OT: Penn State to get scholarships back

[RF2044]

So you're saying Consigliere's anedcotal observations while tailgating hold more weight than Sen. George Mitchell's (independent auditor of PSU's reforms) opinion that Penn State has completely complied with what they were ordered to do?

No, I'm saying that achieving minimum thresholds of institutional compliance after being forced to doesn't trump the decades worth of malfeasance that occurred to intentionally cover up heinous abuse.

And when I hear people express that the punishment was too excessive or is punishing the current team unduly, I have a difficult time wrapping my head around that--especially given examples like Consigliere's anecdotal observations that suggest that a significant portion of the culture that enabled child sexual abuse doesn't appear to have learned a damned thing, and view the recent reduction in penalties as vindication that nothing wrong was perpetrated.

 

[yalikePSU]

First off, let me say that this PSU fan comes in peace.

I am not planning on getting into an argument about who knew what and when. There was clearly (at least) a lack of leadership and action when the three admins did not follow up on whatever McQueary told them about what he saw (and his story has changed/been amended at least four times that we have found).

BUT, the scholarships were only part of the sanctions. PSU football will basically be a non-profit benefitting child abuse prevention for the next four years. The $60 million fine over four years was based on the average annual profit of around $15 million that PSU football brought in. That has to be paid without the benefit of bowl money payouts at the end of the year that are shared by all Big Ten schools.

The school is also paying victims at least $30 million in restitution. That is above and beyond the $60 million fine.

On top of that, schools around the country are using PSU's reforms as a model for their own. They have adopted 115 of the 119 Freeh recommendations.

As for this reduction in the penalty, it only encompasses the least of the "culture changing" penalties. And damage has already been done on that front. After the initial sanctions, ten players transferred without penalty, as was their right. Three were stars. At least 3 more transferred without penalty throughout the next year. With the cap that was on place for the Class of 2013, PSU is now playing with only 65 scholarship players already (5 walk-ons were given scholarships just for this academic year as a reward).

Just wanted to point out that the penalties are still real and severe. They had a definitive impact on the culture and mindset of the university (whether or not you blame that for the scandal). But members of the PSU family cannot be blamed for having some modicum of relief thrown their way after all of the horrible events of the past 2 years. I can guarantee you, no PSU fan I know would turn a blind eye to child abuse for the sake of the football program.

 

[yalikePSU]

I also want to point out that I did agree that something had to be done. As Penn State alums/students/etc, we have most likely been exposed to much more about this case than other schools' communities. We have heard a lot of evidence that makes this situation much less black and white than it has been made out to be. You're entitled to your opinions, but so are we. If I were convinced that Joe told the admin to cover up child rape in order to protect his football team, I would certainly be okay with the sanctions we got. However, there are too many pieces of evidence that point in another direction: A lack of vision and leadership when something more could have been done (mostly on the part of the admins). Now, maybe it stops Jerry, and maybe it doesn't, but there were mistakes made. Most PSU people (and they don't come on this board) will admit that. Penalties were most likely necessary. It was the extent that most fans disagreed with.

 

[Eric15]

No, I'm saying that achieving minimum thresholds of institutional compliance after being forced to doesn't trump the decades worth of malfeasance that occurred to intentionally cover up heinous abuse.

And when I hear people express that the punishment was too excessive or is punishing the current team unduly, I have a difficult time wrapping my head around that--especially given examples like Consigliere's anecdotal observations that suggest that the culture that enabled child s e x ual abuse doesn't appear to have learned a damned thing, and view the recent reduction in penalties as vindication that nothing wrong was perpetrated.

The individual people who facilitated the decades worth of malfeasance that occurred to intentionally cover up heinous abuse are in jail or on their way to jail. That, to me, is what matters. I guess we have to agree to disagree.

I tailgated in that same parking lot, and had a very thoughtful conversation (during the brief time I was sober) with a Penn State fan (guy maybe around 60) in the tailgate next to us about the whole situation. He was unbelievably sympathetic towards the victims and was disgusted by Paterno and the Administrators lack of action.

 

[RF2044]

I also want to point out that I did agree that something had to be done. As Penn State alums/students/etc, we have most likely been exposed to much more about this case than other schools' communities. We have heard a lot of evidence that makes this situation much less black and white than it has been made out to be. You're entitled to your opinions, but so are we. If I were convinced that Joe told the admin to cover up child rape in order to protect his football team, I would certainly be okay with the sanctions we got. However, there are too many pieces of evidence that point in another direction: A lack of vision and leadership when something more could have been done (mostly on the part of the admins). Now, maybe it stops Jerry, and maybe it doesn't, but there were mistakes made. Most PSU people (and they don't come on this board) will admit that. Penalties were most likely necessary. It was the extent that most fans disagreed with.

Why did Joe Paterno continue to grant access to Jerry Sandusky to utilize PSU facilities to conduct his camps for years after the original McQuery information surfaced? Access that was misused by Sandusky to perpetrate more child abuse for years after he was let go by PSU.

If that's not turning a blind eye and indirectly facilitating child rape, I don't know what is. I don't know that there's anybody out there who believes that "Joe [explicitly] told the admin to cover up child rape," but Joe certainly chose to do nothing instead of cutting Sandusky off and severing ties. And in this case, given the circumstances, the pocket veto defense doesn't absolve him or the administration.

 

[rrlbees]

I also want to point out that I did agree that something had to be done. As Penn State alums/students/etc, we have most likely been exposed to much more about this case than other schools' communities. We have heard a lot of evidence that makes this situation much less black and white than it has been made out to be. You're entitled to your opinions, but so are we. If I were convinced that Joe told the admin to cover up child rape in order to protect his football team, I would certainly be okay with the sanctions we got. However, there are too many pieces of evidence that point in another direction: A lack of vision and leadership when something more could have been done (mostly on the part of the admins). Now, maybe it stops Jerry, and maybe it doesn't, but there were mistakes made. Most PSU people (and they don't come on this board) will admit that. Penalties were most likely necessary. It was the extent that most fans disagreed with.

Glad you said you weren't planning to argue who knew what when...oh wait.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yalikePSU]

Why did Joe Paterno continue to grant access to Jerry Sandusky to utilize PSU facilities to conduct his camps for years after the original McQuery information surfaced? Access that was misused by Sandusky to perpetrate more child abuse for years after he was let go by PSU.

If that's not turning a blind eye and indirectly facilitating child rape, I don't know what is. I don't know that there's anybody out there who believes that "Joe [explicitly] told the admin to cover up child rape," but Joe certainly chose to do nothing instead of cutting Sandusky off and severing ties. And in this case, given the circumstances, the pocket veto defense doesn't absolve him.

I'm glad you asked, because it was not Paterno who allowed Sandusky access to PSU facilities. It was Curley, and it was a common courtesy granted when Sandusky retired in 1999. In fact, Paterno never much cared for Sandusky well before any of these incidents occured. That much is clear and documented, not a revision of history. There is also documentation that Paterno did not want Sandusky in PSU facilities, and not because he was suspected of child abuse. There is also evidence that the admin told Sandusky to stop bringing second mile children onto campus.

Yes, I'll admit I am quite biased, but I truly tried to read the Freeh Report, Thornburgh's Report, Clemente's Report, and the Paterno book with an open mind. It's just unfathomable that a blind eye was turned, especially by Paterno. As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, he trusted the admin to take care of it. He was "old school," that way, and he didn't rule State College (especially after the 90s) as some people claim he did. He could barely remember people's names those last 10 years. He really had turned into a figurehead.

 

[yalikePSU]

Glad you said you weren't planning to argue who knew what when...oh wait.

You're right, you caught me. But I really am trying to remain civil here.

As an olive branch, I will say I have great respect of Syracuse University. I almost went there for grad school (communications), but I chose to stay closer to home (and heart) in Happy Valley.

 

[Alsacs]

I'm glad you asked, because it was not Paterno who allowed Sandusky access to PSU facilities. It was Curley, and it was a common courtesy granted when Sandusky retired in 1999. In fact, Paterno never much cared for Sandusky well before any of these incidents occured. That much is clear and documented, not a revision of history. There is also documentation that Paterno did not want Sandusky in PSU facilities, and not because he was suspected of child abuse. There is also evidence that the admin told Sandusky to stop bringing second mile children onto campus.

Yes, I'll admit I am quite biased, but I truly tried to read the Freeh Report, Thornburgh's Report, Clemente's Report, and the Paterno book with an open mind. It's just unfathomable that a blind eye was turned, especially by Paterno. As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, he trusted the admin to take care of it. He was "old school," that way, and he didn't rule State College (especially after the 90s) as some people claim he did. He could barely remember people's names those last 10 years. He really had turned into a figurehead.

C'mon man I mean even if Paterno didn't have the in name power or title to grant Sandusky access then why didn't he make sure followup one time with Curley and ask him if he gave the information that McQueary told Paterno to the police? Paterno had more power than Curley there is no doubt of that. Listen, I don't want to crush Paterno anymore as there are enough people to do that, but Paterno's performance after what McQueary told him is an EPIC FAILURE and anyone who can't admit Paterno's handling after that is in unbecoming is a total homer.

 

[yalikePSU]

C'mon man I mean even if Paterno didn't have the in name power or title to grant Sandusky access then why didn't he make sure followup one time with Curley and ask him if he gave the information that McQueary told Paterno to the police? Paterno had more power than Curley there is no doubt of that. Listen, I don't want to crush Paterno anymore as there are enough people to do that, but Paterno's performance after what McQueary told him is an EPIC FAILURE and anyone who can't admit Paterno's handling after that is in unbecoming is a total homer.

Well, that's the thing I'm just not convinced of, yet. What did McQueary tell Paterno? And if McQueary didn't feel the need to do anything when he was IN the locker room witnessing this, how serious should Paterno feel it was? We also aren't sure that Paterno didn't casually ask Curley at some point, "How's that situation going?" with Curley responding, "we've taken care of it."

Just telling you what I've seen and read (and heard rumors about) makes me question how it actually went down. The Freeh Report's conclusions should not be taken as gospel, I'll just say that.

EDIT: Again, not trying to completely exonerate Joe, here. He said himself, "In hindsight, I wish I had done more." With what he knows now, in other words. I think Joe should have been more forceful in his follow-ups. Frankly, depending on what he actually saw, I think McQueary should have been the most aggressive, but I digress.

If you haven't read Clemente's report, I'd recommend it. It's quite disturbing and really shows how Sandusky was a classic manipulator/groomer. He even had his own family fooled.

 

[yalikePSU]

Another olive branch: I was a bit disappointed Syracuse didn't make it into the Big Ten at the expense of Rutgers, though I understand the logic (TV sets, 'Cuse is a "private" school, etc.). In fact, as a Penn State football fan, I'd almost rather be in the ACC. Easier games to get to, more traditional rivals, etc.

 

[rrlbees]

I'm glad you asked, because it was not Paterno who allowed Sandusky access to PSU facilities.

As Sandusky walked onto the practice field with a 10 year old in tow.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Alsacs]

Well, that's the thing I'm just not convinced of, yet. What did McQueary tell Paterno? And if McQueary didn't feel the need to do anything when he was IN the locker room witnessing this, how serious should Paterno feel it was? We also aren't sure that Paterno didn't casually ask Curley at some point, "How's that situation going?" with Curley responding, "we've taken care of it."

Just telling you what I've seen and read (and heard rumors about) makes me question how it actually went down. The Freeh Report's conclusions should not be taken as gospel, I'll just say that.

EDIT: Again, not trying to completely exonerate Joe, here. He said himself, "In hindsight, I wish I had done more." With what he knows now, in other words. I think Joe should have been more forceful in his follow-ups. Frankly, depending on what he actually saw, I think McQueary should have been the most aggressive, but I digress.

If you haven't read Clemente's report, I'd recommend it. It's quite disturbing and really shows how Sandusky was a classic manipulator/groomer. He even had his own family fooled.

I have read the Clemente report and I am a lawyer in NC and have talked with Dr. Frederic Whitehurst who has told me and many colleagues that the Freeh report has a bunch of holes in it. My gf told her dad about my meeting Whitehurst and he considered contacting and hiring his law firm to go after Freeh until I advised him to stay out of it.

With that said, Joe Paterno did the MINIMUM he could have done NO MATTER what McQueary told him he told him enough to go to the police and let them handle it. Legally Paterno did enough not to commit a crime himself, but morally he should have damn made sure the police were involved and he didn't. That is why I don't get the ardent defense of Paterno. Assume McQueary told him minimal stuff and didn't tell him exact detail Paterno never followed up. McQueary is as big POS as anybody not Sandusky as I have said if I saw what he did and I don't have the athleticism that McQueary a former D-I QB had I would get my ass kicked trying to stop something if I saw what allegedly he saw.

 

[Cheriehoop]

So you're saying Consigliere's anedcotal observations while tailgating hold more weight than Sen. George Mitchell's (independent auditor of PSU's reforms) opinion that Penn State has completely complied with what they were ordered to do?

Isn't this all "after the fact"? There were no proactive actions taken until the threat of these severe penalties. You had PSU officials and fans (still do) protesting PSU didn't do anything wrong. As a PSU fan told me, "we didn't do anything wrong, we're just complying with all these stupid sanctions because we are forced to so our football team can compete and get back to normal. We're being blackmailed."

Regarding the upcoming trials - why are they being held if they aren't still protesting their innocence? Did they plead guilty?

Why would implementing and compliance with reforms "ordered" by a 3rd party because the university wouldn't and didn't do it themselves, excuse PSU's horrific blind eye attitude for decades of institutionally aided child abuse? I like how the apologists believe that McQuery is the devil not Paterno nor the administration. What was the atmosphere that even made McQuery reluctant to report it to Paterno? What was the mindset of Paterno not to personally take any action nor follow up to the very people who owed their jobs to him? Is everyone supposed to be naive and ignore motives? What about the kids? Who in this mess has really cared about them except to do what has been ordered to get the football program "back to normal" as quickly as possible? How is that attitude any different than before it all became public?

 

[Consigliere]

So you're saying Consigliere's anedcotal observations while tailgating hold more weight than Sen. George Mitchell's (independent auditor of PSU's reforms) opinion that Penn State has completely complied with what they were ordered to do?

No question Penn State has complied with what they were ordered to do. Was there another option? In fact I commend the current administration for the steps they have taken and for the responsibility they have accepted. I commend O'Brien for stepping into an impossibly difficult situation and committing himself to the current players. Very clear commitment when he decided to stay at Penn State rather than leverage his somewhat successful season to return to the NFL. In fact after reflecting for a day, I'm not so sure I am totally repulsed by the relaxation of the scholarship limits. That is what Mitchell's opinion addresses.

Where I still have an issue is with the quasi-religious culture that enabled Sandusky's action in the first place. My experience in the MetLife parking lot may have been anecdotal, but it was certainly not isolated. I live in the Southern Tier of NY now, right on the Pennsylvania border and the allegiance in this area is still roughly 50 - 50. I have yet to meet a single Penn State supporter who sees the crimes as any type of indictment of misplaced priorities and an environment that put Paterno and football above all. Yesterday's reaction that the restoration of scholarships was some type of vindication or admission by the NCAA that they went too far in issuing the punishments in the first place manifests that.

 

[MikeSU02]

With that said, Joe Paterno did the MINIMUM he could have done NO MATTER what McQueary told him he told him enough to go to the police and let them handle it. Legally Paterno did enough not to commit a crime himself, but morally he should have damn made sure the police were involved and he didn't. That is why I don't get the ardent defense of Paterno. Assume McQueary told him minimal stuff and didn't tell him exact detail Paterno never followed up. McQueary is as big POS as anybody not Sandusky as I have said if I saw what he did and I don't have the athleticism that McQueary a former D-I QB had I would get my ass kicked trying to stop something if I saw what allegedly he saw.

Exactly. This guy, who had a statue. Who fans treat as a god-like figure. Who was arguably one of the 5 most powerful people in PA at the time, if not higher. He did the minimum. And that guy deserves a statue? This guy deserves to be celebrated still?

The sainthood of JoePa is one of the greatest fictional tales ever told and ever perpetuated.

Anyone in his position who doesn't do the absolute most he can to stop or at least find out more about a possible child rape is nothing but a morally bankrupt and terrible person, period.

The continual presence of Sandusky after this is abhorrent.

Trying to equivocate, to lean on the Freeh report for absolving his responsibility, to grant him a pass is exactly the reason the program should have been shut down. It's not shutting down a Red Cross station in a third-world country. It's football.

Congrats on getting back the scholarships. You should be very proud. The money doesn't mean crap to the people who blindly support this program. The money will come back and is why the school can take out a loan to cover costs. The money will come back in a short period of time.

I understand fanaticism blinding people to a lot of bad things, but I never could imaging a scenario where chronic child rape would be included.

Keep living in your bubble of sanctity in State College.

 

[yalikePSU]

I have read the Clemente report and I am a lawyer in NC and have talked with Dr. Frederic Whitehurst who has told me and many colleagues that the Freeh report has a bunch of holes in it. My gf told her dad about my meeting Whitehurst and he considered contacting and hiring his law firm to go after Freeh until I advised him to stay out of it.

With that said, Joe Paterno did the MINIMUM he could have done NO MATTER what McQueary told him he told him enough to go to the police and let them handle it. Legally Paterno did enough not to commit a crime himself, but morally he should have damn made sure the police were involved and he didn't. That is why I don't get the ardent defense of Paterno. Assume McQueary told him minimal stuff and didn't tell him exact detail Paterno never followed up. McQueary is as big POS as anybody not Sandusky as I have said if I saw what he did and I don't have the athleticism that McQueary a former D-I QB had I would get my ass kicked trying to stop something if I saw what allegedly he saw.

As a lawyer, then, I think you are aware that as an "educator," Paterno actually is not supposed to go to the police after hearing a second-hand account of an incident involving possible child abuse. He could have been fired, etc. His obligation was to tell his superiors. I believe it's in effect in order to protect teachers/educators from the accused. I may not have that 100% correct, but that's the jist of it. That is a state law which they are currently trying to fix. Not saying it's an excuse, but at the time, depending on what he was told, it could certainly be a deterrant. Something he'd done with any other incident.

 

[TheCusian]

Another olive branch: I was a bit disappointed Syracuse didn't make it into the Big Ten at the expense of Rutgers, though I understand the logic (TV sets, 'Cuse is a "private" school, etc.). In fact, as a Penn State football fan, I'd almost rather be in the ACC. Easier games to get to, more traditional rivals, etc.

Now this I can get behind. Penn State would be better off in the ACC.

 

[yalikePSU]

Exactly. This guy, who had a statue. Who fans treat as a god-like figure. Who was arguably one of the 5 most powerful people in PA at the time, if not higher. He did the minimum. And that guy deserves a statue? This guy deserves to be celebrated still?

The sainthood of JoePa is one of the greatest fictional tales ever told and ever perpetuated.

Anyone in his position who doesn't do the absolute most he can to stop or at least find out more about a possible child rape is nothing but a morally bankrupt and terrible person, period.

The continual presence of Sandusky after this is abhorrent.

Trying to equivocate, to lean on the Freeh report for absolving his responsibility, to grant him a pass is exactly the reason the program should have been shut down. It's not shutting down a Red Cross station in a third-world country. It's football.

Congrats on getting back the scholarships. You should be very proud. The money doesn't mean crap to the people who blindly support this program. The money will come back and is why the school can take out a loan to cover costs. The money will come back in a short period of time.

I understand fanaticism blinding people to a lot of bad things, but I never could imaging a scenario where chronic child rape would be included.

Keep living in your bubble of sanctity in State College.

I think some PSU fans also believe other fan bases are singling them out as the only program in the country that exalted football. I think most of us believe that PSU, for the most part, did things the right way more than other football factories like OSU, USC, most SEC schools, etc. This could have happened anywhere.

We graduated our players, tried to be good sports and good students. Outside of this one, horrific incident (that was perpetrated by one man, and can pretty much be nailed down to the inaction of 1-4 people), we strove to hold ourselves to a higher standard. And we also believe that there is more to be learned about what actually happened.

How horrible would these three or four men have to be to KNOW that a man was raping children and do nothing about it just to prevent some bad publicity? As bad as the publicity may have been, there could certainly be a much brighter spin put on it by the admin: "PSU coaches/admin stop child molestor." The news wouldn't have been the end of the program. If anything, a minor setback. If they had know he was a serial child abuser, they would certainly be smart enough to know he would eventually be caught. And the fallout would be MUCH worse if they tried to cover it up.

 

[yalikePSU]

Now this I can get behind. Penn State would be better off in the ACC.

Then you should help precipitate the end of the ACC, so 'Cuse, UVa, Pitt, and UNC can join PSU in an eastern branch of the B1G.

 

[Alsacs]

As a lawyer, then, I think you are aware that as an "educator," Paterno actually is not supposed to go to the police after hearing a second-hand account of an incident involving possible child abuse. He could have been fired, etc. His obligation was to tell his superiors. I believe it's in effect in order to protect teachers/educators from the accused. I may not have that 100% correct, but that's the jist of it. That is a state law which they are currently trying to fix. Not saying it's an excuse, but at the time, depending on what he was told, it could certainly be a deterrant. Something he'd done with any other incident.

Again, I said legally he followed PA law, but Paterno could have reported to the damn Penn State State College police then if he didn't want to go to the outside police and he could have told them what he was told by McQueary and then police would have started an investigation . Paterno did not have any confidentiality requirements to follow like a lawyer or doctor. He FAILED no questions asked to do more than the minimum. If the kids McQueary told Paterno he saw at the Football facility were from his family your damn right he would have done more. I am not talking about the sanctions at all I am talking about the fact Paterno FAILED the State College community but doing the minimum and then hiding behind the fact it was on Curley that is not what a leader does.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Now this I can get behind. Penn State would be better off in the ACC.

HEY YO!

 

[MikeSU02]

How horrible would these three or four men have to be to KNOW that a man was raping children and do nothing about it just to prevent some bad publicity? As bad as the publicity may have been, there could certainly be a much brighter spin put on it by the admin: "PSU coaches/admin stop child molestor." The news wouldn't have been the end of the program. If anything, a minor setback. If they had know he was a serial child abuser, they would certainly be smart enough to know he would eventually be caught. And the fallout would be MUCH worse if they tried to cover it up.

JoePa was the most powerful man at the university and he did the least he could. You ask how horrible these men would have to be? They would have to be as horrible as they were and are.

The fact that you construct a hypothetical and frame it through the lens of what would be better or worse for the program is exactly the problem that permeates your fan base.

There are good people who do bad things and there are bad people who do bad things. Sandusky is an evil person who did evil things.
JoePa is a bad person who did bad things.

He had the power to do more, to inquire, put pressure on the school and authorities and then shut the door on sandusky from the program forever and he didn't, period.

It's child rape. It's child rape. The man was a monster and preyed on the weakest and most vulnerable. And JoePa had a chance to do more and he did not.

Jerry Sandusky terrorized those children and JoePa told his AD. Sounds about right for a guy with a statue and a blindly faithful community worshiping the ground he walks on.

 

[TheCusian]

Then you should help precipitate the end of the ACC, so 'Cuse, UVa, Pitt, and UNC can join PSU in an eastern branch of the B1G.

Oh, god no. My hatred for the B1G runs deep.

 

[TheCusian]

HEY YO!

Oops.