Analysis Of Jerry Sandusky Scandal

Jerry Sandusky, a former assistant football coach for the Nittany Lions, was indicted on 40 counts of child molestation. As the investigation continued, it was determined that Sandusky had used his charity organization, the Second Mile, to track down and sexually abuse young boys interested in playing football. This horrendous abuse is thought to of started as early as the 1970’s, the time period Sandusky was only held responsible for acts that took place during 1994-2009. It is obvious that a very dangerous cultural element existed at Penn State. This culture of devotion, minimal blame and self-preservation. This is what seemed to drive the behavior at Penn State University, leaders, staff and the surrounding community. Good, healthy, productive behaviors cannot exist in a culture that doesn’t support them. Therefore, if you accept bad decisions, such as the ones made by the leaders at Penn State your promoting bad

The Sandusky scandal had a huge impact on Penn State, main reason Penn state officials covered it up for so long. Penn State officials didn’t want the disturbing news to damage Penn State impeccable reputation. Although they tried very hard to cover up this issue it was exposed.

Thamel, P. (2012). Shaken by Sandusky Scandal, a Changed Penn State Moves On. Nytimes.com. Retrieved 5 February 2017, from

Everything was looking good for Joe Paterno and Penn State football as his football managing career rose with an overall record of 298-136-3 but in 2011, all that changed. Back in 2000 a janitor of Penn State witnessed Sandusky receiving oral sex from a young boy, the janitor reported what he saw to co-workers and his supervisor but none of these men reported these actions to authorities. It wasn’t until November 5, 2011 that Sandusky was arrested on a $100,000 bail and up to 40 criminal counts. ESPN were quickly in the scene to investigate and report the allegations on Sandusky. They quickly reported saying Sandusky was charged with more than 50 counts of child sex-abuse involving 10 boys he met through The Second

Since collegiate athletics have begun, there have been all kinds of cheating scandals involving the big-time college sports. College sports today are filled with preventable, scandalous acts made by college coaches and administrators. An example of this would be the case of fake “paper classes” at the University of North Carolina at Chapel-Hill. I personally believe that the NCAA should not have imposed any sanctions or allegations amongst the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for academic integrity violations, threatening to take away titles, and making athletes ineligible to compete.

Although college football is the third-most-popular sport, the majority of schools lose revenue on athletics. The National Collegiate Athletic Association, also known as the NCAA, is promoting beneficial ideas to help players in need while increasing academic standards. As stated in the article, “On some LSU teams, Martin said, half of the players are “special admits””, which means multitudes of players do not achieve the same levels of academic success as “normal” students. As long as academic budgets are miniscule compared to athletic budgets, there will always be controversy. This tension increased when “legendary head coach” Joe Paterno, along with Jerry Sandusky, were fired for being involved in a sex-abuse scandal with a minor.

Over the past 30 years some of college sports most famed athlete’s legacies have been tarnished due to scandals. As a result to the scandals not only are players affected but their schools, along with coaching staffs, depending on the specifics of the NCAA violations. Incidents have dated way back to the 1980’s where both SMU (Southern Methodist University) along with the “Bad Boy Miami Hurricanes” were found of guilty of arguably two of the NCAA’s worst and most televised violations of all time. In 1988 after already being previously on probation as a program, the SMU football team was hit with the most severe penalty possible to a college athletic team, “The Death Penalty”. The penalty insisted the program was to be suspended for two years and football was not to be resumed in University Park until 1989. Not only did the program lose its eligibility but they also sacrificed 55 scholarships over a 4 year span, which to date is the harshest penalty the NCAA has handed out. This penalty and sanction alike came about when investigators had discovered 13 student athletes of that respective team decided to accept cash gifts from a

The school officials that contributed to covering up the Sandusky scandal were: Penn State athletic director Tim Curley, senior vice president for finance and business including overseeing the university police Gary Schultz, Penn State football coach, Joe Paterno and university president, Graham Spanier. All four of the elite university officials became informed of Sandusky’s sexual misconduct by a graduate assistant Mike McQueary who later became assistant coach to Paterno (Chappell, 2012). After Sandusky’s sexual misconduct was officially brought to the attention of these key officials the solution was to basically punish Sandusky by telling him he is no longer allowed to shower with the boys on campus facilities. The core group

The NCAA makes it clear that the main purpose of the student-athletes is to get an education. This is true especially in the NCAA Division two philosophy where it states, “Promoting the academic success of its student-athletes, measured in part by an institution’s student-athletes graduating at least at the same rate as the institution’s student body” (Division II Philosophy Statement). It also states that coaches will be responsible for the actions of their student-athletes. I think this is something that the coaches and athletic staff at Binghamton forgot, because they were too wrapped up in becoming a Division 1 school that they their ethics and values in the

The FBI had stated that after conducting an investigation that these senior officials had known about Sandusky’s actions as early as 1998 and had failed to disclose this information to authorities. On October 9, 2012, Jerry Sandusky was sentenced to a minimum of 30 years and a maximum of 60 years in prison. Spanier, Curley, and Schultz have been charged with grand jury perjury, conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and child endangerment in association with the scandal. Paterno and McQueary never had any charges pressed on them because they did what they were obligated to do. McQueary had reported the incident to his superior which is Joe Paterno. Joe Paterno also reported the incident to his superior who is Curley and Schultz. This whole situation caused a huge reaction nationwide.

However, I would have to agree with the first half and say that Joe Paterno’s actions were inadequate. Although Joe Paterno reported what he saw to the Penn State president his responsibility shouldn’t have ended there. Yes, he fulfilled his obligation to report any illegal actions on campus but when the Penn State President chose not to take legal action Paterno should have made the moral decision and had gone to the authorities. Legally, he fulfilled his obligation and therefore no longer holds any responsibility in the eyes of the legal system. In the eyes of morality though, his responsibility in the matter was not over just because he reported it to who he was supposed to. This major problem should have been dealt with a long time ago. It’s just a moral obligation that Joe Paterno should have acted upon. So yes I feel he deserved to be fired. Everyone who knew about it should have reported it to legal authorities. His great athletic achievements and mutual respect should have pushed towards the issue being resolved and not swept under the rug for it to come out years after and now resulting in him being fired. Every action has a reaction and in this case the reaction is due to Paternos lack of action.

The term groupthink in this report is defined as, the social psychological phenomenon that results in groups during pressure situations. This social psychology theory is broken down into eight signs. Illusion of invulnerability, Collective rationalization, Belief in inherent morality, Stereotyped views of out-groups, Direct pressure on dissenters, Self-censorship, Illusion of unanimity, Self-appointed “mindguards”. According to research conducted by Irving Janis, there are three conditions to groupthink. The first, "high group cohesiveness" which is the direction for a group to be in unity while working towards a goal, or to satisfy the emotional needs of its members. Secondly, the structural faults such as insulation of the group, lack

In Case 7 “Perceptions of Leaders Following Public Failures: A Tale of Two Coaches”, two leaders both college football coaches of their respective teams were encountered with scrutiny, as they lacked a certain level sensitivity regarding serious incidents within their program. The case study talks about both Mike Leach and Gary Barnett’s background as coaches and progress to the events with their program that lead to them being involved in the public failure. This eventually led to people having various perceptions of both coaches based off of how they dealt with the incidents. As a result of both programs image being tarnished, Mike Leach was fired, however; Gary Barnett’s job was retained.

The criticism will have to be based on a school by school basis. I specifically know of a situation where my favorite football team, Notre Dame, had suspended their quarter back for violation of the honor code by cheating on a test, when it was most critical to keep him playing when Notre Dame was ranked #1 and going to the National Championships in 2012 who eventually were beaten for the title by Alabama. Notre Dame has a very strong honor code and strictly adheres to the code of ethics. Is it because the university is a Catholic school?? The university itself contacted the NCAA about the academic dishonesty of four of their players which resulted in the suspension of Everett Golson (QB). “The University is committed to thorough resolution of this matter, consistent with its commitment to academic integrity and adherence to NCAA rules," Father Jenkins said. In this case, it looks as though Notre Dame is based more on ethical values than that of the NCAA. Although they NCAA does have rules, regulations and punishments in place, they do not seem to attack ethical values head on than being more in

A few years ago, there was much discussion relating to the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and those units responsible for instituting student-athlete and athletic department policy. This purpose of this paper is to discuss the ethical misconduct that occurred at Penn State, Ohio State and the University of Arkansas, and how the NCAA played a role in the wrongdoing. Coaches, players, and administrators face mounting pressures brought on by the need to sell seats and win games. In response, this type of pressure creates opportunities for offenses to take place. The first component of the paper will be to determine the fundamental ways in which the ethics programs of the NCAA failed to prevent the scandals at Penn State, Ohio State, and the University of Arkansas. Once those measures are identified and discussed, the ways the NCAA leadership contributed to the ethical violations of these schools will be discussed. The next element of the paper will predict the key differences in the scandals that occurred at each school if an effective ethics program was implemented. Next, the paper will suggest actions that the NCAA leadership should take to regain the trust and confidence of the students and stakeholders. The last section will identify measures that HR departments of