not really a good analogy either considering the punishment that was given to penn state
that issue was addressed and dealt with which is unlike the baylor situ
You mean the punishment that was rescinded because the NCAA didn't want to get sued .... the NCAA couldn't adequately punish them, but you guys want the Big 12 to stick their necks out
yes that punishment. at least they acknowledged the rough ridin' problem and addressed it. sure, much of it was rescinded but they were judged and punished which is a million times more than any entity has done to address the situation at baylor.
look- you've gone so far and i know you aren't coming off the ledge on this one but surely you aren't so myopic that you think that penn state would sue the ncaa. because i refuse to believe that you think that, unless it's just a prank you're pulling?
So, the NCAA just walked back the sanctions because they felt it was the "right thing to do?" Not sure where you are coming from on this one. Something had to motivate their action.
In addition, it still stands that the NCAA walked back on PSU. If that is the case, why go bigger as a conference against Baylor. I guess you can believe that BU will take the moral high ground (for once) and not do something utterly slimy (for once) and not sue the livin' crap out of the conference and its member institutions for over-stepping their authority concerning an issue which they have no legal standing to pursue.
I mean, I guess you can believe that about Baylor. However, their past record would indicate rather strongly that it might not be the best route to put your trust in. Sort of like ol' Joe Stalin trusting Hitler over the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact. All indications were that Adolf had issues with living up to his word when it came to international agreements, sort of like BU has an issue when it comes to taking responsibility when it comes to the safety and well-being of its non-football playing students.