Non-horrible Sandusky thread to discuss PSU sanctions (1 Viewer)

[Wrighteous Ray]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

 

[roadkill1292]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?The other question I'm wondering about is how this will affect attendence at the Penn State games. I imagine they'll still come out in droves this year. But will the season ticket holders still come out when Penn State is 0-9 and losing games by big margins? What happened to SMU completely changed the football culture- but the Mustangs stopped playing other teams in the Southwest conference, and started playing much lesser opponents, which at least allowed them to be competitive. Penn State is still going to have to play Michigan, Ohio State, Nebraska, etc. It's going to be ugly. Perhaps not this year, but pretty soon thereafter.

You can't compare SMU to PSU.SMU had stopped being competitive in the SWC way back in the '60s. They simply didn't have the resources to compete with the big boys, which is why they had to resort to the pay-for-play system in the first place. Once you took away that money, the blue-chip players had little reason to attend SMU.That's not the case with Penn State. Penn State still has great resources, and they've never had to pay players to convince them to play football there. Once the scholarships return, the blue chip players will return as well.

[hijack] The thread discussing who would be college football's power programs if it was not against the rules to pay players was one of my all time favorites here. Lots of you hated the idea. It was wonderful. [/hijack]

 

[Wadsworth]

the "coverup" did not begin until 2001, so vacating wins prior to that is wrong.

I think that's a grey area. Paterno's knowledge of the 1998 incident is part of what makes the 2001 coverup so heinous.

But there was no active cover-up in 1998. There was a criminal investigation by the police and child welfare by outside agencies. The investigation led to no charges because Sandusky and the kid's stories in that particular incident matched. I agree that knowledge of that investigation should have changed the way psu viewed 2001 (and i could get into other convo on this whole thing, but i wont for now) but psu itself did nothing wrong in 1998.

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.So if they hushed it up in 98, then it really puts the pressure on them to keep covering it up, like they did in 2001.

Men do not wake up one day in their mid-50s and decide to start raping little boys. It is hard to believe that from 69-98 no one heard anything. The whole situation stinks of lies and cover-ups going back to at least 1998 but it would not be at all surprising if in fact it stretched back much further. Don't be surprised if their are still cards left to be played by the principles in the cover up.

 

[Good Posting Judge]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

No, they're going to be terrific this year.

 

[Socrates11]

the "coverup" did not begin until 2001, so vacating wins prior to that is wrong.

I think that's a grey area. Paterno's knowledge of the 1998 incident is part of what makes the 2001 coverup so heinous.

But there was no active cover-up in 1998. There was a criminal investigation by the police and child welfare by outside agencies. The investigation led to no charges because Sandusky and the kid's stories in that particular incident matched. I agree that knowledge of that investigation should have changed the way psu viewed 2001 (and i could get into other convo on this whole thing, but i wont for now) but psu itself did nothing wrong in 1998.

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.So if they hushed it up in 98, then it really puts the pressure on them to keep covering it up, like they did in 2001.

Well the Feech report that is apparently gospel states that samdusky had been made aware prior to the investigation that he wouldnt be the coach and his retirement was already in process.

And the retirement was likely in progress due to people becoming aware of Sandusky's proclivities and PSU wanting to get him out of the program quickly and quietly. Then the investigation happens and some pressure is brought to bear by Paterno/PSU that the school is handling it and everything is taken care of.We may never know the exact truth unless someone in the know decides to unburden their conscience.

 

[Arizona Ron]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

No, they're going to be terrific this year.

 

[Socrates11]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

So the Feech report specifically refuting that Sandusky's retirement and the 1998 investigation were not related based on the well documented time line of such things is not enough for you, but an email from people not named Joe Paterno stating "coach wants to know the results of the investigation" and "after speaking with coach I don't feel comfortable" makes Joe Paterno the ring leader in your eyes?

 

[NCCommish]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

So the Feech report specifically refuting that Sandusky's retirement and the 1998 investigation were not related based on the well documented time line of such things is not enough for you, but an email from people not named Joe Paterno stating "coach wants to know the results of the investigation" and "after speaking with coach I don't feel comfortable" makes Joe Paterno the ring leader in your eyes?

You're not really defending Paterno are you?

 

[Wadsworth]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

So the Feech report specifically refuting that Sandusky's retirement and the 1998 investigation were not related based on the well documented time line of such things is not enough for you, but an email from people not named Joe Paterno stating "coach wants to know the results of the investigation" and "after speaking with coach I don't feel comfortable" makes Joe Paterno the ring leader in your eyes?

You're not really defending Paterno are you?

Of course not, that would be crazy. He is just defending Paterno.

 

[NCCommish]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

So the Feech report specifically refuting that Sandusky's retirement and the 1998 investigation were not related based on the well documented time line of such things is not enough for you, but an email from people not named Joe Paterno stating "coach wants to know the results of the investigation" and "after speaking with coach I don't feel comfortable" makes Joe Paterno the ring leader in your eyes?

You're not really defending Paterno are you?

Of course not, that would be crazy. He is just defending Paterno.

Oh good I was getting worried.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Just saw this on twitter. Something to keep in mind.

Larger financial penalty for Penn St still looming. US Education Dept has power to strip all of its federal funding to PSU, after its probe

So now in addition to taking out our frustrations on the football program, we're going to tear up their academic programs too? This is ludicrous.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

Well, the Freeh report does not support this theory at all.

 

[Joe Summer]

the "coverup" did not begin until 2001, so vacating wins prior to that is wrong.

I think that's a grey area. Paterno's knowledge of the 1998 incident is part of what makes the 2001 coverup so heinous.

But there was no active cover-up in 1998. There was a criminal investigation by the police and child welfare by outside agencies. The investigation led to no charges because Sandusky and the kid's stories in that particular incident matched. I agree that knowledge of that investigation should have changed the way psu viewed 2001 (and i could get into other convo on this whole thing, but i wont for now) but psu itself did nothing wrong in 1998.

I agree for the most part, although I think the bolded part is also a grey area. PSU did do a few shady things in 1998:- the campus police chief decided not to file a police report (Schultz approved of this decision)

- Schultz noted that Sandusky's behavior was "inappropriate" and "poor judgment", yet he continued to permit Sandusky to bring kids into the locker rooms.

- Spanier knew about the investigation but did not tell the Board Of Trustees.

It's true that no charges were filed in 1998 -- but I think you can make a strong argument that people at PSU influenced the investigation enough to get Sandusky off the hook.

 

[Socrates11]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

So the Feech report specifically refuting that Sandusky's retirement and the 1998 investigation were not related based on the well documented time line of such things is not enough for you, but an email from people not named Joe Paterno stating "coach wants to know the results of the investigation" and "after speaking with coach I don't feel comfortable" makes Joe Paterno the ring leader in your eyes?

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/12/12703724-freeh-timeline-illustrates-penn-states-actions-in-sandusky-case?liteThis timeline makes it pretty clear that Sandusky decided to retire after the investigation.

May-August 1999:

Sandusky writes a letter to Curley saying, because he will not be next head football coach, he is considering retirement. Sandusky also seeks “to maintain a long‐term relationship with the University.”

You'll note this comes after:

May 4-30, 1998:

Victim 6’s mother reports to the University Police Department that Sandusky showered with her 11‐year-old son in the Lasch Building on the Penn State campus. The police promptly begin an investigation.

Schultz is immediately informed of the investigation and notifies Spanier and Curley. Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?”

In August 1999, Sandusky is granted “emeritus” rank, which carries several privileges, including access to University recreational facilities. Documents show the unusual request for emeritus rank originated from Schultz, was approved by Spanier, and granted by the Provost, who expressed some uneasiness about the decision given Sandusky’s low academic rank and the precedent that would be set.

So Vice President Shultz, who in the timeline- "Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?” , is now comfortable recommending this emeritus rank? And Paterno knows nothing about all of this?

Come on.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

So the Feech report specifically refuting that Sandusky's retirement and the 1998 investigation were not related based on the well documented time line of such things is not enough for you, but an email from people not named Joe Paterno stating "coach wants to know the results of the investigation" and "after speaking with coach I don't feel comfortable" makes Joe Paterno the ring leader in your eyes?

You're not really defending Paterno are you?

No, I am questioning the 1998 date being used for the sanctions and questioning the rationale of a poster who selectively reads the report and gives less weight to portions that have stronger evidence than other portions.I think the statue needed to be taken down. I think hero worship is a problem in this country, not just PSU or college football. I think people get off on tearing others down though, especially those who were portrayed as being "better" than others. I'm guilty of stuff like that as well, and this stuff has made me reflect on how I react to the negative news of others. I think this should be a teaching moment. I get the punishment. I always am against re-writing of history, whether it is an asterisk, barry bonds, vacating wins here USC or OSU etc. I think it's just dumb. Here I think the date is wrong.And while JoePa certainly was the most influential and revered man at PSU, he was not the ultimate decision maker. That comes down to Spanier really, who I always thought was rather slimy. His stonewalling of the board of trustees really is telling of his personality IMO. His opinion certainly carried a lot of weight though, particularly with Curley apparently, so I agree his hands were dirty.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

So the Feech report specifically refuting that Sandusky's retirement and the 1998 investigation were not related based on the well documented time line of such things is not enough for you, but an email from people not named Joe Paterno stating "coach wants to know the results of the investigation" and "after speaking with coach I don't feel comfortable" makes Joe Paterno the ring leader in your eyes?

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/12/12703724-freeh-timeline-illustrates-penn-states-actions-in-sandusky-case?liteThis timeline makes it pretty clear that Sandusky decided to retire after the investigation.

May-August 1999:

Sandusky writes a letter to Curley saying, because he will not be next head football coach, he is considering retirement. Sandusky also seeks “to maintain a long‐term relationship with the University.”

You'll note this comes after:

May 4-30, 1998:

Victim 6’s mother reports to the University Police Department that Sandusky showered with her 11‐year-old son in the Lasch Building on the Penn State campus. The police promptly begin an investigation.

Schultz is immediately informed of the investigation and notifies Spanier and Curley. Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?”

In August 1999, Sandusky is granted “emeritus” rank, which carries several privileges, including access to University recreational facilities. Documents show the unusual request for emeritus rank originated from Schultz, was approved by Spanier, and granted by the Provost, who expressed some uneasiness about the decision given Sandusky’s low academic rank and the precedent that would be set.

So Vice President Shultz, who in the timeline- "Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?” , is now comfortable recommending this emeritus rank? And Paterno knows nothing about all of this?

Come on.

Then the investigation is closed without charges. I do not think you can judge the 1998 actions with a 2011 perspective. Although I do feel that these individuals should have judged 2001 while re-thinking 1998. Do you not see the difference?

 

[B-Deep]

I think this goes beyond saying Joe's opinion carried a lot of weight...

 

[Socrates11]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

Sandusky was likely told he better retire or else.

So the Feech report specifically refuting that Sandusky's retirement and the 1998 investigation were not related based on the well documented time line of such things is not enough for you, but an email from people not named Joe Paterno stating "coach wants to know the results of the investigation" and "after speaking with coach I don't feel comfortable" makes Joe Paterno the ring leader in your eyes?

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/12/12703724-freeh-timeline-illustrates-penn-states-actions-in-sandusky-case?liteThis timeline makes it pretty clear that Sandusky decided to retire after the investigation.

May-August 1999:

Sandusky writes a letter to Curley saying, because he will not be next head football coach, he is considering retirement. Sandusky also seeks “to maintain a long‐term relationship with the University.”

You'll note this comes after:

May 4-30, 1998:

Victim 6’s mother reports to the University Police Department that Sandusky showered with her 11‐year-old son in the Lasch Building on the Penn State campus. The police promptly begin an investigation.

Schultz is immediately informed of the investigation and notifies Spanier and Curley. Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?”

In August 1999, Sandusky is granted “emeritus” rank, which carries several privileges, including access to University recreational facilities. Documents show the unusual request for emeritus rank originated from Schultz, was approved by Spanier, and granted by the Provost, who expressed some uneasiness about the decision given Sandusky’s low academic rank and the precedent that would be set.

So Vice President Shultz, who in the timeline- "Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?” , is now comfortable recommending this emeritus rank? And Paterno knows nothing about all of this?

Come on.

Then the investigation is closed without charges. I do not think you can judge the 1998 actions with a 2011 perspective. Although I do feel that these individuals should have judged 2001 while re-thinking 1998. Do you not see the difference?

Wow. OK. Whatever you say.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/12/12703724-freeh-timeline-illustrates-penn-states-actions-in-sandusky-case?lite

This timeline makes it pretty clear that Sandusky decided to retire after the investigation.

May-August 1999:

Sandusky writes a letter to Curley saying, because he will not be next head football coach, he is considering retirement. Sandusky also seeks “to maintain a long‐term relationship with the University.”

You'll note this comes after:

May 4-30, 1998:

Victim 6’s mother reports to the University Police Department that Sandusky showered with her 11‐year-old son in the Lasch Building on the Penn State campus. The police promptly begin an investigation.

Schultz is immediately informed of the investigation and notifies Spanier and Curley. Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?”

In August 1999, Sandusky is granted “emeritus” rank, which carries several privileges, including access to University recreational facilities. Documents show the unusual request for emeritus rank originated from Schultz, was approved by Spanier, and granted by the Provost, who expressed some uneasiness about the decision given Sandusky’s low academic rank and the precedent that would be set.

So Vice President Shultz, who in the timeline- "Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?” , is now comfortable recommending this emeritus rank? And Paterno knows nothing about all of this?

Come on.

That timeline leaves out some important stuff. Read page 56 of the Freeh report. Sandusky's retirement plans had already been discussed and largely agreed upon before the 1998 incident.

 

[Smack Tripper]

Just saw this on twitter. Something to keep in mind.

Larger financial penalty for Penn St still looming. US Education Dept has power to strip all of its federal funding to PSU, after its probe

So now in addition to taking out our frustrations on the football program, we're going to tear up their academic programs too? This is ludicrous.

Were they a private university, I would think this would be possible, but given their public status, I doubt they take this step. This is still a university with some juice.

 

[Joe Summer]

There is the opinion out there that Sandusky's golden parachute retirement deal with PSU was to hush everything up, with the police and child welfare people going along probably due to PSU football's popularity and not wanting to make waves, with Paterno having knowledge of the deal. I lean to this view. It doesn't seem normal that a very successful d-coordinator just retires in his prime without trying to make it as a head coach somewhere. I'm not buying he retired because Paterno told him he would never be his successor. If he was that good, why didn't he want to go to a different school and make his own mark? Whole series of events smells fishy.

Lots of people suspected this when the scandal broke, but the Freeh report seems to rebut this theory. Sandusky had already made his retirement plans known before the 1998 investigation.

From the Freeh report:February 1998 - Paterno tells Sandusky he won't be the next head football coach. Curley begins discussions with Sandusky about other positions at the University, which Sandusky turns down.

January 1999 - Sandusky tells Curley that he wants to coach one more year.

May 1999 - Sandusky tells Curley that he's considering retirement.

 

[Christo]

For those saying PSU didn't gain any advantage, why did they all cover it up then? If they didn't think that doing the right thing would have hurt them in some way, they wouldn't have all covered it up to begin with.

Jobs, reputations, pride. Many factors. Those claiming this was simply about protecting PSU football are being naive.

Not 'simply' about football. But to not include football is foolish.

Who said not to include football?

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

In December 2000, Sandusky would have become the head football coach at UVA but UVA balked because Sandusky refused to give up his time commitment at the Second Mile. UVA was that close to getting in the middle of this gigantic mess.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

losing those scholarships means they will be crushed and a MAC team for 10 years minimum. Competing against Alabama with 20 less scholarship athletes? GLWAT. This is almost insurmountable.

 

[Short Corner]

Just saw this on twitter. Something to keep in mind.

Larger financial penalty for Penn St still looming. US Education Dept has power to strip all of its federal funding to PSU, after its probe

So now in addition to taking out our frustrations on the football program, we're going to tear up their academic programs too? This is ludicrous.

It will only be used as leverage to make them shut it down.

 

[SHIZNITTTT]

So any good football players on Penn State's roster? I wonder if the other coaches have tried to contact any of them? Wonder if Penn State will need walk on players the next few years? Maybe we can get another RUDY story out of this situation.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Just saw this on twitter. Something to keep in mind.

Larger financial penalty for Penn St still looming. US Education Dept has power to strip all of its federal funding to PSU, after its probe

So now in addition to taking out our frustrations on the football program, we're going to tear up their academic programs too? This is ludicrous.

Were they a private university, I would think this would be possible, but given their public status, I doubt they take this step. This is still a university with some juice.

Why would you do this if it was a private university? You and others keep insisting that this is about sending a message that football shouldn't be such an out-sized priority. How does stripping funding for academics send that message?Stuff like this just reinforces my opinion that this is about irrational vengence, not justice.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

My opinions on this:

1) Penalties by NCAA were extremely harsh, but fair.

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

3) Penalties by B1G were harsh, but fair.

4) Paterno family: Shut. The. ####. Up.

5) Crazy PSU fans/alums: Shut. The. ####. Up.

6) Former PSU players still defending Paterno (I'm looking at you Michael Robinson): Shut. The. ####. Up.

7) Normal PSU fans/alums: Now is the time to support the university through this. We have a great meaning coach in Bill O'Brien. We'll have to wait years to fairly see if he is a great football coach but I like the way he acts during this. Let's keep going to games and supporting the team. They did nothing wrong. Let's keep supporting the students. They did nothing wrong. Let's keep supporting the local businesses. They did nothing wrong. And most importantly, let's support child abuse organizations as much as we do our team. And let's celebrate when we inevitably knock off some team much better than us 3-4 years from now (Please let it be Pitt in 2016).

8) We Are!

 

[jwb]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

losing those scholarships means they will be crushed and a MAC team for 10 years minimum. Competing against Alabama with 20 less scholarship athletes? GLWAT. This is almost insurmountable.

Yea, but that's ok. Lots of lesser programs have happy, dedicated fans and alumni.

 

[Socrates11]

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/12/12703724-freeh-timeline-illustrates-penn-states-actions-in-sandusky-case?lite

This timeline makes it pretty clear that Sandusky decided to retire after the investigation.

May-August 1999:

Sandusky writes a letter to Curley saying, because he will not be next head football coach, he is considering retirement. Sandusky also seeks “to maintain a long‐term relationship with the University.”

You'll note this comes after:

May 4-30, 1998:

Victim 6’s mother reports to the University Police Department that Sandusky showered with her 11‐year-old son in the Lasch Building on the Penn State campus. The police promptly begin an investigation.

Schultz is immediately informed of the investigation and notifies Spanier and Curley. Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?”

In August 1999, Sandusky is granted “emeritus” rank, which carries several privileges, including access to University recreational facilities. Documents show the unusual request for emeritus rank originated from Schultz, was approved by Spanier, and granted by the Provost, who expressed some uneasiness about the decision given Sandusky’s low academic rank and the precedent that would be set.

So Vice President Shultz, who in the timeline- "Schultz’s confidential May 4, 1998 notes about Sandusky state: “Behavior – at best inappropriate @ worst sexual improprieties” and “At min – Poor Judgment.” Schultz also notes: “Is this opening of pandora’s box?” and “Other children?” , is now comfortable recommending this emeritus rank? And Paterno knows nothing about all of this?

Come on.

That timeline leaves out some important stuff. Read page 56 of the Freeh report. Sandusky's retirement plans had already been discussed and largely agreed upon before the 1998 incident.

Page 56 doesn't say anywhere that Sandusky decided to retire, only that he was told he would never be the next head coach and he was looking into other options. Curley said he would find him another position if he wanted, like assistant athletic director. He was told that he had 30 years in the state retirement system and there was some weird window letting him retire with full benefits. It also mentions looking into becoming a head coach at Altoona with Paterno's blessing. Again, no where on that page does it say 'Sandusky has decided to retire'.What page 56 reads like to me, is everyone at PSU treating Sandusky like a ticking time bomb and wanting to get him away from the football program.

 

[roadkill1292]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

losing those scholarships means they will be crushed and a MAC team for 10 years minimum. Competing against Alabama with 20 less scholarship athletes? GLWAT. This is almost insurmountable.

Yea, but that's ok. Lots of lesser programs have happy, dedicated fans and alumni.

Factory fanboys (I don't know if JTG is one or not) refuse to believe that this is possible.

 

[Idiot Boxer]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

losing those scholarships means they will be crushed and a MAC team for 10 years minimum. Competing against Alabama with 20 less scholarship athletes? GLWAT. This is almost insurmountable.

Yea, but that's ok. Lots of lesser programs have happy, dedicated fans and alumni.

Factory fanboys (I don't know if JTG is one or not) refuse to believe that this is possible.

Nah. He's a Purdue fan. Practically MAC material.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

My opinions on this:1) Penalties by NCAA were extremely harsh, but fair. 2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######. 3) Penalties by B1G were harsh, but fair. 4) Paterno family: Shut. The. ####. Up. 5) Crazy PSU fans/alums: Shut. The. ####. Up. 6) Former PSU players still defending Paterno (I'm looking at you Michael Robinson): Shut. The. ####. Up. 7) Normal PSU fans/alums: Now is the time to support the university through this. We have a great meaning coach in Bill O'Brien. We'll have to wait years to fairly see if he is a great football coach but I like the way he acts during this. Let's keep going to games and supporting the team. They did nothing wrong. Let's keep supporting the students. They did nothing wrong. Let's keep supporting the local businesses. They did nothing wrong. And most importantly, let's support child abuse organizations as much as we do our team. And let's celebrate when we inevitably knock off some team much better than us 3-4 years from now (Please let it be Pitt in 2016). 8) We Are!

I don't want to come off as a defender here. But sometimes I feel like throwing some alternate thought into the mix.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

losing those scholarships means they will be crushed and a MAC team for 10 years minimum. Competing against Alabama with 20 less scholarship athletes? GLWAT. This is almost insurmountable.

Yea, but that's ok. Lots of lesser programs have happy, dedicated fans and alumni.

a much needed humbling, imo.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

losing those scholarships means they will be crushed and a MAC team for 10 years minimum. Competing against Alabama with 20 less scholarship athletes? GLWAT. This is almost insurmountable.

Yea, but that's ok. Lots of lesser programs have happy, dedicated fans and alumni.

Factory fanboys (I don't know if JTG is one or not) refuse to believe that this is possible.

Nah. He's a Purdue fan. Practically MAC material.

September 8th...

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

losing those scholarships means they will be crushed and a MAC team for 10 years minimum. Competing against Alabama with 20 less scholarship athletes? GLWAT. This is almost insurmountable.

Yea, but that's ok. Lots of lesser programs have happy, dedicated fans and alumni.

Factory fanboys (I don't know if JTG is one or not) refuse to believe that this is possible.

there is a Sandusky joke in there, somewhere...anywho, I think the punishment is right. But I think people have buried the most significant of those punishments on the list.

 

[Short Corner]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

It's too bad there aren't any other organizations out there to investigate and punish crimes like covering up child molestation. If only we didn't have to rely on the NCAA to punish these folks for their actions.

 

[Joe Summer]

Read page 56 of the Freeh report. Sandusky's retirement plans had already been discussed and largely agreed upon before the 1998 incident.

I just read page 56. They discuss Sandusky's future job options (assistant AD, etc.) but Sandusky never actually states that he plans to retire. That didn't happen until 1999.

 

[Arizona Ron]

In December 2000, Sandusky would have become the head football coach at UVA but UVA balked because Sandusky refused to give up his time commitment at the Second Mile. UVA was that close to getting in the middle of this gigantic mess.

If he went to UVA, this wouldn't have been as bad. It may have never even come to light.

 

[Short Corner]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

It's too bad there aren't any other organizations out there to investigate and punish crimes like covering up child molestation. If only we didn't have to rely on the NCAA to punish these folks for their actions.

We?

 

[roadkill1292]

If these restrictions essentially make Penn State a Division II football team (or whatever the proper term is these days) how will that affect the Big 10? Will Penn State essentially become the doormat of the Big 10 for the next several years?

losing those scholarships means they will be crushed and a MAC team for 10 years minimum. Competing against Alabama with 20 less scholarship athletes? GLWAT. This is almost insurmountable.

Yea, but that's ok. Lots of lesser programs have happy, dedicated fans and alumni.

Factory fanboys (I don't know if JTG is one or not) refuse to believe that this is possible.

there is a Sandusky joke in there, somewhere...anywho, I think the punishment is right. But I think people have buried the most significant of those punishments on the list.

I'm glad you're a Purdue fan. In my dreams, the ideal college football world has way more Purdues in it than Alabamas.

I've lost track of what everyone has been saying. So could you expound a little on the bolded?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

It's too bad there aren't any other organizations out there to investigate and punish crimes like covering up child molestation. If only we didn't have to rely on the NCAA to punish these folks for their actions.

We?

Yes.

 

[Arizona Ron]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

It's too bad there aren't any other organizations out there to investigate and punish crimes like covering up child molestation. If only we didn't have to rely on the NCAA to punish these folks for their actions.

The NCAA

 

[Short Corner]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

It's too bad there aren't any other organizations out there to investigate and punish crimes like covering up child molestation. If only we didn't have to rely on the NCAA to punish these folks for their actions.

We?

Yes.

Speak for yourself. I am not relying on the NCAA for this. They don't have the teeth.

 

[GDogg]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

They weren't going to eliminate their football program forever. This is almost as bad as the death penalty.

 

[roadkill1292]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

It's too bad there aren't any other organizations out there to investigate and punish crimes like covering up child molestation. If only we didn't have to rely on the NCAA to punish these folks for their actions.

We?

Yes.

Speak for yourself. I am not relying on the NCAA for this. They don't have the teeth.

I'm not sure you and Ivan are having a meeting of the minds in this exchange.

 

[Short Corner]

2) I honestly can't understand people saying things like "it wasn't enough" or even "it wasn't nearly enough". I'd hate to be that big of an #######.

I just think covering up and enabling child rape is as low as it gets. I think at a minimum, they should get the Death Penalty indefinitely and wouldn't mind all too much if the rest of the athletic dept were given a time out for a couple years.

They weren't going to eliminate their football program forever. This is almost as bad as the death penalty.

I understand that. It is just my opinion of what they deserve, which apparently makes me an #######.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Read page 56 of the Freeh report. Sandusky's retirement plans had already been discussed and largely agreed upon before the 1998 incident.

I just read page 56. They discuss Sandusky's future job options (assistant AD, etc.) but Sandusky never actually states that he plans to retire. That didn't happen until 1999.

Right. But page 56 rebuts the idea that the 1998 incident was the impetus for the idea of him retiring. The talks had already been going on. It is possible that 1998 changed exactly how everything went down.