come here because of our expectations of integrity, honor, and education” (Elia). One individual cannot bring down Penn State culture; moreover, Sandusky cannot take the pride out of 46,184 University Park students. Penn State fans, students, and athletes consider themselves leaders of child abuse prevention and we will continue to support our Nittany Lions (Elia). Pennsylvania State University will never show shame in our culture because Penn State remains strong and one man will never redefine Penn State.

Works Cited

Beckler, Ryan. “Victim 1: “Do I Blame Penn State? No.”.” Onward State. Onward State, 24 Oct.
2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. <https://onwardstate.com/2012/10/24/victim-1-do-i-blame-
penn-state-no/>.

Chappell, Bill. “Penn State Abuse Scandal: A Guide And Timeline.” NPR. NPR, 21 June 2012.
Web. 11 Mar. 2014. <http://www.npr.org/2011/11/08/142111804/penn-state-abuse-
scandal-a-guide-and-timeline>.
Elia, Nick. “Don’t Be Ashamed of Penn State’s Culture.” Onward State. Onward State, 27 July
2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. <http://onwardstate.com/community/dont-be-ashamed-of-
penn-states-culture/>.

Greenstein, Teddy. “Today’s Question: Were Penn State Sanctions Too Harsh?” Chicago             Tribune. Chicago Tribune, 23 July 2012. Web. 11 Apr. 2014.             <http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-07-23/sports/chi-todays-question-were-penn-            state-sanctions-too-harsh-20120723_1_bowl-ban-death-penalty-penn-state>.

Katz, Andy, and Mark Schlabach. “Penn State Sanctions: $60M, Bowl ban.” ESPN. ESPN
Internet Ventures, 24 July 2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. <http://espn.go.com/college-
football/story/_/id/8191027/penn-state-nittany-lions-hit-60-million-fine-4-year-bowl-ban-
wins-dating-1998>.

Prisbell, Eric. “NCAA Hands out Severe Punishment for Penn State.” USATODAY.COM. USA             TODAY, 23 July 2012. Web. 09 Apr. 2014.             <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/bigten/story/2012-07-23/ncaa-            penn-state-punishment-sanctions/56427630/1>.

Ryan, Christopher. “Penn State NCAA Sanctions Go Too Far.” PolicyMic. Mic Network Inc., 23             July 2012. Web. 11 Apr. 2014. <http://www.policymic.com/articles/11704/penn-state-            ncaa-sanctions-go-too-far>.

Yanda, Steve. “Penn State Football Punished by NCAA over Jerry Sandusky Scandal.”
Washington Post. The Washington Post, 23 July 2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/penn-state-football-punished-by-ncaa-over
sandusky-scandal/2012/07/23/gJQAGNeM4W_story.html>.

Abstract:

The general education classes at Penn State are difficult for students involved in rigorous majors such as nursing and engineering. Because nursing and engineering majors have very strict schedules and have minimal options when selecting general education classes, the General Education Task Force should not create a revised curriculum because a lot of the difficult majors are not given flexibility. If revisions were to be made, they would not reflect the rationale of the GenEd Task Force mission. The revisions would benefit students at PSU who do not take general education classes seriously. As college students, we are going to have the same mindset pertaining to general education classes, which is to pick the easiest courses to boost our GPA’s. Revising the general education curriculum will only be beneficial to students who are involved in majors that are less rigorous; therefore, there is no need to revise the general education program because the revisions will not alter the problems associated with rigor in general education classes for difficult majors.

Recommendation Report:

Revisions are not needed:

General education classes are taken at all colleges and universities. College students are forced to take general education classes; they are a requirement for every major. At Penn State, general education is said to “augment and round out the specialized training students receive in their majors and aim to cultivate a knowledgeable, informed, literate human being” (What is general education?). General education classes certainly are rigorous; however, they do not solely prepare students for their future careers or create an individual who is fully informed and literate. General education classes are supposed to prepare college students for their higher-level courses. They allegedly help us think in a deeper way and inspire us to broaden our intelligence by taking a wide variety of classes. Current general education classes act as a base as they provide a “wide breadth of skills, knowledge, and experience” (Vision). Being that general education classes are already difficult and provide students with adequate skills, knowledge, and experience, there is no need to revise the general education program because the revisions will not alter the problems associated with rigor in general education classes for difficult majors.

Revisions will not reflect the Task Force mission:

Our general education program at the Pennsylvania State University enables students to acquire and integrate knowledge from a variety of sources and fields. Students develop skills and obtain a new awareness of our world through general education classes currently offered at PSU (What is general education?). GenEd Matters states that the purpose of revising general education at PSU is to “enable students to acquire the skills, knowledge, and experiences for living and working in interconnected and globalized contexts, so they can contribute to making life better for others, themselves, and the larger world” (GenEd Mission). If revisions were to be made, they would not reflect the rationale of the GenEd Task Force mission. Students at PSU do not take general education classes seriously so we are not going to take what we learned in a general education class and implement it in order to create a better world for others and ourselves. PSU students purposely choose easy general education classes because we want the best grade. We are desperate and pathetic; we enroll in classes that are known to be easy according to friends and search engines such as ratemyprofessor.com. As college students, we are going to have the same mindset pertaining to general education classes no matter if the revisions are or are not made by the General Education Task Force.

General education courses for a nursing student:

As a freshman student at University Park, I have taken multiple general education classes throughout my first two semesters on campus. A few of the general education classes that I have taken include BIOL 141, BIOL 129, MATH 21, SOC 30, and WMNST 106. My general education classes (physiology, human anatomy, college algebra, sociology and women studies) were very tough and required much more work than expected. As a nursing major, my general education classes are planned out for me on my recommended academic plan. As a nursing student I am required to take forty-five general education credits, which include three credits of GHA courses, nine credits of GN courses, three credits of GQ courses, and six credits of GS courses (Nursing). Twenty-one of the forty-five general education credits are required for my major, which doesn’t leave me which much flexibility. Almost half of my general education classes are chosen for me. For that reason, a revised general education curriculum will not pertain to me, as I cannot explore as much as other students. Because I have minimal options when selecting classes, having the General Education Task Force create a revised curriculum for Penn State is pointless because a lot of the difficult majors are not given flexibility. A revised general education curriculum will not magically bring variation to my schedule.

Revisions are beneficial for less arduous majors:

Students at Penn State who are business majors have a tremendous amount of flexibility when scheduling their general education classes. If I were to decide that I no longer wanted to pursue nursing, I would major in accounting, which is part of the Smeal College of Business. As an accountant, I would be required to take forty-five general education classes. Only twelve of these forty-five credits are required as an accounting major, which include three credits of GWS courses, six credits of GQ courses, and three credits of GS courses (Undergraduate Degree Programs). When compared to the twenty-one required credits for a nursing student, nine fewer credits are required for an accounting student. As an accounting major, I would have thirty-three general education credits to use at my freewill. A few classes that I would enroll in include Criminology (CRIM 012), Food Facts and Fads (FD SC 105), Human Body Form and Function (BI SC 004), and Intro to Forensic Science (FRNSC 100). With more flexibility in my schedule for general education classes as an accounting student, I would be able to explore and take easier, GPA boosting classes as well as classes that I never thought of taking. Accounting majors are at an advantage because with more leniencies in their schedules, new doors that students never knew existed could open. The revisions made by the General Education Task Force would benefit accounting students because even more flexibility would be added to their schedule, which would allow these students to pick classes that are much easier.

Similar classes, dissimilar level of difficulty:

BI SC 004 and BIOL 129 are both classes on the human body, yet BIOL 129 is a rigorous GN for nursing students. My roommate, Jenna, takes BI SC 004 and she barely studies for this class as she says it is extremely easy. Jenna is given four exams, numerous extra credit assignments, and has daily online homework assignments. In BIOL 129, I am given four lab practical exams and daily quizzes. Dr. Waters, the professor for BIOL 129, strictly abides by his rule of giving no extra credit. In a less rigorous major, my roommate is able to get straight A’s. She does not have an elevated stress level and does not constantly worry about school. Students in less rigorous majors are able to enroll in classes that require less effort. GenEd reform would only be beneficial to students who are enrolled in majors that are less rigorous.

Stress as a nursing student in GenEd classes:

College students, specifically nursing students, experience challenges and high levels of stress. The competition for grades, the need to perform to perfection, changes in social lives and family relations, as well as exposure to a new environment create an elevated level of stress for college students. In particular, nursing students are more likely to experience more stress than friends studying in other programs. Nursing students experience higher levels of stress than medical, social work, and pharmacy students (For Nursing Students). As a nursing student at PSU I have dealt with high levels of stress first hand in my freshman year of college. I am always studying for long hours for exams in various general education classes. I can say without doubt that my stress level has skyrocketing as a nursing student. Next year, I will begin clinical practice. “Clinical practice has been identified as one of the most anxiety producing components in nursing programs” (For nursing students). During our first week of classes, Megan Sweeney, a fellow nursing student, and I started stressing over clinical practice a year in advance. Although clinical practice is not a general education class, it adds to the numerous stressors of a nursing student. If revisions were to be made to the general education curriculum, the amount of stress that nursing students are under would not decrease.

General education courses as an engineering student:

Engineering at the Pennsylvania State University is another rigorous major that puts students under a lot of stress. The College of Engineering at University Park is a world-class college of engineering that is one of the nation’s leading academies of learning, discovery, and application (College of Engineering). At University Park, 7,240 students enrolled in various engineering programs in the fall of 2013. These students are taught by some of the best faculty and staff in the nation and world (College of Engineering). U.S. World and News Report ranked Penn State’s undergraduate College of Engineering as 19^th overall. With such high rankings, engineering students have a very strict schedule to follow. For example, for mechanical engineers, twenty-seven of the total forty-five general education credits are for required entrance to major general education classes. The twenty-seven credits of general education courses include nine credits of GN courses, six credits of GQ courses, three credits of GS courses, and nine credits of GWS courses (College of Engineering). More than half of the general education credits are required classes for mechanical engineers. The little flexibility in scheduling general education classes makes the major that much harder. Khalil, an engineering student in my English 015 class, stated, “Engineering is so hard, especially physics! All of the engineering students are very competitive, which makes the major extremely difficult.” Engineering at the Pennsylvania State University results in a grueling four-year experience. Khalil also mentioned that his general education classes are particularly hard because they require a lot of effort and a great time commitment. Revisions made to the general education curriculum would not help Khalil or any other engineering student.

Revisions will not fix the problem:
The College of Nursing and the College of Engineering at University Park have created challenging and intricate programs for their students. These two colleges are not trying to weed out students or make our lives miserable; they are trying to prepare us for the real world. A college education is supposed to be hard. It is supposed to be challenging; if the classes weren’t hard, everyone would do it. Nursing and engineering students do not have the “typical” college experience; however, us students are receiving an education that will help us in the future. Both majors start their freshman year off with difficult general education classes. From there on out, the classes only get harder and more specific. Revising the general education curriculum will only be beneficial to students who are involved in majors that are less rigorous; therefore, there is no need to revise the general education program because the revisions will not alter the problems associated with rigor in general education classes for difficult majors.

Works Cited

“College of Engineering.” Penn State. The Pennsylvania State University, n.d. Web. 10 Apr.             2014. <http://www.engr.psu.edu/>.

“For Nursing Students.” American Holistic Nurses Association. American Holistic Nurses             Association, n.d. Web. 10 Apr. 2014. <http://www.ahna.org/Resources/Stress-            Management/For-Nursing-Students>.

General Education Task Force. “GenEd Mission.” GenEd Matters. WordPress, n.d. Web. 2 Apr.             2014. <http://gened.psu.edu/>.

General Education Task Force. “Vision.” GenEd Matters. WordPress, n.d. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.             <http://gened.psu.edu/vision/>.

“University Bulletin.” Nursing. The Pennsylvania State University, n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2014.             <http://bulletins.psu.edu/undergrad/programs/baccalaureate/N/NURN>.

“University Bulletin.” Undergraduate Degree Programs: Baccalaureate Degree Programs. The             Pennsylvania State University, n.d. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.             <http://bulletins.psu.edu/undergrad/programs/baccalaureate/A/ACCTG>.

“University Bulletin.” WHAT IS GENERAL EDUCATION? The Pennsylvania State University,             n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2014. <http://bulletins.psu.edu/undergrad/generaleducation/>.

General education classes are taken at every college and university. College students are forced to take general education classes because it is a requirement for every major. At Penn State, general education is said to “augment and round out the specialized training students receive in their majors and aim to cultivate a knowledgeable, informed, literate human being” (What is general education?). General education classes certainly are rigorous; however, they do not solely prepare students for their future careers or create an individual who is fully informed and literate. General education classes are supposed to prepare college students for their higher-level courses. They allegedly help us think in a deeper way and inspire us to broaden our intelligence by taking a wide variety of classes. Current general education classes act as a base as they provide a “wide breadth of skills, knowledge, and experience” (Vision). Being that general education classes are already difficult and provide students with skills, knowledge, and experience, there is no need to revise the general education program to be based on mainly exploration, theme, or skills.

Our general education program at the Pennsylvania State University enables students to acquire and integrate knowledge from a variety of sources and fields. Students develop skills and obtain a new awareness on our world through general education classes currently offered at PSU (What is general education?). GenEd Matters states that the purpose of revising general education at PSU is to “enable students to acquire the skills, knowledge, and experiences for living and working in interconnected and globalized contexts, so they can contribute to making life better for others, themselves, and the larger world” (GenEd Mission). Students at PSU do not take general education classes seriously so we are not going to take what we learned in a general education class and implement it in order to create a better world for others and ourselves. PSU students purposely choose easy general education classes because we want the best grade. We are desperate and pathetic; we enroll in classes that are known to be easy according to friends and search engines such as ratemyprofessor.com. As college students, we are going to have the same mindset pertaining to general education classes no matter if the General Education Task Force decides on exploration, theme, or skills.

As a freshman student at University Park, I have taken multiple general education classes throughout my first two semesters on campus. A few of the general education classes that I have taken include Biol 141, Biol 129, Math 21, Soc 30, and WMNST 106. My general education classes (physiology, human anatomy, college algebra, sociology and women studies) were very tough and required much more work than expected. As a nursing major, my general education classes are planned out for me on my recommended academic plan. As a nursing student I am required to take forty-five general education credits, which include three credits of GHA courses, nine credits of GN courses, three credits of GQ courses, and six credits of GS courses (Nursing). Twenty-one of the forty-five general education credits are required for my major, which doesn’t leave me which much flexibility. Almost half of my general education classes are chosen for me. For that reason, the revised general education curriculum will not pertain to me, as I cannot “explore” as much as other students. Because I have minimal options when selecting classes, I believe that having the General Education Task Force create a revised curriculum for Penn State is pointless because a lot of the difficult majors are not given flexibility. A revised general education curriculum based on exploration, theme, or skills will not magically bring variation to my schedule.

Option 1, based on 25% theme, 50% exploration, and 25% skills, would be my preferred option if I have to choose (What Values Should Shape Our Curriculum?). This option allows students to have freedom to explore and choose what classes we want to take. By taking a wide variety of classes, students will become well-rounded individuals who can think in a different way. By taking a diverse set of classes, students will be able to develop a wide set of skills relating to each class. It is important that students explore and take classes that they never thought of taking because this could open up a new door that one never knew existed.

Penn State Football Takes a Hard Hit

Pennsylvania State University students, alumni, football players, and coaches wake up on a Saturday morning and prepare themselves for game day. Penn State fans support our Nittany Lions like no other Division I school. We wake up at odd hours of the night to secure our student season tickets. We support our Nittany Lions in the sweltering heat, the frigid cold, and the torrential rain. Penn State fans cheer on our team every Saturday in Beaver Stadium, on the radio, or on the Big Ten television network. Our student section takes pride in the “We are…Penn State” chant. Players, coaches, and fans sing the alma mater together before the start of every game to unite as one team. Penn State football essentially represents Pennsylvania State University; consequently, we worship our team and look up to the players and coaches because they are the epitome of PSU. Penn State football succeeded an uncountable number of times in the past; however, one event, the Sandusky Scandal, remains embedded in the minds of millions of individuals.

Penn State’s former football assistant coach, Jerry Sandusky, molested ten children on forty-five counts in 2011. Sandusky molested these innocent children on university property, in his car, and on nearby off-campus locations. Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, Joe Paterno, and Graham Spanier covered up Sandusky’s mistakes and failed to report suspected child abuse in fear of penalties brought to the school and our football team (Chappell). In the Washington Post article, Steve Yanda states, “The NCAA slammed Penn State with an unprecedented series of penalties in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal” (Yanda). In my opinion, the NCAA blamed former, present, and future Penn State football players for the nauseating crime committed by Jerry Sandusky. The NCAA fined the school and the Penn State football team severely and unfairly. Were the school and the Penn State football team responsible for Sandusky’s actions? No. Sandusky and the university officials who knew of the heinous acts should have been the only people to receive severe consequences. Why must the NCAA torture Penn State culture even more when the monstrous Sandusky is the one to blame?

Evidently, those who knew of the acts committed by Jerry Sandusky over the past fifteen years deserve harsh punishments. Jerry Sandusky coached at Penn State for thirty two years. Due to his actions, Sandusky’s sentence consisted of thirty years in prison, which is not nearly enough time for the physical and emotional pain as well as discomfort he put ten children through. Tim Curley, the former Penn State athletic director, “denies being told of sexual misconduct by Sandusky in 2002 but is accused of covering up allegations tied to the scandal” (Chappell). Curley went on administrative leave. Gary Schultz, Penn State’s former senior vice president for finance and business, “has been charged with covering up abuse allegations” (Chappell). Schultz retired on November 6^th. Joe Paterno, former legendary football coach, “was fired from his job four days after Sandusky’s arrest” (Chappell). Paterno said, “I wish I had done more” (Chappell). Paterno knew all along about Sandusky’s repulsive actions. JoePa cared more about the consequences his beloved football team would acquire. It is unfathomable how a football coach of sixty years risked everything he worked so hard for to protect one of his coaches. A fourth university official, Graham Spanier, the former Penn State University president, also tried to cover up Sandusky’s actions. On November 9^th, Paterno and Spanier were fired (Chappell). Responsible officials at Penn State took appropriate actions against the former university officials involved in the Sandusky Scandal. The university officials deserved their punishments because their failure to report Sandusky’s illegal actions individually brings about disgust.

Pennsylvania State University football actively participates in the NCAA, a membership and a rules-based organization; therefore, PSU football must abide by the NCAA rules. Because the Penn State football team disregarded the NCAA rules, the football team and the school received multiple sanctions. The NCAA stated, “what we can do is impose sanctions that both reflect the magnitude of these terrible acts and that also ensure that Penn State will rebuild an athletic culture that went horribly awry” (Yanda). The sanctions imposed by the NCAA punish the wrong individuals. The sanctions will not rebuild the athletic culture of Penn State. Sandusky and the university officials no longer possess ties with Penn State so placing the sanctions on the school and the football team will certainly not erase the situation. The sanctions only punish the school, players, and coaches not involved in the scandal. The NCAA also articulates the idea that “football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing, and protecting young people” (Yanda). As a student at Penn State I disagree with this statement. Penn State still places its football team ahead of each player’s education. For example, a top player on the team was in my sociology class this past fall semester. He repeatedly missed class on Friday whenever the team traveled for a game. This individual dropped the class due to his numerous absences. As can be seen, Penn State still puts football over each player’s education.

Pennsylvania State University and the football team received several sanctions. In my opinion, the unjust sanctions placed blame on the wrong people. On July 23, 2012 the NCAA announced the penalties and corrective actions against Penn State. One sanction involved the payment of sixty million dollars over the course of five years. The sixty million dollars will fund programs that prevent child sexual abuse. The NCAA “imposed a four-year postseason ban on Penn State football, significantly reduced the number of scholarship players the team can field over the next four years, and placed the program on probation for five years” (Yanda). The penalties brought upon Penn State punish the wrong individuals. Steve Yanda states, “The most significant individual sanction in the context of college football history is that all of Penn State’s wins from 1998 to 2011 have been vacated” (Yanda). The most significant individual sanction, in my opinion, is not the vacated wins. Although my heart breaks to see the players hard work stripped from them, not Joe Paterno’s number of wins as a coach, the only significance of the imposed sanctions involves how Penn State acts and responds in the future. The NCAA hopes these sanctions will deter the environment of many Division I athletic departments (Yanda). The purpose of the sanctions was to lessen the power that Penn State football possesses. The sanctions impact football athletes, many of whom were not even part of Penn State football while the scandal took place. The idea that the sanctions will lessen the superiority of Penn State football exhibits absurdity. Penn State University is known for its football team and no sanction will reduce the power of our team. The NCAA believes the sanctions imposed will reflect the magnitude of these terrible acts (Yanda). ESPN disputes the reports made in the Washington Post article. As ESPN states “No price the NCAA can levy will repair the grievous damage inflicted by Jerry Sandusky on his victims” (Katz). No matter if the NCAA placed the sanction on the school or the football team, no punishment will erase the horror Jerry Sandusky imposed.

Responsible Penn State officials were left with no choice but to accept the penalties committed by a few sickening individuals. Current Pennsylvania State University president, Rodney Erickson, declared that the entire Penn State culture was involved in the Sandusky scandal, not just Jerry Sandusky and the four university officials. Erickson “accepted the penalties and corrective actions announced by the NCAA” (Yanda). By accepted the penalties, Erickson demonstrates his belief that the entire Penn State culture was involved. Accorded to victim number one of ten, Aaron Fisher articulated, “Do I blame Penn State? No. Do I blame Penn State students? No, not at all. Their students had nothing to with this” (Beckler). Aaron Fisher believes the sanctions imposed on the University and its students are unjust because they penalize the wrong people. Aaron Fisher expressed his belief, which opposes that of Erickson, that the entire Penn State culture was not involved in Jerry Sandusky’s actions.

Jerry Sandusky, an abominable man, changed Penn State forever. Sandusky’s appalling actions toward ten innocent children cannot be undone and will forever linger over Penn State culture. Pennsylvania State University remains unashamed of who WE ARE. Penn State believes in world-class academics and success with honor. Nick Elia depicts Penn State’s culture when he articulates, “Penn Staters have a passion for success with honor in every discipline – academic, athletic, and philanthropic. We’re proud to make athletics a part of our lives and student athletes are proud to come here because of our expectations of integrity, honor, and education” (Elia). One individual cannot bring down Penn State culture; moreover, Sandusky cannot take the pride out of 46,184 University Park students. Penn State fans, students, and athletes consider themselves leaders of child abuse prevention and we will continue to support our Nittany Lions (Elia). Pennsylvania State University will never show shame in our culture because Penn State remains strong and one man will never redefine Penn State.

Works Cited

Beckler, Ryan. “Victim 1: “Do I Blame Penn State? No.”.” Onward State. Onward State, 24 Oct. 2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. <https://onwardstate.com/2012/10/24/victim-1-do-i-blame-
penn-state-no/>.

Chappell, Bill. “Penn State Abuse Scandal: A Guide And Timeline.” NPR. NPR, 21 June 2012. Web. 11 Mar. 2014. <http://www.npr.org/2011/11/08/142111804/penn-state-abuse-  scandal-a-guide-and-timeline>.

Elia, Nick. “Don’t Be Ashamed of Penn State’s Culture.” Onward State. Onward State, 27 July  2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. <http://onwardstate.com/community/dont-be-ashamed-of-
penn-states-culture/>.

Katz, Andy, and Mark Schlabach. “Penn State Sanctions: $60M, Bowl ban.” ESPN. ESPN
Internet Ventures, 24 July 2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. <http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8191027/penn-state-nittany-lions-hit-60-million-fine-4-year-bowl-ban-wins-dating-1998>.

Yanda, Steve. “Penn State Football Punished by NCAA over Jerry Sandusky Scandal.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 23 July 2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/penn-state-football-punished-by-ncaa-over sandusky-scandal/2012/07/23/gJQAGNeM4W_story.html>.

Idea:
My idea for the third paper is to rebut an article that that places blame on Penn State culture as a whole for Jerry Sandusky’s actions. Jerry Sandusky and four university officials are to blame for the child sex abuse scandal, not Penn State University or the former, present, and future football players.
Article to Dispute: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/penn-state-football-punished-by-ncaa-over-sandusky-scandal/2012/07/23/gJQAGNeM4W_story.html

Introduction:
I will start the introduction paragraph by talking about PSU students and fans on game day. I will mention the fact that Penn State has a fan section that is incomparable to other Division I schools. This will lead me into the Sandusky scandal and my rebuttal statement. I do not think the NCAA should have placed blame on the University and its football players. The sanctions imposed place blame on the wrong individuals.

• Penn State fans support the Nittany Lions every Saturday whether it is in Beaver Stadium, on the radio, or on the Big Ten television network.
• Our student section takes pride in the “We are…Penn State” chant and alma mater.
• Penn State football represents PSU.
• One of the very few downfalls of Penn State football is the Sandusky Scandal.
•  Jerry Sandusky was guilty of 45 counts of child molestation
• Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, Joe Paterno, and Graham Spanier covered up Sandusky’s mistakes and failed to report suspected child abuse.
• In my opinion, the NCAA blamed former, present, and future Penn State football players for the nauseating crime committed by Jerry Sandusky.
• The NCAA should not have fined the school and the Penn State football team.
• Sandusky and the university officials who knew of the heinous acts should be the only people punished.

Body Paragraph 1:

• Common ground: Those individuals who knew of the acts committed by Jerry Sandusky over the past fifteen years deserve to be punished.
• Sandusky was sentenced to thirty years in prison – not nearly enough time for the pain and discomfort he put ten children through.
• Four university officials involved in the scandal: Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, Joe Paterno, and Graham Spanier.
• Tim Curley is accused of covering up allegations tied to the scandal. Curley went on administrative leave.
• Gary Schultz has been charged with covering up abuse allegations. Schultz retired on Nov. 6^th.
• Joe Paterno was fired from his job. Paterno knew all along what Sandusky was doing.
  • Paterno said, “I wish I had done more.”
  • Risk everything he worked for to protect Sandusky.
  • Graham Spanier was aware of Sandusky’s actions and tried to cover them up. Spanier was fired on Nov. 9^th.

Body Paragraph 2:

• The Penn State football team did not abide by the NCAA rules.
• The NCAA stated, “what we can do is impose sanctions that both reflect the magnitude of these terrible acts and that also ensure that Penn State will rebuild an athletic culture that went horribly awry.” (I will rebut this statement)
  • The sanctions will not rebuild the athletic culture of Penn State.
  • The sanctions are punishing the school, players, and coaches who were not involved in the scandal.
  • The NCAA also articulates the idea that “football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing, and protecting young people.” (I will rebut this statement)
    • Christian Hackenberg example
    • Penn State places its football team ahead of each player’s education.

Body Paragraph 3:

• In my opinion the sanctions imposed on PSU were unjust and placed blame on the wrong people.
• Sanctions imposed on PSU:
  • Payment of $60 million over the course of five years
  • A four-year postseason ban on Penn State football
  • Significant reduction in the number of scholarship players the team can field over the next four years
  • Football program on probation for five years
  • Enabled any current or incoming player to transfer and play immediately without restriction
  • “The most significant individual sanction in the context of college football history is that all of Penn State’s wins from 1998 to 2011 have been vacated.” (I will dispute this statement)
    • The only significance of the sanctions regards the attitude Penn State has toward the sanctions imposed.
    • The NCAA hopes these sanctions will deter the environment of many Division I athletic departments and lessen the supremacy and hierarchy that Penn State football reflects. (I will dispute this statement)
      • Penn State University is known for its football team.
      • No sanction will reduce the power of our team.
      • The NCAA believes the sanctions imposed will reflect the magnitude of these terrible acts (I will dispute this statement)
        • “No price the NCAA can levy will repair the grievous damage inflicted by Jerry Sandusky on his victims.”

Body Paragraph 4:

• Rodney Erickson accepted the penalties and corrective actions announced by the NCAA.
• Erickson’s acceptance of the penalties proves that the entire Penn State culture was involved in the Sandusky scandal (dispute this with Aaron Fisher)
  • Aaron Fisher (victim #1) believes the sanctions are not fair and penalize the wrong people
  • Aaron Fisher believes that the entire Penn State culture was not involved in Jerry Sandusky’s actions

Conclusion:
In the conclusion I will discuss how Penn State has nothing to be ashamed of because of what one man did.

• Jerry Sandusky- abominable man whose actions can never be fixed
• PSU is not ashamed of who we are
• World-class academics & success with honor
• One individual cannot bring down Penn State culture
• Sandusky cannot take the pride out of 46,184 University Park students
• Penn State is strong and one man will never be able to redefine Penn State