Paterno: NCAA Shouldn't Take Away Bobby Bowden's Wins

Over 40 replies and none addressed the very first one - the fact that Bowden once filed a complaint about Tulane using an "ineligible player" which complaint resulted in Bowden getting a win in a game he lost. That means Tulane got a victory taken away because of an ineligible player.
Why is no one arguing that Bowden wants it both ways? He complained about Tulane and now he wants the NCAA to back off. Can anyone explain?

Paul
What happens on the field, should be dealt with on the field. A clipping penalty or pass interference is assessed on the field. Using an ineligible player (on the field) directly impacted the outcome of the game. Hence, the win was a direct result. Not saying I agree with Bowden's call for the forfeiture, but, it is reasonable.

Conversely, what happens off the field should be dealt with OFF the field. If a student-athlete has academic or behavior issues, it is not for the referees to address on the field. Can you imagine a referee calling back a TD because the ball carrier failed a quiz or got into a fight two days before? There is no direct connection between the off-field actions and the outcome of a game. Now, if the penalties or consequences of the off-field actions make the player ineligible, then, there is the indirect impact, but, in that case, the REASON for the ineligibility is irrelevant. All that matters is that the player was NOT supposed to play.

Please tell us how what happened with books being given to other students impacted the outcome of those games! If the players were ineligible, then, the wins should be forfeited. But, if the players were eligible at the time, then, to forfeit the wins is a MAJOR disconnect between action and consquences.

It is like punishing the father for the sins of the son. We can hold a father financially responsible for the actions of the son (if there is a direct connection between the son's actions and the financial damages), but, we do not fine, incarcerate, or otherwise, punish the father for the actions of the son.

Sorry, Paterno is correct. These forfeitures would not be fair or just!

reidgator:
Let's take your position and apply it to the scenario where Tim Tebow is found to have cheated on an exam in August 2009 and would have been ineligible for the 2009 season. But he plays, Florida wins the national title and then, in February 2010, it is learned that Tebow should not have been eligible to play.
You said: "If the players were ineligible, then, the wins should be forfeited. But, if the players were eligible at the time, then, to forfeit the wins is a MAJOR disconnect between action and consequences."
Tebow was eligible at the time the 2009 season was played.
In hindsight, he should not have played.
Under your logic, Florida keeps the title and retains the 13 wins for the '09-'10 season.
Am I accurate in reading that from your post?
You are nitpiking here. If conduct renders a student ineligible to play, it doesn't matter when the conduct took place or what it was. Books being given to other students. Tebow failing a test.... neither has anything to do with what happens on the field, but both are grounds for ineligibility.
Not sure I see a difference.

You're an IDIOT!!

Let's impose that penalty on you, instead, and save the planet from your idiocy.

Give Joe the Death Penalty??? I'd like to see you get out from behind your computer and say that in Happy Valley. You wouldn't last long... ha ha ha

Please tell me why Penn State should be penalized for Florida State infractions. Bowden was responsible for his players eligibility. Tell me he didn't know about the cheating....please. He and the university should lose the games.

You're entitled to any opinion you have, but what proof do you have that Penn State is corrupt? When have they been sanctioned or penalized by the NCAA?

can you say:SEC?

If Penn State or Florida State were in the Pac 10, at least USC would have some competition. There are no other teams that can hold a candle to the Big 10 in that division. They have one good team....period!

Idiot is such a harsh word... it is the responsibility of the school to educate the players and monitor them on NCAA violations... that is why when A person commits AN act... not much is done, however when the improper acts become the norm (as it seems to be the case here), some action needs taken. Not sure I would have used idiot in your post.