The real problem with anyone saying that the people at the university haven't created this culture is the undisputed fact that several people knew about this and didn't put a stop to it, and that includes Ginger McQueary and Paterno. So, while you and alot of other PSU supporters say that this cultured doesn't exist or that if anyone knew they would've stopped it, etc is just wrong. Out of all of the people that saw it, suspected it, or had direct knowledge of it, no one actually put a stop to it. They passed the buck a bit, kicked it back and forth, told friends but not the police etc...but either way it kept going on and no one seemingly even tried to stop it. so the fact is that there was an attitude at the university, specifically inside the athletic dept, that led to this going on for several years with no reprocussions for the guilty people involved.
I usually avoid commenting on ignorant posts about the matter, but this is different. See what you did there was put myself and other students in the category of "child rape enabler". You just told me I am lying because I said that if I or any members of the student body, alumni, or fans knew about this, we would not have let it slide. You made sure to BOLD my statement where I said this... By doing that, then following that up with this... You're telling me that I would cover that up and not let it go? Not once, no where, at all...did I say the culture of "Football is Priority at Major Universities" does not exist. It exists at the majority of D1 schools, specifically in the top 25 annually. That is the culture that the NCAA wants to get rid of, but frankly, is near impossible. I ask you to please, read and decipher what is typed and posted before you comment on it. Baron Cheez even CoachRedd although make a few points pertaining to punishment of PSU that I do not agree with, they at least read what is posted and acknowledge an understanding about it. I also persuade you to read the article posted earlier of the different people involved in the scandal apart from just Sandusky, Joe, and Spanier. It will identify key people throughout the years involved including Gary Schultz (Head of University Police), Tom Corbett (Former Attorney General/Current PA Governor), Ray Gricar (District Attorney) and other law enforcement officers, that you just happen to believe were not involved. Have a nice day.
No one is saying that you or any other student would have let it happen. When they talk about the culture of football at the university they are talking about coaches and administration.
You certainly are trying to defend Joe Pa. You are trying to undermine the FSS Report with that very statement! That in itself is a ploy to defend him. The NCAA, like the Freeh Group, has no subpoena power. Combine that with the statement from the BoT that the FSS Report was true, and what more do you need? The NCAA was not going to unearth any more pertinent information because they people who declined to interview for Freeh would also do so for them. Most of those people, of course, are those with connections to the Second Mile (which is a primary focus of the federal investagation). Also, in this statement you are once again undermining the Freeh Report. Calling the Freeh Report speculative is a falsehood. The evidence in the Freeh report is that - evidence. Sure, it may reach some "reasonable conclusions" - but reasonable in a sense that there is no "reasonable doubt". Louis Freeh knows what he is doing. If the purpose of that article was to discuss the impact the media has on public opinion, why was it wrapped up so tightly in a blue and white flag? It's possible to write that article without the connection to Penn State or any other major headline. The writer is trying to specifically link "media sensationalism" to the Penn State case. In doing so, he is in effect trying to shift the "blame" for the sanctions on Penn State on to the media. Furthermore, the media doesn't have any new information to withhold at this point- so your opinion as it relates to this case is moot. Sure, you aren't hearing much about Paterno's property investments, his involvement in the plans to prevent the airport from expanding, or the millions of dollars that he made from selling the water bottle company - but after the forensic accountants are done with Penn State, Second Mile, and Paterno's financials they might come to the forefront. Lastly, your theory about the media doesn't even hold water. Different media outlets are constantly trying to outdo one another by getting new information out to the public 1st. They want all the information out there. The fans, alumni, and students certainly do not show that by their overwhelming support for a man who aided and abetted a serial child rapist. Every time someone speaks in favor of Paterno, it is a slap in the face to all of Sandusky's victims. What people are saying by supporting Paterno is exactly that: football is more important than the safety and welfare of children. The bullshit about Paterno doing good for the school does not absolve him in any way, shape, or form. A soul cannot be cleansed by money. That argument is sickening. Same goes for the students, fans, and alumni. The fact that they may have donated money to charity or helped charitable causes in the past has no bearing on what their message is now. 1st - not only did the statue need to come down, but his name needs to be removed from the library. The Paterno name is now and forever linked to Sandusky. Paterno is known to have lied to the grand jury, and would have been charged with perjury, at the very least, if he were alive today. 2nd - Those schools don't have a power scheme where the football coach has more power than the VP and president of the school. A quick, off the cuff, example of this is when Paterno went over the head of Triponey in regards to the discipline of his players. In no other school will you find such a backwards system. 3rd - Again, you can't separate the good from the bad. It would be like Germans supporting Hitler for bringing them out of a depression after WWI. Let's not worry about that whole Holocaust thing or him trying to conquer the world. 4th - The fact that people are calling Paterno's actions "poor judgment" or "mistakes" is both appalling and frightening. These are not mistakes, they are calculated actions that took place to continue to keep Penn State football at the pinnacle of everything and everyone in State College. It was not "a mistake" to lie to the grand jury. It was not just "poor judgment" to cover-up Sandusky's acts. These were the willful decisions of a terrible man. 5th - There is no "light" that can come out of this story. Boys were raped - period. Their lives were severely damaged at the hands of Jerry Sandusky, and given the opportunity to stop him Joe Paterno did nothing. I'll grant you that nearly everyone who has read the FSS Report likely had some bias. Whether it be the inherent bias against child rape, or the overwhelming urge to shield an idol, there is bias in nearly everyone. No new information that came to light would change that bias within people. Cimmy, I actually saw your status after the Freeh report came out where you said something along the lines that you did not know how to support Paterno, or something along those lines. However, your statements here where you continually try to undermine the FSS report show that you are digging for some way to absolve him. Stop it. Save yourself the trouble. What's killing PSU right now is that the vocal majority of fans, alumni, and students are still blindly in support of Paterno. Those who are against him are remaining silent. If you or anyone on that campus wants to do something about it - SPEAK UP! Grab a camera and get attention. Organize a rally in support of the actions undertaken by the university in removing the statue. The sanctions were not enough in my opinion, and here's why: 60 million dollars - paid over 5 years at twelve million per year. So, by the NCAA's own admission, the football program is losing 20% of their football revenue each year over the next five. That would be fantasic... if that was the only supply of revenue going into the program. Last year, boosters and trustees donated over 200 million to the school, and much of that went to the athletic department. Needless to say, the fine is essentially a drop in the bucket. As for the bowl band and scholarship loss - I tend to agree with these. However, your point about needing more of an involvement from Penn State is silly. There was no investigation beause the Freeh report acted as one, and the BoT had already accepted the group's findings. What else would you have liked - giving Penn State a chance to sanction themselves? Quite frankly, I believe that these punishments were handed down in a similar fashion to a plea agreement in court. The NCAA took the death penalty off of the table with the understanding that Penn State would not fight the sanctions. That seems like people at the university were informed, to me. I will grant that my assumption is only that - an assumption. But the way things transpired over the last few days, it is the only thing that makes sense. EDIT: It appears as though I was right about the "plea agreement" http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...ickson-said-school-faced-4-year-death-penalty
Academics. It cannot be lost in all of this that Penn State is still a great academic school. I dont know whether to admit this or not, but I was damn near in the same position as Cimmy. I was accepted to Penn State back in 2009, and nearly went there for meteorology. I just couldnt handle being that far away from home, though, so I stayed here.
I'm not defending JoePa's actions here, he was wrong in what he did by not standing up and saying/doing something. But to paraphrase this guy lots of people know: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone". The fact that JoePa is getting it as bad as Sandusky and people saying "he'll burn in hell" for the sin of ignorance is astounding to me. You all really think you haven't done anything in your lives that would make someone else go "You should rot in hell"? As humans we are all fallible and imperfect, and make terrible decisions at times. Joe's dead, he's met his fate, he bore the weight of his actions, and there's nothing more that can be done.
Since when did the sin of ignorance include willfully lying to cover up a serial child rapist that occurred on your watch?
He didn't lie to cover up Sandusky, he lied to cover his own ass (which lots of people do) because he didn't push the issue years earlier with Sandusky.
The problem with the whole thing is that the intern, McQueary or whatever his name is, since he saw it, he should have gone to the police. I still haven't seen a news report or otherwise that JoePa actualy saw it. If JoePa didn't see any of it then he could not have gone to the police or anything like that it would have been all hearsay to JoePa. I am not saying Penn State should not have been fined, but since by how I remember what I read a while ago no potential Penn State recruits were involved the football program should not have been that severely penalized.
I have a sister-in-law who is a high school teacher and neighbors who are guidance counselors...my understanding is that in PA the legal system and legal chain of relay for something like this is you go to your higher up. McQueary went to Joe, Joe went to Schultz, Curley, Spanier, etc. That is the legal way to do things. Which, I do not agree with at all and would not be surprised if this is changed after all of this. Joe did his legal obligations, but failed morally.
Wow... this is completely and totally wrong. First, hearsay only applies to trials. Cops can and often do use hearsay in building a case. Using your logic, police cannot use informants to help them with their case - a practice that is widely used. In most states (and now in PA due to the Sandusky sex scandal), if an authority figure is made aware of allegations of abuse to a child - they are mandated to report by law. It does not matter what the source is, or if it is "hearsay", they are mandated to report. By your logic, they would be unable to. You are 100% WRONG here. Second, yes, the current football players and recruits were not involved in the scandal. There is no denying that. This is why they were given the opportunity to transfer now and still play this season, rather than force them to waste a year of eligibility due to the transfer rule. The players are also guaranteed their scholarship if they choose to stay at Penn State for a degree and simply stop playing football. So the players really weren't punished all too severely. Third, read my above post. The penalties are essentially a slap on the wrist. The fine is being paid over five years at 12 million per year. Trustees and donors pledged over 200 million to the university last year. If that rate were to continue, and the football team still is able to rake in roughly 55 million per year in gross revenue, the program is being fined under five percent of their gross revenue. It's a slap on the wrist. The wins being stripped away from Paterno is strictly punitive - to further Emmert's plan to change the culture at Penn State. The only substantive penalties were the 4 year bowl ban and the scholarship reductions. Of course, as we know tonight, the NCAA was ready to drop a 4 year death penalty on the university. The penalties could have been much, much worse. Fourth, the NCAA and Penn State agreed to these sanctions. The sanctions levied by the NCAA served as a figurative "plea agreement" similar to what you would see in court. The guilty party pleads guilty and accepts the consequences and takes a lesser sentence. This is what we saw in this case, with the guilty party being Penn State. Lastly, and most egregiously, you have completely ignored the cover-up and the subsequent illegalities that followed. You dont mention the federal investigation into the financial records of Paterno, Penn State, and the Second mile. Nowhere do you mention how Paterno's actions violated the Clery Act through the Dept. of Education. These are all serious crimes that fall at the head of Paterno, Curley, Schultz, and Spanier - all of which were easily preventable had they not shielded Sandusky from prosecution.
my understanding is that it already has been changed in lieu of Penn State. Also, those were minimum legal obligations - which even Paterno admitted that he should have done more. What sad is that he could have very easily done more. He could have gone to someone besides the campus police such as the state dept for welfare of children (or whatever it's called in PA) or even simply the state police. He could have chosen to "not disturb peoples' weekend" and done something that night. He could have ensured that an investigation was followed through upon rather than covered up. Or, again, he could have simply not covered it up to begin with in 98.
He didn't cover up anything in 1998, or are you just spewing what you read online from everyone else who is roasting Penn State over an open fire? The police investigated, he was made aware, no charges were filed, and there was nothing to cover up.
Which is why I find it strange that they vacated his wins all the way to 98, Sandusky wasn't proven guilty (although we now know that to be true) so why should Joe Pa have done anything differently? Sandusky retired in 1999 so up until 2001 nothing else was seen or mentioned. It's too bad we'll never know exactly what everyone knew.
Cimmy>That doesn't make sense that the guy who saw it can't go to the cops. Cheez>I chose the word hearsay because JoePa didn't see it, so he wasn't a witness. He really couldn't do anything with the information, even if he wanted to. He would be repeatiing to the police what he was told, which would not be able to be used in court, hence hearsay. On that basis if he went to the police it would have been pointless, esp since the person who saw it essentially really did nothing or the bare minimum. I have also stated with friends on facebook and thru text that I believe the fine should have been much higher but since, my understanding here, NO POTENTIAL RECRUITS were involved in any way the football program should not have been hit like they were. Please note I don't have a TV with any working channels and I find most internet articles on a lot of different subjects to be very biased and potentially misinformed.
I misspoke there. You got me. However, you do concede that Paterno and others knew of the initial investigation in '98. I can actually see where you are coming from here. The vacating of wins was merely punitive, anyway... so that is a good question. I know what hearsay is, bc. But hearsay only applies to trial - he can still go to the police with hearsay. It happens very frequently, actually. Say a woman is beaten by her husband and she tells a friend about it. The friend can have the police intiate an investigation. Now, you are correct in that McQueary would have needed to speak with police to file the complaint, but had he been asked to do so by Paterno, it is safe to assume he would have done so. Is McQueary culpable in allowing Sandusky to continue raping boys - yes, and so is his dad too. I want to make that clear - I do not absolve him of any blame for his acts. However, there is no evidence linking him to any part of the cover up. I dont understand why you are saying that potential recruits are being hurt by this because, quite frankly, they aren't. All players at Penn State have been given amnesty. If they decide to transfer and play elsewhere, they will not lose a year of eligibility in doing so as they normally would. They can play immediately. Also, if Penn State football players decide that they simply do not want to play football anymore, but would like to stay at the school to get a degree, they are able to do so without fear that their scholarship would be revoked. In other words, if the players at Penn State stay at Penn State, they are locked in for the remainder of their scholarship. That is just as true for the seniors as it is for the incoming freshmen. So, I don't see where the punishment is for them in all of this. If you're talking about this year's HS seniors as potential recruits, then you're just off your rocker. They have not been impacted in any way other than by the knowledge that if they choose to come to Penn State, they will not be eligible to go to a Big Ten Championship game or a bowl game until their 4th year of eligibility (either true senior year or RS junior year). If you want to get caught up on the information, read this: thefreehreportonpsu.com . Download the pdf, sit back, and read it.
@Cimmy14 The "culture" I was talking about - these things are not helping you out: http://www.pennstateclothes.com/store/TS-WEAREPISSEDO!000/We Are Pissed Off T-shirt https://p.twimg.com/Aywyd_eCcAAvUxT.jpg People have no humility there. It's ok to be ashamed of the actions of the fallen idol and his compatriots. It's ok to express regret for the victims, who suffered by the hands of Jerry Sandusky. Instead, people are lashing out angrily at the NCAA. Where was this anger when Sandusky was arrested and tried? Where is the anger for the victims who were raped?! When will people learn that their words and are affecting the perception of the campus and its fans, students, and alumni? They should make a shirt "We are... deeply sorry". That would resonate just as well too, but in a much more positive direction. If you want to "move on", as you say, this is the direction you should be headed. #TeamOutlaw - really embracing the "us against the NCAA" mentality. People who are using this hashtag are, in essence, saying that they support Paterno. By supporting Paterno, you support his actions. In other words, using #TeamOutlaw is essentially saying that they are in support of covering up child rape.
This guy posted this in the facebook College Football: 11-12 group, group I have been apart of for a few years but really haven't kept up for the last year. Eric Hardter posted in College Football: 11-12 in reference to http://www.facebook.com/l/JAQEZGzrf...-undecided-other-players-get-openly-recruited !
There should be limitations on what coaches can and cannot do when recruiting amnestied student-athletes. It falls on Emmert to be shortsighted on this. But this was certainly not his intent, and in all likelihood this will not happen again. I predict that bylaws will be passed limiting contact between coaches and amnestied players in the near future. Does it help the current players, no. But, typically, a loophole has to be exposed before it can be closed.
