| 0 |
Subject: Jerry Sandusky
Posted by: Perm Dude
- [39961218] Mon, Nov 07, 2011, 23:46
This is a story which is going to blow up Penn State football.
I've always like Penn State--they seem to try to get it right. But the fact that Jerry Sandusky did what he did for so long, and that Papa Joe didn't call the police when alerted is going to make for a multiple reputation-busting scandal. |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 46 | DWetzel
ID: 53326279
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 12:55
|
"criminality isn't and shouldn't be the standard for determining who should be fired."
Exactly. ESPECIALLY in a position where the person IS ultimately the image of the university.
|
| 47 | Frick
ID: 387512315
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 13:45
|
This issue wasn't suddenly blown-up over night. Yes, it made main stream media overnight, but this article was alluding the coming storm in April.
|
| 48 | DWetzel
ID: 31111810
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 14:10
|
Welcome to post 21, Frick! :)
You'll note the author of that article also happens to be the same guy in post 42, which is why it's worth looking at even if it's currently in the rumor/speculation stage.
As if the rest of it wasn't completely nauseating enough, give that article and video a look and listen.
If the Sandusky "retirement" was part of a coverup in 1998, and then it happened AGAIN in 2002 and was covered up AGAIN? I mean, at that point I guess there's still the "But we have a game against Nebraska on Saturday, think of the children!" idiots out there, but at this point that's a lunatic fringe.
The final nail in the coffin, which hasn't been drawn yet and is obviously speculation right now -- but almost seems coldly logical at this point given what we do know -- would be if they discovered that Sandusky was pimping out young kids to Penn State football donors, and covered it up to keep the money flowing in. We're quite a ways down that road, and if that happens ... I've said to this point that the "shut down the football program" crowd was nuts because you could get rid of the bad people and let it go on. But if we get to that point, the right course of action is to nuke the entire university from space.
|
| 49 | Razor
ID: 569263121
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 14:24
|
I am surprised that Penn State is not forfeiting not only this game but the rest of the season. There is a black cloud over the program right now, and this isn't one of those situations where sports is the cure since it appears overzealousness about football may have played a role in how Sandusky remained free for 13 years after the first incident was reported.
|
| 50 | Khahan
ID: 373143013
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 14:39
|
Well, this, if true, definitely changes my opinion here.
More Sandusky revelations (note: this is not graphic, but its pretty shocking)
And I will say this - if that article is true then there is no way at all that Joe Paterno or anybody of any rank (including some on the board of trustees) didn't know about this. And with any of that kind of knowledge I would change my opinion.
|
| 51 | weykool
ID: 28102713
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 14:45
|
Shutting down the football program will hurt people who have done nothing wrong.
Punish those who have done wrong.
Punishing the innocent is something the NCAA seems to get wrong over and over.
Reggie Bush did wrong but is making millions playing football.
Pete Carroll was found to be lacking in institutional control, but is doing well coaching in Seattle.
So who got punished?
The USC players and fans who did nothing wrong and are completely innocent.
|
| 52 | Mith
ID: 23217270
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 14:49
|
I'm not inclined to just assume that the board is without some responsibility but I don't see why the scandal must necessarily go up to them. I don't doubt they've been well aware of any and all rumors out there but I also don't know that they were able to act on them, either.
|
| 53 | Khahan
ID: 373143013
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 14:52
|
Ok, 50 was a repost of 42. Little slow on the draw with that.
|
| 54 | DWetzel
ID: 49962710
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 15:05
|
Better late than never, dude. (shoulder pat -- but not, a Sandusky shoulder pat, let's be clear)
While I'm sure there are a number of people that are taking glee in bringing down Paterno, I think anyone here is coming to it with a rather different perspective.
I know it's speculation, but I honestly think we're about two short steps and maybe a week from hearing "the entire Sandusky thing was covered up, twice, to protect major Penn State donors (not necessarily football-specific donors -- I'm talking people with their names on libraries and dorms) who were also diddling little boys, and oh by the way we've finally got the link that proves that the former district attorney was murdered". And at that point, I don't care about the football program -- what do you do with the entire university? Encase it in cement like Fukushima?
|
| 55 | DWetzel
ID: 49962710
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 15:13
|
More in the fun "wild speculation" department as far as powerful Penn State people, because why the hell not at this point:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2011/11/09/santorum-angel-award-for-psus-sandusky/
|
| 56 | DWetzel
ID: 49962710
Thu, Nov 10, 2011, 15:30
|
As usual, The Onion brings it's own brand of common sense to the proceedings. This is no joking matter at it's core of course, but in this case, I'll make an exception:
link
|
| 57 | Seattle Zen
ID: 47630913
Thu, Jul 12, 2012, 16:41
|
PHILADELPHIA -- Joe Paterno and other top Penn State officials hushed up child sex abuse allegations against Jerry Sandusky more than a decade ago for fear of bad publicity, allowing Sandusky to prey on other youngsters, according to a scathing internal report issued Thursday on the scandal. "Our most saddening and sobering finding is the total disregard for the safety and welfare of Sandusky's child victims by the most senior leaders at Penn State," said Louis Freeh, the former director of the FBI who was hired by university trustees to look into what has become one of sports' biggest scandals. "The most powerful men at Penn State failed to take any steps for 14 years to protect the children who Sandusky victimized." After an eight-month inquiry, Freeh's firm produced a 267-page report that concluded that Hall of Fame coach Paterno, President Graham Spanier, athletic director Tim Curley and vice president Gary Schultz "failed to protect against a child sexual predator harming children for over a decade."
Freeh called the officials' disregard for child victims "callous and shocking." "In order to avoid the consequences of bad publicity, the most powerful leaders at the university -- Spanier, Schultz, Paterno and Curley -- repeatedly concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky's child abuse," the report said. Paterno "was an integral part of this active decision to conceal," Freeh said at a news conference.
PSU officials callously allowed Sandusky to continue to rape children.
|
| 58 | Seattle Zen
ID: 47630913
Thu, Jul 12, 2012, 16:49
|
I haven't been following this case closely. I wonder, did Paterno write the forward to Sandusky's Touched?
My opinion of PSU and Paterno post 1998 could not be lower. When you decide against notifying authorities of allegations of child rape IN YOUR LOCKER ROOM, you are telling everyone you know it happens and you don't want the man arrested.
In my opinion, if PSU football plays one down this season, the NCAA is morally bankrupt. You hand out Death Penalties to programs whose crimes are that football players accepted money. Here you have a assistant coach who uses the football program as a vehicle to rape boys, the AD, head coach and Univ. President know this and don't stop it. Which is worse?
|
| 59 | Khahan
ID: 39432178
Thu, Jul 12, 2012, 16:52
|
57- well now I'm disappointed in paterno. But the difference between now and when this first came up is 2-fold:
1) we have a complete investigation and evidence showing he covered up and shame on Joe.
2) Sandusky has been brought to justice. Even if it were shown early on JoePa covered up the extent he did, I would still say its witch-hunt at that point going after him. The story in the early going should have always been sandusky and nobody else. Once the big one is brought down, go after the cover up.
But shame on Joe Paterno. :( Very sad to hear this.
|
| 60 | Khahan
ID: 39432178
Thu, Jul 12, 2012, 17:02
|
Even if it were shown early on JoePa covered up the extent he did, I would still say its witch-hunt at that point going after him
to clarify I mean going after him at that point in time.
Now's the time to lay into those who covered up. The monster has been dealt with.
|
| 61 | Frick
ID: 52182321
Thu, Jul 12, 2012, 18:21
|
It will take the NCAA some time to act, but if they don't they come across as the biggest hypocrits of all time IMO. The Freeh report defines "Lack of Institutional Control" The senior management of Penn St had a plan to report Sandusky, but it was changed after a meet with Paterno.
Janitors were afraid for their jobs if they reported a rape that the witnessed.
Players were explicitly told not to assist in ongoing investigations or they would be kicked off the team.
I don't know what the ultimate penalty for Penn St. will be, but the death penalty should definitely be discussed.
The cynic in me thinks that nothing significant will actually happen. Just some internal penalties that are slaps on the wrist. If that happens it basically tells every school out there that winning is everything and you can pay a small price in the event that you are caught.
|
| 62 | ChicagoTRS
ID: 463161814
Tue, Jul 17, 2012, 16:07
|
My bet is in the end the NCAA will shut down the football program for multiple seasons. There is not precedent for this level of dysfunction and the punishment should exceed all past punishments.
Read the below NCAA letter to PSU after the grand jury report was released. The Freeh report would seem to confirm and strengthen the violations.
http://www.ncaa.com/content/ncaa-letter-penn-state
|
| 63 | Khahan
ID: 39432178
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 09:57
|
Penn State done for how long? This is going to affect the program for years and years to come.
I have problems with this. The fine is no problem. Penn State can cover that.
The 4 year bowl ban is wholly symbolic. Penn State wouldn't get a bowl bid with proper punishments in place, but this one unduly punishes the current players. Any players that stay are going to work hard and bust their butts. If the kids that do remain earn victory after victory they deserve the bowl.
The loss of scholarships - this is good. The scholarships and team in place is there. But this is a punishment directly at the school for the cover up. The higher ups did plenty wrong and now the school will pay the price as is. But this goes back to my last point. Despite the odds being stacked against the now current team, if they manage to play and win those kids who had nothing to do with this scandal deserve to have something to play for.
Maybe something like a loss of revenue from bowl games. Keep hitting Penn State.
I also don't like the 'loss of wins since 1998. Again, this is directly punishing those players who were not involved.
I guess one side effect of the vacating all wins is that JoePa is no longer the winningest coach in NCAA football.
|
| 64 | Razor
ID: 551031157
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 10:16
|
Penn State got what they deserved. The institution put football on a pedestal at the expense of everything else, and now their football program will be decimated for probably 10 years. The university, the town, the alumni, and the students will all have to learn how to put football in the proper perspective. Further, this punishment rightfully serves as a deterrent for other universities - cover up a scandal to protect your university and you'll likely lose football as you know it for a decade. The penalties are so devastating that they will be the worst team in the Big 10 for the foreseeable future.
|
| 65 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 10:27
|
I agree with Khahan that the players seem to be the ones who are taking the brunt of the punishment here. I can see how it would be impossible that the program get punished but not the players, but I still think those current players are being victimized themselves a bit with this. Haven't read this very closely, but I would hope they would at the very least have the opportunity to transfer without penalty or waiting.
|
| 66 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 10:35
|
The NCAA recognizes that student-athletes are not responsible for these events and utilized penalties that will minimize the impact on entering and current football student-athletes. Any entering or current football student-athlete will be allowed to immediately transfer and compete.
|
| 67 | Seattle Zen
ID: 47630913
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 10:47
|
The current players are barely penalized, they can't go to a bowl game. They get to play in front of a huge crowd and get a full ride scholarship, it's just like they are going to Vanderbilt. They can transfer immediately if they so choose.
I don't see this as sufficient. There will be football this year. This year the football stadium should be quiet.
|
| 68 | Razor
ID: 551031157
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 10:57
|
I agree that, symbolically, the death penalty would have ultimately served as a more severe immediate penalty, I think long term this is much harsher. Penn State will have massive attrition from their football team this year. The players can transfer anywhere without penalty and any school in the nation can accept them without a scholarship count hit. That means PSU will lose several players. Couple that with the recruiting restrictions and they might be playing with half as many scholarship players as their opponents in a few years. Repeated 10-loss seasons will be more devastating than one or two seasons without any games. The NCAA told Penn State they can continue playing football, they will just be playing it with far fewer players than anyone else. This will serve the purpose of deemphasizing football. 110,000 people are not going to show up to watch Penn State get beat by 45 points by Ohio State and Michigan and 2 TD's to Northwestern.
|
| 69 | Khahan
ID: 39432178
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 10:58
|
Why SZ. Of Sandusky and those who covered this up, who is left? The program and the institution need to be penalized. Nobody is questioning that.
In fact for the stuff I think steps over the top a little bit I'm even willing to try some different penalties that achieve the same goal but minimize the impact on the players, like a revenue hit from bowl games.
Personally I think there should be some firings from the board of trustees, too. In that respect I don't think any punishment levied has gone far enough.
Makes me wonder about our illustrious governor, too. He was a trustee at the time. Of course maybe this scandal is exactly why some of trustees seemed hellbent on getting Paterno out of there since the late 90's.
|
| 70 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 10:59
|
I think the penalties are carefully constructed to ensure that the player are NOT taking the brunt.
No current player is losing a scholarship.
Any player recruited to play football still gets to play football each weekend during the regular season. And get an education. They only games they don't get to play are (potentially) 4 bowl games.
The vacated wins have no bearing on current players. Frankly, they have little bearing on past players. The vacated wins strike primarily at Joe Paterno, since he is no longer the winningest coach, according to the official record books.
The loss of scholarships is prospective, and while no current student will lose a scholarship, it will hurt the current players to the extent that the overall caliber of the team will be diminished.
A side effect of the four year bowl ban is that any current player can now transfer to another school without any mandated downtime. Admittedly, the time frame to do that prior to the 2012 season is pretty tight.
Also important is that by not nuking the current season, the local economy of State College, PA has not been torpedoed. A death penalty would have dealt a severe economic blow to businesses not directly (or at least legally) affiliated with PSU.
All in all, I think the penalties did a pretty good job of protecting the current players to the extent possible.
|
| 71 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 11:03
|
I agree completely with Guru.
|
| 72 | Frick
ID: 14082314
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 11:07
|
I think that Penn State got off lightly. Current players can transfer out and immediately play somewhere else. If they want to stay and not play in bowl games they have that choice.
USC in the middle of a similar scholarship penalty. Call me cynical, but I question how effect the penalty is since USC is ranked #1 in most pre-season polls.
|
| 73 | Judy
ID: 54203110
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 11:14
|
I was surprised that there was no hint that maybe the board -- exception being the newly elected -- should resign. Although the head of the board kept some in the dark, those on that committee knew something and were derelict in their duty to inform the entire board.
Seems simple to me -- lack of board oversight -- dismiss the board and start over. I was surprised that there was no mention of that by the NCAA.
Also, Corbett's role in this needs to be more heavily explored. Did he not pursue the early leads as AG because he was afraid of losing votes from PSU'ers in the upcoming election as several recent columns have suggested? He sure made sure to attend the meeting to fire paterno...
Just saying...
|
| 74 | KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 24650229
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 14:06
|
I think the penalties will do what the NCAA wants them to do: send a strong message that the actions (or inaction) at Penn State will not be tolerated.
As Dan Wetzel at Yahoo Sports points out, the (one-year) death penalty might have been preferred given that the impact would have been much quicker and not so long-lasting. (Read about the difference with SMU in the article)
I do hope the NCAA pays attention to the impact of the $60M fine on other sports. It's not uncommon for other sports to get funding from football (and men's basketball). By losing $12M of revenue each of the next five years, Penn State could be forced into a situation not unlike Maryland, who recently cut seven sports teams. If Penn St. does end up having to cut other sports as a result of lost funding, those student-athletes should get the same scholarship/transfer opportunity as the football players.
Frick: USC in the middle of a similar scholarship penalty. Call me cynical, but I question how effect the penalty is since USC is ranked #1 in most pre-season polls.
USC is definitely not "in the middle" of their scholarship sanctions yet. As this article points out, "the year USC really feels the pinch will be in 2014 when graduation—combined with the 15 scholarships available—will mean that Kiffin is going to have to be incredibly creative to even stack two deep, much less three at each position."
That's the thing about scholarship reductions. They never really hit a program hard in Year 1 or Year 2. They hit a program hardest when those players they weren't able to offer a scholarship to are the ones that are supposed to be the Seniors and Juniors and Sophomores in the starting lineup.
According to the article, 2012 was the first year of full scholarship sanctions for USC and they only signed 12 players. They have 16 commits this year and while they've assembled a #1 ranking according to Rivals' scoring system, there are still a lot of holes from last year's and this year's recruiting classes to fill with non-scholarship talent.
And Penn State's sanctions are for an extra year. There could easily be 3-5 years, starting around 2015, where Penn State actually is the equivalent of Vanderbilt. It'll happen much sooner if they start losing current players.
|
| 75 | Damoose
ID: 76112313
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 14:11
|
They said they wanted to make it not about football. All that will be talked about for next ten years is the football team at PSU and how the sanctions are affecting them.
|
| 76 | holt
ID: 108501712
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 19:54
|
"Also important is that by not nuking the current season, the local economy of State College, PA has not been torpedoed. A death penalty would have dealt a severe economic blow to businesses not directly (or at least legally) affiliated with PSU."
Excellent point Guru!
|
| 77 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 10:12
|
Its all that collateral damage that most people never even consider.
|
| 78 | Frick
ID: 14082314
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 11:00
|
Would State College be as big as it currently is without the football program? The town has benefited from a program that put everything (including kids being sexually abused) after its image. How much additional benefit has come to an area that either looked the other way or encouraged that type of behavior. To claim that the town and its population would be collateral damage doesn't seem right to me, I can't see them as completely innocent victims.
|
| 79 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 11:05
|
Wow, that seems harsh. So you'd want to punish a local restaurant because several PSU officials failed to report abuse activity?
|
| 80 | Frick
ID: 14082314
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 11:22
|
Sorry, not was I was trying to imply.
In my opinion the NCAA has basically said that if you are a big program you won't get more than a temporary set back. The football program was made to be greater than the University. Anything that could harm the football program was secondary. The punishment seems designed to keep the football program from being hit to hard. The NCAA should not consider the harm to community. If the harm of missing 7 weekends is that great, isn't that more reason to punish the football program? Or will the football program just be placed back on a pedestal because it is the main driver of the local economy?
|
| 81 | Frick
ID: 14082314
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 11:28
|
I also don't see the punishment as a failure to report the abuse. The punishment is the result of the football program, specifically Joe Paterno, running the University. The NCAA is very explicit that no coach should have that power and they report to superiors. The Freeh report made it fairly clear that was not happening at Penn State.
I'm an IU basketball fan. Looking back at how much influence Bobby Knight had at Indiana in the 70s, 80s and 90s you could argue that there was a lack of institutional control because Knight had so much influence on the entire athletic department. The difference is that Knight was repeatedly punished and ultimately terminated by the University. While I will never like Myles Brand, I do respect him for knowing his responsibility and fulfilling it. He was Bobby Knights boss and when Knight misbehaved, he punished him. That didn't happen at Penn State, Paterno had complete control of what happened at the University. That is why Penn State was punished, not for the failure to report.
|
| 82 | Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 14:25
|
Congratulations to FIU. They were outscored 59-0, but have now actually won this game.
|
| 83 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 14:30
|
Actually, Frick, the punishment was exactly because of the failure to report the abuse. In fact, PSU has, for decades, set itself up as the more moral program (Paterno specifically recruited on the basis of a top football program in which the players would learn and instill moral values as well).
The program would have absolutely survived if the abuse had been reported and all those who knew followed the evidence regardless of the risk to the program itself.
|
| 84 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 15:12
|
They did take the W's away from Penn State, but I'm pretty sure they didn't give them to the other schools.
|
| 85 | Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 15:41
|
So, nobody won? If Penn State lost, the other team must have won.
What school has the longest losing streak in college football history?
|
| 86 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 15:47
|
Q: Does vacating a win mean the opponent won?
A: No. According to the NCAA, opposing teams are not granted wins, as in a forfeit. The penalized school simply can't claim credit for that victory. For instance, in 2009, Penn State opened the season with a 31-7 rout of Akron. Penn State will lose credit for that win, but Akron cannot claim it as a victory.
|
| 87 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 15:47
|
That's right--nobody won. And nobody lost, for that matter, so Penn State has no long losing record.
|
| 88 | DWetzel
ID: 49962710
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 15:48
|
According to Wikipedia, Penn State does now!
The various other losing streaks (of a more normal variety) are listed there too.
|
| 89 | Khahan
ID: 39432178
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 15:49
|
I would like to point out something for consideration. Well a few points:
1) Paterno is dead and cannot defend himself or refute the accuastions
2) The board of trustees had some implications in this scandal until recently and had a lot to gain by putting the blame elsewhere
3) Freeh was paid $6.5mil by the board of trustees when they commissioned this report
Those 3 things are facts. You can draw your own conclusions. Personally I think there needs to be a *very* thorough investigation of the board members.
|
| 90 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 15:53
|
I can go into Wikipedia and change that back, DW. It is hardly confirmation!
Unfortunately Paterno isn't around to defend himself, and his actions have to speak on their own. My understanding is that he did the minimal legal amount necessary at the time.
|
| 91 | DWetzel
ID: 49962710
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 15:57
|
Well, sure you could, but given that they have lost 64 games over the last 13 years, and haven't officially won any... :)
(The page also lists the "real" losing streak records for various divisions, of course.)
|
| 92 | Frick
ID: 14082314
Tue, Jul 24, 2012, 16:30
|
Re: 83
The failure to report was a symptom, not the root cause of what resulted in the NCAA violations. The root cause was a Lack of Institutional Control. Lack of Institutional Control is where Penn State failed in the eyes of the NCAA.
It is the responsibility of each member institution to control its intercollegiate athletics program in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Association. he institution’s
president or chancellor is responsible for the administration of all aspects of the athletics program, including approval of the budget and audit of all expenditures.
There were a number of instances where it becomes apparent that Spanier wasn't in charge and was taking "advice" from Paterno.
Re:89
Paterno's interviews, e-mails, and notes show that he was inconsistent at best with regards to what he knew.
I don't disagree that the Board failed in their responsibilities, aided by Spanier's misdirection, but the Freeh report supplies a lot of evidence, not just speculation.
|
| 93 | ChicagoTRS
ID: 416222423
Wed, Jul 25, 2012, 00:22
|
This is a pretty interesting read...gives some insight on how Paterno controlled the university:
Joe Paterno Demanded His Own Code Of Justice—And Code Of Silence—For Infractions By Players
Unfortunately probably a lot of universities still have similar issues.
|
| 94 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Wed, Oct 10, 2012, 01:16
|
Sandusky sentenced to 30-60 years, maintains innocence.
Crazy old man.
|
| 95 | Khahan
ID: 39432178
Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 15:10
|
Jerry Sandusky getting exactly what he deserves.
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: Jerry Sandusky
|