Languish.org

QuoteDan Wetzel

Yahoo! Expert
Joe Paterno's role in covering up Jerry Sandusky's child molestations grows as evidence is leaked
16 hours ago

The Penn State administration had finally hatched a plan. It was too kind, backward and included possibly tampering with a criminal investigation. Still, it was enough of a plan that it could've stopped Jerry Sandusky, child molester, back in 2001.

Just a couple weeks earlier, a football graduate assistant, Mike McQueary, had witnessed Sandusky abusing a boy in a Penn State locker room shower. He told coach Joe Paterno. He told vice president Gary Schultz and athletic director Tim Curley. He could've been more specific. He was clearly specific enough, however, to get their attention.

Schultz plotted out a course of action, according to a bombshell report by CNN, citing an email exchange that's been uncovered in the school's independent investigation by former FBI chief Louis Freeh. The report could be released as early as next month.

According to CNN in an email dated Feb. 26, 2001, Schultz wrote to Curley about a three-part plan that included talking "with the subject asap regarding the future appropriate use of the University facility," ... "contacting the chair of the charitable organization" and "contacting the Department of Welfare."

It would have been better to skip directly to the third action and let the welfare authorities do the meeting and informing, but this should've been enough to end Sandusky's reign of terror.

Except that Curley sent an email to Schultz and school president Graham Spanier on Feb. 27, 2001, that changed everything.

"After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps. I am having trouble with going to everyone but the person involved. I would be more comfortable meeting with the person and tell them about the information we received and tell them we are aware of the first situation," Curley's email said, according to CNN.

It's unclear why Curley suggested that Sandusky (the "person involved") wouldn't be contacted when Schultz's email told Curley to "talk with the subject asap." But the bottom line is that child welfare services was never contacted. And Sandusky, convicted earlier this month on 45 counts of molestation, continued to stalk and abuse the area's disadvantaged boys for seven more years.

The email is devastating on multiple levels, perhaps most for Paterno, who had escaped some measure of scorn thus far by having played the, in-hindsight-I-should've-done-more angle. Paterno, who won more games than any other major college football coach, died at age 85 in January of lung cancer.

According to Curley's email, Paterno participated more than he ever admitted, including likely talking Curley – and thus the others – out of the plan to turn Sandusky over to authorities.

Take a second for that one to sink in.

It is now perfectly reasonable to postulate that Joe Paterno protected Jerry Sandusky, who had been a Penn State assistant coach from 1969 until retiring in 1999. Sandusky went right along with his business of showering with boys in the locker room, of bringing kids to the sidelines during games, of sitting in the press/luxury box area of home games. Sandusky used the program's allure like a lollipop to draw kids into his van.

Paterno will never have the chance to defend against this charge or answer these troubling questions.

However, what would be his defense?

The first could be that he and Curley never met on or about Feb. 27, 2001, or if they did meet, Sandusky wasn't mentioned.

In a 2011 appearance to the grand jury, Paterno said McQueary detailed what he saw in the shower. Within a couple days Paterno relayed the story to Curley over the phone. He said he wasn't involved in the investigation after that.

"Because I figured that Tim would handle it appropriately," Paterno testified on Jan. 12, 2011. "I have a tremendous amount of confidence in Mr. Curley and I thought he would look into it and handle it appropriately."

Curley's email tells a different story, that he discussed with Paterno the plan to bring in child protective services.

Perhaps Curley lied in that original email, although why is anyone's guess. Perhaps Paterno forgot about the meeting (a decade had passed by the time the then 84-year-old testified in front of the grand jury). Or perhaps Paterno was trying to cover his tracks by not mentioning it under oath.

The other possibility is that the meeting did take place and Paterno supported turning Sandusky over to child welfare but Curley, after "giving it more thought," overruled Paterno's position and changed direction.

That one is difficult to believe. Tim Curley was Joe Paterno's boss in title only. Curley grew up in State College in a house just down the street from the current Beaver Stadium. He parked cars and sold programs as a kid. He played football at Penn State and was said to be JoePa's handpicked choice as athletic director years later.

Tim Curley, like so many in State College, stood in awe of Paterno. Forget the organizational chart, he worked for the coach more than the coach worked for him.

The notion that he would ignore Paterno's advice, and then upon doing so never have Paterno question him or later overrule him, is highly unlikely.

There are more details to be sifted through. One is Curley cryptically mentioning he would "tell [Sandusky] we are aware of the first situation."

This seemingly refers to Sandusky being investigated by Penn State police in 1998 for abusing a boy, later known as Victim No. 6, in the showers. The Centre County district attorney at the time chose not to prosecute Sandusky.

While most believe there could be no way that Curley, Schultz and Spanier, let alone Paterno, didn't know about the 1998 investigation when choosing not to act in 2001, this is a smoking gun. It establishes that at least the three administrators did know. And wouldn't Curley have brought it up when discussing Sandusky with Paterno?

It's the most galling and evil part of the CNN revelations. These officials were learning of a second allegation that Sandusky had abused a boy in the showers and yet their reaction wasn't to turn the case over to authorities. Instead they allowed Sandusky to continue to operate on campus, only with the caveat he wasn't supposed to bring children around, an order he routinely violated.

After 1998, you could argue there wasn't much they could do. There was an investigation but no charge. People who work with children are always in fear of such a thing. If the district attorney said there was nothing to it, then you accept there was nothing to it.

Until a similar accusation is made, this time not from a possibly confused kid, but from McQueary, your own 27-year-old, no-reason-to-invent-such-a-story graduate assistant.

[Dan Wetzel: Sandusky is guilty and his victims are heroes for testifying]

In 2001 there was zero excuse to not stop Sandusky. Zero. Penn State's decision was pathetic.

It's a chief reason why Curley and Schultz are facing prison time for failure to report a crime. It's also why Spanier remains a candidate for similar indictment from the attorney general.

Did Spanier realize the stakes of his decision? You bet he did. His email back to Curley concerning not going to child welfare says as much.

"I am supportive," Spanier wrote, according to CNN. "The only downside for us [is] if the message isn't heard and acted upon, and then we become vulnerable for not having reported it."

Graham Spanier is a bad person. That wasn't the "only downside" or even the primary downside of Sandusky not hearing "the message."

The fact that additional children would be abused was the downside. Spanier, ever the self-obsessed top administrator, cared only about his own liability, not some terrified 10-year-old in an empty shower room. At no point, apparently, did anyone write an email about finding the boy McQueary said was being molested.

What remains is the question of why otherwise reasonable people would make such an ethically bankrupt and criminal decision. These are highly educated, high-functioning men. The answer may never be determined. It may help to go back to that moment.

In hindsight, the smart move would have been to have Sandusky arrested. Viewed from today, Curley, Paterno, et. al. would have been lauded for making the correct decision.

At the time, however, the story would've been about a recently retired defensive coordinator molesting kids in JoePa's locker room.

Paterno was 74 and coming off a 5-7 season. He didn't have much of a team for the foreseeable future, either. Rumblings were growing that it was time for him to retire, that the game had passed him by, that at his age he couldn't handle the responsibilities of a major college football program.

An act of child molestation in the locker room would have only fueled that. When word would have eventually leaked out that in 1998 Sandusky had been investigated for the same charge yet still maintained all-hour access to the facilities, it may have too much for Paterno to survive, let alone explain.

In the precise moment, each of the men must have feared being fired. Even Joe Paterno.

Perhaps that wasn't the case. We may never know and it certainly isn't an excuse for allowing Sandusky to continue. It may explain it, however. Self-preservation is a powerful motivator.

If Sandusky had sought the help they suggested, had he stopped his behavior, had the school not commissioned Louis Freeh to dig through every scrap of information in the football program, a witch hunt that found its witches, they may have gotten away with it.

They didn't, though. Instead, the whole thing gets worse for Penn State. The full report looms. The noose tightens on Curley, Schultz and Spanier.

And Joe Paterno, the beloved saint of the Nittany Lions, is left looking nothing like the man everyone believed he was.

Quote from: Caliga on July 01, 2012, 07:38:16 AM
Monstrous.

QuoteSpanier, ever the self-obsessed top administrator, cared only about his own liability, not some terrified 10-year-old in an empty shower room.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 01, 2012, 08:09:27 AM

QuoteSpanier, ever the self-obsessed top administrator, cared only about his own liability, not some terrified 10-year-old in an empty shower room.

[indignantmartinus]HOW DO WE KNOW FOR SURE THE 10 YEAR OLD WAS TERRIFIED WE DONT KNOW THAT NOBODY KNOWS THAT FOR SURE[/indignantmartinus]

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on July 01, 2012, 08:34:52 AM

Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 01, 2012, 08:09:27 AM

QuoteSpanier, ever the self-obsessed top administrator, cared only about his own liability, not some terrified 10-year-old in an empty shower room.

[indignantmartinus]HOW DO WE KNOW FOR SURE THE 10 YEAR OLD WAS TERRIFIED WE DONT KNOW THAT NOBODY KNOWS THAT FOR SURE[/indignantmartinus]

That could apply to any number of the scumbag football fans involved too.

Quote from: Siege on July 01, 2012, 12:25:00 PM
Death penalty for Sandusky!

Quote from: Ed Anger on July 01, 2012, 02:00:00 PM
BEHEAD ALL WHO INSULT TRESSEL

Quote from: sbr on July 01, 2012, 04:37:35 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on July 01, 2012, 02:00:00 PM
BEHEAD ALL WHO INSULT TRESSEL

I forget, where did that lying, cheating, scumbag end up this year?

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on July 01, 2012, 12:30:27 PM

Quote from: Siege on July 01, 2012, 12:25:00 PM
Death penalty for Sandusky!

And for a whole lot of others. But it won't happen.  Too much money, too many people love college football more than they care about child rapists and those who protect them.

Quote from: dps on July 01, 2012, 06:25:11 PM

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on July 01, 2012, 12:30:27 PM

Quote from: Siege on July 01, 2012, 12:25:00 PM
Death penalty for Sandusky!

And for a whole lot of others. But it won't happen.  Too much money, too many people love college football more than they care about child rapists and those who protect them.

Well, and the fact that the Supreme Court would almost certainly strike down any state law that imposes the death penalty on any crime except murder.

Quote from: The Brain on July 01, 2012, 06:28:07 PM

Quote from: dps on July 01, 2012, 06:25:11 PM

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on July 01, 2012, 12:30:27 PM

Quote from: Siege on July 01, 2012, 12:25:00 PM
Death penalty for Sandusky!

And for a whole lot of others. But it won't happen.  Too much money, too many people love college football more than they care about child rapists and those who protect them.

Well, and the fact that the Supreme Court would almost certainly strike down any state law that imposes the death penalty on any crime except murder.

Why? Non-rhetorical.

Quote from: Razgovory on July 01, 2012, 06:47:54 PM
Also the crack down on mob violence and lynching.

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on July 01, 2012, 07:20:13 PM

Quote from: Razgovory on July 01, 2012, 06:47:54 PM
Also the crack down on mob violence and lynching.

That has nothing to do with the justice system. Or it shouldn't.

Quote from: dps on July 01, 2012, 06:25:11 PM

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on July 01, 2012, 12:30:27 PM

Quote from: Siege on July 01, 2012, 12:25:00 PM
Death penalty for Sandusky!

And for a whole lot of others. But it won't happen.  Too much money, too many people love college football more than they care about child rapists and those who protect them.

Well, and the fact that the Supreme Court would almost certainly strike down any state law that imposes the death penalty on any crime except murder.

Quote from: Ideologue on July 02, 2012, 12:57:39 AM
As noted in another thread, I disagree.  I don't think you could realistically claim that the actual 8th Amendment is violated by the death penalty for rape, especially when the victim is a child.

If the USSC did, I'd join you in decrying such legislation from the bench.  (When I disagree, it really is judicial activism. :P )

Quote from: SyllabusHeld: The Eighth Amendment bars Louisiana from imposing the death  penalty for the rape of a child where the crime did not result, and  was not intended to result, in the victim's death.  Pp. 8–36.

Quote from: ulmont on July 02, 2012, 07:21:59 AM

Quote from: Ideologue on July 02, 2012, 12:57:39 AM
As noted in another thread, I disagree.  I don't think you could realistically claim that the actual 8th Amendment is violated by the death penalty for rape, especially when the victim is a child.

If the USSC did, I'd join you in decrying such legislation from the bench.  (When I disagree, it really is judicial activism. :P )

Kennedy v. Louisiana, 2008.

Quote from: SyllabusHeld: The Eighth Amendment bars Louisiana from imposing the death  penalty for the rape of a child where the crime did not result, and  was not intended to result, in the victim's death.  Pp. 8–36.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-343.pdf

Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on July 01, 2012, 12:30:27 PM
And for a whole lot of others. But it won't happen.  Too much money, too many people love college football more than they care about child rapists and those who protect them.

Quote from: grumbler on July 02, 2012, 09:47:50 AM
There are probably child rapists in fields other than college football.

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 02, 2012, 01:24:33 PM
Just need to look at the Boy Scouts and various Churches to see child rapists and those who protect them do not exist exclusively within football.  Although I am not sure whether all of them share a love of college football.

Quote from: katmai on July 02, 2012, 01:25:52 PM
Who doesn't love college football!


I mean besides neil.

Quote from: Ed Anger on July 02, 2012, 07:56:34 PM
Urban Meyer.

Quote from: The Brain on July 01, 2012, 06:34:51 AM
Forget it, Tim. It's America.

Quote from: Caliga on July 02, 2012, 07:51:13 PM

Quote from: katmai on July 02, 2012, 01:25:52 PM
Who doesn't love college football!


I mean besides neil.

I'm not a big fan.  I used to be lukewarm toward college sports before I moved here... but all the YEWKAY!  YEWVELL! shit pushed me over the edge.

Quote from: Gups on July 03, 2012, 06:57:41 AM
UK basketball is televised abroad? I don't think it's even shown here.

QuoteOver the last nine months Joe Paterno has been praised by some in near saintly terms and criticized by others as a villain. He was neither.

As the people who worked closely with Joe know, he was tough, aggressive, opinionated and demanding. He was also highly principled, uncompromisingly ethical, dedicated to his job at Penn State and committed to excellence.

When the Sandusky case exploded last fall, Joe's first instincts were to tell everything he knew. He assumed the University would want to hear from him, but he was never given the chance to present his case.

He planned to hold a press conference, but University officials ordered him to cancel it. And then the various investigations started and the legal process took over. On top of everything else, Joe was diagnosed with lung cancer. Two months later he was gone. The end result is his story has never fully been told.

As this situation unfolded, Joe cautioned everyone not to jump to conclusions. He believed that a rush to judgment and a disregard for due process would ultimately result in conclusions that would not stand the test of time. To be clear, he did not fear the truth, he sought it. As much as anyone he wanted to know exactly what Jerry Sandusky had done and he wanted to understand how it happened.

The hiring of the Freeh Group is the single most important action the Board of Trustees has taken. Joe supported this decision with the hope that it would result in a thorough, balanced and thoughtful assessment of the Sandusky tragedy. Unfortunately, recent events have raised questions about the fairness and confidentiality of the investigative process.

Over the last several weeks there has been a virtual torrent of leaks about the Freeh Group's work. To be clear, we do not know the source, or sources, of the leaks. What cannot be disputed, however, is that select emails intended to smear Joe Paterno and other former Penn State officials have been released. Testimony from witnesses highly critical of Joe has been revealed. And purported conclusions condemning the culture of the football program have been widely disseminated. The Board promised a fair, transparent and impartial process. These developments are a threat to their stated objectives.

When these leaks first started we appealed to the Freeh Group, the Board and the Attorney General to condemn the leaks and caution the public that it would be wrong to reach any conclusions from selectively released materials. We then asked that all emails and other documents be released so a full picture of their research could be understood.

As purported conclusions started leaking out, we followed up with the Freeh Group to ask for the right to respond. Since Joe Paterno never had an opportunity to present his case, we believe we should have a reasonable time to review their findings and offer information that could help complete the picture. We were told we could offer responses to the publicly reported allegations, but the Freeh Group declined to confirm that these allegations are in the final report. It is our firm belief that the report would be stronger and more credible if we were simply given a chance to review the findings concerning Joe Paterno in order to present the case he was never allowed to make.

Since the outcome of this process appears set in stone, we have no choice but to wait for the report and respond as best we can. Given that the report is estimated to be between 100-150 pages it will understandably take us some time to study it and prepare a comprehensive response.

In advance of the release of the report, there are a few facts we want on the record:

- We would still welcome a chance to meet with the Freeh Group to review the findings and offer a response. We do not seek or expect the right to edit the report; but we believe our voice should be reflected in its conclusions.

- To this point, Joe Paterno is the only person who publicly acknowledged that with the benefit of hindsight he wished he had done more. This was an honest and courageous admission that a true leader must assume a measure of responsibility when something goes wrong on his watch.

- The sad and frightening fact is Jerry Sandusky was a master deceiver. He fooled players, coaches, law enforcement officials, child service professionals, Penn State Board members, University leaders, neighbors, donors, staff and supporters of Second Mile and his family.

- With respect to the email from Tim Curley which stated, "After giving it more thought, and talking it over with Joe yesterday - I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps,'' the media spin that this is proof of some sort of cover up is completely false. When the facts come out, it will be clear that Joe Paterno never gave Tim Curley any instructions to protect Sandusky or limit any investigation of his actions.

- Joe Paterno did not cover up for Jerry Sandusky. Joe Paterno did not know that Jerry Sandusky was a pedophile. Joe Paterno did not act in any way to prevent a proper investigation of Jerry Sandusky. To claim otherwise is a distortion of the truth.

If he were with us today, we are certain Joe Paterno would say that he wished he had done any number of things differently. We also believe he would make it clear that he was not an investigator, law enforcement officer, child services professional or a member of the Board of Trustees. Joe would accept his responsibility, but he would expect others to step forward as well.

Quote from: merithyn on July 10, 2012, 08:36:33 PM
When the Sandusky case exploded last fall, Joe's first instincts were to tell everything he knew.

QuoteReport finds Penn State president, Paterno concealed facts about Sandusky sex abuse

By Bill Dedman
Investigative Reporter, msnbc.com

Penn State football coach Joe Paterno and other university leaders "repeatedly concealed critical facts" relating to assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky's child sex abuse from authorities, according to Louis Freeh, the former FBI director who conducted an investigation for the university in the Sandusky scandal.

Freeh also found that "although concern to treat the child abuser humanely was expressly stated, no such sentiments were ever expressed" by university officials, including Paterno and the university president, for Sandusky's victims. The report says that five boys were assaulted by Sandusky on university property after officials knew about a 1998 criminal investigation.

The report says the main cause of the university's failure was a desire to avoid bad publicity. Also contributing:

A striking lack of empathy for child abuse victims.

Lack of oversight by the board of trustees.

"A president who discouraged discussion and dissent."

Ignorance of child abuse issues and laws.

A football program that had opted out of university programs and training on reporting requirements.

"A culture of reverence for the football program that is ingrained at all levels of the campus community."

Freeh's findings may affect the reputation of legendary coach Paterno, who died soon after the Sandusky allegations became public, as well as the university's standing with the National Collegiate Athletic Association, which so far has not announced any punishments of Penn State. The NCAA said Thursday it is studying the report.

Follow Open Channel on Twitter and Facebook.



    "The most saddening finding by the Special Investigative Counsel is the total and consistent disregard by the most senior leaders at Penn State for the safety and welfare of Sandusky's child victims. As the Grand Jury similarly noted in its presentment, there was no "attempt to investigate, to identify Victim 2, or to protect that child or any others from similar conduct except as related to preventing its re-occurrence on University property.

    "Four of the most powerful people at The Pennsylvania State University -- President Graham B. Spanier, Senior Vice President-Finance and Business Gary C. Schultz, Athletic Director Timothy M. Curley and Head Football Coach Joseph V. Paterno -- failed to protect against a child predator harming children for over a decade. These men concealed Sandusky's activities from the Board of Trustees, the University community and authorities. They exhibited a striking lack of empathy for Sandusky's victims by failing to inquire as to their safety and well-being, especially by not attempting to determine the identity of the child who Sandusky assaulted in the Lasch Building in 2001. Further, they exposed this child to additional harm by alerting Sandusky, who was the only one who knew the child's identity, of what McQueary saw in the shower on the night of February 9, 2001.

    "These individuals, unchecked by the Board of Trustees that did not perform its oversight duties, empowered Sandusky to attract potential victims to the campus and football events by allowing him to have continued, unrestricted and unsupervised access to the University's facilities and affiliation with the University's prominent football program. Indeed, that continued access provided Sandusky with the very currency that enabled him to attract his victims. Some coaches, administrators and football program staff members ignored the red flags of Sandusky's behaviors and no one warned the  public about him."

Penn State officials said they would hold a news conference at 3:30 p.m. ET to respond to the report.

On NBC's TODAY show on Thursday morning, the coach's son, Jay Paterno, told host Matt Lauer that all the family has wanted is for an investigation to find the truth. "We have never ever at any time been afraid to see what people have had to say," and he called the Freeh report "one opinion, one piece of the puzzle." "We've never been afraid of the truth, so let's have the truth come out and let's go from there."

The investigation is billed by Pennsylvania State University as "independent," though the university is paying the law firm of Freeh, the former federal judge and director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Sandusky, 68, was found guilty of 45 counts of child sexual abuse last month and is currently in prison awaiting sentencing. He faces a maximum sentence of more than 400 years in prison.

Freeh was hired by the university in November to review the school's dealings with Sandusky and its response to a 2001 report that he sexually abused a boy in a Penn State shower room, an incident witnessed by football assistant Michael McQueary.

Former Penn State President Graham Spanier has come under particular scrutiny in recent weeks amid news reports suggesting he was made aware of suspicious activity involving Sandusky in 2001 and that no report of the incident was made to authorities.

"At no time in the more than 16 years of his presidency at Penn State was Dr. Spanier told of an incident involving Jerry Sandusky that described child abuse, sexual misconduct or criminality of any kind, and he reiterated that during his interview with Louis Freeh and his colleagues,'' Spanier's attorneys, Peter Vaira and Elizabeth Ainslie, said in a written statement.

Former Penn State President Graham Spanier has come under particular scrutiny in recent weeks amid news reports suggesting he was made aware of suspicious activity involving Sandusky in 2001 and that no report of the incident was made to authorities.

"At no time in the more than 16 years of his presidency at Penn State was Dr. Spanier told of an incident involving Jerry Sandusky that described child abuse, sexual misconduct or criminality of any kind, and he reiterated that during his interview with Louis Freeh and his colleagues,'' Spanier's attorneys, Peter Vaira and Elizabeth Ainslie, said in a written statement.

Quote
PHILADELPHIA—Releasing a full report of his investigation into the Penn State scandal at a press conference Thursday morning, former FBI director Louis J. Freeh disclosed that the late Joe Paterno was indeed burning in hell at this very moment for his part in covering up the sexual abuse of young boys. "My examination of the available documents found that Jerry Sandusky's activities were almost certainly known to Coach Paterno, who failed to act appropriately in reporting or following up on certain incidents and who is indeed shrieking in indescribable anguish as the searing flames of hell devour his flesh for all eternity," Freeh told reporters, adding that Paterno's firing by the university was also warranted. "Every moment since his death has been one of pure suffering and excruciating, flesh-melting torment, based on the interdepartmental communications given to us for review." Freeh refused to confirm whether Penn State fans and alumni who supported Paterno during the scandal would also eventually burn in hell, saying they had "the remainder of their lives" to reflect and repent and "may still escape eternal and painful damnation."

QuoteLast November, as the worst month in my alma mater's history unfolded, a Penn State medical-school researcher named Craig Meyers went on the radio to detail a remarkable scientific discovery: He had discovered a potential cure for cancer. It went largely unnoticed, because Craig Meyers is a scientist and because no one associated with Penn State gave a good goddamn about science in that moment, because they were enveloped by football.

That's what we are left with now that former FBI director Louis Freeh's damning independent report on Penn State has been released: It is everything the lawyers and flacks and message-board apologists assured us it wasn't. It is a football scandal, it is a Penn State scandal, and it is a fundamental violation of the very Grand Experiment — of the balance between academics and athletics, of the notion that football can elevate a university rather than weigh it down, of the idea that men like Craig Meyers benefit from men like Joe Paterno — that the school had espoused since the 1960s. It is a betrayal of every academic advancement Penn State has made since Paterno became its head coach; it is a betrayal of all of us who came of age within Paterno's sphere of influence; and it is a betrayal, most of all, of those abused children who grew up as my neighbors, and who were ignored and then abandoned by their elders in apparent deference to the abuser himself.

Taking into account the available witness statements and evidence, the Special Investigative Counsel finds that it is more reasonable to conclude, that, 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 from authorities, the University's Board of Trustees, the Penn State community, and the public at large.

It would be easy for me to say now that I saw this coming, that the mythologizing of Joe Paterno in the town where I grew up always made me a little uneasy, that I had grown increasingly skeptical of the Grand Experiment as Paterno clung to his job long after it appeared to be time for him to let go. But this is not entirely true. Because my doubt was always outweighed by the notion that the people in charge, as distasteful as their treatment of the media might be, as much as they battled against transparency and disclosure and open records, had the best interests of Penn State at heart.

This was my fundamental mistake. This was our mistake, as a community. The Grand Experiment began as a sales pitch, as a way for Paterno to elevate the standards of the university he loved by using football as the lure. And then at some point, the lure outweighed the catch, and the sales pitch drove motivations, and we were too myopic to see it. At some point, the little white lies that Paterno hid behind — that he would retire after five more years, that Bowling Green was, in fact, a formidable opponent, that the culture of football was in no way segregated from the culture of the university at large — ballooned into this, into a lie so unthinkable that it takes your breath away.

I realize that, in the upcoming days and weeks and months, the focus will be on Paterno, because he was the face, and because he is the only one of these four "powerful leaders" Freeh mentions who has a statue in his likeness. But I couldn't care less about Paterno's legacy right now, and I couldn't care less whether that statue stays or goes. For me, this extends far beyond a single cult of personality. For me, this is now and has always been about the legacy of the institution, about a university I grew up around, a university where I met some of my best friends, a university that I hold a degree from and return to several times a year. There are four men who betrayed this legacy, and I hold them all equally responsible. Beyond the egregious and irreparable damage to those children, I hold them accountable for a betrayal of the people who raised me: My father, who has spent 35 years at Penn State conducting arcane organic chemistry research and teaching a generation of premed students; my mother, who spent two decades working at the university library, a wing of which now bears Paterno's name. My parents gave themselves to this university, as so many others did, and this university failed them, and instead of confronting their failures, the men in charge chose to "hope it is now behind us."1 They made this a Penn State scandal. In so doing, they cheapened everything my alma mater ever purported to stand for, and that is unforgivable.

It is absurd, of course, to presume that the work of a cancer researcher will ever win more public attention than the exploits of a football team. Society is not structured that way, and the beauty of the Grand Experiment is that it seemed built to work around that flaw, to use football to impact the greater good. It is clear now that the most powerful leaders at my university perverted that cause, and if it takes a temporary shutdown or de-emphasis of the program to right that wrong, those of us whose primary concern is the integrity of this university we held dear will accept that. Anyone who doesn't — and anyone who is more concerned with the lasting legacy of a football coach than that of the institution itself — is just furthering the lie. The Grand Experiment is a failure, and the entire laboratory is contaminated, and there is no choice but to go back and start all over again.

Quote from: Neil on July 12, 2012, 07:54:31 PM
And why penalize the football program at all?  That's the height of Timmay-thinking.

Quote from: Neil on July 12, 2012, 07:54:31 PM
I find it difficult to believe that a lot of universities don't have dark secrets that wouldn't come out in a witchhunt.

Quote from: Neil on July 12, 2012, 07:54:31 PM
I find it difficult to believe that a lot of universities don't have dark secrets that wouldn't come out in a witchhunt.  And why penalize the football program at all?  That's the height of Timmay-thinking.

Quote from: Martinus on July 13, 2012, 02:59:18 AM

Quote from: Neil on July 12, 2012, 07:54:31 PM
I find it difficult to believe that a lot of universities don't have dark secrets that wouldn't come out in a witchhunt.  And why penalize the football program at all?  That's the height of Timmay-thinking.

I agree. Unlike penalizing, say, corporations or churches, when you penalize schools, you are really penalizing students first and foremost, and not the teaching staff. Which is the height of idiocy, considering the students were the victims of these shenenigans.

Quote from: sbr on July 13, 2012, 03:23:58 AM

Quote from: Martinus on July 13, 2012, 02:59:18 AM

Quote from: Neil on July 12, 2012, 07:54:31 PM
I find it difficult to believe that a lot of universities don't have dark secrets that wouldn't come out in a witchhunt.  And why penalize the football program at all?  That's the height of Timmay-thinking.

I agree. Unlike penalizing, say, corporations or churches, when you penalize schools, you are really penalizing students first and foremost, and not the teaching staff. Which is the height of idiocy, considering the students were the victims of these shenenigans.

Actually no, the kids he was raping were far too young to be in college.  They were 8-11ish for the most part.

Quote from: sbr on July 13, 2012, 04:00:01 AM
A trolling Canuck and a fucking Polack who doesn't even like Eurofag sports trying to discuss what might or might not happen to an American College football team?   :rolleyes:

No thanks, I'd rather slam my dick in the dishwasher door.

Quote from: sbr on July 13, 2012, 04:00:01 AM
A trolling Canuck and a fucking Polack who doesn't even like Eurofag sports trying to discuss what might or might not happen to an American College football team?   :rolleyes:

No thanks, I'd rather slam my dick in the dishwasher door.

Quote from: Rasputin on July 13, 2012, 10:33:38 AM
that being said, i don't actually see a violation of the ncaa rules here or even where the ncaa would have any more jurisdiction than an alaska justice of the peace would have to sanction me for getting a parking ticket in miami.

Quote from: ulmont on July 13, 2012, 10:49:05 AM

Quote from: Rasputin on July 13, 2012, 10:33:38 AM
that being said, i don't actually see a violation of the ncaa rules here or even where the ncaa would have any more jurisdiction than an alaska justice of the peace would have to sanction me for getting a parking ticket in miami.

You're not thinking creatively.  Check out 10.1 (unethical conduct) in particular, which is an inclusive list only, as well as 11.1 (honesty and sportsmanship) and 2.1 (institutional control responsibility).  Those are vague enough that the NCAA could do whatever they want.

Quote from: grumbler on July 12, 2012, 11:29:03 AM
This is the most destructive and despicable case of lack of institutional control in the history of American college sports.  I think PSU needs to self-destruct the football program for three years, just to stay accredited and in the Big Ten.

And the JoPa statue has to go the way of Stalin's.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frussianrulers.podhoster.com%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F1956-10-31_stalin_statue_pulled_down_hungary.jpg&hash=4740fd5dcecda5f587a8cf99bac170d574199620)

Quote from: FunkMonk on July 13, 2012, 01:13:48 PM
A Glorious Tribute To Joseph Paterno (http://youtu.be/P19OBhVaS0A)

This video may have been more relevant back when Paterno died but your picture reminded me of it.

Quote from: garbon on July 13, 2012, 01:20:06 PM

Quote from: FunkMonk on July 13, 2012, 01:13:48 PM
A Glorious Tribute To Joseph Paterno (http://youtu.be/P19OBhVaS0A)

This video may have been more relevant back when Paterno died but your picture reminded me of it.

WTF?

Also I wonder what that mourning footage is from.

Quote from: Rasputin on July 13, 2012, 12:05:13 PM

Quote from: ulmont on July 13, 2012, 10:49:05 AM

Quote from: Rasputin on July 13, 2012, 10:33:38 AM
that being said, i don't actually see a violation of the ncaa rules here or even where the ncaa would have any more jurisdiction than an alaska justice of the peace would have to sanction me for getting a parking ticket in miami.

You're not thinking creatively.  Check out 10.1 (unethical conduct) in particular, which is an inclusive list only, as well as 11.1 (honesty and sportsmanship) and 2.1 (institutional control responsibility).  Those are vague enough that the NCAA could do whatever they want.

bad facts make bad law

Quote from: Martinus on July 13, 2012, 02:59:18 AM
I agree. Unlike penalizing, say, corporations or churches, when you penalize schools, you are really penalizing students first and foremost, and not the teaching staff. Which is the height of idiocy, considering the students were the victims of these shenenigans.

Quote from: Ed Anger on July 13, 2012, 04:50:29 PM
If the Football program gets penalized, maybe they(the B10) can restore Ohio State's traditional rivalry with Illinois. OHIO STATE SHOULD PLAY ILLINOIS EVERY YEAR, NOT PEDO STATE.

Quote from: Neil on July 13, 2012, 04:52:45 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on July 13, 2012, 04:50:29 PM
If the Football program gets penalized, maybe they(the B10) can restore Ohio State's traditional rivalry with Illinois. OHIO STATE SHOULD PLAY ILLINOIS EVERY YEAR, NOT PEDO STATE.

Is Illinois less good?  Surely the overwhelming priority for Ohio State is to play as many weak teams as possible.

Quote from: Rasputin on July 13, 2012, 10:33:38 AM

Quote from: sbr on July 13, 2012, 04:00:01 AM
A trolling Canuck and a fucking Polack who doesn't even like Eurofag sports trying to discuss what might or might not happen to an American College football team?   :rolleyes:

No thanks, I'd rather slam my dick in the dishwasher door.

:lol:

This is a huge freaking issue of an epic scale for penn state as an institution both legally and morally

Quote from: Valmy on July 13, 2012, 04:19:47 PM

Quote from: Martinus on July 13, 2012, 02:59:18 AM
I agree. Unlike penalizing, say, corporations or churches, when you penalize schools, you are really penalizing students first and foremost, and not the teaching staff. Which is the height of idiocy, considering the students were the victims of these shenenigans.

Just to clarify Marty it would be the football team and program that would get penalized not the academic programs.  Well...besides the bizarre phenomenon of people's degrees becoming more impressive when the school's football team is good even though that makes no sense.

Quote from: sbr on July 13, 2012, 05:23:21 PM
I hope the NCAA finds a way to lay the smackdown on PSU.  I am a fan of college football but a lot of these programs are getting out of hand.  From the kid falling out of the lift and dying at Notre Dame, to the Sweatervest's cover-up of OSU's problems to this scandal these coaches and programs seems believe they are above all laws; NCAA, state, federal and nature.  They have good reason to think that, but I would like to see it brought back down again.

Quote from: sbr on July 13, 2012, 05:23:21 PM
I hope the NCAA finds a way to lay the smackdown on PSU.  I am a fan of college football but a lot of these programs are getting out of hand.  From the kid falling out of the lift and dying at Notre Dame, to the Sweatervest's cover-up of OSU's problems to this scandal these coaches and programs seems believe they are above all laws; NCAA, state, federal and nature.  They have good reason to think that, but I would like to see it brought back down again.

Quote from: Neil on July 14, 2012, 04:27:23 PM
The programs are out of control, but the NCAA itself is so loathsome and corrupt that it's painful to see them take any action.

Quote from: Neil on July 13, 2012, 04:52:45 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on July 13, 2012, 04:50:29 PM
If the Football program gets penalized, maybe they(the B10) can restore Ohio State's traditional rivalry with Illinois. OHIO STATE SHOULD PLAY ILLINOIS EVERY YEAR, NOT PEDO STATE.

Is Illinois less good?  Surely the overwhelming priority for Ohio State is to play as many weak teams as possible.

QuoteArtist removes Joe Paterno's halo from Penn State mural

On Saturday, muralist Michael Pilato altered his famous Penn State artwork – by removing a halo painted over the head of former head football coach Joe Paterno – because of revelations about Paterno's role in the child sexual abuse scandal that has rocked the university.

The mural, which adorns the university bookstore at the corner of Heister Streets and College Avenue in State College, Pa., depicts a group of local luminaries, including Paterno, who was head coach of the Penn State football team for nearly 46 years. Pilato had added the halo after Paterno's death on Jan. 22.

Pilato and his family have been friends with the Paternos for many years so this decision was a tough one, he said. But after considering what was revealed in last week's Freeh report, Pilato said, he "had no choice."

"Sue Paterno had been quoted as saying Joe was not a saint. That made this difficult decision easier for me to execute," Pilato told NBC News.

"The last time I saw Joe in his home before he died, he said to me, 'I wish there were classes taught on sexual abuse,'" Pilato said. "The blue ribbon signifies awareness of the sexual abuse and knowing where Joe's thoughts were on this, I felt it was appropriate to give him the blue ribbon."

In December, emboldened by the victims in the Penn State scandal, Pilato's 16-year-old daughter, Skye, went public with the story of her own abuse — being raped by two men when she was 12, the local Centre Daily Times reported. The artist has dedicated a recent mural in State College to her and other victims of sexual abuse.

Pilato removed the image of Jerry Sandusky from the earlier mural after Sandusky's arrest in November, and later replaced him with the image of Dora McQuaid, a Penn State graduate who is an activist on sexual and domestic abuse issues. He plans to have all the handprints of all the victims of Sandusky added to the mural in the near future.

Pilato has not decided what he will do with the image of Spanier, the former Penn State president, on the mural. "In the last two days, people have been throwing eggs on the Spanier section of the mural," adds Pilato. "Maybe they are doing my work for me."

Quote from: merithyn on July 14, 2012, 08:15:32 PM

Quote from: Neil on July 13, 2012, 04:52:45 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on July 13, 2012, 04:50:29 PM
If the Football program gets penalized, maybe they(the B10) can restore Ohio State's traditional rivalry with Illinois. OHIO STATE SHOULD PLAY ILLINOIS EVERY YEAR, NOT PEDO STATE.

Is Illinois less good?  Surely the overwhelming priority for Ohio State is to play as many weak teams as possible.

Illinois sucks. I'm guessing that's why Ed wants O-HI-O State to play them, since they're only good against schools like the Illini.

Quote from: grumbler on July 14, 2012, 06:50:48 PM
I'd prefer it if PSU did it to themselves, but essentially agree: PSU has shown it can't handle college football.

Quote from: DontSayBanana on July 15, 2012, 10:20:13 AM
They'd already been on Middles States' radar: http://www.psu.edu/vpaa/pdfs/middlestatesinquiryletter.pdf

They passed that time around, but this report is really going to make their accreditation review in 2014 difficult for them.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 15, 2012, 06:54:49 AM
Yeah, after much contemplation, I think PSU needs some time alone to figure out its priorities.  Like 3 years.  Let the kids walk, and waive the year of eligibility issues. 
That stadium needs to be empty for a while, and that school needs a time-out in the time-out corner to reevaluate its priorities as an institution of higher learning.

Quote from: Berkut on July 15, 2012, 07:31:04 PM
That would play holy hell with conference schedules, now wouldn't it?

Quote from: grumbler on July 15, 2012, 09:36:41 PM

Quote from: Berkut on July 15, 2012, 07:31:04 PM
That would play holy hell with conference schedules, now wouldn't it?

Not as badly as it would if they had 9 conference games.

The three out-of-division opponents would just get in-division foes that lost their PSU games.  You would just need to find opponents for the other two in-division opponents. Not trivial, but not impossible.

Quote from: Martinus on July 16, 2012, 01:13:21 AM
Why do you guys have college football in the first place? Most countries do not have anything remotely like this.

Quote from: Martinus on July 16, 2012, 01:13:21 AM
Why do you guys have college football in the first place? Most countries do not have anything remotely like this.

Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 16, 2012, 11:00:12 PM
Not unexpected, I'm sure the main reason Sandusky founded the 2nd mile was to troll for victims.

Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 17, 2012, 05:09:41 AM

Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 16, 2012, 11:00:12 PM
Not unexpected, I'm sure the main reason Sandusky founded the 2nd mile was to troll for victims.

Good work there, detective.

Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 17, 2012, 06:09:53 AM

Quote from: CountDeMoney on July 17, 2012, 05:09:41 AM

Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 16, 2012, 11:00:12 PM
Not unexpected, I'm sure the main reason Sandusky founded the 2nd mile was to troll for victims.

Good work there, detective.

I don't have to take that from you, the biggest case you ever cracked was a case of bud light.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 16, 2012, 04:12:11 AM

Quote from: Martinus on July 16, 2012, 01:13:21 AM
Why do you guys have college football in the first place? Most countries do not have anything remotely like this.

I think it's an extension of the English public school tradition.

Quote from: grumbler on July 17, 2012, 07:32:51 AM

Footy has become much more popular than the other kinds because it requires so much less equipment and is so much easier to learn.  So latecomers like Poland tended to go for that version.

Quote from: grumbler on July 17, 2012, 07:32:51 AM
Footy has become much more popular than the other kinds because it requires so much less equipment and is so much easier to learn.  So latecomers like Poland tended to go for that version.

Quote from: Sheilbh on July 17, 2012, 11:00:54 AM
I think the role of class in the UK matters too.  Generally it became the working class sport (though not in some parts of the North or Wales) and lots of countries picked it up from British sailors and dockers. 

Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on July 17, 2012, 10:08:52 AM

Quote from: grumbler on July 17, 2012, 07:32:51 AM

Footy has become much more popular than the other kinds because it requires so much less equipment and is so much easier to learn.  So latecomers like Poland tended to go for that version.

I've found that basketball is surprisingly popular, especially in urban Asia, for similar reasons.

Quote from: dps on July 17, 2012, 07:36:30 PM

Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on July 17, 2012, 10:08:52 AM

Quote from: grumbler on July 17, 2012, 07:32:51 AM

Footy has become much more popular than the other kinds because it requires so much less equipment and is so much easier to learn.  So latecomers like Poland tended to go for that version.

I've found that basketball is surprisingly popular, especially in urban Asia, for similar reasons.

In urban areas, basketball has an advantage over baseball and football (all varieties), because basketball courts require less space.

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 17, 2012, 08:01:23 PM
The freaks are those that are height challenged.

Quote from: katmai on July 17, 2012, 08:06:32 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 17, 2012, 08:01:23 PM
The freaks are those that are height challenged.

:mad:

Quote from: dps on July 17, 2012, 07:36:30 PM
In urban areas, basketball has an advantage over baseball and football (all varieties), because basketball courts require less space.

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 17, 2012, 08:27:48 PM
I'm uncomfortable around people taller than me.

QuoteNCAA should allow Penn State players to transfer without restrictions, an advocacy group says
2 hours 30 minutes ago

A student-athlete advocacy group has asked the NCAA to lift all transfer restrictions for Penn State football players, allowing them to switch schools without penalty. The request comes in the wake of the school-funded Freeh Commission concluding that administrators and coaches helped conceal the Jerry Sandusky sexual molestation scandal.

The request would allow any Penn State player to become immediately eligible to play at any other program and still receive a full scholarship. It would also allow other schools to communicate with players about potential transfers. NCAA rules stipulate a player on scholarship who transfers must sit out one year before becoming eligible.

Former UCLA linebacker Ramogi Huma is the president of the National College Players Association. (AP) Citing "an apparent cover-up by Penn State officials" of Sandusky's crimes over a decade, Ramogi Huma, the president of the California-based National College Players Association, called for the NCAA to remember current student-athletes are innocent bystanders in this case.

"While Penn State coaches and administrators have been implicated in heinous activities, Penn State football players have done nothing wrong," Huma wrote in a letter to NCAA president Mark Emmert dated Tuesday.

Emmert said Monday on PBS that he's "never seen anything as egregious as this in terms of just overall conduct and behavior inside a university" and that in terms of potential punishment for the university he didn't want to take "anything off the table."

That includes a possible "Death Penalty," which would prohibit Penn State from fielding a team for a period of time. The school said Tuesday that it was in the process of responding to the NCAA about possible violations stemming from the Freeh report findings.

Huma suggested that one potential action would be lifting the NCAA's restrictive transfer policy. NCAA rules also prohibit a school from communicating with a potential transfer unless Penn State grants a release. A player's inability to test the waters stymies possible movement.

It's common for the NCAA to relax the prohibitions when schools are facing bans on post-season competition, among other situations.

"The actions of Penn State officials have already tarnished the experience of Penn State football players," Huma said. "Penn State officials should not be given the power to hold players' financial aid and athletic opportunities hostage."

In an interview Tuesday evening, Huma said he did not know if any Penn State players were interested in transferring, he just wanted them to have the option to do so without penalty.

"This has been something we have been advocating for a long time," Huma said of his organization's opposition to transfer rules. "Our position is a school should never be allowed to hold a player hostage, let alone a school whose action may warrant the death penalty.

"In light of President Emmert's comments, we want the transfer restrictions to be a consideration when he is handing down a punishment, if there is a punishment."

Huma said that while it may be difficult for a player to transfer on the eve of the season, each current member of the program should retain the right to leave without restriction at a later date.

"The president of Penn State is thinking about taking down the statue of Joe Paterno [the coach who the majority of these players signed to play for]," Huma said. "No one can blame a Penn State football player for wanting to list a different school on his resume the rest of his life."

Huma played linebacker at UCLA from 1995-99. He founded the NCPA in 1997 to argue for student-athlete rights after a teammate was suspended for receiving groceries he otherwise couldn't afford.

The NCPA has worked in recent years for improved health care for players, the use of new television revenue to make up for cost of living shortfalls and other issues to improve the experience for players

Quote from: Berkut on July 18, 2012, 12:21:24 AM
Arizona could use them some guys!

Quote
Jim Delany Wants the Power to Fire Coaches

July 19, 2012, 7:24 am

By Brad Wolverton

The Big Ten is mulling a proposal that would give its commissioner, already one of the most powerful men in college sports, the authority to fire coaches himself, The Chronicle reports today.

The proposal, part of a plan being circulated among Big Ten leaders, would give James E. Delany, who has overseen the league since 1989, and a powerful committee of conference presidents the ability to penalize individual members of an institution, should their actions significantly harm the league's reputation.

The sanctions, spelled out in a document obtained by The Chronicle, could include financial penalties, suspension, or termination of employment.

The proposal, which has not been approved, is part of an 18-page plan prompted by problems at Penn State, where a former assistant football coach repeatedly molested children on campus property while university leaders turned a blind eye.

The ideas are designed in part to root out problems that could include coaches or athletic officials who interfere with normal admissions, compliance, hiring, or disciplinary processes, the document says.

The plan calls for Big Ten universities to empower presidents and athletic directors and have policies to dissuade rogue boosters and trustees with inappropriate involvement in programs from trying to influence university leaders' decisions.

Big Ten officials are still in the early stages of debating how to handle fallout from the scandal. Among other ideas, the league's presidents and chancellors could consider removing Penn State from the conference, one Big Ten leader told The Chronicle.

The Big Ten Conference Handbook, which governs the league's operations, does not contain language addressing a situation as egregious as what happened at Penn State.

But the conference's bylaws prescribe potentially severe penalties for member institutions that break lesser rules. Any Big Ten university that employs or retains workers who intentionally falsify or deliberately fail to provide complete and accurate information during an investigation may be required to "show cause why its membership in the conference should not be suspended or terminated," the Big Ten's 2011-12 handbook says.

At least four top Penn State officials—including Graham B. Spanier, the former president, and Timothy M. Curley, the athletic director on administrative leave—failed to paint an accurate picture of how much they knew about Jerry Sandusky, the former coach convicted on 45 counts of child sex abuse, according to an  independent report released last week. Both Spanier and Curley were part of a culture that tried to "actively conceal" abuse by the former coach, the report said.

The Big Ten's 12-member Council of Presidents and Chancellors must approve any decision to suspend, expel, or place on probation any member of the conference. According to the conference handbook, expulsion requires a vote of not less than 60 percent of the full council (a Big Ten spokesman said that figure is actually 70 percent, or eight members, which will be reflected in the 2012-13 handbook).

The Big Ten does not have a contingency scheduling plan should Penn State's football team be banned from playing this or any season, a senior league official told The Chronicle. But fallout from the scandal has many Big Ten leaders on edge.

"This whole situation is unprecedented," said Sally Mason, president of the University of Iowa and chair of the Council of Presidents and Chancellors. "It's sports-related, but there were very significant moral, legal, and institutional failures."

She and her colleagues plan to discuss those problems in coming weeks, but she has no early sign of what they may decide. "Until all of our presidents and chancellors sit down and talk in depth," she said, "I have no idea of what the outcome is likely to be, and I wouldn't want to predict."

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 17, 2012, 11:46:48 PM

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on July 17, 2012, 08:27:48 PM
I'm uncomfortable around people taller than me.

So am I.

Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 19, 2012, 07:52:42 AM
Wow, that's a hell of a penalty. Can't see them actually doing that though, it would cost to much money.

http://chronicle.com/blogs/players/jim-delany-wants-the-power-to-fire-coaches/30771

Quote
Jim Delany Wants the Power to Fire Coaches

July 19, 2012, 7:24 am

By Brad Wolverton

The Big Ten is mulling a proposal that would give its commissioner, already one of the most powerful men in college sports, the authority to fire coaches himself, The Chronicle reports today.

The proposal, part of a plan being circulated among Big Ten leaders, would give James E. Delany, who has overseen the league since 1989, and a powerful committee of conference presidents the ability to penalize individual members of an institution, should their actions significantly harm the league's reputation.

The sanctions, spelled out in a document obtained by The Chronicle, could include financial penalties, suspension, or termination of employment.

The proposal, which has not been approved, is part of an 18-page plan prompted by problems at Penn State, where a former assistant football coach repeatedly molested children on campus property while university leaders turned a blind eye.

The ideas are designed in part to root out problems that could include coaches or athletic officials who interfere with normal admissions, compliance, hiring, or disciplinary processes, the document says.

The plan calls for Big Ten universities to empower presidents and athletic directors and have policies to dissuade rogue boosters and trustees with inappropriate involvement in programs from trying to influence university leaders' decisions.

Big Ten officials are still in the early stages of debating how to handle fallout from the scandal. Among other ideas, the league's presidents and chancellors could consider removing Penn State from the conference, one Big Ten leader told The Chronicle.

The Big Ten Conference Handbook, which governs the league's operations, does not contain language addressing a situation as egregious as what happened at Penn State.

But the conference's bylaws prescribe potentially severe penalties for member institutions that break lesser rules. Any Big Ten university that employs or retains workers who intentionally falsify or deliberately fail to provide complete and accurate information during an investigation may be required to "show cause why its membership in the conference should not be suspended or terminated," the Big Ten's 2011-12 handbook says.

At least four top Penn State officials—including Graham B. Spanier, the former president, and Timothy M. Curley, the athletic director on administrative leave—failed to paint an accurate picture of how much they knew about Jerry Sandusky, the former coach convicted on 45 counts of child sex abuse, according to an  independent report released last week. Both Spanier and Curley were part of a culture that tried to "actively conceal" abuse by the former coach, the report said.

The Big Ten's 12-member Council of Presidents and Chancellors must approve any decision to suspend, expel, or place on probation any member of the conference. According to the conference handbook, expulsion requires a vote of not less than 60 percent of the full council (a Big Ten spokesman said that figure is actually 70 percent, or eight members, which will be reflected in the 2012-13 handbook).

The Big Ten does not have a contingency scheduling plan should Penn State's football team be banned from playing this or any season, a senior league official told The Chronicle. But fallout from the scandal has many Big Ten leaders on edge.

"This whole situation is unprecedented," said Sally Mason, president of the University of Iowa and chair of the Council of Presidents and Chancellors. "It's sports-related, but there were very significant moral, legal, and institutional failures."

She and her colleagues plan to discuss those problems in coming weeks, but she has no early sign of what they may decide. "Until all of our presidents and chancellors sit down and talk in depth," she said, "I have no idea of what the outcome is likely to be, and I wouldn't want to predict."

QuoteHow many levies can Jim of Delany raise?

Quote
Sandusky Case Bombshell: Did 6 Penn State Coaches Witness Abuse?

by Tom Winter, Hannah Rappleye and Tracy Connor

As many as six assistant coaches at Penn State witnessed "inappropriate behavior" between Jerry Sandusky and boys, stretching as far back as the 1970s, NBC News has learned.

It is unclear if any of the men reported what they saw to higher-ups at Penn State before the sex-abuse scandal erupted in 2011.

The information, which comes from court documents and multiple sources with direct knowledge of legal proceedings, raises new questions about how long the abuse went on, why no one stopped it and whether there could be even more victims than previously known.

Sandusky — who worked in the football program at Penn State under legendary head coach Joe Paterno for three decades — is serving 30 to 60 years in prison after being convicted of molesting 10 boys he met through a charity starting in 1994.

But sources told NBC News that one former Penn State assistant coach witnessed an incident in the late 1970s. Three other coaches — who have gone on to work in the NFL and at Division I colleges — allegedly saw inappropriate conduct between Sandusky and boys in the early and mid-1990s.

"You won't believe what I just saw," one of those three coaches blurted out after bursting into a room filled with Penn State football staff, according to sources who spoke to a person who was in that room.

A lawyer for one of the three '90s coaches denied his client had seen anything. A second coach declined to comment. A third could not be reached, and the name of the fourth was not disclosed to NBC News.

Bolstering the sources' account, Sandusky's adopted son, Matt, who says he also was molested, told NBC News that investigators informed him a football program employee witnessed what he believed to be a sex act between Matt and Sandusky in a locker room in the early 1990s.

In addition to the four assistants detailed by sources, court papers made public this week point to two more coaches who allegedly witnessed what was described as "inappropriate" or "sexual" contact between Sandusky and children in 1987 and 1988.

Those same documents also revealed that a child allegedly told Joe Paterno he was molested by Sandusky in 1976 — 25 years earlier than Paterno acknowledged hearing about Sandusky in a shower with a child.

Those papers are tied to a legal dispute between Penn State and an insurance company over who should pay the university's share of $60 million in settlements to 26 victims, and the court was not required to verify the allegations.

Asked about the four coaches detailed by NBC's sources, Penn State released a written statement.

"The university is facing and has faced a number of litigation matters and claims related to the Sandusky events. Allegations of various kinds have been made, and will likely continue to be made," it said.

"The university does not speculate publicly or hypothesize about individual allegations. These are sensitive matters, and we want to be respectful of the rights of all individuals involved. It would be inappropriate to do otherwise."

Sandusky, 72, recently petitioned for a new trial.

Paterno died of lung cancer in 2012, months after being fired as head coach amid allegations he knew about Sandusky's abuse and failed to act.

His family is hitting back at the claim that he knew about Sandusky's crimes back in 1976.

"Because of a single sentence in a court record of an insurance case, Joe Paterno's reputation has once again been smeared with an unsubstantiated, forty year old allegation," the family said in a written statement.

"Over the past four and a half years, numerous allegations that were taken as fact when they were initially communicated have been proven false. It is in this context that the latest claim should be viewed."

Penn State said it could not comment on the allegation that a child told Paterno he had been abused.

"The university has no records from the time to help evaluate the claims. More importantly, Coach Paterno is not here to defend himself. Penn State does not intend to comment further, out of concern for privacy, and due to the strict confidentiality commitments that govern our various settlement agreements."

Quote from: The Brain on May 07, 2016, 03:36:23 AM
Penn State sucks.

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on May 07, 2016, 04:40:38 AM

Quote from: The Brain on May 07, 2016, 03:36:23 AM
Penn State sucks.

Especially the football team.

Quote
Jeffrey Sandusky, the son of the former Penn State assistant who was convicted in the school's child sexual-abuse scandal, was arrested Monday by Pennsylvania State Police and charged with sexually assaulting a child.

Sandusky, 41, was arraigned in Bellefonte, Pa., after what WTAJ-TV reports was an investigation that began last November, in which a child claimed to have received text messages from Sandusky, including some that asked for naked photographs.

[...]

Quote from: viper37 on February 13, 2017, 05:15:27 PM
Like father, like son? (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/02/13/jerry-sanduskys-son-charged-with-sexually-assaulting-a-child/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_sandusky-3pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory)