Author Topic: In retrospect what do you now think about the PSU scandal?  (Read 19521 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline greg683x

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3047
  • Tommy Points: 485
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.
Greg

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1238
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.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Offline Moranis

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14973
  • Tommy Points: 710
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.
Ohio State 2014/15 National Champions.

Offline eja117

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16217
  • Tommy Points: 1008
    • Celtics Green myspace
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.

Offline fairweatherfan

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16908
  • Tommy Points: 2162
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
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. 

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Jae Crowder
  • Posts: 313
  • Tommy Points: 46
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...
« Last Edit: January 16, 2015, 02:12:24 PM by chicagoceltic »
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

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

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1238
Agreed.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Offline celticsclay

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6585
  • Tommy Points: 800
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.

Offline celticsclay

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6585
  • Tommy Points: 800
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.


Offline chicagoceltic

  • Jae Crowder
  • Posts: 313
  • Tommy Points: 46
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.
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

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

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Jae Crowder
  • Posts: 313
  • Tommy Points: 46
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.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2015, 04:05:32 PM by chicagoceltic »
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

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

Offline eja117

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16217
  • Tommy Points: 1008
    • Celtics Green myspace
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.

Offline littleteapot

  • Isaiah Thomas
  • Posts: 802
  • Tommy Points: 87
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.
How do you feel about websites where people with similar interests share their opinions?
I'm forum!

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Jae Crowder
  • Posts: 313
  • Tommy Points: 46
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.
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

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

Offline kraidstar

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1060
  • Tommy Points: 159
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.