The controlling majority of Penn State’s board of trustees has accused the trustee plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the NCAA of having a conflict of interest.
The only conflict of interest that I can identify is the same kind that Maish Rennick had when he bet against his own boxer in “Requiem for a Heavyweight.”
Most of the trustees similarly bet their reputations that the NCAA’s illegitimate (per its own written rules) sanctions were not contestable.
A court-ordered repudiation of the sanctions would, therefore, show the board’s controlling majority to be derelict in its fiduciary duty to Penn State. These trustees presumably would rather be “right” — even at the cost of Penn State’s reputation along with more than $60 million of its money — than have events prove them wrong.
This reinforces the growing perception that Penn State needs an external entity, such as the legislature, to take over its affairs.
When you throw a game or take a dive, as student trustee Peter Khoury did under pressure from the board’s leadership, you may regret it for the rest of your life.
As stated by Terry Malloy in “On the Waterfront,” “I could have had class. I could have been a contender. I could have been somebody, instead of a bum.”
The board’s four contenders — Ryan McCombie, Anthony Lubrano, Adam Taliaferro and Alvin Clemens — are easy to identify. So are the Maish Rennicks who, having bet against Penn State, are now pressuring these contenders to throw the game.
William A. Levinson, Wilkes-Barre
Comments