OT- Phil Knight Issues Statement Condemning Freeh Report

Submitted by yzerman19 on February 11th, 2013 at 9:54 AM

Phil Knight is backtracking and saying he rushed to judgment re: Paterno and the NCAA acted outside its authority when it enacted sanctions against PSU - this based on his reading of the new report commissioned by the Paterno family.  I used to wish UM would go back to Nike but not now and not ever.  Ill never by another pair of Nike Frees again which sucks because they are lightweight and very stylish.





February 11th, 2013 at 10:49 AM ^

I saw on the interwebz that most of the products 'made' by Nike and Adidas are produced in the same Chinese factory complex which has approximately 50,000 workers.

Their both turning to shit.


February 11th, 2013 at 11:58 AM ^

Someone needs to get Martha Stewart over to that factory to teach the Adidas workers how to stitch.  I'm sick of jerseys ripping all the time because workers are doing a piss-poor job producing our horrifically ugly uniforms. 

Adidas isn't paying you $.65 an hour to put out poor quality work, Chinese laborers.



February 11th, 2013 at 11:37 AM ^

Knight should kept his mouth shot.  Nike's move to pull Paterno's name off of a child care centre was the right one that should have been there only move.  No one outside of Paterno's family believes he didn't do anything wrong.


February 11th, 2013 at 12:30 PM ^

Phil Knight is claiming he rushed to judgement without having read the enitre Freeh report  last year.  Here are some things I'm comfortable claiming.

  1. The Penn State administration DID read the entire Freeh report.
  2. The NCAA DID read the entire Freeh report.
  3. Penn State felt that the NCAA's proposed sanctions were fair based upon what was revealed in the Freeh report.
  4. A counter investigation by the Paterno family is not going yield results unaffected by bias.

Therefore, Phil Knight's opinion means precisely dick.


February 11th, 2013 at 3:48 PM ^

Not really.  The findings of the "Paterno investigation" into the findings of the Freeh report have come out this past week.  Members of the Paterno family will be making numerous public appearances / interviews to try and restore Joe's image and discredit the Freeh report.  Phil Knight and JoePa were friends, so he's making this statement now to try and lend another public voice of support to the Paterno family's cause.


February 11th, 2013 at 3:50 PM ^

I still see Paterno as an old man who didn't want to believe that an old friend was a perverted POS.  I still think Paterno was a victim of a media-fueled feeding frenzy.  The Paterno family has every right to be angry, and they have the same First Amendment rights as everyone who directed their anger toward Joe Paterno and broke his spirit, ultimately doing him in.

Jerry Sandusky was and is the real criminal here.  Child molesters and other abusers who get away with it for a long time do it because they are great at fooling everyone.  If Paterno asked Sandusky what happened, I have no doubt that Sandusky had a perfectly normal-sounding explanation for it.  

Was Joe Paterno probably too naive?  In retrospect, of course he was.  But maybe it's time to revisit who the real criminal in this case was.  Joe Paterno, at this point, is just another victim.  The half-truths and hatred that were perpetrated upon him cost him his life.  

Most people who hold this opinion are immediately called some variation of "blind Joe Paterno supporters who drank the kool-aid."  Personally, though, I'm just someone who is disgusted with the mob mentality that has become so prevalent in today's society.  I'm also someone who would like to see a bit more actual evidence before saying that Joe Paterno was complicit in any of this.

If the NCAA or the media cared about the victims here, all they needed to do was give them at least $1 million each, and start some kind of support group for them, hire someone to run a "therapy clearinghouse" where the victims could get the help that they need, 

Then again, none of this has ever been about the victims.  




February 11th, 2013 at 8:41 PM ^

that are flocking to message boards to voice favor of Joe today.

It's almost cultish. There is no logical reason to keep up the charade and it really devalues his life even more because it tries to force an all-or-nothing judgment. They can't accept his good deeds if he wasn't perfect.

OK, then Joe is 100% immoral and his entire legacy is enabling the abuse of victims. Next topic.