<p>Bethie- I think it is an important change. Some programs don’t put names on the jerseys because it is “all about the team” and not the individual at all. This allows for more focus on each individual and a little slide away from “We are Penn State.”. You get the idea.</p>
<p>OK I get it. And does this mean no product endorsement on uniforms? i’ve seen that in other countries. Like “We are Coke”. Those were “professional” teams and not college teams, I guess.</p>
<p>I always thought keeping the names off uniforms was a way to sell more programs at the game. That’s why some MLB teams do it. Program revenue has been shown to go down when names are added to the uniforms and people can then tell who’s who without a program.</p>
<p>The trial for Curley and Schultz has been scheduled to begin on January 7, 2013. </p>
<p>[Penn</a> State perjury case trial date set for January | Reuters](<a href=“http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/17/us-usa-pennstate-idUSBRE87G0W520120817]Penn”>http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/17/us-usa-pennstate-idUSBRE87G0W520120817)</p>
<p>The last line of the article says the grand jury investigating is “continuing,” so maybe there will be charges against Spanier eventually.</p>
<p>ETA: Here’s an article about Spanier’s current legal status. (It’s from yesterday so does not note that Curley & Schultz’s trial date has been set.)</p>
<p><a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost;
<p>So his sabbatical is only for the fall semester, and he retains the title President Emeritus.</p>
<p>some info from a book about Paterno … [Family</a> pushed Joe Paterno to read Jerry Sandusky report, book says - NCAA Football - SI.com](<a href=“http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/ncaa/08/17/paterno-book-penn-state.ap/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a4&eref=sihp]Family”>http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/ncaa/08/17/paterno-book-penn-state.ap/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a4&eref=sihp)</p>
<p>Thanks Janesmith—from your link;
"What is known is that he has performed top-secret national security consulting work for the federal government in recent months. His security clearance underwent a four-month review after Sandusky’s arrest, and was reaffirmed – proof, suggested Spanier, that he has done nothing wrong.</p>
<p>Spanier also remains a tenured faculty member at Penn State, although he is on sabbatical until December and it is unclear whether he will return. University spokesman Dave La Torre would only say that Spanier’s “status is under review.”</p>
<p>There’s no indication that Penn State has launched disciplinary proceedings against Spanier, who did not respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press."</p>
<p>How could Penn State not plan to start disciplinary proceedings against Spanier? They took down Paterno’s statue, so why not also do the same with Spanier, take away his emeritus status, etc. Honestly, he was the president. He had the power to tell Paterno, NO, we are going forward with our plan despite your decision. How can he still be considered</p>
<p>
That may work for baseball, but I think if it worked for football other teams would have done it too. Of course, we are all constantly being reminded that PSU had a “unique” (i.e. horrible) football culture, so perhaps a sheeplike desire to purchase programs is just part of it.</p>
<p>
This is one of the many reasons why PSU alumni, students, and fans are so widely dissatisfied with the actions of the administration and BoT - they are based on soothing the media, not finding justice. If Spanier is truly innocent, the decisions to hang Paterno are suddenly ridiculous, and if Paterno’s firing and subsequent tar-and-feathering are valid then Spanier’s continued liberty is absurd.</p>
<p>"That may work for baseball, but I think if it worked for football other teams would have done it too.</p>
<p>I don’t know whether it “worked” or not but Penn State is not unique in having no names on football uniforms. Notre Dame removed the names from their uniforms back in the 80s and then put them back on again in 2008. Now they apparently have removed them once again with gimmicky new uniforms they are introducing for the 2012 season.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why Spainer hasn’t been fired. There is a lot of evidence/emails etc about Spainer–perhaps more paper evidence about Spainer than about Paterno. At minimum you would think formal disciplinary actions would have started. Even if they think he is leaving for another position, take action!
3togo, thanks for the link. I thought I had read somewhere that Paterno didn’t much like Sandusky (mentioned in the link/book). That’s one of the reasons the whole 1998 cover up makes so little sense. If you don’t like the guy, the defense isn’t doing well, you want him gone, why cover up? And how is it a cover up when there was an investigation? I do think the 2001 was a cover up. And I don’t think Sandusky should have been have given Sandusky locker room access at all, not after 1998 or 1999 (whenever he actually retired). That was crazy.</p>
<p>Just skimmed the article about the Paterno family pushing Joe to read the grand jury report (3togo’s link, above). I’ve long said some of the problem was Joe’s advanced age–people of his generation don’t generally discuss such distasteful topics as child sexual abuse although he certainly should’ve been aware of such concerns because he was charged with shepherding young men on a college campus today, as opposed to a couple of generations ago–Joe had to ask his son about the meaning of sodomy as he read the report. Doesn’t excuse his lack of reporting, but it doesn’t really surprise me that he didn’t have a good working vocabulary related to the topic at hand.</p>
<p>^^ I think I made a similar observation about 5000 posts ago. That generation simply didn’t acknowledge the problem of child sexual abuse, so JoePa’s initial and natural inclination would probably have been to just turn away. But if he’d been the man of honor and integrity he wanted everyone to think he was, he wouldn’t have allowed squeamishness to override his moral duty.</p>
<p>I’m not buying the Paterno family’s attempt to paint JoePa as an innocent who’d never dreamed that such a thing existed. In 2001, he knew enough to ask someone about his legal duties; we know that because he did exactly what was required of him and not one iota more. That means that long before the grand jury report, he knew at least the nature of what was going on. Whether he knew the vocabulary or even the precise particulars of the accusation is irrelevant. In 2001, he knew that Sandusky was doing something wrong and illegal, and he knew he’d be in trouble if he didn’t report it to his supervisor.</p>
<p>Simply put, I do not believe Joe says he’s not “omniscient” yet doesn’t know the definition of sodomy. Seems inconsistent to me. One word is far harder and far less common than the other.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>If Paterno was so naive and ignorant that he didn’t know about sodomy he shouldn’t have been in charge of young people in the first place. They should have hired a grown-up to be the coach - someone who knew at least in theory about the problems and dangers that lurk out there, so that he could be prepared to protect the young people in his charge.</p>
<p>The article quotes a book…not the Paterno family. The author was writing a bio, and was present at the events. I think that’s a different perspecitive.</p>
<p>I can believe that a person of Paterno’s age would use onmiscient but not have a clear knowledge of the definition od sodomy. In his world, one was useful, the other never discussed. It doesn’t excuse the failure to raise the roof, get the flame thrower, etc…but it doesn’t seem inconsistent. For one thing, my dad and MIL are both of similar age. They would both use omniscient, and neither would discuss sodomy–not asking if they can define it.</p>
<p>[Joe</a> Paterno biography describes a rocky relationship with Jerry Sandusky, a belief Paterno ‘did the right thing’ | PennLive.com](<a href=“http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/08/joe_paterno_biography_describe.html]Joe”>Joe Paterno biography describes a rocky relationship with Jerry Sandusky, a belief Paterno 'did the right thing' - pennlive.com)</p>
<p>In Posnaski’s book, according to excerpts a “I Hate Jerry Sandusky” memo written by Paterno in 1993!!</p>
<p>So wouldn’t it stand to reason if Paterno got wind of reports Sandusky was ‘horsing around’ with young kids (supposedly to his utter shock and surprise in 1998), he wouldn’t have said, “gee, I knew there was something pervy about Sandusky all along” and fed him straight to the police?</p>
<p>No, and one of the reasons that he grew to “hate” Sandusky (whom he kept on staff for 30 years, arranged for his sweetheart package for retirement - including an extra payment of $162,000 and facilitated his child sex trafficking) is that the former Professor Emeritus had something on him much earlier, perhaps as early as the 1970s, when JoePa didn’t come forward.</p>
<p>The “idiot child” defense doesn’t hold water.</p>
<p>author, no. Paterno’s #1 priority was the football program, and its undeserved reputation for rectitude. If he’d turned Sandusky in, the reputation would have been sullied.</p>
<p>Interesting article in PennLive. Actually, when I read the email chain re:Sandusky, I thought it meant that Paterno wanted Curley et all to let Sandusky know they were calling Second Mile, CPS, the cops. I did not interpret it to mean that Paterno just wanted Curley et all to talk to Sandusky and not do the rest. </p>
<p>Of course, that is not the only interpretation. And it does not excuse the failure to follow through, change to locks on the gym, etc. I still believe that if Paterno had raised a fuss, kick the bum out, lock the door, etc the football program reputation would not have suffered. Look, any one of us could employ/encounter/witness a child abuser on any given day–it’s not like they have a neon sign blinking over their head. It’s what happens next that is critical. And where PSU critically failed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please explain. Are you saying Sandusky had something on Paterno from the 1970s??? If so, what was it, and how do you know this?</p>