Despite all the praise that the NCAA has received for handing down the Penn State sanctions, there have also been some criticisms. Most people believed that Penn State deserved some type of punishment, but it’s debatable if it was the NCAA’s job to do the punishing.
But now a new debate has arisen and it comes from a member of the group that created the Freeh Report. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education, an unnamed member of the Freeh Group has criticized the NCAA for using the Freeh Report as a basis for the sanctions placed on Penn State.
“That document was not meant to be used as the sole piece, or the large piece, of the NCAA’s decision-making,” a source familiar with the investigation told The Chronicle on Thursday. “It was meant to be a mechanism to help Penn State move forward. To be used otherwise creates an obstacle to the institution changing.”
The Freeh team reviewed how Penn State operated, not how they worked within the NCAA’s system,” this person said. “The NCAA’s job is to investigate whether Penn State broke its rules and whether it gained a competitive advantage in doing so.”
“In using this report largely as the basis for their decision, the NCAA could hurt Penn State’s enrollment, recruiting, and outside relationships and partnerships,” the source said. “If you don’t attract good faculty and research dollars, your institution has no stature.”
If you recall, NCAA president Mark Emmert stated that the Freeh Report was a big part of their decision-making process on the sanctions. So the fact that a person who helped craft the report doesn’t think it should have been used just adds fuel to the fire for those that have criticized the NCAA on this.