Blue White Illustrated

issues, they have been relatively minor and have been quickly addressed. " NCAA officials framed the new consent decree as a reward for Penn State's compliance with the previous agreement. Emmert told The Associated Press that "Penn State's fulfillment of nearly all those requirements at this very early date has been a very strong indicator of the seriousness with which they've taken this mission." NCAA expert John Infante noted in his Bylaws Blog that by cooperating with Mitchell, Penn State made a convincing case for lenience. "If it was the cover-up, not the crime, that was being punished and that this cover-up was the result of a poor culture at Penn State, then the reduction in the sanctions was not just possible but almost compelled by what has happened since, he wrote. "If the goal of " the sanctions was to force Penn State to change its approach to athletics and adopt recommendations to that effect, the NCAA could not ignore that this process was highly praised by the monitor and ahead of schedule. " But while Mitchell's reports have received ample scrutiny in the Penn State community, the national commentary following the NCAA's decision to relax its penalties was focused elsewhere. In the 14 months since the sanctions were announced, much of the attention has shifted from Penn State to the NCAA itself. It botched the Miami investigation by breaking its own rules to gather testimony. It clumsily removed items from its online store after ESPN's Jay Bilas noted that it was making money off of player memorabilia while at the same time fighting multiple lawsuits aimed at giving athletes a cut of the revenue they generate. It ruled that North Carolina hadn't committed any violations in its academic scandal, while docking Oregon only two scholarships to settle a case in which questions were raised about a $25,000 payment to a Texas-based recruiting service. Those developments rekindled com- plaints that the NCAA had adjudicated the Penn State case improperly, making it seem less like the end of a thoughtful and deliberative process than a capitulation to public pressure. In the eyes of its critics, the NCAA had been so determined to appear proactive in the wake of Sandusky's trial and the release of Freeh's findings that it failed to follow its own disciplinary procedures or consider the consequences of bringing criminal cases into the scope of its jurisdiction. Those critics found plenty of backing in an ESPN.com interview with Michigan State president Lou Anna Simon, chairwoman of the NCAA's executive committee, who admitted that the public outcry may have "pushed both sides in a process that was unconventional. Had the NCAA " acted against Penn State because of its prominence? That might have been a tough case to make initially – and a scandalized public might not have cared anyway – but in the context of the NCAA's subsequent missteps, it doesn't seem quite WHAT THEY'RE SAYING COLUMNISTS WEIGH IN ON DECISION TO REVISIT SANCTIONS Today I laud [Mark] Emmert and the NCAA for taking the first step in righting their wrong against Penn State, even as he refuses to admit he ever acted out of place to begin with, and even as this decision only reinforces the common perception that the NCAA arbitrarily makes up rules as it goes along. Stewart Mandel SI.com The NCAA is taking a page from the Roger Goodell school of PR – I mean, discipline. When the press and fans want blood (e.g., when Michael Vick fights dogs) Goodell levies a brutal penalty. But when the offender is "rehabilitated" (e.g., when Vick is a changed man), Goodell reduces the penalty, and gets a lot of good press out of that, too. Here, the NCAA clobbered Penn State when Sandusky was history's greatest monster. Then it offered clemency when the image of Sandusky was replaced by the fighting O'Briens. Bryan Curtis Grantland.com He won't admit it, of course. Nobody at the NCAA will acknowledge that Emmert's grandstand move in July 2012 to slam the Nittany Lions for the sins of Jerry Sandusky was a vast overreach. But they don't have to admit anything. Actions speak louder than words, and the embattled president of the most controversial institution in sports just had the biggest decision of his tenure significantly softened Tuesday morning. Pat Forde Yahoo Sports The point of the ground-breaking NCAA sanctions was that Penn State – and all of us – would never forget. Mov- ing on should be extremely difficult. The punishment was right the first time. Christine Brennan USA Today The decision to begin restoring scholarships is a tacit acknowledgment that the NCAA sanctions constituted an overreaction that diminished the organization in the eyes of its member schools and the public. Ivan Maisel ESPN.com When Southern Methodist was given the death penalty in 1986, it had no wins vacated – zero. Even though SMU had a long history of recruiting violations and shelling out cash to players – factors that had an impact on the field – the Mustangs didn't have to give any wins back. The NCAA pretty much stands alone when it comes to this revisionist history. Mike McGovern Reading Eagle

• Cover