Sandusky/Penn State Thread (MERGED)

[Beerfish]

Originally Posted by crasherino

Penalties announced officially



I'm as angry at PSU as anyone in the general public (well most), but I really don't understand the majority of these penalties. Fining the school $60 million? What is the point of that?

And how is stripping PSU of its wins in any way related to what happened? As disgusting as this whole scandal is, its not like it was an on the field issue. The Administation and Staff deserved to be fired, I have no problem with removing the statue, but PSU's on field performances are what they are - its not like the players were not eligible.

The football program made massive amounts of money for the school. One of the reasons for the coverup at the highest levels was for this reason. Totally deserved, you don't profit from covering up crimes like these.

[Jungle Shift Jet]

Way too punitive overall but it is what it is, now let's move on to considering getting indignant about abortions.

[EM31]

Originally Posted by Beerfish

The football program made massive amounts of money for the school. One of the reasons for the coverup at the highest levels was for this reason. Totally deserved, you don't profit from covering up crimes like these.

I think the money is stupid.

Should have been stronger on the football program however.

The beginning, middle and end of the reputation of Penn State University was derived from the football program. It was a cash cow and marketing gold mine for the university for decades and this whole coverup was about trying to protect the goose that laid the golden egg. If there was not a successful football program that some people felt that they needed to protect then I very much doubt that there would have been any cover up to begin with.

Therefore in trying, albeit belatedly to redress the balance, the football program should have been given the death penalty IMO. Current athletes should be permitted to transfer out without any penalty.

I am not sure $60 million flowing to the NCAA coffers is going to help pay damages to victims here and indeed is it true to say that the NCAA is without any blame itself?

[crasherino]

Originally Posted by Beerfish

The football program made massive amounts of money for the school. One of the reasons for the coverup at the highest levels was for this reason. Totally deserved, you don't profit from covering up crimes like these.

And if it was a for profit entity, I would agree. But all its doing is taking away money from an educational institution that would otherwise be using that money for its core purpose - education. And with budget cutbacks everywhere, I doubt the school is swimming in money.

To me, if the NCAA wants to cut scholarships and ban post-season play, go ahead - that's squarely within the purview of the NCAA. Even the stripping of the wins - which I don't necessarily agree with - is the bailiwick of the NCAA. That's what they deal with.

But the fine, to me, seems like the NCAA making the school pay forced reparations which is misplaced, in my view. The school will, no doubt, be the subject of law suits which they will have to respond to and then could always choose (and probably would) to make donations or set up certain programs to combat in the future the very evil that it helped promulgate. Considering that PSU will no longer have the revenue stream that football once brought in, and the perpetrators of these evils have already been dealt with, the NCAA is just piling on and kicking the school when its already down.

[NYJCAP2]

Originally Posted by EM31

I think the money is stupid.

Should have been stronger on the football program however.

The beginning, middle and end of the reputation of Penn State University was derived from the football program. It was a cash cow and marketing gold mine for the university for decades and this whole coverup was about trying to protect the goose that laid the golden egg. If there was not a successful football program that some people felt that they needed to protect then I very much doubt that there would have been any cover up to begin with.

Therefore in trying, albeit belatedly to redress the balance, the football program should have been given the death penalty IMO. Current athletes should be permitted to transfer out without any penalty.

I am not sure $60 million flowing to the NCAA coffers is going to help pay damages to victims here and indeed is it true to say that the NCAA is without any blame itself?

The bolded I most certainly agree with.

$60 million may seem like a small chunk on what they have cashed in on over the last couple of decades, but it's a good portion going to a good cause. So I don't see anything wrong with it. It's one years worth of revenue. I doubt they come near that in the future with all these levy's, so in going froward it will make it's mark.

The death penalty would have much more crippled the society around it than the school. Fans can still cook out, people can still go to games, players can still play and get an education. Just as long as they don't mind watching a piss poor team. It's a moral test. If wan't to be apart of the changing culture, it's there for the taking.

I don't strongly disagree with any of the sanctions.

[EM31]

Originally Posted by crasherino

And if it was a for profit entity, I would agree. But all its doing is taking away money from an educational institution that would otherwise be using that money for its core purpose - education. And with budget cutbacks everywhere, I doubt the school is swimming in money.

To me, if the NCAA wants to cut scholarships and ban post-season play, go ahead - that's squarely within the purview of the NCAA. Even the stripping of the wins - which I don't necessarily agree with - is the bailiwick of the NCAA. That's what they deal with.

But the fine, to me, seems like the NCAA making the school pay forced reparations which is misplaced, in my view. The school will, no doubt, be the subject of law suits which they will have to respond to and then could always choose (and probably would) to make donations or set up certain programs to combat in the future the very evil that it helped promulgate. Considering that PSU will no longer have the revenue stream that football once brought in, and the perpetrators of these evils have already been dealt with, the NCAA is just piling on and kicking the school when its already down.

Or more importantly acting like an aggrieved party here by asking PSU to fork over $60 million in fines.

I think the NCAA is responsible for establishing the rules under which some programs like PSU can grow into national football powerhouses. At the very least if the NCAA had made it clear that the punishment will be cumulative and will outweigh the short term benefits from any coverup then maybe just maybe Penn State might have made different choices. The NCAA did not do that, yet it stands right now the NCAA is set to pocket $60 million.

Not really sure how that works exactly.

[crasherino]

Originally Posted by EM31

Or more importantly acting like an aggrieved party here by asking PSU to fork over $60 million in fines.

I think the NCAA is responsible for establishing the rules under which some programs like PSU can grow into national football powerhouses. At the very least if the NCAA had made it clear that the punishment will be cumulative and will outweigh the short term benefits from any coverup then maybe just maybe Penn State might have made different choices. The NCAA did not do that, yet it stands right now the NCAA is set to pocket $60 million.

Not really sure how that works exactly.

Well, they aren't pocketing $60 million - it will be donated to worthy and relevant charities. Typically, fine money in the sports arena is donated to charities or to the league's fund which helps, among others, indigent players and the like.

[AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite]

I wonder if excited, likely confused chick is a meme sensation yet...

[EM31]

There will now be 40% fewer scholarship football players for these young ladies to try and bang.

[crasherino]

Originally Posted by AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite

I wonder if excited, likely confused chick is a meme sensation yet...

That's kind of an odd thing to gather with others to watch, no?

"Our school is about to get a$$ raped by the NCAA in front of the entire nation. Come to Wilson Hall to watch together. Light refreshments will be served."

[crossfire]

I read that the $60 million figure was used because it was what Penn State brought in annually from football.

[BushyTheBeaver]

Originally Posted by crasherino

That's kind of an odd thing to gather with others to watch, no?

"Our school is about to get a$$ raped by the NCAA in front of the entire nation. Come to Wilson Hall to watch together. Light refreshments will be served."

Maybe they're watching Underdog?

[LockeJET]

So after taking away their last 111 wins dating back to 98, guess who the QB was in Paterno's last victory in the books?

Mike McQueary (1997)

[crossfire]

Originally Posted by LockeJET

So after taking away their last 111 wins dating back to 98, guess who the QB was in Paterno's last victory in the books?

Mike McQueary (1997)

Wow!

[WestCoastOffensive]

Originally Posted by LockeJET

So after taking away their last 111 wins dating back to 98, guess who the QB was in Paterno's last victory in the books?

Mike McQueary (1997)

Poetic justice?

Never...uh...Forget!


can you make this stuff up? mebbe not

[Apache 51]

Originally Posted by crossfire

I read that the $60 million figure was used because it was what Penn State brought in annually from football.

Yes, around 52 million last year.

[BushyTheBeaver]

Three things I'd really like to know about the whole thing cuz they just don't make sense to me.

1) Sandusky circa 1998 was the #2 guy at PSU and according to many the guy credited in coaching circles as the reason behind the moniker "Linebacker U." So why weren't other colleges banging down his door with coaching offers? Were there rumors about him already circulating in coaching circles? Very strange. I guess it's possible there were indeed tons of offers and he turned them down. But if so, why, given all the coverage this story has received, has there not been a single article saying so or naming said offers? Is it just bad reporting?

2) The idea that some PSU officials were completely aware of Sandusky's sickness yet out of self-interest decided not only to not go public but also give him full access to PSU facilities...there's something missing in the logic here. Think of it this way: You're a publicly traded company. You catch one of your senior employees doing something very bad (cooking books, bribing officials, etc.) that if it came to light could majorly hurt the stock price. I can understand (though not approve) why you might not turn him in out of selfish self-interest. But wouldn't you at least put him out to pasture and distance yourself from him as much as possible? Make sure that down the line he was no longer in a position to hurt you? But by giving Sandusky continued access to PSU facilities senior PSU officials did not do that and in fact could only set themselves up for a greater fall than if they'd turned him in in the first place. Either they were incredibly naive (about the nature or degree of his sickness) or incredibly stupid (thinking that a verbal warning could bring it into check). I don't see a lot of in-between. These were not stupid people. A major piece is missing here.

3) Supposedly Sandusky, given his tenure and reputation, expected to become the next head coach of Penn State (shudder) after Paterno. And in 1998 (or maybe 2001, I forget), Paterno informed Sandusky that he would not be the next head coach. And the university administration went along with this. Now this is weird on so many levels. First, what head coach gets to pick his successor? Second, what school administration would allow him to? And even given that, why did Paterno decide no to Sandusky? Possibly it was as simple as Paterno saying, "Jerry, if you're waiting for me to retire so you can get my job, don't. Cuz I'm not retiring so you'll never get it." But it was also at exactly that time that Sandusky resigned his assistant coach position. This doesn't pass the smell test for completeness. Again, something major s missing.

There is surely a lot of **** here that has not come to light yet. And as many have speculated, a great deal of the answer may lie valuing money and winning at sports above common decency. The spooky thing is, as much as some want to paint Penn State as an exception and a rogue program, when it comes to the culture of valuing football above all else, PSU prolly pales in comparison to most SEC and Big 12 programs, and you can toss into that mix most Big 10, Notre Dame, half of the Pac 10, etc.

[crasherino]

Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver

2) The idea that some PSU officials were completely aware of Sandusky's sickness yet out of self-interest decided not only to not go public but also give him full access to PSU facilities...there's something missing in the logic here. Think of it this way: You're a publicly traded company. You catch one of your senior employees doing something very bad (cooking books, bribing officials, etc.) that if it came to light could majorly hurt the stock price. I can understand (though not approve) why you might not turn him in out of selfish self-interest. But wouldn't you at least put him out to pasture and distance yourself from him as much as possible? Make sure that down the line he was no longer in a position to hurt you? But by giving Sandusky continued access to PSU facilities senior PSU officials did not do that and in fact could only set themselves up for a greater fall than if they'd turned him in in the first place. Either they were incredibly naive (about the nature or degree of his sickness) or incredibly stupid (thinking that a verbal warning could bring it into check). I don't see a lot of in-between. These were not stupid people. A major piece is missing here.

I agree that it doesn't fully add up. Unfortunately, Joe took a lot of it to the grave. From the first time we heard of this scandal, I was fully looking forward to having Joe sit for a deposition during one of the inevitable civil trials that will be filed. For instance, what was his relationship with Sandusky post-1998. Were they still close friends bbq'ing on weekends with their families or was he never truly that close and did he not fraternize with him at all?

More than anything (with respect to the bolded above), it seems like they engaged in some severe willful ignorance - an "If you ignore it, it will go away" approach. I'm sure when/if they focused on it, they were (or would be) outraged, but whatever action they took (or thought they took - as the issue was simply 'kicked upstairs' by everyone) was deemed to be sufficient.

Guys like Paterno, Curley, etc. probably had no understanding of the issue. They were old school guys 15 years ago and Paterno even stated as much when he said that he didn't understand that their could be male/male rape. They probably viewed the issue as akin to a drinking problem. They assumed that a verbal admonishment was enough and never gave it a second thought. I would hope that if they truly understood the depth of the depravity, they would have acted on it. But of course, we'll never know whether that's true.

[loluchka80]

Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver

Three things I'd really like to know about the whole thing cuz they just don't make sense to me.

1) Sandusky circa 1998 was the #2 guy at PSU and according to many the guy credited in coaching circles as the reason behind the moniker "Linebacker U." So why weren't other colleges banging down his door with coaching offers? Were there rumors about him already circulating in coaching circles? Very strange. I guess it's possible there were indeed tons of offers and he turned them down. But if so, why, given all the coverage this story has received, has there not been a single article saying so or naming said offers? Is it just bad reporting?

some of the speculation that i've heard discussed that makes sense to me is that it was part of the deal paterno made with sandusky. you have to retire and never take another job (we will let u keep your office) and we won't turn you in.

[PatriotReign]

Originally Posted by loluchka80

some of the speculation that i've heard discussed that makes sense to me is that it was part of the deal paterno made with sandusky. you have to retire and never take another job (we will let u keep your office) and we won't turn you in.

A likely scenario which, if true, just confirms how callous and/or clueless PSU was. This is the academic version of the the Catholic church pedo priest scandal.