Jump to content

Say it ain't so, Joe


Viper
 Share

Recommended Posts

Obviously they didn't get the death penalty, but was it fair to the players on USC they couldn't compete for the title the last couple of years because of what a player did who was gone for over 5 years? The NCAA at LEAST needs to put in an indefinite bowl ban immeadiately. Of course because Penn State is popular, they probably won't be too harsh on them. If a Big Sky team etc, or lesser popular 1-A team like say Washington State or Northwestern, the NCAA would probably make a huge example of them by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is something I've been thinking about off and on throughout this entire mess...

If Penn State moves on Sandusky at the first sign of trouble, they're heroes. If someone, anyone, had just done what was right from the outset, Penn State would be held up as an example of how "it's supposed to work." Think about it, all it would have taken was a simple "We have discovered that Mr. Sandusky showers with kids. We do not do that at Penn State. It's entirely inappropriate and Mr. Sandusky has been relieved of his duties." Do that one simple thing, and Penn State is a shining example if how college football is supposed to work. Everyone involved is a hero for simply doing the right thing. And, it fits right in with their squeaky clean image.

Instead, Penn State spends years cultivating this squeaky clean image, this "grand experiment" and when the perfect chance comes along to actually prove that Penn State isn't "like everyone else", that they are "better", they blow, and they blow it big. Ironic isn't it?

Debatable. Sandusky had been at Penn State for 30 years at that point. I think it's just as likely that everyone in PSU's administration and Paterno would have been forced out in disgrace then because "You had to have known; you've known him for so long and this isn't something that just happens." I suspect that said self-interested concern probably helped prompt the cover up in the first place.

I think you're right. Even if they'd forced him out in 1998 or 2001 there still would have been fallout. And Paterno would likely still have been fired (for the "you had to have known" aspect that would have run rampant). What would have been different however is Paterno and Penn St football still would have been redeemable. There's so far no evidence they knew anything prior to 1998. And no evidence yet they covered something up prior to 98. So any scandal would have been all based on speculation and assumption. Which while damaging in the court of public opinion, aren't criminal like their actions subsequent to 1998/2001. There actions after that point became a conspiracy to cover up and enable Sandusky's actions that IS evidenced by actual proof, not supposition. And the fact it's proven is what has destroyed Paterno's legacy as well as his job, and put the football program in a position where the majority, of press at least, seem to be calling for its complete shut down.

Basically Paterno and co. traded their legacy, and in some cases their freedom if the trials go the way they should of the guys who had the decency not to die before they could be prosecuted, and their morality for an extra decade of "JoePa football."

I should have been clearer with my point. I meant the university overall, not the football program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every day that the statue of Paterno and all of the facilities with his name on it remain in place makes me despise Penn State and the people of Happy Valley more and more. The university needs to wash their hands completely of anything and anyone associated with this scandal. While I believe that the world is a better place without him on it, I really wish that he was still alive so that he would have to answer to everything. The man was nothing but a coward and lived his life as a coward until the very end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's disappointing to hear, is that there are people speculating that the NCAA won't and can't do anything. If the NCAA doesn't see that this was a complete lack and disregard for institutional control, I don't know what is. If SMU got the Death Penalty for 1 year for players getting money and not hurting a soul, then I think Penn State needs to get at least 5 years away from football. I hate hearing people talk about how punishing the players on the current team is wrong. Is it really punishing them if you allow them to transfer like SMU players were? They are free to go. What's wrong is that the Penn State money maker will be allowed to continue as if nothing happened, because anything other than shutting down the program is a slap on the wrist and looking the other way.

Essentially, if college football wants to retain any sense of dignity or a single shred of credibility, they simply have to shut down Penn State's football program. Problem is, college football, more than any sport, enjoys spitting in the face of dignity and credibility. There is no sport in the world (ok, South American soccer during the narco-soccer era was worse, but still) that is more corrupt and devoid of any moral compass than American college football. That's essentially why I don't see anything coming of this. Hopefully if that happens people will see college for the complete farce that it really is and protest their team's games against Penn State. Unfortunately, I don't think most fans have that much sense.

I have hope that something will come of this. Too many people in power I think are up in arms over this and as powerful as the Penn State football program is, even they only go so far.

In terms of the culture around college football your not going to change that overnight. But I do think college football is becoming more and more isolated from the rest of society in terms of where it is on the social landscape. I know speaking from my own personal life I can't watch the sport anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's disappointing to hear, is that there are people speculating that the NCAA won't and can't do anything. If the NCAA doesn't see that this was a complete lack and disregard for institutional control, I don't know what is. If SMU got the Death Penalty for 1 year for players getting money and not hurting a soul, then I think Penn State needs to get at least 5 years away from football. I hate hearing people talk about how punishing the players on the current team is wrong. Is it really punishing them if you allow them to transfer like SMU players were? They are free to go. What's wrong is that the Penn State money maker will be allowed to continue as if nothing happened, because anything other than shutting down the program is a slap on the wrist and looking the other way.

Please read more about SMU.

SMU was already under probation and still committed violations to the point which the NCAA could not take anymore. SMU was placed on probation five times in the previous 11 years so they were a "Repeat Offender". Some of those probations were before the NCAA membership passed a "Death Penalty".

Their repeat violatiors included the Board of Governors which was led by soon-to-by Governor Bill Clements giving the approval for the continued payment of players as to honor the payment 'contracts'.

SMU football is the most penalized program in FBS football. Penn State has not been under investigation until now.

Granted, if CalTech* gets popped for violations at the D-III level, then something should occur to Penn State, but not a death penalty.

*-Full Disclosure: CalTech has an AD who has now been there for a year and I was on campus to interview to be their Associate AD a month after she took over in 2011.

Obviously they didn't get the death penalty, but was it fair to the players on USC they couldn't compete for the title the last couple of years because of what a player did who was gone for over 5 years? The NCAA at LEAST needs to put in an indefinite bowl ban immediately. Of course because Penn State is popular, they probably won't be too harsh on them. If a Big Sky team etc, or lesser popular 1-A team like say Washington State or Northwestern, the NCAA would probably make a huge example of them by now.

Again, Montana was sent their official NCAA Notice in May. Nothing yet has been sent to Penn State.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have been clearer with my point. I meant the university overall, not the football program.

IDK about that. If 1998 was in fact the first time (and what would make you think it was), but let's say it was at a minimum the first time ANYONE at PSU knew about it. If it was acted upon immediately, with Sandusky in handcuffs 14 years ago, then I think the football program itself wouldn't be affected one lick. If that's instantly unearthed then it's one sick bastard who just happened to be the D-Coordinator of their football team but could've just as easily been a teacher or an accountant or one of a million other things.

It only became a football program issue the minute a coverup began. Without a cover-up from a FOOTBALL STANDPOINT ONLY the only change that would have had to have been made was a new D-Coordinator. He did something heinous, we found out, he's been arrested, end of story (again, end of story from a FOOTBALL STANDPOINT ONLY).

For instance, let's say I'm a senior manager and I steal from my company. The CFO (Paterno) finds out and has me immediately fired because of what I did. The CEO (Administration) replaces me with whomever. Some people say "wow, I'm stunned he would do such a thing" and its a topic of conversation, but the day to day operations go on regardless.

Now let's have the same scenario but instead of stealing I'm preparing fraudulent financial statements and the CFO and CEO are in cahoots (think Enron, Bernie Madoff). Then a few years later it comes out that we're frauds, and the entire operation gets cut off at the head and everything below dies with it.

That's the difference. If they took immediate action the football program doesn't skip a beat (save for the embarrassment of having a sick bastard child molester on their staff). The minute it was covered up, that's the minute everything has to die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have been clearer with my point. I meant the university overall, not the football program.

IDK about that. If 1998 was in fact the first time (and what would make you think it was), but let's say it was at a minimum the first time ANYONE at PSU knew about it. If it was acted upon immediately, with Sandusky in handcuffs 14 years ago, then I think the football program itself wouldn't be affected one lick. If that's instantly unearthed then it's one sick bastard who just happened to be the D-Coordinator of their football team but could've just as easily been a teacher or an accountant or one of a million other things.

It only became a football program issue the minute a coverup began. Without a cover-up from a FOOTBALL STANDPOINT ONLY the only change that would have had to have been made was a new D-Coordinator. He did something heinous, we found out, he's been arrested, end of story (again, end of story from a FOOTBALL STANDPOINT ONLY).

For instance, let's say I'm a senior manager and I steal from my company. The CFO (Paterno) finds out and has me immediately fired because of what I did. The CEO (Administration) replaces me with whomever. Some people say "wow, I'm stunned he would do such a thing" and its a topic of conversation, but the day to day operations go on regardless.

Now let's have the same scenario but instead of stealing I'm preparing fraudulent financial statements and the CFO and CEO are in cahoots (think Enron, Bernie Madoff). Then a few years later it comes out that we're frauds, and the entire operation gets cut off at the head and everything below dies with it.

That's the difference. If they took immediate action the football program doesn't skip a beat (save for the embarrassment of having a sick bastard child molester on their staff). The minute it was covered up, that's the minute everything has to die.

You get that you're basically agreeing with me, right? Again, I wasn't clear enough. When I said "I meant the university overall, not the football program", I should have said "I meant the university overall, not just the football program." If anyone had simply done what was right the minute they knew about Sandusky, I think everyone with the exception of those with knowledge of Sandusky's behavior etc. would have come out of it looking pretty good. Anyone on the right side of the whole mess would have been considered an example of "doing the right thing." Instead, those that could have done something deferred to those that were only interested in "making it go away" and we see the results.

Also, I don't know what you mean by "(and what would make you think it was)" but at no point did I ever say I thought 1998 was the first time Sandusky molested a kid. I'm not defending Penn State and I don't have a bit of sympathy for them. Any reference to 1998 was made because the timeline as it's been presented to us states that 1998 was the first time it was brought to the university's attention.

My point throughout has been that this could have gone in a completely different direction if someone, anyone, had just had the guts to do what needed to be done. Don't mistake me for a Penn State apologist. If I had my way, they woould hang everyone involved by their balls from the goalposts.

Hope that clears it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have been clearer with my point. I meant the university overall, not the football program.

IDK about that. If 1998 was in fact the first time (and what would make you think it was), but let's say it was at a minimum the first time ANYONE at PSU knew about it. If it was acted upon immediately, with Sandusky in handcuffs 14 years ago, then I think the football program itself wouldn't be affected one lick. If that's instantly unearthed then it's one sick bastard who just happened to be the D-Coordinator of their football team but could've just as easily been a teacher or an accountant or one of a million other things.

It only became a football program issue the minute a coverup began. Without a cover-up from a FOOTBALL STANDPOINT ONLY the only change that would have had to have been made was a new D-Coordinator. He did something heinous, we found out, he's been arrested, end of story (again, end of story from a FOOTBALL STANDPOINT ONLY).

For instance, let's say I'm a senior manager and I steal from my company. The CFO (Paterno) finds out and has me immediately fired because of what I did. The CEO (Administration) replaces me with whomever. Some people say "wow, I'm stunned he would do such a thing" and its a topic of conversation, but the day to day operations go on regardless.

Now let's have the same scenario but instead of stealing I'm preparing fraudulent financial statements and the CFO and CEO are in cahoots (think Enron, Bernie Madoff). Then a few years later it comes out that we're frauds, and the entire operation gets cut off at the head and everything below dies with it.

That's the difference. If they took immediate action the football program doesn't skip a beat (save for the embarrassment of having a sick bastard child molester on their staff). The minute it was covered up, that's the minute everything has to die.

You get that you're basically agreeing with me, right? Again, I wasn't clear enough. When I said "I meant the university overall, not the football program", I should have said "I meant the university overall, not just the football program." If anyone had simply done what was right the minute they knew about Sandusky, I think everyone with the exception of those with knowledge of Sandusky's behavior etc. would have come out of it looking pretty good. Anyone on the right side of the whole mess would have been considered an example of "doing the right thing." Instead, those that could have done something deferred to those that were only interested in "making it go away" and we see the results.

Also, I don't know what you mean by "(and what would make you think it was)" but at no point did I ever say I thought 1998 was the first time Sandusky molested a kid. I'm not defending Penn State and I don't have a bit of sympathy for them. Any reference to 1998 was made because the timeline as it's been presented to us states that 1998 was the first time it was brought to the university's attention.

My point throughout has been that this could have gone in a completely different direction if someone, anyone, had just had the guts to do what needed to be done. Don't mistake me for a Penn State apologist. If I had my way, they woould hang everyone involved by their balls from the goalposts.

Hope that clears it up.

Oh I know. That "you" was a "royal you", not you specifically. My point was if 1998 was the first reported case, there's no reason at this point to believe that it was ACTUALLY the first one. At this point I'd have to assume this was going on well before that. I don't think you just start molesting kids at a certain age after having never done so. This almost certainly had to have been going on for probably decades (with Sandusky, not necessarily anyone at PSU's knowledge that is).

And I know you're not an apologist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is everybody so hung up on "repeat offender" status? NCAA bylaws allow them to suspend a university from competition for a first offense, if deemed serious enough.

I know that's the precedent set, but Penn State's crimes are without precedent, and justify a singular response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best punishment is to give the entire athletics department the death penalty, but after the 2012-13 athletics season. Obviously, the school forgoes any postseason participation, forgoes any money coming in to the school, etc. Kill all sports for a couple years, and the football team for even longer.

Why after this upcoming season? Too much money is lost by the other schools (for example, football home games on PSU's road schedule) and by TV networks.

By giving everyone a year's notice, you'll allow those that weren't a part of the wrongdoings a year to decide their next move, whether it be transfers (without penalty) or job searching, whatever. You allow the Big Ten decide what to do about PSU's inclusion in the conference.

If the NCAA still wants to keep the death penalty around, those indirectly affected (other schools, for one) aren't going to like losing unshared revenue and competitive imbalance. Hence, the program/school receives a "drop-dead" date from the NCAA so all parties involved have ample time to sort things out.

This is a business world, after all. Completely different times today than back in the 80's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, here is more to what Paterno allegedly knew.

Credit: NY Times

In January 2011, Joe Paterno learned prosecutors were investigating his longtime assistant coach Jerry Sandusky for sexually assaulting young boys. Soon, Mr. Paterno had testified before a grand jury, and the rough outlines of what would become a giant scandal had been published in a local newspaper.

That same month, Mr. Paterno, the football coach at Penn State, began negotiating with his superiors to amend his contract, with the timing something of a surprise because the contract was not set to expire until the end of 2012, according to university documents and people with knowledge of the discussions. By August, Mr. Paterno and the university's president, both of whom were by then embroiled in the Sandusky investigation, had reached an agreement.

Mr. Paterno was to be paid $3 million at the end of the 2011 season if he agreed it would be his last. Interest-free loans totaling $350,000 that the university had made to Mr. Paterno over the years would be forgiven as part of the retirement package. He would also have the use of the university's private plane and a luxury box at Beaver Stadium for him and his family to use over the next 25 years.

The university's full board of trustees was kept in the dark about the arrangement until November, when Mr. Sandusky was arrested and the contract arrangements, along with so much else at Penn State, were upended. Mr. Paterno was fired, two of the university's top officials were indicted in connection with the scandal, and the trustees, who held Mr. Paterno's financial fate in their hands, came under verbal assault from the coach's angry supporters.

Board members who raised questions about whether the university ought to go forward with the payments were quickly shut down, according to two people with direct knowledge of the negotiations.

In the end, the board of trustees — bombarded with hate mail and threatened with a defamation lawsuit by Mr. Paterno's family — gave the family virtually everything it wanted, with a package worth roughly $5.5 million. Documents show that the board even tossed in some extras that the family demanded, like the use of specialized hydrotherapy massage equipment for Mr. Paterno's wife at the university's Lasch Building, where Mr. Sandusky had molested a number of his victims.

According to university records, Mr. Paterno first expressed a desire to revisit his contract in January 2011. It was very early in that month that he learned he had been subpoenaed to testify before the Sandusky grand jury.

On Nov. 5, 2011, Mr. Sandusky was arrested, and two Penn State administrators — men who were Mr. Paterno’s superiors — were indicted on charges of failing to report to the authorities a 2001 allegation that Mr. Sandusky had attacked a young boy in the football building’s showers.

Quickly, it became clear that Mr. Paterno, too, had failed to go to the authorities or even to confront Mr. Sandusky after he had been told in person of the episode. The prospect that Mr. Paterno, a revered figure, might be fired by the board of trustees was suddenly real.

Mr. Paterno quickly issued a statement saying, in effect, that the board need not act, that he would resign at the end of the season. Neither he nor the university revealed that he had effectively agreed to do so already, in return for an expensive financial package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best punishment is to give the entire athletics department the death penalty, but after the 2012-13 athletics season. Obviously, the school forgoes any postseason participation, forgoes any money coming in to the school, etc. Kill all sports for a couple years, and the football team for even longer.

Why after this upcoming season? Too much money is lost by the other schools (for example, football home games on PSU's road schedule) and by TV networks.

By giving everyone a year's notice, you'll allow those that weren't a part of the wrongdoings a year to decide their next move, whether it be transfers (without penalty) or job searching, whatever. You allow the Big Ten decide what to do about PSU's inclusion in the conference.

If the NCAA still wants to keep the death penalty around, those indirectly affected (other schools, for one) aren't going to like losing unshared revenue and competitive imbalance. Hence, the program/school receives a "drop-dead" date from the NCAA so all parties involved have ample time to sort things out.

This is a business world, after all. Completely different times today than back in the 80's.

It's a good point that the ship has sailed for cancelling 2012, but I can't get on board with punishing non-revenue sports any more than I can the academic side of the university. It all comes down to "college football as unduly enormous and unassailable revenue generator" to me, and so I've no desire to drop the hammer on girls' cross-country or whatever. Then again, if football really subsidizes the rest of college athletics such that they can't operate without that money coming in, maybe everyone else doesn't really have a choice, other than hitting up various levels of government for a $25,000,000 Unpopular Sports Management Fee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just hoping that's how it goes. It is probably too late to do anything about this year. Maybe just ban them from a bowl game, which will probably be irrelevant to this team this year anyway. Take some time, and come down on them and announce the death penalty for football with enough time for the Big Ten and their out of conference opponents to figure something out for next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's disappointing to hear, is that there are people speculating that the NCAA won't and can't do anything. If the NCAA doesn't see that this was a complete lack and disregard for institutional control, I don't know what is. If SMU got the Death Penalty for 1 year for players getting money and not hurting a soul, then I think Penn State needs to get at least 5 years away from football. I hate hearing people talk about how punishing the players on the current team is wrong. Is it really punishing them if you allow them to transfer like SMU players were? They are free to go. What's wrong is that the Penn State money maker will be allowed to continue as if nothing happened, because anything other than shutting down the program is a slap on the wrist and looking the other way.

SMU was using the money to give itself a competitive advantage that was expressly forbidden within the NCAA rules after the NCAA told them to stop. Penn State was not.

---------------------

Granted I'm not sure shutting down the football program sends the best possible message to the larger-than-normal swath of American society that is currently paying attention here. Oh sure, you're telling the hilljacks that football doesn't trump everything else, but the Penn State administrators and Paterno, as typical for large-scale ethical lapses such as these, weren't from the hilljack class. They aren't going to get any message from this punishment (besides don't use email to discuss large-scale ethical lapses). The only message that they will get is one in which you explicitly spell out that money, and the unfettered quest for more of it, was the root cause here. So a punishment that targets that is a better one from the message-sending perspective.

Pressure the Big Ten to take away Penn State's share of the money that comes from athletic events, but let them participate. Make Penn State demonstrate that it is possible to play football "for the love of it" rather than the greater glory of the athletic department's financial statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Documents show that the board even tossed in some extras that the family demanded, like the use of specialized hydrotherapy massage equipment for Mr. Paterno?s wife at the university?s Lasch Building, where Mr. Sandusky had molested a number of his victims.

Rural Pennsylvania sure gets busy in the showers, huh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, Montana was sent their official NCAA Notice in May. Nothing yet has been sent to Penn State.

dfwabel is right that we should be paying attention to what happens to Montana. Reportedly Montana's problem isn't the standard recruiting violation/impermissible benefits so much as "the football team was really, really rape-y and nobody did anything about it except the exact opposite of what you should be doing."

So essentially criminal enterprise is the issue there. Like Penn State.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, sorry, this absolutely ties into football.

When a football coach uses the football facilities to rape children, and the football head coach looks the other way because he's more concerned with wins, recruits, and reputation, it's a criminal issue AND a football issue.

When a university becomes so obsessed with a football team and its coach that it creates an environment where this can happen, it's a football issue.

When the football team keeps getting top-notch recruits, wins, bowl invites, ratings, and merchandise money for over a decade because nobody knows about Sandusky's crimes, that's an unfair advantage and a football issue.

The NCAA won't do anything, and they'll try to claim this had nothing to do with football, but reasonable people will know that this will really only be a profit-motivated decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best punishment is to give the entire athletics department the death penalty, but after the 2012-13 athletics season. Obviously, the school forgoes any postseason participation, forgoes any money coming in to the school, etc. Kill all sports for a couple years, and the football team for even longer.

Why after this upcoming season? Too much money is lost by the other schools (for example, football home games on PSU's road schedule) and by TV networks.

By giving everyone a year's notice, you'll allow those that weren't a part of the wrongdoings a year to decide their next move, whether it be transfers (without penalty) or job searching, whatever. You allow the Big Ten decide what to do about PSU's inclusion in the conference.

If the NCAA still wants to keep the death penalty around, those indirectly affected (other schools, for one) aren't going to like losing unshared revenue and competitive imbalance. Hence, the program/school receives a "drop-dead" date from the NCAA so all parties involved have ample time to sort things out.

This is a business world, after all. Completely different times today than back in the 80's.

I get the logistics of it being late in the year to be canceling the upcoming PSU football season. But that said, I don't envy the Nittany Lions this year. Away games in particular I suspect are going to be very rough. I can just see the signs and hear the chants from opposition crowds. The whole "we are Penn St" mentality that got them through the end of last season will definitely be gone outside Happy Valley. Which is unfortunate for the kids on the team, but frankly the program itself will deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.