Joe Paterno Exit

[Blue Horseshoe]

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.

[Dish]

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.

[MUMac]

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.

[GGGG]

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.

[Bieberhole69]

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

[Aughnanure]

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

[MUMac]

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.

[MUMac]

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

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!

[mu03eng]

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.

[StillAWarrior]

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

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.

[Blue Horseshoe]

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

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

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

[MerrittsMustache]

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?

[StillAWarrior]

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.

[MUMac]

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.   

[MUMac]

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.

[Blue Horseshoe]

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

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

[StillAWarrior]

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.

[MUMac]

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

[MUMac]

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.

[MerrittsMustache]

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.

[StillAWarrior]

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.

[Blue Horseshoe]

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.

[Boone]

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."

[MerrittsMustache]

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."