Nothing arbitrary or capricious about unprecedented penalties, the absence of a single "repugnance" reference in its regulations, and universities successfully defeating penalties on behalf of child molesters. Nothing at all.
Private organizations have leeway to manage fairly and equitably. Otherwise, they do not. No court is gonna foster arbitrary elements of justice.
And where's an answer to my point-shaving-and-banners question, slapd!ck??
"Elite program," my a$$...
I'm not saying that the court won't find the actions of the NCAA to be arbitrary and capricious, I'm just pointing out that at that point the burden is all on Louisville, and that the threshold is very high. At that point, a "he said, she said" situation won't change the status quo, or overturn the ruling. Private organizations have a lot more leeway than you think, especially when they are "voluntary." I agree that in reality, there is nothing voluntary about the NCAA, but it technically is. As far as Sandusky goes, there was a great injustice in how the NCAA handled the whole situation, and Sandusky deserves the worst punishment imaginable. But, these are two different situations, and just because the NCAA screwed that one up, doesn't mean a court is going to assume they screwed this one up.
I'm really just here for the law discussion, and honestly, I haven't paid much attention to events that happened almost 70 years ago, so I can't say one way or the other whether those banners should come down. If they were proven to have cheated in those seasons, and their actions were against NCAA rules, then yes, the titles should go back. That being said, I don't think the NCAA should have taken away the 2013 banner, and I think Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame. But that's just like, my opinion, man.