Online Now 420

Wolverine247 Board

The place for discussion on the Michigan Wolverines

On this Board 333
Record: 2671 (1/26/2013)

Online now 632
Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)

Reply

PSU Discussion

  • bkp1883 said...

    Just that the lawsuits won't be able to get the compensation that they should because JoePa is a piece of s***.

    I don't know what he thinks about an NCAA investigation.

    Right. And he was responding to your point that the NCAA should not get involved absent evidence of NCAA rules being broken. You said the matter was more appropriately handled by the criminal and civil court system and he responded by saying Paterno's sale of his home cheated the victims out of the civil remedy. Paterno's home sale is irrelevant to the debate about the NCAA's role and that is what I said.

    MrWoodson

  • MrWoodson said...

    Agree. The NCAA is notoriously inconsistent and incompetent in enforcing its own rules. The last thing we should want is an expansion of their power so they can start handing out penalties for violations of state and federal laws. This reminds me of their foray into banning certain school mascots. The result is FSU with a Native Amercan mascot that apparently is ok because they are paying off some tribe while Illinois is forced to change theirs.

    We have a criminal justice system to handle violations of criminal law. We have civil courts on top of that. PSU fired a legendary coach and his reputation is in tatters. The school's image also has taken a massive hit. People are going to jail (and Sandusky will not be the only one). They are going to be sued for hundreds of millions of dollars. The NCAA should only have jurisdiction to penalize schools when the NCAA's rules are broken. Despite how horrific what Sandusky has done is, it is not a violation of any NCAA rule.

    If LOIC is expanded to include cases where no NCAA rules are broken but other "bad" things have happened, where does the NCAA's power end? Should the NCAA start issuing show cause orders to coaches who receive DUIs? How about if an AD is found to be embezzling funds? That's a crime. Should the NCAA step in with LOIC after the AD is sent to prison. Sorry, but the NCAA is the worst possible organization to be stepping in and enforcing our criminal laws. They can't even honestly and competently enforce their own.

    Excellent diatribe......also parallel's for an argument being against obamacare/government overreach as well

    signature image signature image signature image

    Awink2 ●

  • NigelUno said...

    A "fair" point? I thought I made a pretty obvious point. Glad you noticed at least that though.

    I coulda just said, "Son, You're on your own."

    attachment

    bkp1883

  • bkp1883 said...

    I coulda just said, "Son, You're on your own."

    Instead you chose the alternative.

    Truth, justice, and the red, white, and blue!

    God Bless America!

    NigelUno

  • Dizzo said...

    I actually see the opposite. The athletic department clearly did these things for a competitive advantage for their football team. Had reports come out that a coach was raping kids in the locker room, it would have damaged the football team's reputation, caused issues with their recruiting, the brand would've been tarnished which could've lead to lost advertising, etc.

    They didn't hide these crimes because they liked Sandusky, they hid them because the story would've hurt the football team and caused them to lose the competitive advantage of being a "clean" program. So whether it is to gain a competitive advantage, or prevent yourself from losing one, it's a LOIC.

    I don't think the punishment should involve any sort of scholarship reductions for this specific case because it wasn't the players issues, but there clearly should be athletic department penalties put in place. Who knows how much money they made in the past because their brand wasn't tarnished. Shouldn't they be penalized for that and somehow have some of the future revenue taken away, be it from not participating in bowl games?

    The University should just self-impose that any bowl game revenue for the next few years they get go to some child abuse charity or something like that.

    I suppose I can see it both ways. I would argue that they were protecting the university as a whole and their own reputations, rather than just the football program, but because of the prominence of the football program I can undertand your argument.

    I guess it comes down to how the NCAA sees it, although, all things equal, I'd rather the NCAA just stay out of it. Don't need the keystone cops making a mockery of all of this.

    bkp1883

  • MrWoodson said...

    Right. And he was responding to your point that the NCAA should not get involved absent evidence of NCAA rules being broken. You said the matter was more appropriately handled by the criminal and civil court system and he responded by saying Paterno's sale of his home cheated the victims out of the civil remedy. Paterno's home sale is irrelevant to the debate about the NCAA's role and that is what I said.

    Fair enough. I don't really care.

    If he wants to clarify what he means he can.

    bkp1883

  • bkp1883 said...

    I suppose I can see it both ways. I would argue that they were protecting the university as a whole and their own reputations, rather than just the football program, but because of the prominence of the football program I can undertand your argument.

    I guess it comes down to how the NCAA sees it, although, all things equal, I'd rather the NCAA just stay out of it. Don't need the keystone cops making a mockery of all of this.

    And that's exactly what it would be. A mockery. The NCAA getting involved in this equates Child Rape to USC cheating and that is just wrong. This is specifically a legal thing and should be handled harshly by the legal system.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine

  • WillyWolverine said...

    And that's exactly what it would be. A mockery. The NCAA getting involved in this equates Child Rape to USC cheating and that is just wrong. This is specifically a legal thing and should be handled harshly by the legal system.

    I agree, which is why I said I don't think it should go down the path of scholarship reductions, etc. The Athletic Department should have some sort of penalties against it though, maybe not because of Sandusky specifically, but because of the other emails from their school enforcement people complaining that Paterno controlled any discipline centered on football players getting in trouble and prevented anything from going through the proper university channels. Clearly they had a desire to coverup any bad news, which likely constituted other NCAA violations.

    Thinking it through again, I think the NCAA should stay out of the Sandusky case, but launch an investigation based on "in plain sight" evidence that they covered multiple things up and may have also covered up violations the NCAA would be interested in penalizing.

    Dizzo ●

  • WillyWolverine said...

    And that's exactly what it would be. A mockery. The NCAA getting involved in this equates Child Rape to USC cheating and that is just wrong. This is specifically a legal thing and should be handled harshly by the legal system.

    I think the NCAA needs to act on this case to both protect their brand and to do what's right. If the NCAA does nothing, its sending the signal that we won't get involved if it doesn't directly involve athletics and/or competition.

    The NCAA has always sought to appear as the morally correct wing of sports - and incidents like this harm that image immeasurably.

    UMPat

  • Awink2 said...

    Excellent diatribe......also parallel's for an argument being against obamacare/government overreach as well

    I'm somewhat of a libertarian at heart. I hate seat belt laws.

    MrWoodson

  • Dizzo said...

    I agree, which is why I said I don't think it should go down the path of scholarship reductions, etc. The Athletic Department should have some sort of penalties against it though, maybe not because of Sandusky specifically, but because of the other emails from their school enforcement people complaining that Paterno controlled any discipline centered on football players getting in trouble and prevented anything from going through the proper university channels. Clearly they had a desire to coverup any bad news, which likely constituted other NCAA violations.

    Thinking it through again, I think the NCAA should stay out of the Sandusky case, but launch an investigation based on "in plain sight" evidence that they covered multiple things up and may have also covered up violations the NCAA would be interested in penalizing.

    Yeah if they can prove NCAA violations occured that Paterno hid then yeah they can hit the football team.

    I wouldn't have a problem with the NCAA hitting the University in some way for the cover up of the Child rape as long as the punishment is not centered around the football program specifically.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine

  • UMPat said...

    I think the NCAA needs to act on this case to both protect their brand and to do what's right. If the NCAA does nothing, its sending the signal that we won't get involved if it doesn't directly involve athletics and/or competition.

    The NCAA has always sought to appear as the morally correct wing of sports - and incidents like this harm that image immeasurably.

    But to equate Child Rape to cheating in a sport is wrong. If the NCAA is going to hit Penn State the punishment needs to be non football program specific.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine

  • UMPat said...

    I think the NCAA needs to act on this case to both protect their brand and to do what's right. If the NCAA does nothing, its sending the signal that we won't get involved if it doesn't directly involve athletics and/or competition.

    The NCAA has always sought to appear as the morally correct wing of sports - and incidents like this harm that image immeasurably.

    NCAA stands for National Collegiate Athletic Association. It is supposed to be focused on sports. This is exactly the slippery slope problem. Are you suggesting that if Sandusky had just been a high profile professor or administrator in the Biology Department that the NCAA should get involved? I mean it still would be a lack of institutional control and really horrific things still would have happened and we all still would be outraged. IMO the NCAA is one of the worst possible organizations to handle something like this. The next thing we will hear is the UN is stepping in because foreign nationals are students at PSU.

    This post was edited by MrWoodson on 7/12/2012 at 1:12 PM

    MrWoodson

  • WillyWolverine said...

    Yeah if they can prove NCAA violations occured that Paterno hid then yeah they can hit the football team.

    I wouldn't have a problem with the NCAA hitting the University in some way for the cover up of the Child rape as long as the punishment is not centered around the football program specifically.

    I believe the "violation" is the extreme lack of governance. When 1 prominent individual can impose a cover-up of that magnitude it is clear that there was no effective institutional governance in place. Whether or not this lack of governance led to violations is another matter imo - the fact that there was no governance/control in place is the greater crime.

    UMPat

  • MrWoodson said...

    NCAA stands for National Collegiate Athletic Association. It is supposed to be focused on sports. This is exactly the slippery slope problem. Are you suggesting that if Sandusky had just been a high profile professor or administrator in the Biology Department that the NCAA should get involved? I mean it still would be a lack of institutional control and really horrific things still would have happened and we all still would be outraged. IMO the NCAA is one of the worst possible organizations to handle something like this. The next thing we will hear is the UN is stepping in because foreign nationals are students at PSU.

    This.

    Even if you can make a case about the NCAA policing its member institutions for brand purposes (I'm thinking NFL suspending players for failing drug tests or getting a DUI), this would be so out of the scope of the NCAA that anything the NCAA did would be absurd.

    bkp1883

  • UMPat said...

    I believe the "violation" is the extreme lack of governance. When 1 prominent individual can impose a cover-up of that magnitude it is clear that there was no effective institutional governance in place. Whether or not this lack of governance led to violations is another matter imo - the fact that there was no governance/control in place is the greater crime.

    Paterno didn't do anything without compliance of the administration. This goes way above the football team and athletic department up to the high university brass.

    bkp1883

  • bkp1883 said...

    Paterno didn't do anything without compliance of the administration. This goes way above the football team and athletic department up to the high university brass.

    That's for damn sure. The Freeh report makes it clear that AD Curley was pretty much Paterno's hand-puppet, but there's no doubt that everyone up to Spanier collaborated on keeping this quiet.

    signature image signature image signature image

    CMXI

  • NigelUno said...

    Trolling?

    I was being quite intentionally sarcastic. Anyone defending Paterno at this point isn't really bright. Anyone doing it on a message board would probably be...trolling.

    Carry on.

    I wasn't knocking it, I should've thrown in the sarcasm emoticon. It was a great response I thought

    signature image signature image signature image

    michagain

  • I'm not here to get into extended arguments. This is your board and you guys can think what you want. Just want to express an opinion both regarding a few of the specific comments I've seen on here and on the report in general.

    One thing I do find interesting is the perception that Paterno had ultimate power, or that Curley was under Paterno's control.

    I didn't get that at all from the Freeh Report and I'd be interested to know where people got that perception. My understanding from the Report was that Spanier, Curley and Schultz all made the decisions. Paterno was either an observer or gave advice (per his discussion with Curley), but there's no evidence that I can see that he made any sort of decisions himself. Influencing decisions does not equal making them. That said, Paterno obviously had his own failings in this case, and is not without criticism.

    Frankly, the conclusion I've reached is that none of them understood the depth of Sandusky's issues. And part of their failing is that they never tried to understand what exactly was going on. Not an excuse or exoneration - it just seems they never realized how serious it was, and thus they didn't take it that seriously.

    Regarding where to go from here, I think the focus needs to be on the victims. First and foremost, PSU needs to compensate them in some way, whether it's money, psychological help, whatever they can do. Something as tragic as this can't be erased, but whatever we can do should be done. Second, the University needs to make changes in how it reports crimes or patterns of suspicious behavior. They need to work with the DOE, among others to ensure something like this absolutely never happens again.

    Let's hope that those who deserve justice earn it in the courts.

    signature image

    psubills62

  • psubills62 said...

    I'm not here to get into extended arguments. This is your board and you guys can think what you want. Just want to express an opinion both regarding a few of the specific comments I've seen on here and on the report in general.

    One thing I do find interesting is the perception that Paterno had ultimate power, or that Curley was under Paterno's control.

    I didn't get that at all from the Freeh Report and I'd be interested to know where people got that perception. My understanding from the Report was that Spanier, Curley and Schultz all made the decisions. Paterno was either an observer or gave advice (per his discussion with Curley), but there's no evidence that I can see that he made any sort of decisions himself. Influencing decisions does not equal making them. That said, Paterno obviously had his own failings in this case, and is not without criticism.

    Frankly, the conclusion I've reached is that none of them understood the depth of Sandusky's issues. And part of their failing is that they never tried to understand what exactly was going on. Not an excuse or exoneration - it just seems they never realized how serious it was, and thus they didn't take it that seriously.

    Regarding where to go from here, I think the focus needs to be on the victims. First and foremost, PSU needs to compensate them in some way, whether it's money, psychological help, whatever they can do. Something as tragic as this can't be erased, but whatever we can do should be done. Second, the University needs to make changes in how it reports crimes or patterns of suspicious behavior. They need to work with the DOE, among others to ensure something like this absolutely never happens again.

    Let's hope that those who deserve justice earn it in the courts.

    We will never know most of what was discussed and said about this between Spanier, Schultz, Curley and Paterno. Paterno is dead and the other three aren't talking. But a few things are painfully clear:

    1. All four failed miserably in their responsibilities. Any one of them could have gone to the authorities. Throw in McQueary, his dad and anyone else who was told of the 2001 incident while you're at it. What were they thinking?

    2. The idea that Spanier or Schultz or Curley were not able to go against Paterno's wishes is hogwash. It happens every day in life. McQueary, a lowly GA, went to Paterno even though he knew how powerful Sandusky was. And ultimately the BOT summarily fired both Spanier and Paterno. Was it easy? No. But that is character and leadership.

    3. Paterno clearly knew about 1998. Based on the facts, it's understandable why no prosecution happened at that time. But as soon as the 2001/2002 incident came up there should have been zero discussion about what the right thing to do was. Sandusky should have been immediately banned from PSU and Second Mile and the authorities should have been notified. That's a decision most people could have made properly in their sleep.

    4. Anyone who knew about the 1998 allegations (which includes both PSU and Second Mile people) should have seen red flag after red flag every time Sandusky showed up anywhere in the company of young boys. He should have been watched extremely carefully and never allowed to be alone with them. Again, what were these people thinking watching him bring boy after boy to PSU events and facilities after 1998 and certainly after 2001/2002?

    This post has been edited 8 times, most recently by MrWoodson on 7/12/2012 at 2:56 PM

    MrWoodson

  • I have no problem agreeing with your points, MrWoodson.

    This post was edited by psubills62 on 7/12/2012 at 2:49 PM

    signature image

    psubills62

  • psubills62 said...

    I have no problem agreeing with your points, MrWoodson.

    I think the consensus on the PSU board is that Shultz was the most deviant, and probably the biggest/most prominent figure in the coverup (based on the Freeh Report, tough to debate), but all 4 are s***heads.. Do you concur bills? Michigan thoughts?

    chasfcd11

  • chasfcd11 said...

    I think the consensus on the PSU board is that Shultz was the most deviant, and probably the biggest/most prominent figure in the coverup (based on the Freeh Report, tough to debate), but all 4 are s***heads.. Do you concur bills? Michigan thoughts?

    Schultz was in charge of campus police. It was his primary responsibility to investigate both the 1998 and 2001/2002 incidents and take the appropriate legal action. And he should have known the legalities better than any of the four. But this was not rocket science. Common sense was enough for the other three to realize this was not the type of matter they could "handle internally", which appears to be the decision they came to as a small group. This wasn't a campus bar fight or a failed drug test. It was allegations of child molestation. You automatically turn it over to the proper authorities.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by MrWoodson on 7/12/2012 at 4:04 PM

    MrWoodson

  • MrWoodson said...

    Schultz was in charge of campus police. It was his primary responsibility to investigate both the 1998 and 2001/2002 incidents and take the appropriate legal action. And he should have known the legalities better than any of the four. But this was not rocket science. Common sense was enough for the other three to realize this was not the type of matter they could "handle internally", which appears to be the decision they came to as a small group. This wasn't a campus bar fight or a failed drug test. It was allegations of child molestation. You automatically turn it over to the proper authorities.

    This goes back to what I mentioned - that I don't think these guys realized what they were dealing with. The first situation was obviously not seen as molestation, otherwise there would have been a case against Sandusky that Corbett (hopefully) would have prosecuted.

    Schultz is the one who looks the worst, though they're all at fault in some way. I believe it was said that from the evidence, Schultz appears to be devious, Spanier and Curley appear to be dunderheads and Joe appears to be relatively ignorant (willfully).

    signature image

    psubills62

  • From listening to the PSU press conference the board of directors claimed that they had no idea Sandusky was under investigation from a grand jury in 1998.

    I absolutely do not believe that for a second. I remember when it came over the media waves. I saw the story on Fox. It stated that Sandusky was resigning or retiring amidst abuse investigation in two accounts. It was a shock to me as a college football fan because he was probably the best assistant coach going a that time and PSU was very good.

    They need to start the process by telling the truth. No way that I saw that on the television in 1998 and not one of them knew anything about it.

    Amazinglyblue78

Michigan
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports