Pitt87 wrote:
They are not extraordinary, and they were not 'levied'; Penn State accepted their penalty. It was the right thing to do, regardless of the veracity of the report, because Penn State is guilty of harboring a rapist. Had the NCAA dug deeper, it could be found to be guilty of harboring MULTIPLE rapists, as the allegations seem to indicate.
Penn State did not accept the penalty. The president alone accepted the penalty with much scrutiny from the BOT, the rest of the university, and the community.
The President that did not have the authority to agree to that expenditure without the approval of the board of trustees, which has still not voted that authority. And in doing so violated one of the Freeh recommendations for oversight!
I think this situation turns out quite differently in the media if ANYONE from Penn State had led (or even just defended themselves) in November 2011. I think Spanier would have handled things way better than Erickson, but I understand why he was forced out. I think this was one of the BOT's first mistakes, as that, followed by the Paterno filing, sealed their guilt in the public mind, no matter how far from the truth that was.
This mess won't truly be over until EVERY member of the 11/11 Board of Trustees is gone. But even when they get thrown out, as two Trustees who lost re-election attempts this year, they bring them back as trustees emeritus!
Between 2002 and 2008, 46 Penn State players were charged with a total of 163 crimes; 27 were found guilty. The Daily Beast was not able to obtain information confirming how many of those charged were accused of sex crimes but there were at least four cases of students accused of sex crimes during that period.
Pitt87 wrote:
They are not extraordinary, and they were not 'levied'; Penn State accepted their penalty. It was the right thing to do, regardless of the veracity of the report, because Penn State is guilty of harboring a rapist. Had the NCAA dug deeper, it could be found to be guilty of harboring MULTIPLE rapists, as the allegations seem to indicate.
Penn State did not accept the penalty. The president alone accepted the penalty with much scrutiny from the BOT, the rest of the university, and the community.
The President that did not have the authority to agree to that expenditure without the approval of the board of trustees, which has still not voted that authority. And in doing so violated one of the Freeh recommendations for oversight!
I think this situation turns out quite differently in the media if ANYONE from Penn State had led (or even just defended themselves) in November 2011. I think Spanier would have handled things way better than Erickson, but I understand why he was forced out. I think this was one of the BOT's first mistakes, as that, followed by the Paterno filing, sealed their guilt in the public mind, no matter how far from the truth that was.
This mess won't truly be over until EVERY member of the 11/11 Board of Trustees is gone. But even when they get thrown out, as two Trustees who lost re-election attempts this year, they bring them back as trustees emeritus!
I completely agree. As the saying goes, "Culture eats everything else for lunch..." Until the culture changes, they'll be at perpetual risk.
Between 2002 and 2008, 46 Penn State players were charged with a total of 163 crimes; 27 were found guilty. The Daily Beast was not able to obtain information confirming how many of those charged were accused of sex crimes but there were at least four cases of students accused of sex crimes during that period.
oh oh... i see. you mean rape as in Penn State players raping girls off campus at parties and whatnot. I thought you meant a man not named Sandusky raping young boys on Penn State's Campus.
Show me one institution that has zero history of their football players being a scumbag and I'll bow down and kiss your feet.
shmenguin wrote:If the Freeh report was so easily tainted, I don't know why you'd think whatever the NCAA came up with would be any different. Again, it would have just been a waste of time and resources to hire some firm to produce the same results.
yes, the NCAA obviously has much better ways to spend their time and resources than do their due diligence regarding the biggest scandal to date in the history of college athletics.
Between 2002 and 2008, 46 Penn State players were charged with a total of 163 crimes; 27 were found guilty. The Daily Beast was not able to obtain information confirming how many of those charged were accused of sex crimes but there were at least four cases of students accused of sex crimes during that period.
Most of those charges are for underage drinking or petty crimes, not a heroin bust (wink wink). This is fairly irrelevant. The players that play on that team have more honor and keep their heads about them than most of the kids on this campus.
Last edited by DontToewsMeBro on Tue Jul 30, 2013 11:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
shmenguin wrote:If the Freeh report was so easily tainted, I don't know why you'd think whatever the NCAA came up with would be any different. Again, it would have just been a waste of time and resources to hire some firm to produce the same results.
yes, the NCAA obviously has much better ways to spend their time and resources than do their due diligence regarding the biggest scandal to date in the history of college athletics.
if the NCAA was intent on a witch hunt (which they likely were), then they would have come up with the same results as the Freeh report. Also, if you think them doing a separate audit would have come up with the definitive truth, then that's being a little naive.
shmenguin wrote:If the Freeh report was so easily tainted, I don't know why you'd think whatever the NCAA came up with would be any different. Again, it would have just been a waste of time and resources to hire some firm to produce the same results.
yes, the NCAA obviously has much better ways to spend their time and resources than do their due diligence regarding the biggest scandal to date in the history of college athletics.
Between 2002 and 2008, 46 Penn State players were charged with a total of 163 crimes; 27 were found guilty. The Daily Beast was not able to obtain information confirming how many of those charged were accused of sex crimes but there were at least four cases of students accused of sex crimes during that period.
Most of those charges are for underage drinking or petty crimes, not a heroin bust (wink wink). This is fairly irrelevant. The players that play on that team have more honor and keep their heads about them than most of the kids on this campus.
Didn't mean to suggest that the football team is in any more or less trouble than any other group, just that there are allegations that would indicate that an investigation would likely turn up more violations, as they always tend to do. NCAA standards are also higher than that for most colleges' general population in terms of an 'honor code', real or implied, and they also have more to lose. I don't think its relevant to compare a scholarship athlete to a kid who's parents are paying for an apartment in Beaver Canyon.
Between 2002 and 2008, 46 Penn State players were charged with a total of 163 crimes; 27 were found guilty. The Daily Beast was not able to obtain information confirming how many of those charged were accused of sex crimes but there were at least four cases of students accused of sex crimes during that period.
oh oh... i see. you mean rape as in Penn State players raping girls off campus at parties and whatnot. I thought you meant a man not named Sandusky raping young boys on Penn State's Campus.
Show me one institution that has zero history of their football players being a scumbag and I'll bow down and kiss your feet.
I totally agree, but my point is that the agreement with NCAA on the current sanctions saved PSU from years of scrutiny. Right or wrong, its over.
the NCAA was simply helping themselves to money (read: extortion) while sounding like they cared. (So as not to be caught in the media canard that somehow one could not be pro PSU and also against child abuse)
relantel wrote:the NCAA was simply helping themselves to money (read: extortion) while sounding like they cared. (So as not to be caught in the media canard that somehow one could not be pro PSU and also against child abuse)
I think it was more like putting on a show to maintain relevancy and showing the universities that they do have some sort of 'ultimatum' power than the money factor. They dropped the ball on that too. At the time when people wanted blood, it was cool--but now (barely a year later) there are many voices in the media voicing disdain for the NCAA and their blowhard of a President.
It's funny you say that NCAA investigations often uncover more violations and have "higher standards" after botching case after case over the last year or two. Look at what happened with Miami--which will impact the on-field product much, much more than what happened at PSU.
Seems despite the testimony, the motions to dismiss were denied. So many holes poked in the OAG's case these two days that their task is all the more difficult. And by forcing a trial, discovery continues for the defense, and finally gets Harmon and McQueary under cross-examination, among others. Same way Spanier's suit against Freeh will force Freeh to be on the record.
As a matter of law, I still don't see the legitimacy of the path the OAG is using to try and prove failure to report, since even under the most generous of terms in the prosecution's favor, the statute of limitations on that charge is expired for all three men. Throw in the fact that it is now known that PSU did report to CYS in 2001 (which was not required to retain records of unfounded charges, hence nothing in their records in 2011), and the charge falls apart, really, so does the entire alleged coverup.
McQueary's unreliability is what will do in the perjury charges, as he is the only witness they are relying on, since the Baldwin testimony is sure to be thrown out for violating attorney-client privilege.
I do wonder if Kane's office will reach a point when they realize they have a losing hand. I just hope it's after a point where the full truth has been revealed.
It's a stupid name to choose for a website and I don't always agree with Ziegler's points or style but he does a great job of pointing out the contradictions in McQuery's story over time. He also points out the holes in the prosecution's case against Curley, Schultz, and Spanier.
Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:It's a stupid name to choose for a website and I don't always agree with Ziegler's points or style but he does a great job of pointing out the contradictions in McQuery's story over time. He also points out the holes in the prosecution's case against Curley, Schultz, and Spanier.
What is the point of their website? Is there an end game? Is it to lift the sanctions on the football team? Is it to restore the Paterno record? Even if the wins were returned, would it matter? The damage has already been done?
That's what I don't get. At some point, you just have to let it go and move on. Focus on the kids and the team that is still there. Focus on THON and the million of other good things that the school does on a consistent basis. For the longest time, Joe Pa was an idol. He was Penn State. But this proves that no one man can be Penn State. Collectively, they're better than that. They have a chance to focus on just that. I think the students and the school want to move on, but you have guys like Ziegler and Free Meal Franco who want to keep bring this up in the media to prove some point that I just don't get. At the end of the day, children were harmed. That should have been the main focus. Not this manhunt to nowhere.
I think it's clear Paterno's legacy will never be completely restored. I think that there is hope that the sanctions and the vacated wins will be restored if enough people raise objection to how this investigation was handled. It's obviously terrible that children were harmed by Sandusky but if PSU officials acted properly should the school just accept unjust punishment so we can "move on"? If you were wrongly punished would you just accept your punishment, or would you fight?
Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:I think it's clear Paterno's legacy will never be completely restored. I think that there is hope that the sanctions and the vacated wins will be restored if enough people raise objection to how this investigation was handled. It's obviously terrible that children were harmed by Sandusky but if PSU officials acted properly should the school just accept unjust punishment so we can "move on"? If you were wrongly punished would you just accept your punishment, or would you fight?
Did the school come out and say that the punishments were unjust?
Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:I think it's clear Paterno's legacy will never be completely restored. I think that there is hope that the sanctions and the vacated wins will be restored if enough people raise objection to how this investigation was handled. It's obviously terrible that children were harmed by Sandusky but if PSU officials acted properly should the school just accept unjust punishment so we can "move on"? If you were wrongly punished would you just accept your punishment, or would you fight?
Did the school come out and say that the punishments were unjust?
I'm using school to mean the collective group of educators, students, and alumni. The BOT leadership, which is comprised of those not elected by the alumni, have not come out against the penalties. Recently though the alumni have voted in three members to the BOT that are against the sanctions.
As someone who has lived in downtown State College through all of this, let me tell you that the town and students had "moved on" very quickly.
It was a little difficult when you would have CNN and ESPN vans parked outside of your class building, but you're right we have other things to worry about than playing in the Outback Bowl for the next few years.
And yes most if not all think the sanctions are ridiculous, mostly stemming from the fact they were the culmination of a witch hunt--the loss of scholarships being the only one I personally have serious problems with.
Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:I think it's clear Paterno's legacy will never be completely restored. I think that there is hope that the sanctions and the vacated wins will be restored if enough people raise objection to how this investigation was handled. It's obviously terrible that children were harmed by Sandusky but if PSU officials acted properly should the school just accept unjust punishment so we can "move on"? If you were wrongly punished would you just accept your punishment, or would you fight?
Did the school come out and say that the punishments were unjust?
I'm using school to mean the collective group of educators, students, and alumni. The BOT leadership, which is comprised of those not elected by the alumni, have not come out against the penalties. Recently though the alumni have voted in three members to the BOT that are against the sanctions.
Inasmuch that 5 members of the Board of Trustees (before those recent three were seated) joined the lawsuit against the NCAA, I would say they are fighting it. The only reason it's not more is the structure of the Board. The Governor controls a number of seats, in addition to having a seat himself, and business and industry get seats.
Cranky asks about the goal. I think for most the end goal is the whole truth, and where that leads us. The sanctions (the yearly scholarship impact and bowl ban) will be mostly over by the time the trials happen and lawsuits are heard, so at that point the only thing to reverse is the monetary penalty and the wins. (the same thing the NCAA claims does not affect any person's records, including Paterno, yet everyone treats it as though that's exactly the intent - and the NCAA admitted in its recent reply brief to the Paterno et al suit that they did indeed threaten the death penalty. Sounds like what baseball is trying to do to A-Rod)
Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:I think it's clear Paterno's legacy will never be completely restored. I think that there is hope that the sanctions and the vacated wins will be restored if enough people raise objection to how this investigation was handled. It's obviously terrible that children were harmed by Sandusky but if PSU officials acted properly should the school just accept unjust punishment so we can "move on"? If you were wrongly punished would you just accept your punishment, or would you fight?
Did the school come out and say that the punishments were unjust?
I'm using school to mean the collective group of educators, students, and alumni. The BOT leadership, which is comprised of those not elected by the alumni, have not come out against the penalties. Recently though the alumni have voted in three members to the BOT that are against the sanctions.
As an alumnus, I'll come out and say the punishments were just.
I think you're largely in the minority of alumnus Factorial, and I'd be willing to bet (without actually looking at any sources such as polls or whatnot) that it's about a 50/50 split with the rest of the nation.
yes, the NCAA obviously has much better ways to spend their time and resources than do their due diligence regarding the biggest scandal to date in the history of college athletics.