I think it is an outrage as well.  However it seems as long as the person in question (Paterno) keeps playing stupid about what he did or didnt know things like this seem to have a way of just fading away.  They are rioting him being fired.  I would take that as I sign that he sill has support.

"I think it is an outrage as well.  However it seems as long as the person in question (Paterno) keeps playing stupid about what he did or didnt know things like this seem to have a way of just fading away."

If this allegation proves true, this thing isn't "fading away" anytime soon.

http://www.nesn.com/2011/11/jerry-sandusky-rumored-to-have-been-pimping-out-young-boys-to-rich-donors-says-mark-madden.html

forsberg_us wrote:

"Chalk one up for Penn St. and Uncle Joe for making a dignified exit."

The Penn State trustees--yes.  But the media attacks directed toward the trustess during the press conference that followed were an embarrassment and the riots that followed are a bit of a black eye for the university.

I was being sarcastic all around.  Chalk one up for the Trustees for taking control and doing what needed to be done.  Perhaps Paterno thought he could ride this out.  If the University had been in a stronger position I might have let him finish the season, but I think the university's potential exposure played a role in the trustee's actions.

The news about the riots hadn't broke when I wrote that, and I'm just looking at it now.  If it is what it seems to be, it's a great study of human priorities: ask any of those kids what they would do if they saw a random 60 year fucking a 10 year old boy in the ass, and I'll bet a 25% would say that guy wouldn't see another sunrise.  Granted Paterno wasn't the one to fuck the little kid in the ass, but Paterno's own status offered protection to the boy-rapist.  This is people, people.  Right is right, and wrong is wrong, and for about 50% of humanity the fine line separating right and wrong is that "me and my people are right".

artie_fufkin wrote:

I'm trying to think if anyone's legacy has turned 180 degrees faster than Paterno's. Maybe O.J. Simpson's, but Simpson already had the stain of attending 'SC on his record.

It turned quickly, but it may yet turn back a bit. 

It's hard for me to judge at this point if he is clearly guilty of sheltering a guy who he knew beyond reasonable doubt was a child rapist, or if simply disliked uncomfortable questions and kicked them upstairs, where higher ups misread the situation and fumbled.  If, after the smoke clears and dust settles, it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that he sheltered a known child rapist, then he's toast.

forsberg_us wrote:

I'm not sure if anyone else watched the press conference last night, but the media's conduct during that thing was really embarassing.  They basically railed on the Board of Trustees representative for having the temerity to not allow Paterno to leave at the end of the year.  I realize Paterno has been there forever, but it his power seemed for cult-like than anything.

The representative did a pretty decent job handling the media.  My favorite question/answer went something like this:

Q: You've made reference several times to the "best interests of the University."  Can you define for me what you mean by the "best interests of the University."

A:  The "best interests of the University" is very broad; however, I can tell you what isn't in the "best interests of the University," and it's the situation that has apparently been allowed to fester for more than a decade within a particular department of this University.


Great answer

P-shaw, intellectuals. *spit*  Always turning questions on their head and comparing apples to oranges.

forsberg_us wrote:

"I think it is an outrage as well.  However it seems as long as the person in question (Paterno) keeps playing stupid about what he did or didnt know things like this seem to have a way of just fading away."

If this allegation proves true, this thing isn't "fading away" anytime soon.

http://www.nesn.com/2011/11/jerry-sandusky-rumored-to-have-been-pimping-out-young-boys-to-rich-donors-says-mark-madden.html

And a second one buried in the first:

"The other thing I think that may eventually become uncovered, and I talked about this in my original article back in April, is that I think they'll find out that Jerry Sandusky was told that he had to retire in exchange for a cover-up," Madden said. "If you look at the timeline, that makes perfect sense, doesn't it?
"My opinion is when Sandusky quit, everybody knew -- not just at Penn State," Madden added. "I think it was a very poorly kept secret about college football in general, and that is why he never coached in college football again and retired at the relatively young age of 55. [That's] young for a coach, certainly."

Am I overreacting when I say this will cause irreparable damage to PSU? This thing isn't even close to being over and it's already been horrifying enough. When the smoke clears on this, Penn State will be nothing more than a burned out husk.

"Am I overreacting when I say this will cause irreparable damage to PSU?"

Hard to say. The public loves to give second chances, if there's the appropriate amount of remorse. Even Michael Vick's image has been repaired to a degree.
But the PSU situation might be so much more egregious than anything we've seen before, and right now it's hard to imagine the principals or the institution will be ever seen in the same light.

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

"If it is what it seems to be, it's a great study of human priorities: ask any of those kids what they would do if they saw a random 60 year fucking a 10 year old boy in the ass, and I'll bet a 25% would say that guy wouldn't see another sunrise."

I'm reading the folks in Happy Valley are making out the asst. coach - McQuery or whatever his name is - who witnessed the assault in the shower to be a villain in all this.

They have a point.  If a football club is a secret fraternity, where the coach is empowered to serve as judge and jury, then McQeery did the right thing.  But in any other circumstance, if you witness a 60 year old guy raping a 10 year old boy you call the police, not your boss.

I should have been clearer. McQueary is being villified on one hand because he didn't punch Sandusky's lights out on the spot. The True Believers are pissed at him because he got poor ol' JoePa fired.

tkihshbt wrote:

I just don't see how they can recover, especially if the NCAA decides to penalize them. If SMU was damaged beyond repair for paying players, I don't see how Penn State can recover by with a huge cover-up of child rape.

Depends what you mean, TK.  The institution is a very prestigious academic institution.  In this fairly credible ranking by ARWU Penn State is rated 43 in the world, a little bit ahead of USC.  It's a good comparison (even though I am once again comparing apples and oranges) because USC is similarly renowned for its football program.  My hunch is that either institution would survive, and perhaps even improve academically, if they ditched their football program (although having the football program go down in flames is not an ideal way to jettison).  Look at the example of University of Chicago, which summarily ended its vaunted football program many decades ago and is now rated 9th in the world for its academics.

But if you are asking whether its football program will ever recover, it's much cloudier.  I think this controversy is large enough that it potentially threatens their academics, if the punitive damages are large enough, and that alone should indicate how serious the problem is for athletics and the football program.

http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2010.jsp

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

"Am I overreacting when I say this will cause irreparable damage to PSU?"

Hard to say. The public loves to give second chances, if there's the appropriate amount of remorse. Even Michael Vick's image has been repaired to a degree.

Not to throw water on your contention that second chances are waiting for those who grab them, a contention that I agree with, but this is WAY beyond what Michael Vick did.

Absolutely. I was trying to find an illustration of the public's penchant for forgiveness. Sandusky will be a terminal pariah, as he should be. I was trying to refer more to the institution itself.
In either event, I don't think we're going to associate Penn State with child molestation the way we associate Columbine with a mass murder.

This keeps getting worse, with more hands getting dirty.

Now the mother of one victim states that officials at her sons school would allow sandusky to take him out of school without her knowledge, and that a wrestling coach once witnessed inappropriate touching.  And all of this happened well after the events of 2000 and 2002.  This is just a hunch, but I think Penn State, Clinton County High, and a number of individuals all now have their pants pulled down about their ankles and are about to get anally raped by the PI lawyers.

"According to the grand jury presentment that led to Sandusky's arrest last week on 40 counts of molesting eight boys over a 15-year period, the coach had unfettered access to the Clinton County high school attended by Victim 1. Sandusky, who volunteered at the school's varsity football program, would often have unmonitored meetings with the boy. On one occasion a school wrestling coach witnessed inappropriate touching between the two in a secluded weight room, according to the grand jury presentment."

http://gma.yahoo.com/penn-state-scandal-mother-alleged-victim-says-son-082520374.html