CelticsStrong
Other Discussions => Other / General Sports => Patriots / Football => Topic started by: Eja117 on January 14, 2015, 08:58:37 AM
-
I am deeeeffffinitely not here to stick up for JoePa. Or PSU.
This is my problem. My facebook feed is just absolutely full of PSU stuff alllll the time and has been for years. A LOT of PSU alumni are just unwilling for the school or football team (and CERTAINLY not JoePa) to take ANY blame. They just completely deny that the school should have been punished. It's actually hard to sort out.
I just need some sort of non PSU reality check.
It seems the PSU main contentions are something like....
PSU didn't have a culture problem at any level and doesn't now. A few guys made some mistakes perhaps out of ignorance or well meaningly. Sandusky fooled the whole world for many years and these guys aren't investigators.
McQueery wasn't the most trustable guy (I find this argument absurd).
JoePa did exactly what he was supposed to do, which was put it in the hands of his superiors almost immediately, get out of the way, and let them do their job. What he did is exactly what the NCAA now recommends all employees do. (Technically true, but at least slightly self serving). JoePa never got due process and now the world is free to take shots at him because he's dead.
The Freeh report is totally bogus from top to bottom. You can't trust Freeh to pour a glass of water let alone do a report like this. The entire report was just the BOT cyaing and he was paid to do that and that alone. It wasn't about the truth. He didn't even interview the people involved.
The NCAA punishments were just about taking money from PSU and they themselves have had to admit they bluffed and probably didn't have jurisdiction. We're gonna get the money and the wins back.
The only reason the rest of the world gets the sense that PSU has admitted blame is because the BOT is so dysfunctional that they backed down as quickly as possible, largely to avoid the football death penalty. In the chaos that ensued it was very difficult to ascertain any truth, and rather than try to find it there was just a rush to judgement.
That is the bubble I have been living in for years now. Does the rest of the world buy any of these arguments? I do think the BOT is full of liars that knew about this way ahead of time. I do think the Freeh report should be strongly questioned. I do think the NCAA is dysfunctional and used this as an opportunity to bolster themselves and grab some cash, as did the Big Ten. I am still waiting for various law suits to sort some of this out.
But I still think people have to go to jail for what they did and didn't do. Stories don't add up. I thought the rest of the world had generally settled on a version of "PSU fudged up. Got caught. Got a fair punishment".
But did I miss something? Is the rest of the world coming around to PSU's line of thinking? I went to an MSNBC poll the other day and like 96% of thousands of people thought JoePa should get his wins back. I couldn't believe that.
What is the evolving public perception of all this now?
-
Seeee...this is what I'm talking about. Dan Patrick saying the wins should be given back? Whhhaaaaaa?
To me the only way that can happen is if it's shown JoePa is largely innocent in the whole deal and I don't think that can shown at this time.
http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/13/dan-patrick-ncaa-should-give-joe-paternos-victories-back/
-
I think they should 'give the victories back to his family' with an asterisk that says "By the way, this guy let his assistant bang kids in the team shower. Go Lions."
-
http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/forfeiting-wins-was-never-a-fitting-punishment-for-penn-state/ar-AA87Stx
Here's sort of another example.
Are people's minds actually changing? If so why?
-
I think they should 'give the victories back to his family' with an asterisk that says "By the way, this guy let his assistant bang kids in the team shower. Go Lions."
I don't think it's so much "this guy" as it is "the head of PSU police, the president, and athletic director" but he definitely could have said "I trust my old QB. I don't want that guy around my program."
The argument makes no sense to me. Either you have a person on your staff telling viscous lies (McQueery) or you have someone breaking some pretty important laws at your facility. You'd want to know which so you could deal with it. You wouldn't throw up your hands and be like "Iiiiiiii don't know! Whatever!"
-
See, I actually don't think that's the case. My suspicion is that Paterno ignored/never followed up on what was happening with Sandusky in order to focus on football. He washed his hands of it as quickly as possible with the most token effort in order to pay attention to what was happening on the gridiron.
Eff that. People are trying to get the wins reinstated because they want to brag about their alma mater, by the way, and because they don't really care about Sandusky (or child abuse) either.
-
See, I actually don't think that's the case. My suspicion is that Paterno ignored/never followed up on what was happening with Sandusky in order to focus on football. He washed his hands of it as quickly as possible with the most token effort in order to pay attention to what was happening on the gridiron.
Eff that. People are trying to get the wins reinstated because they want to brag about their alma mater, by the way, and because they don't really care about Sandusky (or child abuse) either.
Yeah I could see that point of view.
At best you have to come to this conclusion that JoePa lacked a tremendous amount of common sense and just trusted others to do their jobs and do the right thing and then was so naive that he just neeevvverr asked the most basic questions like "Hey. That old thing was just a bunch of confusion or something eh?" And then they were like "Just some weird confusion Joe!" I mean come on. The guy may have been nice and trusting, but that's just absurd.
But then you have to ALSO believe that he never told anyone (like under oath or something) that he was informed about it. Just nuts.
-
If PSU wants to pretend that JoePa was innocent and all that then fine...I can give em that. But then guys like the president and the head of the PSU police have to go to jail. And they never say that. Like just nobody is responsible on any level.
PSU doesn't exactly love those guys but they aren't exactly pointing fingers at them either. I think they're waiting for the results of the perjury trials.
If they lose they'll say "Seeeee. It was thooossse guys. Not JoePa! The DA saaaiiid JoePa wasn't under any suspicion."
If they win they'll say "Seeeee. Nobody at PSU did anything wrong. Sandusky fooled evvvveerryoone."
-
Maybe guys like Dan Patrick are just saying give back the wins because forgiveness is popular or something now.
I'm just not aware of any new info that should matter. Other than the NCAA is full of it, but we already knew that.
-
If PSU wants to pretend that JoePa was innocent and all that then fine...I can give em that. But then guys like the president and the head of the PSU police have to go to jail. And they never say that. Like just nobody is responsible on any level.
PSU doesn't exactly love those guys but they aren't exactly pointing fingers at them either. I think they're waiting for the results of the perjury trials.
If they lose they'll say "Seeeee. It was thooossse guys. Not JoePa! The DA saaaiiid JoePa wasn't under any suspicion."
If they win they'll say "Seeeee. Nobody at PSU did anything wrong. Sandusky fooled evvvveerryoone."
I agree with this.
-
I never felt the punishment fit the crime. It wasn't a football thing and shouldn't have affected the football program. In fact I think had PSU challenged it they would have won in Court as this sort of thing falls outside the purview of the NCAA. Felt that way from the beginning. Also felt that everyone should have been fired and a clean slate was the way to go.
For the record I feel the same way about the NFL and the off field stuff. Shouldn't be suspended for things you do off the field unless it affects you on the field (though feel the team should be able to do what they want i.e. NFL shouldn't suspend Ray Rice, but the Ravens could certainly cut him).
Sports sanctioning bodies shouldn't be morality police, they should police the field and the things that affect the field. Period. The PSU scandal had nothing to do with the field, competition, etc. and as such the NCAA had no business doing anything about it.
-
I never felt the punishment fit the crime. It wasn't a football thing and shouldn't have affected the football program. In fact I think had PSU challenged it they would have won in Court as this sort of thing falls outside the purview of the NCAA. Felt that way from the beginning. Also felt that everyone should have been fired and a clean slate was the way to go.
For the record I feel the same way about the NFL and the off field stuff. Shouldn't be suspended for things you do off the field unless it affects you on the field (though feel the team should be able to do what they want i.e. NFL shouldn't suspend Ray Rice, but the Ravens could certainly cut him).
Sports sanctioning bodies shouldn't be morality police, they should police the field and the things that affect the field. Period. The PSU scandal had nothing to do with the field, competition, etc. and as such the NCAA had no business doing anything about it.
Especially in the NFL those suspensions are about "protecting the brand" far more than morality. I don't think the NFL gives a crap about protecting women despite the pink gloves once a year. It was just a PR move.
-
I definitely don't think the NCAA or the NFL or NBA cares about women or issues but I think they shooouullld and I can't really blame them for attempting to appear like they do once in a while.
But I admit I would have preferred the actual people involved to be punished instead of the athletes playing years after what happened.
-
I agree with the three of you for the most part, but I very heavily disagree that the Sandusky thing wasn't involved with football, insofar as I don't think the blind eye is turned if he isn't involved with the beloved sports program, which carries a (frankly disgusting) amount of weight in that community.
Does that mean the NCAA should have been involved? There's merit to both sides.
-
I agree, but it's also a little disgusting the world wouldn't care about it otherwise. If a top legendary physics prof at MIT did this would they cut physics scholarships there? Fine MIT physics? It wouldn't have made much of a dent in the news anyway
-
I think it kinda sucked that Joe Paterno died soon after the whole thing unraveled and the world to blame without knowing his 'side'. He really did do what he was supposed to, but I also think he was an old guy that just didn't want to get into that sort of thing and certainly didn't understand it - plus, his focus was on football.
Could he have done more follow-up? Sure, but it wasn't really for him to decide. To say that his entire career was pretty much non-existent just because he had an assistant coach who was a horrible person isn't really fair.
And I have not changed my stance on this at all. I would probably have things to say about Donald Sterling. The fact is, not everything is black and white.
-
See, I actually don't think that's the case. My suspicion is that Paterno ignored/never followed up on what was happening with Sandusky in order to focus on football. He washed his hands of it as quickly as possible with the most token effort in order to pay attention to what was happening on the gridiron.
Eff that. People are trying to get the wins reinstated because they want to brag about their alma mater, by the way, and because they don't really care about Sandusky (or child abuse) either.
Yup. People tend to attack the "process" when in reality they don't like the result. They want Penn St. "back" to what it was. Having a successful "amateur" football program is more important than any victims, deterence, or future issues.
It was covered up and ignored because they didn't want to hurt football or their own view of the world. Its a pretty common response to abuse in a family, denial/dismissal. In this case it was the "family" of a football program and university. Since the president et all have a legal duty to report and protect in this situation they need to go to jail.
I am puzzled that this dynamic isn't pretty well recognized at this point, but sports is an insular world and the NCAA is greatly disliked.
-
I think it kinda sucked that Joe Paterno died soon after the whole thing unraveled and the world to blame without knowing his 'side'. He really did do what he was supposed to, but I also think he was an old guy that just didn't want to get into that sort of thing and certainly didn't understand it - plus, his focus was on football.
Could he have done more follow-up? Sure, but it wasn't really for him to decide. To say that his entire career was pretty much non-existent just because he had an assistant coach who was a horrible person isn't really fair.
And I have not changed my stance on this at all. I would probably have things to say about Donald Sterling. The fact is, not everything is black and white.
"Did everything he was supposed to do." What a great "leader of men" and "molder of men" I guess....
I care not one whit that he doesn't have a record in a dusty tome.
-
See, I actually don't think that's the case. My suspicion is that Paterno ignored/never followed up on what was happening with Sandusky in order to focus on football. He washed his hands of it as quickly as possible with the most token effort in order to pay attention to what was happening on the gridiron.
Eff that. People are trying to get the wins reinstated because they want to brag about their alma mater, by the way, and because they don't really care about Sandusky (or child abuse) either.
Yup. People tend to attack the "process" when in reality they don't like the result. They want Penn St. "back" to what it was. Having a successful "amateur" football program is more important than any victims, deterence, or future issues.
It was covered up and ignored because they didn't want to hurt football or their own view of the world. Its a pretty common response to abuse in a family, denial/dismissal. In this case it was the "family" of a football program and university. Since the president et all have a legal duty to report and protect in this situation they need to go to jail.
I am puzzled that this dynamic isn't pretty well recognized at this point, but sports is an insular world and the NCAA is greatly disliked.
I'd also agree with this.
Football came before child abuse in this instance. And there were multiple people at Penn State culpable here. It's pretty sickening.
-
I mean do people really think athletes getting into easy courses, having grades fixed, having tickets and court cases "disappear", and get all the other perks and privledges isn't a part of the athletic machine? That's all handled on a largely unofficial level, but it is a real thing. Why would the misdeeds of a prominent coach not recieve similar protection?
I don't really care one way or the other about penn states records, but I really don't buy into the "don't punish the current kids". The issue is not the individual actors but the systemic pressures and incentives.
-
One thing that's pretty sad is that for many years towards the end JoePa was barely coaching the team. Barely made decisions. Knew his players and all that, but just was not coaching at all. He was old and tired and not capable. But he loved what he did and was a legend and was worth the most to PSU on the sideline. But PSU would not want that getting out. I guess they want you to think he was a spry guy with lots of energy who just suddenly died.
You can't have it both ways. Either he was an old man with little grasp of the facts....who was barely coaching (admit it) orrrr he was mentally alert and on top of it and totally responsible for his actions and inactions.
You can't have it both ways and tell me he's a genius energetic football coach, but also a tired broken down man who just didn't have it in him to follow up on something pretty important in his midst.
One or the other
-
I think his reputation is tarnished. It already was in my book as he stayed too long and the game passed him up. Great coach in his prime but staying too long and this scandal will hurt his legacy.
I think if I was notified of such a matter, I would watch the person like a hawk. Also, I would have reported it to the local authorities as well as the college chain of command. This would include the police and the Department of Jobs and Family Services which investigate incidents of child abuse. I would have sent staff out in buddy teams from that point on. No more Jerry on the loose, he would be accompanied by another staff. But I would do that to all staff to protect the children and also protect the staff from allegations.
I don't know if any of these steps were taken. If he missed any of them it was mishandled. Here is what wikipedia had, not that it makes it credible but if it is true, then it was badly handled.
According to the first indictment, in 2002 assistant coach Mike McQueary, then a Penn State graduate assistant,[41] said he walked in on Sandusky anally raping a ten-year-old boy. The next day, McQueary reported the incident to head coach Joe Paterno. (Later while testifying during the Sandusky trial, McQueary spoke about what he had relayed to Paterno: "I told him and I want to make sure I'm clear. I made sure he knew it was sexual and wrong. There was no doubt.")[42] Paterno told McQueary at the time, “You did what you had to do. It is my job now to figure out what we want to do.”[43] At the Preliminary Hearing for Tim Curley and Gary Shultz, McQueary testified that Paterno was "shocked and saddened, kind of slumped back on his chair." He said that Paterno told him: "I'm sorry you had to see that. It's terrible. And he said, I need to think and tell some people about what you saw and I'll let you know what...what we'll do next."[44] Paterno then informed Penn State athletic director Tim Curley. At the Preliminary Hearing, McQueary also testified that he "believed" Sandusky was having "some type of intercourse" with the boy. He said that this was based on "the positioning" of Sandusky and the boy, but that he never saw "insertion" or "penetration" and is not "100 percent sure" that intercourse was occurring.[45]
Curley and senior vice president for finance and business Gary Schultz (who oversaw the Penn State police department) called McQueary to a meeting a week and a half later.[46] During the meeting McQueary said that he relayed in "graphic detail" what he had witnessed in the locker-room showers at the Lasch Building. At the Preliminary Hearing of Curley and Shultz, McQueary testified that he would have given Curley and Shultz a "rough idea" of the body positions of the individuals in the shower, and would have described the activity as "extremely sexual and I thought some kind of intercourse was going on."[47]
The indictment accused Curley and Schultz not only of failing to tell the police, but also of falsely telling the grand jury that McQueary never informed them of the alleged sexual activity.[48]
The one which got him caught.
An investigation was initiated by the Pennsylvania attorney general’s office into sexual abuse allegations against Sandusky in 2008. The charges were initiated at Central Mountain High School, where a student made allegations of abuse against Sandusky.[35] The investigation reached a new level of urgency when it became apparent that the allegations were not an isolated set of incidents, but that Sandusky had a strategy to cull vulnerable boys (whom he would first approach when they were 8–12 years-old) through the Second Mile organization, targeting his potential victims at will (boys tended to be from homes without a father present), at which point Sandusky employed classic child grooming strategies (offering trips to football games, gifts — leading to incremental touching). This form of manipulation is generally the modus operandi of pedophiles as a ploy to build trust while invading personal boundaries — all part of instilling confusion, leading up to and part of the sexual abuse (Sandusky often initiated overtly sexual behavior in the locker room showers). "The testimony of one victim who said he was forced to put his hand on Sandusky’s erection when he was 8 to 10 years old particularly outraged investigators. 'The poor kid was too young to even understand what an erection was,' one said."[36
Note, it was not Penn State, that initiated this investigation, but rather a high school, Central Mountain High School this was the one that stopped Sandusky's acts of molestation. The NCAA should not be the sole investigator of a crime as they have a vested interest in the money involved.
It is a reality that jocks and coaches if they are good get a lot more leeway than normal folks. I got drunk in the service, broke a brick wall with a punch and ripped a door off it's hinges and I got off scott free because I was the Center of the Army Post basketball team, the Sergeant Major was my coach who was to discipline me, I got told never to do it again, which I did not. But I am sure if was not scoring 27 ppg, that I would have got thrown out of the service. This was small fry stuff, imagine a program like Penn State where they approach dietyhood in PA. It is not right, I later declined promotion in the service because I didn't think it was right to be promoted just because I could ball it up. I also, got to go home on leave once during a leave freeze during Desert Storm. My Commander told me if we won the tourney he would validate my leave, I scored 25 a game and I got to go home and get married but it was conditional. I imagine at Penn State and every college there is stuff like this going on.
While, I think they mishandled this on many levels, part of me thinks it is even less fair, that players got punished for something they did not do. I hate seeing a Coach like Calipari walk and the program punished. I 'd rather see a huge fine than to punish those who are left.
-
I mean do people really think athletes getting into easy courses, having grades fixed, having tickets and court cases "disappear", and get all the other perks and privledges isn't a part of the athletic machine? That's all handled on a largely unofficial level, but it is a real thing. Why would the misdeeds of a prominent coach not recieve similar protection?
I don't really care one way or the other about penn states records, but I really don't buy into the "don't punish the current kids". The issue is not the individual actors but the systemic pressures and incentives.
Woah woah woah. I gotta disagree. Giving a kid a class in basketweaving is not at all the same as protecting a Sandusky. You don't go to jail for an easy class.
And this again is a place where PSU's perception breaks down. They want to be known as this world class facility that gets its players an education (basically true) but then also want you to think that just accidents happen and these guys running the place weren't sure what to do and Sandusky fooled em.
If I'm PSU I'm going with...JoePa immediately did what he was supposed to do, then got out of the way and entrusted a world class facility to do their jobs and only inform him on the minimum that he needed to know because he respected the privacy of possible victims and staff.
The football team and school shouldn't be punished for a crime they didn't commit.
The president and AD and whatnot should probably go to jail or something.
The police dropped the ball the first time and this could have been dealt with then.
Don't believe the Freeh report because it's basically bogus.
Wait for the trial.
And that's as far as I could even possibly try to go. And they aren't doing that. It's all woe is us. No. Woe are the victims.
-
I mean do people really think athletes getting into easy courses, having grades fixed, having tickets and court cases "disappear", and get all the other perks and privledges isn't a part of the athletic machine? That's all handled on a largely unofficial level, but it is a real thing. Why would the misdeeds of a prominent coach not recieve similar protection?
I don't really care one way or the other about penn states records, but I really don't buy into the "don't punish the current kids". The issue is not the individual actors but the systemic pressures and incentives.
Woah woah woah. I gotta disagree. Giving a kid a class in basketweaving is not at all the same as protecting a Sandusky. You don't go to jail for an easy class.
If you want to pick an example from those 5 to compare perhaps not going with the easiest instance would be better? The comparable instance for this case is when players have serious criminal charges made to disappear, which has happened repeatedly and recently across the country.
You do go to jail for assault, sexual assualt, reckless driving, and the like frequently. But if an athlete at a power program gets into any of those situations they largely go away with maybe maybe probation or a warning. Happens all the dang time.
-
In the PSU thread at the time, I posed the question, say Sandusky was not a child molester but was a con man running scams. Did the same type of things, used PSU and the football program to lure people in, got them to invest, and basically stole their money. Do you have the same gut reaction? Does the NCAA do the same thing? There was a mix of reactions. To me that says, it is more the type of crime that had people up in arms not the actual act. Because the crimes were so grotesque, people reacted more harshly. In other words, emotion played too large a role. There should be no emotion.
Also, it should be noted that the incident McQueary spoke of, was one of the few indictments in which Sandusky was found not guilty. Maybe not quite so cut and dry afterall.
-
My biggest problem with the how everything went down is how they crippled that program, and hurt kids that didn't deserve it. What did the kids do to deserve to have a a few season of medicroity based on no bowls, limited practice, scholarships cut in half. That's not fair. Put the criminals in jail and make PSU pay a HUGE fine. Something insane like 10mill.
-
My biggest problem with the how everything went down is how they crippled that program, and hurt kids that didn't deserve it. What did the kids do to deserve to have a a few season of medicroity based on no bowls, limited practice, scholarships cut in half. That's not fair. Put the criminals in jail and make PSU pay a HUGE fine. Something insane like 10mill.
'Hurt kids that didn't deserve it' seems to be, in most cases, coded language for 'hurt a fanbase that didn't deserve it.' I sincerely doubt many people are really all that concerned with the future and well being of the Lion's football players beyond their capacity to put on the right colored laundry.
-
My biggest problem with the how everything went down is how they crippled that program, and hurt kids that didn't deserve it. What did the kids do to deserve to have a a few season of medicroity based on no bowls, limited practice, scholarships cut in half. That's not fair. Put the criminals in jail and make PSU pay a HUGE fine. Something insane like 10mill.
'Hurt kids that didn't deserve it' seems to be, in most cases, coded language for 'hurt a fanbase that didn't deserve it.' I sincerely doubt many people are really all that concerned with the future and well being of the Lion's football players beyond their capacity to put on the right colored laundry.
The kids were also given the opportunity to transfer and play immediately at another school without having to sit out a year.
The school made the bed but those who remained behind chose to sleep it in. They knew the sanctions. It's unfortunate but there was an opt out available.
-
I mean do people really think athletes getting into easy courses, having grades fixed, having tickets and court cases "disappear", and get all the other perks and privledges isn't a part of the athletic machine? That's all handled on a largely unofficial level, but it is a real thing. Why would the misdeeds of a prominent coach not recieve similar protection?
I don't really care one way or the other about penn states records, but I really don't buy into the "don't punish the current kids". The issue is not the individual actors but the systemic pressures and incentives.
Woah woah woah. I gotta disagree. Giving a kid a class in basketweaving is not at all the same as protecting a Sandusky. You don't go to jail for an easy class.
If you want to pick an example from those 5 to compare perhaps not going with the easiest instance would be better? The comparable instance for this case is when players have serious criminal charges made to disappear, which has happened repeatedly and recently across the country.
You do go to jail for assault, sexual assualt, reckless driving, and the like frequently. But if an athlete at a power program gets into any of those situations they largely go away with maybe maybe probation or a warning. Happens all the dang time.
That's all true, although to be fair (don't know if this will make you feel better or worse) I have definitely in my own community seen things just go away and not because people were rich or connected. They just carry on with no finding and it just drags out. They don't have to show up at probation hearings or take their court ordered drug test. Sometimes it's just a joke. Community service or some such stupid thing.
Drives the police nuts because they have to work very hard in some cases to make an arrest and build a case and then just nothing
-
My biggest problem with the how everything went down is how they crippled that program, and hurt kids that didn't deserve it. What did the kids do to deserve to have a a few season of medicroity based on no bowls, limited practice, scholarships cut in half. That's not fair. Put the criminals in jail and make PSU pay a HUGE fine. Something insane like 10mill.
'Hurt kids that didn't deserve it' seems to be, in most cases, coded language for 'hurt a fanbase that didn't deserve it.' I sincerely doubt many people are really all that concerned with the future and well being of the Lion's football players beyond their capacity to put on the right colored laundry.
The kids were also given the opportunity to transfer and play immediately at another school without having to sit out a year.
The school made the bed but those who remained behind chose to sleep it in. They knew the sanctions. It's unfortunate but there was an opt out available.
I agree a lot of fans care about themselves in this case, but they definitely care about the kids too. Would you ever tell your kid "Well. Son. Someone you know at your school committed a crime, so I tell ya what I'm gonna do. You have two options. You could go to a school you didn't want to go to or you can keep going to the school you're at now, but I'm gonna find ways to make it way less rewarding an experience".
A lot of those kids grew up wanting to play nowhere else. The captain in particular was a legacy through his father and the family was the happiest family on Earth when he committed. Kids that grew up in PA and felt they were living the dream. Sure they would get educations as well.
I mean it worked out great for some of the players. Two of them transferred to Cal and USC (also excellent schools), but a lot of them didn't want to.
-
A lot of PSU fans sort of have a persecution complex and feel like the NCAA has a history of picking on them and feel like because they were a top squeaky clean program people were more than delighted to come down on them.
They point to all sorts of other schools problems and say "So who has the culture problem"?
It's not going to work. If you think you're so great hold yourself to the highest standards. Take things as seriously as possible. I think this is a little why the alums are so mad at the BOT. They just came off as completely incompetent at everything they're supposed to do....knowing what's going on, sticking up for the school, etc
-
My biggest problem with the how everything went down is how they crippled that program, and hurt kids that didn't deserve it. What did the kids do to deserve to have a a few season of medicroity based on no bowls, limited practice, scholarships cut in half. That's not fair. Put the criminals in jail and make PSU pay a HUGE fine. Something insane like 10mill.
'Hurt kids that didn't deserve it' seems to be, in most cases, coded language for 'hurt a fanbase that didn't deserve it.' I sincerely doubt many people are really all that concerned with the future and well being of the Lion's football players beyond their capacity to put on the right colored laundry.
The kids were also given the opportunity to transfer and play immediately at another school without having to sit out a year.
The school made the bed but those who remained behind chose to sleep it in. They knew the sanctions. It's unfortunate but there was an opt out available.
I agree a lot of fans care about themselves in this case, but they definitely care about the kids too. Would you ever tell your kid "Well. Son. Someone you know at your school committed a crime, so I tell ya what I'm gonna do. You have two options. You could go to a school you didn't want to go to or you can keep going to the school you're at now, but I'm gonna find ways to make it way less rewarding an experience".
A lot of those kids grew up wanting to play nowhere else. The captain in particular was a legacy through his father and the family was the happiest family on Earth when he committed. Kids that grew up in PA and felt they were living the dream. Sure they would get educations as well.
I mean it worked out great for some of the players. Two of them transferred to Cal and USC (also excellent schools), but a lot of them didn't want to.
It's a tough situation (and bad timing) especially for the legacy kids but no one was putting a gun to their head to stay there so I have a tough time sympathizing with the whole idea of it "hurting the current players". Now if the NCAA hadn't offered the immediate transfer thing, I could look at things in a different light. I just don't buy the whole "poor kids" argument, though. Their school screwed up bad but an exit clause was available.
-
My biggest problem with the how everything went down is how they crippled that program, and hurt kids that didn't deserve it. What did the kids do to deserve to have a a few season of medicroity based on no bowls, limited practice, scholarships cut in half. That's not fair. Put the criminals in jail and make PSU pay a HUGE fine. Something insane like 10mill.
'Hurt kids that didn't deserve it' seems to be, in most cases, coded language for 'hurt a fanbase that didn't deserve it.' I sincerely doubt many people are really all that concerned with the future and well being of the Lion's football players beyond their capacity to put on the right colored laundry.
The kids were also given the opportunity to transfer and play immediately at another school without having to sit out a year.
The school made the bed but those who remained behind chose to sleep it in. They knew the sanctions. It's unfortunate but there was an opt out available.
I agree a lot of fans care about themselves in this case, but they definitely care about the kids too. Would you ever tell your kid "Well. Son. Someone you know at your school committed a crime, so I tell ya what I'm gonna do. You have two options. You could go to a school you didn't want to go to or you can keep going to the school you're at now, but I'm gonna find ways to make it way less rewarding an experience".
A lot of those kids grew up wanting to play nowhere else. The captain in particular was a legacy through his father and the family was the happiest family on Earth when he committed. Kids that grew up in PA and felt they were living the dream. Sure they would get educations as well.
I mean it worked out great for some of the players. Two of them transferred to Cal and USC (also excellent schools), but a lot of them didn't want to.
It's a tough situation (and bad timing) especially for the legacy kids but no one was putting a gun to their head to stay there so I have a tough time sympathizing with the whole idea of it "hurting the current players". Now if the NCAA hadn't offered the immediate transfer thing, I could look at things in a different light. I just don't buy the whole "poor kids" argument, though. Their school screwed up bad but an exit clause was available.
It's the least of anybody's problems.
I would be a liar if I didn't admit I have been known to dance with glee when maybe a Miami or an Ohio State or a USC gets similar sanctions for lesser problems.
-
I'm willing to sacrifice the legacy kid's situation because their school willingly overlooked pedophilia as to keep their football program intact.
Doesn't move my moral/ethical barometer one iota, actually. If I found out my boss was allowing someone I worked with to boink kids, even if it was my dream job, I'd quit. I'd quit twice as fast if someone guaranteed me a gig doing the same thing somewhere else. While I'll fully acknowledge that many 19-22 year old men are extraordinarily stupid, you have to wonder about the football players that, you know, decided to stick it out. I wouldn't want that association in any way shape or form.
Again, to my way of looking at it this is all extraordinarily arbitrary loyalty to an alma mater and an attempt for people to 'feel good' about Penn State football. Which they shouldn't, because they allowed (inaction is still an allowance) a guy to molest children by virtue of his position in the program.
This isn't rocket surgery.
-
Also, it should be noted that the incident McQueary spoke of, was one of the few indictments in which Sandusky was found not guilty. Maybe not quite so cut and dry afterall.
This is absolutely one of the thing that PSUers cling to. They point out at one point there was confusion as to whether the kid retracted his story and I think they use it to point McQueery in a pretty bad light.
They also are sorta subtly saying "Well hey. If that thing never even happened then how can you be mad at JoePa and the administration for not following up on something that didn't happen? How can there be a coverup about something that didn't happen?"
I think they have a pretty weak point there. I'll admit to it being a point, but still pretty weak.
-
Rocket surgery? I think I may use that in the future. Dos has coined a new term and I kinda love it.
-
Since I am an Alabama guy, let me make this example as indictment of the NCAA and collegiate sports in general. In the late 90's, the Alabama program was contaminated by a few rogue boosters who were doing everything from the relatively harmless $100 handshake to more severe stuff like money laundering through a guy's car dealership in Memphis.
In the Alabama case, the NCAA went on a 5 year witch hunt to get anyone and everyone involved (even though none were graduates of the university and there was no concrete evidence that any coaches were actively involved). The NCAA treated the minor offender just as severely as the top cheaters in the bunch. As we all know, Alabama got hit and hit HARD! 5 years probation, loss of many scholarships, etc.
The NCAA actually gave Penn St. about the same if not less of a penalty than Alabama for looking the other way when CHILD MOLESTATION was going on IN THEIR FOOTBALL FACILITIES and the sexual predator was at one point AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE COACHING STAFF and the rest of the time a FRIEND OF THE PROGRAM with keys which allowed him access anywhere he wanted to go in the athletic facilities. Not only were these facts, but the HEAD COACH AND SCHOOL PRESIDENT HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THE CLAIMS and an ASSISTANT COACH WALKED IN ON ABUSE IN PROGRESS!
In the Penn St. case, the NCAA investigation was not nearly as hot and heavy. While they interviewed those involved and did a little work, it was nowhere near the hundreds of hours of interviews that went on in the Alabama case which involved some idiot boosters and not sex offenders.
This is the problem. The NCAA has rule book 4 inches thick about what is and is not permissible. However, they do not have penalties set out as clearly and therefore you get this ridiculously non-level reaction when penalties are handed down. I think we all agree that cheating is wrong...but on the same level or less than sexual abuse? The NCAA has to stick to their guns here or Alabama, USC and everyone else could cry out for getting wins back. Perspective.
-
Rocket surgery? I think I may use that in the future. Dos has coined a new term and I kinda love it.
That's definitely not mine to claim, even though it is a great phrase.
(http://mediacdn.snorgcontent.com/media/catalog/product/r/o/rocketsurgerykelly_fullpic_1.jpg)
;D
-
Since I am an Alabama guy, let me make this example as indictment of the NCAA and collegiate sports in general. In the late 90's, the Alabama program was contaminated by a few rogue boosters who were doing everything from the relatively harmless $100 handshake to more severe stuff like money laundering through a guy's car dealership in Memphis.
In the Alabama case, the NCAA went on a 5 year witch hunt to get anyone and everyone involved (even though none were graduates of the university and there was no concrete evidence that any coaches were actively involved). The NCAA treated the minor offender just as severely as the top cheaters in the bunch. As we all know, Alabama got hit and hit HARD! 5 years probation, loss of many scholarships, etc.
The NCAA actually gave Penn St. about the same if not less of a penalty than Alabama for looking the other way when CHILD MOLESTATION was going on IN THEIR FOOTBALL FACILITIES and the sexual predator was at one point AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE COACHING STAFF and the rest of the time a FRIEND OF THE PROGRAM with keys which allowed him access anywhere he wanted to go in the athletic facilities. Not only were these facts, but the HEAD COACH AND SCHOOL PRESIDENT HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THE CLAIMS and an ASSISTANT COACH WALKED IN ON ABUSE IN PROGRESS!
In the Penn St. case, the NCAA investigation was not nearly as hot and heavy. While they interviewed those involved and did a little work, it was nowhere near the hundreds of hours of interviews that went on in the Alabama case which involved some idiot boosters and not sex offenders.
This is the problem. The NCAA has rule book 4 inches thick about what is and is not permissible. However, they do not have penalties set out as clearly and therefore you get this ridiculously non-level reaction when penalties are handed down. I think we all agree that cheating is wrong...but on the same level or less than sexual abuse? The NCAA has to stick to their guns here or Alabama, USC and everyone else could cry out for getting wins back. Perspective.
They probably should cry for getting wins back. They'll probably get them.
Another thing that ticks me off is vacated wins. Not forfeits. Vacated wins. Just nobody wins. The game never happened. Well if the game never happened then NCAA has to give everyone their money back. Hello you paid to watch a game that never happened. Here's your money back. Oh and you paid for an advertisement in a game that never happened. Here's your money back too. We can't give you your time back but here's your money.
But the NCAA has a money addiction so here we are.
-
I am not a Penn State fan, but I absolutely care about those kids. They got screwed, and as I said earlier it wasn't fair. Let me give some rebuttals to what people used against me.
1)Yes kids were given an opt out, but the chose Penn State for a reason, primarily: Family legacy, they like the program, they liked the school, close to home, etc. Because someone 10 years before you f'd up you need to go through to recruiting process again?
2) What I mean about hurting the kids is this, the kids at PSU work just as hard on their craft (thanks KG) as any other college football player. Because of a few sick people these kids now have been shorthanded. They DID not get the same opportunities as other players around the NCAA.
My point wasn't really about an individual child's legacy
-
You're not wrong, but again -- I'm operating on the assumption that they chose Penn State because they didn't know about Sandusky. In their shoes, I don't see how I could stay, particularly if I was a football player, after knowing that my coach and administration paid short shift to such a horrible thing.
-
Since I am an Alabama guy, let me make this example as indictment of the NCAA and collegiate sports in general. In the late 90's, the Alabama program was contaminated by a few rogue boosters who were doing everything from the relatively harmless $100 handshake to more severe stuff like money laundering through a guy's car dealership in Memphis.
In the Alabama case, the NCAA went on a 5 year witch hunt to get anyone and everyone involved (even though none were graduates of the university and there was no concrete evidence that any coaches were actively involved). The NCAA treated the minor offender just as severely as the top cheaters in the bunch. As we all know, Alabama got hit and hit HARD! 5 years probation, loss of many scholarships, etc.
The NCAA actually gave Penn St. about the same if not less of a penalty than Alabama for looking the other way when CHILD MOLESTATION was going on IN THEIR FOOTBALL FACILITIES and the sexual predator was at one point AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE COACHING STAFF and the rest of the time a FRIEND OF THE PROGRAM with keys which allowed him access anywhere he wanted to go in the athletic facilities. Not only were these facts, but the HEAD COACH AND SCHOOL PRESIDENT HAD KNOWLEDGE OF THE CLAIMS and an ASSISTANT COACH WALKED IN ON ABUSE IN PROGRESS!
In the Penn St. case, the NCAA investigation was not nearly as hot and heavy. While they interviewed those involved and did a little work, it was nowhere near the hundreds of hours of interviews that went on in the Alabama case which involved some idiot boosters and not sex offenders.
This is the problem. The NCAA has rule book 4 inches thick about what is and is not permissible. However, they do not have penalties set out as clearly and therefore you get this ridiculously non-level reaction when penalties are handed down. I think we all agree that cheating is wrong...but on the same level or less than sexual abuse? The NCAA has to stick to their guns here or Alabama, USC and everyone else could cry out for getting wins back. Perspective.
one affects the field of play, one does not. that is the difference.
-
You're not wrong, but again -- I'm operating on the assumption that they chose Penn State because they didn't know about Sandusky. In their shoes, I don't see how I could stay, particularly if I was a football player, after knowing that my coach and administration paid short shift to such a horrible thing.
you mean the coach and administration that had been fired.
-
You're not wrong, but again -- I'm operating on the assumption that they chose Penn State because they didn't know about Sandusky. In their shoes, I don't see how I could stay, particularly if I was a football player, after knowing that my coach and administration paid short shift to such a horrible thing.
you mean the coach and administration that had been fired.
Yet you'd still be going to a program facing sanctions.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
-
'Hurt kids that didn't deserve it'
To play devil's advocate, this is exactly what Sandusky did, but in his case it was kids not young men.
The punishment does not suit the crime, I agree. The players affected did nothing but got hammered. But, I think Sandusky's punishment does not fit the crime, I also think they should castrate guys like Sandusky.
-
Football in general has a culture problem. It is the most team-oriented sport in the US and it is very unhealthy to play. In order to get people to play their role for the team and to also sacrifice their body for a win, people take on distorted perspectives of team loyalty that makes it hard to root out non-football problems.
I doubt Penn State was any worse culture-wise than many other top schools, but they happened to have a person there causing great harm and they didn't take action.
-
I am not a Penn State fan, but I absolutely care about those kids. They got screwed, and as I said earlier it wasn't fair. Let me give some rebuttals to what people used against me.
1)Yes kids were given an opt out, but the chose Penn State for a reason, primarily: Family legacy, they like the program, they liked the school, close to home, etc. Because someone 10 years before you f'd up you need to go through to recruiting process again?
2) What I mean about hurting the kids is this, the kids at PSU work just as hard on their craft (thanks KG) as any other college football player. Because of a few sick people these kids now have been shorthanded. They DID not get the same opportunities as other players around the NCAA.
My point wasn't really about an individual child's legacy
So you are concerned that they didn't get everything they wanted the way they wanted?
There had to be accountability. We can make these same entitled critiques of any NCAA penalty ever handed down. If one player gets money and a team gets in trouble, what about all the innocent teammates? Why do we hear so much about Penn State, where something egregious actually happened, and few complaints about UConn basketball, where the violations were far more trivial?
I would go so far as to say the loyalty they have to PSU is part of the problem. There is nothing magical about these institutions. Welcome to the real world, players. These players should have more loyalty to humanity and ethics instead of to a university.
-
1) Joe Paterno is a disgrace and he should be remembered only for this incident.
2) Penn State should of gotten the death penalty. This is a institution of higher learning not the NFL. Molest kids or you are letting kids through your negligence be harmed you lose your right to compete in sports until you can prove your campus is safe and your institution is a responsible member of the NCAA.
3) the players - well this is the problem isnt it, but please this not the first time the NCAA has invoked this rule and screwed the student athlete.
A coach can leave at any time and with little if any penalty. Players cannot transfer without losing a year of eligibility.
The NCAA is not fair, they do not care about the student athlete, they care about making money and to the NCAA, Penn State has TV deals, Shoe Deals and they cannot let the Penn State Football name be tarnished and lose revenue.
Sorry I despise the NCAA and how they have destroyed all sports to give the SEC, the Big Ten and the Big Twelve another football game so these schools, the NCAA and ESPN can make money. Which is ironic since the NCAA and schools make more money on the NCAA Men's BBall Tourney.
Ask yourself how is the best basketball program of the last 30 years, UConn (9 Women NCAAs Championships and 3 Mens Championships) NOT in a major conference?
Football.
Sorry off topic, but no I feel no remorse for Penn State or Joe Pa, the players were exploited as they were exploited before the scandal. Unfortunately this will continue regardless of scandals, money is everything in the US.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
-
You're not wrong, but again -- I'm operating on the assumption that they chose Penn State because they didn't know about Sandusky. In their shoes, I don't see how I could stay, particularly if I was a football player, after knowing that my coach and administration paid short shift to such a horrible thing.
you mean the coach and administration that had been fired.
Yet you'd still be going to a program facing sanctions.
I don't know if it's a matter of going there but of staying there in the state where your family probably lives, where your family wants you to be, where you want to be, where all your teammates and friends are, and probably your girlfriend, former high school coach, church etc.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Fair point. My point is that, if I'm in that situation, there's no way I want to be associated with the football program after the Sandusky stuff comes to light.
I kind of agree with Moranis, insofar as I don't think that the NCAA should necessarily act as a moral governing body for college sports, but I think that the NCAA was the correct institution for dealing with Penn State because of how intertwined CFB was with what was happening and the reaction to it.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Church tax-free properties is the biggest scam going in the US. They can hold onto insanely valuable properties at essentially no cost. We have million dollar homes going tax free to snakeoil salesmen and their prosperity gospel.
But the worst form of argument in the world is the "but X is worse" argument. "I only killed 5 people in cold blood. The Nazis killed millions!"
-
You're not wrong, but again -- I'm operating on the assumption that they chose Penn State because they didn't know about Sandusky. In their shoes, I don't see how I could stay, particularly if I was a football player, after knowing that my coach and administration paid short shift to such a horrible thing.
you mean the coach and administration that had been fired.
Yet you'd still be going to a program facing sanctions.
I don't know if it's a matter of going there but of staying there in the state where your family probably lives, where your family wants you to be, where you want to be, where all your teammates and friends are, and probably your girlfriend, former high school coach, church etc.
Welcome to real life, where you don't get everything you want.
-
You're not wrong, but again -- I'm operating on the assumption that they chose Penn State because they didn't know about Sandusky. In their shoes, I don't see how I could stay, particularly if I was a football player, after knowing that my coach and administration paid short shift to such a horrible thing.
you mean the coach and administration that had been fired.
Yet you'd still be going to a program facing sanctions.
I don't know if it's a matter of going there but of staying there in the state where your family probably lives, where your family wants you to be, where you want to be, where all your teammates and friends are, and probably your girlfriend, former high school coach, church etc.
Sure. And that's where the idea of sacrifice comes in. Do you go to a program where you can get a shot at a Rose Bowl or something or do you stay behind to be closer to family, girlfriend, etc.. and swallow the fact that you might not play in the postseason until sanctions are lifted (if you're still even there)? Still, its a choice they have and probably not an easy one but it's still a choice. Life is full of hard decisions.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Fair point. My point is that, if I'm in that situation, there's no way I want to be associated with the football program after the Sandusky stuff comes to light.
I kind of agree with Moranis, insofar as I don't think that the NCAA should necessarily act as a moral governing body for college sports, but I think that the NCAA was the correct institution for dealing with Penn State because of how intertwined CFB was with what was happening and the reaction to it.
I don't like agreeing with that, but I largely have to. The NCAA had to do something and actually showed some restraint. They waited till the Freeh report came out. It was at the time accepted by the school, so the NCAA accepted it too and said "You have a former FBI directer making some of the harshest accusations ever and you accept it. Here is your very tough punishment".
The idea they were supposed to say "Well...even though this is clearly an issue within your football program and clearly highly illegal, but it's a crime instead of like a minor recruiting thing so we just won't get involved".....yeah right.
They wanted to make an example of them and they did. Better to overreach a bit and get pushed down later than do nothing.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Church tax-free properties is the biggest scam going in the US. They can hold onto insanely valuable properties at essentially no cost. We have million dollar homes going tax free to snakeoil salesmen and their prosperity gospel.
But the worst form of argument in the world is the "but X is worse" argument. "I only killed 5 people in cold blood. The Nazis killed millions!"
The whole BC/Diocese thing was really only about one thing; real estate.
Boston College had been trying for years to snap up more real estate in an area where its extremely difficult to come by. When the Diocese had their scandal and need the funds, BC was quick to just in & snap up that land. It made just too much sense. It just happened to be the Diocese on the other end of that deal.
I'm not sure why there would be any outrage there by the NCAA.
-
I think on some level PSU fans feel entitled. They felt like the ran a squeaky clean program for 40 years held up as a model and then at the first sign of chaotic problems the NCAA and Big Ten stabbed them in the back and went for a PSU cash grab. That the NCAA should have waited for due process and the truth to come out. That's going to take yeeeeeeaaarrss. They waited till the report came out.
They have it backwards. If the NCAA and Big Ten came down on them hard it's partly precisely because they were held up as a model. Hold yourself to higher standards. If anyone backstabbed anyone it's PSU that backstabbed people.
PSU had to be initially punished because it's not just their team responsible/answerable for this. It's the president, the BOT, the campus police, etc.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Church tax-free properties is the biggest scam going in the US. They can hold onto insanely valuable properties at essentially no cost. We have million dollar homes going tax free to snakeoil salesmen and their prosperity gospel.
But the worst form of argument in the world is the "but X is worse" argument. "I only killed 5 people in cold blood. The Nazis killed millions!"
The whole BC/Diocese thing was really only about one thing; real estate.
Boston College had been trying for years to snap up more real estate in an area where its extremely difficult to come by. When the Diocese had their scandal and need the funds, BC was quick to just in & snap up that land. It made just too much sense. It just happened to be the Diocese on the other end of that deal.
I'm not sure why there would be any outrage there by the NCAA.
Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. There are other schools that could have bought it and the diocese could have sold it to them a long time before that.
Sandusky's Second Mile group had to fold and close its door and whatnot. What if instead PSU right at that moment gave them a ton of money for their property and then said "We've been looking to buy property for years"? I'm not sure people would have been totally ok with that.
Obviously not apples to apples, but the Catholic connection looked a tad convenient to people at the time.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Church tax-free properties is the biggest scam going in the US. They can hold onto insanely valuable properties at essentially no cost. We have million dollar homes going tax free to snakeoil salesmen and their prosperity gospel.
But the worst form of argument in the world is the "but X is worse" argument. "I only killed 5 people in cold blood. The Nazis killed millions!"
The whole BC/Diocese thing was really only about one thing; real estate.
Boston College had been trying for years to snap up more real estate in an area where its extremely difficult to come by. When the Diocese had their scandal and need the funds, BC was quick to just in & snap up that land. It made just too much sense. It just happened to be the Diocese on the other end of that deal.
I'm not sure why there would be any outrage there by the NCAA.
Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. There are other schools that could have bought it and the diocese could have sold it to them a long time before that.
Sandusky's Second Mile group had to fold and close its door and whatnot. What if instead PSU right at that moment gave them a ton of money for their property and then said "We've been looking to buy property for years"? I'm not sure people would have been totally ok with that.
Obviously not apples to apples, but the Catholic connection looked a tad convenient to people at the time.
The diocese is directly across Comm Ave from BC's campus. My guess is that that if word had ever got out about the Diocese trying to sell the property in the past, that BC would've tried at that time too. Prior to the scandal. Sure there's the Catholic convenience thing of the sale but then there is also the most apparent common sense proximity convenience.
What other school in the area would buy that property? If BC didn't buy it, I doubt another school would've been chasing it. BU? Miles down the road? Mt. Ida? It probably would've fell into commercial or additional residential.
-
This is the kind of thing I'm seeing on my facebook feed like every single day, sometimes multiple times a day for years now. I'm highlighting it only to keep it separate from my thoughts. You guys already know I'm crazy.
While we're stepping on the neck of the NCAA today, here's what I'd want (note: I have a completely separate list for our BoT which we'll tackle on another day). What's your list of NCAA demands?
1.NCAA retraction and apology for Julie Roe’s contention that "Penn State had great success on the field from 1998-2012 and those wins were based on a pristine image which was a lie. As a result, those wins need to be taken away.”
2.Public apology on national television by Mark Emmert acknowledging that the NCAA was wrong in indicting the entire Penn State culture for the crimes of just one man, Jerry Sandusky. An apology that an overreach in sanctions contributed to a patently false narrative that has unfortunately been cemented in minds across America. And, a plea to journalists, through this lesson learned, that no matter the public outcry, it is far more important to get the story right, than to act in haste. Better to delay the punishment of the correct individual than to hastily punish those who are undeserving.
3.Acknowledgement that the Penn State culture has always been exemplary in its dedication to academics and athletics, noting that the athletic program has NEVER had one single NCAA infraction or violation, and has consistently ranked at the top for athlete graduation rates, as well as highest GPAs/most honors for students across all college sports. Apology to former and current Penn State football players and coaches, former and current staff and faculty, alumni, current students, the greater State College community for unfairly blaming, penalizing and crippling them.
4.Post the NCAA apology PROMINENTLY in the front page of the NCAA website, just as they did the Consent Decree.
5.Establish a new award to be given by the NCAA (with annual input from the Paterno family and a panel of former Penn State lettermen), called the Paterno “Grand Experiment” Award, recognizing one program annually that exemplifies the key characteristics of Paterno’s incomparable philosophy of integrity, academic excellence, athletic achievement, and success with honor.
6.Long-form, one-on-one interview with Mark Emmert on general consumer news programming such as Sixty Minutes or 20/20, expressing all speaking points above. ESPN's Outside the Lines is not good enough.
7.Together with the Paternos, meet with Brian DePalma and Al Pacino and set the narrative straight for the purposes of the proposed Happy Valley movie, ultimately ensuring that Paterno AND Penn State are portrayed in a manner acceptable to both.
That's right. There are people out there that want the world to apologize TO Penn State. It's not enough for some of them to have sanctions lifted and all that. They want the world to apologize to Penn State and acknowledge PSU is just so awesome.
I'd settle for "Maybe we were a tad harsh and shoulda waited longer to really figure things out. Maybe it was a tad more complicated than we thought. But seriously. Things looked really really bad. Now let's wait for the trial".
If I'm the NCAA I'm not making the same mistake twice. I'm like "You're right. There wasn't enough due process. So let's wait for it. Let's go to trial. Let's wait for results."
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Church tax-free properties is the biggest scam going in the US. They can hold onto insanely valuable properties at essentially no cost. We have million dollar homes going tax free to snakeoil salesmen and their prosperity gospel.
But the worst form of argument in the world is the "but X is worse" argument. "I only killed 5 people in cold blood. The Nazis killed millions!"
The whole BC/Diocese thing was really only about one thing; real estate.
Boston College had been trying for years to snap up more real estate in an area where its extremely difficult to come by. When the Diocese had their scandal and need the funds, BC was quick to just in & snap up that land. It made just too much sense. It just happened to be the Diocese on the other end of that deal.
I'm not sure why there would be any outrage there by the NCAA.
Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. There are other schools that could have bought it and the diocese could have sold it to them a long time before that.
Sandusky's Second Mile group had to fold and close its door and whatnot. What if instead PSU right at that moment gave them a ton of money for their property and then said "We've been looking to buy property for years"? I'm not sure people would have been totally ok with that.
Obviously not apples to apples, but the Catholic connection looked a tad convenient to people at the time.
The diocese is directly across Comm Ave from BC's campus. My guess is that that if word had ever got out about the Diocese trying to sell the property in the past, that BC would've tried at that time too. Prior to the scandal. Sure there's the Catholic convenience thing of the sale but then there is also the most apparent common sense proximity convenience.
What other school in the area would buy that property? If BC didn't buy it, I doubt another school would've been chasing it. BU? Miles down the road? Mt. Ida? It probably would've fell into commercial or additional residential.
I'm under the impression (possibly wrongly) that the many schools in Boston have property all over the city (partly because of the nature of the city) and are known to run buses between them as well as just have people use the T.
It just didn't exactly seem like there was a very transparent or thorough bidding process there. It seemed quite sudden. It just seemed like a convenient Catholic connection.
Not saying how it was. Just a bit how it seemed to the outside world.
Which is a little what PSU is trying to say. Hey world. You just don't understand. It wasn't like that.
-
I thought of the Catholic Church when I was writing my posts. They protected individuals accused of stuff, or turned a blind eye, I didn't write that so as not to offend. Their situation was poorly handled as well.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Church tax-free properties is the biggest scam going in the US. They can hold onto insanely valuable properties at essentially no cost. We have million dollar homes going tax free to snakeoil salesmen and their prosperity gospel.
But the worst form of argument in the world is the "but X is worse" argument. "I only killed 5 people in cold blood. The Nazis killed millions!"
The whole BC/Diocese thing was really only about one thing; real estate.
Boston College had been trying for years to snap up more real estate in an area where its extremely difficult to come by. When the Diocese had their scandal and need the funds, BC was quick to just in & snap up that land. It made just too much sense. It just happened to be the Diocese on the other end of that deal.
I'm not sure why there would be any outrage there by the NCAA.
Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. There are other schools that could have bought it and the diocese could have sold it to them a long time before that.
Sandusky's Second Mile group had to fold and close its door and whatnot. What if instead PSU right at that moment gave them a ton of money for their property and then said "We've been looking to buy property for years"? I'm not sure people would have been totally ok with that.
Obviously not apples to apples, but the Catholic connection looked a tad convenient to people at the time.
The diocese is directly across Comm Ave from BC's campus. My guess is that that if word had ever got out about the Diocese trying to sell the property in the past, that BC would've tried at that time too. Prior to the scandal. Sure there's the Catholic convenience thing of the sale but then there is also the most apparent common sense proximity convenience.
What other school in the area would buy that property? If BC didn't buy it, I doubt another school would've been chasing it. BU? Miles down the road? Mt. Ida? It probably would've fell into commercial or additional residential.
I'm under the impression (possibly wrongly) that the many schools in Boston have property all over the city (partly because of the nature of the city) and are known to run buses between them as well as just have people use the T.
It just didn't exactly seem like there was a very transparent or thorough bidding process there. It seemed quite sudden. It just seemed like a convenient Catholic connection.
Not saying how it was. Just a bit how it seemed to the outside world.
Which is a little what PSU is trying to say. Hey world. You just don't understand. It wasn't like that.
True but we're talking a real estate deal which just happened to be with the Catholic Church v. child molestation & cover-ups.
Big differences here.
-
And a program that was inextricably linked to child abuse. There's an easy joke about Catholicism in here, somewhere.
Spppeeeakking of that....remember when the Diocese of Boston was having a very tough year and then all of a sudden out of nowhere Boston College dishes out like $20 mill for a building owned by the diocese? Helped with some bills. No outrage by the NCAA.
It's not like PSU handed money to Sandusky knowing full well what his situation was and why. Juuuussttt saying.
Granted that wasn't a BC football issue even though they probably make some nice money from that.
Church tax-free properties is the biggest scam going in the US. They can hold onto insanely valuable properties at essentially no cost. We have million dollar homes going tax free to snakeoil salesmen and their prosperity gospel.
But the worst form of argument in the world is the "but X is worse" argument. "I only killed 5 people in cold blood. The Nazis killed millions!"
The whole BC/Diocese thing was really only about one thing; real estate.
Boston College had been trying for years to snap up more real estate in an area where its extremely difficult to come by. When the Diocese had their scandal and need the funds, BC was quick to just in & snap up that land. It made just too much sense. It just happened to be the Diocese on the other end of that deal.
I'm not sure why there would be any outrage there by the NCAA.
Sometimes appearances can be deceiving. There are other schools that could have bought it and the diocese could have sold it to them a long time before that.
Sandusky's Second Mile group had to fold and close its door and whatnot. What if instead PSU right at that moment gave them a ton of money for their property and then said "We've been looking to buy property for years"? I'm not sure people would have been totally ok with that.
Obviously not apples to apples, but the Catholic connection looked a tad convenient to people at the time.
The diocese is directly across Comm Ave from BC's campus. My guess is that that if word had ever got out about the Diocese trying to sell the property in the past, that BC would've tried at that time too. Prior to the scandal. Sure there's the Catholic convenience thing of the sale but then there is also the most apparent common sense proximity convenience.
What other school in the area would buy that property? If BC didn't buy it, I doubt another school would've been chasing it. BU? Miles down the road? Mt. Ida? It probably would've fell into commercial or additional residential.
I'm under the impression (possibly wrongly) that the many schools in Boston have property all over the city (partly because of the nature of the city) and are known to run buses between them as well as just have people use the T.
It just didn't exactly seem like there was a very transparent or thorough bidding process there. It seemed quite sudden. It just seemed like a convenient Catholic connection.
Not saying how it was. Just a bit how it seemed to the outside world.
Which is a little what PSU is trying to say. Hey world. You just don't understand. It wasn't like that.
True but we're talking a real estate deal which just happened to be with the Catholic Church v. child molestation & cover-ups.
Big differences here.
Which just happened to be when the Church needed a lot of money suddenly to deal with molestation and cover ups. Definitely a difference.
It's the way it appeared to some people
-
Appeared that way to people who need a........
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/66/669db27dc4436180a2a16e098cafef630807404ad07f31ef8f958a2951707517.jpg)
Wait what were we talking about?
-
This is the kind of thing I'm seeing on my facebook feed like every single day, sometimes multiple times a day for years now. I'm highlighting it only to keep it separate from my thoughts. You guys already know I'm crazy.
While we're stepping on the neck of the NCAA today, here's what I'd want (note: I have a completely separate list for our BoT which we'll tackle on another day). What's your list of NCAA demands?
1.NCAA retraction and apology for Julie Roe’s contention that "Penn State had great success on the field from 1998-2012 and those wins were based on a pristine image which was a lie. As a result, those wins need to be taken away.”
2.Public apology on national television by Mark Emmert acknowledging that the NCAA was wrong in indicting the entire Penn State culture for the crimes of just one man, Jerry Sandusky. An apology that an overreach in sanctions contributed to a patently false narrative that has unfortunately been cemented in minds across America. And, a plea to journalists, through this lesson learned, that no matter the public outcry, it is far more important to get the story right, than to act in haste. Better to delay the punishment of the correct individual than to hastily punish those who are undeserving.
3.Acknowledgement that the Penn State culture has always been exemplary in its dedication to academics and athletics, noting that the athletic program has NEVER had one single NCAA infraction or violation, and has consistently ranked at the top for athlete graduation rates, as well as highest GPAs/most honors for students across all college sports. Apology to former and current Penn State football players and coaches, former and current staff and faculty, alumni, current students, the greater State College community for unfairly blaming, penalizing and crippling them.
4.Post the NCAA apology PROMINENTLY in the front page of the NCAA website, just as they did the Consent Decree.
5.Establish a new award to be given by the NCAA (with annual input from the Paterno family and a panel of former Penn State lettermen), called the Paterno “Grand Experiment” Award, recognizing one program annually that exemplifies the key characteristics of Paterno’s incomparable philosophy of integrity, academic excellence, athletic achievement, and success with honor.
6.Long-form, one-on-one interview with Mark Emmert on general consumer news programming such as Sixty Minutes or 20/20, expressing all speaking points above. ESPN's Outside the Lines is not good enough.
7.Together with the Paternos, meet with Brian DePalma and Al Pacino and set the narrative straight for the purposes of the proposed Happy Valley movie, ultimately ensuring that Paterno AND Penn State are portrayed in a manner acceptable to both.
That's right. There are people out there that want the world to apologize TO Penn State. It's not enough for some of them to have sanctions lifted and all that. They want the world to apologize to Penn State and acknowledge PSU is just so awesome.
I'd settle for "Maybe we were a tad harsh and shoulda waited longer to really figure things out. Maybe it was a tad more complicated than we thought. But seriously. Things looked really really bad. Now let's wait for the trial".
If I'm the NCAA I'm not making the same mistake twice. I'm like "You're right. There wasn't enough due process. So let's wait for it. Let's go to trial. Let's wait for results."
To the blue: You can't fix stupid.
-
This is the kind of thing I'm seeing on my facebook feed like every single day, sometimes multiple times a day for years now. I'm highlighting it only to keep it separate from my thoughts. You guys already know I'm crazy.
While we're stepping on the neck of the NCAA today, here's what I'd want (note: I have a completely separate list for our BoT which we'll tackle on another day). What's your list of NCAA demands?
1.NCAA retraction and apology for Julie Roe’s contention that "Penn State had great success on the field from 1998-2012 and those wins were based on a pristine image which was a lie. As a result, those wins need to be taken away.”
2.Public apology on national television by Mark Emmert acknowledging that the NCAA was wrong in indicting the entire Penn State culture for the crimes of just one man, Jerry Sandusky. An apology that an overreach in sanctions contributed to a patently false narrative that has unfortunately been cemented in minds across America. And, a plea to journalists, through this lesson learned, that no matter the public outcry, it is far more important to get the story right, than to act in haste. Better to delay the punishment of the correct individual than to hastily punish those who are undeserving.
3.Acknowledgement that the Penn State culture has always been exemplary in its dedication to academics and athletics, noting that the athletic program has NEVER had one single NCAA infraction or violation, and has consistently ranked at the top for athlete graduation rates, as well as highest GPAs/most honors for students across all college sports. Apology to former and current Penn State football players and coaches, former and current staff and faculty, alumni, current students, the greater State College community for unfairly blaming, penalizing and crippling them.
4.Post the NCAA apology PROMINENTLY in the front page of the NCAA website, just as they did the Consent Decree.
5.Establish a new award to be given by the NCAA (with annual input from the Paterno family and a panel of former Penn State lettermen), called the Paterno “Grand Experiment” Award, recognizing one program annually that exemplifies the key characteristics of Paterno’s incomparable philosophy of integrity, academic excellence, athletic achievement, and success with honor.
6.Long-form, one-on-one interview with Mark Emmert on general consumer news programming such as Sixty Minutes or 20/20, expressing all speaking points above. ESPN's Outside the Lines is not good enough.
7.Together with the Paternos, meet with Brian DePalma and Al Pacino and set the narrative straight for the purposes of the proposed Happy Valley movie, ultimately ensuring that Paterno AND Penn State are portrayed in a manner acceptable to both.
That's right. There are people out there that want the world to apologize TO Penn State. It's not enough for some of them to have sanctions lifted and all that. They want the world to apologize to Penn State and acknowledge PSU is just so awesome.
I'd settle for "Maybe we were a tad harsh and shoulda waited longer to really figure things out. Maybe it was a tad more complicated than we thought. But seriously. Things looked really really bad. Now let's wait for the trial".
If I'm the NCAA I'm not making the same mistake twice. I'm like "You're right. There wasn't enough due process. So let's wait for it. Let's go to trial. Let's wait for results."
To the blue: You can't fix stupid.
Pretty much.
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
If McQueery had walked in on it and seen clearly that it was happening and told Joe who told campus police and they did nothing....yeah...I think there'd be an outrage.
Now there is a question as to what McQueery actually saw, but still
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
Yeah, I'm scratching my head on this one. Are we trying to equate child molestation with a Ponzi scheme? Is this a fantasy land notion where all crimes are considered equal?
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
Yeah, I'm scratching my head on this one. Are we trying to equate child molestation with a Ponzi scheme? Is this a fantasy land notion where all crimes are considered equal?
I think his point is to crimes that don't have to do with football. Off the field type crimes that don't directly involve a current staff member. I think.
-
I think maybe some PSU alums are thinking/praying/hoping/expecting that at trials they'll ask "Why didn't you follow up and try to find the kid?" and they'll say "We did! JoePa insisted! And we found him! He was fine! He said nothing happened!" and then they'll get the grown up kid who will say nothing happened and there will be this big dramatic shock where people will all go "Ooooohh!" and then they'll say "This means JoePa has been innocent all along!"
I'm pretty sure if that was the case it would have happened by now or would never have gone to court.
In the real world I doubt this will happen.
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
Yeah, I'm scratching my head on this one. Are we trying to equate child molestation with a Ponzi scheme? Is this a fantasy land notion where all crimes are considered equal?
In each case Sandusky would have been "using" PSU to facilitate a crime. The nature of the crime shouldn't matter to the punishment to PSU (the punishment to Sandusky is a different matter). Neither has anything to do with football, the players, the coaches, or the performance on the field. There is no practical difference. Thus there should be no difference in penalty. The fact that child molestation charges you up emotionally while a guy bilking old people out of their savings doesn't have the same emotional effect, should have no bearing on a football program. Take the emotion out of it. It doesn't belong in a governing body.
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
Yeah, I'm scratching my head on this one. Are we trying to equate child molestation with a Ponzi scheme? Is this a fantasy land notion where all crimes are considered equal?
In each case Sandusky would have been "using" PSU to facilitate a crime. The nature of the crime shouldn't matter to the punishment to PSU (the punishment to Sandusky is a different matter). Neither has anything to do with football, the players, the coaches, or the performance on the field. There is no practical difference. Thus there should be no difference in penalty. The fact that child molestation charges you up emotionally while a guy bilking old people out of their savings doesn't have the same emotional effect, should have no bearing on a football program. Take the emotion out of it. It doesn't belong in a governing body.
I think a persons opinion on this depends on whether they believe Paterno and some of the staff new something screwy was going on and they turned a blind eye too it. If thats the case, if I remember correctly, he had one of his victims on the sidelines with him during some of these games. At this point how could you think it has nothing to do with football, if hes trotting one of these kids onto the field with him and folks know something shady might be going on but dont want to do anything about it for the sake of the football program?
if you believe Paterno didnt know anything at this point and no eyebrows had been raised, then yes I see your point.
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
Yeah, I'm scratching my head on this one. Are we trying to equate child molestation with a Ponzi scheme? Is this a fantasy land notion where all crimes are considered equal?
In each case Sandusky would have been "using" PSU to facilitate a crime. The nature of the crime shouldn't matter to the punishment to PSU (the punishment to Sandusky is a different matter). Neither has anything to do with football, the players, the coaches, or the performance on the field. There is no practical difference. Thus there should be no difference in penalty. The fact that child molestation charges you up emotionally while a guy bilking old people out of their savings doesn't have the same emotional effect, should have no bearing on a football program. Take the emotion out of it. It doesn't belong in a governing body.
You're the one that's introducing emotion into the equation. What if I say that I think PSU should have been hit just as hard for the Ponzi scheme? Then you say "my god that's absurd this poster is clearly off his rocker," right? isn't that just as much an appeal to emotion, just one couched in a reader's perception of whether or not something is reasonable?
You can keep harping on the fact that this has "nothing to do" with the football program, but (as I've said before) that's a knowingly ignorant position to take, given the importance of the Lions to the Penn State circle jerk/high ethical value of the community given to the community by the community. While I agree with you in the general sense, that the NCAA shouldn't be the morality police (as I've said before), I don't think there was a better choice than the NCAA in this case.
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
Yeah, I'm scratching my head on this one. Are we trying to equate child molestation with a Ponzi scheme? Is this a fantasy land notion where all crimes are considered equal?
In each case Sandusky would have been "using" PSU to facilitate a crime. The nature of the crime shouldn't matter to the punishment to PSU (the punishment to Sandusky is a different matter). Neither has anything to do with football, the players, the coaches, or the performance on the field. There is no practical difference. Thus there should be no difference in penalty. The fact that child molestation charges you up emotionally while a guy bilking old people out of their savings doesn't have the same emotional effect, should have no bearing on a football program. Take the emotion out of it. It doesn't belong in a governing body.
You're the one that's introducing emotion into the equation. What if I say that I think PSU should have been hit just as hard for the Ponzi scheme? Then you say "my god that's absurd this poster is clearly off his rocker," right? isn't that just as much an appeal to emotion, just one couched in a reader's perception of whether or not something is reasonable?
You can keep harping on the fact that this has "nothing to do" with the football program, but (as I've said before) that's a knowingly ignorant position to take, given the importance of the Lions to the Penn State circle jerk/high ethical value of the community given to the community by the community. While I agree with you in the general sense, that the NCAA shouldn't be the morality police (as I've said before), I don't think there was a better choice than the NCAA in this case.
I'd have no problem if someone said they think the ponzi scheme should have also been penalized the same way. I'd disagree, but at least that is a consistent position to take i.e. the school was covering up criminal activity and should be punished for it. It is different if you think the punishment to the school should be different based on the type of crime being committed because there isn't consistency there. Governing bodies need consistency.
Penn State caved under the public pressure they were under and accepted sanctions they shouldn't have. There were a number of articles written about how the NCAA didn't have the authority to sanction PSU for this type of conduct and had PSU fought it they would have likely won (probably would have lost the PR battle, but of course they were never going to look good anyway). Especially given there wasn't a trial, there wasn't evidence in court, testimony, etc. The Freeh report was just that a report. The NCAA way over stepped its bounds, and PSU let it.
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
Yeah, I'm scratching my head on this one. Are we trying to equate child molestation with a Ponzi scheme? Is this a fantasy land notion where all crimes are considered equal?
In each case Sandusky would have been "using" PSU to facilitate a crime. The nature of the crime shouldn't matter to the punishment to PSU (the punishment to Sandusky is a different matter). Neither has anything to do with football, the players, the coaches, or the performance on the field. There is no practical difference. Thus there should be no difference in penalty. The fact that child molestation charges you up emotionally while a guy bilking old people out of their savings doesn't have the same emotional effect, should have no bearing on a football program. Take the emotion out of it. It doesn't belong in a governing body.
I think a persons opinion on this depends on whether they believe Paterno and some of the staff new something screwy was going on and they turned a blind eye too it. If thats the case, if I remember correctly, he had one of his victims on the sidelines with him during some of these games. At this point how could you think it has nothing to do with football, if hes trotting one of these kids onto the field with him and folks know something shady might be going on but dont want to do anything about it for the sake of the football program?
if you believe Paterno didnt know anything at this point and no eyebrows had been raised, then yes I see your point.
See I would want to find out campus police did an investigation and came to reasonable conclusions.
But then I'd have to believe that this happened and the Freeh report just magically missed it somehow. That seems a bit unlikely.
-
If Sandusky had been running a Ponzi scheme and using Penn State facilities to do it, do you have the same outrage? Would the media and NCAA reacted the same way?
If the answer is no, then the NCAA got it wrong.
Why?
Yeah, I'm scratching my head on this one. Are we trying to equate child molestation with a Ponzi scheme? Is this a fantasy land notion where all crimes are considered equal?
In each case Sandusky would have been "using" PSU to facilitate a crime. The nature of the crime shouldn't matter to the punishment to PSU (the punishment to Sandusky is a different matter). Neither has anything to do with football, the players, the coaches, or the performance on the field. There is no practical difference. Thus there should be no difference in penalty. The fact that child molestation charges you up emotionally while a guy bilking old people out of their savings doesn't have the same emotional effect, should have no bearing on a football program. Take the emotion out of it. It doesn't belong in a governing body.
You're the one that's introducing emotion into the equation. What if I say that I think PSU should have been hit just as hard for the Ponzi scheme? Then you say "my god that's absurd this poster is clearly off his rocker," right? isn't that just as much an appeal to emotion, just one couched in a reader's perception of whether or not something is reasonable?
You can keep harping on the fact that this has "nothing to do" with the football program, but (as I've said before) that's a knowingly ignorant position to take, given the importance of the Lions to the Penn State circle jerk/high ethical value of the community given to the community by the community. While I agree with you in the general sense, that the NCAA shouldn't be the morality police (as I've said before), I don't think there was a better choice than the NCAA in this case.
I'd have no problem if someone said they think the ponzi scheme should have also been penalized the same way. I'd disagree, but at least that is a consistent position to take i.e. the school was covering up criminal activity and should be punished for it. It is different if you think the punishment to the school should be different based on the type of crime being committed because there isn't consistency there. Governing bodies need consistency.
Penn State caved under the public pressure they were under and accepted sanctions they shouldn't have. There were a number of articles written about how the NCAA didn't have the authority to sanction PSU for this type of conduct and had PSU fought it they would have likely won (probably would have lost the PR battle, but of course they were never going to look good anyway). Especially given there wasn't a trial, there wasn't evidence in court, testimony, etc. The Freeh report was just that a report. The NCAA way over stepped its bounds, and PSU let it.
Taking it in the other direction, would you argue the program should be equally penalized if they knew Sandusky was not just using team facilities to rape children, but killing and eating them too? And that for the sake of "consistency", that penalty should be identical to what they'd get for knowing that Sandusky was using team facilities to buy and store untaxed cigarettes?
This just seems like a Bizarro equivalent of "zero tolerance" logic to me.
-
ESPN is reporting that JoePa will have his wins reinstated and will be (again) the all-time winningest coach in NCAA Football. (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12179571/joe-paterno-111-wins-were-vacated-restored)
I lived in PA for 6 years just prior to this scandal and have a lot of PSU fans for friends. It has always been my opinion that the one punishment meted out to PSU that really stung them (and the only one they truly cared about) was the loss of those wins and that record. In my opinion, PSU, it's alumni and fans were most concerned about their idol's tarnished image and that record. I am certain that most of these people who are now trumpeting this as vindication and are conveniently ignoring the fact that JoePa was likely the most powerful man at that university and if he showed the slightest interest in following up on what he was told about Sandusky that there would have been an investigation long ago. The rest of the university leaders simply followed his disinterest and how many more children were tormented because of that? PSU fans, please do not celebrate too hard...
-
Agreed.
-
ESPN is reporting that JoePa will have his wins reinstated and will be (again) the all-time winningest coach in NCAA Football. (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12179571/joe-paterno-111-wins-were-vacated-restored)
I lived in PA for 6 years just prior to this scandal and have a lot of PSU fans for friends. It has always been my opinion that the one punishment meted out to PSU that really stung them (and the only one they truly cared about) was the loss of those wins and that record. In my opinion, PSU, it's alumni and fans were most concerned about their idol's tarnished image and that record. I am certain that most of these people who are now trumpeting this as vindication and are conveniently ignoring the fact that JoePa was likely the most powerful man at that university and if he showed the slightest interest in following up on what he was told about Sandusky that there would have been an investigation long ago. The rest of the university leaders simply followed his disinterest and how many more children were tormented because of that? PSU fans, please do not celebrate too hard...
I mean the guy died in complete shame in a town he dedicated his whole life too while the whole world called him a monster (I am not commenting whether he was or wasn't). Wins restored or not, there really aren't any winners in any of this.
PS: I did go to Penn State and definitely don't say or do the things a lot of people in this thread have attributed to Penn State fans. It kind of stinks to be lumped in with the lunatic fringes.
-
1) Joe Paterno is a disgrace and he should be remembered only for this incident.
2) Penn State should of gotten the death penalty. This is a institution of higher learning not the NFL. Molest kids or you are letting kids through your negligence be harmed you lose your right to compete in sports until you can prove your campus is safe and your institution is a responsible member of the NCAA.
3) the players - well this is the problem isnt it, but please this not the first time the NCAA has invoked this rule and screwed the student athlete.
A coach can leave at any time and with little if any penalty. Players cannot transfer without losing a year of eligibility.
The NCAA is not fair, they do not care about the student athlete, they care about making money and to the NCAA, Penn State has TV deals, Shoe Deals and they cannot let the Penn State Football name be tarnished and lose revenue.
Sorry I despise the NCAA and how they have destroyed all sports to give the SEC, the Big Ten and the Big Twelve another football game so these schools, the NCAA and ESPN can make money. Which is ironic since the NCAA and schools make more money on the NCAA Men's BBall Tourney.
Ask yourself how is the best basketball program of the last 30 years, UConn (9 Women NCAAs Championships and 3 Mens Championships) NOT in a major conference?
Football.
Sorry off topic, but no I feel no remorse for Penn State or Joe Pa, the players were exploited as they were exploited before the scandal. Unfortunately this will continue regardless of scandals, money is everything in the US.
If you want to bring Money in to it and speak of the Death Penalty you are not discussing a pretty key aspect: The Death Penalty would destroy the entire town and community. If you have never been to State College is it literally in the middle of nowhere. It is not a stretch to say that there are a large number of hotels, restaurants, bars and stores that make 50% of there revenue for the year during the 3 months of football season. If Penn State football went away a large number of these businesses would completely go under. Obviously none of these people had anything to do with the crime and aren't high on the hog business owners that can just easily start up another hotel or restaurant in a different city. Like when most bad things happen, the poorest and people with the least mobility would be the ones that would suffer the most. It seems like a really big stretch to say these people deserve that kind of punishment for choosing to operate a business in hospitality when they could not conceivably had known what was going on with the team.
This would have a larger impact of making the area a less desirable place to live, would make the university less desirable for faculty and students and in the long term really damage the school as an academic institution. For the majority of kids growing up in PA Penn State represents far and away the most affordable and best education opportunity they have. Destroying the university would ultimately punish them also.
This is not my own crazy thinking, there have been a number of people affiliated with the NCAA that said they regretted applying the death penalty to SMU because of the unforeseen consequences that happened that were associated with it (and also provided as a reason for why they didn't give it to the NCAA).
As I mentioned in my other post, I did in fact go to Penn State, but I am by no means a big supporter of football or huge fan of the school as a whole. However, having lived in the area for about 5 years I can also say there are a lot of things people don't consider when they just yell about shutting the whole place down.
-
ESPN is reporting that JoePa will have his wins reinstated and will be (again) the all-time winningest coach in NCAA Football. (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12179571/joe-paterno-111-wins-were-vacated-restored)
I lived in PA for 6 years just prior to this scandal and have a lot of PSU fans for friends. It has always been my opinion that the one punishment meted out to PSU that really stung them (and the only one they truly cared about) was the loss of those wins and that record. In my opinion, PSU, it's alumni and fans were most concerned about their idol's tarnished image and that record. I am certain that most of these people who are now trumpeting this as vindication and are conveniently ignoring the fact that JoePa was likely the most powerful man at that university and if he showed the slightest interest in following up on what he was told about Sandusky that there would have been an investigation long ago. The rest of the university leaders simply followed his disinterest and how many more children were tormented because of that? PSU fans, please do not celebrate too hard...
I mean the guy died in complete shame in a town he dedicated his whole life too while the whole world called him a monster (I am not commenting whether he was or wasn't). Wins restored or not, there really aren't any winners in any of this.
PS: I did go to Penn State and definitely don't say or do the things a lot of people in this thread have attributed to Penn State fans. It kind of stinks to be lumped in with the lunatic fringes.
You are right, there definitely were no winners in any of this and I must apologize if I lumped all PSU fans and alumni into this lunatic fringe...I probably should have said "most" or "many" (my wife is an Ohio State alum and I have found that most of their lunatic fringe did not attend the school, I would guess the same may hold true for PSU). However, I do stand by the rest of my post and I get the emotion...I think most fan bases (at least most fan bases lunatic fringe) would have a similar reaction.
-
1) Joe Paterno is a disgrace and he should be remembered only for this incident.
2) Penn State should of gotten the death penalty. This is a institution of higher learning not the NFL. Molest kids or you are letting kids through your negligence be harmed you lose your right to compete in sports until you can prove your campus is safe and your institution is a responsible member of the NCAA.
3) the players - well this is the problem isnt it, but please this not the first time the NCAA has invoked this rule and screwed the student athlete.
A coach can leave at any time and with little if any penalty. Players cannot transfer without losing a year of eligibility.
The NCAA is not fair, they do not care about the student athlete, they care about making money and to the NCAA, Penn State has TV deals, Shoe Deals and they cannot let the Penn State Football name be tarnished and lose revenue.
Sorry I despise the NCAA and how they have destroyed all sports to give the SEC, the Big Ten and the Big Twelve another football game so these schools, the NCAA and ESPN can make money. Which is ironic since the NCAA and schools make more money on the NCAA Men's BBall Tourney.
Ask yourself how is the best basketball program of the last 30 years, UConn (9 Women NCAAs Championships and 3 Mens Championships) NOT in a major conference?
Football.
Sorry off topic, but no I feel no remorse for Penn State or Joe Pa, the players were exploited as they were exploited before the scandal. Unfortunately this will continue regardless of scandals, money is everything in the US.
If you want to bring Money into and speak of the Death Penalty you are really not discussing a pretty key aspect of that: The scorched earth policy it would have on the rest of the town. If you have never been to State College is it literally in the middle of nowhere. It is not a stretch to say that there are a large number of hotels, restaurants, bars and stores that make 50% of there revenue for the year during the 3 months of football season. If Penn State football went away a large number of these businesses would completely go under. Obviously none of these people had anything to do with the crime and aren't high on the hog business owners that can just easily start up another hotel or restaurant in a different city.
This would have a larger impact of making the area a less desirable place to live, would make the university less desirable for faculty and students and in the long term really damage the school as an academic institution. For the majority of kids growing up in PA Penn State represents far and away the most affordable and best education opportunity they have. Destroying the university would ultimately punish them also.
This is not my own crazy thinking, there have been a number of people affiliated with the NCAA that said they regretted applying the death penalty to SMU because of the unforeseen consequences that happened that were associated with it (and also provided as a reason for why they didn't give it to the NCAA).
As I mentioned in my other post, I did in fact go to Penn State, but I am by no means a big supporter of football or huge fan of the school as a whole. However, having lived in the area for about 5 years I can also say there are a lot of things people don't consider when they just yell about shutting the whole place down.
I know the area a bit and you are right, the death penalty would have been disastrous to many, many people and I was always against that. No penalty can undo the horrors that were done on that campus but PSU and JoePa did need to pay a price for the role that they played in all of this. The loss of that record was a way to pay that penalty and also to now hurt the innocent kids in that program.
-
ESPN is reporting that JoePa will have his wins reinstated and will be (again) the all-time winningest coach in NCAA Football. (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12179571/joe-paterno-111-wins-were-vacated-restored)
I lived in PA for 6 years just prior to this scandal and have a lot of PSU fans for friends. It has always been my opinion that the one punishment meted out to PSU that really stung them (and the only one they truly cared about) was the loss of those wins and that record. In my opinion, PSU, it's alumni and fans were most concerned about their idol's tarnished image and that record. I am certain that most of these people who are now trumpeting this as vindication and are conveniently ignoring the fact that JoePa was likely the most powerful man at that university and if he showed the slightest interest in following up on what he was told about Sandusky that there would have been an investigation long ago. The rest of the university leaders simply followed his disinterest and how many more children were tormented because of that? PSU fans, please do not celebrate too hard...
I have to register some significant disagreement here (and agreement). One is that we should wait for the results of various law suits and trials to have a final verdict of who cared and didn't, but this idea that JoePa was pushing around the head of campus police and the president and the AD....no way. JoePa was never known to do stuff like that and typically if you want to ignore something or cover it up you don't start by going to your bosses within 48 hours. You don't cover stuff up by exposing something. JoePa and McQueery seemed to have done the minimum required of them. The idea that these other men in the prime of their careers get to blame JoePa seems silly to me.
I somewhat agree that the wins thing has been very important to PSU fans. They feel JoePa was never given due process and that the DA has said he was never under any suspicion of a crime and that he was the only one who did what he was supposed to do. They also feel its clear that the NCAA bluffed PSU and really had very little authority to do what they did and that the Freeh report was just a bogus thing paid for by the BOT in order to cover themselves.
Also the death penalty would never have happened to PSU. They make way too much money for the NCAA. It would be a little like MLB giving the death penalty to the Yankees.
-
If anyone who knew about the Sandusky scandal had wanted it to be dealt with, they would have continued to contact different law enforcement groups until they found one that actually wanted to deal with the problem instead of cover up. At the very least they would have gone to the media.
I don't see how there's any way Paterno (or McQueery or anyone else in this scandal) could have wanted to end this tragedy and bring Sandusky to justice if the result was that this was covered up for a decade.
This is a Kitty Genovese situation - everyone involved is at fault. I don't think any punishment was too harsh. Honestly this may be unfair but I think Paterno got off easy. I wish he would have had to be alive to see himself be brought to justice in a courtroom and his cowardice put on display for the entire world to see.
-
ESPN is reporting that JoePa will have his wins reinstated and will be (again) the all-time winningest coach in NCAA Football. (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/12179571/joe-paterno-111-wins-were-vacated-restored)
I lived in PA for 6 years just prior to this scandal and have a lot of PSU fans for friends. It has always been my opinion that the one punishment meted out to PSU that really stung them (and the only one they truly cared about) was the loss of those wins and that record. In my opinion, PSU, it's alumni and fans were most concerned about their idol's tarnished image and that record. I am certain that most of these people who are now trumpeting this as vindication and are conveniently ignoring the fact that JoePa was likely the most powerful man at that university and if he showed the slightest interest in following up on what he was told about Sandusky that there would have been an investigation long ago. The rest of the university leaders simply followed his disinterest and how many more children were tormented because of that? PSU fans, please do not celebrate too hard...
I have to register some significant disagreement here (and agreement). One is that we should wait for the results of various law suits and trials to have a final verdict of who cared and didn't, but this idea that JoePa was pushing around the head of campus police and the president and the AD....no way. JoePa was never known to do stuff like that and typically if you want to ignore something or cover it up you don't start by going to your bosses within 48 hours. You don't cover stuff up by exposing something. JoePa and McQueery seemed to have done the minimum required of them. The idea that these other men in the prime of their careers get to blame JoePa seems silly to me.
I somewhat agree that the wins thing has been very important to PSU fans. They feel JoePa was never given due process and that the DA has said he was never under any suspicion of a crime and that he was the only one who did what he was supposed to do. They also feel its clear that the NCAA bluffed PSU and really had very little authority to do what they did and that the Freeh report was just a bogus thing paid for by the BOT in order to cover themselves.
Also the death penalty would never have happened to PSU. They make way too much money for the NCAA. It would be a little like MLB giving the death penalty to the Yankees.
I did not say that JoePa did or should push anyone around or that he covered anything up. Maybe you came up with that when I said that JoePa was likely the most powerful person on the campus...I should have said "most influential". I guess my point is that JoePa did the very minimum and if he of all people would have followed up the others would have followed up and investigated further. He did not need to strong arm or push anyone around. I do not mean to come across as if I am lambasting JoePa but I think he made a mistake (one with horrible consequences) by not following up more on this. Sandusky is the real monster here but there are others who could have and should have done more. Knowing the reputation that JoePa built up over the years it amazes me that he did not do more and I have no doubt that at the end that this ate him up quite a bit. All in all it is a sad and horrible thing that happened here.
-
In the PSU thread at the time, I posed the question, say Sandusky was not a child molester but was a con man running scams. Did the same type of things, used PSU and the football program to lure people in, got them to invest, and basically stole their money. Do you have the same gut reaction? Does the NCAA do the same thing? There was a mix of reactions. To me that says, it is more the type of crime that had people up in arms not the actual act. Because the crimes were so grotesque, people reacted more harshly. In other words, emotion played too large a role. There should be no emotion.
Also, it should be noted that the incident McQueary spoke of, was one of the few indictments in which Sandusky was found not guilty. Maybe not quite so cut and dry afterall.
i have a friend who when he was young was repeatedly molested by a man at church. this guy is now a career criminal, in and out of jail, and has serious emotional problems. you can see the wildness in his eyes, it's absolutely tragic. his siblings are all the exact opposite, they're stable and make good decisions. that pedophile ruined that boy's psyche.
this kind of crime is completely on a different level than theft. money can be recovered; when you abuse a child you're dealing severe emotional damage which will likely never fully go away.
and regarding the response to abuse, the abuse of my friend was actually discovered at the church itself; the police were immediately called by an adult who witnessed it, and the rapist was banned from the church and went to prison. hopefully he has never done it again. the church handled it the right way.
penn state should have done the same, but they dragged their feet because they didn't want to threaten their idol and cash cow, penn state college football.
i think they got off lightly, in retrospect.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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).
-
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.
-
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.
-
I guess they ll think about it ....before they go raising any new statues in his honor... :-X
-
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.
-
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/ (http://onwardstate.com/2014/11/05/internal-emails-show-ncaa-questioned-jurisdiction-over-penn-state/)
“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.”
“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…”
“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.”
“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.”
-
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.
-
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/ (http://onwardstate.com/2014/11/05/internal-emails-show-ncaa-questioned-jurisdiction-over-penn-state/)
“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.”
“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…”
“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.”
“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.”
Onward State is, quite simply, Penn State’s blog.
What began as a small project by three innovative Penn State freshmen in 43 Simmons Hall has grown into an editorial team of writers, photographers, videographers, and editors who work to produce content that is interesting and relevant. Onward State seeks to provide the Penn State community with a slice of student life that can only be conveyed by real Penn State students, and drive the conversation to help improve the Penn State experience. We harness the power of social media not only to share content rapidly, but also to get a pulse for the Penn State student body.
Since publishing our first post on November 17, 2008, Onward State has established itself as one of the quickest and most informative places for Penn State students, faculty, staff, and alumni to find the news that matters most to them. Our award-winning staff works tirelessly to keep the community abreast of everything deserving of coverage.
Onward State is produced entirely by students at Penn State and was founded by Eli Glazier, Evan Kalikow, and Davis Shaver.
http://onwardstate.com/about/
Curious. But who wrote that particular post?
Kevin Horne was the editor of Onward State from 2012-2014, and currently holds the position of Managing Editor Emeritus. He graduated from Penn State with degrees journalism and political science in 2014 and is currently seeking his J.D. at the Penn State Dickinson School of Law. A third generation Penn Stater from Williamsport, Pa., Kevin is a director of the Nittany Valley Society 501(c)(3) and is involved in student government.
Oh.
-
But unless you are claiming the quoted emails are just made up, your post has no relevancy to the topic, so I'm not sure why you even made it.
-
My guess is that you didn't actually dive into the PDF, which has a large number of emails from which to excerpt choice lines, and provides context for every one of those seemingly '[dang]ing' quotes.
And I get it -- It's much easier to read a Penn Stater's blog about how Penn State probably didn't deserve to have the hammer swung at it, particularly when you, by your own admission, are looking for confirmation of your own suspicions.
;)
-
The whole reinstatement of Paterno's win thing is a bit laughable. The guy's legacy is already tarnished and will continue to be. Whether or not he has "most wins ever" title isn't really going to change that. I guess its a moral victory for the Paterno family and those particular alums who hold the football program as the sacred cow but the damage is done.
-
My guess is that you didn't actually dive into the PDF, which has a large number of emails from which to excerpt choice lines, and provides context for every one of those seemingly '[dang]ing' quotes.
And I get it -- It's much easier to read a Penn Stater's blog about how Penn State probably didn't deserve to have the hammer swung at it, particularly when you, by your own admission, are looking for confirmation of your own suspicions.
;)
of course they were pulled from emails to fit the purpose they want, but no amount of context is going to change that language.
I mean here is an ESPN article on it, would you have felt better had I used that one. http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11826657/internal-ncaa-emails-offer-glimpse-penn-state-sanctions-jerry-sandusky-child-sex-abuse-scandal (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11826657/internal-ncaa-emails-offer-glimpse-penn-state-sanctions-jerry-sandusky-child-sex-abuse-scandal)
or maybe USA Today http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2014/11/05/ncaa-emails-expose-questionable-governing-practices-for-penn-state-punishment/18531861/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2014/11/05/ncaa-emails-expose-questionable-governing-practices-for-penn-state-punishment/18531861/)
how about deadspin ing-emails-show-the-ncaa-was-bluffing-on-penn-sta-1655021442]http://deadspin.com/[dang]ing-emails-show-the-ncaa-was-bluffing-on-penn-sta-1655021442 (http://deadspin.com/[dang)
Or for the records, that PSU blog, they are the ones credited by USA Today, Deadspin, and numerous other sources as actually publishing the emails first.
The Deadspin article actually has a number of the emails in their entirety (though some parts were redacted before they were produced in the litigation).
Context doesn't change the facts at all, the NCAA didn't have the jurisdiction to punish Penn State for this, and used PSU's embarrassment into getting punishment that never would have stood up.
-
The whole reinstatement of Paterno's win thing is a bit laughable. The guy's legacy is already tarnished and will continue to be. Whether or not he has "most wins ever" title isn't really going to change that. I guess its a moral victory for the Paterno family and those particular alums who hold the football program as the sacred cow but the damage is done.
would be like Pete Rose getting into the hall of fame or something haha
-
The whole reinstatement of Paterno's win thing is a bit laughable. The guy's legacy is already tarnished and will continue to be. Whether or not he has "most wins ever" title isn't really going to change that. I guess its a moral victory for the Paterno family and those particular alums who hold the football program as the sacred cow but the damage is done.
TP, I agree. Joe Pa is forever tarnished, those who think about him will always think about the scandals. Someone in the future will google him, as I did today and about 1/3 of the weblinks are about the scandal. I bet there will be even more in the future. Those kinds of records rarely stand more than 40 -50 years though and some young genius coach will take him off number one and he will be an afterthought as people who cared about him die off.
-
The whole reinstatement of Paterno's win thing is a bit laughable. The guy's legacy is already tarnished and will continue to be. Whether or not he has "most wins ever" title isn't really going to change that. I guess its a moral victory for the Paterno family and those particular alums who hold the football program as the sacred cow but the damage is done.
TP, I agree. Joe Pa is forever tarnished, those who think about him will always think about the scandals. Someone in the future will google him, as I did today and about 1/3 of the weblinks are about the scandal. I bet there will be even more in the future. Those kinds of records rarely stand more than 40 -50 years though and some young genius coach will take him off number one and he will be an afterthought as people who cared about him die off.
I'm not actually sure his record will be broken. Not the way the game is today. A lot of the hot coaches end up trying the NFL (Spurrier, Saban, Chip Kelly, etc.) or they end up exhausted and retire earlier than the guys in the past (though some like Meyer come back). Now there are more games now, but I still don't think anyone gets there. Beamer has the most wins of the active coaches at 273, but 42 of those are from Murray State. Paterno has 409. Even counting the 42 Murray State wins, Beamer needs just about 14 more years of 10 wins a year to pass him up, I don't know if he gets there given he is already 68 (and you really can't count the Murray State wins since if you count all levels John Gagliardi is the all time leader and not Paterno). The only other active DIA coaches with 200 wins are Steve Spurrier, Brian Kelly (though 118 of Kelly's wins were not DIA so don't count), and Dennis Franchione (like Kelly most of his aren't DIA wins). Bill Snyder and his 187 DIA wins and Gary Pinkel and his 186 DIA wins are the next closest, but I think age keeps them from getting anywhere near 409. Urban Meyer probably has the best shot. He is 50 years old, at a school where 10 wins should be his minimum for the foreseeable future, and has 142 wins. Then again he has already missed time for health reasons and would need 26.7 more years of 10 wins to get there. Bob Stoops at 54 and 168 wins also has a shot.
-
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 - **** that guy.
maybe the reason it was so funny to the press was that they knew him and his wife and knew they had the best possible relationship and that she largely wore the pants. You think the multimillion dollar gifts to the school (largest in history from an employee to his employer) were his idea?
-
Since the media is a court room now and all facts come from them, and since blogs and the internet are now media I guess it would make sense to also listen to the defense per se, and decide if you trust Freeh more than the Paternos.
http://www.framingpaterno.com/list-most-under-known-facts-sandusky-scandal
Also. There are some things I don't get here. McQueery sees this and goes to....his father? Really? That's what you do? Then his father says ....go to an 86 year old man who is no longer this other man's employer and is not law enforcement or any kind of abuse specialist. Really? Is that what you would tell your kid?
Sooooo....naturally....JoePa immediately goes to ......the Athletic Director and the head of campus police. They say...."Joe. Who else knows about this highly illegal act?" He says "Ummm....me, Mike McQueery, Mike's Dad, Jerry of course, now you two, and of course there's the kid".
So naturally the response is now...."Ok. Let's cover this up but without involving Mike's dad or the kid or Jerry. Because that makes total sense. This is probably the only time Jerry ever did something like this".
So that's I guess what Freeh wants us to believe and that's why PSU was fined $60mill and banned from bowls and recruiting, and had to forfeit wins.
-
I think this video makes some fair points
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJqRXKBrFRU
-
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 - **** that guy.
maybe the reason it was so funny to the press was that they knew him and his wife and knew they had the best possible relationship and that she largely wore the pants. You think the multimillion dollar gifts to the school (largest in history from an employee to his employer) were his idea?
How would you possibly know that they had the best possible relationship, that she wore the pants (i.e., she was in charge of the household), and that his gifts to the school were her idea?
I get so curious about how people come to feel that they really know celebrities. Even if you've heard them speak about their relatonship, or, saw them interact on Regis and Kathy Lee, you can't really think that you know how their relationship is behind closed doors, can you?
-
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 - **** that guy.
maybe the reason it was so funny to the press was that they knew him and his wife and knew they had the best possible relationship and that she largely wore the pants. You think the multimillion dollar gifts to the school (largest in history from an employee to his employer) were his idea?
How would you possibly know that they had the best possible relationship, that she wore the pants (i.e., she was in charge of the household), and that his gifts to the school were her idea?
I get so curious about how people come to feel that they really know celebrities. Even if you've heard them speak about their relatonship, or, saw them interact on Regis and Kathy Lee, you can't really think that you know how their relationship is behind closed doors, can you?
They were a very transparent couple in a small town. Many many people knew them in many capacities. They weren't a Hollywood couple or a Kennedy hiding in their Hills villa or compound.
-
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 - **** that guy.
maybe the reason it was so funny to the press was that they knew him and his wife and knew they had the best possible relationship and that she largely wore the pants. You think the multimillion dollar gifts to the school (largest in history from an employee to his employer) were his idea?
How would you possibly know that they had the best possible relationship, that she wore the pants (i.e., she was in charge of the household), and that his gifts to the school were her idea?
I get so curious about how people come to feel that they really know celebrities. Even if you've heard them speak about their relatonship, or, saw them interact on Regis and Kathy Lee, you can't really think that you know how their relationship is behind closed doors, can you?
They were a very transparent couple in a small town. Many many people knew them in many capacities. They weren't a Hollywood couple or a Kennedy hiding in their Hills villa or compound.
Listen, I don't know the first thing about Joe Paterno, and I think that football is a sport that needs to be banned, quite honestly, after watching that piece by frontline. With that said, if you were in my shoes, and after hearing about the horrifying Jerry Sandusky scandal you see such a clip about this 'legend' 'joking' about going home to beat his wife, what would you think? Even Bill Cosby wasn't that graphic when people were shouting at him at his latest performance. I believe he said that, "you should be careful about drinking with me," or something, after that was voiced from the crowd. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I don't think that you can say things like that after such incidents are revealed. Leave that to the comics (or, in Cosby's case, the other comics). Just, please stop talking, lol.
-
I'm not actually sure his record will be broken.
Great Analysis, I think I am wrong and your right. TP
-
Saw this on a PSU facebook thing. I'm not 100% sure what all of it refers to. My best guess is that the way this thing is seen in the state of PA is really different than a lot of the rest of the country.
I think the best case scenario at the exact moment for the JoeBots and PSU diehards is to get to a place where PSU's position and the position of these administrators and Joe isn't really believed or trusted, but neither is the Freeh Report....which would then put us in a position of waiting for trials and lawsuits, which in a perfect world should have happened in the first place, but the media has a strong interest in wanting to be perceived as a court room and as investigators/prosecutors. I think we in New England got a sense of that with deflategate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6OnVodl44I
-
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/05/jerry_sandusky_cover-up_charge.html
So conspiracy charges have been dropped and a perjury charge.
The theory in PSU circles is that these guys are just neeeeevvvverrr going to go to trial. They think the whole case was based on these guys ratting each other out but they never did so now they have no case against them.
To be fair to Spanier he's suing PSU so he doesn't seem to mind going through discovery.
-
Just like the church. Lot of people getting away free . Evil stuff.
-
http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/education/penn-state/jerry-sandusky/article108012672.html
another charge has been dropped. Not sure if you would hear about it in the main stream media.
Not sure what is taking so long to actually put these guys on trial. I've never heard of a 4 year wait.
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
Why do you believe this? Because of what Louis Freeh says? What if they drop all charges for everyone involved except Sandusky?
Also....in regards to the football coach....going to the campus police within 36 hours of being told of a vague incident (that didn't even happen) seems an odd way to knowingly allow children to be hurt
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
Why do you believe this? Because of what Louis Freeh says? What if they drop all charges for everyone involved except Sandusky?
Also....in regards to the football coach....going to the campus police within 36 hours of being told of a vague incident (that didn't even happen) seems an odd way to knowingly allow children to be hurt
Yeah, I admit that I haven't followed the story as close as you, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that people like mkogav are even less versed on it than I am. To think that Paterno knowingly covered up countless molestations so that he could protect Penn State football seems a bit short sighted to say the least. Besides, he was the big name in the program, not Sandusky, why protect that piece of trash?
I am on record as saying that Paterno got a bad wrap in this case and I am standing by that. It is a real shame how quickly he went from hero to villain to dead.
-
I am on record as saying that Paterno got a bad wrap in this case and I am standing by that. It is a real shame how quickly he went from hero to villain to dead.
I am going to guess that it is not a shame how quickly he went to dead.
-
Eff Paterno. He's a scumbag.
-
Just like the church. Lot of people getting away free . Evil stuff.
TP. Paterno is the equivalent of the pope. Evil mf'ers.
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
Why do you believe this? Because of what Louis Freeh says? What if they drop all charges for everyone involved except Sandusky?
Also....in regards to the football coach....going to the campus police within 36 hours of being told of a vague incident (that didn't even happen) seems an odd way to knowingly allow children to be hurt
Yeah, I admit that I haven't followed the story as close as you, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that people like mkogav are even less versed on it than I am. To think that Paterno knowingly covered up countless molestations so that he could protect Penn State football seems a bit short sighted to say the least. Besides, he was the big name in the program, not Sandusky, why protect that piece of trash?
I am on record as saying that Paterno got a bad wrap in this case and I am standing by that. It is a real shame how quickly he went from hero to villain to dead.
Personally I wish he were still alive to testify if needed.
-
Time to move on from this garbage...put Sandusky in the Electric Chair, pull the switch...bury him in a ditch...wipe your hands and get on with life.
-
"Short sighted"... wow.
Go ahead and do not stand by that post.
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
Why do you believe this? Because of what Louis Freeh says? What if they drop all charges for everyone involved except Sandusky?
Also....in regards to the football coach....going to the campus police within 36 hours of being told of a vague incident (that didn't even happen) seems an odd way to knowingly allow children to be hurt
I find it very hard to believe they didn't know.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17015181/testimony-unsealed-documents-alleges-joe-paterno-knew-jerry-sandusky-abuse-1976
-
Guy was a sick individual. .....old man Parerno should have investigated and fired him soon as he knew .
To turn his head on something like this was criminal to your fellow humans .
He failed an important test in life.
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
Why do you believe this? Because of what Louis Freeh says? What if they drop all charges for everyone involved except Sandusky?
Also....in regards to the football coach....going to the campus police within 36 hours of being told of a vague incident (that didn't even happen) seems an odd way to knowingly allow children to be hurt
I find it very hard to believe they didn't know.
http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/17015181/testimony-unsealed-documents-alleges-joe-paterno-knew-jerry-sandusky-abuse-1976
See now the media story is evolving to an entire team of coaches in on a decades long conspiracy to continuously harm children for the sake of football, because presumably, if they turn in a coach it will immediately destroy the team, only this is the first conspiracy in the history of the world where neither the perpetrator, nor the victim are in the conspiracy, and none of the coaches are ever charged.
Or maybe someone was just trying to get a lot of insurance money (which they did get) because PSU was paying out without vetting claims and the guy that was pointed at wasn't alive to defend himself. The other coaches that are alive have completely denied this happened.
I just see no actual evidence. The coaching staff (I'm talking mostly about 2001 now) are neither children welfare experts, nor investigators, and Sandusky wasn't an employee at that point. Rather the coach goes to the campus police almost immediately and then they kick him off campus, even though that specific incident reported never even happened.
Further is the assertion that these guys all knew, but then Paterno is going to the police anyway? Kind of an odd way to avoid being found out.
I fully understand the idea that this is similar to the Catholic church thing, but there seems to be an extra element of overkill here. Like because one priest did something every single other priest knew about it for decades and did nothing.
What happens if a staff member at a school gets caught doing something? Does that mean every single other staff member was involved, including the one that reports it the next day to the police?
I think we should wait for actual evidence at actual trials. Only the trials aren't happening and charges keep getting dropped.
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
Why do you believe this? Because of what Louis Freeh says? What if they drop all charges for everyone involved except Sandusky?
Also....in regards to the football coach....going to the campus police within 36 hours of being told of a vague incident (that didn't even happen) seems an odd way to knowingly allow children to be hurt
Yeah, I admit that I haven't followed the story as close as you, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that people like mkogav are even less versed on it than I am. To think that Paterno knowingly covered up countless molestations so that he could protect Penn State football seems a bit short sighted to say the least. Besides, he was the big name in the program, not Sandusky, why protect that piece of trash?
I am on record as saying that Paterno got a bad wrap in this case and I am standing by that. It is a real shame how quickly he went from hero to villain to dead.
You want to believe that Paterno, was innocent. This has nothing to do with PSU football. I get it. It was only Sandusky and no one else. You are wrong. Someday you may understand.
Mk
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
Why do you believe this? Because of what Louis Freeh says? What if they drop all charges for everyone involved except Sandusky?
Also....in regards to the football coach....going to the campus police within 36 hours of being told of a vague incident (that didn't even happen) seems an odd way to knowingly allow children to be hurt
Yeah, I admit that I haven't followed the story as close as you, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that people like mkogav are even less versed on it than I am. To think that Paterno knowingly covered up countless molestations so that he could protect Penn State football seems a bit short sighted to say the least. Besides, he was the big name in the program, not Sandusky, why protect that piece of trash?
I am on record as saying that Paterno got a bad wrap in this case and I am standing by that. It is a real shame how quickly he went from hero to villain to dead.
You want to believe that Paterno, was innocent. This has nothing to do with PSU football. I get it. It was only Sandusky and no one else. You are wrong. Someday you may understand.
Mk
I agree it has nothing to do with football.
I don't have a problem with Paterno being guilty. But it needs to be proved. In a court.
I don't accept the results of trial by media.
Trial by media resulted in Deflategate. It resulted in the University of Virgina rape case thing (all lies). It resulted in the Duke rape case (all lies).
Right now we have a situation where it's been stated publicly by authorities that Paterno would never have faced charges (I'm not sure i believe that at all), and where the other guys are still waiting for trials years later, because realistically there is not enough evidence to go to trial, let alone convict them. And one of them is actually suing, so stuff might backfire.
The media used to do investigative journalism. Now it does horse race journalism for ratings. Speaking of which wikileaks is today stating an unknown state actor has cut their internet feed. Currently that's not being reported on msnbc.com or cnn.com. Gee I wonder why.
-
http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/18325512/lawsuit-alleges-msu-failed-act-claims-sex-abuse-school-usa-gymnastics-doctor (http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/18325512/lawsuit-alleges-msu-failed-act-claims-sex-abuse-school-usa-gymnastics-doctor)
I will be very very curious to see how the media treats this. Far more [dang]ing (and widespread) in my opinion for multiple reasons.
One thing is for certain....MSU won't be hiring Louis Freeh to do the internal investigation.
-
For decades PSU & their football coach knowingly allowed countless children to be raped under their watch b/c of a big $$$ game. Their punishment is nothing compared to their crimes.
Mk
Why do you believe this? Because of what Louis Freeh says? What if they drop all charges for everyone involved except Sandusky?
Also....in regards to the football coach....going to the campus police within 36 hours of being told of a vague incident (that didn't even happen) seems an odd way to knowingly allow children to be hurt
Yeah, I admit that I haven't followed the story as close as you, but I am going to go out on a limb and say that people like mkogav are even less versed on it than I am. To think that Paterno knowingly covered up countless molestations so that he could protect Penn State football seems a bit short sighted to say the least. Besides, he was the big name in the program, not Sandusky, why protect that piece of trash?
I am on record as saying that Paterno got a bad wrap in this case and I am standing by that. It is a real shame how quickly he went from hero to villain to dead.
You want to believe that Paterno, was innocent. This has nothing to do with PSU football. I get it. It was only Sandusky and no one else. You are wrong. Someday you may understand.
Mk
I agree it has nothing to do with football.
I don't have a problem with Paterno being guilty. But it needs to be proved. In a court.
I don't accept the results of trial by media.
Trial by media resulted in Deflategate. It resulted in the University of Virgina rape case thing (all lies). It resulted in the Duke rape case (all lies).
Right now we have a situation where it's been stated publicly by authorities that Paterno would never have faced charges (I'm not sure i believe that at all), and where the other guys are still waiting for trials years later, because realistically there is not enough evidence to go to trial, let alone convict them. And one of them is actually suing, so stuff might backfire.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/02/penn-state-ex-president-spanier-other-administrators-sentenced-in-sandusky-case.amp.html (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/02/penn-state-ex-president-spanier-other-administrators-sentenced-in-sandusky-case.amp.html)
So the news has been updated. 2-3 months in jail for three Penn State administrators, two of whom pled guilty and the third who was convicted. I guess there was enough evidence for a conviction after all. And the judge said the following of Paterno (who obviously will never be tried by an earthly court)
Describing the case as a "Shakespearean tragedy," the judge also chided Paterno for failing to report the crimes, saying: "Paterno could've made that phone call without getting his hands dirty."
Now that it's been trial by an actual criminal court, will you accept the results?
-
Generally speaking I do accept these results on multiple levels.
I said for a long time I wanted to wait to see the trial results and now they've happened. I'm glad Spanier fought this because then we had at least one trial where we got more context.
I am generally satisfied with the explanation that Paterno met the minimum level of legality by reporting it to the experts and then walked away from it as he wasn't an expert in this.
I accept that largely these men made a decision together....a bad one. A really really bad one that was avoidable at the time and that should never have been made.
I like that at least two of these guys basically said "It's not that we did nothing. We did several things and in the end made a totally wrong decision and we accept the punishment for it."
I'm happy that we have learned that this was not a PSU football or culture problem. PSU football did the right thing by reporting it to the campus police and supervisors. It was a problem with three guys....well 4 if you include Sandusky.
I'm happy that these guys are going to serve as an example to everyone else.
I am interested in what could happen on appeal, but my understanding is that a big part of the appeal is based on statute of limitations.
I hope the media and authorities are as thorough and unrelenting on the Baylor case and the Michigan State case as this.
My guess is they won't be because there's no big name like Paterno involved and those schools never really put themselves out there as schools that were more moral than anyone else. The sensationalism and potential for ratings isn't there in the same way.
-
I think these are some fair questions that remain and apparently this is not 100% done. The Paternos are still suing the NCAA for defamation, but it looks like we may not see some of the evidence.
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/06/will_we_ever_know_the_truth_un.html (http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/06/will_we_ever_know_the_truth_un.html)
http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/education/penn-state/jerry-sandusky/article155773494.html (http://www.centredaily.com/news/local/education/penn-state/jerry-sandusky/article155773494.html)
-
I don't think I'm going to watch the Paterno HBO movie. I've heard different things. The comments section of this article are interesting too. A generation of younger students going there now are nowhere near as loyal to Paterno as others were so they have slightly different attitudes.
https://onwardstate.com/2018/04/09/wont-watch-hbos-paterno-movie/ (https://onwardstate.com/2018/04/09/wont-watch-hbos-paterno-movie/)