Starkey: Is Penn State's image ruined?
Sunday, November 6, 2011
The recent "scandals" that have rocked college football are nothing compared to what the state Attorney General says occurred within the walls of a program regarded as perhaps the most pristine of all: Penn State.
The charges are child abuse and an institutional cover-up.
Saturday's news stunned the sports world: The attorney general's office charged former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky with 40 counts related to the sexual abuse of children.
It also charged two top university administrators -- athletic director Tim Curley and senior vice president for finance and business Gary Schultz -- for failing to report suspected crimes. Schultz's position includes oversight of the university police department.
So many disturbing questions arise.
Two primary ones:
• How does anybody employed within the football program -- most notably iconic head coach Joe Paterno -- survive this mess, regardless of how the cases turn out?
• Did Paterno do the right thing when, according to a grand jury presentment, he was told in 2002 of an eyewitness account of a Sandusky assault and informed only Curley?
Taking the second question first, Paterno's course of action as described in the presentment seems inadequate on several levels.
First, some background: Sandusky retired as defensive coordinator in 1999 but was given "emeritus" status within the school, Attorney General Linda Kelly said.
According to the presentment, Sandusky had unfettered access to campus and an office at the Lasch Football Building, even though, as Schultz testified to the grand jury, he had been the subject of a 1998 university police investigation. The investigation included allegations of sexually inappropriate behavior involving Sandusky and young boys in the football building showers.
Sandusky's activities again drew attention in March 2002 when, Kelly said, a graduate assistant football coach "reportedly observed Sandusky sexually assaulting a naked boy who appeared to be about 10 years old."
The graduate assistant told his father, and the two informed Paterno the next day, the presentment stated. Paterno testified to the grand jury that he reported the allegation to Curley, who then handled -- or perhaps mishandled -- the matter in conjunction with Schultz.
Both men have said through their attorneys that they are innocent.
This is what Kelly said: "The failure of top university officials (Curley, Schultz) to act on reports of Sandusky's alleged sexual misconduct, even after it was reported to them in graphic detail by an eyewitness, allowed a predator to walk free for years continuing to target new victims."
But what about Paterno? If all he did was report the account to Curley and wash his hands of it, was that enough?
The grand jury thought so, as it found no wrongdoing with how Paterno handled himself. He fulfilled his legal obligation, but was there a higher moral responsibility?
It seems so.
Paterno is by far the most powerful man in Penn State athletics. He is the king. He is the football program. He should have told the police -- and not the university police.
And you have to wonder why Paterno apparently did nothing as Sandusky maintained his "emeritus" status even after he was accused in 2002. How could Sandusky have been allowed to keep an office in the football building -- the very building where Kelly says the assault occurred?
Now, to the matter of who survives this mess.
Recruiting is about perception. About creating an image. When that image is sullied, decisive action is required.
Witness the Pitt scandal involving Michael Haywood, who was fired as coach within 24 hours of being arrested on a domestic violence charge in January.
The statement from Pitt chancellor Mark Nordenberg could be instructive in this case.
"To be clear, the university's decision is not tied to any expectation with respect to the terms on which the legal proceeding now pending ... might ultimately be concluded," Nordenberg said. "Instead, it reflects a strong belief that moving forward with Mr. Haywood as our head coach is not possible under the existing circumstances."
How is it possible for Penn State's current staff, led by Paterno, to recruit high-school players under the existing circumstances?
College coaches must convey a certain moral authority to the parents of teenage boys, as they will be essentially be surrogate parents during the course of the players' college careers.
I cannot see how that is possible given the current climate at Penn State. Which means a lot of innocent people could be hurt.
Of course, if the charges are proven true, a lot of innocent people already have been.