Home
i'm an actor, not a reactor

Primary links

  • About
    • $upport (lol)
    • Ethics
    • FAQ
    • Glossary
    • Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • MGoStore
    • Hail to Old Blue
  • MGoBoard
    • MGoBoard FAQ
    • Michigan bar locator
    • Moderator Action Sticky
  • Useful Stuff
    • Depth Chart By Class
    • Hoops Depth Chart by Class
    • 2017 Recruiting Board
    • Unofficial Two Deep
    • MGoFlickr
    • Diaries, Windows Live Writer, And You
    • User-Curated HOF
    • Where To Eat In Ann Arbor
  • Schedule/Tix
    • Future Schedules (wiki)
    • Ticket spreadsheet
Home Forums MGoBoard

Navigation

  • Forums
  • Recent posts

User login

  • Create new account
  • Request new password

MGoElsewhere

  • @MGoBlog (Brian)
  • @aceanbender
  • @Misopogon (Seth)
  • @Aeschnepp (Adam)
  • @BISB
  • @EUpchurchPhoto
  • @FullOfTwitt (Fuller)
  • Hail to the Victors 2016
  • MGoFacebook
  • MGoPodcast
  • WTKA
  • Instagram

Michigan Blogs

  • Big House Blog
  • Burgeoning Wolverine Star
  • Genuinely Sarcastic
  • Go Blue Michigan Wolverine
  • Holdin' The Rope
  • MVictors
  • Maize 'n' Blue Nation
  • Maize 'n' Brew
  • Maize And Go Blue
  • Michigan Hockey Net
  • MMMGoBlueBBQ
  • The Blog That Yost Built
  • The Hoover Street Rag
  • The M Zone
  • Touch The Banner
  • UMGoBlog
  • UMHoops
  • UMTailgate
  • Wolverine Liberation Army

M On The Net

  • mgovideo
  • MGoBlue.com
  • Mike DeSimone
  • Recruiting Planet
  • The Wolverine
  • Go Blue Wolverine
  • Winged Helmet
  • UMGoBlue.com
  • MaizeRage.org
  • Puckhead
  • The M Den
  • True Blue Fan Forum

Big Ten Blogs

  • Illinois
    • Illinois Loyalty
    • Illinois Baseball Report
  • Indiana
    • Inside The Hall
    • The Crimson Quarry
  • Iowa
    • Black Heart, Gold Pants
    • Fight For Iowa
  • Michigan State
    • The Only Colors
  • Minnesota
    • GopherHole.com
    • The Daily Gopher
  • Nebraska
    • Corn Nation
    • Husker Max
    • Husker Mike's Blasphemy
    • Husker Gameday
  • Northwestern
    • Sippin' On Purple
    • Lake The Posts
  • Notre Dame
    • The House Rock Built
    • One Foot Down
  • Ohio State
    • Eleven Warriors
    • Buckeye Commentary
    • Men of the Scarlet and Gray
    • Our Honor Defend
    • The Buckeye Nine
  • Penn State
    • Slow States
    • Black Shoe Diaries
    • Happy Valley Hardball
    • Penn State Clips
    • Linebacker U
    • Nittany White Out
  • Purdue
    • Boiled Sports
    • Hammer and Rails
  • Wisconsin
    • Bruce Ciskie

Links of Note

  • Baseball
    • College Baseball Today
    • The College Baseball Blog
  • Basketball
    • Ken Pomeroy
    • Hoop Math
    • John Gasaway
    • Luke Winn/Sports Illustrated
  • College Hockey
    • Chris Heisenberg (Class of 2016)
    • College Hockey Stats
    • Michigan College Hockey
    • Hockey's Future
    • Sioux Sports
    • USCHO
  • Football
    • Smart Football
    • Every Day Should Be Saturday
    • Matt Hinton/Grantland
    • Football Study Hall
    • Football Outsiders
    • Harold Stassen
    • NCAA D-I Stats Page
    • The Wizard Of Odds
    • CFB Stats
  • General
    • Sports Central
  • Local Interest
    • The Ann Arbor Chronicle
    • Arborwiki
    • Arbor Update
    • Ann Arbor Observer
    • Teeter Talk
    • Vacuum
  • Teams Of The D
    • Lions
      • Pride of Detroit
    • Pistons
      • Detroit Bad Boys
      • Need4Sheed
    • Tigers
      • Roar Of The Tigers
      • Bless You Boys
      • The Daily Fungo
      • The Detroit Tigers Weblog
    • Red Wings
      • Winging It In Motown
      • On The Wings
    • Michigan Sports Forum

Beveled Guilt

Site Search

Diaries

  • New
  • Popular
  • Hot
  • Thirteen unlucky minutes (TL;DNR-This is a bit of rant about the refs)
    docwhoblocked - 2 weeks ago
  • Fan Satisfaction Index End of Season Bball Survey
    OneFootIn - 2 weeks ago
  • How likely are we to revert to the mean?
    Bo Glue - 2 weeks ago
  • It's time to avenge Villanova's 1985 NCAA tourney upset over Michigan
    Communist Football - 2 weeks ago
  • 14 Months Ago: The Fire Beilein Threads.
    stephenrjking - 3 weeks ago
  •  
  • 1 of 2
  • ››
more
  • This Month in MGoBlog History - March 2008: Pryor isn't coming, Boren has left, and some academic fraud allegations sprinkled in
    Maize.Blue Wagner - 215 comments
  • The Ballad of Jordan Poole
    k.o.k.Law - 176 comments
  • 14 Months Ago: The Fire Beilein Threads.
    stephenrjking - 91 comments
  • PreSpring Football updates from Sam Webb
    AZBlue - 90 comments
  • Thirteen unlucky minutes (TL;DNR-This is a bit of rant about the refs)
    docwhoblocked - 61 comments
  •  
  • 1 of 2
  • ››
more

MGoBoard

  • New
  • Recent
  • Hot
  • OT: How do some student-athletes finish a bachelors so quickly (to transfer)?
    0 replies
  • OT: Avicii dead at 28
    19 replies
  • Chase Young becomes highest drafted Michigan lacrosse player
    13 replies
  • Podcast discussion on the conference
    25 replies
  • Matthews Declares WITHOUT agent
    36 replies
  • OT - Jalen Hurts possibly looking to transfer
    94 replies
  • Game Day Condos - who's gonna buy one?
    59 replies
  • OT: Arsene Wenger set to retire from Arsenal FC
    41 replies
  • OT: The Cube Inaccessible Until Fall 2019
    16 replies
  • It’s Friday - Time to POSBANG!!
    73 replies
  • RIP Earle Bruce
    41 replies
  • Final 2018 Basketball COMPOSITE Rankings
    33 replies
  • OT: Map of college stadiums that sell alcohol
    87 replies
  • Auston Robertson arrested again
    59 replies
  • Michigan announces single-game ticket prices for 2018 football season
    36 replies
  •  
  • 1 of 7
  • ››
  • OT: How do some student-athletes finish a bachelors so quickly (to transfer)?
    0 replies
  • Chase Young becomes highest drafted Michigan lacrosse player
    13 replies
  • OT: Avicii dead at 28
    19 replies
  • Any news on Grant Newsome?
    81 replies
  • OT - Jalen Hurts possibly looking to transfer
    94 replies
  • Game Day Condos - who's gonna buy one?
    59 replies
  • Matthews Declares WITHOUT agent
    36 replies
  • Podcast discussion on the conference
    25 replies
  • OT: Arsene Wenger set to retire from Arsenal FC
    41 replies
  • RIP Earle Bruce
    41 replies
  • OT: The Cube Inaccessible Until Fall 2019
    16 replies
  • It’s Friday - Time to POSBANG!!
    73 replies
  • OT: Map of college stadiums that sell alcohol
    87 replies
  • Auston Robertson arrested again
    59 replies
  • Belleville coach Jermain Crowell mad at UM again
    243 replies
  •  
  • 1 of 7
  • ››
  • Why should we be optimistic about 2018 M football?
    273 replies
  • Belleville coach Jermain Crowell mad at UM again
    243 replies
  • Police investigating Elysee Mbem-Bosse for death threat against Harbaugh
    224 replies
  • "Being Not-Rich at UM" Guide
    168 replies
  • Buckle Up
    159 replies
  • Scouting the Enemy: Ohio State QBs are Good
    158 replies
  • Semi-OT: What sports would you fix?
    158 replies
  • Elysee Mbem-Bosse disturbing tweets
    157 replies
  • Whats the Best Way to Make Flight Arrangements?
    149 replies
  • Wagner to NBA
    141 replies
  • Urban Meyer throws more shade at Michigan
    141 replies
  • FB new Nutrition plan under Herbert is well received by players
    132 replies
  • What past season would you have liked to see an Amazon-style documentary on?
    121 replies
  • OT: best-selling musical artists by state of birth
    120 replies
  • The Ice Storm Cometh - And Your Favorite Winter Storm
    119 replies
  •  
  • 1 of 7
  • ››

Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon

Is the tide turning on Penn State sanctions?

93 posts / 0 new
Login or register to post comments
Last post
February 14th, 2013 at 11:27 AM
#1
Cold War
Joined: 01/15/2012
MGoPoints: -3537
Is the tide turning on Penn State sanctions?

ESPN Report looks at the issue

Van Natta: "Louis Freeh is like a prosecutor who made an opening statement last summer...but it was only an opening statement. It was dramatic and compelling and it hardened in the minds of Americans for 7 months until someone from the defense table finally stood up and defended Paterno. It is going to be really hard to change the minds of Americans because they are not easily swayed, but the evidence and arguments in the Paterno report are extremely damning of the Freeh report."

Van Natta: "Louis Freeh made it sound like his report was very exhaustive, reviewing millions of emails and interviewing hundreds of people. But the Paterno report points out that out of all that information, only a couple of vague emails an no verbal testimony were used to level these heavy indictments on Paterno."
 
http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=8944609
 
 
 

Another Penn State trustee urges look at Paterno report

Another Penn State trustee is urging a close look at a critique commissioned by Joe Paterno’s family of a school-sanctioned report by former FBI director Louis Freeh on the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal.

Trustee Ryan McCombie said in a statement late Monday that the findings should give pause to “closing the book and moving on” from the scandal.

McCombie stressed that he was speaking only for himself, not the board. Trustee Alvin Clemens said in a separate statement Monday that the board should re-examine Freeh’s findings after the analysis commissioned by late coach Joe Paterno’s family raised serious questions.

“We need to ‘take a breath;’ read the entire (Paterno family) report and digest it,” McCombie said. “Only then can we begin an open, thoughtful and useful conversation about what happened in Happy Valley and how to prevent it from happening anywhere again.”


http://www.centredaily.com/2013/02/13/3500611/another-psu-trustee-urges-look.html

 

Even a rumor Bill Clinton could become involved

http://twitter.com/MarkHorgas/status/301867428340707329

 
Top
  • Login or register to post comments
Tags:
  • MGoBoard

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
February 14th, 2013 at 11:29 AM
#2
State Street
State Street's picture
Joined: 07/09/2011
MGoPoints: 15302
Tide of public opinion? 

Tide of public opinion?  Maybe.  But if the NCAA were to reverse course on their decision, they would lose whatever microscopic amount of credibility they have left.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:37 AM
(Reply to #4) #3
State Street
State Street's picture
Joined: 07/09/2011
MGoPoints: 15302
Right, but there really is no

Right, but there really is no way to prove that the document was "faulty," nor is there a way to accept it as fact.  It is based on limited evidence and full of assumption and innuendo - but everyone knew this when it came out, and many in the media acknowledged it.

PSU also didn't impose the sanctions.  They claimed they would readily accept any handed down by the NCAA.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:38 AM
(Reply to #4) #4
GoBlueInNYC
GoBlueInNYC's picture
Joined: 03/23/2010
MGoPoints: 9532
The Freeh Repor wasn't an

The Freeh Repor wasn't an NCAA investigation. The NCAA got lazy and just wanted to jump in and yell "us too!" Also, it was publicly aired that PSU "self-imposed" under the threat of the death penalty from the NCAA (i.e., "do this or you're going to get it even worse").

And let's not lose sight of the fact that the NCAA is fucking stupid.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:53 AM
(Reply to #14) #5
APBlue
APBlue's picture
Joined: 01/07/2011
MGoPoints: 21898
"...the NCAA is fucking

"...the NCAA is fucking stupid." - YES!  Given that fact, I have no reason to believe that they're going to make the right decision here.  

The Freeh Report was an investigation, it just wasn't an NCAA investigation.  Under threat of the death penalty, PSU said here, this is the punishment we'll levy against ourselves.  With that, the NCAA said - Okay.  

If PSU were to backtrack, it would be at the risk of the NCAA opening up their own investigation and issuing their own punishment.  Given PSU is already one year into a four year (I think it was four years) punishment, I don't think it's worth the risk.  I think they've weathered the storm pretty nicely up to this point too.  I don't think it's been nearly as bad as many thought it would be.  Granted, as they enter year 3 or 4, their reduction in scholarships will begin to sting a bit more.  However, the alternative could be much worse.  

...which would be dragging this thing out another year or two.  We saw first hand (sort of) how the NCAA can drag out an investigation into something so minor as extra practice time for stretching.  Can you imagine how long it would take the NCAA to investigate this?  Would you want that?  

 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:42 PM
(Reply to #31) #6
bluebyyou
Joined: 09/07/2009
MGoPoints: 10801
The Freeh report was done on

The Freeh report was done on behalf of Penn State.  It was requested by PSU and paid for by them.  To the extent possible, Freeh relied on all available emails and personal interviews.  Paterno had an opportunity to be interviewed, but refused to do so as did, I believe, Spanier, Schultz and Curley.  Freeh had no axe to grind.  He was hired to be objective, and not to pull punches, and that seems to be exactly what he did.  

The report prepared for the Paterno family is self-serving and examined ZERO new evidence. If I were doing cross-examination on a witness, I might take an approach similar to what was outlined in  the the Paterno family report.  Raising a question about the veracity of evidence does not necessarily prove it was incorrect. That's why a defense calls its own witnesses who provide evidence to refute the plaintiff's case.  That has not happened here.

I may be a bit simplistic, but to me the Paterno report is pure spin. 

 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 2:10 PM
(Reply to #65) #7
Section 1
Section 1's picture
Joined: 06/29/2009
MGoPoints: 16556
You're a bit simplistic.

I may be a bit simplistic, but to me the Paterno report is pure spin.  

 

I think that you may be a bit simplistic.

Why is the Penn State/Freeh report not "spin," but the Paterno/Sollers report is "pure spin"?  For what it's worth, I don't think of much of anything as "pure."

People always do this.  They say, "Oh, you can't believe that lawyer, saying so-and-so.  He's been hired by {fill in the blank}."  Louis Freeh was hired by Penn State.  Spanier has a lawyer, whom he hired.  Ditto McQueary, Schultz, Curley, etc.  The Paterno family hired Wick Sollers and the King & Spaulding firm.  Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

I'd prefer to return to the merits and details of the story.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 2:57 PM
(Reply to #71) #8
bluebyyou
Joined: 09/07/2009
MGoPoints: 10801
I have to diagree with your

I have to diagree with your assessment. Freeh was hired by PSU to give them what, hopefully, was an objective evaluation of a situation.  He had, short of subpoena power, full access to university records and then some.  His group interviewed hundreds of people. What was the incentive for him to reach the conclusions he reached? The trustees did not have the opportunity to review his report, make comments for editing, and have him do a rewrite.  The conclusions Freeh made had evidentiary basis. Whom do you think the "Joe" was in the email?  

The Paterno family's report, OTOH, had an objective right from the gitgo, namely, to cast aspersions on Freeh's work product.  The trouble for Paterno's family is that they had zero evidence, other than saying one could reach a different conclusion, to support their position.

I've looked at the facts to the extent available.  They represent a series of emails and Sandusky's conviction at an open trial.  Perhaps when Curley, Schultz and Spanier have their day in court or their plea agreement, there will be more light shed on Freeh's conclusion.

Until then, I'd like to see what you have that would support a different conclusion.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 5:08 PM
(Reply to #77) #9
Section 1
Section 1's picture
Joined: 06/29/2009
MGoPoints: 16556
See what you did?

You went to the substantive details, in order to rebut a presumption that I favored Paterno, and therefore you needed to buttress the Freeh Report.

I never said that I had a preference for either one.

I have said, about ten different times in ten different ways, that I wasn't defending Paterno and had no desire to do so.  And I've also said that I am appreciative, of anybody who has read the hundreds of pages of the two reports, and who can distill them in a careful way for a less-interested audience.  That, along with my feeling rather dismissive of people who, without having read the full reports, immediately jump to the conclusion that Paterno's memory must be repeatedly kicked lest it get up again.  All that I was doing, in this thread and the other one, was to downgrade the Michigan fanboize who obviously never read the reports and who probably don't remember how close Paterno was to becoming the Head Football Coach of the Wolverines.  (Not that I wish it had happened.  Things turned out okay for Michigan after the 1968 season.)

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 15th, 2013 at 12:40 PM
(Reply to #86) #10
bluebyyou
Joined: 09/07/2009
MGoPoints: 10801
Section 1, don't know if you

Section 1, don't know if you will ever read this, as the thread is getting long in the tooth, but I read both reports cover to cover.  My conclusions, as someone who has practiced law longer than I want to think about, was that one report had factual basis with logical conclusions; the other pure spin. My few posts on the topic were made to support my position and really only looked at both reports from an evidentiary standpoint (Hoke's favorite word).

And, FWIW, I didn't downvote you.  I almost never do that to anyone as  I find up and down voting to be juvenile. Kate Upton being the only exception.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 3:10 PM
(Reply to #71) #11
ESNY
Joined: 11/06/2008
MGoPoints: 7199
Because the Paterno report is

Because the Paterno report is pure spin.  it doesn't represent an investigation or review of new/additional evidence.  It ignores known facts that aren't helpful to clearing Paterno's name (e.g., JoePa's testimony to the grand jury and responses to the Curley emails clearing indicating the topic was the Sandusky investigation) and rather tries to obfuscate the facts (e.g, Coach could refer to the basketball coach at the time, you should look at Paterno's 62 yrs of service when assessing the information).

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:30 PM
(Reply to #14) #12
Soulfire21
Soulfire21's picture
Joined: 03/18/2010
MGoPoints: 14525
The NCAA didn't "get lazy",

The NCAA didn't "get lazy", IIRC.  Penn State gave the okay to the NCAA to use the already-commissioned Freeh report as a basis for their decisions to avoid a lengthy NCAA investigation.  Penn State didn't want to drag this out.  Hasty?  Perhaps, but I wouldn't characterize it as lazy.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 3:26 PM
(Reply to #60) #13
bluebyyou
Joined: 09/07/2009
MGoPoints: 10801
People may be forgetting this

People may be forgetting this ESPN piece on the negotiations over the NCAA's sanctions for Penn State.  The negotiations went on for some time.

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/8228641/inside-secret-negotiation...

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 7:21 PM
(Reply to #14) #14
snarling wolverine
snarling wolverine's picture
Joined: 12/14/2011
MGoPoints: 42991
The Freeh Repor wasn't an

The Freeh Repor wasn't an NCAA investigation. The NCAA got lazy and just wanted to jump in and yell "us too!"

That's what the NCAA always does. Schools hire law firms to look into violations and then the NCAA accepts the findings.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:38 AM
(Reply to #4) #15
MichiganManOf1961
MichiganManOf1961's picture
Joined: 05/18/2012
MGoPoints: -805798
I know the NCAA doesn't have

I know the NCAA doesn't have an even compared level of credibility to the criminal justice system, but would you be happy if someone was sentenced to 40 years in prison, was known to be not such a good guy, but was convicted using shakey evidence and under the guise of a public opinion witch hunt?  I think Penn State should get what is due, but the ground on which the NCAA stands in leveling such penalties is questionable. 

~Herm

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:41 AM
(Reply to #15) #16
MichiganManOf1961
MichiganManOf1961's picture
Joined: 05/18/2012
MGoPoints: -805798
Also, I would most certainly

Also, I would most certainly trust anything and everything Bill Clinton has to say about a sex scandal.

~Herm

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:49 AM
(Reply to #15) #17
Ccapilla
Joined: 02/11/2012
MGoPoints: 454
Devil's advocate here...

But does it change your mind any if said person pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 40 years rather than take a chance on going to trial?

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:03 PM
(Reply to #26) #18
MichiganManOf1961
MichiganManOf1961's picture
Joined: 05/18/2012
MGoPoints: -805798
I'd equate it with something

I'd equate it with something like this:  Penn State committed manslaughter which carries a 10 year sentence.  The NCAA charged them with a quadruple homicide which carries a mandatory life sentence.  But, the NCAA offered them a plea deal for 20 years.  Penn State wasn't going to risk it and took the deal.  (Although I think the issue is more over whether the NCAA even has the authority to sanction PSU for criminal wrongs rather than mere NCAA rules-violations.  Kind of like someone being charged with murder and then the IRS raising their taxes.)

~Herm

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 2:41 PM
(Reply to #4) #19
acs236
Joined: 01/27/2009
MGoPoints: 824
You mean the sanction that Penn State CONSENTED to?*

nm

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:50 AM
(Reply to #2) #20
NittanyFan
Joined: 12/04/2012
MGoPoints: 7752
Convicted criminals get parole every single day ...

that doesn't undermine the credibility and/or authority of our criminal justice system.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if come next spring, the scholarship restrictions are moved from 65/15 to something like 70/18 or 75/20, with the NCAA giving this "partial parole" to PSU for "good behavior" since November 2011. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 8:04 PM
(Reply to #27) #21
pbmd
pbmd's picture
Joined: 04/24/2010
MGoPoints: 1217
no more protection of pedophiles?

this is indeed a great instiution.

what group of people supports this american tragedy.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:34 AM
#22
Cold War
Joined: 01/15/2012
MGoPoints: -3537
Did you use NCAA and

State Street, did you use NCAA and credibility in the same sentence?

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:34 AM
(Reply to #3) #23
MgoBadFish
MgoBadFish's picture
Joined: 01/30/2012
MGoPoints: 424
Yes, he did... And so did

Yes, he did... And so did you. Gotcha!

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:43 AM
(Reply to #7) #24
Cold War
Joined: 01/15/2012
MGoPoints: -3537
Hate when that happens.

Hate when that happens.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:32 AM
#25
Jmilan
Jmilan's picture
Joined: 10/13/2011
MGoPoints: 751
The public outrage that would

The public outrage that would occur if the sanctions got turned around would be ridiculous. Joe Paterno is guilty in the eyes of the public and there really isn't much to do to change that. Penn state fans are the only ones to cry for a retrial and think thy Paterno is abstain from any responsibility. They just need to move on accept their punishment and quit trying to force everyone to believe Paterno's innocence.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:32 AM
#26
BiSB
BiSB's picture
Joined: 08/15/2009
MGoPoints: 44839
No.

Next question.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:24 PM
(Reply to #6) #27
BiSB
BiSB's picture
Joined: 08/15/2009
MGoPoints: 44839
To elaborate

The Paterno family report did almost nothing to refute the evidence uncovered by the Freeh report investigation. All the Paterno report did was to explain the gaps in the Freeh report's research and to offer a logic-based counter-narrative.

Besides, many of the Paterno report claims are ridiculous. They argued that Freeh et al., didn't try to get the full story because they didn't interview people, but then they pointed out that Freeh didn't have subpoena power and were therefore powerless (also, the Paterno report ALSO didn't interview these key people). They argued that somethings DIDN'T point to Paterno, as if it somehow negated the stuff that DID point to Paterno.

But beyond that, the Paterno report is merely an attempt to extricate Paterno himself from Sandusky, Curley, Spanier, Schultz, etc. Even if the Paterno report is completely and totally accurate and vindicative of Paterno, the bulk of the stuff directed at Penn State writ large still remains.

So, no. Next question.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:42 PM
(Reply to #46) #28
saveferris
saveferris's picture
Joined: 07/02/2009
MGoPoints: 15686
Ramzy over at 11W did a nice

Ramzy over at 11W did a nice summary of this as well and reached the same conclusions as you.  The Paterno report just tries to deflect the blame or spin the Freeh report to make Joe seem less cupable in the whole affair.  The idea that this could be presented in an actual court of law as refutation of the Freeh report is ludicrous.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:33 PM
(Reply to #51) #29
Section 1
Section 1's picture
Joined: 06/29/2009
MGoPoints: 16556
I like Ramzy, but...

Ramzy can be a very entertaining blogger.  I generally like him.  But I thought that snarling outburst of his regarding the Sollers Report (everybody can call it the "Paterno Report" if they want to, but I don't think that's a useful title) was a waste of bandwidth.  A very uncharacteristic Ramzy fail.

This thread, led off by a really great OP by Cold War, is exactly the sort of reflective discussion that I thought, and predicted, would be worthwhile.  But the MGoGroupthink was oh so against it when I suggested it, HERE.

Personally, I couldn't care less what happens to Penn State, with its sanctions.  I'd just as soon see them stay in place.  They could kick Penn State out of the Conference, for all I care.  But I had a feeling all along, even though I didn't have time to read 238 pages (plus exhibits) of the Sollers report, that there would be more to the story.  I'm glad that serious people like Van Natta have read it, even if the MGoCommentariat never saw the need to be bothered with things like the, uh, complete text of the document.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:59 PM
(Reply to #59) #30
BiSB
BiSB's picture
Joined: 08/15/2009
MGoPoints: 44839
Well

As a member of the MGoCommentariat who DID read the report, I can confirm two things: 1) there is almost certainly more to the story than was detailed in the Freeh report, and 2) none of it is likely to make the slightest dent in the underlying conclusion o the Freeh report.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 2:15 PM
(Reply to #70) #31
Section 1
Section 1's picture
Joined: 06/29/2009
MGoPoints: 16556
Aaaand...

And of course I never said that I'd play defense counsel for Paterno.  I didn't predict any exoneration, or any particular new finding.  I just didn't like the complete out-of-hand dismissal of the Sollers Report.

Good on you for reading it.  If you still hate all things PSU and Paterno, you'll hear no complaints from me.  I am honestly glad that guys like you do take the time and trouble to read the report.  And as I suggested, the beauty of this thread is that it is exploring the additional story, through the people who are actually reading the Sollers Report.

+1 for you. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:59 PM
(Reply to #46) #32
jackrobert
Joined: 07/09/2009
MGoPoints: 119
Agreed

I said this when the Freeh Report came out and the NCAA imposed its sanctions: even if the Freeh Report had 100% vindicated Joe Paterno (which obviously it did not), Penn State should still get massively sanctioned because the fucking President, AD, and a high-ranking VP of the university clearly made a decision not to report credible allegations of child sex abuse to the proper law enforcement authorities.

The fact that the President, AD, and a high-ranking VP failed to report McQuery's allegations shows a greater lack of institutional control than if Paterno was solely responsible for the cover up--a university's adminstrators are supposed to be a check on the football coach, not his protector or (if you think JoePa was in on the conspiracy, which I do) his enabler.  As someone who worked in academic adminstration at another Big Ten University (not UM or PSU), I actually find the actions of the President, AD, and the VP more shocking and appalling than anything JoePa might have done.

This is why all the PSU apologists need to STFU.  Even if JoePa was an angel, your school's administration was completely corrupted by the football-first culture.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:34 AM
#33
Blazefire
Blazefire's picture
Joined: 04/17/2009
MGoPoints: 25034
What?

Hoke is selling Michigan jerseys like hotcakes in Pennsylvania, now?

In all seriousness, the sanctions are in, they are done. Of course the Penn State crowd prefers the new Paterno report. It's done up like a defense attorney would do it, demanding that everything be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The NCAA doesn't demand that. They operate like a civil trial, THings only need to be highly likely, not absolutely proven.  And everything the report said is Highly, HIGHLY likely.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:34 AM
#34
NFG
NFG's picture
Joined: 04/24/2012
MGoPoints: 30679
Let the victims decide.

Let the victims decide.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:35 AM
#35
GoBlueInNYC
GoBlueInNYC's picture
Joined: 03/23/2010
MGoPoints: 9532
A few thoughts: 1. The NCAA

A few thoughts:

1. The NCAA is not who commissioned the Freeh report. The NCAA is an idiotic organization, and anything and everything they do is stupid. They could completely reverse the sanctions and award PSU extra scholarships and last seasons National Title, and it wouldn't change the fact that it might be the dumbest organization in the country.

2. Remember that the Freeh Report was commissioned by the school. The "critique" was commissioned by the Paterno estate specifically to defend Paterno. I don't think it's out of line to take the rebuttal with a huge grain of salt, given the obvious motives and biases. (Same should be said of members of PSU that point to the second report to publicly wonder aloud, "well, maybe our school wasn't some dispicable hot bed of tacitly approved child rape that everyone thinks it is...")

3. The NCAA presumably sanctioned PSU for the entire school and athletic department's involvement in the Sandusky scandal, not just Paterno. So even if Paterno wasn't directly involved, the sanctions probably wouldn't change.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:35 AM
#36
MikeCohodes
MikeCohodes's picture
Joined: 08/28/2012
MGoPoints: 4805
irregardless of JoePa

there was still plenty of dirty coverup to go around by the others involved. The sanctions will rightfully stay in place. It doesn't matter if JoePa ever gets cleared or not, there was still plenty of culpability by other leaders at PSU, specifically the ones that have been indicted.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:40 AM
(Reply to #11) #37
1464
1464's picture
Joined: 06/21/2010
MGoPoints: 36385
*unregardless

*unregardless

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:46 AM
(Reply to #17) #38
MikeCohodes
MikeCohodes's picture
Joined: 08/28/2012
MGoPoints: 4805
whoops

I never knew irregardless wasn't a legit word, i've heard it used in plenty of conversations, meaning the same thing as regardless.  Sort of like flammable and inflammable.  Good to know!

/TheMichiganDifference

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:04 PM
(Reply to #23) #39
wolverineswag
Joined: 03/12/2012
MGoPoints: 45
I mean, you can always bust

I mean, you can always bust it out instead of the long form of "without not having regard"

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:17 PM
(Reply to #23) #40
yzerman19
yzerman19's picture
Joined: 02/03/2012
MGoPoints: 1809
IRRESPECTIVE

IRRESPECTIVE is the word you are looking for

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:38 AM
#41
Trebor
Trebor's picture
Joined: 06/30/2008
MGoPoints: 3697
Even if you take Paterno out

Even if you take Paterno out of the equation, it was still a cover-up by the university. They weren't punished exclusively because of Paterno's alleged involvement. They were punished because people in power positions knew about the 1998 and 2001 cases and didn't do anything about it.

The Paterno-sponsored "Critique" was aimed primarily at clearing Joe's name, not at absolving the university of any involvement. I don't see how you could justify revoking the sanctions when the goal of them was to change the "football is more important than anything else" culture that many large universities have.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:55 AM
(Reply to #13) #42
DarkWolverine
DarkWolverine's picture
Joined: 01/02/2011
MGoPoints: 1787
Was Going to Respond

But you covered my thoughts, thanks!

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:38 AM
#43
OmarDontScare
OmarDontScare's picture
Joined: 08/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1800
Penn State tried to fire

Penn State tried to fire JoePa years before the Sandusky stuff came to light. JoePa told them "Nah, I'm good. I'm going to remain as head coach."

He obviously remained as coach. Now that is the epitome of power and influence. It's laughable the people who claim he didn't know or didn't have the power to do anything.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:59 AM
(Reply to #16) #44
WolverineHistorian
WolverineHistorian's picture
Joined: 08/10/2009
MGoPoints: 29510
Actually, when those PSU guys

Actually, when those PSU guys tried to ask him to think about retirement, JoePa threw them out of his house.  From there, JoePa's bosses threw up their hands and said, "Oh well.  We tried." 

PSU nation and the Paterno family will never budge that he knew more than what he claimed, even though Paterno himself never told them a damn thing.  Even lying under oath about not knowing the 1998 shower incident (despite Schultz and Curly knowing) is conveniently ignored.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:52 AM
(Reply to #22) #45
jblaze
jblaze's picture
Joined: 08/29/2008
MGoPoints: 14147
Paterno is guilty

And a scumbag. This report changes nothing.



However, the PSU sanctions ate overly harsh, considering they were based on public opinion and the Feech report and not on an NCAA investigation.



PSU should concentrate on lifting the sanctions not on proving JoePa to be ignorant and therefore a god in their eyes.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 4:41 PM
(Reply to #22) #46
bigmc6000
Joined: 01/12/2009
MGoPoints: 1949
About McQuery...

He did the exact same thing as Joe Pa - passed it on to his superiors but for whatever reason people give him a pass.  I have no idea how that is even possible.  HE SAW IT HAPPEN IN FRONT OF HIS OWN TWO EYES!!!  He broke the law by witnessing it and not going to the police.  People say "oh well Joe should have stayed with it" and that is 100% true but how the hell is McQuery getting a pass on this?  He did as little as possible, actually broke state law by not reporting it directly to the police and Joe Pa is supposed to be the worst guy right behind Sandusky? Give me a break.

 

That doesn't exaunerate Joe Pa by any stretch but McQuery has been and always will be #1 in the "should be punished" category once you're talking about non-Sandusky people but people talk about him like he was some little kid who told his parents about something.  He's an adult, a well paid adult who works for the State of Pennsylvania - his actions (and in-actions) speak to his ineptitude and he should have been the very first person fired when this hit since Sandusky was already gone.

 

If you want to give him the "oh he was under Joe Pa's shadow" argument I'd say that's a load of BS - I'd say that each and everyone of us has been under someone at our job.  That doesn't give you free reign to be witness to crimes and say nothing just because your mentor doesn't. He's an adult and should be treated (and tried) as such.

 

/end rant

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 7:02 PM
(Reply to #84) #47
Yeoman
Joined: 06/08/2011
MGoPoints: 13242
The exact same thing as Paterno?

There's no e-mail from Joe, or anyone else down the chain, saying "well, now that I've talked to McQueary I've changed my mind--I'm uncomfortable going to the authorities."

So, no, it's not quite the exact same thing.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:49 AM
#48
Darker Blue
Darker Blue's picture
Joined: 10/30/2011
MGoPoints: 23320
Is this tide controlled by

Is this tide controlled by the moon too? 

 

EDIT: Holy shit this post just made me how gross it is to be an Alabama fan. Good god. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:49 AM
#49
boliver46
boliver46's picture
Joined: 09/14/2012
MGoPoints: 13109
Great police work!

Ok...so where does the police department/state police come into all this?  How does a commissioned report (whether Freeh or Paterno side) dig up so much more information than the police ever brought to light?  Why are essentially "investigative reporters" doing all the legwork? 

 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:59 AM
(Reply to #25) #50
OmarDontScare
OmarDontScare's picture
Joined: 08/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1800
Because its Happy Valley and

Because its Happy Valley and no one was interested in stirring up shit with the most powerful people in the region. Remember, it took a 20-something reporter from a small local paper to uncover this whole thing. There is no doubt she was taking a lot of heat locally for asking too many questions.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:52 AM
#51
MGlobules
Joined: 11/17/2008
MGoPoints: 16431
Because Paterno's family issues a self-serving report

questioning Freeh? No. And as people note, PSU accepted the sanctions. But that doesn't mean there aren't unanswered questions. A lot more will come out in several upcoming trials. 

This story has several more chapters. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:52 AM
#52
Rabbit21
Rabbit21's picture
Joined: 11/12/2009
MGoPoints: 19350
No, some people have

No, some people have political cover now and are trying to use it, but even if Paterno isn't guilty of enabling Sandusky, I think it can be proved the athletic department of the university was.  As far as Clinton getting involved, no politics just an observation, PA has a lot of electoral votes and Hillary seems to be plotting a run for '16.

Everything in this case has reeked of self interest.  The University trying to pin the problem on Paterno to make the governing body less culpable, the Paterno family for commissioning the report and using every method possible to clear his name, the former PA governor working the Paterno report who could also be reasonably accused of malfeasance in the whole business and reporters trying to burnish their credibility by offering the "thoughtful take".  

The truth of the matter may lie somewhere in between, but until Curley(sp?) and Schulz(sp?) take the stand and say exactly what happened under oath, I'm inclined to believe JoePa enabled Sandusky's bahavior due to his outsize power and influence at State College.  If he can veto his own firing it seems to me there isn't a whole hell of a lot else he didn't have control over.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:05 PM
(Reply to #30) #53
OmarDontScare
OmarDontScare's picture
Joined: 08/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1800
Good points. Im not sure we

Good points. Im not sure we can rely on Curley and Schulz to tell the truth but it will be interesting to hear their take. I'd be shocked if they don't throw Paterno under the bus. Self preservation is the reason these guys are in this position in the first place.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:21 PM
(Reply to #39) #54
yzerman19
yzerman19's picture
Joined: 02/03/2012
MGoPoints: 1809
How does throwing Paterno under the bus help Curley and Shulz?

How does throwing Paterno under the bus help Curley and Shulz?  What does the prosecution have to gain from that testimony that would facilitate such a deal?  Or what does Curley/Shultz have to gain from throwing Paterno under the bus in front of the jury?  Can they possibly raise as a defense "Joe said not to do it?"

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:53 PM
(Reply to #44) #55
OmarDontScare
OmarDontScare's picture
Joined: 08/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1800
Yes? I mean, what else can

Yes? I mean, what else can they do at this point? Might as well make themselves look a little bit less evil and make Joe out to be the dictator and claim that whatever he says goes. Ultimately, theyre screwed no matter how they spin it.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 11:53 AM
#56
Laser Wolf
Joined: 07/09/2008
MGoPoints: 17652
I think Louis Freeh is going

I think Louis Freeh is going to have sell some more jerseys (like hotcakes, even) to turn the tide back.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:01 PM
#57
LSAClassOf2000
LSAClassOf2000's picture
Joined: 01/07/2011
MGoPoints: 81272
The Proper Focus...

"My main part of the Freeh report I was interested in was the recommendations to change our governance and policies so this can never happen again,” - Carl Shaffer, PSU Trustee, quoted in the article

You would hope that this is one of the things the school would focus on - it was indeed tasked to do this by virtue of having an ethics monitor as a result of the sancitons. Fighting over whatever remains of Joe Paterno's reputation, which seems to be essentially what his family wants this to become since they cannot separate the man from the school, still would not answer to the breaksdowns which allowed the systematic abuse of children to occur on the Penn State campus and at the hands of Jerry Sandusky. I do not understand how the Paterno family could possibly think they would win the argument with a report which is literally a rationalization of Joe's role in the case.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:01 PM
#58
wolverineswag
Joined: 03/12/2012
MGoPoints: 45
Penn State officials, fans,

Penn State officials, fans, and alumni are absolutely delusional. It all boils down to the fact that Joe Paterno was effectively the most powerful man on campus, not the President or Trustees or anyone. Saying he did his job by reporting up the stream is a joke. Anyone who doesn't believe that Joe Paterno had the power get a proper investigation going just hasn't been paying attention to college football the past 20 years.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:08 PM
#59
eamus_caeruli (not verified)
Reduce the penalty

I believe they need to take a "if PSU does these things..." line, and reduce the bowl ban and scholarship cap.  Emmert's statement about cultural was a laughable remark, and he needs to remember from whench he came.  I look at it like reckless driving: big fine, probabtion, driving skills course, still can function as a normal person.  

Honestly, I think hitting them with 60 mill fine was best move I have seen the NCAA make as far as sanctions go.  If Universities AD's only care about sports revenue, then hit them with financial fines, even windfalls amounts. How doesn't that punitive measure make institutions step back and say, "wow, losing those resources hurts everyone, not just the young men on the football roster".   I respectfully disagree with any notion that scholarship reductions fairly or equitably treat institutions on a punitive level.  If you need freshman walk-ons/run-ons to play, you basically are doing more long term harm by crunching the rosters. Also, you punish innocent people rather than the wrong doers.  I could see bowl bans up-to four years, a significant fine and only slight scholarship restrictions for less time (e.g. OSU example) as a better overal punishment.  I am not defending PSU, but I think what the NCAA did was another in a long line of mis-steps.  

My epinion is that most BIG and college football fans sort have a thread in their minds that since we all felt PSU and Paterno presented themselves as morally superior to everyone else, that when this horrible crime unveiled itself, we all had a "gotcha" complex.  We wanted them to be punished since we were tried of their meme.  Well, Sandusky is a criminal, and was punished. PSU had a major failure in leadership, they are being punished (frankly, cost Paterno his life and legacy).  Yet, the institution, players, fans and many associated with that campus and school did nothing wrong.  

Why should they suffer? Does a few really dictate terms for the many? 

 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:19 PM
(Reply to #40) #60
Hannibal.
Hannibal.'s picture
Joined: 09/09/2008
MGoPoints: 6297
The problem with the

The problem with the financial penalties is that the fans, the ultimate source of power in sports institutions, don't give a crap.  The rich alumni will pony up some money to help them out.  You've got to hit the fans where it hurts -- wins and losses.  Make the fans' teams lose games or miss out on the postseason, and it makes them hate the activity that caused the sanctions.  If anything, I think that the NCAA needs to abandon fines and levy scholarship penatlies on a much greater scale than what they do now.  Cheating programs should be punished in a manner that exceeds the competitive advantage that they gain from cheating. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:01 PM
(Reply to #43) #61
OmarDontScare
OmarDontScare's picture
Joined: 08/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1800
Exactly. I never understand

Exactly. I never understand when people break out the hurting "innocent kids" line. So short-sighted. It's about punishing the institution. The poor kids on the football team can transfer wherever they would like if they want to go to a bowl game.

Do you remember what happened to our basketball program? Granted, there were plenty of issues (coaches/facilities) but did Lavell Blanchard deserve to have a post-season ban?

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:10 PM
#62
MidnightBlue
MidnightBlue's picture
Joined: 03/15/2010
MGoPoints: 330
Let me say, that if the tide

Let me say, that if the tide turns on public opinion back to giving Joe Paterno the benefit of the doubt, then this country truly is doomed. How is it that the BigTen hasn't booted PSU out, as fast as they let them in, is beyond me.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:44 PM
#63
mGrowOld
mGrowOld's picture
Joined: 10/04/2010
MGoPoints: 111672
All of this posturing on the

All of this posturing on the part of the Paterno's & their unofficial mouthpiece ESPN is laughable given that in a month or so the actual trial of Curley, Spanier & Schultz will begin.  And you don't need to have graduated Summa Cum Laude from Harvard Law (or Michigan for that matter) to know that the most likely defense of both of these guys will be to pin EVERYTHING on Joe.  Under oath. 

And that my friends should bury this revisionist history nonsense once and for all.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 4:17 PM
(Reply to #48) #64
Yeoman
Joined: 06/08/2011
MGoPoints: 13242
It's been asked above by

It's been asked above by others but I'll ask it here too: how does "our subordinate told us to do it" provide a defense?

I have little doubt that's what they'll say, mostly because I don't have much doubt that it happened. But I don't know what legal difference it would make, or how much it would influence a judge's sentencing decision.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:34 PM
#65
Perkis-Size Me
Joined: 11/30/2011
MGoPoints: 40685
A last ditch effort by a

A last ditch effort by a desperate family to clear Paterno's name. At this point, they're really doing more harm than good to what's left of their reputation. Child sex abuse is an extremely polarizing subject, and people with opinions of Paterno based on the scandal will likely never change their opinions. I honestly don't know what they think they can accomplish.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 12:40 PM
#66
CRex
CRex's picture
Joined: 09/28/2009
MGoPoints: 9002
This is just journalists

This is just journalists fishing for article clicks.  At the end of the day you have Sandusky in jail on multiple counts of rape, no matter what reports the Paterno family pays people to write.  A criminal conviction speaks much louder than a tailor made report purchased by someone to clear their family's name.

About the only way the sanctions could ever be reversed is if the prejury charges against various PSU admins completely come apart in court.  The DA would likely need to 0 for 3 in court against Curley, Spanier, and Schultz for PSU to open the door for appeals.  

I just don't understand people who act like the reports are definitive legal rulings.  The Freeh report was ordered by the PSU BoT to discover how bad their posistion was.  It's like talking to a lawyer and hearing him say "Yeah, take the plea bargain man, take it!".  The Paterno report was clearly done to clear the Paterno family name.  Yet people think this report cleared Paterno and PSU, despite the fact three of their admins still face multiple charges and the DoJ is still digging around up there for failure to report issues.  

The "this was overblown side" is 0 for 1 in court, with Sandusky gone on multiple convictions, and unless they have a run of good luck with the other guys, no report they release is going to change anything.  

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:05 PM
#67
BolognaFadeOut
BolognaFadeOut's picture
Joined: 12/12/2012
MGoPoints: 43
In Happy Valley

In Happy Valley, the bare minimum is next to godliness.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:13 PM
#68
DaytonBlue
DaytonBlue's picture
Joined: 12/08/2009
MGoPoints: 1703
No

The evidence stands.  The Leadership at PSU stepped aside and let a pedophile run wild from 1998 to 2012.  The fact that people are pretending that somehow it isn't as bad as that is .... well, repugnant.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:38 PM
#69
Soulfire21
Soulfire21's picture
Joined: 03/18/2010
MGoPoints: 14525
Doesn't matter, IMO.  The AD,

Doesn't matter, IMO.  The AD, President of the university, et. al were aware of damning allegations brought forth by a graduate assistant of rape of young men happening by one of their staff members on PSU property and they either failed to act appropriately or actively covered it up.  Either way, they are deserving of what they got, and I think it really is that simple.  Whether or not Paterno's name should be "cleared" is sort of trivial in the scheme of things, don't you think?  It misdirects the focus from the victims of a tragic story.

I also think it is peculiar that everything seemed "go ahead" with the Freeh report until they turned up bad info about Joe Paterno, then it became negligible and we've got to start over?  Please.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:38 PM
#70
michelin
Joined: 09/22/2009
MGoPoints: 2199
I have mixed feelings

I share the feelings of many about Sandusky's heinous crimes.  I am equally disillusioned about Joe Paterno and the shameful behavior of Penn State.  I also recognize that I am not well informed enough to prejudge this case and I lack the "moral expertise" required to determine whether and how Penn St should be punished by the NCAA. 

At the same time, I have had some doubts raised in my mind after I read the link below about the checkered career of the investigator, Mr. Freeh.  Many questions are raised in this link about how judicious and impartial Mr. Freeh has been in the past.

To be sure, based on his findings, I can see a rationale for NCAA punishment vs. PSU.  At the same time, I am not sure that the NCAA, with its purportedly limited resources, should be spending its time prosecuting such cases.  It seems to put the NCAA on a slippery slope regarding where it should draw the line.  When should the NCAA investigate possible university supression of other information about other embarassing moral or legal offenses?  I don't know.

Additionally, if the NCAA does not draw some clear lines, I fear that it will be even more distracted from  investigations, which are more clearly germane to its mission.  Witness the effect the Penn St affair had in distracting attention from the ongoing investigation of Ohio.  IMO, the NCAA did a pretty shoddy job in their own "investigation", leaving countless questions poorly evaluated or completely unanswered. 

(eg Clarett's admitted illegal benefits, other players allegations about free cars, valuable memorabilia, and no-show jobs, not to mention the relations of Tressel, Sarniak and Pryor, in part impeded by Ohio's refusal to release emails )

In the case of Ohio, I even wonder if any major penalties would have been forthcoming if Goodell had not prodded Pryor into releasing further details about Sarniak and about illlegal benefits given to him and his teammates at a charity function.

Here, as well as in embracing the opportunity provided by the Freeh report, the NCAA looks a little like the drunk who was seen searching for his key under a spotlight in the alley.  Asked if that's where he dropped his key, he said "No, but that's where the light is."  Similarly, the NCAA often seems to look only at problems after light has been cast on them.  To often, it fails to shed much light on many other possible violations.

.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Freeh

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:39 PM
#71
FrankMurphy
FrankMurphy's picture
Joined: 08/19/2008
MGoPoints: 9998
No, it's not. Penn State got

No, it's not. Penn State got what it deserved. These are the types of misdeeds the NCAA should be punishing, not free sandwiches for football players at the corner deli. The fact that the NCAA had to step outside of its normal enforcement procedures to impose the Penn State sanctions says more about how out of whack the NCAA's priorities are than whether or not the sanctions were proper.

The NCAA should have rules that punish an athletic department for covering up child rape to avoid tarnishing the reputation of its football program. The NCAA should not have rules that prevent John Beilein from interacting with his own son at basketball camps. 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:44 PM
#72
DaytonBlue
DaytonBlue's picture
Joined: 12/08/2009
MGoPoints: 1703
Couldn't care less about Freeh

"I have had some doubts raised in my mind after I read the link below about the checkered career of the investigator, Mr. Freeh"

This isn't about Freeh.  It's about a culture that supported JoPa and PSU football above all else.  After looking at the timeline, I'd believe the Devil hisself over PSU, the Paternos and their lackeys.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 2:32 PM
(Reply to #66) #73
michelin
Joined: 09/22/2009
MGoPoints: 2199
All I am saying is that---

Not having all the evidence at hand, part of my opinion is influenced by the new information I just read about the credibility of the investigator.

Perhaps, as you say, Penn St does deserve its punishment--maybe even more.  What they did was terrible. I agree with this.  Also, perhaps as others suggest, this will serve as a warning to other schools that cover up information. 

On the other hand, the more dishonest schools may draw the opposite conclusion.   Seeing the consequences at Penn St, these schools may be less inclined to hire an "independent" investigator that cannot easily be controlled. Recall that, rather than hire a former FBI guy like Freeh to evaluate allegations against them, Ohio hired a consulting firm run by multiple former leaders of Arthur Anderson--the corrupt accounting firm that was involved in the coverup of accounting crimes at Enron.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:44 PM
#74
Michiganmad
Michiganmad's picture
Joined: 01/17/2012
MGoPoints: 77
It's about money.

Penn State deserves the sanctions because of the cover up from top to bottom. But unfortunately in our society money talks. Penn State, NCAA and BIG 10 want the revenue of not destroying the football program for 5 years. A lot of the facts aren't being disputed by the Paterno's. They are just adding a different spin on it. If they drop the sanction against Penn State they should put Old Joe's statue back up and we can all pretend like nothing happened.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:47 PM
#75
trueblueintexas
trueblueintexas's picture
Joined: 11/10/2008
MGoPoints: 14425
I disagree with, but know

I disagree with, but know why the Paterno family is doing what they are doing. Having grown up with a father who was a high ranking college administrator, the part that gets me is the absolute and continued lack of control the leadership of PSU has over this issue. You should not have board members publicly making comment about this issue for PR and legal reasons. Why they did not make the board members and any other school officials sign a gag order until all trials are over is beyond my comprehension of stupidity.

PSU is more than a football institution. College football is not the only lens through which life is viewed for the majority of our population (yes, that is true). All those "leaders" associated with PSU should remember that.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 1:58 PM
#76
MidnightBlue
MidnightBlue's picture
Joined: 03/15/2010
MGoPoints: 330
Here is a related

Here is a related thought....

Imagine that Canham's first choice was Paterno,  who turned us down... and Bo was second.

And it was Paterno who even said that success without honor is akin to a steak without seasoning.

Thank goodness that we got Bo.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 2:29 PM
#77
Steve in PA
Steve in PA's picture
Joined: 08/10/2009
MGoPoints: 5418
3 trials will decide the fate of the sanctions

If the prosecution goes 0-3 in the upcoming trials against Spanier, Curley, and the guy who I cannot remember I believe the NCAA will be forced to look at the sanctions on Penn State because of public pressure.

If all 3 are convicted, it will be case closed and Penn State can eat a lump of excrement until the sanctons are over.

Anything inbetween and the clarity of the situation will remain as it is now with two distinct sides to the issue.

Personally I'd have no problem with them getting schollys back after 2 years but extending thebowl ban to 6 or 8.  

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 2:36 PM
#78
Michiganguy19
Michiganguy19's picture
Joined: 07/05/2008
MGoPoints: 1437
If you pay a consultant or investigator...

to tell you what you want to hear. You can get it almost every time.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 3:12 PM
#79
ESNY
Joined: 11/06/2008
MGoPoints: 7199
So because one person at ESPN

So because one person at ESPN liked the content of the report = tide turning?  You can easily find hundreds of articles that vehemently disagrees with Van Natta's opinion, a few of which were also published on ESPN.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 3:39 PM
#80
Swazi
Swazi's picture
Joined: 08/13/2010
MGoPoints: 7439
Not at all.

I believe these are the same Trustees that just got elected in last year, and have called for the sanctions to get dropped immediately. They're Joe Paterno disciples that think he could never do any wrong.

So no, this won't change anything.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 3:44 PM
#81
Alton
Joined: 07/05/2008
MGoPoints: 6751
No.

It was said above, but it bears repeating:

The NCAA did not punish Penn State for what Joe Paterno did.  The NCAA punished Penn State for what Penn State did. 

The Paterno Report does not challenge the Freeh Report on the facts of what Penn State University did; it only questions how involved one particular individual was in the decision-making behind Penn State's actions.  The problem here is that it doesn't matter why Penn State University behaved as they did--the facts not in dispute are enough to justify the consent agreement.  There are no new facts in the Paterno Report that contradict anything in the NCAA's release of the consent agreement.  Therefore, there is nothing that will change that agreement. 

 

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 5:05 PM
#82
Tater
Tater's picture
Joined: 08/13/2008
MGoPoints: 30564
I like it

I never agreed with the Paterno witch hunt.  AFAIC, they can put Jerry Sandusky in general population for his prison term, but I still think Joe's only "crime" was not wanting to believe that an old friend was a POS.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 5:28 PM
#83
MI Expat NY
Joined: 07/24/2008
MGoPoints: 7492
The first quote in the OP

The first quote in the OP fundementally misrepresents the two respective reports.  The Freeh report was not an "opening statement."  Freeh was hired by PSU to provide an objective report on just what happened to allow Sandusky to continue to utilize his PSU connections to act as a predator.  The only people who saw this as an opening statement in the trial against Joe Paterno were the Paterno family and a certain segment of the PSU fan base who, defying all logic, thought Penn State had an incentive to bring their entire football empire crashing down.

The "Patern Report" was a defense's opening statement against a non-existant opening statement.  It didn't seek to find the truth, it only sought to flaunt what it saw as "weaknesses" in the non-existant "prosecution" of Joe Paterno.  It's not meant to represent truth, it's only meant to deny any potential wrong doing by Joe Paterno.

This isn't to say that the Freeh report was perfect or should be taken as gospel.  The report couldn't be perfect when Freeh wasn't allowed to interview any of the key participants.  What you can say is that the Freeh report presented plenty of evidence that several people at PSU, through their actions or inaction allowed Jerry Sandusky to continue to be the Monster that he is.  Unfortunately, this group of people almost certainly includes Joe Paterno.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
February 14th, 2013 at 7:39 PM
#84
bronxblue
Joined: 11/22/2008
MGoPoints: 59107
At this point, both sides

At this point, both sides seem to be arguing at the edges.  A bunch of kids were sexually assaulted by Jerry Sandusky, and there is rather conclusive evidence that other people at PSU either had direct and/or significant evidence that he was acting inappropriately.  Yes, maybe Joe Paterno didn't know as much as the Freeh report stated, but this feels like quibbling, a bunch of men and women arguing about how far on the wrong side of history they are.

Top
  • Login or register to post comments
Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system
Theme provided by Roopletheme; sidebars adapted from Chris Murphy.