What took Penn so long?

It was about 2 p.m. yesterday when I heard the news from a Penn athletic spokesman.

Despite the fact that the NFL had canceled its games this weekend, despite the fact that many big-time Division I-A conferences had canceled their games, despite the fact that Temple and UConn wouldn't be playing on Franklin Field as scheduled on Saturday...

Despite all that, the Quakers football team would still be playing visiting Lehigh on Saturday.

It was about 4:40 p.m. when I heard the news again, on a voicemail from the same spokesman.

The game was definitely on.

It was about 5:10 p.m. when I heard the news a third time, from the same spokesman.

Still playing. See you on Saturday night.

But then the NCAA made its announcement. All Division I-A college football games this weekend would be postponed.

Not coincidentally, I found out through a 6 p.m. phone call that Penn Athletic Director Steve Bilsky was in a meeting.

And at around 7 p.m., the decision was announced: Penn would be cancelling its athletic contests through Sunday.

That was, without a doubt, the correct decision.

But why didn't Penn make this decision earlier? Why did the Athletic Department send out a press release earlier in the day saying that virtually all Saturday and Sunday contests would be held as scheduled? Why did Bilsky and company wait until every major sport had decided to cancel its games before they followed suit?

I certainly realize that this is a difficult period, and I understand the argument that getting back to a routine and a normal life is an escape from these horrors, a part of moving on.

I understand that there are tough decisions to be made. But this was not one of them.

The NFL, a professional league, had decided not to hold games this weekend. Why would Penn, a team in a league that prides itself in realizing that athletics are not the top priority, even think of doing otherwise?

Granted, following the NFL's lead would be reactionary, but not as reactionary as what Penn ultimately did.

More importantly, though, why should that be a concern?

Thousands of lives were lost, millions of people were affected in one way or another. This was not the time to make a stand. Playing a Penn-Lehigh football game or a Penn-Harvard field hockey game would not prove anything.

And the Athletic Department had nothing to lose by postponing its games. With pro leagues and scores of other colleges cancelling competition through the weekend, who could possibly criticize a Division I-AA team for doing the same?

This was the time to err on the side of caution, to shrink the importance of sports down to practically nothing.

Yes, I know that some people wanted to play. I know that on Wednesday, Penn quarterback Gavin Hoffman called playing football "a good way for people to come together and sort of forget what happened for a couple hours."

Yes, Penn men's soccer coach Rudy Fuller told me that, "Obviously, any player wants to compete on any day."

But Fuller also told me that his team's thoughts have been elsewhere recently. And the Penn men's soccer team is certainly not alone.

How can we expect people to compete while the weight of this tragedy still hangs heavy?

And the winners of these contests, contests that will have a bearing on postseason berths and the like, will they be the teams that can cope best?

Is that really fair? Is that really appropriate?

Bilsky said that Penn discussed the possibility of cancellations with faculty and students throughout the day yesterday.

At just after 7 p.m., I began to wonder what there was to discuss.

As I write this last line at 11 p.m., I'm still wondering.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.