-
Comment -
It makes no sense. What does the wins and loses have to do with any of this. They did not cheat to get them. Stupid NCAA.Comment -
Freeh Report found emails showing that he was influential in deciding not to report Sandusky. He was part of the conversation that let a rapist go unreported and enabled him to use Penn State to attract more victims and rape them in their facilities.
I used to respect Paterno, but I lost it before all this scandal hit. It was during the Ohio State scandal when Paterno was giving excuses for Tressel covering up the violations that I lost my respect for it. This scandal hit not too long after that.Comment -
Send this to the Saloon!Comment -
It makes sense for me. Freeh report found evidence that avoiding bad publicity was among the causes they covered up Sandusky. Anytime an athletic association leadership makes a decision to cover up crimes and let crimes continue in their facilities, I am fine with taking away their wins. Obviously they don't do it out of good of their heart for the rapist.
Want your wins? Easy, don't cover up crimes and let them continue in your facilities.Comment -
I guess the ncaa did not want a guy who was cool with his pal's pedophilia sitting atop of one of their most prestigious records in sports.
Excellent moveComment -
it sends a message to all big football (or any sport) programs. That none of the on court stuff matters anywhere near as keeping your institution run in ways that will not make the NCAA look bad.
like I said before, its a kick in the nuts mainly to the fan base that continues to adore everything the university and football program were supposed to stand for.
does it really matter if we still say PSU went 10-1 or 0-11 or whatever back in 2002?
no not really. So i'm not sure why its even worth people saying its unfair or dumb of the ncaa to do.
if it doesn't matter in your head...then it doesn't matter
in my head it makes me chuckle
in the victims' and families heads it might give a tiny jolt of revenge/justice satisfaction of "ha finally, serves them right, and someone HAS/IS finally heard my pain"Comment -
Unless something else is known that I am simply glossing over, his illegality in this whole thing is minimum to none. So, assuming that - we can also say that pedophilia is outside the scope of the NCAA to punish. We can say however, the NCAA can get involved based on charging them with lack of institutional control, but if they are to go that route - the sanctions don't correlate very well.
First issue I have is with taking away the wins from the players who played from 1998 and onward. They did nothing wrong in this instance, and the are being punished. Furthermore, let us never confuse this as a football issue. This is an administrative issue. As such, the administrators that are guilty have been fired and are being charged or will be charged in a court of law.
My whole argument is, the NCAA has next to no business in this, and if they are to go the lack of institutional control route, the loss of wins doesn't make sense.
I get why they want to do it, they want to knock Paterno off the top line - fine. But in doing so, you have simply punished hundreds of hard working good student athletes. That does not make sense.
We need to stop sensationalizing this story, realize Paterno would have never stayed night one in jail for this, because he never stuck his dick in a small child - as so many are so quick to associate him with.Comment -
Chalky,
Covering up a crime is illegal. You don't have the right to know someone is raping kids, and then police it yourself. It's called being an accomplice. Penn State, Joe included, knew of Sanduskys crimes and tried to police them on their own.
How is this hard to get?Comment -
If he is in fact seen as covering it up. That is a stretch. His sole responsibility is to take it to his superiors, that is it. He did that. Should he have done more? You are goddamn right - but believe me when I say he was not going to spend night 1 in jail. Accomplice liability is a stretch. Accessory too.
With all that said, even if you want to say he is criminally liable - it is still outside the purview of the NCAA.Comment -
Does it really hurt the ayers? Not really. The memories of the glory, the ttriumph, the trophies ect. It's not a big deal. It would have been nice if people in power would have given half as much effort defending 9 year old boys as a lot of apologists feel for paterno or former players ect. I mean is lavarr Arrington gonna survive the stripping of wins? Is Larry Johnson? Ect. I think soComment -
The fans who are up in arms over this just shows how widespread the problem is.
To Penn St maybe football just really is more important than child rape. At least they're not trying to pretend it isn't.Comment -
I want to be clear, I am not a penn state fan, never have been, could not care less if that exists or not. However, I do watch ESPN, and have an understanding of the issue, and it is outrageous how ridiculous this has become.Comment -
300th Win
For what its worth, Joe Paterno never used email to my knowledge. However, he may have dictated messages to his secretary or someone else who used email. I would like to see the emails with Joe Paterno's name on them though. I could care less about the penalties the NCAA imposed on Penn State because I don't have a dog in that race ----- WAR EAGLE!!!!!
Julie Henderson
Comment -
I have Espn, stayed in a holiday express, and still know the most ridiculous aspect is that paterno and ccompany were cool with Sandusky bringing kids to molest to bowl games, flying with the team, staying in the same hotel and they didn't do shit about it. Day after day as he brought kids to campus.Comment -
Year 2107 they will over turn this rulingComment -
This may be the most ridiculous of all of the "blame Joe" nonsense that has come out since the Boards "Cover Our Ass Freeh" report came out. Freeh was hired by the Board to dig up and place as much blame on Joe as possible to help fend off the Paterno family's wrongful termination suit. But the most absurd slide of all in this BS is the one that says "after 1998 Joe failed to closely monitor Sandusky's behavior". First, that might be because Sandusky left PSU in 1999. But more over, Joe Paterno was a football coach, not a law enforcement official, or a Child Welfare Department employee, or anybody who was in any position to know what Sandusky was doing much less "monitor" his behavior. The alleged notes that claim to say that Joe wanted to be kept informed of the 1998 investigation led to him being informed that the charges were dropped and Sandusky was cleared. So what a reporter is saying is Joe should have confronted Sandusky and said "even though you don't work here any more, and you have been cleared of the charges against you, I am going to monitor your private life behavior?" Ridiculous. It was also made clear that Sandusky was given emeritous status and access to PSU by The President of the University, not by Joe Paterno and it was part of a retirement package, not because he was connected to the football program. Nobody knows what, if anything, Joe discussed with Tim Curley until Curleys trial.
Joe Paterno's job was coaching the football team, not "watching" Jerry Sandusky when he was on campus. Joe had no way of knowing when Sandusky was on campus much less have the time to follow him around "watching" him. If the university has suspicions, they should have had security watch him. How can you say that after the 1998 incident (where Sandusky was cleared) that Joe never said "get away from PSU football?". Sandusky quickly decided to retire in 1999. You don't think Joe was behind that and that was his way of saying "I don't care if you were cleared, I don't want you around my program"? Freeh said he could not draw any conclusions about that. Also don't overlook several other facts. The incident in the shower in 2001 took place at 9:30 at night. Long after the Lash Building was closed. Where was security? Joe was no longer there to "watch" him. How do you know Joe was "OK" with Sandusky having an office right next to him? Sandusky was given office space by Graham Spanier as part of his retirement package. Another important fact left out by Freeh was that Tim Curley and Graham Spanier told Sandusky not to bring any more kids on campus and took away his keys to the locker room after the 2001 shower incident. Mike McQueary testified at the Curley/Schultz hearing that he saw Sandusky around campus after 2001 but he never saw him on campus with a child after that. I am not in denial about anything. I am just not willing to drink the Freeh Report coolaide. Especially when he states that the cornerstone of his investigation was a conversation between Joe and Curely that he admits he knows nothing about other than a vague reference in an email. He never talked to either party so he has no way of knowing what Joe said. Is Joe guilty of poor judgement, probably; he is guilty of making a mistake, probably. But is he guilty of knowingly "enabling" or "allowing" Sandusky to molest children? No way in hell. Is he "complicit" in the crimes of a former employee? No way in hell. And no bogus report by anybody is ever going to change that.
Comment -
[QUOTE=ttwarrior1;15464784]This may be the most ridiculous of all of the "blame Joe" nonsense that has come out since the Boards "Cover Our Ass Freeh" report came out. Freeh was hired by the Board to dig up and place as much blame on Joe as possible to help fend off the Paterno family's wrongful termination suit. But the most absurd slide of all in this BS is the one that says "after 1998 Joe failed to closely monitor Sandusky's behavior". First, that might be because Sandusky left PSU in 1999. But more over, Joe Paterno was a football coach, not a law enforcement official, or a Child Welfare Department employee, or anybody who was in any position to know what Sandusky was doing much less "monitor" his behavior. The alleged notes that claim to say that Joe wanted to be kept informed of the 1998 investigation led to him being informed that the charges were dropped and Sandusky was cleared. So what a reporter is saying is Joe should have confronted Sandusky and said "even though you don't work here any more, and you have been cleared of the charges against you, I am going to monitor your private life behavior?" Ridiculous. It was also made clear that Sandusky was given emeritous status and access to PSU by The President of the University, not by Joe Paterno and it was part of a retirement package, not because he was connected to the football program. Nobody knows what, if anything, Joe discussed with Tim Curley until Curleys trial.
Joe Paterno's job was coaching the football team, not "watching" Jerry Sandusky when he was on campus. Joe had no way of knowing when Sandusky was on campus much less have the time to follow him around "watching" him. If the university has suspicions, they should have had security watch him. How can you say that after the 1998 incident (where Sandusky was cleared) that Joe never said "get away from PSU football?". Sandusky quickly decided to retire in 1999. You don't think Joe was behind that and that was his way of saying "I don't care if you were cleared, I don't want you around my program"? Freeh said he could not draw any conclusions about that. Also don't overlook several other facts. The incident in the shower in 2001 took place at 9:30 at night. Long after the Lash Building was closed. Where was security? Joe was no longer there to "watch" him. How do you know Joe was "OK" with Sandusky having an office right next to him? Sandusky was given office space by Graham Spanier as part of his retirement package. Another important fact left out by Freeh was that Tim Curley and Graham Spanier told Sandusky not to bring any more kids on campus and took away his keys to the locker room after the 2001 shower incident. Mike McQueary testified at the Curley/Schultz hearing that he saw Sandusky around campus after 2001 but he never saw him on campus with a child after that. I am not in denial about anything. I am just not willing to drink the Freeh Report coolaide. Especially when he states that the cornerstone of his investigation was a conversation between Joe and Curely that he admits he knows nothing about other than a vague reference in an email. He never talked to either party so he has no way of knowing what Joe said. Is Joe guilty of poor judgement, probably; he is guilty of making a mistake, probably. But is he guilty of knowingly "enabling" or "allowing" Sandusky to molest children? No way in hell. Is he "complicit" in the crimes of a former employee? No way in hell. And no bogus report by anybody is ever going to change that.
You mean to tell me that pile of shit paterno didnt know what was going on? get the fukk out of here. that pile of shit was probably whacking his old prick while sandusky was banging those little childrenComment -
wait I can't read all that.. but I got 1 paragraph in and got two sentiments...
1)he couldn't have known what was going on-he didn't follow him around
2) of course he knew...he forced him out in 1999 from coaching
both of those arguments suck and hence make the rest not read-ableComment -
u have to admit, one hell of post i made
Do you know what your mom, dad, sisters, brothers , co workers , kids are always doing??? i mean all of them, not just one.
Was joe supposed to put hidden cameras around.
Wouldn't 1st or 3rd mile or whatever know before paterno??? or even the police??? Give me a break. I need to send that to espn. An eye openerComment -
yes he forced him out, so how is joe supposed to know wtf sandusky was doing from 99 to 2012??????Comment -
if he forced him OUT...
he only did enugh to get him off the team payroll/staff photo
he didn't force him OUT of campus ( he could have)
he didn't force him OUT of little kids butt holes ( he let maybe another 200 get molested possibly)
he didn't force him OUT from attending PSU bowl traveling with the team
he didn't force him OUT of his office on campus where he plied kids with alcohol and raped them
most importantly he didn't start the process to put sandusky behind bars and OUT of the public for 10-15 years......
he might have tried to get him OUT of his legacy story, but after that he didn't give a flying fok
at least after it came out he admitted...
I wish I did MORE......Comment -
why the need for people to defend him and say he did enough when the guy HIMSELF said he didn't do enough?
if it was your family member getting raped you wouldn't be protecting paterno
guy was more powerful than a mafia boss in that area...Comment -
Ttwarrior you fat fuk
Dont bring your copy and paste shit into my thread you pedo supporter.Comment -
TT, that argument is shooting yourself in the foot. For christ sake, USC got sanctioned hard - with the basic understanding that head coaches know what all their players are doing all the time. A life long friend and coach - GTFO. That argument is literally ridiculous.
Joe has a legal argument to be made, not some "duh - i didn't knowz I swearz"Comment -
Comment -
Louis Freeh's report on Penn State's response to Jerry Sandusky's crimes against children has now led to serious NCAA sanctions and the removal of a monument to coach Joe Paterno. The report alleges a cover-up by the quartet of former university president Graham B. Spanier, vice president Gary Schultz, Athletic Director Tim Curley, and Paterno.
But the report itself shows the key decisions were made by only three of them. There is almost no evidence that they consulted substantially with Paterno.
Story continues below.
The report first considers the 1998 accusations that Sandusky showered with and molested a boy involved in his charity, the Second Mile. Authorities ultimately did not pursue the case, partly because the investigation was mishandled. But nothing in the report shows Paterno was in any way involved in the investigation or that he attempted to influence it.
The only mention of the coach in this regard are two e-mails from Curley: "I have touched base with the coach. Keep us posted. Thanks." And, a week later, "Anything new in this department? Coach [Paterno] is anxious to know where it stands." Nothing in the report suggests any further involvement by Paterno. In fact, it concludes: "After Curley's initial updates to Paterno, the available record is not clear as to how the conclusion of the Sandusky investigation was conveyed to Paterno."
While the report suggests that Paterno knew "everything that was going on," it's silent as to the nature of any discussions involving Paterno. What the coach knew is therefore purely a matter of speculation, although "touched base" doesn't suggest an in-depth review.
Given this background, Paterno's response to the 2001 incident witnessed by a coaching assistant Mike McQueary is far less outrageous than has been asserted. McQueary testified to a grand jury that he told Paterno he witnessed something "extremely sexual in nature" but did not go into "very much detail." Paterno's testimony was that he understood the conduct was "sexual in nature" but did not press for details because McQueary "was very upset."
Paterno called Curley two days later and met with him and Schultz. The only report of this conversation is Schultz's. In his grand jury testimony, Schultz said it was his impression that Sandusky's behavior was inappropriate and that Paterno wanted to bring it to his and Curley's attention. In spite of this, Schultz did think the allegations were serious or criminal.
Public relations
The report shows that Schultz, Curley, and later Spanier wanted to minimize the incident to protect the university. It also shows that Paterno was not an active participant in the alleged cover-up.
The report details many meetings among Curley, Schultz, and Spanier, who expressed concern about "public relations." The plan they arrived at was that Curley would talk to Paterno and to Sandusky, and, barring a confession by Sandusky, would indicate he was going to notify the Second Mile and the state Department of Public Welfare.
Story continues below.
After Curley had a discussion with Paterno, he wrote an e-mail to Schultz and Spanier saying, "After giving the matter more thought and talking it over with [Paterno] yesterday — I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps. I am having trouble with going to everyone but the person involved." He adds that he wants to talk to Sandusky, discuss the incident, and get his cooperation in notifying the charity and state officials "at some point." Spanier e-mailed his agreement to Curley and Schultz, calling the proposed approach "humane."
This Curley e-mail constitutes the only mention of a contact with Paterno after the coach's initial report to Curley and Schultz. The e-mail is most important for what it does not contain — namely, any information concerning the substance of the discussion with Paterno or Paterno's reaction to Curley's proposal. It does not state what advice, if any, Paterno gave. Nor does Curley attribute his being "uncomfortable" to anything Paterno said.
Daily vilification
The report shows that although Paterno was a powerful man at the university, in this instance he let his superiors (at least in the official chain of command) make the calls. He was not in the loop.
No one can deny, in hindsight, that Paterno should have tried to be more involved in the matter. But despite his stature on campus, his job was in fact to coach football, not to investigate the misconduct of a longtime friend who was no longer part of the football program. Curley, Schultz, and Spanier had assumed the responsibility to handle the case, and Paterno was probably happy that they had. Most of us would have done the same thing.
Freeh's report notes that Paterno wanted to cooperate in the investigation but died before he could. So he is not here to rebut the innuendo that is endemic to the report.
Paterno had a virtually unblemished record over the course of his long, outstanding career. He was regarded as a paragon. But he was a human being, and human beings make mistakes — mistakes that look worse when viewed in retrospect.
He does not, however, deserve daily vilification in the media. And he does not deserve to have his reputation, built over a lifetime, destroyed because he didn't interfere when those who supposedly had the responsibility and expertise to handle the Sandusky matter failed miserably to do so.
David C. Harrison is a Philadelphia attorney and Penn State alumnusComment -
Paterno might as well have raped those children himself. Im shocked they didnt shut down the whole university.
They recruited children to come and get raped. They are all responsible.
Also, what about that attorney that was investigating this over a decade ago...? ya know.. the guy who went missing, they found his car vacated and his laptop hard drive wiped?
this big U has been covering this up with that cash money forever. I think PSU got off easy.Comment -
fantastic thread tho. fantastic.
I have to go to a wedding in st college in october. I need a good "youre all a bunch of molestors" shirtComment -
the stupidest thing about all of it is when they had a feeling or caught first wind they could have squashed it. it would have been a 30 day story. Instead it will last forever.Comment -
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w
ontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplore r4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;** </style> <![endif]--> Hi
You can find this info by using search box in the top of website with some keywords related before posting questions.Comment -
He'll get that 300 win in hell along with all the beyond redemption pedos like Sandusky and their supporters like ttlardass.Comment -
Joe is still aliveComment
