If the proverbial road to hell is indeed paved with good intentions, a few people in Rec Hall and Old Main should be feeling pretty warm about now.

The Penn State philosophy of stressing academics over athletics is proper and, as some are fond of saying, noble. But the administration is damning itself with faint praise when it believes every school should model itself after the Lions' program.

It's an idea that isn't only stupid, but impossible. If every institution of higher education were to be the same, there should only be one college for the entire country. Until the United States College begins operation, Penn State should live and let live.

And that's why I think the often holier-than-thou athletic department overstepped its bounds when it comes to Proposal 42. Penn State was one of the schools that backed the Proposal that was recently passed at the NCAA's annual convention.

The proposal, which strengthens Proposition 48, would deny athletes financial aid during their first year in school unless a 'C' average was attained along with meeting a minimum score on either the SAT or ACT admissions test.

There's a need to assure student athletes attend college to learn as much in the classroom as they do on the field, but voting for a rule that would keep people out of college certainly isn't the answer. This is where Penn State not only missed the boat, but went against many of the principles it supposedly stands for.

A school that has admitted it needs to do more for minorities voted to enforce a rule that would keep many minorities from any means of receiving a college education. Reading between the lines, it seems the Penn State view is a minority student who is not good enough by our standards shouldn't be good enough for any other school. Which is about as hypocritical as it gets.

Several of the Ivy League schools voted against Proposal 42. And you don't hear them claiming student athletes that don't meet their standards aren't smart enough to attend other colleges. There are many colleges out there and each should be allowed to set its own agenda.

While charges of racism may be too harsh, there's little denying the SAT and ACT discriminate against under-privileged youths -- a great majority of which are minorities. Two men who should know what they're talking about, Harvard University President Derek Bok and Robert Atwell, president of the American Council on Education, have both criticized the rule.

Penn State officials need to realize that their way may be right for them, but may go against the principles of inner-city schools like Temple and others across the country.

Jim Tarman, the school's athletic director, made a point of stressing that Joe Paterno was one of the main boosters of the original Proposition 48 and that this just took it a step farther. Although he hasn't publicly commented on Proposal 42, it seems Paterno would favor its implementation.

If so, Paterno actually is doing an about face. The Brown University graduate has often stressed the value of an education -- saying it's much more important than athletics. But, the implementation of Proposal 42 would eliminate many from ever attending college.

Almost all of Paterno's cries about academic reforms are good ideas that should be heeded. He's long cried for freshmen to be ineligible and that would be the best solution.

"We want our players to enjoy football and their entire college experience," Paterno has said in the past. "We want them to learn about art and literature and music and all of the other things college has to offer. College should be a great time. It is the only time a person is really free. We don't want them just tied to a football program."

If Proposal 42 ever takes effect, many potential college students won't have to worry about being tied to a football or basketball program. Instead, they'll have to try to find a way to experience fine literature and art when they aren't pumping gas, flipping hamburgers or emptying garbage trucks.

In fact, as recently as 1986, Paterno made Bob White an example of what an athlete can do when given a chance to develop academically. White showed potential in the classroom, but wasn't the best of high school students. Paterno, however, felt White deserved a chance and offered him a scholarship.

White took a redshirt as a freshman in 1982 to concentrate on his academic progress. He knew it wouldn't be easy, but received plenty of tutoring, including sessions with Sue Paterno, the coach's wife.

In 1986, shortly before White graduated with a degree in administration of justice, Paterno talked about the impact White made -- on and off the playing field.

"Bobby White has not only played very well . . . but he's been a guy that has a social conscience," Paterno said at the time. "He's worked very hard with different types of groups in town. He's a very religious kid and he leads our team in Bible discussions.

"He's been a very, very fine influence on a lot of people in a lot of different ways."

Ways that can't be found simply by looking at an SAT or ACT score.

There are likely more athletes like White out there. Now they might not get the break White did. That should be enough a reason to vote against Proposal 42.

Penn State's administrators apparently forgot about White and others like him when they cast their vote in favor of Proposal 42. It's a sense of self-righteousness that even appears to be reaching the field.

On Jan. 16, freshman quarterback Tony Sacca was quoted in The Daily Collegian as saying he favored Proposal 42.

"I guess it's a good idea . . . I never had to worry about it," he said. "It's just going to make it harder to get dumb people in, and we really don't need them anyway."

Sacca, it seems, has gotten caught up in the mentality passed down from the top of the athletic department. Unfortunately it's the wrong mentality, one that is only concerned with looking out for number one.

If it continues to persist, the powers that be may find themselves feeling awfully warm for January.

Hopefully, the brisk Happy Valley winds will lower the heat and cooler, more rational attitudes will prevail at a school that supposedly cares for the underprivileged.