<p>He’s leaving himself an out, but everyone is wondering why it took former AG Corbett’s office so long to bring charges, knowing what Sandusky was up to.</p>
<p>On a more amusing note, Sandusky’s attorney, Amendola, was named #10 on GQ’s list of Least Influential People of 2012. He was trying so hard to be something else, though I’m not sure exactly what.</p>
<p>1moremom—don’t understand why you think I was uninformed. In the real world when one is forced out of a job due to poor judgment, etc. they don’t receive such “perks”.
I agree with the opinion in this article;</p>
<p>Officials explained the startling deal as required under Spanier’s 2010 contract, noting that Spanier was “terminated without cause.”
That’s funny. We thought Spanier was forced out because of the mess that occurred on his watch. Regardless of his own complicity — if any — the scandal earned international attention. Legendary football coach Joe Paterno lost his job, the university got a huge black eye and the school’s football program, among the biggest in the nation, was hit with heavy-duty sanctions by the NCAA. Those sanctions will have significant impact not only on the quality of the program but on the funds the program generates for the university. All in all a really big deal.</p>
<p>Here’s another deal, one that should raise some questions. According to the published report, Spanier’s contract, the one officials say entitles Spanier to the aforementioned millions, was announced months after subpoenas had been issued in the Sandusky probe — a probe Spanier was aware of. That’s the finding of a former FBI director hired by the university to conduct an independent investigation.
With so much roiling at the time, why did the university re-up with Spanier? And why did the deal include guaranteed money in light of gathering storm clouds?</p>
<p>Exactly, why did PSU continue to provide and protect Spanier at that point in time??</p>
<p>Thank you. Tom. myturnnow, do you honestly believe the university would be paying out millions of dollars to someone whose actions brought on this scandal if they were not contractually obligated? It makes no sense.</p>
<p>I mean why did JoePa pay the former Professor Emeritus an extra $160k that he wasn’t obligated by contract to, and get him a title which was highly unusual as well?</p>
<p>I am only talking about Spanier. The BOT is putting much of the blame on him (though they clearly have some culpability). I don’t think they would be working so hard to pass the buck in that direction if he had something on them.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, I don’t think we will never know exactly how much of this is the result of Paterno’s actions (and lack of action).</p>
<p>What he has on them, at the very least, is the threat of a very nasty civil suit in which he would name names. The amount they are paying him might be very cheap in comparison to the damage he could do to the brand.</p>
<p>1moremom—if you read my last post, the point I made is that they contracted for this severance etc. after Spanier had been subpoenaed and they surely didn’t need to do that. </p>
<p>“Spanier’s contract, the one officials say entitles Spanier to the aforementioned millions, was announced months after subpoenas had been issued in the Sandusky probe — a probe Spanier was aware of.”</p>
<p>In the organizations I have worked in and respected, when anyone, in particular such a highly paid leader has demonstrated such utter lack of judgment, they would be canned and there would be no reward. PSU surely did take his back, just as Spanier did for Schultz and Curley.</p>
<p>Spanier issued a statement the day the charges came to light in which he said Curley and Schultz had his “complete confidence”, and they "operate at the highest levels of honesty."Spanier was criticized for expressing support for Curley and Schultz, and failing to express any concern for Sandusky’s alleged victims.</p>
<p>It was this ol’ boys club mentality that permitted this abuse to occur and continue.</p>
<p>“Then why doesn’t he do it? The payout for him is small beer.”</p>
<p>Because the cost to him may be as great as it is to PSU. So there was a meeting of the minds, the millions are to be paid out, and they all shut up as best they can. </p>
<p>Exactly what likely happened with JoePa and the former Professor Emeritus.</p>
<p>1moremom–not quite sure why your reaction is so sharp? are you defending PSU? just trying to understand because if you look at their actions in relation to Spanier they are STILL supporting him.</p>
<p>the reality is PSU kept him on as a tenured faculty throughout this entire ordeal, he was treated like a valued employee, which I personally find outrageous, and I suspect so do the victims.</p>
<p>“Spanier was still a tenured faculty member at Penn State. He was on sabbatical and had a national security job for the federal government, though the specific position and agency are unknown.[On November 1, 2012, Spanier was indicted on charges of conspiracy in the Jerry Sandusky case. He was placed on leave with pay by Penn State on that day.”</p>
<p>why leave with pay??? why not finally fire the guy. where I work, and consult if someone is arrested on such egregious charges which impacted the institution they are let go. Not kept on a leave with pay. </p>
<p>if you don’t think that is PSU still supporting him, that is your prerogative. But I do, and it doesn’t make me uninformed. Please respect we all have different opinions.</p>
<p>Just wanted to say I was at a wedding and the guys at the table were talking about how great Notre Dame football is doing, and of course Penn State came up. (And not by me!) EVERYONE there said it’s a shame that so many Penn State officials knew what was going on and let it continue. I said, well, no one has been convicted of that, and I was practically laughed off the table. I guess you have to be a PSU’er to see it that way. :)</p>
<p>This PSU’er has no idea what you are talking about. Sandusky has been convicted, others are in the legal system. Likely, more convictions will occur. Notre Dame has had a fantastic year and I’ll be rooting for them on Jan 7.</p>
<p>I don’t know - I am friends with a Philly-area ADA who processes prisoner complaints and requests, and it seems EVERYBODY in the pen complains and asks for better treatment. Why would Sandusky be different?</p>
<p>Personally, I hope they grant all his requests and fully expose him to the general population. I will be happy when he is BEGGING for restrictive custody!</p>