Penn State scandal (merged)

They are still guilty of allowing Jo Pa to become a power vacuum....who was essentially accountable to no one. He made decisions that he had absolutely no business making. Fans/administration share responsibility for creating that environment.

If he truly were the perfect individual that a lot of people used to think he was, then it wouldn't have been so bad for him to have a lot of power. It seems weird to us, because we're not part of PSU, and UT has turned over coaching staffs several times since the 60s. I'm trying to consider the perspective of someone at PSU who wasn't working next to Paterno and was unaware of what was being covered up.

What if General Neyland were still alive and coaching? He would be a very powerful and revered figure on campus.
 
So Marilyn Manson was responsible for Columbine?

Furthermore...Charles Manson is responsible for Marilyn Manson.

I'm saying that the school and its fans are responsible for the fact that Jo Paterno had the power to wield influence. They blindly followed, and he rewarded them by covering up for a sexual predator. On top of it all he was a self righteous prick.

There is culpability in following blindly. They are not innocent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I don't think the death penalty should be handed out, but I do think the NCAA has the opportunity to levy that or a smaller punishment should they choose to do so, because a case can be made that the cover-up helped Paterno keep his job in 2001. There was chatter at the time that he should step down, because the program was declining, based on their W/L records. So, it's entirely possible that this scandal would have cost him his job, had it come out in 2001.

Like I said before, that's extremely unlikely.

"You've had a run of mediocre seasons, but we'll let you keep your job."

"You've had a run of mediocre seasons, and you made sure a sexual predator was taken off the streets the moment you were alerted to his behavior, so we're going to have to let you go."

That doesn't add up to me.
 
ukvols,

I think you're wrong about Paterno protecting his job, and spot on about protecting his legacy. I think the reason that Paterno talked Schulz, Curley, and Spanier out of going to the authorities is that he figured he was invincible, and they were afraid of losing their jobs if they stood up to him. There is no doubt that PSU would have been embarrassed by the scandal had they turned Sandusky in back in '01. And I think Paterno was worried that it might make recruiting difficult.

But in the end, I think his absolutely certainty about his job security is the exact reason why he thought he could cover it up. Had he been at all concerned about losing his job, turning Sandusky in would be the safest route. Spanier even acknowledged as much in an email after Joe nixed the idea of going to the police. Spanier pointed out that there was a major risk if the story broke, and it was shown that they all knew. The stooges were certainly scared for their careers, but Paterno quite obviously wasn't.

You could be correct on all counts. It's impossible to know for sure.

But, I'm pretty sure that at about that time, Paterno was even approached about stepping down and refused. Perhaps I am confusing him with Bowden, but I think there was talk in 2001 about him leaving. Maybe I can find an old news article about it.
 
If he truly were the perfect individual that a lot of people used to think he was, then it wouldn't have been so bad for him to have a lot of power. It seems weird to us, because we're not part of PSU, and UT has turned over coaching staffs several times since the 60s. I'm trying to consider the perspective of someone at PSU who wasn't working next to Paterno and was unaware of what was being covered up.

What if General Neyland were still alive and coaching? He would be a very powerful and revered figure on campus.

If's.........so you have to live with the consequences of allowing one man to run the University....a senile football coach nonetheless.
 
If he truly were the perfect individual that a lot of people used to think he was, then it wouldn't have been so bad for him to have a lot of power. It seems weird to us, because we're not part of PSU, and UT has turned over coaching staffs several times since the 60s. I'm trying to consider the perspective of someone at PSU who wasn't working next to Paterno and was unaware of what was being covered up.

What if General Neyland were still alive and coaching? He would be a very powerful and revered figure on campus.

Pat Summitt and the women's AD?
 
Like I said, blaming "culture" is fine. People create cultures, both good and bad. But the NCAA can't punish "cultures." They can only punish programs. If they could punish cultures, then Tennessee should have lost scholarships when a few idiots rioted after Kiffin left.

That's the whole point. The program WAS the culture. The program did such a great job of instilling the fundamental value of responsibility (as the NCAA rulebook calls it) that when McCreary saw a kid getting raped in the showers, his response was to do nothing and call the football coach the next day.

You want to punish actions? Fine. The NCAA now has evidence that the football coach and AD acted to cover up a child rape that committed in the football showers by a former coach. That's an action in violation of the "fundamental values" part of the NCAA rulebook. It should be punished. I don't care that the coach is dead and the AD is gone; when has the NCAA cared about the coach being gone when it's handed out punishment before?
 
Furthermore...Charles Manson is responsible for Marilyn Manson.

I'm saying that the school and its fans are responsible for the fact that Jo Paterno had the power to wield influence. They blindly followed, and he rewarded them by covering up for a sexual predator. On top of it all he was a self righteous prick.

There is culpability in following blindly. They are not innocent.

I don't agree. Schulz, Curley, and Spanier? They are absolutely guilty because they let themselves be intimidated into silence by someone who was nominally their subordinate.

But the fans and alumni who only knew Paterno from a distance, and didn't even have nominal authority? No. They adored Paterno because he won games, and presented himself as a paragon of virtue. Many of those same fans are crushed to find out they were wrong. Sure, there are still some idiots who will worship Paterno until their last breath despite this tragedy, but they no more caused this than you or I.
 
Like I said before, that's extremely unlikely.

"You've had a run of mediocre seasons, but we'll let you keep your job."

"You've had a run of mediocre seasons, and you made sure a sexual predator was taken off the streets the moment you were alerted to his behavior, so we're going to have to let you go."

That doesn't add up to me.

Put that way, I agree with you.

I have been considering the possibility that Paterno had someone asking him to consider stepping down, because he's old, and the program's declining, and the fan base is dividing (you can't tell me there weren't a lot of fans who wanted him out in 2001), and then he hears about Sandusky.

He could have thought that the Sandusky story could have caused more people to say, 'Look, the time has come for this program to change.'

But, if it went in the order as you described, then I agree.
 
I don't agree. Schulz, Curley, and Spanier? They are absolutely guilty because they let themselves be intimidated into silence by someone who was nominally their subordinate.

But the fans and alumni who only knew Paterno from a distance, and didn't even have nominal authority? No. They adored Paterno because he won games, and presented himself as a paragon of virtue. Many of those same fans are crushed to find out they were wrong. Sure, there are still some idiots who will worship Paterno until their last breath despite this tragedy, but they no more caused this than you or I.

If you blindly follow you pay the price.

JoPa's sphere of influence was legendary.
 
I don't agree. Schulz, Curley, and Spanier? They are absolutely guilty because they let themselves be intimidated into silence by someone who was nominally their subordinate.

But the fans and alumni who only knew Paterno from a distance, and didn't even have nominal authority? No. They adored Paterno because he won games, and presented himself as a paragon of virtue. Many of those same fans are crushed to find out they were wrong. Sure, there are still some idiots who will worship Paterno until their last breath despite this tragedy, but they no more caused this than you or I.
Furthermore....as a general rule, most of these paragons of virtue usually turn out to be self righteous hypocrites.
 
You want to punish actions? Fine. The NCAA now has evidence that the football coach and AD acted to cover up a child rape that committed in the football showers by a former coach. That's an action in violation of the "fundamental values" part of the NCAA rulebook. It should be punished. I don't care that the coach is dead and the AD is gone; when has the NCAA cared about the coach being gone when it's handed out punishment before?

The "fundamental values" are about fair play and amateurism. The NCAA rulebook isn't law. The NCAA was created because there are certain things the law doesn't deal with. A college kid signing with an agent is not illegal, but it is against the values of fair play. Protecting a sexual predator is against the law, but it does not violate the sanctity of the game of football. It is morally repugnant, but it is not an NCAA violation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I don't think the death penalty should be handed out, but I do think the NCAA has the opportunity to levy that or a smaller punishment should they choose to do so, because a case can be made that the cover-up helped Paterno keep his job in 2001. There was chatter at the time that he should step down, because the program was declining, based on their W/L records. So, it's entirely possible that this scandal would have cost him his job, had it come out in 2001.

That and the intergrity and clean image of the football program

If people would have known that Paterno was covering for a child rapest, would that not have hurt recruiting?

Any way you try and turn it, the only thing concerning Penn St., the AD, and Joe PA was protecting the program
 
If you blindly follow you pay the price.

JoPa's sphere of influence was legendary.

Of course it was. And the lemmings will typically follow the leader right off the cliff.

But is it the NCAA's responsibility to make sure every last lemming goes over?
 
Of course it was. And the lemmings will typically follow the leader right off the cliff.

But is it the NCAA's responsibility to make sure every last lemming goes over?

The NCAA has one question to answer. Did the institution control JoPa, or did JoPa control the institution? If it is the latter, the Gestapo has all the probable cause it needs to snoop around.
 
The "fundamental values" are about fair play and amateurism. The NCAA rulebook isn't law. The NCAA was created because there are certain things the law doesn't deal with. A college kid signing with an agent is not illegal, but it is against the values of fair play. Protecting a sexual predator is against the law, but it does not violate the sanctity of the game of football. It is morally repugnant, but it is not an NCAA violation.

Membership organizations sanction their members for stuff that happens outside their purview all the time. My wife's a CPA, but if she gets busted for DUI, she could lose her license, even though that obviously has nothing to do with her professional life. Lawyers get disbarred for unrelated crimes. This is how membership organizations work.

Anyway, Bruce Feldman certainly thinks the NCAA can get involved if they choose to, and I'm guessing that he knows more about it than anybody on this board.
 
In order to avoid the consequences of bad publicity, the most powerful leaders at the university — Spanier, Schultz, Paterno and Curley — repeatedly concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky’s child abuse,” the report said. Paterno “was an integral part of this active decision to conceal,”

School leaders “empowered Sandusky to attract potential victims to the campus and football events by allowing him to have continued, unrestricted and unsupervised access” to campus and his affiliation with the football program, the report said. The access, the report states, “provided Sandusky with the very currency that enabled him to attract his victims.”

.
 
That and the intergrity and clean image of the football program

If people would have known that Paterno was covering for a child rapest, would that not have hurt recruiting?

Any way you try and turn it, the only thing concerning Penn St., the AD, and Joe PA was protecting the program

I agree with you.

I am suggesting that had Paterno and others not covered it up, the timing of the scandal, along with what looked like a major decline on the field, MIGHT have cost him his job in 2001. Thus, I think it's reasonable to suggest that PSU's competitive level was affected by the cover up.
 
Last edited:
I agree with you.

I am suggesting that had Paterno and others not covered it up, that the timing of the scandal, along with what looked like a major decline on the field, MIGHT have cost him his job in 2001. Thus, I think it's reasonable to say that PSU's competitive level was affected by the cover up.

I agree with you in that he probably would have been forced to ride off into the sunset if this had come to light in 2001, but it's just so hypothetical and impossible to prove any tangible competitive gain from the concealing of this scandal.
 
Membership organizations sanction their members for stuff that happens outside their purview all the time. My wife's a CPA, but if she gets busted for DUI, she could lose her license, even though that obviously has nothing to do with her professional life. Lawyers get disbarred for unrelated crimes. This is how membership organizations work.

Exactly.
 
The NCAA should give them the death penalty for lack of institutional control..

If this does not meet that criteria nothing never will.
 
I agree with you in that he probably would have been forced to ride off into the sunset if this had come to light in 2001, but it's just so hypothetical and impossible to prove any tangible competitive gain from the concealing of this scandal.

That's exactly what I've been thinking - that he might have been forced to ride into the sunset, with a lot more glory then than now.

You cannot prove a tangible competitive benefit. But, you can conclude that the decision to cover up was at least partially made with the team's ability to win in mind, whether it was about Paterno keeping his job or his ability to recruit or both.
 
That's exactly what I've been thinking - that he might have been forced to ride into the sunset, with a lot more glory then than now.

You cannot prove a tangible competitive benefit. But, you can conclude that the decision to cover up was at least partially made with the team's ability to win in mind, whether it was about Paterno keeping his job or his ability to recruit or both.

Yes!

If they gave up Sandusky, they would have all been heroes and Jo Pas legend would be bigger than it was.

His ego, his friend, and his program was more important
 

VN Store



Back
Top