Penn State Child Molestation Case

[Vinny]

Originally Posted by 2012Champs

My stance certainly isnt that the football program didnt have anything to do with it. Two of the coaches had something to do with the cover up. What they were covering up wasnt football related.

it was more of an individual concern...until they decided to protect the football program instead of the kids. Then it became a coverup for the football program. There was no other reason to not call in the authorities and give up control of your secret knowledge...about things going on inside the Penn St. Football shower room. Covering up the information makes it your problem.

anyway, I came here to post this link to the Sean Pendergast opinion piece from the Houston Press. Its in response to the Paterno family spewage.

Since it appears that the Paterno family is only capable of speaking in the age old language of Released Statement-ese, allow me to release my statement to them:

Shut the **** up. Seriously, shut the **** up.
Unless you have something of substance to add to the allegations against Jerry Sandusky or have a fat six figure check you wish to donate to a charity helping the victims of child sexual abuse heal, nobody gives a rat's ass what you think about the removal of your father's statue, the removal of scholarships from Penn State's program, or the removal of dog **** from your front yard.

http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairba...p?ref=trending
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairba...p?ref=trending

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by Vinny

it was more of an individual concern...until they decided to protect the football program instead of the kids. Then it became a coverup for the football program. There was no other reason to not call in the authorities and give up control of your secret knowledge...about things going on inside the Penn St. Football shower room. Covering up the information makes it your problem.

anyway, I came here to post this link to the Sean Pendergast opinion piece from the Houston Press. Its in response to the Paterno family spewage.


http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairba...p?ref=trending
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairba...p?ref=trending

Well Joe's family certainly arent helping his cause or case or theirs, however you want to put it.

[Vinny]

Originally Posted by 2012Champs

Well Joe's family certainly arent helping his cause or case or theirs, however you want to put it.

They are behaving in a similar way that Joe behaved. They seem to think that the end justifies the means or that you can somehow excuse Joe's behavior with his good deeds. Dude did a lot of good things, but as I tell my 16yo kid...you can ruin a good reputation far faster than building a good one. It just takes a little bit of poor judgement.

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by Vinny

They are behaving in a similar way that Joe behaved. They seem to think that the end justifies the means or that you can somehow excuse Joe's behavior with his good deeds. Dude did a lot of good things, but as I tell my 16yo kid...you can ruin a good reputation far faster than building a good one. It just takes a little bit of poor judgement.

very true its crazy to see the amount of support Joe has from alum and those around the school

[Blake]

I still think these Penn State sanctions are weak ass ****. I hear Herbstreit talking about Penn State is going to be a weak football team for years to come even after the 4 years. But when I look at USC, I see them still winning a PAC10 title, and next year looking to contend for a NC and a heisman QB.

Yeah, those sanctions are really hurting USC. /sarcasm

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by Blake

I still think these Penn State sanctions are weak ass ****. I hear Herbstreit talking about Penn State is going to be a weak football team for years to come even after the 4 years. But when I look at USC, I see them still winning a PAC10 title, and next year looking to contend for a NC and a heisman QB.

Yeah, those sanctions are really hurting USC. /sarcasm

What were the terms of USCs punishment ?

[GlassHalfFull]

Originally Posted by Blake

I still think these Penn State sanctions are weak ass ****. I hear Herbstreit talking about Penn State is going to be a weak football team for years to come even after the 4 years. But when I look at USC, I see them still winning a PAC10 title, and next year looking to contend for a NC and a heisman QB.

Yeah, those sanctions are really hurting USC. /sarcasm

USC had a 2 year bowl ban, Penn State has a 4 year bowl ban. In my mind, that is way more powerful. They won't be able to effectively recruit for at least 2 years with a 4 year post season ban. With a 2 year ban, you still are able to recruit, most players expect to be redshirted anyway their first year. With a 4 year ban, you have nothing to offer. Not to mention most current players who can, will more than likely jump ship. 2 other factors will come into play, the scholarship hit was bigger and the shame factor cannot be discounted.

I think this penalty will have much harder sting than USC had. Dead team walking.

[Texan_Bill]

Originally Posted by Blake

I still think these Penn State sanctions are weak ass ****. I hear Herbstreit talking about Penn State is going to be a weak football team for years to come even after the 4 years. But when I look at USC, I see them still winning a PAC10 title, and next year looking to contend for a NC and a heisman QB.

Yeah, those sanctions are really hurting USC. /sarcasm

Really? (Not being a smartass here) but how can you compare the two situations? Recruits (albeit less scholarships) would go to SC becuase the infractions that SC ware penalized for are far less then the stigma of a program that one that covered up pedophilia (By the one of the most powerful people in the state of Pennsylvania) in a conference where a lot of teams are on equal playing ground

Conversely, SC will continue to draw great recuits with or without bowl sanctions because they are the "cream and crop" of the PAC 37. *EDIT* Also SC plays in a conference where sometimes OSU, Stanford or anyone else once in a while stands up and makes a play... The Big 10??? Way more comp...

In a novel called, 'Oklahoma Vs Texas: When Football Becomes War' by Robert Heard there are way more egregious NCAA infractions than USC or even many years later SMU..

At PSU, I think their penalty is far harsher (as it should be) than SMU's "Death Penalty". Why?? Again, that program will have such a long lasting negative stigma that they will lose a lot, let me say this again, A LOT of PA kids that wanted to play there.

I also think it's a harsher penalty in the sense that while they continue to play football (and remain in the minds of college football fans) that their legacy will falter and their indiscrentions will be recognized..

SMU on the other hand has their program under control and even built a beautiful Gerald Ford Stadium... (no dumbasses, not that Gerald Ford)

[steelbtexan]

Originally Posted by Texan_Bill

Really? (Not being a smartass here) but how can you compare the two situations? Recruits (albeit less scholarships) would go to SC becuase the infractions that SC ware penalized for are far less then the stigma of a program that one that covered up pedophilia (By the one of the most powerful people in the state of Pennsylvania) in a conference where a lot of teams are on equal playing ground

Conversely, SC will continue to draw great recuits with or without bowl sanctions because they are the "cream and crop" of the PAC 37. *EDIT* Also SC plays in a conference where sometimes OSU, Stanford or anyone else once in a while stands up and makes a play... The Big 10??? Way more comp...

In a novel called, 'Oklahoma Vs Texas: When Football Becomes War' by Robert Heard there are way more egregious NCAA infractions than USC or even many years later SMU..

At PSU, I think their penalty is far harsher (as it should be) than SMU's "Death Penalty". Why?? Again, that program will have such a long lasting negative stigma that they will lose a lot, let me say this again, A LOT of PA kids that wanted to play there.

I also think it's a harsher penalty in the sense that while they continue to play football (and remain in the minds of college football fans) that their legacy will falter and their indiscrentions will be recognized..

SMU on the other hand has their program under control and even built a beautiful Gerald Ford Stadium... (no dumbasses, not that Gerald Ford)

Really,

Little boys getting a** raped and Penn St isn't even kicked off TV for a yr.

Meanwhile all SMU did was pay a few players and their program was shut down and all of their players transfered immediately. They had to rebuild their program from scrath.

Penn St players can but probably wont transfer. So they wont have to start from scratch. I will bet you that in 5-7 yrs Penn St will be a top tier big 11 team. Meanwhile SMU still hasn't recovered 25 yrs later.

[Dutchrudder]

Originally Posted by steelbtexan

Really,

Little boys getting a** raped and Penn St isn't even kicked off TV for a yr.

Meanwhile all SMU did was pay a few players and their program was shut down and all of their players transfered immediately. They had to rebuild their program from scrath.

Penn St players can but probably wont transfer. So they wont have to start from scratch. I will bet you that in 5-7 yrs Penn St will be a top tier big 11 team. Meanwhile SMU still hasn't recovered 25 yrs later.

I want them on TV, I get the Big 10 network and I will enjoy seeing them lose 77-12 each week. It will be quite amusing, as will the announcers who may have to be careful of what they say about the school and its sanctions.

[Blake]

In reply to all... yes, Penn State will be bad, ...for 2 years. In 2 years once PSU recruits realize as USC recruits did that they can sign on with PSU, redshirt a year and position themselves to be starters when the bowl ban is over they will go right back to Linebacker U and all the amenities and perks that a school like PSU are powerful enough to offer these kids.

PSU president just said that they were faced with either their current sanctions, or a 4 year death penalty. I think they deserved the latter.

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by steelbtexan

Really,

Little boys getting a** raped and Penn St isn't even kicked off TV for a yr.

Meanwhile all SMU did was pay a few players and their program was shut down and all of their players transfered immediately. They had to rebuild their program from scrath.

Penn St players can but probably wont transfer. So they wont have to start from scratch. I will bet you that in 5-7 yrs Penn St will be a top tier big 11 team. Meanwhile SMU still hasn't recovered 25 yrs later.

Im not sure I would say all SMU did was pay a few players. That certainly doesnt acknowledge what was going on at SMU for a long time.

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by Blake

In reply to all... yes, Penn State will be bad, ...for 2 years. In 2 years once PSU recruits realize as USC recruits did that they can sign on with PSU, redshirt a year and position themselves to be starters when the bowl ban is over they will go right back to Linebacker U and all the amenities and perks that a school like PSU are powerful enough to offer these kids.

PSU president just said that they were faced with either their current sanctions, or a 4 year death penalty. I think they deserved the latter.

Its not like Penn had a choice in which punishment it would get. I believe they were told this is what is going to happen and if you dont like it we can hit you with a 4 year death penalty.

[Goldensilence]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...not-omniscient


I have lost what little respect I still had for Paterno.

[AnthonyE]

I've defended JoePa throughout this entire time, but after reading that article even I raised my eyebrow. A very sad situation, indeed.

[Hervoyel]

I'm convinced that he knew far more than anyone close to him or who supported him will ever admit. I think we're going to find that most if not all of the various "paths" that could be investigated around Joe Paterno have been quietly walled off by people trying to salvage his reputation and who are devoted to the schools cult. Unless those people missed something or made a mistake we're never going to find a genuine smoking gun that proves exactly how much he knew.

Instead we're going to have to use our own individual bull**** meters to parse the version of the story we get. That's fine by me. I'm convinced now that he was either profoundly retarded and incapable of feeding and dressing himself OR he's a ****ing liar. I'm sure it's one of the two.

[ArlingtonTexan]

I really should just stay away from this case, but latest insult to my intelligence is that Paterno did not know what "sodomy" was. Taking it to the illogical extreme, if he was that sheltered from the world, then yes I could buy that Joe Pa could be totaly unaware of something this horrible going on under his nose.

I don't believe that though. I mean see him not knowing what a "hot carl" or "tossing the salad" or a "london bridge" is. Sodomy is garden variety religious and legal term that has been used forever.

[steelbtexan]

Originally Posted by 2012Champs

Im not sure I would say all SMU did was pay a few players. That certainly doesnt acknowledge what was going on at SMU for a long time.

Enlighten me,

What was going on at SMU?

[MojoMan]

Originally Posted by ArlingtonTexan

I really should just stay away from this case, but latest insult to my intelligence is that Paterno did not know what "sodomy" was. Taking it to the illogical extreme, if he was that sheltered from the world, then yes I could buy that Joe Pa could be totaly unaware of something this horrible going on under his nose.

I don't believe that though. I mean see him not knowing what a "hot carl" or "tossing the salad" or a "london bridge" is. Sodomy is garden variety religious and legal term that has been used forever.

I agree with you on Joe Paterno and the meaning of the word sodomy.

But, I have to admit, I do not know what any of the three terms in the bolded sentence refer to. That being said, if they are terms that refer to some sort of perverted sex acts, please feel free to not explain it to me.

[ArlingtonTexan]

Originally Posted by MojoMan

I agree with you on Joe Paterno and the meaning of the word sodomy.

But, I have to admit, I do not know what any of the three terms in the bolded sentence refer to. That being said, if they are terms that refer to some sort of perverted sex acts, please feel free to not explain it to me.

They are and I won't.