Unverified Voracity Welcomes Nine Games Back

Submitted by Brian on July 16th, 2012 at 12:30 PM

tumblr_krxbm1e3Lp1qa7cj8o1_500[1]

blog policy is to always have a picture
no this is not relevant

Commit watch. Seriously. For what it's worth, David Dawson says [protected] we're on commit watch, and then says "seriously." If that actually transpires it would have to be LaQuon Treadwell—Michigan doesn't have anyone else on the board who has been making noises about committing before official visits happen. Treadwell, meanwhile, flirted with pulling the trigger at the Opening and told various people Michigan had a big edge but also just announced he was going to visit Oklahoma State.

I'm betting false alarm, but hey there you go.

[UPDATE: Ace suggests that it may be a 2014 guy, which makes more sense.]

Zak Irvin exploding. There is some disagreement in the scouting community about just how good Zak Irvin is—Scout has him a three-star outside of their top 100 while the other two services rank him around #60. That gap may  be getting wider as Scout has seemingly no inclination to change that opinion and ESPN guys are writing stuff like this($) after catching him at the Adidas Invitational:

He is starting to separate himself from everybody else and may be the best overall player at the adidas Invitational. He is an aggressive scorer with a high skill level and excellent athletic ability. He has terrific size for a small forward and consistently knocked down 3-pointers on the break or coming off screening action in the half-court set. He can also get all the way to rim with his drive or find an open teammate. Overall, Michigan landed itself a player who competes hard and can fill up the stat sheet.

That's high praise at a major event—the next guy that writeup mentions is five-star SG Isaac Hamilton.

In 2014 news, UMHoops has scouting video of Devin Booker from the same event. Booker's continuing to play it cool:

On whether he has a top group:
“I don’t have an (order). It’s just all of them.”

On a time table for making a decision:
“I don’t [have a time table]. Me and my dad were thinking about talking about it when the summer’s over and first we’re going to cut down the schools, and see where we go from there.”

Michigan and Missouri are probably his top two with Michigan State lurking—a scheduled visit had to be re-scheduled due to Izzo unavailability.

Nine games again? With the Pac-12 agreement dead everyone's head goes back to what they were going to do in the first place:

"You know, if we hadn’t done the collaboration, we’d do nine," Delany said of the Big Ten's league slate. "If we do the collaboration, we’ll do eight. So, we’re able to attract a higher quality of game. We’re not expanding the number of games, we’ll still play 12.

"The question is, are you gonna play eight quality conference games and assure there’s a ninth quality game in the mix, one way or the other? ... The idea was to upgrade the quality of the schedules, either through nine or through the collaboration.”

I'm guessing everyone outside of the Purdue/Northwestern/Other Teams For Whom Bowl Eligibility Is A Big Deal athletic departments is in favor of expanding the conference schedule again, and even teams who frequently find themselves on the bowl eligibility bubble seem to be less desperate for their minor prestige these days. Unfortunately, I can't find it anymore but there was an article in which Northwestern said they were in favor of moving the bowl eligibility line to 7-5.

If you don't care about getting to your very-likely-unprofitable bowl game when you''re not that good, then it's just a matter of figuring out what's more likely to sell tickets: a Big Ten game or the #3 nonconference game you can scrounge up.

Downing rising. Recently named an "A" prospect by the NHL's Central Scouting Bureau, 2013 D commit Michael Downing gets a full profile at College Hockey Perspective:

On his style of play:

”I am an offensive defensmen who loves to rush the puck and create scoring chances.  At the same time, I know when to join a play and when not to join a play. My biggest key factor is that  I’m very solid defensively and I would dive face first to block a shot because one goal could make a difference in a game. The most important part to my game is keeping the puck out of our net.  I play exactly the same as Niklas Krownwall (of the Detroit Red Wings). I love to throw big hits.  I’m solid defensively and I am a humble leader.”

Downing is a bit of an oddity in that he does not play for the NTDP team but has participated in a number of international tourneys that the NTDP forms the core of the team for. For what it's worth, OHL piracy seems a distant possibility…

On his commitment to play college hockey at Michigan:

“I committed to Michigan for several reasons. The two main reasons are that it’s every parents’ dream to see their kid play college hockey and, more importantly, in your home state. The other reason is that I’ve been in love with the school since I was four. When you know, you know, and I just fell in love. Playing at Yost (Ice Arena) is just a dream come true because there are so many historic moments there.  I honestly just can’t wait to be a Wolverine.

…but I say that about everyone. If Connor Carrick can end up at Plymouth anyone can.

Etc.: TOC starts writing guest columns for the Free Press. I was intrigued to see Piston Powered-authored columns pop up in my news feed at the same thing. Filed under cost-saving measures.

BSD defends Penn State from the torrent of outrage. Trey Burke declares M a national title contender. Erik Bakich adds the state's Mr. Baseball to kick off his recruiting. Economists are bad at statistics, but the Felix Salmon thing doesn't really prove it. Maize and Blue Nation looks back at five years on the internet.

Comments

Bronco648

July 16th, 2012 at 12:46 PM ^

Uh, what was BSD's point? Patting yourself on the back for something that should have been done all along? Whether they like it or not, The Penn State Way now involves abuse and cover up, among other things. I'm not so sure I'd be shouting from the roof tops defending that.

Bryan

July 16th, 2012 at 1:58 PM ^

BSD and PSU fans don't get it. He could have donated a billion dollars and made sure each kid was an academic all-American, graduate and then went on to make the world a better place filled with puppies, sunshine and unicorns.

ALL HE HAD TO DO WAS TELL THE POLICE. Every single person on this blog, the Internet and sport writers would have lauded him for doing so. Instead, he chose a path that was nothing but a moral failing. It's not schadenfreude, it's criticism because he protected a child rapist when he could have picked up a telephone.

They are Penn State, and they're choosing to poorly define what that means.

WolverBean

July 16th, 2012 at 2:22 PM ^

when one of the top comments is "everyone called him [Paterno] senile for years, and yet now all of a sudden they expect him to remember everything that happened in 1998" as though this were some kind of excuse.

The point isn't whether he remembered last year what happened in 1998 -- it's whether he did the right thing in 1998, at a time when I don't recall people calling him senile yet. If he was actively involved in the coverup at that time, you can't blame it on senility.

I do feel a little bad for the Penn State faithful right now, though. As much as we mock each other for our overwrought definitions of "Michigan Man," I think there really are a lot of Michigan (the institution) fans who believe that Michigan truly does stand for something that we can be proud of. Several generations of Penn State fans have grown up feeling the same way about their program, and it has to be hard to grapple with the fact that the very people leading their institution weren't living up to those values. I don't blame BSD for rallying its readers to what they've always believed "We Are Penn State" means. Those words may have been a lie from the athletic department and university leadership, but they're still true to the average supporter. I have a huge problem with anyone making excuses for Paterno, but I have no problem at all with Penn State supporters trying to rally around values Paterno supposedly embodied: the values are still worthy, even if the man turned out not to be. Which is a difficult argument to make, and I'm not sure BSD does it effectively. But that argument is something like "The Catholic Church has been caught several times covering up sexual abuses by priests, and that is BAD, but don't use that to say that all Catholics are bad people; please stop taking so much joy in Catholic-bashing." People (including on this board) arguing that a culture change is required at Penn State should be more specific: the culture of the administration itself is clearly corrupt and needs changing, but it doesn't necessarily follow that the entire Penn State culture is also corrupted.

triangle_M

July 16th, 2012 at 3:39 PM ^

The thing is, we have our idols here (Bo/Yost/Oosterbaan et al) but our idols also retired at appropriate times and one of the things that makes Michigan great is the largely uninterrupted line of excellent coachs.  Its not the person, its the billet.  We love to drink the koolaid.   But we also acknowledge the shortcomings of these folks (Carr's lame duck recruiting/Yost's racism/Harbaugh being Harbaugh, RR's weaknesses were to me endearing-but I was mad as hell on Saturdays). 

The ruthless self-examination and intellectual integrity of Michigan is one of the many things that make it great.   I try to explain this to my wife, the Auburn/UNC alumnus, and she doesn't get it, at all.  At Michigan, there is an active sports counter culture.  If there are students who see high profile student athletes doing things that other students can't do, they narc because they just don't care enough about the sports and actively want to see that favoritism curtailed.  Many of you may have a different experience than I did, but my coterie at Michigan didn't go to the games and were part of the anti-sports counter-culture.   Dissent is a Michigan and an American tradition.  Its healthy.  It doesn't exist in many places (I'm looking at you SEC).

uncleFred

July 16th, 2012 at 9:27 PM ^

"As much as we mock each other for our overwrought definitions of "Michigan Man," I think there really are a lot of Michigan (the institution) fans who believe that Michigan truly does stand for something that we can be proud of. "

Count me among them. I suspect that I am one of the older members here. From my perspective, shaped by my time at Michigan, we and our university does stand for something far more precious than a winning season in any sport. Michigan taught me and my fellow classmates to be accountable at a higher level. To hold ourselves to a higher standard. Laugh behind your hands, but we were expected to do our absolute best without regard for outcomes, and to do what was right. Not in some social sense, but in a honorable sense. 

Our football team was/is an extension of that. To be champions. To answer without excuse to the very very best within themselves. 

A champion. Someone who is personally humble, yet holds themself to the highest standard without excuse. Knowing that they will fall short of those goals 90+% of the time, and still strive to be their best.

I am an older guy. Except for a couple occasional triumphs, I have failed to meet that standard most of my life. Yet I, like most of my classmate from so very long ago,  still measure myself to that standard. 

I find myself wondering what you think Michigan stands for. I wonder what you think about your time there. 

Your legacy is many generations of folks like me, The vast majority of us never set foot on any sports field, yet we internalized what it is to aspire to be a champion. So everyday we go to work, or to our businesses, or to our practices, or to defend our nation, with the singular goal to exceed every expectation inculding our own, knowing that most of the time we'll fall short.

That is what Michigan stands for, to humbly strive to be your best every day. Champions find a way to win, on the field and in life.

WolverBean

July 17th, 2012 at 1:54 PM ^

 

I find myself wondering what you think Michigan stands for. I wonder what you think about your time there.

 

Since you wrote this in response to my comment, I'll answer for myself. I can't speak for anyone else.

I was born and raised in Ann Arbor, the child of two Michigan alums. We learned the Michigan fight song in music class in 2nd grade, same time as we learned the Star Spangled Banner. I went to high school across the street from the Big House. Although the first football team I can clearly remember following was Moeller's 1991 squad, I grew up inculcated in the legend of Bo. I enrolled at Michigan in the fall of 2000, and spent the next 7 years acquiring a smattering of degrees from LS&A and Engineering. My wife likewise spent 9 years at Michigan, from bachelor's thru to PhD. When we sang the fight song at our wedding reception, 60% of our hundred-or-so guests sang it with us. Michigan has been such a fundamental part of my life that I can't reflect on a single aspect of who I am without reflecting on Michigan.

What Michigan means to me is always challenging yourself to be the best that you can be, doing things the right way, on the level, without cutting corners. It means being creative, industrious, working together, and giving back. It means that when I study free radical chemistry in the lab (which I do, daily), I think back to Moses Gomberg isolating the first free radical at Michigan in 1900, and how my hall in South Quad bore his name. Every day I work to further the legacy that innovators like him have left us. When I search for old articles as part of my research, I remember how Michigan was one of the first universitites Google chose to be part of their digitization project. When I read articles in the news that discuss amazing new cancer research, or a rover on Mars, or an important contextualization of a Supreme Court ruling provided by a law professor, I am proud at how often Michigan is behind it.

And it's not just that Michigan is an elite research university with top notch professional schools. There really is an esprit de corps at Michigan that even other top notch schools do not share (including the one where I'm currently finishing my PhD). I see the students I GSI for, and I think, these are some of the smartest kids in the world, but they aren't challenging each other to be creative and working together; they're competing against each other and cheating like crazy. It's clear they're at this school as a means to an end, and that being here may be challenging their minds, but it isn't shaping their souls. Whereas the shape that Michigan has left on my soul is indelible, precious, something I'm immensely proud of.

My comments about "over-wrought definitions of the Michigan Man" were written in the tone they were because, well, it's MGoBlog, and I was trying to make a point without starting an argument about what "Michigan Man" means and whether we should even be using such a term. But when I observe that there are a group of Michigan faithful who really believe that there's something special about this place, let me make clear that I myself fall firmly into that category. And as much fun as I've made of our current, sort of cheesy commercials, I do agree that there really is a Michigan Difference.

Thanks, uncleFred, for inspiring me to write this.

Brown Bear

July 16th, 2012 at 2:22 PM ^

Penn State fans are the most delusional fan base in the world and that's saying something. They don't get it and won't get it until they realize there is more to the world then penn state football. This is why only taking that away will change the mindset of a cult that knows nothing else. Somebody on that page commented can't we move on and start the healing? How can you do that when nobody wants to in happy valley. The Paternos have to have another investigation of an investigation because they don't realize the king is dead and it's time for his empire to follow.

AnthonyThomas

July 16th, 2012 at 11:30 PM ^

The problem with Penn State is a cult of personality surrounding Paterno has existed there for years. It's comparable to that of a communist dictatorship. An entire ideology was born through their football program, and the fans ate it up for decades. Now it has all been proven as a farce and they just can't accept it.

M-Wolverine

July 16th, 2012 at 1:48 PM ^

 

I'd rather have the 9th Big Ten game (though I'd REALLY rather have the 9th and 10th, so it's balanced), but it's not really a decision between a Big Ten game at your place or a snacky cake game at your place. It's a decision between a game at your place every year vs. a game at your place every other year.  So financially the snacky cake is better. Now does all the other benefits in helping the overall Big Ten schedule outweigh it? I'd like to think so.  But if you're talking "sell tickets" it's easy. Even 2x 3/4 filled stadium is more than 1x full stadium. (or for most B10 venues, probably 1/2 and 3/4, respectively)

friendlyNeighb…

July 16th, 2012 at 3:22 PM ^

haven't followed this debate closely, but i haven't heard much about what seems to me, the main downside of 9 conference games: you can't figure out which conference is best. 9 conference games allows confident conclusions about which team in a given conference is best, but it makes between-conference comparisons well nigh impossible. as a fan, this drives me nuts — i can't tell the difference between, for example, a very good team in a great conference and a good team in a solid conference. the move to 9 game conference schedules seems like yet another step towards the inevitable scheduling strategy of: in-conference teams + the snackiest snack cakes money can persuade to play at your building.

given the general consensus that the sec is the greatest conference in the history of the universe, shouldn't the b1g see the move towards more conference games as a negative? if the b1g catches up or surpasses the sec, it'll take the voters/media et al a long time to figure it out this way. let's hypothesize that the sec and the b1g are exactly as good as each other from 2012-2014...how long will it take for the media to catch on and rank b1g teams as highly as their sec brethren? given the entire lack of head-to-head games, that conclusion will be based on a lot of shoddy data...and to change the minds of the sports media takes an awful lot of time...

generally, it seems to me that more conference games insulates conferences against changes in the judgement of their overall quality. this is a good thing if everybody believes you're the big kid on the block, but not such a good thing if your'e considered to be a notch below.

 

M-Wolverine

July 16th, 2012 at 3:32 PM ^

I still have the biggest problem with some teams playing an extra road game. I don't quite get how the site has a big problem with us playing OSU every year, while someone else gets, say Indiana, which has ALWAYS been the case, but not having an issue with a year where Nebraska might play 5 home games when we play 4. It needs to be an even number. But your'e not going to get a team to give up another game for bowl eligibility.  

Yeah, it's a problem comparing...but have we not been able to tell who's good in the Pac-12? If they're giving up ND for another B10 game, that would be bad. But it seems they're giving up a game vs. the Pac-12 for this.  (Or giving that up has reopened that).  If anything, maybe it encourages the SEC to go to more conference games. Because while I don't agree that an awful SEC team on the schedule makes their schedules "tough enough", the SEC hardly plays anyone outside of the conference with a pulse, so even Vanderbilt is tougher than the game they'd be giving up. 

What they're going to do with 35 teams in their conference or whatever they have now, I don't know.

Callahan

July 17th, 2012 at 7:36 AM ^

I completely agree with you. It sounds great to have a nine game conference schedule ... until you lose out on the division championship because you played five away games while another team only four. If they go to nine games, they might as well go to ten. Just two non-con games? The Pac 10 did it for years before the NCAA added the 12th game. And as long as non con scheduling is going to largely consist of MAC/AA teams, who cares about the other two games? (As M fans, I mean. Clearly, Purdue and Indiana need those tomato cans to kick around.)

Ali G Bomaye

July 16th, 2012 at 4:56 PM ^

I don't see that as a downside.  Under the current scheduling system, with 8 conference games, Michigan generally plays ND, one lower-tier AQ or higher-tier non-AQ team, and two snacky cakes out of conference.  For example:

  • 2011: ND, SDSU (high non-AQ), Western, Eastern
  • 2010: ND, UConn (low AQ), UMass, BGSU
  • 2009: ND, Western, Eastern, Baby Seal U
  • 2008: ND, Utah (high non-AQ), Miami NTM, Toledo
  • 2007: ND, Oregon (at the time scheduled, medium AQ), Eastern

Ohio State follows a similar scheduling pattern, generally playing a high-AQ team, a low AQ team, and two MAC-y cakes (or a high-AQ and three pushovers):

  • 2011: Miami YTM, Colorado, Akron, Toledo
  • 2010: Miami YTM, Ohio, Marshall, Eastern
  • 2009: USC, Navy, New Mexico St., Toledo
  • 2008: USC, Ohio, Troy, Youngstown St.
  • 2007: Washington, Akron, Kent St., Youngstown St.

Of course, Wisconsin always plays a rotation of various sisters of the poor out of conference, and Penn State generally plays relatively weak teams out of conference with Notre Dame or Alabama occasionally thrown in.

My point is that, of the Big Ten teams that matter, the new schedule isn't going to reduce comparisons between conferences to a great extent.  Michigan and OSU are still probably going to play one serious OOC game per year, because I can't see either of them giving up the national exposure and prestige generated by such games.  Wisconsin isn't going to lose a comparison that anyone cares about, unless the Big Ten finds itself competing against the Sun Belt for a bowl bid at some point.  And Penn State will probably keep doing what they do.  The current state of nonconference scheduling is that an extra conference game will be replacing a MAC school or worse for most teams, not a game that will provide insight into the relative strength of conferences.

WolvinLA2

July 16th, 2012 at 6:51 PM ^

I agree with this point, and I think you illustrated it well.  As it stands, our OOC games do very little to tell how good the Big Ten is against other conferences.  For most of the SEC, this is the same.  It's the bowl season that really tells us how good we are relative to the rest of the country.

Did we know that the SEC was good because Florida beat FAMU and the Citadel? Or because Alabama beat Troy St. and Middle Tennessee?  Nope.  Chuck Testa. 

With 8 conference games, we've used our OOC games to determine that the Big Ten is better than the MAC, and little else.  With 9, we'll do no different. 

friendlyNeighb…

July 16th, 2012 at 10:41 PM ^

clearly, your'e right, it isn't going to make a big change to um's schedule in the near term , but what about the conference as a whole over time? it won't be much harder to tell if um is better than florida in a given year, but won't it be harder to compare the b1g to the sec?

basically, it means 12 fewer games against other conferences. if everybody in a 12 team conference goes from 4 ooc games to 3 ooc games, you're left with a measly 36 games to compare the whole conference to other conferences. given that a huge chunk of those 36 are going to be against the dregs of college football, comparisons between the major conferences are going to be based on next to nothing. going from 48 ooc games to 36 seems like its probably a meaningful change in terms of making useful comparisons, particularly if it means further incentivizing playing weaker opponents (eg: um less likely to schedule nd and osu less likely to schedule miami/tex/usc, etc.)

 

friendlyNeighb…

July 16th, 2012 at 10:41 PM ^

clearly, your'e right, it isn't going to make a big change to um's schedule in the near term , but what about the conference as a whole over time? it won't be much harder to tell if um is better than florida in a given year, but won't it be harder to compare the b1g to the sec?

basically, it means 12 fewer games against other conferences. if everybody in a 12 team conference goes from 4 ooc games to 3 ooc games, you're left with a measly 36 games to compare the whole conference to other conferences. given that a huge chunk of those 36 are going to be against the dregs of college football, comparisons between the major conferences are going to be based on next to nothing. going from 48 ooc games to 36 seems like its probably a meaningful change in terms of making useful comparisons, particularly if it means further incentivizing playing weaker opponents (eg: um less likely to schedule nd and osu less likely to schedule miami/tex/usc, etc.)

 

harmon98

July 16th, 2012 at 2:51 PM ^

"I expect them to understand that the reason they feel anger, hurt and betrayed, is because the actions of the Paterno they thought they knew were, in fact, real. Those actions spurred them to design a temple of polished white alabaster. But when it revealed itself to be gray marble, they suddenly wanted it painted black."

PSU sold the "polished white alabaster" image.  Writers are simply calling it phoney.

They're going to be so embarrassed when the delusion wears off.

 

El Jeffe

July 16th, 2012 at 3:52 PM ^

I kind of agree with the author of that post (bscaff) that there is something nauseating about all of this self-flagellation by sportswriters about how wrong they were and how duped they were and how they wish they had never written what they wrote and mea culpa mea maxima culpa, of which Rick Reilly's piece was the most reflux-inducing version.

Nevertheless, the idea that "THE SPORTSWRITERS" are the ones who constucted the cult of Joe Pa and the cult of the grand experiment and the cult of the Penn State Way is laughable. It was cultivated and produced by Joe Pa and others at Penn State, and all critics are saying is that this now appears to be hypocritical, craven, and just plain false.

I still don't understand why the following things can't simultaneously be true:

  1. Joe Pa was exceedingly good at producing results in a particular way on the football field, and should have been commended for that, given what was known at the time.
  2. Joe Pa committed a series of contemptible and tragic errors of commission and omission by not aggressively pushing for the investigation of Jerry Sandusky and his subsequent removal from polite society. For these errors, Joe Pa should be posthumously excoriated and his legacy severely tarnished.
  3. In the main, there could still be a laudable Penn State Way; however, Penn State fans should now be vigilant not to forget that the Penn State Way is produced and reproduced daily by the actions of individuals. It is not some benevolent aura that exists outside of human agency and therefore has its own causal force. It's like there is no ontological thing called a "Michigan Man." A Michigan Man, if it exists, is a person who acts like a Michigan Man.

 

jmblue

July 16th, 2012 at 3:06 PM ^

Does anyone here live in State College?  If so, is there any kind of a backlash to the Paterno cult?  I can't believe the seeming unaminity of PSU fans here.  I keep expecting there to be protesters around the stadium, like I'm sure there would be in Ann Arbor.  As big as football is here, there's always been that anti-sports counterweight, that faction that wants to keep sports in its place, and I think it helps us sports fans keep some sense of perspective.  Is there really no such faction at PSU?

M-Wolverine

July 16th, 2012 at 3:26 PM ^

I always assumed that most colleges were like Michigan, and there was a segment of academia who hated athletics, and thought it wasn't a part of the mission of the University and/or were just jealous of the attention (and money) they got.  There are levels at a school...those who embrace it fully, those who see a necessary balance, those who don't care, and those who are outright hostile.  But you're not getting much of that at PSU. You'd think this would be the opportunity for everyone who's had an ax to grind or wants to take a shot at the local athletic team to come out of the woodwork.  But the few that still must be there seem pretty cowed.

triangle_M

July 16th, 2012 at 4:35 PM ^

This is a false assumption.  Just look at what happened at UNC.  Around 50 different classes that were attended by all or mostly football players only or all athletes (an NCAA violation) --some of which had no syllabus, no exams and no real class periods.   Disgraceful-but that is the culture of southern football, even at UNC, which, in many other respects is the ACC's mirror of UM.  Imagine the uproar had this happened in Ann Arbor.   How the AD was allowed to ride off into the sunset here is astounding to me.

M-Wolverine

July 17th, 2012 at 1:28 PM ^

But not professors. UNC doesn't make up a work class university faculty with just people from the South.  And most professors I've been around would freak about such things, and have no love for bending rules for athletes. The difference is that the environment around them beats them into submissive silence because of the emphasis placed on athletics but Alumni, Students, Administrators, and (most importantly)  the community at large. The South is different. But more and more I realize the "South" basically starts south of Toledo.

Ziff72

July 16th, 2012 at 3:40 PM ^

So I find the rationalizing interesting from PSU.

98- Paterno is informed of investigation.  Not enough evidence to charge, Sandusky let go under mysterious circumstances.   I think Joe Pa is in the clear here.  What more is he supposed to do?

99-01- Sandusky hanging around program with little boys.  Getting Dicey. I wouldn't have him around, but I can see how you can be in denial.  He was cleared and you were friends with the guy you want to believe.

02- Shower incident reported.   Paterno goes to superiors.  Issue dies.   Come on Joe you own the town you can't hide behind superiors.  Please.  Joe Pa ranks ahead of the  Govenor in Pennsylvania at this point.

03-12- WTF Joe PA.    I haven't seen all the detail and how many times this guy was around, but the fact that this guy was allowed to be within 10,000 yds of campus is shocking.   This is the 1 thing that really confounds me.  Why these guys would try and cover this up.  I wonder if Sandusky had something on them.  Why protect a guy not even part of the program at this point?  

PSU fans can argue semantics but Paterno knew and allowed him to be around for almost 10 years.   I have to hand it to the inbred community though.  How this stays a secret for this long is crazy.  The minute the investigation started in 98 you would think the whispers and rumors would grow. I would think eveyrone in town had heard a rumor about Sandusky.

You'd like to get Paterno's wife to in an honest who gives a fuck moment.   You all know if a guy was being investigated at work for being a child molester you'd talk it over with your wife at home.    They had to have lengthy discussions over the years about this.

 

 

bigmc6000

July 16th, 2012 at 3:58 PM ^

Had McQuery done what he was legally obligated to do (report to police) none of this would have happened.  As an eye witness to the events he had a legal and moral responsibility to go to the police and he didn't.  I really don't care that he went to Joe Pa or any one else at the university - you go to the police (the real ones...) and let them do their job...  That doesn't excuse anyone else but I'm just baffled and disgusted at how that guy gets a pass...

French West Indian

July 16th, 2012 at 4:47 PM ^

McQuery is hardly getting a pass.  His life has been turned upside down and it's already cost him his dream job.  And although many of us are prone to talking about what we would have done, at no point would any of us want to be in his shoes.  He stumbled onto something that nobody would want to see, dutifully reported to the most powerful force in his universe and was told that it would be taken care of.

Now just imagine if a whole bunch of the assumption with which you operate your life turned put to be false and your world risked being turned upside down if you probed too far?  If you grew up admiring someone like Paterno only to find out that he's willing to harbor a child predator, after your initial moment of holy-fucking-shit shock, you might find yourself wonder just what else those around you are capable of. 

In hindsight, it's pretty clear what McQuery should have done.  But the reality of fucked-up circumstances is that most of us will do whatever is necessary to ensure our own survival first.

Engin77

July 16th, 2012 at 4:49 PM ^

McQueary had grown up in State College, Paterno and Sandusky were larger-than-life boyhood idols. He had played QB for Penn St, then was a grad assistant when he witnessed the assault in the shower. He was basically an intern hoping for a chance to coach at his alma mater. McQueary talked to his Dad about what he had seen in the shower and they jointly decided he should tell Joe, Joe would know what to do.

I'm willing to give McQueary a pass; because as I see it, without his Grand Jury testimony, this never comes to light, and Sandusky is still having sleepovers with kids from The Second Mile.

jackrobert

July 16th, 2012 at 4:31 PM ^

I've heard (admittedly second-hand but from two different people who are close friends) interesting stories relayed by two different former PSU players dating from the mid-1990s.  One said that a nude Sandusky would come up behind nude players in the shower and give them "bear hugs."  Sandusky would also work out in just a jock strap, peddling away at his workout bike while the players were working out.  This behavior was characterized by the former player as weird if not creepy but obviously this was a far cry from serial child molestation.

The other former player, whose dad was a high school football coach in Pa., said that it was something of an open secret among Pa. high school coaches that Sandusky had a weird thing for boys.  I don't think people suspected at this time that he was a serial pedophile, but clearly Sandusky was engaging in behavior that struck lots of folks as highly unusual and at least a little suspicious.

If anyone read the Sally Jenkins article, she dropped a line about it being a running joke among PSU administrators that you didn't want to drop your soap when Jerry was in the shower.  I suspect she heard stories similar to the one relayed to my buddy by former PSU player #1 re Sandusky's bear hugs.  Perhaps this behavior was discussed in the Freeh Report (I read only portions of it).

At any rate, take these second-hand anecdotes for what they're worth.

bigmc6000

July 16th, 2012 at 3:49 PM ^

Of the 9th conference game. I really don't care about how often we play Wisconsin or how we get screwed because our cross-over game is tougher. I just don't see a point in creating an unfair advantage for half the conference just for scheduling sake.  At least with the pac-12 thing if you went on the road and lost it didn't hit against your conference win-loss.  You do 9 and now you've got this ugly "what if" scenario where, say, UM is 7-2 on a 5 game road schedule and MSU is 8-1 on a 5 game home schedule where they got, say, OSU at home when we had to play OSU on the road and we beat them.  What's the point in that?  I'd much, much, much rather have the possibility to play some school we don't play very often than make sure we play Purdue more often and get screwed every other year.

 

Oh, and if we go to 9 conference games you can kiss anyone other than ND goodbye on those years when we get the short end of the home stick.  DB will NEVER agree to 6 road games on a 12 game schedule (unless they go stupid and put ND away games with 5 road game B1G schedule).  I just don't get the allure of playing Wisconsin a little more, yeah, it's usually a big game but what's the point then?  So we can play again in the championship game?  Let's ask LSU, MSU and countless others how well that second meeting worked out for them...

 

Yes, I know I'm in the minority on this one...

wolvrine32

July 16th, 2012 at 4:44 PM ^

This is the only truly acceptable response to the current situation from a Penn State sports blog right now (some derivation of these core concepts.)

1.  What happened was horrible and unconscionable

2.  Joe Paterno could've stopped it, didn't, and is therefore morally culpable in the single biggest test of his character he ever faced

3.  The Penn State community needs to perform a serious evaluation of the culture that got us to this point so that it never happens again

That's it.  Anything else at this time is pretty much unjustifiable. 

Also, I take zero schadenfreude in this situation.  Zero.  All I think through any of this stuff as I read it is "what if that were my son?"  There is no joy in any of this, in any way.

triangle_M

July 16th, 2012 at 6:19 PM ^

Well written. I don't think anyone here is reveling in the demise of Paterno and the iconic Penn State football.  We mostly want to see the Penn Staters who are clinging to their reverence to Paterno to drop it.  In the beginning of the scandal there were some posts saying something along the lines of  "I thought it was a sham" or more likely on these boards, "At long last the veneer of rectitude surrounding Paterno's Grand Experiment has eroded and the vestigages of a once grand program are lost to moral penury."  The folks on BSD are lost.   Hopefully they have families to go to and things other than football to occupy thier time.

Nolongerusingaccount

July 16th, 2012 at 8:24 PM ^

Yeah, in all honesty, I didn't know anything about the "Success with Honor" or "Grand Experiment" crap until recently.  I do remember Joe Pa literally crapping his pants during a game against Ohio and that he somehow kept most of his entire team eligible after half the team assaulted a bunch of kids in their apartments.  Sorry, I really don't give a sh*t about Penn State.  I just hope the vicitms can live some semblance of a normal life and that the Penn State football program gets the punishment it deserves.  Think about all the other "scandals" in college football during the past two years.  Those have nothing on Penn State, which is really sad and should necessitate strong reactions from the NCAA and Big Ten.  

TWharry

July 16th, 2012 at 8:09 PM ^

I know Sarnia is interested in Downing (who wouldn't be?), and I know the Windsor Spitfires are interested in him as well. But I get the impression that Downing is quite a bit more committed to UM than Carrick was.

Another thing you have to remember is that a big selling point for Carrick was that he can attend UM on Plymouth's dime while he plays for Plymouth. Plenty of Plymouth players do it, and that's a big reason why Plymouth does so well getting top Americans without paying them the big money that other teams (allegedly) do.

It's not feasible to play in Sarnia and attend UM. UM fans are going to love having Downing in a UM jersey.

Niels

July 16th, 2012 at 9:11 PM ^

They are going all Kubler-Ross right now, and have awhile to go until acceptance. I thought the trashing of Brian by the poster today was pretty dumb, but understandable insofar as they are dealing with a lot of piling on by the national media, with "addressed to sender" diatribes like that. God I would not want to be a PSU alum right now.

Blue boy johnson

July 17th, 2012 at 8:55 AM ^

I haven't followed the PSU situation as closely as many, but in light of victims coming forward from the '70's, it is plausible Joe Pa was aware of Sandusky's abuses earlier than '98, which is why Sandusky was told he would never be head coach at PSU.