Sanctions against Penn State were necessary, NCAA tells judge

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 The National Collegiate Athletic Association’s sanctions against Pennsylvania State University for its role in the Jerry Sandusky sex-abuse scandal were necessary to protect the integrity of intercollegiate sports, a lawyer for the Indianapolis-based association argued in court Monday.

The sanctions, while extraordinary, were necessary to preserve the character of college football, James Scott Ballenger, an attorney for the NCAA with the law firm Latham & Watkins, said in a hearing in Harrisburg, Penn.

“The NCAA responded in extraordinary fashion to an extraordinary event,” Ballenger said. He argued there’s no precedent for NCAA involvement on this scale in a criminal action because there hasn’t been a case this “horrifying.”

The NCAA, the governing body for college sports, is asking U.S. District Judge Yvette Kane to dismiss a suit filed by Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett over the sanctions, which included a $60 million fine. The NCAA in July stripped Penn State of 112 football wins from 1998 through 2011 and barred the Nittany Lions from bowl games for four years, matching the longest postseason ban in NCAA history.

The sanctions were agreed to by Penn State. They were imposed for the school’s failure to prevent sexual abuse by Sandusky when he was an assistant football coach. He was sentenced in October to at least 30 years in prison for molesting 10 boys over 15 years.

Corbett sued the NCAA in January arguing that the sanctions violate antitrust laws by restraining competition in the markets for college sports and enrollment. Corbett also claimed the NCAA had no jurisdiction over the issue, which was being pursued as a criminal matter in the courts.

Melissa Maxman, an attorney for the state with the law firm Cozen O’Connor, continued that argument today saying the ruling was a “complete departure from their previous approach toward criminal cases.”

“The NCAA had no reason to get involved in this except as a pretext to burnish its own reputation of being soft on enforcement,” Maxman said.

Ballenger countered that the complaint should be dismissed because it fails to allege any plausible anticompetitive effects and the governor lacks standing to bring such a case since he hasn’t alleged an antitrust injury.

The alleged impact of the sanctions on state revenue from ticket sales, on jobs in the local economy and on the value of a Penn State education are indirect harms that are insufficient to serve as the basis for an antitrust claim, Ballenger said.

James Schultz, Pennsylvania’s general counsel, told Kane the university’s football program generates about $90 million in business in the local community and about $5 million in tax revenue while creating about 2,200 jobs.

“Penn State football is an economic powerhouse for the commonwealth, and when that core no longer exists, it has impacts across the grid,” Schultz said.

Kane said she will issue a written opinion in a few weeks.


  • Get your facts straight
    You need to get your facts straight. Sandusky was not an assistant football coach in 2001 and it was only the 2001 incident that allegedly took place on campus. Sandusky was founf not guilty of that charge, by the way.
  • Football guy
    Read "pATERNO" from that book by sports illustrated author it sure seems to me that innocence was within Paterno and his very long character as an educator extraordinaire. He probably coached too long but all the great coaches have. Think Bear Bryant and bobby Bowden! Paterno family and PSU were damaged! They seek redemption, but should file a defamation suit. iMHO!
  • So Funny I Forgot to Laugh
    The NCAA has the authority to sanction an entire school if a single player is caught receiving unauthorized gifts. In the case of Penn State an assistant coach was sentenced to life in prison after being convicted of numerous felonies on campus, and members of the administration have been charged with covering it up. To suggest that the NCAA had no reason to get involved is laughable.

    Post a comment to this story

    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. If I were a developer I would be looking at the Fountain Square and Fletcher Place neighborhoods instead of Broad Ripple. I would avoid the dysfunctional BRVA with all of their headaches. It's like deciding between a Blackberry or an iPhone 5s smartphone. BR is greatly in need of updates. It has become stale and outdated. Whereas Fountain Square, Fletcher Place and Mass Ave have become the "new" Broad Ripples. Every time I see people on the strip in BR on the weekend I want to ask them, "How is it you are not familiar with Fountain Square or Mass Ave? You have choices and you choose BR?" Long vacant storefronts like the old Scholar's Inn Bake House and ZA, both on prominent corners, hurt the village's image. Many business on the strip could use updated facades. Cigarette butt covered sidewalks and graffiti covered walls don't help either. The whole strip just looks like it needs to be power washed. I know there is more to the BRV than the 700-1100 blocks of Broad Ripple Ave, but that is what people see when they think of BR. It will always be a nice place live, but is quickly becoming a not-so-nice place to visit.

    2. I sure hope so and would gladly join a law suit against them. They flat out rob people and their little punk scam artist telephone losers actually enjoy it. I would love to run into one of them some day!!

    3. Biggest scam ever!! Took 307 out of my bank ac count. Never received a single call! They prey on new small business and flat out rob them! Do not sign up with these thieves. I filed a complaint with the ftc. I suggest doing the same ic they robbed you too.

    4. Woohoo! We're #200!!! Absolutely disgusting. Bring on the congestion. Indianapolis NEEDS it.

    5. So Westfield invested about $30M in developing Grand Park and attendance to date is good enough that local hotel can't meet the demand. Carmel invested $180M in the Palladium - which generates zero hotel demand for its casino acts. Which Mayor made the better decision?