(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:16 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:04 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:00 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  When you say "Sold us out" do you mean "Completely saved us from being bent over by the NCAA and possibly kicked out of the B1G"?

No, what the NCAA did was against their own byways and could have easily been fought by any competent lawyer. Errickson signed the consent decree saying that we accept these penalties even though NCAA rules weren't broken. I wouldn't care if the Big 10 kicked us out. They need us more than we need them financially.

No it couldn't, the NCAA is a private group and the members used actual by laws to punish PSU. Also the B1G is much bigger than PSU. Count your lucky stars someone with half a brain realized they needed to take their medicine and get on with it. If they fought it then people would have dug deeper into the schools past and the possibility of even more skeletons spilling out was a real risk. Was getting kicked out of the NCAA and having your certification being under review worth it for your egos?

The NCAA had no right to get involved in the first place as it had nothing to do with football. Penn State was independent until 1991 and they were fine as an independent. Penn State brings in the most money out of anyone in the Big 10 along with the Pittsburgh/Philadelphia markets. Penn State also has the largest alumni association in the country, so we'd be perfectly fine going independent.

No. PSU is #3 behind Michigan and Ohio State and it isn't particularly close.

Also, there's no way that anyone would have looked the other way if it was a math teacher or a basketball coach. It absolutely had to do with football and protecting the PSU football brand.

How exactly would it? Sandusky was no longer a coach. Would parents frown upon sending their kids to a school who reports criminals? You are vastly overstating the impact it would have.

Also calling what happened a cover up is laughable at best...

And before Sandusky news broke out, Penn State was the most profitable in the Big 10.

(07-08-2013 03:20 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:16 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:04 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  No, what the NCAA did was against their own byways and could have easily been fought by any competent lawyer. Errickson signed the consent decree saying that we accept these penalties even though NCAA rules weren't broken. I wouldn't care if the Big 10 kicked us out. They need us more than we need them financially.

No it couldn't, the NCAA is a private group and the members used actual by laws to punish PSU. Also the B1G is much bigger than PSU. Count your lucky stars someone with half a brain realized they needed to take their medicine and get on with it. If they fought it then people would have dug deeper into the schools past and the possibility of even more skeletons spilling out was a real risk. Was getting kicked out of the NCAA and having your certification being under review worth it for your egos?

The NCAA had no right to get involved in the first place as it had nothing to do with football. Penn State was independent until 1991 and they were fine as an independent. Penn State brings in the most money out of anyone in the Big 10 along with the Pittsburgh/Philadelphia markets. Penn State also has the largest alumni association in the country, so we'd be perfectly fine going independent.

No. PSU is #3 behind Michigan and Ohio State and it isn't particularly close.

Also, there's no way that anyone would have looked the other way if it was a math teacher or a basketball coach. It absolutely had to do with football and protecting the PSU football brand.

How exactly would it? Sandusky was no longer a coach. Would parents frown upon sending their kids to a school who reports criminals? You are vastly overstating the impact it would have.

So you think that there would have been a cover up if Ed DeChellis was the one who committed the crimes?

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:16 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:04 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:00 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  When you say "Sold us out" do you mean "Completely saved us from being bent over by the NCAA and possibly kicked out of the B1G"?

No, what the NCAA did was against their own byways and could have easily been fought by any competent lawyer. Errickson signed the consent decree saying that we accept these penalties even though NCAA rules weren't broken. I wouldn't care if the Big 10 kicked us out. They need us more than we need them financially.

No it couldn't, the NCAA is a private group and the members used actual by laws to punish PSU. Also the B1G is much bigger than PSU. Count your lucky stars someone with half a brain realized they needed to take their medicine and get on with it. If they fought it then people would have dug deeper into the schools past and the possibility of even more skeletons spilling out was a real risk. Was getting kicked out of the NCAA and having your certification being under review worth it for your egos?

I agree.

My esteemed alma mater is lucky that it didn't get a 4-5 year death penalty. Fighting the penalty would have been catastrophic for the entire athletic department and much of the school's identity.

How are we lucky? This had NOTHING to do with football. The NCAA shouldn't be involved in the first place.

The FB coach using his power to cover up the former Defensive coordinator who used the FB locker room as a way to lure victims into his rape trap. Nothing to do with FB?

(07-08-2013 03:21 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  Also calling what happened a cover up is laughable at best...

The State of Pennsylvania doesn't find it so funny.

(07-08-2013 03:25 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:16 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:04 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  No, what the NCAA did was against their own byways and could have easily been fought by any competent lawyer. Errickson signed the consent decree saying that we accept these penalties even though NCAA rules weren't broken. I wouldn't care if the Big 10 kicked us out. They need us more than we need them financially.

No it couldn't, the NCAA is a private group and the members used actual by laws to punish PSU. Also the B1G is much bigger than PSU. Count your lucky stars someone with half a brain realized they needed to take their medicine and get on with it. If they fought it then people would have dug deeper into the schools past and the possibility of even more skeletons spilling out was a real risk. Was getting kicked out of the NCAA and having your certification being under review worth it for your egos?

I agree.

My esteemed alma mater is lucky that it didn't get a 4-5 year death penalty. Fighting the penalty would have been catastrophic for the entire athletic department and much of the school's identity.

How are we lucky? This had NOTHING to do with football. The NCAA shouldn't be involved in the first place.

The FB coach using his power to cover up the former Defensive coordinator who used the FB locker room as a way to lure victims into his rape trap. Nothing to do with FB?

1. Paterno had no power if Sandusky used the locker rooms, that was a part of his retirement agreement with President Graham Spanier

2. Paterno reported the issue and did what he was legally supposed to do, hence he didn't face any legal trouble.

3. If a cover up were to happen, why did 7 people know about the issue? Isn't the point of a cover up to make sure nobody knows about it?

4. Why does it matter where it happened?

(07-08-2013 03:23 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  And before Sandusky news broke out, Penn State was the most profitable in the Big 10.

As of 2009, you're wrong (according to the DoE). OSU #1, Michigan #2, and PSU #3.

OSU had $123,174,176 in revenue, Michigan had $106,666,191, and PSU had $106,614,724 in revenue. I didn't look at profit, because A) UM and OSU are insanely profitable, and I figured that you meant revenue instead of profit. However, if you really did mean profit, and care to press the issue, I can examine profit. Otherwise, I'm content to let the issue die.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/SelectDownlo...323620504d

Don't get me wrong, PSU would instantly get an ACC invite, and would be OK, so your general point is right, but your specifics are not.

I'll just leave it at this, you can say he could have done more, whatever. But to say he actively covered it up is just ridiculous.

(07-08-2013 03:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:23 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  And before Sandusky news broke out, Penn State was the most profitable in the Big 10.

As of 2009, you're wrong (according to the DoE). OSU #1, Michigan #2, and PSU #3.

OSU had $123,174,176 in revenue, Michigan had $106,666,191, and PSU had $106,614,724 in revenue.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/SelectDownlo...323620504d

Look at 2011

(07-08-2013 03:28 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:25 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:16 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  No it couldn't, the NCAA is a private group and the members used actual by laws to punish PSU. Also the B1G is much bigger than PSU. Count your lucky stars someone with half a brain realized they needed to take their medicine and get on with it. If they fought it then people would have dug deeper into the schools past and the possibility of even more skeletons spilling out was a real risk. Was getting kicked out of the NCAA and having your certification being under review worth it for your egos?

I agree.

My esteemed alma mater is lucky that it didn't get a 4-5 year death penalty. Fighting the penalty would have been catastrophic for the entire athletic department and much of the school's identity.

How are we lucky? This had NOTHING to do with football. The NCAA shouldn't be involved in the first place.

The FB coach using his power to cover up the former Defensive coordinator who used the FB locker room as a way to lure victims into his rape trap. Nothing to do with FB?

1. Paterno had no power if Sandusky used the locker rooms, that was a part of his retirement agreement with President Graham Spanier

2. Paterno reported the issue and did what he was legally supposed to do, hence he didn't face any legal trouble.

3. If a cover up were to happen, why did 7 people know about the issue? Isn't the point of a cover up to make sure nobody knows about it?

4. Why does it matter where it happened?

Uh Paterno DIED before anyone faced legal trouble.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12...67727.html

"These men concealed Sandusky's activities from the Board of Trustees, the University community and authorities," the report stated. "They exhibited a striking lack of empathy for Sandusky's victims by failing to inquire as to their safety and well‐being, especially by not attempting to determine the identity of the child who Sandusky assaulted in the Lasch Building in 2001," when then-graduate assistant Mike McQueary reported witnessing Sandusky sexually assault a young boy in a locker room.



"There were more red flags here than you could count over a long period of time," Freeh said Thursday in a press conference.

Sandusky retired in 1999, but kept an office at the school and used its facilities, where there were several reported sightings of him assaulting young children on campus.



In a January 2012 interview with the Washington Post, Paterno tried to explain his rationale for not reporting Sandusky.

"I didn't know exactly how to handle it and I was afraid to do something that might jeopardize what the university procedure was," Paterno said. "So I backed away and turned it over to some other people."

Several emails between Spanier, Paterno, Curley and Schultz in the report showed careful deliberation about how to handle the assaults. Curley and Schultz stated that the "humane" thing to do was to "carefully and responsibly assess" the best way to handle the allegations against Sandusky, but reported nothing to anyone.

However, the report details an extensive cover-up stretching from 1998 to 2011 by some of the most powerful officials at Penn State.

(07-08-2013 03:33 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  I'll just leave it at this, you can say he could have done more, whatever. But to say he actively covered it up is just ridiculous.

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt, it's also a college town in the middle of PA.

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  This may be an unpopular statement, but I'm not so sure the NCAA had any jurisdiction over this kind of crime. This is an actual crime...not an athletic violation.

Until they can produce a student athlete linked to this, I feel the same.

Where it concerns this "good news" with donations and whatnot...Sara Ganim, the one who broke the abuse story, has reminded us repeatedly to be mindful and cautious of how PSU moves their dollar. She really stirred the pot when she questioned where THON money was going, but she's dead on. This number, you just don't really know...

(07-08-2013 03:33 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:33 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:23 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  And before Sandusky news broke out, Penn State was the most profitable in the Big 10.

As of 2009, you're wrong (according to the DoE). OSU #1, Michigan #2, and PSU #3.

OSU had $123,174,176 in revenue, Michigan had $106,666,191, and PSU had $106,614,724 in revenue.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/SelectDownlo...323620504d

Look at 2011

Well, the scandal broke in March 2011, but sure. Give me a second.

EDIT: Here are 2011 numbers:
Ohio State: $142,043,056
Michigan: $128,750,370
Penn State: $108,252,284

PSU is still #3 and actually lost ground.
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/SelectDownlo...323620504d

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  This may be an unpopular statement, but I'm not so sure the NCAA had any jurisdiction over this kind of crime. This is an actual crime...not an athletic violation.

Something can be a crime and a NCAA violation. The two aren't mutually exclusive. However, I agree that the NCAA should not and did not have jurisdiction over the matter purely because a crime was committed. I think that the NCAA has/had jurisdiction over the issue via other grounds. In fact, I think that certain people should have been punished by the NCAA, even though they didn't commit a crime. I realize that sounds crazy at first, but think about it. Paying players isn't a crime, but I'm pretty sure that we all agree that it is a NCAA violation, and rightfully so (unless the rules are changed so that everyone can give a stipend).

(07-08-2013 03:37 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  This may be an unpopular statement, but I'm not so sure the NCAA had any jurisdiction over this kind of crime. This is an actual crime...not an athletic violation.

Until they can produce a student athlete linked to this, I feel the same.

Where it concerns this "good news" with donations and whatnot...Sara Ganim, the one who broke the abuse story, has reminded us repeatedly to be mindful and cautious of how PSU moves their dollar. She really stirred the pot when she questioned where THON money was going, but she's dead on. This number, you just don't really know...

I think the NCAA felt like it must had to act because this was such and unusual incident, but I agree that their job is to regulate how student athletes and programs operate within a university. They are not the cops or district attorney.

(07-08-2013 03:59 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:37 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  This may be an unpopular statement, but I'm not so sure the NCAA had any jurisdiction over this kind of crime. This is an actual crime...not an athletic violation.

Until they can produce a student athlete linked to this, I feel the same.

Where it concerns this "good news" with donations and whatnot...Sara Ganim, the one who broke the abuse story, has reminded us repeatedly to be mindful and cautious of how PSU moves their dollar. She really stirred the pot when she questioned where THON money was going, but she's dead on. This number, you just don't really know...

I think the NCAA felt like it must had to act because this was such and unusual incident, but I agree that their job is to regulate how student athletes and programs operate within a university. They are not the cops or district attorney.

But they violated the by-laws of ethics and integrity.

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)psualltheway5 Wrote:  How are we lucky? This had NOTHING to do with football. The NCAA shouldn't be involved in the first place.

This, unfortunately, is an example of the delusional cult fan base that continues to believe that, despite the arrest of multiple senior administration, there was no coverup up, no one knew anything, and football didn't run the show (nor continues to do so) at that school. Sad, pathetic, delusional....downright scary when you think of the examples in history that this sort of holocaust-denying train-of-thought parallels.

That program should have been put down, and actually still needs to be put down as its roster of assistant coaches and cult slurping fanbase keeps proving over and over again.

(07-08-2013 04:02 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:59 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:37 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  This may be an unpopular statement, but I'm not so sure the NCAA had any jurisdiction over this kind of crime. This is an actual crime...not an athletic violation.

Until they can produce a student athlete linked to this, I feel the same.

Where it concerns this "good news" with donations and whatnot...Sara Ganim, the one who broke the abuse story, has reminded us repeatedly to be mindful and cautious of how PSU moves their dollar. She really stirred the pot when she questioned where THON money was going, but she's dead on. This number, you just don't really know...

I think the NCAA felt like it must had to act because this was such and unusual incident, but I agree that their job is to regulate how student athletes and programs operate within a university. They are not the cops or district attorney.

But they violated the by-laws of ethics and integrity.

Mmmm. Think about it this way. If this happened anywhere else, would the district attorney charge the suspect with committing crimes against ethics and integrity? IMO it's just not something the NCAA is set up for. On the other hand, I see the argument where they had to do something. It's a tricky situation.

Hopefully it will never happen again.

(07-08-2013 03:46 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(07-08-2013 03:18 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  This may be an unpopular statement, but I'm not so sure the NCAA had any jurisdiction over this kind of crime. This is an actual crime...not an athletic violation.

Something can be a crime and a NCAA violation. The two aren't mutually exclusive. However, I agree that the NCAA should not and did not have jurisdiction over the matter purely because a crime was committed. I think that the NCAA has/had jurisdiction over the issue via other grounds. In fact, I think that certain people should have been punished by the NCAA, even though they didn't commit a crime. I realize that sounds crazy at first, but think about it. Paying players isn't a crime, but I'm pretty sure that we all agree that it is a NCAA violation, and rightfully so (unless the rules are changed so that everyone can give a stipend).

You have a valid point regarding who knew and what was done prior.