tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post501177120243908528..comments2024-01-30T04:57:48.673-05:00Comments on Second Mile Sandusky Scandal: The NCAA's blind eye to Michigan StateBarry Bozemanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03484041114078117845noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-25336413784394844402019-01-14T09:19:09.626-05:002019-01-14T09:19:09.626-05:00Gregory,
You gotta love America because we all hav...Gregory,<br />You gotta love America because we all have the right to free speech and dissent. (I'm feeling exceptionally Patriotic for some reason right now).<br /><br />So, thanks for your comments.<br /><br />Like many others, you are fixated on Nassar's acts, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with institutional control. The institutional control issue comes about because Kathy Klages and athletic trainers did not forward complaints about Nassar to their BOSSES. <br /><br />I think you will agree that if an athlete is concerned about the legitimacy of a medical procedure (why is the doctor grabbing my butt and I saw him about a knee injury???), it is not up to the coach or an athletic trainer to render a decision on the appropriateness of the treatment. Instead, they should inform their boss and have that complaint addressed by appropriate persons. In this case, the reports would have gone through the AD and to the MSU Medical Staff.<br /><br />Reporting things up the chain is at the heart of institutional control (By Law 2.2.1). <br /><br />MSU should NOT be penalized for not being able to identify Nassar as a serial sex offender or for not stopping Nassar immediately. As I wrote, it takes a compilation of allegations and evidence to make a case against these types of offenders and the failure to report complaints from 1997 to 2002 helped Nassar evade detection. Moreover, had those complaints been on record, then the 2014 complaint about Nassar (Title IX investigation) would have obviously been handled very differently (instead of being handled by an isolated complaint). <br /><br />That's why Michigan State's case is so different from Penn State's. At PSU, all complaints went up the chain and outside the University. At MSU there was, to steal a phrase from Louis Freeh, "active concealment."<br /><br />Cheers!!Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-81046494028144207892019-01-14T02:56:22.045-05:002019-01-14T02:56:22.045-05:00I dissent. The NCAA had no business in any of the...I dissent. The NCAA had no business in any of the above cases. I also note that the police had as much information as the college administrators, and they flay out whiffed.<br /><br />The MSU situation is similar to what happened at USC with their staff gynocologist. In fact, the entire medical school at USC was harboring drug addicts and sexual predators. Nothing to do with athletics except that some patients were athletes. Both MSU and USC fired their Presidents and are on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. The Attorneys General for both California and Michigan are undertaking criminal investigations. USC has cleaned house in its College of Medicine, and the California Medical Board is under investigation for how it bungled the case. Justice will be done. And for real justice to occur, Mark Emmert should be charged with extortion. Greg Vernonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10566899608592908874noreply@blogger.com