NCAA Attempts to Justify Consent Decree Process
It hasn’t been the best two weeks for the NCAA. First, emails came out wherein prominent NCAA officials wrote they were “bluffing Penn State” and “relying on the fact that Penn State is so embarrassed they will do anything” when it entered into the consent decree. Soon after, emails revealed that the NCAA had more influence in the Freeh report than was previously thought. Yet another batch showed that generating a positive public image for NCAA President Mark Emmert was a central factor in the NCAA’s decision to sanction Penn State.
Today, the NCAA responded by putting up a new page on its website aimed at clarifying the Penn State consent decree, calling the last two weeks of hits a “misleading impression,” daring the lawsuit brought by State Senator Jake Corman to trial.
“When taken out of context, some of this material creates a misleading impression of the important issues related to the consent decree between the NCAA and Penn State,” wrote NCAA spokesperson Erik Christianson. “The NCAA believes the full story will emerge at the trial scheduled for January 2015.”
The website includes a number of bullet points, accompanied by emails and depositions, trying to explain some of the revelations from recent weeks. The NCAA’s arguments are hardly novel — Penn State entered freely into the consent decree at the advice of counsel, the death penalty was a possible outcome if the university went through the regular infractions process, that Penn State’s culture needed fixed, etc — but hey, they tried. A response to emails allegedly out of context with, well, emails put together by public relations flack that are most certainly out of context is an interesting approach, for sure.
You can check out the new NCAA explanation here.