<p>Ditto on annasdad’s post. I completely agree. Paterno was a lot more than just a winning coach. He was regarded as a leader and father figure to athletes for many, many years. It is all ruined now, and the chips have to fall. At least with Bobby Knight (I am a fan) you got what you thought you were getting!</p>
<p>That’s just bizarre. And sad. And weird. Gosh, no hero worship and denial going on there. </p>
<p>You know what let em do it. Let em sleep there. Let the world see how warped Penn state students can be when it comes to paterno and let the world see why people lived in fear of losing jobs if they went against the mighty Joe.</p>
<p>And I guess some will never be satisfied that Joe p was a pedophile enabler unless he comes back from the grave. Guess ten years of Sandusky roaming the cam
Is at will and joes support don’t mean a thing as proof he embraced Sandusky although he knew what an animal he was.<br>
S back from the grave and admits it.</p>
<p>“Three Penn State students decided it would be productive for them to set up a tent by the Paterno statue late Tuesday night, with a sign that said “Protect the Paterno statue.” The three refused to reveal their names (although The Collegian named two of the three) because they say they have been receiving a lot of criticism.”</p>
<p>Innocent people are always “punished” in these matters. The innocent SMU football players who hadn’t done anything wrong got punished with the death penalty. It’s unfortunate, and as a general rule it’s best to minimize those things, but there are few ways around such things.</p>
<p>USC innocent football players also suffered when USC was given sanctions. Sanctions ARE supposed to have an effect, otherwise, what is the point. Definitely the innocent victims of the system that harmed these young men witnesses & others who have not yet stepped forward should be redressed as well as possible–possibly in the courts, since that is the main way things happen in the US.</p>
<p>I’m confused by now about what if any investigations are still going on, and by whom? Is the FBI or the US attorney involved? Perhaps someone can summarize what prosecutions/suits are likely going forward, and where will the evidence come from? The civil suits, for example, what further investigations might occur? When the suggestion was made about some of Sandusky’s paid trips amounting to child trafficking, what level of law enforcement gets into that? Are the allegations that he was running a pedophile ring being officially investigated?</p>
<p>It would be helpful if someone could sum up what prosecutorial activity may be continuing related to this scandal.</p>
<p>USC got five years worth of sanctions primarily for the actions of one student-athlete and his parents under rules that were invented for that purpose. PSU is in deep doo-doo.</p>
<p>I think that the Big Ten Network (BTN) will have issues putting the Penn State games on TV. I am not sure advertisers want the potential problems. If the NCAA does not act the Big Ten may need to do something. Because of BTN and several other reasons the Big 10 Conference is the most lucrative in college sports.</p>
<p>I don’t know if there is a list anywhere of the potential investigations. But there are many…
civil suits from victims
Clery Act violations
perjury trials
NCAA</p>
<p>If PSU paid for hotels/transportation for Sandusky and children who were victims, then the trafficking laws come into play–I think that’s the FBI.
The BOT failure to act could come under the 2004 laws inacted to make sure boards do more than rubber stamp decisions. I think that’s a federal law.</p>
<p>Of course, Second Mile is a separate can of worms, and potential lawsuits.</p>
The trouble is that he didn’t run a squeaky clean program at all - he just gave the illusion of doing so. When you read some of the articles about how football ruled the roost, it is apparent that misbehavior by football players was covered up so as to give the appearance of “squeaky clean”.</p>
I think this sums up the cause of the difference of opinions here. Those who had no prior knowledge of Paterno’s reputation cannot understand why it’s so hard to believe he did something heinous. He was a football coach for gosh sakes. I’ve read stories around the internet by people that had personal contact with him that said he wasn’t so nice. Just going to show he wasn’t perfect, there were people who didn’t like him, just like the rest of us. So this “saint” image, for a football coach is baffling.</p>
<p>That’s not to say if I had gone to PSU, or any of my kids, I wouldn’t be on the same train as others. I surely would have more of an understanding of it, I think. But as it stands, it’s hard for me to understand this reluctance to see Paterno as deeply flawed.</p>
<p>So to say you need solid evidence before you can believe that, evidence that you know will most likely never come to light, is disturbing to the non-Paterno influenced. How can you prove what a dead man knew and did? You can dismiss whatever Curley and Schultz say now as just throwing him under the bus to save their own skins. You can dismiss the emails because they didn’t spell everything out in lurid detail. You can hold onto your Paterno idolation as long as you care to.</p>
<p>I am glad to hear that there are just 3 students camping out to protect the statue. The student organization who changed the name of Camp Paterno got some very nasty posts to their facebook for doing so.</p>
<p>The students who are still going all out to defend Paterno are really shooting themselves in the foot. And everyone else. When I read articles such as the nasty facebook messages to the above organization or people camping out to protect a statue, it makes me think “these people really don’t get it”. </p>
<p>The more they defend the indefensible, the more I think that drastic measures such as shutting the fball program down for a while may be the way to go. I didn’t really start off thinking that as I’m not generally a proponent of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. But the more I read about this the more I am beginning to understand the arguments in favor of it.</p>
<p>I think any misbehavior of football players (of which there was some) was not as much “covered up” as it was subject to a different legal/disciplinary system. Joe Pa, in his arrogance, thought he was the proper authority to deal with ALL things involving his team and players. He did discipline them, and I believe he was not easy on them at all. It was all just part of the concept that PSU football stood alone.</p>
<p>“Squeaky clean” in terms of recruiting. I agree that he was wrong in protecting players from the university disciplinary process. </p>
<p>In terms of compensation. The players, you give the choice between completing their studies on the same financial terms of their scholarships, or you facilitate their transferring elsewhere. Employees, you find other jobs for or you give them generous severance payouts.</p>
<p>If the football program is shut down, I’ll be very interested to see whether Penn State shows up by the tens of thousands for other PSU athletic events. We’ll find out how much of this is real PSU pride, and how much is just that people really like football.</p>
<p>I don’t agree with you. There was documented evidence that one or more football players beat up another student so badly the other student had to leave school. Paterno had them clean up the stadium for two hours. </p>
<p>Yes, Paterno demanded he handle football player discipline.</p>
<p>No, he was easy on them, at least some of the time.</p>