Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials

Forum for posts that are not hockey-related.
DontToewsMeBro
AHL'er
AHL'er
Posts: 4710
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by DontToewsMeBro »

Anybody else think it's ironic that the NCAA is punishing Penn State for allowing a few corrupt men to hold absolute power by changing their own rules and giving all governing power to their President to make the decision on the sanctions?
Staggy
AHL'er
AHL'er
Posts: 3174
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 12:33 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by Staggy »

DontToewsMeBro wrote:Anybody else think it's ironic that the NCAA is punishing Penn State for allowing a few corrupt men to hold absolute power by changing their own rules and giving all governing power to their President to make the decision on the sanctions?
ESPN was hinting at this without really saying it.

And wow, some of the interviews of PSU students they showed were embarrassing. They must just interview ten people then pick the most controversial ones to air.
Bioshock
AHL'er
AHL'er
Posts: 4087
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:55 pm
Location: Mt. Lebanon

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by Bioshock »

DontToewsMeBro wrote:Anybody else think it's ironic that the NCAA is punishing Penn State for allowing a few corrupt men to hold absolute power by changing their own rules and giving all governing power to their President to make the decision on the sanctions?
Indeed
Bioshock
AHL'er
AHL'er
Posts: 4087
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:55 pm
Location: Mt. Lebanon

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by Bioshock »

Penn State could face 60 million dollars in Fines:
http://deadspin.com/5928112?utm_campaig ... socialflow" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
MWB
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
Posts: 15747
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:36 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by MWB »

DontToewsMeBro wrote: A lot of Penn State fans are hurt, confused, and justly angry at what has transpired. Joe made horrible decisions in his life, there is no doubt, but did a lot of good as well. Twenty times more good than I will ever accomplish in my own time sadly. He really did help turn this place from a small farmers college into a huge university. No matter what he did we Penn State students still owe a lot to him in a way. In no way do I " idolize" anybody but I can recognize his importance in the way this school was ran. Even if Paterno's "success with honor" was a facade, does that change the way the graduated athletes, the students, and the faculty carried themselves over that time?
This is a tricky tightrope to walk. I get what you're saying, but at what point does the bad make the good not worth it? Yes, I'm sure there are plenty of students who he helped. There also are several people who were incredibly harmed, in part because of his inaction. I can't imagine the type of conflict people who were in contact with him and the university feel.
DontToewsMeBro
AHL'er
AHL'er
Posts: 4710
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by DontToewsMeBro »

Not worth what? Is his impact on the thousands of football players lives he made better an illusion? The millions of dollars he donated worth less? The good does not "outweigh" the bad because people's actions should not be placed on scales to judge the quality of one's character, but that's how we operate I suppose.

I don't really want to go down the Paterno wormhole again, but it's clear there is a much bigger picture here. But don't let anybody tell you this is somehow about the victims, because it sure as hell isn't. The NCAA better tread carefully because this is something that is going to impact college athletics forever. Emmert is literally saying "**** the rules" and doing this his way.
Last edited by DontToewsMeBro on Sun Jul 22, 2012 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
PensFanInDC
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
Posts: 27917
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Fredneck

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by PensFanInDC »

DontToewsMeBro wrote:Not worth what? Is his impact on the thousands of football players lives he made better an illusion? The millions of dollars he donated worth less? The good does not "outweigh" the bad because people's actions should not be placed on scales to judge the quality of one's character, but that's how we operate I suppose.
Sorry bro. Forgiveness is one thing, but when you turn a blind eye to CHILD RAPE it certainly does outweigh the good he did.
MWB
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
Posts: 15747
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:36 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by MWB »

DontToewsMeBro wrote:Not worth what? Is his impact on the thousands of football players lives he made better an illusion? The millions of dollars he donated worth less? The good does not "outweigh" the bad because people's actions should not be placed on scales to judge the quality of one's character, but that's how we operate I suppose.
Well, if you want to judge someone's character, then that's exactly what you do. Does the good a person contributes outweigh the bad. And if you're going to judge his character, then his character sucked. No two ways about it.

That's not really what I was getting at though. I was just suggesting that I'm sure it's difficult for many who had an opinion about him to take into account all of it and form one coherent, all-encompasing opinion about him. I've never faced that type of conflict about someone so I really wasn't sure how people reconcile the two aspects.
MWB
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
Posts: 15747
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:36 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by MWB »

DontToewsMeBro wrote: I don't really want to go down the Paterno wormhole again, but it's clear there is a much bigger picture here. But don't let anybody tell you this is somehow about the victims, because it sure as hell isn't. The NCAA better tread carefully because this is something that is going to impact college athletics forever. Emmert is literally saying "**** the rules" and doing this his way.
I don't really care about what the NCAA does with PSU, so my involvement in the discussion doesn't really relate to that at all.
DontToewsMeBro
AHL'er
AHL'er
Posts: 4710
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:31 pm

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by DontToewsMeBro »

PensFanInDC wrote:
DontToewsMeBro wrote:Not worth what? Is his impact on the thousands of football players lives he made better an illusion? The millions of dollars he donated worth less? The good does not "outweigh" the bad because people's actions should not be placed on scales to judge the quality of one's character, but that's how we operate I suppose.
Sorry bro. Forgiveness is one thing, but when you turn a blind eye to CHILD RAPE it certainly does outweigh the good he did.
I think you're missing my point "bro".If you want to call Joe a bad person that's your call, hell you can think he's the antichrist for all I care, but the point is that because of the things he's done the University still owes the man, whether they like it or not. If he's a terrible person, so be it, it doesn't make the fact any less true.
MWB
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
Posts: 15747
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:36 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by MWB »

Serious question: Is PSU better off today than they were the day Paterno stepped foot on campus?

I know DTMB's answer, but am curious what others think. This obviously requires some prediction on what the university will face in terms of rebuilding in the next several years.
bhaw
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
Posts: 28740
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:00 pm
Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by bhaw »

malkinshair wrote:Funny, but my eyes are wide open on this issue. I'm looking for who knew what and when. I want reasons for their behavior, if they knew definitely what was going on. I want to hear from the people involved before passing judgement. I want the Feds to determine whether Schultz and Curley perjured themselves. I want the NCAA to initiate their own due process before determining what punishment should be handed down. I want the media to do their job. What, exactly, is wrong with that line of thinking? Since when is wanting all the facts on the table considered burying your head in the sand?
here's exactly where you said you are incapable of making a determination until the people involved give their side of the story. Then you say in your next breath that what they say is more worthy of skepticism.

Perhaps people are "unfairly" painting your view because you keep changing your view or you can't communicate it clearly. What you have made plainly obvious is that there is nowhere near enough information at this time to make any sort of logical jump in your decision making process.

It seems more than plainly obvious based on evidence, logic, and common sense that the child molesting did occur and that these guys were aware of it in some regard. That's more than enough for me to say that all of them need to rot in hell. I could care less what happens to the football team. That's so secondary, it's ridiculous to even discuss it now. But sure... keep going back to the opinion piece and how there's not enough information for anyone to make the logical connection that this was a group of old guys trying to protect each other because anything other than what they did/didn't do would have negatively impacted all of them. You keep going back to "all the facts" as if we will ever get them all. And that's the convenience of your apologetic stance... the facts will never all be there, so we can never judge PSU or Joe or any of these guys.
MRandall25
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
Posts: 19694
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Location: BOBROVSKY!!!

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by MRandall25 »

MWB wrote:Serious question: Is PSU better off today than they were the day Paterno stepped foot on campus?

I know DTMB's answer, but am curious what others think. This obviously requires some prediction on what the university will face in terms of rebuilding in the next several years.
If you mean like right now, today, they are "better" in the sense that the school has received so much money since Paterno came, but are they in a better position? It's debatable. Need to see what the sanctions are.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
Posts: 5956
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by Pitt87 »

shafnutz05 wrote:
Pitt87 wrote:
shafnutz05 wrote:That culture is gone, whether or not football is played
Did you see the people lose their minds about changing the name of Paternoville? How many people have you heard say that 'this is being blown out of proportion'? Internally things are different, but the culture of reverence for PSU Football is not gone.
As I stated clearly in the portion of my post you didn't copy and paste, football will always be revered at Penn State. No death penalty is going to change that. Culturally, people are still going to cheer for the football team.

As you yourself admitted, institutionally, that university will never be like that again.
Not sure admitted is the best descriptor, but my point was that people are outraged at the wrong thing. Starting over is hard and there are two coaches are still there, one of whom was Sandusky's assistant. Change of this magnitude takes years and it hasn't even started yet.
shafnutz05
NHL First Liner
NHL First Liner
Posts: 60559
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by shafnutz05 »

I still do find it interesting (as others have mentioned), the nearly unilateral power the NCAA has given Emmert to cast down his ruling. If Penn State wasn't rolling over in full penitence mode, they would have plenty of grounds for a lawsuit. And I don't think it would make them look "pathetic" as others have suggested.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
Posts: 5956
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by Pitt87 »

MWB wrote:Serious question: Is PSU better off today than they were the day Paterno stepped foot on campus?

I know DTMB's answer, but am curious what others think. This obviously requires some prediction on what the university will face in terms of rebuilding in the next several years.
Yes. But I think it would be reasonable to say that Joe Paterno was part of the betterment, not the reason for it.
viva la ben
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
Posts: 9888
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 10:45 am
Location: Location: Location

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by viva la ben »

shafnutz05 wrote:I still do find it interesting (as others have mentioned), the nearly unilateral power the NCAA has given Emmert to cast down his ruling. If Penn State wasn't rolling over in full penitence mode, they would have plenty of grounds for a lawsuit. And I don't think it would make them look "pathetic" as others have suggested.
A bunch of my friends who went to psu are angry about the BOT...it could be argued they are as angry as they are about Sandusky.

Maybe Penn State is accepting all of this because the Freeh report confirmed rumblings they have know about for a while? What if everything was true and they never delved deeper because the 4 from the Freeh report assured everyone things were fine?

Isn't that the most plausible explanation?
malkinshair
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
Posts: 1243
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:27 pm
Location: about 455 yards away...with a 2 iron, I think.

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by malkinshair »

bhaw wrote:
malkinshair wrote:Funny, but my eyes are wide open on this issue. I'm looking for who knew what and when. I want reasons for their behavior, if they knew definitely what was going on. I want to hear from the people involved before passing judgement. I want the Feds to determine whether Schultz and Curley perjured themselves. I want the NCAA to initiate their own due process before determining what punishment should be handed down. I want the media to do their job. What, exactly, is wrong with that line of thinking? Since when is wanting all the facts on the table considered burying your head in the sand?
here's exactly where you said you are incapable of making a determination until the people involved give their side of the story. Then you say in your next breath that what they say is more worthy of skepticism.

Perhaps people are "unfairly" painting your view because you keep changing your view or you can't communicate it clearly. What you have made plainly obvious is that there is nowhere near enough information at this time to make any sort of logical jump in your decision making process.

It seems more than plainly obvious based on evidence, logic, and common sense that the child molesting did occur and that these guys were aware of it in some regard. That's more than enough for me to say that all of them need to rot in hell. I could care less what happens to the football team. That's so secondary, it's ridiculous to even discuss it now. But sure... keep going back to the opinion piece and how there's not enough information for anyone to make the logical connection that this was a group of old guys trying to protect each other because anything other than what they did/didn't do would have negatively impacted all of them. You keep going back to "all the facts" as if we will ever get them all. And that's the convenience of your apologetic stance... the facts will never all be there, so we can never judge PSU or Joe or any of these guys.
'More worthy of skepticism' does not equal 'not worth being heard'...especially when trying to figure out appropriate punishment.

I've never said 'JoePa knew nothing' or 'PSU shouldn't be punished'...my problem has always been using a report that failed to even talk to those that it uncerimoniously destroys. The report states as fact what they knew, the extent, and their reason for covering it up...without ever giving them a chance to explain the 'dots' that were connected. Would their answers be open to vast scrutiny? Absolutely...but is it fair to deny them the opportunity? I thought that's what our entire justice system was based on. (I know this isn't a court of law, but the principle remains).

Again, I'm not an apologist. My stance has little to nothing to do with JoePa, or PSU, or football...I'm just very concerned about the way this has been handled.
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
Posts: 16795
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by pfim »

DontToewsMeBro wrote:Anybody else think it's ironic that the NCAA is punishing Penn State for allowing a few corrupt men to hold absolute power by changing their own rules and giving all governing power to their President to make the decision on the sanctions?
Yes. I think the end result is justified, how they are getting there is scary and not good for college sports imo, and completely ill advised and unjustified.
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
Posts: 16795
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by pfim »

shafnutz05 wrote:I still do find it interesting (as others have mentioned), the nearly unilateral power the NCAA has given Emmert to cast down his ruling. If Penn State wasn't rolling over in full penitence mode, they would have plenty of grounds for a lawsuit. And I don't think it would make them look "pathetic" as others have suggested.
We'll wait to see the extent of the punishment. If they lose 10-15 scholarships, postseason appearances etc. I don't see them challenging it. If it's tipping to "we'd be just as better off with the death penalty" it's something they'll have to consider.
columbia
NHL Second Liner
NHL Second Liner
Posts: 51889
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: دعنا نذهب طيور البطريق

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by columbia »

I think it is in the best interest of everyone to have this resolved before the academic year starts (and the football season too, of course.) If PSU really signed off on this, I think it's because they feared an even worse punishment and simply want to move forward.
Malkamaniac
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
Posts: 34732
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Who is Sims?

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by Malkamaniac »

It's very interesting right now watching my Facebook/twitter feed with PSU friends.
columbia
NHL Second Liner
NHL Second Liner
Posts: 51889
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: دعنا نذهب طيور البطريق

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by columbia »

Vacating all of those wins...wow, would not have expected that.
skullman80
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
Posts: 21391
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:55 am
Location: New Kensington, PA

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by skullman80 »

60 million dollar fine
4 year bowl ban
Scholarships reduced from 25 to 15 for 4 years.
Kids can transfer and not have to wait a year to play.
Vacating all wins from 1998-2011
shafnutz05
NHL First Liner
NHL First Liner
Posts: 60559
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial

Post by shafnutz05 »

$60 million fine

Banned from bowls for four years

Scholarships reduced from 25 to 15 for four years

All wins vacated from 1998-2011.

5 years probation.

Individual sanctions.

This is FAR worse than the death penalty.