Sandusky/Paterno victim bullied out of school

[Pope Flick]

http://forums.thehuddle.com/index.php?s=&a...t&p=3576699

 

You going to answer this question beer?

[BeeR]

BeeR, what part of "nobody gives a flip how much money you spend on a library if you turn a blind eye to a child molester to protect your program" don't you understand?

And who is saying "spending a lot on a library (or whatever) excuses someone if they turn a blind eye to a child molester?" Nobody that I see, at least certainly not me. But hey let's not that slow down the bonfire.

 

What part of, "Hey PSU, the second you quit trying to defend PSU and admit that a man you idolize turned a blind eye to a child molester, we'll stop riding you guys" don't you understand?

Who is "PSU" exactly? The school? The students? The fans? All of the above? If either of the latter 2, you mean every single one of them? And yes, we are defending "PSU" because "PSU" didn't do this. One guy did this and perhaps a small handful of others didn't follow up on it. It's not the whole freaking school. Can you not see what a ridiculously broad brushstroke that is?

 

PS for the sake of argument I'm happy to concede there are some people trying to say leave Paterno alone and ignore his fault in this and so on - but again I am not one, nor near as I can tell is anyone else here. But again, let's not that slow down the bonfire.

 

It's really simple. Nobody is saying that every Penn State grad of fan should hold his/her head in shame.

Oh, I'm quite sure "nobody" is inaccurate - hard to say where the percentages lie but there are more than a few.

 

Just the ones who seem more interested in protecting the legacy of a man who turned a blind eye to a child molester

For the umpteenth time I do not hold him faultless. Nor do I think most PSU fans and so on. Hell even he does not hold himself faultless. But nor do I think he simply "turned a blind eye." I think he assumed the AD/etc followed up and given the fantastic claim it appeared to be at the time, figured McQueary was wrong in what he saw. Should he have followed up on it? Yes of course. He effed up, badly. But I don't think he should be cruxified in hindsight after the fact, esp by or due to a lot of blind rage d-bags who are just looking for bodies to burn in a fit of revenge, or worse, want to "get" him/PSU because they just don't like him/them.

 

It's not your fault that Jo Pa didn't do enough. Nobody is blaming you. We're all guilty of idolizing our sports heroes, and this is a shameful example of what that can lead to. Right up until the moment that you insist upon honoring Joe Pa even after you've learned that "he could have done more" to protect children from being FREAKING RAPED, you're no worse than the rest of us. But once you do. Once you dig your heels in and fight back against "all the PSU haters", that's where it gets pretty sick indeed.

I don't see any point trying to honor Joe or anyone/anything PSU-related right now. Tempers are running too high and rational thought and objectivity are lucky to even be an afterthought for many. I am saying punish whoever for whatever they deserve to be punished for AFTER this has been thoroughly examined and given due process. As for honoring them, do so for whatever they deserve to be honored for (clearly there are many differing opinions there) after the dust has settled. But no such luck. Many would rather take a "shoot/fire/aim" approach. To each their own.

[BeeR]

Finally the voice of reason

[wiegie]

The WSJ has an interesting article today about how back around 2005 JoePa threatened Penn State that if penalized his players for illegal actions the same way that the university penalized normal students that he would quit fundraising for the university.

[bpwallace49]

The WSJ has an interesting article today about how back around 2005 JoePa threatened Penn State that if penalized his players for illegal actions the same way that the university penalized normal students that he would quit fundraising for the university.

 

Here is the whole article. Nice pull weigie!!

 

A Discipline Problem

Paterno Fought Penn State Official Over Punishment of Players.

 

.STATE COLLEGE, Pa.—Legendary Penn State football coach Joe Paterno clashed repeatedly with the university's former chief disciplinarian over how harshly to punish players who got into trouble, internal emails suggest, shedding new light on the school's effort to balance its reputation as a magnet for scholar-athletes with the demands of running a nationally dominant football program.

 

.In an Aug. 12, 2005, email to Pennsylvania State University President Graham Spanier and others, Vicky Triponey, the university's standards and conduct officer, complained that Mr. Paterno believed she should have "no interest, (or business) holding our football players accountable to our community standards. The Coach is insistent he knows best how to discipline his players…and their status as a student when they commit violations of our standards should NOT be our concern…and I think he was saying we should treat football players different from other students in this regard."

 

The confrontations came to a head in 2007, according to one former school official, when six football players were charged by police for forcing their way into a campus apartment that April and beating up several students, one of them severely. That September, following a tense meeting with Mr. Paterno over the case, she resigned her post, saying at the time she left because of "philosophical differences."

 

In a statement Monday, Dr. Triponey said: "There were numerous meetings and discussions about specific and pending student discipline cases that involved football players," which she said included "demands" to adjust the judicial process for football players. The end result, she said, was that football players were treated "more favorably than other students accused of violating the community standards as defined by the student code of conduct."

 

Mr. Paterno's lawyer, Wick Sollers, said through a spokesman that "the allegations that have been described are out of context, misleading and filled with inaccuracies….Penn State's record of producing successful student athletes under coach Paterno's guidance is unquestioned."

 

.Mr. Spanier didn't respond to requests for comment. A Penn State spokesman declined to comment.

 

For years, Penn State's football program, which has won two national championships, was regarded as a model. Its players graduated at rates far above average, and it is one of only four major-conference athletic programs never to have been sanctioned for major violations by the sport's governing body, the NCAA. In recent weeks, a sex-abuse scandal involving Jerry Sandusky, a longtime assistant coach of Mr. Paterno's, has badly tarnished that reputation. Mr. Sandusky has said he is innocent.

 

Related Video

 

Penn State Prepares for Post-Paterno Era

Joe Paterno Era Ends at Penn State

.Messrs. Paterno and Spanier have been ousted from their jobs in the wake of the scandal. Athletic Director Tim Curley was indicted for perjury in the case and has been removed from his job and placed on administrative leave. Mr. Curley has denied any wrongdoing. A representative for Mr. Curley said he had no comment on any email traffic, but that, as athletic director, he tried to make sure all student athletes were treated equally with regard to the code of conduct.

 

On Monday, Penn State's Special Committee of the Board of Trustees said at a news conference in Philadelphia that former FBI director Louis Freeh will lead the investigation into the school's handling of child sexual-abuse allegations.

 

Penn State, like many universities, saw its endowment swell in recent decades, to about $1.7 billion, thanks to the contributions of loyal alumni. Sports brought in $106.6 million in revenue in the school's 2010 fiscal year.

 

Related Document

Read emails related to the August 2005 meeting.

 

View Document

..Students at Penn State are subject to a code of conduct administered by the office of judicial affairs—an arm of the student-affairs department. The office can open investigations of any incident on or off campus. It can order a range of punishments, including, if it sees fit, expulsion.

 

When Dr. Triponey arrived from the University of Connecticut in 2003 to become vice president of student affairs, she was charged with overseeing the department that enforced the code.

 

Just before she arrived, Penn State faced an episode in which Mr. Paterno had decided to let cornerback Anwar Phillips play in a bowl game, even though he had been charged with sexually assaulting a woman and had been temporarily expelled from school. Mr. Paterno declined to field questions about the incident at the time. Mr. Spanier referred to it as a case of "miscommunication." Mr. Phillips was acquitted of the charge in a subsequent trial.

 

Enlarge Image

 

CloseZumaPress

 

Joe Paterno returns to his house on Nov. 9.

.In 2004, after several incidents involving football players, Mr. Paterno told the Allentown Morning Call newspaper that the players weren't misbehaving any more than usual, but that such news was now more public. "I can go back to a couple guys in the '70s who drove me nuts," he said. "The cops would call me, and I used to put them in bed in my house and run their rear ends off the next day. Nobody knew about it. That's the way we handled it."

 

In the spring of 2005, Dr. Triponey's office suspended Penn State offensive lineman E.Z. Smith and a teammate for the summer after they were caught shooting arrows through an off-campus apartment wall, according to news reports at the time. In an email that August to Dr. Triponey, Penn State athletic director Curley said that Mr. Paterno was "frustrated" because Mr. Smith couldn't participate in preseason practice.

 

In August 2005, Mr. Spanier, the university president, suggested that Dr. Triponey meet with Mr. Paterno. Athletic director Curley, assistant athletic Director Fran Ganter and Joe Puzycki, the assistant to Dr. Triponey, also attended the Aug. 11 meeting, according to two people knowledgeable about the meeting. Mr. Paterno loudly criticized Dr. Triponey at the meeting for meddling, these people say.

 

The following day, Dr. Triponey sent an email to Messrs. Spanier, Curley and Puzycki summarizing the meeting and sharing her thoughts and concerns. In the email, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, she said that football players were getting in trouble at a "disproportionate rate" from other students, often for serious acts. She said her staff had tried to work with the athletic department, sometimes sharing information, but that whenever her department initiated an investigation into a football player, the phones lit up. "The calls and pleas from coaches, Board members, and others when we are considering a case are, indeed, putting us in a position that does treat football players differently and with greater privilege."

 

Dr. Triponey also wrote that Mr. Paterno believed that the school's code of conduct should not apply to any incidents that take place off campus—that those should be handled by police—and they shouldn't be allowed to affect anyone's status as a student.

 

"Coach Paterno would rather we NOT inform the public when a football player is found responsible for committing a serious violation of the law and/or our student code," she wrote, "despite any moral or legal obligation to do so."

 

Dr. Triponey ended her note by asking Mr. Curley and Mr. Spanier if these were accurate impressions of Mr. Paterno's views—and whether they shared them.

 

Enlarge Image

 

CloseEmail from then-athletic director Tim Curley to the school's then-chief disciplinarian Vicky Triponey.

.Mr. Curley's response, also reviewed by the Journal, was sent three days later and was copied to Mr. Spanier. "I think your summary is accurate," it said.

 

Mr. Curley, who had played for Mr. Paterno's team, explained what he said was the coach's "frustrations with the system." Mr. Paterno, he wrote, felt that "it should be his call if someone should practice and play in athletics." He said Mr. Paterno felt the school had "overreacted" by deciding to allow reporting of off-campus incidents, and that the NCAA had gone "overboard" with new rules on academic-eligibility requirements.

 

In an email to Mr. Spanier on Sept. 1, Dr. Triponey wrote of Mr. Paterno: "I do not support the way this man is running our football program. We certainly would not tolerate this behavior in our students so I struggle with how we tolerate it in our coach."

 

That same fall, Dr. Triponey's office suspended Dan Connor, a Penn State linebacker, who had been accused of making harassing calls to a retired assistant coach. Shortly after the suspension was handed down, Mr. Paterno ordered the player to suit up, according to a person familiar with the matter. Dr. Triponey informed the player that if he suited up for practice, he would be in violation of his suspension and could face expulsion. Mr. Connor says he recalled being suspended only for games, not practice.

 

The incident prompted Mr. Spanier to visit Dr. Triponey at her home. Dr. Triponey confirms he told her that Mr. Paterno had given him an ultimatum: Fire her, or Mr. Paterno would stop fund-raising for the school. She says Mr. Spanier told her that if forced to choose, he would choose her over the coach—but that he did not want to have to make that choice.

 

Later, Mr. Connor's suspension was reduced to 10 days, allowing him to return to football.

 

In 2007, as many as two dozen players broke into an off-campus apartment, sparking a melee that captured headlines and prompted the police to file criminal charges against six Penn State football players. "Pretty much the entire Penn State defense broke in and started swinging bar stools and stuff," says John Britt, then a third-year criminal-justice major who was beaten up in the incident. Mr. Britt says he took a beer bottle to the back of the head—and that players apparently continued to beat him after he'd lost consciousness. (Now 25, Mr. Britt serves warrants for state court in Philadelphia.)

 

Dr. Triponey's department began an inquiry. According to a Penn State employee's record of the proceedings, Mr. Spanier was involved in at least nine meetings with representatives of the judicial-affairs department, and Mr. Paterno was involved in at least six.

 

In a meeting with Messrs. Paterno and Spanier and others, Dr. Triponey complained that the players were stonewalling her and suggested that Mr. Paterno ought to compel them to be truthful, according to one person familiar with the meeting. Mr. Paterno angrily responded that his players couldn't be expected to cooperate with the school's disciplinary process because, in this case, they would have to testify against each other, making it hard to play football together, these people say.

 

In the end, police dropped many of the charges against the players, and two pleaded guilty to misdemeanors. The school's inquiry led to four players being suspended for a summer semester. They did not miss any games.

 

Coach Paterno imposed his own punishment: he said the whole team would spend two hours cleaning up the stadium after home games that fall.

 

After Dr. Triponey's departure, the university hired Bob Secor, a former vice provost at the school, to head a committee to examine the judicial-review process. Mr. Secor says that Mr. Paterno told him that he didn't think other people should be able to decide whether a football player should be able to play or not. "And we agreed with that," he says.

 

On Oct. 1, 2007, Mr. Spanier accepted the committee's recommended changes. Under the new rules, the judicial-review process would have only a limited ability to end a student's participation in activities—including football.

 

"The committee's rationale, which I fully support, is based on the assumption that involvement in student activities is for the most part a healthy influence on student behavior," Mr. Spanier wrote. "Removing such involvement as a way of getting a student's attention to correct misbehavior may or may not be productive."

 

—Rachel Bachman, Kevin Helliker and John W. Miller contributed to this article.

[detlef]

BeeR, and I quote:

 

Naming a stadium after him wouldn't be a "celebration" but an acknowledgement and appreciation for all the good he has done - which is quite a few truckloads' worth, unmatched in the school's history. That didn't all suddenly disappear because he wasn't aggressive enough in doing something about Sandusky, much as all the headhunting idiots want it to.

 

You wrote that. And that's what I'm talking about. Yes, it does all suddenly disappear because he didn't do enough here. More importantly, let's discuss, "didn't do enough". Because, in this case, that's effing BS.

 

If your kid tells you they saw something horrible done by someone totally unrelated to you and you don't go to the cops. That's "not doing enough".

 

If you're the head of a major college football program and something like this comes across your desk, done by someone with the kinds of ties to your organization that Sandusky had and you just "send it up the chain" and leave it be. That goes beyond "not doing enough". That crosses the line because it is in your best interest that nothing ever comes of this. The best thing for you is that it just goes away.

 

That you keep trivializing this major detail totally flies in the face of the outrage you claim you share with us about this.

 

And as far as blaming everyone involved with PSU, I think I made myself clear. I've truly got no trouble with anyone involved with PSU, right up until they start playing the school pride card. You want to show me how much pride you have in PSU? Rise above these jackwads who preyed on your loyalty and thought they could get away with keeping this whole story hush so that it wouldn't get in the way with business.

[BeeR]

Yes, it does all suddenly disappear because he didn't do enough here.

Agree to disagree. I see little point going back and forth on that further.

 

If your kid tells you they saw something horrible done by someone totally unrelated to you and you don't go to the cops. That's "not doing enough".

Very weak, in fact invalid, analogy.

 

That you keep trivializing this major detail totally flies in the face of the outrage you claim you share with us about this.

That you keep assuming you (and others) know the "details" and how all this went down and assuming the worst about it (and Paterno) is completely ridiculous. Again the mob mentality rears its ugly head. Burn baby burn. Who cares about facts or "details?" Joe is a big ol fish so let's fry him but good.

 

Or am I the only one who notices how it's practically all about Paterno here? No mention of McQueary (remember, the guy who actually saw the offense occur) or all the other people who likely knew about this stuff. Curious is the kindest word I can think of.

 

I can't help but wonder how many of you all rabid with pitchfork in hand agree with those saying PSU shouldn't be allowed to play a bowl game. Yes let's penalize the players who had nothing to do w/this. Brilliant.

Edited November 24, 2011 by BeeR

[detlef]

Agree to disagree. I see little point going back and forth on that further.

 

Very weak, in fact invalid, analogy.

 

That you keep assuming you (and others) know the "details" and how all this went down and assuming the worst about it (and Paterno) is completely ridiculous. Again the mob mentality rears its ugly head. Burn baby burn. Who cares about facts or "details?" Joe is a big ol fish so let's fry him but good.

 

Or am I the only one who notices how it's practically all about Paterno here? No mention of McQueary (remember, the guy who actually saw the offense occur) or all the other people who likely knew about this stuff. Curious is the kindest word I can think of.

 

I can't help but wonder how many of you all rabid with pitchfork in hand agree with those saying PSU shouldn't be allowed to play a bowl game. Yes let's penalize the players who had nothing to do w/this. Brilliant.

 

 

As soon as some blithering a-hole starts going on about not forgetting all the great things McQueary did for the U, then I'll worry about him. I've said plenty in these threads about how what he did (or didn't do) was pathetic. The AD and Pres, those guys should hang as well. It's just that Paterno is the only one that guys like you keep defending.

[Pope Flick]

And yep, no bowl game should be played.

[The Holy Roller]

And yep, no bowl game should be played.

 

But...but....isn't that punishing the innocent players!?

[Menudo]

I've tried to stay out of this for the most par, because this whole situation still makes me sick to my stomach. I grew up 20 minutes from PSU. Going to PSU football games has been a way of life for me since I was very young. Finding out that JoePa kept these things quiet is almost like finding out that your Grandfather did the same. Joe was an icon who we thought stood for what was right. We thought that PSU won with honor, and that was a great source of pride. I still go to football games and have season tickets for wrestling. Here are some of my current thoughts.

 

1. Unless something comes out totally exonerating JoePa, and that isn't going to happen, his image is deservedly forever tainted. If he didn't do everything possible to stop that absolute maniac from committing these despicable acts, then , his image will suffer as it should. Do I still think the man did a lot of great things ? Yes. Do I still think he was a great man prior to this awful act . Yes. Does his awful act ruin all the good he did ? Unfortunately, yes, it does. Naming a stadium after him would be a big mistake. He ruined his legacy, plain and simple.

 

2. For those suggesting that I and other PSU fans should be embarrassed to continue to root for this team and chant "We Are Penn State", give me a break. PSU is bigger than the group involved in this tragedy, and that includes Paterno. I'm embarrassed by what was happened and sickened by everyone involved in letting it happen. However, that group, which is a small group in comparison to the size of this university will not stop me from rooting for the university I have loved forever. I will be a Penn State fan until I die.

 

3. For those suggesting that this year's team should not play in a Bowl game, I respectfully disagree. These football players did absolutely nothing wrong and should not be punished. If after the NCAA investigation is concluded, sanctions are delivered, PSU will have to live with them, and you won't hear one complaint from me on those sanctions.

 

4. Penn State's image wii be tarnished for a long time, and I don't blame kids who choose not to go there. However, what this group did does not remove the wonderful philanthropic things that this University has done anymore than the philanthropic acts take away from these despicable acts that occurred and were covered up.

 

Just my $.02 right now

[tonorator]

3. For those suggesting that this year's team should not play in a Bowl game, I respectfully disagree. These football players did absolutely nothing wrong and should not be punished. If after the NCAA investigation is concluded, sanctions are delivered, PSU will have to live with them, and you won't hear one complaint from me on those sanctions.

 

i disagree with this one. the program should be punished and that means no games. i would have shut things down 2 weeks ago. they kept playing games for a decade while they covered this up. the idea that missing the rest of this season is some kind of tragedy just doesn't register for me. the university is broadly at fault here and the program should be shut down until all involved are removed. most likely, right now, on that sideline are people who participated in this cover up. that's tough luck for the kids who didn't have anything to do with this, but they did choose to play for a program where those in charge decided to cover up child molestation ... if i chose to work for a company that was shut down due to the immoral, illegal action of those in charge, i become unfortunate collateral damage. trying to protect the precious games is what got them in this position in the first place, and they are still doing it, even with some violators still there.

[otis29]

Well, as to the point of innocent players suffering for something they had no control over, isn't that always the case when any team goes on probation? Why are the current PSU players any different than this year's USC squad?

 

No doubt, it would suck for them. But them's the breaks when the university you play for is involved in covering up something as horrendous as this.

[Ditkaless Wonders]

burrito'em Bucky

[Menudo]

i disagree with this one. the program should be punished and that means no games. i would have shut things down 2 weeks ago. they kept playing games for a decade while they covered this up. the idea that missing the rest of this season is some kind of tragedy just doesn't register for me. the university is broadly at fault here and the program should be shut down until all involved are removed. most likely, right now, on that sideline are people who participated in this cover up. that's tough luck for the kids who didn't have anything to do with this, but they did choose to play for a program where those in charge decided to cover up child molestation ... if i chose to work for a company that was shut down due to the immoral, illegal action of those in charge, i become unfortunate collateral damage. trying to protect the precious games is what got them in this position in the first place, and they are still doing it, even with some violators still there.

 

First of all, you are making assumptions. You have no idea if those remaining on the sidelines knew anything. There has been no evidence saying that is the case. Also, bringing up that the kids chose to go to to a school that covered this up is ridiculous. I guess the kids should have been able to predict that this might occur. Like I said, you are entitled to your opinion, but, we just disagree on this one.

[Menudo]

burrito'em Bucky

 

That wasn't a surprise in the least. Wisconsin is easily the most talented team in that conference.

[tonorator]

First of all, you are making assumptions. You have no idea if those remaining on the sidelines knew anything. There has been no evidence saying that is the case. Also, bringing up that the kids chose to go to to a school that covered this up is ridiculous. I guess the kids should have been able to predict that this might occur. Like I said, you are entitled to your opinion, but, we just disagree on this one.

 

i didn't say they knowingly chose to go to a school that did this. my point was they went there, this happened. that is unfortunate for them because the program should be shut down and they should not get to play games this season. given everything that's happened, games should not continue for their sake ... again - the program continued for a decade under the guise of letting the players play.

 

this program is not bigger than this situation.

 

and no, i don't know for sure if anyone still on the sidelines was involved. but i damn sure don't let them keep going out there until i know for sure. only way to do that? shut it down!

 

hell, they didn't fire paterno until he made the statement "i should have done more" which was turning on the green light for all lawsuits. they knew he knew per testimony, but i believe had he not made that statement, they would have still tried to have him out there until the end of the season to protect his legacy. even joe, who admitted he should have done more, still wanted to coach out the rest of the year. he wasn't even man enough to step down once his cover was blown. that, my friend, is someone with a giant sized ego, consistent with the one who wanted a different standards for his players and threatened to stop his fundraising if he didn't get it ...

 

joepa was an illusion.

[Pope Flick]

2. For those suggesting that I and other PSU fans should be embarrassed to continue to root for this team and chant "We Are Penn State", give me a break. PSU is bigger than the group involved in this tragedy, and that includes Paterno. I'm embarrassed by what was happened and sickened by everyone involved in letting it happen. However, that group, which is a small group in comparison to the size of this university will not stop me from rooting for the university I have loved forever. I will be a Penn State fan until I die.

 

3. For those suggesting that this year's team should not play in a Bowl game, I respectfully disagree. These football players did absolutely nothing wrong and should not be punished. If after the NCAA investigation is concluded, sanctions are delivered, PSU will have to live with them, and you won't hear one complaint from me on those sanctions.

 

 

Nice post menudo. I'll chime in on these two parts: first off, I would like to respectfully submit that the whole "we are Penn State" thing from an outsiders perspective is what led your program down the wrong path in the first place. It may or may not be fair, as that attitude isn't isolated to Penn State, but it is what it is. And right now, most people don't find it appropriate to be tossing that slogan around in the wake of the scandal.

 

As for the bowl game, I believe you're missing the point: you can't say you feel for the victims while wanting the football team to play above and beyond it's regular season schedule. Dropping any games scheduled would have been unfair to the players on the other teams. At this point, witth the regular season wrapped up, you have to look out for the victims and shut this season down. Any bowl game does nothing but keept the scandal in the national news for another 4-5 weeks in the run up to the Gator Bowl or whatever. Enough is enough, time to shut the thing down, send in Louis Freeh and contemplate how far short of the death penalty Penn State football is going to land, if it is short. But most people do not want to hear about how it's unfair to anyone other than the victims at this point.

 

I'm not on the blind finger-pointing witch hunt tonormanondog is, but it is time to put the victims first and hang up the shoulder pads for 2011. Anything else really becomes distasteful. Penn State Football 2011 is over, and not a moment too soon.

[gbpfan1231]

Nice post menudo. I'll chime in on these two parts: first off, I would like to respectfully submit that the whole "we are Penn State" thing from an outsiders perspective is what led your program down the wrong path in the first place. It may or may not be fair, as that attitude isn't isolated to Penn State, but it is what it is. And right now, most people don't find it appropriate to be tossing that slogan around in the wake of the scandal.

 

As for the bowl game, I believe you're missing the point: you can't say you feel for the victims while wanting the football team to play above and beyond it's regular season schedule. Dropping any games scheduled would have been unfair to the players on the other teams. At this point, witth the regular season wrapped up, you have to look out for the victims and shut this season down. Any bowl game does nothing but keept the scandal in the national news for another 4-5 weeks in the run up to the Gator Bowl or whatever. Enough is enough, time to shut the thing down, send in Louis Freeh and contemplate how far short of the death penalty Penn State football is going to land, if it is short. But most people do not want to hear about how it's unfair to anyone other than the victims at this point.

 

I'm not on the blind finger-pointing witch hunt tonormanondog is, but it is time to put the victims first and hang up the shoulder pads for 2011. Anything else really becomes distasteful. Penn State Football 2011 is over, and not a moment too soon.

I have to agree with this opinion.

[Menudo]

Nice post menudo. I'll chime in on these two parts: first off, I would like to respectfully submit that the whole "we are Penn State" thing from an outsiders perspective is what led your program down the wrong path in the first place. It may or may not be fair, as that attitude isn't isolated to Penn State, but it is what it is. And right now, most people don't find it appropriate to be tossing that slogan around in the wake of the scandal.

 

As for the bowl game, I believe you're missing the point: you can't say you feel for the victims while wanting the football team to play above and beyond it's regular season schedule. Dropping any games scheduled would have been unfair to the players on the other teams. At this point, witth the regular season wrapped up, you have to look out for the victims and shut this season down. Any bowl game does nothing but keept the scandal in the national news for another 4-5 weeks in the run up to the Gator Bowl or whatever. Enough is enough, time to shut the thing down, send in Louis Freeh and contemplate how far short of the death penalty Penn State football is going to land, if it is short. But most people do not want to hear about how it's unfair to anyone other than the victims at this point.

 

I'm not on the blind finger-pointing witch hunt tonormanondog is, but it is time to put the victims first and hang up the shoulder pads for 2011. Anything else really becomes distasteful. Penn State Football 2011 is over, and not a moment too soon.

 

Very valid argument.

[tonorator]

I'm not on the blind finger-pointing witch hunt tonormanondog is, but it is time to put the victims first and hang up the shoulder pads for 2011.

 

hey, just make taco up man ... i want those who helped to cover this up removed. that's what i have consistently said.

 

how does that mean blind witch hunt?

[Pope Flick]

hey, just make taco up man ... i want those who helped to cover this up removed. that's what i have consistently said.

 

how does that mean blind witch hunt?

 

most likely, right now, on that sideline are people who participated in this cover up.

 

This statement, along with your others seems to imply both guilty by association, and guilty until proven innocent, I believe cooler heads are needed moving forward in a very careful manner, and you do not seem to. That's I believe where we disagree, although we appear to agree on a lot.

[Azazello1313]

For those suggesting that I and other PSU fans should be embarrassed to continue to root for this team and chant "We Are Penn State", give me a break. PSU is bigger than the group involved in this tragedy, and that includes Paterno.

 

yeah, and it was bigger, in particular, than those poor kids whose story might have brought ill repute to the mighty institution....which led everyone with any power to do anything at the mighty institution to sweep those kids under the rug and all the other kids that fell victim because nobody did anything. because "PSU is bigger" than all of them.

 

yeah, you're penn state all right. everyone who is inclined to say that right now is penn state. and you should be damned ashamed of it.

Edited November 28, 2011 by Azazello1313

[detlef]

yeah, and it was bigger, in particular, than those poor kids whose story might have brought ill repute to the mighty institution....which led everyone with any power to do anything at the mighty institution to sweep those kids under the rug and all the other kids that fell victim because nobody did anything. because "PSU is bigger" than all of them.

 

yeah, you're penn state all right. everyone who is inclined to say that right now is penn state. and you should be damned ashamed of it.

This

 

And I don't see how PSU apologists can have it both ways. On one hand, you have a ton of people saying, "But look at all the great things Jo Pa did? He turned a two-bit Ag college into what it is today. He's more than just the football coach, he is PSU, and so many people, not just football players, can thank Jo Pa for what he did for this University"

 

Now all of a sudden, you're bigger than Jo Pa and the football program? How convenient.

 

Regardless, when those of us on the outside see images like people chanting "We are Penn State!", in front of Jo Pa's house, as way of supporting him, well, it sort of makes us sick.

 

Sure, if you want to hold out for more info and not run the guy out on a rail until you are absolutely certain that he had fault in the cover-up, that's fine. But if that's the case, you should just stay quiet on the sidelines and wait. But taking some part in the circling of the wagons is basically assuming he's clean, which seems just as bad as assuming he's not, only with less evidence to support your opinion.

[tonorator]

This statement, along with your others seems to imply both guilty by association, and guilty until proven innocent, I believe cooler heads are needed moving forward in a very careful manner, and you do not seem to. That's I believe where we disagree, although we appear to agree on a lot.

 

i am all for due process!