MUScoop

I'm sure most of you have heard about the allegations. All around awful story. Personally, I think everyone should be fired today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/sports/ncaafootball/penn-state-said-to-be-planning-paternos-exit.html

I agree, up to and including the University President. What a mess. For anyone to suggest that Paterno, the AD, President, you name it, was not aware of this and turning a blind eye to it, is ludicrous. The fact that Sandusky was in the PSU facilities as recently as last week is just sick. Almost as equally as disturbing as it would be to have Paterno in the coach's booth on Saturday. Coaching legend or not, you have forfeited your right to retire on your terms, just as the University has forfeited their right to celebrate his career. Time to clean house.

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 08, 2011, 11:58:47 AM
I'm sure most of you have heard about the allegations. All around awful story. Personally, I think everyone should be fired today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/sports/ncaafootball/penn-state-said-to-be-planning-paternos-exit.html

JoePa is a college football icon, but he needs to go. In fact, everyone at the university who knew anything regarding Sandusky's actions but failed to act needs to go. The fact that these allegations came to administrators' and coaches' attention in 2002 yet Sandusky was allowed on campus with young boys in 2007 is absolutely sickening. It's one thing to look the other way when players are selling jerseys. It's another to look the other way on a felony of this magnitude.

This makes me wonder if Sandusky had some kind of leverage in regard to dirt on the Penn State program. What other secrets will this unveil?

Got this link from Joe Posnanski.  It's a great editorial.

http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/hr.asp?fpVname=PA_PN&ref_pge=lst

This is what happen when sports come before people. Yikes.

Whether MU did anything right or wrong in last years "events", its a small reminder, compared to this, to make sure our beloved University has its priorities straight. A couple years ago, I didn't care what type of kid we brought in as long as we won basketball games. Now as I've become more of a family man, I don't want anyone associated with the team or university who would or could potentially portray it in a bad light.  I admit if I knew the names of the players from the issues last year I would look at them differently. If that means were stuck being a team ranked somewhere in the 20-50 range forever than I am ok with that.

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 08, 2011, 12:46:08 PM
It's one thing to look the other way when players are selling jerseys. It's another to look the other way on a felony of this magnitude.

Which makes me wonder what if anything the pathetic organization known as the NCAA will do about this. SMU, Miami, USC get the book thrown at them for cash and hot tubs, but if there is any program out there that deserves severe punishment, it is the one led by BCS President Grant Spanier. I won't hold my breath. They haven't seemed to care about the athletes being taken advantage of all these years, so why would they care about these other kids being taken advantage of while PSU officials looked the other way.

Everything about this is beyond sick and disgusting. It keeps getting worse by the day, as far as PSU's reaction (or lack thereof) has been handled.

Even a movie script or a novel couldn't be as bad as what has happened. It's unfathomable, it really is.

How Paterno could rightfully even be at practice today (let alone years and years and years when this was happening) and lead/teach/coach young men is beyond my grasp. He should either be fired or placed on an immediate leave of absence. Seriously, how does he show up to coach football right now? And if you're a player, how can you go out there and play for him on Saturday or ever again?

I just heard on the news that JoPa intends to be on the sidelines this Saturday.  If he is, how empty will, or should, the stands be?  Happy Valley fans should abandon the University until they clean house.  If he's allowed to coach another practice, what does that say for putting the "kids" first?  It says the "kids" aren't first.  Joe Paterno, and the number of games he wins, is.

Quote from: MUDish on November 08, 2011, 02:05:08 PM
Seriously, how does he show up to coach football right now? And if you're a player, how can you go out there and play for him on Saturday or ever again?

Everything that is wrong with sports, particularly college sports, will be on full display in Happy Valley Saturday afternoon if in fact Paterno is still coaching. Even though he clearly deserves their ire and disdain, the overwhelming majority of the 100,000+ in attendance will undoubtedly make a point to publicly show their support for him.

As I generally and unfortunately come to conclude in situations like these (although this is certainly a new one), we the fans are ultimately to blame because we continue to come back with our time, attendance, and most importantly, our dollars.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 08, 2011, 01:57:30 PM
Which makes me wonder what if anything the pathetic organization known as the NCAA will do about this. SMU, Miami, USC get the book thrown at them for cash and hot tubs, but if there is any program out there that deserves severe punishment, it is the one led by BCS President Grant Spanier. I won't hold my breath. They haven't seemed to care about the athletes being taken advantage of all these years, so why would they care about these other kids being taken advantage of while PSU officials looked the other way.

The NCAA has no jurisdiction here.  PSU didn't break any of their rules.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 08, 2011, 02:18:00 PM

The NCAA has no jurisdiction here.  PSU didn't break any of their rules.

Recruiting rules, practice rules, etc.? No. But, if there are no NCAA standards of behavior, or institutional control guidelines in place, that's even more pathetic. Given the arbitrary nature by which they typically seem to operate, I'm sure they could come up with something.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 08, 2011, 01:57:30 PM
Which makes me wonder what if anything the pathetic organization known as the NCAA will do about this. SMU, Miami, USC get the book thrown at them for cash and hot tubs, but if there is any program out there that deserves severe punishment, it is the one led by BCS President Grant Spanier. I won't hold my breath. They haven't seemed to care about the athletes being taken advantage of all these years, so why would they care about these other kids being taken advantage of while PSU officials looked the other way.

I'm not sure that this is an NCAA issue. It's not a matter of players getting paid, someone fudging test scores or some other action that gave a team an advantage. It's a group of university administrators ignoring and/or lying about several reports of sexual abuse that took place on campus, including in the football lockerroom. I'd be all for sanctions against Penn State football, but I just don't know if the NCAA can punish the team for something like this. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of the NCAA's reach can chime in.

EDIT: Guessed I missed a couple posts while typing.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 08, 2011, 02:21:02 PM
Recruiting rules, practice rules, etc.? No. But, if there are no NCAA standards of behavior, or institutional control guidelines in place, that's even more pathetic. Given the arbitrary nature by which they typically seem to operate, I'm sure they could come up with something.

So you want them to "come up with something" to randomly enter an area where they have no precedence in entering?  Cmon...  That sounds well and good until the NCAA finds a way to enter every legal issue that an athletic department has to deal with.  Do you really want that?

This is under the jurisdiction of the State of Pennsylvania and the University's Board of Trustees.  That is where it needs to be.  The NCAA needs to stay out of this.

http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/uploadedFiles/Press/Sandusky-Grand-Jury-Presentment.pdf

Grand Jury summary and charging documents. 

I liken this to the Baylor Basketball situation, while they ultimately uncovered recruiting issues as well, I think the biggest issue was a lack of institutional control. THE PSU situation doesn't break any recruiting or eligibility rules, but neither does covering up a murder. My guess is that the NCAA rule book has more than two sections.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 08, 2011, 02:26:40 PM

So you want them to "come up with something" to randomly enter an area where they have no precedence in entering?  Cmon...  That sounds well and good until the NCAA finds a way to enter every legal issue that an athletic department has to deal with.  Do you really want that?

This is under the jurisdiction of the State of Pennsylvania and the University's Board of Trustees.  That is where it needs to be.  The NCAA needs to stay out of this.

Since there doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason to many of their decisions, which are frankly a result of trivial maters by comparison, I'd be fine with it if they fit this into whatever rule was violated. Again, see Baylor. Do you really think that or this is something that the NCAA should stay out of? I'm not about to go paging through the NCAA rule bok, but do you really believe there aren't some sort of regulations and brand protections in there beyond recruiting periods, minimum GPAs and text messages? Of course there are.

The Baylor lack of institutional control had everything to do with recruiting and improper benefits for Baylor basketball players.  It had nothing to do with the murder of Brian Dennehey.  The NCAA would be way exceeding its current area of control by getting involved with Penn State...unless it somehow uncovers something that actually breaks their rules.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 08, 2011, 02:33:20 PM
Do you really think that or this is something that the NCAA should stay out of? I'm not about to go paging through the NCAA rule bok, but do you really believe there aren't some sort of regulations and brand protections in there beyond recruiting periods, minimum GPAs and text messages? Of course there are.

Unless there is a relevant rule in place, the NCAA has no jurisdiction and should stay well away from this.  I mean, *maybe* there is a rule that prevents a former assistant coach from having an office in the AD facilities and prevents them from having access to players.  (I don't think there is though.)

For the NCAA to act without a relevant rule in place sets precedents that I don't think anyone wants set in the long-term. 

As is often the case with the NCAA, the current players (that have nothing to do with this scandal) will suffer.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 08, 2011, 02:33:52 PM
The Baylor lack of institutional control had everything to do with recruiting and improper benefits for Baylor basketball players.  It had nothing to do with the murder ofPATRICK Dennehey.  The NCAA would be way exceeding its current area of control by getting involved with Penn State...unless it somehow uncovers something that actually breaks their rules.

Fixed. I needed to google that one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Dennehy
Brian Dennehy  is an actor.

Agree with you Sultan. from what is known so far PSU broke no NCAA laws. whatever PSU's punishment is, it'll be internal

I really do feel sorry for all the Penn St fans out there, this has to be absolutely brutal.

Just curious, if you were a Penn St alum/fan/season ticket holder, would you go to Saturday's game?

I know the easy answer is "no", but let's say you replaced "Penn State" with "Marquette" in this scenario.

Quote from: MUDish on November 08, 2011, 03:37:22 PM
Just curious, if you were a Penn St alum/fan/season ticket holder, would you go to Saturday's game?

I know the easy answer is "no", but let's say you replaced "Penn State" with "Marquette" in this scenario.

No way to know for sure, but pretty confident I would not. 1) I hope I would make that decision myself. 2) My wife would kill me if I didn't make said decision.

Great editorial from a former Nitany Lion, Roxanne Jones,  a founding editor of ESPN The Magazine and a former VP at ESPN.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/08/opinion/jones-penn-state/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

Another from Andy Staples at SI.com.  Both good reads about the trash known as JoPa.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/andy_staples/11/08/penn-state-joe-paterno-scandal/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_sports

Quote from: MUDish on November 08, 2011, 03:37:22 PM
Just curious, if you were a Penn St alum/fan/season ticket holder, would you go to Saturday's game?

I know the easy answer is "no", but let's say you replaced "Penn State" with "Marquette" in this scenario.

Thought about it, and the answer is probably yes.  Would just want the players to know I'm behind them - they could definitely use the support after being placed in a situation like this.  Just means more to me to send a message to the players that you're there for them even if it makes a senile old man want to believe you're there for him.  

I don't think I could do it and go. I understand the argument of go to support the players, but in right mind I don't see how I could go and support the coach and administration who turned a blind eye to all this. I also don't know how I could sit there and enjoy the game. Sports is supposed to be a release and entertainment, and I think I would feel hypocritical if I went and supported Paterno, who is the king/dictator/emperor of State College, PA.

Quote from: Ari Gold on November 08, 2011, 03:04:39 PM
Fixed. I needed to google that one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Dennehy
Brian Dennehy  is an actor.

Oh my...thank you.

What's with all the Joe Pa hate? I will admit that I havent read everything that he apparently turned his back on....but:

1) No person/institution has been found guilty of sexual abuse more than cathlic priests.
2) There seems to be a lot of similarities between Joe Pa and Bob Wild. Both just simply ignored warning signs and said 'aww shucks' years later when they got nailed. F*ck both of them....moreso Bob Wild because he at least fooled people into making them believe he was a priest. I'd love to stick my fists through his teeth....moreso than Joe Pa....but he is right behind him. Bob is not a priest....hasnt been for a long time. But hey, I hope some of you still cherish his bobble head. I mean....imagine this....imagine Penn State handing out bobble head dolls of Joe Pa AFTER all of this happened???!!! Well, the MU athletic department did it with Bob Wild. I threw mine in the garbage right in front of an MU rep that greeted us as we walked through the check-in counter at the suite level. The 11 people I was with all did the same....right in front of her. Felt bad for her. I wish I could have thrown the bobble head and Bob's head instead.

And here, in a nutshell, is why I have been reluctant to cast stones.    I can't ignore the plank in the Catholic Church's and MU's eye.   

Quote from: muhs03 on November 08, 2011, 08:25:13 PM
What's with all the Joe Pa hate? I will admit that I havent read everything that he apparently turned his back on....but:

1) No person/institution has been found guilty of sexual abuse more than cathlic priests.
2) There seems to be a lot of similarities between Joe Pa and Bob Wild. Both just simply ignored warning signs and said 'aww shucks' years later when they got nailed. F*ck both of them....moreso Bob Wild because he at least fooled people into making them believe he was a priest. I'd love to stick my fists through his teeth....moreso than Joe Pa....but he is right behind him. Bob is not a priest....hasnt been for a long time. But hey, I hope some of you still cherish his bobble head. I mean....imagine this....imagine Penn State handing out bobble head dolls of Joe Pa AFTER all of this happened???!!! Well, the MU athletic department did it with Bob Wild. I threw mine in the garbage right in front of an MU rep that greeted us as we walked through the check-in counter at the suite level. The 11 people I was with all did the same....right in front of her. Felt bad for her. I wish I could have thrown the bobble head and Bob's head instead.

Prob not the right place to discuss this, but why don't you consider him a priest? Also, I have no idea what position he held in the church when that stuff happened or his role in it.


I feel sorry for JoePa in that this should've never been on his lap. Great career ruined by someone else. He is a football coach, not a university administrator nor law enforcement official. He made the wrong decisions but he was a 75 yo man given a crap hand. Instead of folding and going to police while bringing shame to his school, he tried bluffing and ended up losing everything he built.

Quote from: Ari Gold on November 08, 2011, 03:04:39 PM
Fixed. I needed to google that one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Dennehy
Brian Dennehy  is an actor.

Agree with you Sultan. from what is known so far PSU broke no NCAA laws. whatever PSU's punishment is, it'll be internal

It remains true that the Baylor lack of institutional control had nothing to do with the murder of Brian Dennehy.

Quote from: muhs03 on November 08, 2011, 08:25:13 PM
1) No person/institution has been found guilty of sexual abuse more than cathlic priests.
2) There seems to be a lot of similarities between Joe Pa and Bob Wild. Both just simply ignored warning signs and said 'aww shucks' years later when they got nailed. F*ck both of them....moreso Bob Wild because he at least fooled people into making them believe he was a priest. I'd love to stick my fists through his teeth....moreso than Joe Pa....but he is right behind him. Bob is not a priest....hasnt been for a long time. But hey, I hope some of you still cherish his bobble head. I mean....imagine this....imagine Penn State handing out bobble head dolls of Joe Pa AFTER all of this happened???!!! Well, the MU athletic department did it with Bob Wild. I threw mine in the garbage right in front of an MU rep that greeted us as we walked through the check-in counter at the suite level. The 11 people I was with all did the same....right in front of her. Felt bad for her. I wish I could have thrown the bobble head and Bob's head instead.

1. Supply sources (other than your own calculation) to back up your claim. Although not overly prevalent in our society, in most cases of child sexual abuse the predator is a family member or a "friend" of the family.

2. Fr. Wild has nothing to do with Jerry Sandusky.

Quote from: muhs03 on November 08, 2011, 08:25:13 PM
What's with all the Joe Pa hate? I will admit that I havent read everything that he apparently turned his back on....but:

1) No person/institution has been found guilty of sexual abuse more than cathlic priests.
2) There seems to be a lot of similarities between Joe Pa and Bob Wild. Both just simply ignored warning signs and said 'aww shucks' years later when they got nailed. F*ck both of them....moreso Bob Wild because he at least fooled people into making them believe he was a priest. I'd love to stick my fists through his teeth....moreso than Joe Pa....but he is right behind him. Bob is not a priest....hasnt been for a long time. But hey, I hope some of you still cherish his bobble head. I mean....imagine this....imagine Penn State handing out bobble head dolls of Joe Pa AFTER all of this happened???!!! Well, the MU athletic department did it with Bob Wild. I threw mine in the garbage right in front of an MU rep that greeted us as we walked through the check-in counter at the suite level. The 11 people I was with all did the same....right in front of her. Felt bad for her. I wish I could have thrown the bobble head and Bob's head instead.

So to you, that makes what Sandusky did and JoePa covered up acceptable then.

No outrage for the 28 year old man that witnessed something terrible, then called daddy?

Quote from: tower912 on November 08, 2011, 08:31:32 PM
And here, in a nutshell, is why I have been reluctant to cast stones.    I can't ignore the plank in the Catholic Church's and MU's eye.   

Did i miss something...?

Quote from: martyconlonontherun on November 08, 2011, 09:54:11 PM
I feel sorry for JoePa in that this should've never been on his lap. Great career ruined by someone else. He is a football coach, not a university administrator nor law enforcement official. He made the wrong decisions but he was a 75 yo man given a crap hand. Instead of folding and going to police while bringing shame to his school, he tried bluffing and ended up losing everything he built.

No, no, no, and no...Clearly he and plenty of others around the program knew damn well this was going on. What did JoePa do about it? Nothing. Not one damn thing, but allow it to happen. As you correctly point out, he was looking out for number one. That's it. Does he share equal blame? No. There is a special place in hell for guys like Sandusky, but by allowing it to happen when he had full knowledge (Beyond the atual incidents that were brought forward, anyone here knows how strong the rumor mill and grapevines are among college programs...anyone who had been around Sandusky/that program for any substantial amount of time knew damn well that he had a little boy problem) makes his hands extremely dirty. For anyone to say they feel sorry for JoePa boggles the mind. The guys is a self absorbed coward, plain and simple.

Quote from: LancesOtherNut on November 09, 2011, 08:09:17 AM
No outrage for the 28 year old man that witnessed something terrible, then called daddy?

I thought Mike Golic was going to LOSE IT this morning...on that same topic.

Quote from: LancesOtherNut on November 09, 2011, 08:09:17 AM
No outrage for the 28 year old man that witnessed something terrible, then called daddy?

I agreed with you at first, but people handle situations differently. I can only imagine what went through the guys head.

Either way, he needs to get back from the 'recruiting trip' he is on and start talking.

Quote from: APieperFan3 on November 09, 2011, 08:12:17 AM
I thought Mike Golic was going to LOSE IT this morning...on that same topic.

Golic, like always, was a little much.

Quote from: LancesOtherNut on November 09, 2011, 08:09:17 AM
No outrage for the 28 year old man that witnessed something terrible, then called daddy?

Who happens to be the WR coach on this very day. However, at least he reported it, and connecting the dots was likely intimidated into keeping his mouthy shut after that. Again, not clean by any means, but he is pretty far down the list of guys that deserve outage.

The fact that Paterno/PSU did nothing when it was reported, makes it very clear to me that he/they were already well aware that Sandusky was doing this crap well before it was reported. It is just so sick.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 08:14:04 AM
Who happens to be the WR coach on this very day. However, at least he reported it, and connecting the dots was likely intimidated into keeping his mouthy shut after that. Again, not clean by any means, but he is pretty far down the list of guys that deserve outage.

Not really that far down for me.

Regardless of who the person was, I don't think I could witness a 10 year-old in a shower not with their parent and walk away. I would stop it at that moment and take the child away. This coming from a person who likely will never have children and isn't always that fond of them yet I'd feel strong enough to step in.

Besides, the guy wasn't all that intimidated as he went to Paterno after he called his father. Scared but yet he goes to the head of the program to complain about that guy's longest serving assistant? Doesn't add up.

Quote from: The Golden Avalanche on November 09, 2011, 08:20:02 AM
Not really that far down for me.

Regardless of who the person was, I don't think I could witness a 10 year-old in a shower not with their parent and walk away. I would stop it at that moment and take the child away. This coming from a person who likely will never have children and isn't always that fond of them yet I'd feel strong enough to step in.

Besides, the guy wasn't all that intimidated as he went to Paterno after he called his father. Scared but yet he goes to the head of the program to complain about that guy's longest serving assistant? Doesn't add up.

You're right. I guess I give him somewhat of a pass for the initial interaction, because I can't really imagine what went through his mind, at least he tried to do something, but the fact that he never called the cops or did anything after that certainly does amount to a tacit endorsement.

BTW, these idiot students who went to show their support outside Paterno's house? Good grief. I understand that students in general are typically unequivocal idiots who don't quite think things through, but like I said yesterday, its just a small taste of what will be on display at the game on Saturday with the majority of the 107,000 there showing their support for a cretin.

I don't get how someone can live with themselves after hearing -- let alone witnessing -- that incident and then doing the bare minimum. Obviously, Paterno still doesn't get it. If he did, he'd have resigned by now. Shameful.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 08:14:04 AM
The fact that Paterno/PSU did nothing when it was reported, makes it very clear to me that he/they were already well aware that Sandusky was doing this crap well before it was reported. It is just so sick.

Sandusky was no longer coaching at PSU at the time when McQueary witnessed the act. Paterno reported that incident to the AD, head of campus police and other administrators. JoePa could have been told that it is being handled and will be investigated further. I'm not giving him a pass at all, but it would be understandable if at that point, to the best of his knowledge, the university and campus police were dealing with the situation, and presumably getting the police involved. (Although, I do wonder if JoePa placed a WTF call to Sandusky at some point. He had to, right?)

The part that is absolutely inexcusable is that after the incident in the shower was reported, Sandusky was still allowed on campus, including visits where he had young boys with him. How could everyone standby and let that happen?!? Where was just ONE person with a conscience to say "this isn't OK" and report it? Go to JoePa, go to the AD, go to the school president, the police, a professor, a dean, someone! I believe it was Howard Bryant who said that the school didn't need a hero in this situation, it just needed an adult. I'd agree with that 100%.

This does a nice job of pointing out those who have to go away and never come back.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/11/09/jerry-sandusky-scandal-seven-key-players-in-the-penn-state-abuse-case/#the-second-mile (http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/11/09/jerry-sandusky-scandal-seven-key-players-in-the-penn-state-abuse-case/#the-second-mile)

With Spanier the current BCS President, I would suggest they need to make an immediate change as well, even if PSU somehow chooses not to act on him.

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 09, 2011, 08:53:40 AM
Sandusky was no longer coaching at PSU at the time when McQueary witnessed the act. Paterno reported that incident to the AD, head of campus police and other administrators. JoePa could have been told that it is being handled and will be investigated further. I'm not giving him a pass at all, but it would be understandable if at that point, to the best of his knowledge, the university and campus police were dealing with the situation, and presumably getting the police involved. (Although, I do wonder if JoePa placed a WTF call to Sandusky at some point. He had to, right?)

I think you're missing my point...It is crystal clear to me that Paterno (and probably plenty of others) had complete knowledge of Sandusky's problem well before that shower incident even took place, and they let it go on. Just as he let it go on after.

For the record, he reported that incident to the AD. That's it.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 08, 2011, 01:57:30 PM
Which makes me wonder what if anything the pathetic organization known as the NCAA will do about this. SMU, Miami, USC get the book thrown at them for cash and hot tubs, but if there is any program out there that deserves severe punishment, it is the one led by BCS President Grant Spanier. I won't hold my breath. They haven't seemed to care about the athletes being taken advantage of all these years, so why would they care about these other kids being taken advantage of while PSU officials looked the other way.

Unless there is a morals clause with the NCAA, what can they do?  This is better left up to the University, community and league, IMHO.

The story gets more sickening with each follow up.

Quote from: MUMac on November 09, 2011, 09:14:37 AM
Unless there is a morals clause with the NCAA, what can they do?  This is better left up to the University, community and league, IMHO.

The story gets more sickening with each follow up.

There are ethics guidelines within the NCAA constitution and by-laws, so... I'm just saying that if PSU doesn't handle it by getting rid of everyone from the grad assistant up to the President, the NCAA might have to.

Given that the ex-coach (I can't even type his name) wasn't even a Penn St. employee in '02, why even go to the AD with this info? Of course the AD should be informed, but given that the AD wasn't his boss anymore, why not leapfrog him and go directly to the proper authorities?

Quote from: Boone on November 09, 2011, 09:18:16 AM
Given that the ex-coach (I can't even type his name) wasn't even a Penn St. employee in '02, why even go to the AD with this info? Of course the AD should be informed, but given that the AD wasn't his boss anymore, why not leapfrog him and go directly to the proper authorities?

Didn't Paterno go to the AD  AND the guy who is in charge of the campus police?

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 09:03:27 AM
I think you're missing my point...It is crystal clear to me that Paterno (and probably plenty of others) had complete knowledge of Sandusky's problem well before that shower incident even took place, and they let it go on. Just as he let it go on after.

For the record, he reported that incident to the AD. That's it.

That is a reach. "Complete knowledge"? I highly doubt anyone was fully aware of how bad it was, and your implication that everyone just knew an assistant coach was raping young boys but decided to do nothing (for no identifiable reason, he wasn't a player they were protecting or even still a coach) is flawed. You are insinuating that they all were "okay" and even encouraged this behavior somehow.

What about The Second Mile organization that was aware he was being investigated (in two separate instances), but still allowed him access to boys for another 10 years? Is everyone pure evil to you? I guess it makes it easier to comprehend how something like this can occur.

No, the most likely scenario is that whatever information or allegations they received, from McQueery and others, was that there was "sexual misconduct","fondling" or any other semi-ambiguous descriptions. In that case, when you've known someone for 30+ years, you tend to to doubt and block out the reality of the situation.

Did they do enough? Of course not, but what you are accusing them of is being fully knowledgeable of what was happening and accessories to a crime.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 09:03:27 AM
I think you're missing my point...It is crystal clear to me that Paterno (and probably plenty of others) had complete knowledge of Sandusky's problem well before that shower incident even took place, and they let it go on. Just as he let it go on after.

For the record, he reported that incident to the AD. That's it.

I have avoid commenting on this story because as a life long Penn State fan, I felt no good could of the discussion and at no point could anything approaching a rational discussion take place.  However Navin you have forced me to comment

First what Sandusky did is beyond reprehensible and he fully deserves the special place in hell he's going to.  Any statements I make after this should in no way be viewed as excusing Sandusky.

However, for you to accuse the program, all of the coaches and players over 30 years, of knowing about Sandusky's problem is disgusting.  People like Lavar Arrington and Matt Millen to name a few have known and worked with Sandusky for years and knew nothing.  You would have us believe that they knew this was going on and looked the other way?  Millen sits on the board of Second Mile, he had to know according to you.  To make this conclusion is irresponsible and quite frankly is a symptom of exactly why I think the media coverage is so flawed.  No one is reporting facts and determining exactly who knew what and when.  Its all a rush to be more indignant then the next talking head.  I believe a lot of wrong has gone on but no one is looking at it objectively.  Personally I think your stance is intellectually lazy because you can simply say everyone is the devil and move on.  Its easy to paint with a wide brush, its much harder to actually understand what happened.

I have a lot of blame to assign, from McQueary and his father, to Paterno and up to Spanier.  Should any of them done more, absolutely, but we have the benefit of the complete picture now.  Again it is not an excuse for not doing more, but I do think someone has to make the following point:  If someone came to you and said I thought I saw something your brother or father or mother etc was doing, would you believe it? would you go to the cops?  Obviously this all depends on what you are told.  Sandusky was part of the Penn State family, and it really is that there.  If faced with one report(which we don't know exactly what everyone was told) about a family member would you report it?  I'd like to think I would but I'm not ready to indict a man who for 46 years has shown nothing but a strong moral compass as some sort of facilitator for unspeakable crimes without more information.

The whole thing is terrible and I hate that it happened, but I just don't want to take the easy road and spew hatred at everyone and walk away.

Quote from: Aughnanure on November 09, 2011, 09:35:17 AM
Did they do enough? Of course not, but what you are accusing them of is being fully knowledgeable of what was happening and accessories to a crime.

Yep. You're damn right I am. The jackass admitted to showering with boys in 1998. The "reported" shower incident took place in 2002. To suggest that they didn't know this was going on within the confines of the athletic facilities over a period of three-four years simply doesn't pass the smell test. For God's sake, incidents involving 6 of the 8 identified victims identified in the Grand Jury report took place before 2000. You really believe people around that place didn't know it was going on. Come on. I would suggest you may be the one who is looking for a way to make this easier to comprehend.

So they thought maybe it was just "sexual misconduct","fondling" or any other semi-ambiguous descriptions, but didn't rise to the level of anal rape, and therefore what, its ok? Just Jerry being Jerry?  There's a reason Paterno didn't really do anything about the 2002 incident. He wasn't surprised by it, and clearly he also wasn't upset by it.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 09:18:05 AM
There are ethics guidelines within the NCAA constitution and by-laws, so... I'm just saying that if PSU doesn't handle it by getting rid of everyone from the grad assistant up to the President, the NCAA might have to.

Actually, that comment is not what you were saying in your post that I quoted.  There was no "if PSU doesn't handle ..."  Your initial comment, that I commented upon, was an absolute.  Stating the NCAA needs to get involved and punish the program.  You cited other programs and how the NCAA punished them as examples.

As I stated, this is best left to the university, community and Big10, not the NCAA.  It appears as though PSU is taking serious action. 

I do wonder, though, how PSU would have handled Paterno if he was 54, not 84 ...

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 09:46:14 AM
However, for you to accuse the program, all of the coaches and players over 30 years, of knowing about Sandusky's problem is disgusting.

First of all, you're going to have to show me where I made that accusation. I accused Paterno and likely a few others of knowing that the guy had a problem with boys. For you to claim that is implausible is to choose to ignore reality. Catholic Church ring any bells? How long was that garbage ignored and swept under the rug, while predators were allowed to assault more victims? Why should this be any different? Again, 3/4 of the victims in the report (have you read it) took place before the 2002 shower incident. The number of victims has reportedly already doubled.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 09:46:14 AM
If someone came to you and said I thought I saw something your brother or father or mother etc was doing, would you believe it? would you go to the cops?  Obviously this all depends on what you are told.  

Maybe not, but would I contact that close friend or family member to see what happened? Yep, I sure would. You are going to have show me in the report where Paterno testified to having that discussion. Again, to suggest that after several years of this going on within the confines of the PSU facilities, displays a shocking level of willful naivety...and that is just from the 8 victims we know of.

Even if you want to assume all of that is wrong,  Jerry Sandusky was in the PSU facilities LAST WEEK! Clearly Paterno and the PSU brass were not bothered by what they knew at that time had taken place.

Quote from: MUMac on November 09, 2011, 10:12:39 AM
It appears as though PSU is taking serious action. 

Let's hope so. If he coaches on Saturday, they most certainly are not. If that President has a job on Saturday, they aren't.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 09:54:07 AM
Yep. You're damn right I am. The jackass admitted to showering with boys in 1998. The "reported" shower incident took place in 2002. To suggest that they didn't know this was going on within the confines of the athletic facilities over a period of three-four years simply doesn't pass the smell test. For God's sake, incidents involving 6 of the 8 identified victims identified in the Grand Jury report took place before 2000. You really believe people around that place didn't know it was going on. Come on. I would suggest you may be the one who is looking for a way to make this easier to comprehend.

So they thought maybe it was just "sexual misconduct","fondling" or any other semi-ambiguous descriptions, but didn't rise to the level of anal rape, and therefore what, its ok? Just Jerry being Jerry?  There's a reason Paterno didn't really do anything about the 2002 incident. He wasn't surprised by it, and clearly he also wasn't upset by it.

Cute response, but in no part of of it did you actually show that these people knew the full extent of what was going on. I don't know if you're aware, but investigations are different than full-on complicit knowledge. You suggestion that everyone n the football program knew that Jerry anal rapes little boys, but was totally okay with it is ridiculous. No way does that information last 3 years, much less 3 days, if the "crystal clear" knowledge is as widespread as you contend.

But sure, keep it simple for you over reactionary mind - evil JoePa and Penn St are totally okay with anal raping young boys. Yep, that clears it up.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 10:14:15 AM
Maybe not, but would I contact that close friend or family member to see what happened? Yep, I sure would. You are going to have show me in the report where Paterno testified to having that discussion. Again, to suggest that after several years of this going on within the confines of the PSU facilities, displays a shocking level of willful naivety...and that is just from the 8 victims we know of.

Yep, and I bet Jerry just totally admitted to having regular anal intercourse with prepubescent boys in the football showers.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 10:14:15 AM
Even if you want to assume all of that is wrong,  Jerry Sandusky was in the PSU facilities LAST WEEK! Clearly Paterno and the PSU brass were not bothered by what they knew at that time had taken place.

If anything, that clearly shows you how ignorant they were of his actions, as well as what the investigations had uncovered.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 10:14:15 AM
First of all, you're going to have to show me where I made that accusation. I accused Paterno and likely a few others of knowing that the guy had a problem with boys. For you to claim that is implausible is to choose to ignore reality. Catholic Church ring any bells? How long was that garbage ignored and swept under the rug, while predators were allowed to assault more victims? Why should this be any different? Again, 3/4 of the victims in the report (have you read it) took place before the 2002 shower incident. The number of victims has reportedly already doubled.

With all due respect, you have absolutely no clue what Paterno did or did not know. Nobody, far as I can tell, is suggesting that what you believe is implausible. Fact is, you're the only one who's speaking in absolutes here. And I'm not sure how anyone can speak in absolutes about what someone else "knew" unless a) that person says he/she knew or b) you have amazing mind-reading capabilities.
Barring that, you're merely speculating. Your speculation could turn out to be spot on. But right now, it's still just supposition.

The Catholic Church rings lots of bells. Every hour, in some places. But I don't see what that has to do with this.

Quote from: Aughnanure on November 09, 2011, 10:17:48 AM
Cute response, but in no part of of it did you actually show that these people knew the full extent of what was going on.

Nope, and at no point did I suggest they knew the full extent of what was going on. What I am suggesting...actually stating as fact, is that Paterno, and likely some others knew something was going on, and chose not to deal with it.

What exactly are you suggesting? If they thought he was just "horsing around" with 10 year old boys in the shower, that's not a big deal? They should only have done anything if they knew just how bad it was? Or are you suggesting that they literally knew nothing, even though it went on for several years, seemingly with double digit victims, and the police were involved in 1998? Really? You think nobody around that place knew anything?

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 10:14:15 AM
First of all, you're going to have to show me where I made that accusation. I accused Paterno and likely a few others of knowing that the guy had a problem with boys. For you to claim that is implausible is to choose to ignore reality. Catholic Church ring any bells? How long was that garbage ignored and swept under the rug, while predators were allowed to assault more victims? Why should this be any different? Again, 3/4 of the victims in the report (have you read it) took place before the 2002 shower incident. The number of victims has reportedly already doubled.

Apples and oranges.  The catholic church scandal was scattered across the country and did not take place in a single confined location where everyone knew everyone.  I think it is implausible that, if it is as obvious as you make it sound for Paterno to know, that other people wouldn't know.  That staff has been together for years you don't think everyone would know if Joe knew?  You don't think if it was so obvious that all the players that played for Sandusky would know?  This behavior went on for something like 20 years, at least.  If it was that obvious, you are telling me that only a handful would know and willfully cover it up?  What in the 46 years of Paterno's very public record tells you he would engage in a cover up for something as heinous as that????

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 10:14:15 AM
Maybe not, but would I contact that close friend or family member to see what happened? Yep, I sure would. You are going to have show me in the report where Paterno testified to having that discussion. Again, to suggest that after several years of this going on within the confines of the PSU facilities, displays a shocking level of willful naivety...and that is just from the 8 victims we know of.

Show me in the report where he testified he didn't talk to Sandusky about it.  

We have seen this a million times, unfortunately these types of monsters are very good at keeping the lives separate, people are fooled all of the time.  Not saying that excuses not doing more, but to make it so cut and dry minimizes the truly difficult nature of recognizing something so despicable in someone who you are so close to.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 10:14:15 AM
Even if you want to assume all of that is wrong,  Jerry Sandusky was in the PSU facilities LAST WEEK! Clearly Paterno and the PSU brass were not bothered by what they knew at that time had taken place.

What did they really know took place at that time?  Grand Jury reports are sealed until complete and released(or so I understand) so they hadn't seen it until we all did.  Isn't it possible they had no inkling the depth of the depravity?  I find it much more likely that they were wildly naive about what was going on than that they were essentially as evil as Sandusky himself.  I ask you, what in the universities history or that of the key players would indicate them capable of that level of insanity?

A lot of people did wrong but it is entirely too easy to throw the baby out with the bathwater

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 10:29:14 AM
Nope, and at no point did I suggest they knew the full extent of what was going on. What I am suggesting...actually stating as fact, is that Paterno, and likely some others knew something was going on, and chose not to deal with it.

What exactly are you suggesting? If they thought he was just "horsing around" with 10 year old boys in the shower, that's not a big deal? They should only have done anything if they knew just how bad it was? Or are you suggesting that they literally knew nothing, even though it went on for several years, seemingly with double digit victims, and the police were involved in 1998? Really? You think nobody around that place knew anything?

Its amazingly easy to connect all the dots when they are laid out before you.  Show me in all of these incidents and reports you have access to who knew what and when.  Actually prove to me with FACTS that Paterno or Bradley or McQueary or Spainer or anyone else knew everything and was actually in a position to put it together.  It ain't popular right now, but lets actually have a case let alone guilt establish before we go chopping off heads.

Quote from: Pakuni on November 09, 2011, 10:25:42 AM
With all due respect, you have absolutely no clue what Paterno did or did not know. Nobody, far as I can tell, is suggesting that what you believe is implausible. Fact is, you're the only one who's speaking in absolutes here. And I'm not sure how anyone can speak in absolutes about what someone else "knew" unless a) that person says he/she knew or b) you have amazing mind-reading capabilities.

Here's what I know. I know OJ Simpson killed two people. I know the parents are somehow responsible for Baby Lisa's disappearance in Missouri. I haven't talked to anyone involved, nor do I read minds. I do however have a mind, the powers of deduction, and the ability to draw a conclusion. Why do you care? If I'm speculating, and I'm wrong, that's on me. However, I have no problem coming to the conclusion that Paterno knew that Sandusky was doing something with boys on the PSU campus.

Quote from: Pakuni on November 09, 2011, 10:25:42 AM
The Catholic Church rings lots of bells. Every hour, in some places. But I don't see what that has to do with this.

That's a good one. What does it have to do with this? I am being told that, "You suggestion that everyone n the football program knew that Jerry anal rapes little boys, but was totally okay with it is ridiculous. No way does that information last 3 years, much less 3 days, if the "crystal clear" knowledge is as widespread as you contend."

How long did that information last in the Catholic Church? A heck of a lot longer that 3 years, let alone 3 days. That is a clear suggestion that my conclusion that Paterno knew something was going on, and allowed it to go on is implausible, when clearly it is not. It happened on a much larger scale and many people worked very hard to cover it up while the victim count grew exponentially.

JoePa retiring at season's end. It will be interesting to see if he lasts that long. IMO, he shouldn't.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7211281/penn-state-nittany-lions-joe-paterno-retire-end-season (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7211281/penn-state-nittany-lions-joe-paterno-retire-end-season)

Quote from: Aughnanure on November 09, 2011, 10:21:26 AM
Yep, and I bet Jerry just totally admitted to having regular anal intercourse with prepubescent boys in the football showers.

If anything, that clearly shows you how ignorant they were of his actions, as well as what the investigations had uncovered.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

This whole thing is just beyond maddening, my disgust level grows every hour, and I can only imagine when this thing goes to trial, it might (horribly) be ten times worse than where we are at now. I'm guessing when reports come out about the foundation Sandusky was running, will only lead to more horrible things being brought to light.

I still can not fathom how Paterno can coach one more day. He's supposed to be a leader and set an example for the young men he is coaching, both on and off the field. Retiring at the end of the season...who cares. For his own sake, the sake of PSU, and god help the victims, retire now so the healing process and fixing this so it NEVER happens again should start NOW, not having to wait for 3 more games, and then a month long wait for a bowl game. Every day he shows up to coach is just a reminder of this beyond words awful case.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 10:42:47 AM
  It ain't popular right now, but lets actually have a case let alone guilt establish before we go chopping off heads.

You are free to do that, and from a legal standpoint, absolutely. I don't need to do that. I have seen and heard enough to know that Paterno, Curly, Spanier, and McQuerry's hands are plenty dirty to conclude that they need to be done today...If it were my call of course, but I am just a dumbass with no say in the matter.

Quote from: MUDish on November 09, 2011, 10:51:03 AM
Retiring at the end of the season...who cares. For his own sake, the sake of PSU, and god help the victims, retire now so the healing process and fixing this so it NEVER happens again should start NOW, not having to wait for 3 more games, and then a month long wait for a bowl game. Every day he shows up to coach is just a reminder of this beyond words awful case.

I think it also speaks volumes about whom and what exactly he is concerned...himself, his 400 wins, his 46 years. Obviously he wants to go out on his terms, but, I'm sorry, he has forfeited that right. It isn't about him anymore. We can argue round or flat about what he knew when, but I hope all would agree he knew something, sometime and could not have handled it worse, and he bears responsibility for a number of those victims. The AD and President are in that boat with him.

Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 09, 2011, 11:02:58 AM
I think it also speaks volumes about whom and what exactly he is concerned...himself, his 400 wins, his 46 years. Obviously he wants to go out on his terms, but, I'm sorry, he has forfeited that right. It isn't about him anymore. We can argue round or flat about what he knew when, but I hope all would agree he knew something, sometime and could not have handled it worse, and he bears responsibility for a number of those victims. The AD and President are in that boat with him.

I agree with all that, you're absolutely right. That's what part of so maddening to me...he's been there 46 years, has 400 wins...we all agree he can coach football, and his football coaching ability won't be challenged. But my god, it's 3 f'n games and a bowl game left, he has zero to prove (on the field), for the sake of himself, the university, the victims...step down. Coaching the rest of the season does nothing other than continue to tarnish his legacy.

I myself am overly stubborn to a degree, but this is absurd how defiant and stubborn Paterno is. For all the wrong things that have been done, by so many people, on so many levels, the one right thing that is obvious (to me anyway) is for him to step down now, and it won't be done. It's a disgrace to me.

I believe Paterno only reported the incident to Curley, the AD, and not to Schultz, who oversaw the campus police.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 10:42:47 AM
Its amazingly easy to connect all the dots when they are laid out before you.  Show me in all of these incidents and reports you have access to who knew what and when.  Actually prove to me with FACTS that Paterno or Bradley or McQueary or Spainer or anyone else knew everything and was actually in a position to put it together.  It ain't popular right now, but lets actually have a case let alone guilt establish before we go chopping off heads.

Read the Grand Jury Report if you want FACTS.  In particular, read about Victim 2.  Here's an excerpt:

"As the graduate assistant put the sneakers in his locker, he looked into the shower.  he saw a naked boy, Victim 2,. whose age he estimated to be ten years old,with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky."

You might want to get your head out of the sand or your arse, wherever it may be, and look at the findings of FACT.  We know the graduate assistant to be McQueary and we know he reported the fact that Sandusky was naked with the naked 10 year old to Paterno.  We also know Paterno reported it to his superiors.

Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on November 09, 2011, 11:24:38 AM
Read the Grand Jury Report if you want FACTS.  In particular, read about Victim 2.  Here's an excerpt:

"As the graduate assistant put the sneakers in his locker, he looked into the shower.  he saw a naked boy, Victim 2,. whose age he estimated to be ten years old,with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky."

You might want to get your head out of the sand or your arse, wherever it may be, and look at the findings of FACT.  We know the graduate assistant to be McQueary and we know he reported the fact that Sandusky was naked with the naked 10 year old to Paterno.  We also know Paterno reported it to his superiors.

I won't pretend to know what happened, but what's been reported is pretty damning.

That said, a grand jury report is a long, long way from FACT. A grand jury report is exclusively what the authorities want you to know about a set of allegations, and nothing more.
If a grand jury report were FACT, there would be no such thing as (or need for ) a trial. Everyone would be guilty. Because the grand jury report says so.

Quote from: Pakuni on November 09, 2011, 11:33:12 AM
I won't pretend to know what happened, but what's been reported is pretty damning.

That said, a grand jury report is a long, long way from FACT. A grand jury report is exclusively what the authorities want you to know about a set of allegations, and nothing more.
If a grand jury report were FACT, there would be no such thing as (or need for ) a trial. Everyone would be guilty. Because the grand jury report says so.

Agreed as far as trials and jail, etc. for anyone, including Sandusky.  But as far as losing their jobs, the "findings of fact" set forth by the grand jury, which include direct testimony from McQueary and Paterno, are more than enough.

Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on November 09, 2011, 11:24:38 AM
Read the Grand Jury Report if you want FACTS.  In particular, read about Victim 2.  Here's an excerpt:

"As the graduate assistant put the sneakers in his locker, he looked into the shower.  he saw a naked boy, Victim 2,. whose age he estimated to be ten years old,with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky."

You might want to get your head out of the sand or your arse, wherever it may be, and look at the findings of FACT.  We know the graduate assistant to be McQueary and we know he reported the fact that Sandusky was naked with the naked 10 year old to Paterno.  We also know Paterno reported it to his superiors.

Absolutely those are facts, where is the smoking gun that Paterno knew more?  He reported the incident to the administration and the campus police, is he suppose to launch his own independent investigation?  My point in all of this is that Paterno and McQueary and everyone else in this whole business may have been wildly wrong, but we don't know that for sure and we won't know that for sure because everyone is demanding a shotgun blast to the head.  When everything goes quiet none of the correct information will ever see the light of day and that is a shame because we won't have learned anything from this.

The media's job should be to determine facts and connect dots, none of which is happening.  Nobody has put a timeline together of who knew what and when they knew it.  Until I see that I'm going wait before picking up my pitchfork, I have it on standby, but I'm not ready to use it yet.

Or we could go your route, call names, scream oh the humanity, sit proudly and talk about how you were one of the million people who expressed your outrage over a situation you knew half of the facts.  Its easy to do that, its easy to just swim along with the tide.  I'm not content with just labeling everyone involved terrible human beings and moving on, apparently you are.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 12:39:50 PM
Nobody has put a timeline together of who knew what and when they knew it.  Until I see that I'm going wait before picking up my pitchfork, I have it on standby, but I'm not ready to use it yet.

As I said earlier, the grand jury testimony of McQueary is that he personally witnessed Sandusky having anal intercourse with a 10 year old.  He then told Paterno the next morning"where he reported what he had seen."  Peterno testified he told Tim Curley, the AD, "the very next day".  Approximately one and a half weeks later, McQueary told Curley and Gary Schultz, senior VP, that he witnessed what he believed to be Sandusky having anal sex with a boy in the showers.  Have you read the grand jury report?  How is that not a timeline of "who knew what and when they knew it"?

Once Paterno was told that Sandusky was in the"showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy", did JoePa not have the moral duty to ask Sandusky and McQueary more about it?  Do you think he actually did?  If so, he put his head in the same place yours seems to be.

Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on November 09, 2011, 12:53:31 PM
As I said earlier, the grand jury testimony of McQueary is that he personally witnessed Sandusky having anal intercourse with a 10 year old.  He then told Paterno the next morning"where he reported what he had seen."  Peterno testified he told Tim Curley, the AD, "the very next day".  Approximately one and a half weeks later, McQueary told Curley and Gary Schultz, senior VP, that he witnessed what he believed to be Sandusky having anal sex with a boy in the showers.  Have you read the grand jury report?  How is that not a timeline of "who knew what and when they knew it"?

Once Paterno was told that Sandusky was in the"showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy", did JoePa not have the moral duty to ask Sandusky and McQueary more about it?  Do you think he actually did?  If so, he put his head in the same place yours seems to be.

Do you know he didn't?  No you don't.  You just know what is in a grand jury report that tells information related to Sandusky's awlful behavior and Curley and Schultz's culpability.  This report doesn't do anything to understand what broke down at PSU and clearly something broke down.

The funny thing is ultimately I think everyone should go from McQueary on up just like you and Navin.  Everyone of them should be gone.  However, I want to learn from this incident, people like you just want to call names and stand on your high horse.  I want to know how good people could go this far astray so it doesn't happen again, apparently you are more interested in your moral superiority and rush to judgement.  I'm done with this conversation, I've said what I had to say.  You guys enjoy kicking the carcasses. 

Here's the part I need to reply to regarding why Paterno should be gone immediately and in my opinion is morally repugnant:

mu03eng:

QuoteI have a lot of blame to assign, from McQueary and his father, to Paterno and up to Spanier.  Should any of them done more, absolutely, but we have the benefit of the complete picture now.  Again it is not an excuse for not doing more, but I do think someone has to make the following point:  If someone came to you and said I thought I saw something your brother or father or mother etc was doing, would you believe it? would you go to the cops?  Obviously this all depends on what you are told.

You also asked that after Paterno found some of this out

QuoteHe reported the incident to the administration and the campus police, is he suppose to launch his own independent investigation?

Given those two quotes together - yes he was. As a human being, if I were to find out one of my family members were accused of this, I couldn't live with myself if I didn't find out enough to know one way or the other if it was true. Would I go to the cops or try to find things out myself? I guess I can't answer that. I can say that I would be totally consumed with finding out whether or not this was true, and wash what I felt was the blood on my hands for what I had already been told. I need no more facts to determine that Paterno felt that despite what he had been told, he felt he had no blood on his hands, and did not feel compelled to do more. That is not good enough for me. unnatural carnal knowledge him.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 10:34:32 AMWhat did they really know took place at that time?  Grand Jury reports are sealed until complete and released(or so I understand) so they hadn't seen it until we all did.  Isn't it possible they had no inkling the depth of the depravity?  I find it much more likely that they were wildly naive about what was going on than that they were essentially as evil as Sandusky himself.  I ask you, what in the universities history or that of the key players would indicate them capable of that level of insanity?

A lot of people did wrong but it is entirely too easy to throw the baby out with the bathwater

Since JoePa was interviewed (as others also were) by the grand jury he was well aware of the investigation long beforethe release of the GJ summary this weekend yet Sandusky was still allowed access to their facilities. Why still allow a former employee access? Just because he was given emeritus status?

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 12:39:50 PM
Or we could go your route, call names,

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 01:06:58 PM
people like you just want to call names and stand on your high horse.  

Where did I call anyone names?  You asked for a timeline.  I gave you a timeline.  Not my timeline, the grand jury's, made from testimony of those who knew what they knew and when they knew it.  Should McQueary have done more? I don't know how anyone can say he shouldn't have gone into the shower to a) get the kid away from Sandusky and b) kick the sh!t out of Sandusky.  Should Paterno have done more?  Who can argue that Joe Paterno isn't Penn State.  As a human being who is the program known as Penn State Football, did he not have a responsibility to the 10 year old?  To his assistant coaches?  His players?  The rest of the administration?  To do the right thing and make sure Sandusky never stepped foot on the campus again and that the incident (s) be fully investigated?

I don't think that's standing on my high horse mu03.  Nor do I think it's a rush to judgment.  But to not act immediately does more harm to Penn State than keeping the status quo when those at the University know what's going on.

Quote from: MUBurrow on November 09, 2011, 01:08:18 PM
Here's the part I need to reply to regarding why Paterno should be gone immediately and in my opinion is morally repugnant:

mu03eng:
You also asked that after Paterno found some of this out
Given those two quotes together - yes he was. As a human being, if I were to find out one of my family members were accused of this, I couldn't live with myself if I didn't find out enough to know one way or the other if it was true. Would I go to the cops or try to find things out myself? I guess I can't answer that. I can say that I would be totally consumed with finding out whether or not this was true, and wash what I felt was the blood on my hands for what I had already been told. I need no more facts to determine that Paterno felt that despite what he had been told, he felt he had no blood on his hands, and did not feel compelled to do more. That is not good enough for me. frack him.

I guess I can't help myself

Burrow, I think you and I are on the same page.  It may not come across because I have a tendency to play devil's advocate with everything, but I do think he had a moral duty to do more.  What I haven't seen yet is, did he try and do more.  Did he talk to Sandusky.  Did he talk to police.  I haven't seen anyone investigate that and I haven't heard from Joe himself.  I suspect he couldn't believe it and didn't do as much as he could and for that, should it prove true, he should be gone.  But I'm not willing to accept suspicions and assumptions.

And ultimately, the whole system broke down, but everyone is so damn hell bent to nail Paterno we are losing focus on the bigger picture

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 01:06:58 PM
Everyone of them should be gone.  However, I want to learn from this incident, people like you just want to call names and stand on your high horse.  I want to know how good people could go this far astray so it doesn't happen again, apparently you are more interested in your moral superiority and rush to judgement. 

That doesn't make any sense. What exactly does one have to do with the other? You're the one who is using hyperbole like shotgun blast to the head, kicking carcasses, moral superiority, etc. I simply believe that there is no way on God's green earth that Joe Paterno should be coaching that game Saturday, nor should the President serve another day as the head of PSU or the BCS, if for no other reason than out of respect for the victims, as well as the rest of the PSU community who had absolutely nothing to do with this. How does that prevent us from learning anything from this?

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 01:23:47 PM
Burrow, I think you and I are on the same page.  It may not come across because I have a tendency to play devil's advocate with everything, but I do think he had a moral duty to do more.  What I haven't seen yet is, did he try and do more.  Did he talk to Sandusky.  Did he talk to police.  I haven't seen anyone investigate that and I haven't heard from Joe himself.

I'll definitely agree with you that I want to hear from Paterno himself, and want him to take questions. Its too bad the presser yesterday was cancelled, and by the time we hear from Paterno the result will likely be some worthless amalgamation of what Penn St powers want him to say, what he wants to say, and what really happened.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 01:06:58 PM
I want to know how good people could go this far astray so it doesn't happen again

Oh I can pretty much guaranty you how this happened.  Penn State looks like it is clearly an inbred organization, run more like a family than a business.  Sandusky was the "uncle with the drinking problem" that no one wanted to talk about or confront - just as long as we all smile for the family photo in front of the Christmas tree.

No one had the guts to say "Hey, this guy was caught anal raping a 10 year old.  Not only should we kick him off campus, but we should call the police.  Yeah, I know this will be embarrassing to us - one of our own family is a monster - but this is the *right* thing to do."  This is the same type of leadership problem the Catholic Church had too BTW.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 09, 2011, 01:23:47 PM
everyone is so damn hell bent to nail Paterno we are losing focus on the bigger picture

The bigger picture is that kids were molested.  At least one was anally raped.  THAT'S the bigger picture.  Those who knew have to be gone and gone now.  To think otherwise is to be as ignorant as the students on Paterno's lawn who think the bigger picture means Penn State needs to beat Nebraska on Saturday.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 09, 2011, 01:52:04 PM

Oh I can pretty much guaranty you how this happened.  Penn State looks like it is clearly an inbred organization, run more like a family than a business.  Sandusky was the "uncle with the drinking problem" that no one wanted to talk about or confront - just as long as we all smile for the family photo in front of the Christmas tree.

No one had the guts to say "Hey, this guy was caught anal raping a 10 year old.  Not only should we kick him off campus, but we should call the police.  Yeah, I know this will be embarrassing to us - one of our own family is a monster - but this is the *right* thing to do."  This is the same type of leadership problem the Catholic Church had too BTW.

I think college sports has this problem in general as well (not molesting children, rather protecting the program first and foremost). Scandal after scandal shows that the big time college sports athletics first reaction is protection, rather than doing what needs to be done. The Kansas ticket scandal, OSU, and even Marquette are all examples of this. When your athlete gets in trouble, your first reaction is not to call the police and report an incident, but instead to call your lawyer to make sure this doesn't affect next week's big game.

Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on November 09, 2011, 01:52:37 PM
The bigger picture is that kids were molested.  At least one was anally raped.  THAT'S the bigger picture.  Those who knew have to be gone and gone now.  To think otherwise is to be as ignorant as the students on Paterno's lawn who think the bigger picture means Penn State needs to beat Nebraska on Saturday.

and the rapist has finally been arrested and Paterno reported what he knew (we think) to the guy in admin who runs the campus police.  What is the PSU procedure?  Is it not to report the incident to your supervisor?

Just heard this, and I think Jay Bilas sums up my opinion pretty nicely. This is not complicated...

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=7211213 (http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=7211213)

The comment that really sums up and demonstrates exactly how PSU turned a blind eye to all of this is exactly what they were saying when they instructed him not to bring any boys on campus anymore...Just don't do it here. Spot on.

Quote from: ATWizJr on November 09, 2011, 02:42:28 PM
and the rapist has finally been arrested and Paterno reported what he knew (we think) to the guy in admin who runs the campus police.  What is the PSU procedure?  Is it not to report the incident to your supervisor?

yes. He reported it to his supervisor and that's PSU protocol. Does that mean he shouldn't have done more?  Especially if (and he is, let's not sugarcoat it) he's THE top dog at the University?  Go ahead and argue he did all he had to do as a teacher, parent, grandparent and coach.  Go ahead.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 09, 2011, 01:52:04 PM

Oh I can pretty much guaranty you how this happened.  Penn State looks like it is clearly an inbred organization, run more like a family than a business.  Sandusky was the "uncle with the drinking problem" that no one wanted to talk about or confront - just as long as we all smile for the family photo in front of the Christmas tree.

No one had the guts to say "Hey, this guy was caught anal raping a 10 year old.  Not only should we kick him off campus, but we should call the police.  Yeah, I know this will be embarrassing to us - one of our own family is a monster - but this is the *right* thing to do."  This is the same type of leadership problem the Catholic Church had too BTW.

Here is where I have trouble wrapping my head around.....What McQueary saw was so clearly wrong and should obviously have been reported to anyone who would listen.  However at least six intelligent and previously upstanding individuals at best took the route of plausible deniability and worst facilitated a child rapist.  To me it seems so obvious that something should have been done long before and then on top of to still allow him around the program as recently as a week ago knowing full well about the grand jury....what the hell? 

It just boggles my mind that the plot that is unfolding could actually happen, there is just no way you could logically take any of the actions that everyone seems to think happened in this case.  That is why I go back to who knew what and when, I need the smoking gun to prove to myself beyond a reasonable doubt that people had this information and didn't act.

Quote from: Lighthouse 84 on November 09, 2011, 03:00:39 PM
yes. He reported it to his supervisor and that's PSU protocol. Does that mean he shouldn't have done more?  Especially if (and he is, let's not sugarcoat it) he's THE top dog at the University?  Go ahead and argue he did all he had to do as a teacher, parent, grandparent and coach.  Go ahead.

Who can you name that has ever done everything he had to do as a teacher, parent, grandparent and coach?  He's human, like everyone else and he reported the incident, as relayed to him, to the guy who ran the campus police.  Did he make a citizen's arrest?  No.  Should he have done more?  Wasn't what happened next up to      the administration?

By this logic, Buzz should have been fired for not going to the police when last year's events unfolded at MU.   You can't have it both ways.    Horrifying events happened.   JoePa received second hand information that he took to his superior.    Superiors apparently talked to the person who came to Joe.    An internal investigation took place (sound familiar?)    PSU handled everything from there on out wrong.  Without a doubt.    If these allegations are found through due process to be true, I hope there is a special place in hell reserved for him.    You can argue that JoePa should have gone to the police himself.   You can argue that Buzz should have gone to the police himself.    The only difference is scope and details.    IMO, we have short memories here.    Let the process happen.    Let the whole story come out.   

Quote from: tower912 on November 09, 2011, 04:57:14 PM
By this logic, Buzz should have been fired for not going to the police when last year's events unfolded at MU.   You can't have it both ways.    Horrifying events happened.   JoePa received second hand information that he took to his superior.    Superiors apparently talked to the person who came to Joe.    An internal investigation took place (sound familiar?)    PSU handled everything from there on out wrong.  Without a doubt.    If these allegations are found through due process to be true, I hope there is a special place in hell reserved for him.    You can argue that JoePa should have gone to the police himself.   You can argue that Buzz should have gone to the police himself.    The only difference is scope and details.    IMO, we have short memories here.    Let the process happen.    Let the whole story come out.   

2 differences. One, Buzz isn't the equivalent of Joe Paterno. If it was Al, maybe but Buzz isn't Al or JoePa. Second, MU's issue wasn't 10 year olds getting anally raped. Was what happened at MU enough to go to the police?  Maybe so. I didn't see a grand jury report.

"The only difference is scope and details".    Let the due process play out.    And considering the glass house MU has found itself for the last 7 months, perhaps the stone casting should be more carefully considered.

Quote from: tower912 on November 09, 2011, 06:00:12 PM
"The only difference is scope and details".    Let the due process play out.    And considering the glass house MU has found itself for the last 7 months, perhaps the stone casting should be more carefully considered.

This.

The Board of Trustees just fired Paterno and the President.

The pre-emptive strike by Paterno announcing his retirement earlier in the day backfired.

House cleaning completed?  Who knows. 

The Department of Education will now send in their Inspector General agents for federal violations in non-reporting of criminal acts.

What a mess........

Next will be recruits bailing out.

Is Paterno taking the rear exit?

Either:
A) Board just wants to completely clean house as quickly as possible and stop having the Nittany Lion on ESPN behind everyone implicated, or
B) Board knows what JoePa has to say in that press conference that never happened and it isn't good/different than many of the conclusions out there right now

Or both.

How the hell did they not let McQueary go tonight? Seriously, how? There is zero chance he is on the field Saturday, no f'n way.

Rumor is another major allegation to be announed between now and Saturday.

Quote from: MUDish on November 09, 2011, 11:20:40 PM
Rumor is another major allegation to be announed between now and Saturday.

I'm guessing Sandusky wasn't the only predator and The Second Mile was their farm of boys.

Let the wrongful termination lawsuits commence.

Quote from: marqptm on November 09, 2011, 11:27:38 PM
I'm guessing Sandusky wasn't the only predator and The Second Mile was their farm of boys.

You're not sayin' JoePa was double dippin' too, now, are ya?

Quote from: MUBurrow on November 09, 2011, 10:07:13 PM
Either:
A) Board just wants to completely clean house as quickly as possible and stop having the Nittany Lion on ESPN behind everyone implicated, or
B) Board knows what JoePa has to say in that press conference that never happened and it isn't good/different than many of the conclusions out there right now

Or both.

A 3rd possible reason.  Joe Pa's announcement forced the BOT hands.  The fact he went to the press with this as a preemptive strike and without the agreement of the BOT showed arrogance on his part.  He felt he, because of who he is, could control his destiny.  When he said they don't need to worry about him, they have more important things to worry about, that was a slap to the BOT.  After I heard that, I knew the BOT had no other option.

Quote from: 4everwarriors on November 10, 2011, 04:54:23 AM

You're not sayin' JoePa was double dippin' too, now, are ya?

Not JoePa, I don't think he's really all there anymore to really know/care what's going on outside of football.

Just seems like a lot of work to cover for Sandusky, and seems like there's more.

Quote from: nyg on November 09, 2011, 09:43:59 PM
The Board of Trustees just fired Paterno and the President.

The pre-emptive strike by Paterno announcing his retirement earlier in the day backfired.

House cleaning completed?  Who knows. 

The Department of Education will now send in their Inspector General agents for federal violations in non-reporting of criminal acts.

What a mess........

Next will be recruits bailing out.

Is PSU obligated to provide a severance package since he was fired and didn't "retire" or "quit"? Not that he needs one, but, you know.

Our guy who covers PSU is hearing there could be at least 20 cases of sexual abuse before this is all done. Every penny from PSU football tickets could be going to pay lawsuits for the next 20 years. When is The Big Ten Network going to run weekly specials on all the scandals at all its schools?

Quote from: MUDish on November 09, 2011, 11:20:40 PM
Rumor is another major allegation to be announed between now and Saturday.

I have no idea what that may be, but I think the other thing people who are questioning this, or considering it some sort of rush to judgement need to account for is the fact that Sandusky 'retired' in '99 at age 55, seemingly at the top of his game in the prime of his career, while the then current head coach was already in his 70's. If you are willfully naive enough to conclude that the timing of that decision was merely coincidence given the shower incident of '98, then I would suggest that it may be time to get back on the turnip truck.

You also have to account for the incidents that took place in the three years between '99 and the shower incident in 2002 and beyond, and convince yourself that nobody at PSU knew what was going on. Particularly given how they handled things in 2002 when they effectively said, "just don't do it here." My disgust level unfortunately continues to go up on this, even sitting here thinking about/typing that.

Marqptm hit the nail right on the head. My family is from eastern PA, and both they (and I) have heard from multiple reports/sources that the next allegation is the Second Chance program served more or less as a "pimp" to farm out young boys to wealthy donors.

Also meant to say, there can't possibly be any way that game gets played Saturday, at least not played in State College (in my opinion).

If for no other reason than you're basically inviting an angry mob of people into a confined enviornment, and safety of fans/players/locals is at risk.

Perhaps if the PSU administration handled this in a more swift and decisve manner, but after what happened there last night, there's no way they can control a crowd of 100,000+ in approx 48 hours from now.

Quote from: ATWizJr on November 09, 2011, 11:45:04 PM
Let the wrongful termination lawsuits commence.

There's not a chance of that happening.  In Paterno's case, his contract was up at the end of this year.  They'll pay him.  The AD and Sr VP, and likely the President, are at-will employees with back up positions.  They'll pay them the back up money.

Quote from: MUDish on November 10, 2011, 08:17:50 AM
Marqptm hit the nail right on the head. My family is from eastern PA, and both they (and I) have heard from multiple reports/sources that the next allegation is the Second Chance program served more or less as a "pimp" to farm out young boys to wealthy donors.

holy crap-balls.

http://audio.weei.com/a/48513317/mark-madden-talks-about-the-penn-state-scandal-and-drops-a-new-bomb-about-jerry-sandusky.htm

Quote from: MUDish on November 10, 2011, 08:17:50 AM
Marqptm hit the nail right on the head. My family is from eastern PA, and both they (and I) have heard from multiple reports/sources that the next allegation is the Second Chance program served more or less as a "pimp" to farm out young boys to wealthy donors.

That might be the worst thing I've ever heard. No offense, MUDish, but I pray to God that your sources are wrong.

Quote from: MUDish on November 10, 2011, 08:17:50 AM
Marqptm hit the nail right on the head. My family is from eastern PA, and both they (and I) have heard from multiple reports/sources that the next allegation is the Second Chance program served more or less as a "pimp" to farm out young boys to wealthy donors.

I pray that is the trumped up rumor version and that it is far less serious than that. Good Lord.

I know Mark Madden has been reporting it, I heard it from another report as well.

I think we can all agree that hopefully this rumor is 100% wrong. It literally made me sick to my stomach when I heard it.

Well, we will find out, because you know damn well Sandusky is singing like a canary.

If thats true, and I pray it isn't, Matt Millen is going to have a lot of questions to answer himself because he sits on the board of 2nd Mile.  I'll be curious to see how ESPN goes after one of their own.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 10, 2011, 09:24:02 AM
If thats true, and I pray it isn't, Matt Millen is going to have a lot of questions to answer himself because he sits on the board of 2nd Mile.  I'll be curious to see how ESPN goes after one of their own.

And there will be some personal liability as a Director as well.  If this rumor is true, PSU may have to suspend their athletic department for years.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 10, 2011, 08:32:07 AM
There's not a chance of that happening.  In Paterno's case, his contract was up at the end of this year.  They'll pay him.  The AD and Sr VP, and likely the President, are at-will employees with back up positions.  They'll pay them the back up money.

Which, in effect, is why the wrongful termination lawsuits wouild be filed in the first place.  They might just buy them out up front instead of going to court.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 10, 2011, 09:26:14 AM

And there will be some personal liability as a Director as well.  If this rumor is true, PSU may have to suspend their athletic department for years.

He's an honorary member along with a pretty impressive list.  I doubt they have much to do with the organization other than putting some money behind it, which will still deserve some questions to be asked.

http://www.thesecondmile.org/ourTeam/bod/bodHono.php

Have to give Mark Madden some credit (I know most people don't like him), but he had the Sandusky story reported 6 months ago.

This new allegation/rumor seems to be gaining a lot of steam, quite sadly.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 10, 2011, 09:24:02 AM
If thats true, and I pray it isn't, Matt Millen is going to have a lot of questions to answer himself because he sits on the board of 2nd Mile.  I'll be curious to see how ESPN goes after one of their own.

As someone else pointed out, he was not actually a member of the BOD.  He was listed on the "Honorary Board" with a significant group of others.  I doubt they would necessarily know if any illegal, unethical or morbid things were being done.

But, to Millen, he has been pretty downright angry about Sandusky, what happenned and how long it happenned.  He said if he had witnessed the shower incident, the article would have been about manslaughter as he would have taken Sandusky down himself.  While everything, every twist and turn, has surprised me, I would be SHOCKED if Millen would be implicated in any way.

Quote from: Bieberhole69 on November 10, 2011, 09:38:37 AM
He's an honorary member along with a pretty impressive list.  I doubt they have much to do with the organization other than putting some money behind it, which will still deserve some questions to be asked.

http://www.thesecondmile.org/ourTeam/bod/bodHono.php

It literally depends on how "honorary" they are.  I can tell you this, if you are (or were) an elected board member with governance responsibility, you have to be shaking in your boots right now.  Because, while I am sure they had Director and Officer liability coverage, that coverage has limits.  And those lawsuits can be filed against you...personally.

Beaver County Times reporter Mark Madden told WEEI that Sandusky was "pimping out boys to rich donors."

Whether this is true or not will need to be investigated. Going back to the late 70s the total number of victims has to exceed 100.

I'm not trying to sensationalize this, but Penn State might need to put it's football program on it's own leave of absence.

If what I've heard is true, and god knows what else is going to come to light, I don't know how Penn State can play football now or soon. I realize this is not on the players that are there, and this isn't a "football" issue, but I don't know how in right mind and judgement they can go on playing football right now. The school has so much more to do going forward.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 10, 2011, 09:58:07 AM

It literally depends on how "honorary" they are.  I can tell you this, if you are (or were) an elected board member with governance responsibility, you have to be shaking in your boots right now.  Because, while I am sure they had Director and Officer liability coverage, that coverage has limits.  And those lawsuits can be filed against you...personally.

If you check the site, there are several boards and then the "honorary" board.  The honorary board has famous or known names.  Included John Capaletti and Lou Holz among others.  I would be SHOCKED if there would be any liability for the honorary board members.

To get liability for any of the board, you would have to show that they knew of what was going on and did not act on that knowledge.  If something like this went all the way to the board level, Happy Valley will have a whole lot more issues on it's hands than just Penn State.

EDIT:  One item I meant to respond to.  I am not aware of any D&O policy that would cover a Director's liability for an illegal act.  If they were aware of something illegal and di dnot act appropriately, no insurance policy would step in to protect them.

MUMac...I agree that the honorary board members look like they are just that.

However, your second paragraph isn't entirely correct.  Board members may be sued for the actions of the non-profit, even if they weren't fully aware.  It depends on the state what those limits are though, and I have no idea what PA law is.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 10, 2011, 10:45:10 AM
MUMac...I agree that the honorary board members look like they are just that.

However, your second paragraph isn't entirely correct.  Board members may be sued for the actions of the non-profit, even if they weren't fully aware.  It depends on the state what those limits are though, and I have no idea what PA law is.

I've got no idea what the PA law says, but I'd be stunned if Mark Wahlberg was sued over this

Great post from a Kansas U board:
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=172&f=2485&t=8235316

A Penn State Employee's Take

I've posted a couple times on this issue in various threads. Let me first say that for those living in the Midwest, NY, LA, or wherever, this is a shocking situation. I have offered a mild defense of Paterno's legacy while advocating his ouster. I have also offered a defense of the fan base here, one that is historically a pretty decent one. As I have said, for PSU, this is their Bear Bryant, their Coach K, their Phog Allen, their Dean Smith. It isn't hard to understand that some of their fans will come to his defense. He defines the athletics at Penn State, and goes beyond that a bit, in terms of his generosity towards academics (starting a classics program at the school) and building a library. So I get that.

But he had to go, and he went tonight. The house came down.

I am a physician at Penn State's hospital in Hershey. They will within a few months complete a childrens' hospital here, a result of a massive effort that resulted from donations, and from requests from surrounding docs about the need for such a facility. Now I have nothing to do with this, as an adult physician. But the whole thing seems so weird right now. Of course an assistant football coach 90 miles away who was a pedophile has nothing to do with a world class Childrens' hospital. But it's just so awkward.

While we discuss this in the way that we discuss cheating at Memphis, paid players at Auburn, or academically ineligible players here or there, lets collectively take a time out. The issues at Penn State were obviously systemic, and infested the President on down to the AD and the football program, including arguably the greatest coach of all time on the field. Left behind is a university. People didn't come forward because they were confronting a power structure, rooted in Penn State football's success on the field, and its utility in building the profile of the university in general. As we see schools jumping conference to make more money and see universities ridiculed by an assistant coach who is a pedophile, at what point do we stop pointing fingers at the schools and start realizing that the problem is how huge athletics have gotten?

This may sound hypocritical, as I am not denouncing my love for KU sports. I am headed to MSG for the UK game next week. I hope we beat Missouri to send them off in style in a couple weeks. But as I see stuff go on at school after school, while the basic mission of the schools in educating people is either damaged or put in jeopardy by failure of or excessive focus on sports, it makes me sick. The easy thing to do is to point fingers at Penn State like we might for Memphis getting vacated, or USC with Bush. But this case, more heinous, and more high profile, exemplifies the worst of athletics run wild in universities. This could happen anywhere. Perhaps we can all learn a lesson.

The bastardization of college athletics seen here is not an anomaly, simply a front page warning sign

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 10, 2011, 10:45:10 AM
MUMac...I agree that the honorary board members look like they are just that.

However, your second paragraph isn't entirely correct.  Board members may be sued for the actions of the non-profit, even if they weren't fully aware.  It depends on the state what those limits are though, and I have no idea what PA law is.

My 2nd paragraph was poorly written, too much of an absolute.  Did not mean that.  What would be difficult is to find the Director individually liable for something they did not know about, unless they reasonably should have known about, or through their negligence did not know about it. 

What I mean, more specifically, is if there are illegal actions occurring, but being hidden from the view of the BOD, it would be difficult to have a claim against an individual Director.  Unless they did not have the proper procedures in place, controls in place ... and the activities were able to hide from their view due to their negligence in responsibilities - in that instance, even if they do not know, they could be held liable.

An article, partly taken from the Madden interview linked on the previous page:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ycn-10407023 (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ycn-10407023)

This could get ugly for Paterno and Penn St. if the allegations of a forced retirement due to the sexual activity are true.  Knowing that much of the allegations we know of occurred at Penn St. facilities and AFTER he retired. 

That does not even take into account any potential with the Second Miler rumor.  If that is true, don't worry about suspending the football program for a year or two, worry about suspending Happy Valley!

If the dominos fall correctly(as they should if anyone was actually doing any investigation instead of setting up a pillory for Paterno) this scandal could bring down the governor of Pennsylvania as well.  Corbett is on the PSU BoT and according to some reports in the PSU bloggosphere he was aware of the 2002 incident.  Additionally, the rumor is that there is another BoT member(don't know the name yet) who was aware of both the 1998 and 2002 incidents.  If this is true, this could wipe out the entire university leadership and perhaps even some in the state government.

Quote from: MUMac on November 10, 2011, 11:37:53 AM
An article, partly taken from the Madden interview linked on the previous page:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ycn-10407023 (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ycn-10407023)

Ugh!

It's worth noting, however, that the "article" was "created on the Yahoo! Contributor Network, where users like you are published on Yahoo! every day."


Yahoo's sports group has done some really good reporting over the last couple of years, but this "article" was written by a reader.

Quote from: StillAWarrior on November 10, 2011, 12:16:48 PM
Yahoo's sports group has done some really good reporting over the last couple of years, but this "article" was written by a reader.

I think the article does a relatively good job reporting the events that have occurred up to this point as well as citing Mark Madden's article from April. Insane to think that it was published all the way back in April and had no mainstream media coverage.

http://www.timesonline.com/columnists/sports/mark_madden/madden-sandusky-a-state-secret/article_863d3c82-5e6f-11e0-9ae5-001a4bcf6878.html#user-comment-area

Maybe the victims should have been told to "pray about it."

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 10, 2011, 12:29:43 PM
I think the article does a relatively good job reporting the events that have occurred up to this point as well as citing Mark Madden's article from April. Insane to think that it was published all the way back in April and had no mainstream media coverage.

http://www.timesonline.com/columnists/sports/mark_madden/madden-sandusky-a-state-secret/article_863d3c82-5e6f-11e0-9ae5-001a4bcf6878.html#user-comment-area

It only seems fair to ask: If Mark Madden was privy to these allegations, why wasn't he banging down the doors of the state police and university administrators? At the very least to find out why no actions had been taken or why Sandusky left so suddenly in 1999? He lists off a bunch of questions in his article, why is he asking them rhetorically in a newspaper article and not asking them of PSU officials? If they won't talk, why didn't he take this story to ESPN or the NY Times or Washington Post?

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 10, 2011, 12:29:43 PM
I think the article does a relatively good job reporting the events that have occurred up to this point as well as citing Mark Madden's article from April. Insane to think that it was published all the way back in April and had no mainstream media coverage.

http://www.timesonline.com/columnists/sports/mark_madden/madden-sandusky-a-state-secret/article_863d3c82-5e6f-11e0-9ae5-001a4bcf6878.html#user-comment-area

I don't disagree at all.  My intent wasn't to suggest that there was anything wrong with what the contributor wrote, just that when I'm clicking on links and reading "articles," I like to know what it is.  I think the writer did a nice job summarizing what was out there so far.

And you're right...it's hard to believe that this didn't get more coverage after Madden's initial article in April.

Quote from: StillAWarrior on November 10, 2011, 01:06:10 PM

I don't disagree at all.  My intent wasn't to suggest that there was anything wrong with what the contributor wrote, just that when I'm clicking on links and reading "articles," I like to know what it is.  I think the writer did a nice job summarizing what was out there so far.

And you're right...it's hard to believe that this didn't get more coverage after Madden's initial article in April.

I guess the link's address didn't tip you off then.   ::)

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 10, 2011, 12:45:39 PM
It only seems fair to ask: If Mark Madden was privy to these allegations, why wasn't he banging down the doors of the state police and university administrators? At the very least to find out why no actions had been taken or why Sandusky left so suddenly in 1999? He lists off a bunch of questions in his article, why is he asking them rhetorically in a newspaper article and not asking them of PSU officials? If they won't talk, why didn't he take this story to ESPN or the NY Times or Washington Post?

Listen to the radio show that was linked on a previous page.  He talks to this a bit, I believe.  He mentions how the information he wrote about was all public record (he was not privy to anything more than you or I), yet no other journalist even picked up a pen to write about it.  That is the better question.  Why did the others sit on their fannies?

His original article, which is fairly spot on, was written several weeks ago.  I don't see that he was acting rhetorically then.  He is following through now.  Again, why didn't any of the other "journalists" bother to investigate?

The comments he made were about the power in Happy Valley.  The power from Paterno through the power of the university.  He made it appear as though news outlets were in fear of this power.  Don't know if, or how much, he is embellishing.  I do, though, see where that would be viable.

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 10, 2011, 12:45:39 PM
It only seems fair to ask: If Mark Madden was privy to these allegations, why wasn't he banging down the doors of the state police and university administrators? At the very least to find out why no actions had been taken or why Sandusky left so suddenly in 1999? He lists off a bunch of questions in his article, why is he asking them rhetorically in a newspaper article and not asking them of PSU officials? If they won't talk, why didn't he take this story to ESPN or the NY Times or Washington Post?

Madden asks the questions in blunt fashion, "It seems logical to ask: What did Paterno know, and when did he know it? What did Penn State's administration know, and when did they know it?"

Penn State is crooked from top to bottom. A secluded area in central Pennsylvania only adds to the leverage for abuse of power. The missing District Attorney adds to the confusion and complexity in the time line of events.
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/133615093.html (http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/133615093.html)

I also think people are naive in wanting to believe/not believe this story. For whatever reason people choose to ignore the hard evidence.

Quote from: MUMac on November 10, 2011, 01:42:04 PM
I guess the link's address didn't tip you off then.   ::)

Two things:

First, I often don't read the link...I read what someone says about it and click on it.

Second, maybe I'm missing something, but how would "http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ycn-10407023" tip me off that it was reader contributed material?  I guess you're suggesting that I should have known that the "ycn" (in the link that I really didn't read) meant Yahoo Contributor Network.  Sorry for not noticing or knowing that.

You referred to it as an "article" in your initial post.  I was just clarifying that it was user content.  Not sure what's causing the eye rolling.

WARNING - Graphic.  Read it if you wish.  Most of the information has already been discussed in the public.  Here is the Grand Jury Indictment.  Very disturbing.

http://media.nbcphiladelphia.com/documents/Sandusky-Grand-Jury-Presentment.pdf (http://media.nbcphiladelphia.com/documents/Sandusky-Grand-Jury-Presentment.pdf)

Quote from: StillAWarrior on November 10, 2011, 02:08:22 PM
Second, maybe I'm missing something, but how would "http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ycn-10407023" tip me off that it was reader contributed material?  I guess you're suggesting that I should have known that the "ycn" (in the link that I really didn't read) meant Yahoo Contributor Network.  Sorry for not noticing or knowing that.

You referred to it as an "article" in your initial post.  I was just clarifying that it was user content.  Not sure what's causing the eye rolling.

To the 2nd part, I guess the "ugh" in your initial reply to my post, followed by your soap box lecture drew my response and roll of eyes.  I stick by those, as frankly, they are correct.   I quoted your 2nd, which was a continuation of the 1st response, that frankly was ::)  If it get's your undies in a bundle, so be it.

As to the other comment, your lecture was about "yahoo".  Look at the link, it might tip you off it is "yahoo".  Further, my only comment about the "article" was that it was partly taken from the Madden interview.  What part of that is difficult to understand?  The guy rehashed what Madden said on the air.  Isn't that clear by what I stated?  As for your questioning of the term "article", well if that get's you in a tizzy, not much I can do to help you there.  Call it what you like.

Quote from: MUMac on November 10, 2011, 01:48:08 PM
Listen to the radio show that was linked on a previous page.  He talks to this a bit, I believe.  He mentions how the information he wrote about was all public record (he was not privy to anything more than you or I), yet no other journalist even picked up a pen to write about it.  That is the better question.  Why did the others sit on their fannies?
His original article, which is fairly spot on, was written several weeks ago.  I don't see that he was acting rhetorically then.  He is following through now.  Again, why didn't any of the other "journalists" bother to investigate?

The comments he made were about the power in Happy Valley.  The power from Paterno through the power of the university.  He made it appear as though news outlets were in fear of this power.  Don't know if, or how much, he is embellishing.  I do, though, see where that would be viable.

Why is that a better question? Sure, it was public information but he's the one who brought it to the forefront. Why didn't he take it any further than to write an article about it in April?

He asked 5 months ago..."Why did college football let an accomplished coach like Sandusky walk away at 55? Why did he disappear into relative anonymity?..."Plenty of questions remain yet unanswered. Potentially among them: What's more important, Penn State football or the welfare of a few kids?"

Why didn't he try to get answers to those questions? I just don't see how he can question why others didn't do more when he didn't do more himself.

Quote from: MUMac on November 10, 2011, 02:22:29 PM
To the 2nd part, I guess the "ugh" in your initial reply to my post, followed by your soap box lecture drew my response and roll of eyes.  I stick by those, as frankly, they are correct.   I quoted your 2nd, which was a continuation of the 1st response, that frankly was ::)  If it get's your undies in a bundle, so be it.

As to the other comment, your lecture was about "yahoo".  Look at the link, it might tip you off it is "yahoo".  Further, my only comment about the "article" was that it was partly taken from the Madden interview.  What part of that is difficult to understand?  The guy rehashed what Madden said on the air.  Isn't that clear by what I stated?  As for your questioning of the term "article", well if that get's you in a tizzy, not much I can do to help you there.  Call it what you like.

There's the heart of the misunderstanding, I think:  the "Ugh" in my initial post was related to the disgusting underlying allegations that were in the linked commentary.  That "Ugh" had nothing to do with your post or the source of the information in the link.  

I clearly was misunderstood, and I guess I'll take responsibility for that.  I wasn't intending to lecture anyone.  I thought the linked post was well done and provided a lot of good information.  I was just pointing out that it was user content.  And I certainly wasn't intending to lecture about Yahoo.  In fact, the opposite.  My point was that over the last couple of years Yahoo has been one of the better sources of investigative sports journalism out there.  When I see Yahoo links on sports journalism, I think that helps their credibility.  That's honestly the reason that I was pointing it out.  It was a user blog, and not from the respected (by me at least) Yahoo sports department.

I had absolutely no intent to be critical of your post or of the content of the link, and I do apologize if it seemed otherwise.

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 10, 2011, 02:28:03 PM
Why didn't he try to get answers to those questions? I just don't see how he can question why others didn't do more when he didn't do more himself.

Doing investigative reporting, writing an article, and talking about it on his radio show aren't enough? He didn't witness any of the crimes first hand and doesn't have jurisdiction or access into Penn State facilities.

This was touched on in an earlier post, but the dirtbag retired in '99, a year after the first incident allegedly came up. Why does a distinguished coach from Penn St. suddenly retire at the relatively young age of 55? Not only that, how does he not even sniff another coaching job? I don't buy that he left PSU b/c he wasn't considered to be in line to replace Paterno. Connecting the dots, I wouldn't be surprised if officials told him to "retire and we'll keep your indiscretions quiet."

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 10, 2011, 02:41:30 PM
Doing investigative reporting, writing an article, and talking about it on his radio show aren't enough? He didn't witness any of the crimes first hand and doesn't have jurisdiction or access into Penn State facilities.

As sports reporter and radio talkshow host you don't think he has the means to contact anyone at PSU about why Sandusky suddenly retired? Or to ask about the handling of sexual assault allegations against a former coach? And he didn't have any connections to take his story to a publication more prominent than the Beaver County Times?

Look, I'm not saying that this guy should be indicted. I just find it hard to process how someone can more or less say, "I knew about this months ago. I can't believe other people didn't do more during that time."

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 10, 2011, 03:42:01 PM
Look, I'm not saying that this guy should be indicted. I just find it hard to process how someone can more or less say, "I knew about this months ago. I can't believe other people didn't do more during that time."

Totally.

(http://thirtynothings.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/death_wish_1poster_2.jpg)

Quote from: StillAWarrior on November 10, 2011, 02:39:03 PM

There's the heart of the misunderstanding, I think:  the "Ugh" in my initial post was related to the disgusting underlying allegations that were in the linked commentary.  That "Ugh" had nothing to do with your post or the source of the information in the link.  

I clearly was misunderstood, and I guess I'll take responsibility for that.  I wasn't intending to lecture anyone.  I thought the linked post was well done and provided a lot of good information.  I was just pointing out that it was user content.  And I certainly wasn't intending to lecture about Yahoo.  In fact, the opposite.  My point was that over the last couple of years Yahoo has been one of the better sources of investigative sports journalism out there.  When I see Yahoo links on sports journalism, I think that helps their credibility.  That's honestly the reason that I was pointing it out.  It was a user blog, and not from the respected (by me at least) Yahoo sports department.

I had absolutely no intent to be critical of your post or of the content of the link, and I do apologize if it seemed otherwise.

I apologize for my misinterpretation as well.  I thought the "ugh" was directed towards me and reacted.  So now it is my turn to apologize and say sorry for my snarkiness in return.

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 10, 2011, 03:42:01 PM
As sports reporter and radio talkshow host you don't think he has the means to contact anyone at PSU about why Sandusky suddenly retired? Or to ask about the handling of sexual assault allegations against a former coach? And he didn't have any connections to take his story to a publication more prominent than the Beaver County Times?

Look, I'm not saying that this guy should be indicted. I just find it hard to process how someone can more or less say, "I knew about this months ago. I can't believe other people didn't do more during that time."

My god you are critical of the only one that wrote ANYTHING.  I hope your perfection never gets a critical view.

As to your constant questions, who is to say he did not try to get the questions asked?  It does, though, take someone to answer the questions.  Who do you think would have been talking?  Those that were involved in the Grand Jury testimony and sworn to secrecy?  Others in the university?  Who?

Quote from: Boone on November 10, 2011, 03:00:53 PM
This was touched on in an earlier post, but the dirtbag retired in '99, a year after the first incident allegedly came up. Why does a distinguished coach from Penn St. suddenly retire at the relatively young age of 55? Not only that, how does he not even sniff another coaching job? I don't buy that he left PSU b/c he wasn't considered to be in line to replace Paterno. Connecting the dots, I wouldn't be surprised if officials told him to "retire and we'll keep your indiscretions quiet."

This is a very logical line of thinking.

I'm not sure people truly remember just how admired Sandusky was for his defensive knowledge in the PSU heyday. Weird a guy like that would simply up and leave with no ambition in furthering his career.

Now announced that McQueary will not coach on Saturday, due to death threats.  http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2011/11/penn-state-mike-mcqueary-threats-will-not-coach-nebraska-game/1 (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2011/11/penn-state-mike-mcqueary-threats-will-not-coach-nebraska-game/1)  The question is, who is making the threats?  Those upset that McQueary did not do enough with what he witnessed?  Or those who are upset that Joe Pa was fired, yet he is coaching and feel he brought down Joe Pa?  Maybe both?  This is really warped at every turn.

Quote from: MUMac on November 10, 2011, 06:11:32 PM
I apologize for my misinterpretation as well.  I thought the "ugh" was directed towards me and reacted.  So now it is my turn to apologize and say sorry for my snarkiness in return.

As soon as I realized that you thought the "ugh" was directed at you, I understood that we were on completely different pages.  Sometimes it's hard to communicate clearly on message boards.

Here's something we can all agree on:  Go Marquette!

(See, in the spirit of Kumbayaism, I said "Marquette" rather than Warriors!)

Quote from: MUMac on November 10, 2011, 10:04:44 PM
Now announced that McQueary will not coach on Saturday, due to death threats.  http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2011/11/penn-state-mike-mcqueary-threats-will-not-coach-nebraska-game/1 (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2011/11/penn-state-mike-mcqueary-threats-will-not-coach-nebraska-game/1)  The question is, who is making the threats?  Those upset that McQueary did not do enough with what he witnessed?  Or those who are upset that Joe Pa was fired, yet he is coaching and feel he brought down Joe Pa?  Maybe both?  This is really warped at every turn.

This whole threats thing is trumped up, none are credible but the BoT is using it as an excuse to not have McQueary at the game.  He should be fired, but general consensus seems to be he has Whistleblower status so can't be fired and this is their way of handling it.

Quote from: mu03eng on November 11, 2011, 08:37:51 AM
This whole threats thing is trumped up, none are credible but the BoT is using it as an excuse to not have McQueary at the game.  He should be fired, but general consensus seems to be he has Whistleblower status so can't be fired and this is their way of handling it.

McQueary is going to lose his job one way or another.

Quote from: ATWizJr on November 11, 2011, 08:41:33 AM
McQueary is going to lose his job one way or another.

Agreed and he should.  The national media has totally failed on this one.  They got Paterno's scalp and now they are moving on.  Joe had to leave but there is no way that should satisfy anyone.  Additionally, Joe failed, but I think its becoming clear it was not his failure allow nor was it even close to the worst failure.

Curley(AD) - Administrative leave, will be defended by PSU in perjury and obstruction charges
Schultz(de facto commisioner of campus police in 2002) - Allowed to retire, will be defended by PSU as well
Spanier - Allowed to resign
McQueary - Still employed
BoT - Still employed despite at least half of the board at a minimum being aware of the grand jury investigation in 2010.

And then there is this story

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/03/jerry_sandusky_former_penn_sta.html

By the way this was reporting that should have taken place all along
This is the kind of

This entire fiasco will cost PSU a whole lotta sheckles. Pretty easy case for some paper pusher.

There is specualtion this will also cost PSU corporate sponsors, time will tell.






(http://i.imgur.com/1mLj9.jpg)

Anyone wearing white tomorrow in support of Joe Paterno will confirm that they too are ok with child rape and the wrong doings that have been taking place at Penn State.

http://www.freep.com/article/20111111/SPORTS08/111111030/Ex-Penn-State-players-organize-support-team-Saturday-s-home-finale

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 11, 2011, 02:15:07 PM
Anyone wearing white tomorrow in support of Joe Paterno will confirm that they too are ok with child rape and the wrong doings that have been taking place at Penn State.

http://www.freep.com/article/20111111/SPORTS08/111111030/Ex-Penn-State-players-organize-support-team-Saturday-s-home-finale

that is in no way true and you know it. You're just buying into the sensationalism and going after the octogenarian who has spent the last 46 seasons building and rebuilding Penn State football.

Quote from: Ari Gold on November 11, 2011, 02:52:47 PM
that is in no way true and you know it. You're just buying into the sensationalism and going after the octogenarian who has spent the last 46 seasons building and rebuilding Penn State football.

It is very true and you are in denial. The University as a whole, not just the football program, has been tainted. How do you not understand that this is not a football issue?

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 11, 2011, 02:15:07 PM
Anyone wearing white tomorrow in support of Joe Paterno will confirm that they too are ok with child rape and the wrong doings that have been taking place at Penn State.

http://www.freep.com/article/20111111/SPORTS08/111111030/Ex-Penn-State-players-organize-support-team-Saturday-s-home-finale

Thanks for the link.  That was a good article to read.  Those lost in all of this are the current players.  That has to be awfully hard to focus on the game with all that has gone on.

Where, though, did you hear about wearing white in support of Paterno?  I thought they wore white to most games, or was it just the night games?

NBC Philly reported that attendants tomorrow are encouraged to wear light blue in support of sexual abuse victims.

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Blue-Out-Saturday-at-PSU--133496103.html (http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Blue-Out-Saturday-at-PSU--133496103.html)

Other reports are surfacing that alumni, former players, coaches, and family have to told to wear white in support of Paterno:
http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2011/11/10/2553195/penn-state-coaches-players-meeting-wear-white-joe-paterno-support (http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2011/11/10/2553195/penn-state-coaches-players-meeting-wear-white-joe-paterno-support)

This one is TMZ, so take it for what it is worth, we'll see.
http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-team-wear-white-support-paterno/#.Tr2NjvT1mzk (http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-team-wear-white-support-paterno/#.Tr2NjvT1mzk)

Quote from: MUMac on November 11, 2011, 02:59:18 PM
Thanks for the link.  That was a good article to read.  Those lost in all of this are the current players.  That has to be awfully hard to focus on the game with all that has gone on.

Where, though, did you hear about wearing white in support of Paterno?  I thought they wore white to most games, or was it just the night games?

They where white to all games usually with a special emphasis on big games.

For this game a lot of Penn Staters, especially student leadership is pushing for a blue out, because blue is the color for child abuse awareness or something to that effect.  They are making tshirts for that and raising money for RAINN.  Hopefully some sort of good will come of this disgusting mess

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/11/11/142244069/blue-out-planned-at-penn-state-game-to-focus-attention-on-victims

http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2011/11/11/2554018/RAINN-sandusky-paterno-scandal-fundraiser-update

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 11, 2011, 03:05:11 PM
NBC Philly reported that attendants tomorrow are encouraged to wear light blue in support of sexual abuse victims.

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Blue-Out-Saturday-at-PSU--133496103.html (http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Blue-Out-Saturday-at-PSU--133496103.html)

Other reports are surfacing that alumni, former players, coaches, and family have to told to wear white in support of Paterno:
http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2011/11/10/2553195/penn-state-coaches-players-meeting-wear-white-joe-paterno-support (http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2011/11/10/2553195/penn-state-coaches-players-meeting-wear-white-joe-paterno-support)

This one is TMZ, so take it for what it is worth, we'll see.
http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-team-wear-white-support-paterno/#.Tr2NjvT1mzk (http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-team-wear-white-support-paterno/#.Tr2NjvT1mzk)

Man, this is turing into one big mess.  I would hope that the coaches, if true, began that on their own without knowledge of the "light blue out" being pushed.  I would guess tomorrow's game gets more than the typical viewer to watch.

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 11, 2011, 03:05:11 PM
NBC Philly reported that attendants tomorrow are encouraged to wear light blue in support of sexual abuse victims.

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Blue-Out-Saturday-at-PSU--133496103.html (http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Blue-Out-Saturday-at-PSU--133496103.html)

Other reports are surfacing that alumni, former players, coaches, and family have to told to wear white in support of Paterno:
http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2011/11/10/2553195/penn-state-coaches-players-meeting-wear-white-joe-paterno-support (http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2011/11/10/2553195/penn-state-coaches-players-meeting-wear-white-joe-paterno-support)

Not saying this isn't a possibility, but I troll the PSU blogs and twitter accounts for a lot of the players and I haven't seen a whisper of this.  Hope it doesn't happen.

This one is TMZ, so take it for what it is worth, we'll see.
http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-team-wear-white-support-paterno/#.Tr2NjvT1mzk (http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-team-wear-white-support-paterno/#.Tr2NjvT1mzk)

I troll the PSU blogs and follow a lot of players on twitter, hasn't been a whisper of this, hope it doesn't happen.  I'm cautiously optimistic that you will see the best in the PSU fans tomorrow.

I just took Nebraska giving 3.5 points.   I forsee a meltdown. 

Quote from: mu03eng on November 11, 2011, 03:13:05 PM
I troll the PSU blogs and follow a lot of players on twitter, hasn't been a whisper of this, hope it doesn't happen.  I'm cautiously optimistic that you will see the best in the PSU fans tomorrow.

It's been pretty well publicized that they've ditched the white out for a blue out tomorrow, including the PA governor talking about it in his press conference in State College tomorrow.

Quote from: nyg on November 11, 2011, 03:13:51 PM
I just took Nebraska giving 3.5 points.   I forsee a meltdown. 

I think that is a pretty safe bet. In all seriousness, what happens if all hell breaks loose and Penn State has to forfeit the game? Do you take the score at the time of forfeit, or is it considered a push?

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 11, 2011, 03:20:17 PM
I think that is a pretty safe bet. In all seriousness, what happens if all hell breaks loose and Penn State has to forfeit the game? Do you take the score at the time of forfeit, or is it considered a push?

Forfeit the game?   A little overly dramatic aren't we?

McQueary has been placed on administrative leave per the interim president. Possible he might hold whistleblower protection

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7219659/penn-state-assistant-coach-whistleblower-protection-reporting-sandusky-alleged-incident


Also for those that feel that PSU students are the scum of the earth for rioting/supporting Paterno, I encourage you to read this:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/16078483/the-real-penn-state-in-room-206-plenty-of-heart-to-be-found

Quote from: ATWizJr on November 11, 2011, 03:25:30 PM
Forfeit the game?   A little overly dramatic aren't we?

"All hell breaks loose" aka violent rioting. Nebraska has legitimite reason for concern.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/38242/nebraska-has-safety-concerns-at-penn-state (http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/38242/nebraska-has-safety-concerns-at-penn-state)

Extra security has been added, but all bets are off for expectations of good behavior.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7215871/nebraska-cornhuskers-tom-osborne-asks-fans-not-wear-read-game-vs-penn-state-nittany-lions (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7215871/nebraska-cornhuskers-tom-osborne-asks-fans-not-wear-read-game-vs-penn-state-nittany-lions)

I am sure this was mentioned before but isn't it odd that in 13 years one of the top guys in college coaching never was offered a job. Honestly I think this goes beyond PSU and everyone in the business knew about this freak. Barry Switzer is probably right on all PSU staff but it might go far further than just the inner circle.

Wouldn't it be something if NCAA officials had heard rumors and never acted on it. They get involved in ticky tacky stuff and just possibly they ran from the biggest sports scandal of all time. A 55 year old man at the top of his profession being black balled is fishy to me.

Quote from: Goose on November 11, 2011, 06:54:11 PM
I am sure this was mentioned before but isn't it odd that in 13 years one of the top guys in college coaching never was offered a job. Honestly I think this goes beyond PSU and everyone in the business knew about this freak. Barry Switzer is probably right on all PSU staff but it might go far further than just the inner circle.

Wouldn't it be something if NCAA officials had heard rumors and never acted on it. They get involved in ticky tacky stuff and just possibly they ran from the biggest sports scandal of all time. A 55 year old man at the top of his profession being black balled is fishy to me.

Are you sure he was "blackballed" or did he, either through the negotiation of his "retirement" or his own decision, make it so that he would not take another job?  I haven't seen anything that addresses exactly what happened.  I definitely have not seen anywhere that is factual that states he was "blackballed".

I still contend that game should not be played tomorrow, at least not in Happy Valley. It's basically inviting an angry mob into a confined area. I hope I'm wrong. If Nebraska blows the game open, it could get real ugly.

MuMac--My thought is that a two time assistant coach of the year retiring at 55 and never being mentioned for a job is fishy to me. Possibly others heard rumors and that scared them away or possibly it is deeper. I pray that this issue does not grow into a bigger thing but my fear is that this is much bigger than our imagination.

College sports is such big business and schools hire bad guys all the time and yet this creep never received a phone call from anyone. Hate to say it but Barry Switzer seems to be the most honest guy to come out from the coach fraternity.

Quote from: Goose on November 12, 2011, 08:50:10 AM
MuMac--My thought is that a two time assistant coach of the year retiring at 55 and never being mentioned for a job is fishy to me. Possibly others heard rumors and that scared them away or possibly it is deeper. I pray that this issue does not grow into a bigger thing but my fear is that this is much bigger than our imagination.

College sports is such big business and schools hire bad guys all the time and yet this creep never received a phone call from anyone. Hate to say it but Barry Switzer seems to be the most honest guy to come out from the coach fraternity.

My thought is that he was made to retire and under the circumstances, not going to coach again.  Although, he did interview for the Virginia job that went to Al Groh.  That was after he "retired".  He did not get the job, as Virginia felt his heart was not in to coaching.   

Whichever way it occurred, this is a truly disturbing situation all around.

This is a side of the financial exposure for Penn State that I admit I hadn't considered.  http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/6931fd44-0cb6-11e1-a45b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1dVjsdalF (http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/6931fd44-0cb6-11e1-a45b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1dVjsdalF)  Moody's may downgrade their debt rating.  That could cause problems for Penn State.

That link only took me to the Financial times website.

Here is a Business Week article about it.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-11/penn-state-debt-may-be-cut-by-moody-s-on-child-sex-abuse-scandal.html (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-11/penn-state-debt-may-be-cut-by-moody-s-on-child-sex-abuse-scandal.html)

Quote from: Blue Horseshoe on November 12, 2011, 11:41:10 AM
That link only took me to the Financial times website.

Here is a Business Week article about it.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-11/penn-state-debt-may-be-cut-by-moody-s-on-child-sex-abuse-scandal.html (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-11/penn-state-debt-may-be-cut-by-moody-s-on-child-sex-abuse-scandal.html)

I guess you needed to register on the site.  Sorry about the link.

What?  No riot?  No forfeit?  Geez.