Author Topic: In retrospect what do you now think about the PSU scandal?  (Read 57495 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
This whole notion that (70 year old) football coaches are supposed to be great investigators of crime is one I have to resist a little. Was Belichick supposed to know all about Aaron Hernandez? If one of the coaches went to him and said "I think Aaron might have killed a guy" and then Bill went to Bob Kraft and said "One of my coaches thinks Aaron killed a guy" and then nothing happened would you all be calling for all Pats wins to be forfeited and Bill to be fired or go to jail and for the Pats to be fined $60 mill and have draft picks taken away for years? Kinda curious where New Englanders would stand on that one.

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30859
  • Tommy Points: 1327
This whole notion that (70 year old) football coaches are supposed to be great investigators of crime is one I have to resist a little. Was Belichick supposed to know all about Aaron Hernandez? If one of the coaches went to him and said "I think Aaron might have killed a guy in our facility" and then Bill went to Bob Kraft and said "One of my coaches thinks Aaron killed a guy in our showers" and then nothing happened would you all be calling for all Pats wins to be forfeited and Bill to be fired or go to jail and for the Pats to be fined $60 mill and have draft picks taken away for years? Kinda curious where New Englanders would stand on that one.
Edited your statement a bit for it to make a lick of sense. Oh and Bill would have to be a volunteer sheriff with mandatory reporting duties too.

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
This whole notion that (70 year old) football coaches are supposed to be great investigators of crime is one I have to resist a little. Was Belichick supposed to know all about Aaron Hernandez? If one of the coaches went to him and said "I think Aaron might have killed a guy in our facility" and then Bill went to Bob Kraft and said "One of my coaches thinks Aaron killed a guy in our showers" and then nothing happened would you all be calling for all Pats wins to be forfeited and Bill to be fired or go to jail and for the Pats to be fined $60 mill and have draft picks taken away for years? Kinda curious where New Englanders would stand on that one.
Edited your statement a bit for it to make a lick of sense. Oh and Bill would have to be a volunteer sheriff with mandatory reporting duties too.
My understanding is that the NCAA ...as a direct result of the PSU tragedy....issued new rules of conduct stating that if someone has something like this reported to them they have to report it to their supervisor.....just like JoePa did. So JoePa was punished for doing....exactly what they now say he is supposed to do...as a direct result of this incident.

So. So we now have in your scenario BB reporting immediately what he has heard to his owner about something in his facility and nothing happens. We now want BB sent to jail and his wins forfeited and the Pats severely punished. Hmmm. Yeah I don't believe it.

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
This whole notion that (70 year old) football coaches are supposed to be great investigators of crime is one I have to resist a little. Was Belichick supposed to know all about Aaron Hernandez? If one of the coaches went to him and said "I think Aaron might have killed a guy in our facility" and then Bill went to Bob Kraft and said "One of my coaches thinks Aaron killed a guy in our showers" and then nothing happened would you all be calling for all Pats wins to be forfeited and Bill to be fired or go to jail and for the Pats to be fined $60 mill and have draft picks taken away for years? Kinda curious where New Englanders would stand on that one.
Edited your statement a bit for it to make a lick of sense. Oh and Bill would have to be a volunteer sheriff with mandatory reporting duties too.
So just to make things make more licks of sense in the case where Bill goes to Bob and says "One of our coaches thinks Aaron killed a guy" ...in that case everything is fine. But in the case where he says "One of our coaches thinks Aaron killed a guy on our property".....well these things have to be treated really differently by the court of public opinion I guess. So the immediate answer in the future from someone like Bob Kraft has to be "Well. Wait a minute. Did it happen in our facility?"

Interesting all the things we've learned from recent NFL goings ons.

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30859
  • Tommy Points: 1327
You keep coming up with stranger and stranger hypothetical because dealing with the facts of the case are too [dang]ing for what you want I think.

I'm not entirely sure what you want, my guess is to not feel guilty about PSU and what they covered up. Don't worry you've pretty much talked yourself into it already, you'll get there.

You're right though there is similar evil out there, I'm sure NFL teams are aware of some dark stuff with their players too. The number of off-duty and ex-cops on their security staff who are on call by the players at any hour likely leads to gross things too.

But I don't think that should change how PSU is looked upon. The cry that since others have done similar things (without specifics) or could do similar wrongs hypothetically so I should get away with something you know I did doesn't ring true to me.

Neither does the idea that all crimes are equal, but again if you want to talk yourself into something you can.

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
You keep coming up with stranger and stranger hypothetical because dealing with the facts of the case are too [dang]ing for what you want I think.

I'm not entirely sure what you want, my guess is to not feel guilty about PSU and what they covered up. Don't worry you've pretty much talked yourself into it already, you'll get there.

You're right though there is similar evil out there, I'm sure NFL teams are aware of some dark stuff with their players too. The number of off-duty and ex-cops on their security staff who are on call by the players at any hour likely leads to gross things too.

But I don't think that should change how PSU is looked upon. The cry that since others have done similar things (without specifics) or could do similar wrongs hypothetically so I should get away with something you know I did doesn't ring true to me.

Neither does the idea that all crimes are equal, but again if you want to talk yourself into something you can.
To be more clear for the analogy challenged I definitely don't think all crimes are equal and I think guilt by association has its place in the world and that there won't be any shortage of faux outrage or hypocrisy any time soon.

I still think in all likelihood however that the three guys most responsible with the biggest mountain to climb here are the three guys actually facing charges. The DA said JoePa wasn't under any suspicion. I personally think he was trying to calm things (because JoePa was dead) and that in all likelihood JoePa would have faced charges had he been alive, but I only have what the DA says to go on.

I also find it very curious that the Paternos are suing the NCAA. I think that might end up being a trial for Joe. They seem very confident and I feel like we should pay attention to that as well.

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1155
  • Tommy Points: 208
This whole notion that (70 year old) football coaches are supposed to be great investigators of crime is one I have to resist a little. Was Belichick supposed to know all about Aaron Hernandez? If one of the coaches went to him and said "I think Aaron might have killed a guy" and then Bill went to Bob Kraft and said "One of my coaches thinks Aaron killed a guy" and then nothing happened would you all be calling for all Pats wins to be forfeited and Bill to be fired or go to jail and for the Pats to be fined $60 mill and have draft picks taken away for years? Kinda curious where New Englanders would stand on that one.
You may be taking a few liberties here and are at least stretching what I said a bit (and looking back at all the posts in this thread it looks like you may not disagree with me all that much...methinks you like to play devil's advocate and argue both sides).  Nobody said "football coaches are supposed to be great investigators of crime".  My point is that as a leader of men, especially with his sterling reputation, I would expect that after he told the AD etc that he was told that one of his former coaches was raping a child in the PSU facilities that he may just want to follow up on that...in fact I do not know how he could not follow up on it, particularly when he continued to see Sandusky in the facilities with other young boys.  As for the Belicheck references, if Dante Sarranchia came to him and told him that he thought he saw Romeo Crennel raping a young boy in the Patriots facility I would expect him to go to Kraft and the police and continue to follow up on it.  If he didn't and Crennel continues to rape then I would expect Belicheck's legacy and reputation to be tainted, I would hope he would be fired and I would be fine with the NFL handing down some significant penalties.
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

At the Bar: The Most Interesting Man in the World
At the Door:  Hugh Hefner
On Stage:  O.A.R., Louis C.K., EDGAR! Special Drinks:  Irish Car Bomb, Martinis On Tap: Lite, Beamish, 3 Floyds Seasonal, Chimay Grand Reserve, Spotted Cow

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
This whole notion that (70 year old) football coaches are supposed to be great investigators of crime is one I have to resist a little. Was Belichick supposed to know all about Aaron Hernandez? If one of the coaches went to him and said "I think Aaron might have killed a guy" and then Bill went to Bob Kraft and said "One of my coaches thinks Aaron killed a guy" and then nothing happened would you all be calling for all Pats wins to be forfeited and Bill to be fired or go to jail and for the Pats to be fined $60 mill and have draft picks taken away for years? Kinda curious where New Englanders would stand on that one.
You may be taking a few liberties here and are at least stretching what I said a bit (and looking back at all the posts in this thread it looks like you may not disagree with me all that much...methinks you like to play devil's advocate and argue both sides).  Nobody said "football coaches are supposed to be great investigators of crime".  My point is that as a leader of men, especially with his sterling reputation, I would expect that after he told the AD etc that he was told that one of his former coaches was raping a child in the PSU facilities that he may just want to follow up on that...in fact I do not know how he could not follow up on it, particularly when he continued to see Sandusky in the facilities with other young boys.  As for the Belicheck references, if Dante Sarranchia came to him and told him that he thought he saw Romeo Crennel raping a young boy in the Patriots facility I would expect him to go to Kraft and the police and continue to follow up on it.  If he didn't and Crennel continues to rape then I would expect Belicheck's legacy and reputation to be tainted, I would hope he would be fired and I would be fine with the NFL handing down some significant penalties.
Wait wait wait. You mean you actually understood that analogy and had an answer for it? Wow. Well that's pretty good.

Does anyone know if Joe or anyone was ever asked under oath if he followed up? Or if they followed up with him?  Things just aren't adding up to me. I'm under the impression Freeh came to the conclusion through emails that Joe did follow up and they decided not to go to the police as a result. Yet here we have Dan Patrick and others saying to give Joe wins back and we have the NCAA backing down. I haven't followed this perfectly. I'm just guessing people have realized maybe Freeh's reports has some flaws and maybe something else I don't realize.

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1155
  • Tommy Points: 208

Wait wait wait. You mean you actually understood that analogy and had an answer for it? Wow. Well that's pretty good.

Does anyone know if Joe or anyone was ever asked under oath if he followed up? Or if they followed up with him?  Things just aren't adding up to me. I'm under the impression Freeh came to the conclusion through emails that Joe did follow up and they decided not to go to the police as a result. Yet here we have Dan Patrick and others saying to give Joe wins back and we have the NCAA backing down. I haven't followed this perfectly. I'm just guessing people have realized maybe Freeh's reports has some flaws and maybe something else I don't realize.
No, I do not know that he was ever asked under oath.  Perhaps he was and perhaps he did.  If so, he never should have been fired (or forced to resign or whatever it was) and never should have vacated his wins.  That may be how it actually went down.  I do not buy that though as I would imagine that with as many JoePa supporters are out there that they would have been shouting that from the rooftops and showing that proof to everyone and I have not seen any such proof.  Again, I am not trying to lambast JoePa, I just do not understand how in the world he could not and would not do a little followup regarding such serious allegations (if in fact he did not follow up).
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

At the Bar: The Most Interesting Man in the World
At the Door:  Hugh Hefner
On Stage:  O.A.R., Louis C.K., EDGAR! Special Drinks:  Irish Car Bomb, Martinis On Tap: Lite, Beamish, 3 Floyds Seasonal, Chimay Grand Reserve, Spotted Cow

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254

Wait wait wait. You mean you actually understood that analogy and had an answer for it? Wow. Well that's pretty good.

Does anyone know if Joe or anyone was ever asked under oath if he followed up? Or if they followed up with him?  Things just aren't adding up to me. I'm under the impression Freeh came to the conclusion through emails that Joe did follow up and they decided not to go to the police as a result. Yet here we have Dan Patrick and others saying to give Joe wins back and we have the NCAA backing down. I haven't followed this perfectly. I'm just guessing people have realized maybe Freeh's reports has some flaws and maybe something else I don't realize.
No, I do not know that he was ever asked under oath.  Perhaps he was and perhaps he did.  If so, he never should have been fired (or forced to resign or whatever it was) and never should have vacated his wins.  That may be how it actually went down.  I do not buy that though as I would imagine that with as many JoePa supporters are out there that they would have been shouting that from the rooftops and showing that proof to everyone and I have not seen any such proof.  Again, I am not trying to lambast JoePa, I just do not understand how in the world he could not and would not do a little followup regarding such serious allegations (if in fact he did not follow up).
I completely agree. That's where it gets so odd. It's like either he/they made a conscious choice not to report this or follow up and the evidence is minimal leading the DA to say Joe isn't a suspect (and I just find it hard to believe all these guys thought they'd never get caught and didn't see how illegal and wrong it was), or they did follow up but are waiting for trials to say so and prove it, so have just unnecessarily lived as the major social pariahs of our time, thereby allowing their school and Joe to get trashed and punished.
It just doesn't add up either way to me.  I would think they must have followed up on some level. There must have been some confrontation with Jerry or something. They must have gotten horrid advice from a legal department or the police or something and everyone is claming up because it looks even dumber. I just can't believe they wouldn't have wanted to know the truth, or would have known the horrid truth and knowingly done nothing knowing what was going on. Nobody in their right mind would continuously allow the guy around with more kids if they didn't feel ok on some level. Too many people knew. How do you cover up an extremely serious thing that half a dozen people know about? The kid himself could go to the police at any moment? How do you sleep?  In my town you can't get a beer without people knowing.
This is why I want the trials to proceed. Too many questions still.

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
http://onwardstate.com/2014/11/13/espns-outside-the-lines-discusses-paterno-legacy/

So I guess according to Jay Paterno there were "only two incidents were ever brought to the attention of anyone in the university’s athletic department, and both were reported to someone outside the university."

I never heard that before.

Also....Jay Paterno also mentioned how it would have been illegal for his father to follow-up with the investigation, according to Pennsylvania law.

“He did not just do what was legally required of him, he did the maximum of what he was allowed to do at that time,”



Yeah, I don't know. Looking forward to trials and whatnot.

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 36776
  • Tommy Points: 2961
I guess they ll think about it ....before they go raising any new statues in his honor... :-X

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1155
  • Tommy Points: 208
http://onwardstate.com/2014/11/13/espns-outside-the-lines-discusses-paterno-legacy/

So I guess according to Jay Paterno there were "only two incidents were ever brought to the attention of anyone in the university’s athletic department, and both were reported to someone outside the university."

I never heard that before.

Also....Jay Paterno also mentioned how it would have been illegal for his father to follow-up with the investigation, according to Pennsylvania law.

“He did not just do what was legally required of him, he did the maximum of what he was allowed to do at that time,”



Yeah, I don't know. Looking forward to trials and whatnot.
It always bothered me the way Jay Paterno would refer to his dad as "Joe".  It just came across as off to me.  Also, I would not put much stock in anything Jay Paterno says.
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

At the Bar: The Most Interesting Man in the World
At the Door:  Hugh Hefner
On Stage:  O.A.R., Louis C.K., EDGAR! Special Drinks:  Irish Car Bomb, Martinis On Tap: Lite, Beamish, 3 Floyds Seasonal, Chimay Grand Reserve, Spotted Cow

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
I missed this when it came out in November apparently.  Confirms what I always suspected, the NCAA had no real grounds or jurisdiction to do anything to Penn State.

http://onwardstate.com/2014/11/05/internal-emails-show-ncaa-questioned-jurisdiction-over-penn-state/

Quote
“We could try to assert jurisdiction on this issue and may be successful but it’d be a stretch,” wrote former NCAA Vice President of Enforcement Julie Roe in an email on July 14, 10 days before the sanctions were announced. “I characterized our approach to PSU as a bluff when talking to Mark [Emmert] yesterday afternoon after the call. He basically agreed b/c if we make this an enforcement issue, we may win the immediate battle but lose the war when the COI [Committee on Infractions] has to rule.”

Quote
“I know we are banking on the fact the school is so embarrassed they will do anything, but I am not sure about that, and no confidence conference or other members will agree to that,” wrote NCAA Vice President of Academic and Membership Affairs Kevin Lennon on the same day. “This will force the jurisdictional issue that we really don’t have a great answer to that one…”

Quote
“I think Mark believes based on conversations with some presidents that PSU did gain an advantage although Berst, Wally and I disagree with that point,” Roe wrote. “The point some have made is that had PSU dealt with this in 2001, they might have suffered a recruiting disadvantage due to the bad publicity at that point. Given that they have a decent recruiting class now, not sure this holds up.”

Quote
“Delicate issue, but how did PSU gain a competitive advantage by what happened?” Lennon wrote. “Even if discovered, reported, and actions taken immediately by the administration, not sure how this would have changed anything from a competitive advantage perspective.”
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
I have no respect for Joe Paterno.  This is a guy who, during a press conference, joked that he had to, "go home and beat his wife," which, incredibly, was met with much laughter from the press corps.  You don't joke about stuff like that.  Ever.  So, yeah - Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline. that guy.