The NCAA has announced a settlement and will return the 111 wins that were vacated as a result of the consent agreement. JoePa is once again the winningest coach in college football.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id...oach-again

I am not sure what lesson to learn from all this.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...an-lawsuit

Full statement from NCAA. In addition to the restored victories:

Quote:•Penn State agrees to commit a total of $60 million to activities and programs for the prevention of child sexual abuse and the treatment of victims of child sexual abuse.
•Penn State acknowledges the NCAA's legitimate and good faith interest and concern regarding the Jerry Sandusky matter.
•Penn State and the NCAA will enter into a new Athletics Integrity Agreement that (with concurrence of the Big Ten) includes best practices with which the university is committed to comply and that provides for the university to continue to retain the services of Sen. George Mitchell and his firm to support the university's activities under the Athletics Integrity Agreement and in the areas of compliance, ethics and integrity.

(01-16-2015 01:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am not sure what lesson to learn from all this.

Covering up heinous crimes pays, as long as you keep insisting that it should pay?

(01-16-2015 01:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am not sure what lesson to learn from all this.

That big time college FB is big money.

(01-16-2015 01:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am not sure what lesson to learn from all this.

If you get caught, don't sign a plea deal. Let the process play out.

(01-16-2015 01:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  If you get caught, don't sign a plea deal. Let the process play out.

The NCAA wanted to look like it was important and it mattered, in front of the nation. So they made a power grab, made illegal threats to Penn St and PSU was so scared that it was willing to sign whatever was shoved in front of it, by whomever was deeming itself an authority.

The NCAA had nothing to do with the crimes that were committed by the former Penn St coach and never had a rightful place at the table.

Q: Do you currently have employed for you since sometime in the early 2000s an assistant coach named Michael McQueary?

Mr. Paterno: Yes.

Q: I’d like to direct your attention to what I believe would be a spring break of 2002, around that time. Do you recall Michael McQueary calling you and asking to have a discussion with you about something that he observed?

Mr. Paterno: I’m not sure of the date, but he did call me on a Saturday morning. He said he had something that he wanted to discuss. I said, come on over to the house.

He came over to the house.

And as I said, I’m not sure what year it was, but I know it was a Saturday morning and we discussed something he had seen.

Q: Without getting into any graphic detail, what did Mr. McQueary tell you he had seen and where?

Mr. Paterno: Well, he had seen a person, an older — not an older, but a mature person who was fondling, whatever you might call it — I’m not sure what the term would be — a young boy.

Q: Did he identify who that older person was?

Mr. Paterno: Yes, a man by the name of Jerry Sandusky who had been one of our coaches, was not at the time.

Q: You’re saying that at the time this incident was reported to you, Sandusky was no longer a coach?
Mr. Paterno: No, he had retired voluntarily. I’m not sure exactly the year, but I think it was either ‘98 or ‘99.

Q: I think you used the term fondling. Is that the term that you used?

Mr. Paterno: Well, I don’t know what you would call it. Obviously, he was doing something with the youngster.

It was a sexual nature. I’m not sure exactly what it was.

I didn’t push Mike to describe exactly what it was because he was very upset. Obviously, I was in a little bit of a dilemma since Mr. Sandusky was not working for me anymore.

So I told — I didn’t go any further than that except I knew Mike was upset and I knew some kind of inappropriate action was being taken by Jerry Sandusky with a youngster.

Q: Did Mike McQueary tell you where he had seen this inappropriate conduct take place?

Mr. Paterno: In the shower.

Q: Where was the shower?

Mr. Paterno: In the Lasch Building.

Q: Is that on the campus of Penn State University?

Mr. Paterno: It’s right on the campus.

(01-16-2015 01:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(01-16-2015 01:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am not sure what lesson to learn from all this.

If you get caught, don't sign a plea deal. Let the process play out.

Or that the NCAA knows they overstepped their bounds with the deal they forced on PSU. IMO this shows that the NCAA is acknowledging that they have limited jurisdiction when it comes to criminal investigations.

(01-16-2015 01:53 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  Q: Do you currently have employed for you since sometime in the early 2000s an assistant coach named Michael McQueary?

Mr. Paterno: Yes.

Q: I’d like to direct your attention to what I believe would be a spring break of 2002, around that time. Do you recall Michael McQueary calling you and asking to have a discussion with you about something that he observed?

Mr. Paterno: I’m not sure of the date, but he did call me on a Saturday morning. He said he had something that he wanted to discuss. I said, come on over to the house.

He came over to the house.

And as I said, I’m not sure what year it was, but I know it was a Saturday morning and we discussed something he had seen.

Q: Without getting into any graphic detail, what did Mr. McQueary tell you he had seen and where?

Mr. Paterno: Well, he had seen a person, an older — not an older, but a mature person who was fondling, whatever you might call it — I’m not sure what the term would be — a young boy.

Q: Did he identify who that older person was?

Mr. Paterno: Yes, a man by the name of Jerry Sandusky who had been one of our coaches, was not at the time.

Q: You’re saying that at the time this incident was reported to you, Sandusky was no longer a coach?
Mr. Paterno: No, he had retired voluntarily. I’m not sure exactly the year, but I think it was either ‘98 or ‘99.

Q: I think you used the term fondling. Is that the term that you used?

Mr. Paterno: Well, I don’t know what you would call it. Obviously, he was doing something with the youngster.

It was a sexual nature. I’m not sure exactly what it was.

I didn’t push Mike to describe exactly what it was because he was very upset. Obviously, I was in a little bit of a dilemma since Mr. Sandusky was not working for me anymore.

So I told — I didn’t go any further than that except I knew Mike was upset and I knew some kind of inappropriate action was being taken by Jerry Sandusky with a youngster.

Q: Did Mike McQueary tell you where he had seen this inappropriate conduct take place?

Mr. Paterno: In the shower.

Q: Where was the shower?

Mr. Paterno: In the Lasch Building.

Q: Is that on the campus of Penn State University?

Mr. Paterno: It’s right on the campus.

What does the NCAA have to do with this crime?

If someone shoots a student on campus, do you call the NCAA?

(01-16-2015 01:54 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-16-2015 01:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(01-16-2015 01:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am not sure what lesson to learn from all this.

If you get caught, don't sign a plea deal. Let the process play out.

Or that the NCAA knows they overstepped their bounds with the deal they forced on PSU. IMO this shows that the NCAA is acknowledging that they have limited jurisdiction when it comes to criminal investigations.

What I haven't seen (in 3 separate articles) is whether that $60 million is now spent only in Pennsylvania. That seemed to be the main basis for the suit and the biggest over-reach by the NCAA.

(01-16-2015 01:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am not sure what lesson to learn from all this.

The lesson is:
A booster giving a player's family free rent > a coach being aware that his players were trading autographs for tattoos > a program letting a known child molestor hang around the campus.

(01-16-2015 01:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-16-2015 01:54 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-16-2015 01:42 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(01-16-2015 01:31 PM)goofus Wrote:  I am not sure what lesson to learn from all this.

If you get caught, don't sign a plea deal. Let the process play out.

Or that the NCAA knows they overstepped their bounds with the deal they forced on PSU. IMO this shows that the NCAA is acknowledging that they have limited jurisdiction when it comes to criminal investigations.

What I haven't seen (in 3 separate articles) is whether that $60 million is now spent only in Pennsylvania. That seemed to be the main basis for the suit and the biggest over-reach by the NCAA.

Saw it in the ABC article. A lot of these are relying on NCAA press releases where they don't want to admit how much they overstepped. The $60 million will be spent in Pennsylvania.

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/p...e-28274688

His memory will forever be tarnished; the same goes for the entire university football team.

I know this isn't popular, but: winning those games had absolutely nothing to do with him not doing enough in the Sandusky matter. I suppose one could say he was a better football coach than he was a person.

(01-16-2015 02:01 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  The lesson is:
A booster giving a player's family free rent > a coach being aware that his players were trading autographs for tattoos > a program letting a known child molestor hang around the campus.

Two of those are not crimes, rather just violation of NCAA rules.

The other is a crime and has nothing to do with the NCAA.

(01-16-2015 02:12 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-16-2015 02:01 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  The lesson is:
A booster giving a player's family free rent > a coach being aware that his players were trading autographs for tattoos > a program letting a known child molestor hang around the campus.

Two of those are not crimes, rather just violation of NCAA rules.

The other is a crime and has nothing to do with the NCAA.

And the last isn't really a crime. The crime was the police chief, et al, knowing about a crime and not doing anything about it. They're being charged with child endangerment. Curly, Schultz and Spanier are also in trouble for possible perjury in the case.

(01-16-2015 02:11 PM)esayem Wrote:  I know this isn't popular, but: winning those games had absolutely nothing to do with him not doing enough in the Sandusky matter. I suppose one could say he was a better football coach than he was a person.

Yup, that about sums it up. I've never seen a coach with about a minute to go and already up by an ungodly amount of points choose to gun it down the field for a touchdown just to rub it in that they were dominant. Doug Graber and Paterno almost got into a fist fight at midfield after the game.

(01-16-2015 02:12 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(01-16-2015 02:01 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  The lesson is:
A booster giving a player's family free rent > a coach being aware that his players were trading autographs for tattoos > a program letting a known child molestor hang around the campus.

Two of those are not crimes, rather just violation of NCAA rules.

The other is a crime and has nothing to do with the NCAA.

How was what happened a lack of institutional control?

(01-16-2015 02:11 PM)esayem Wrote:  I know this isn't popular, but: winning those games had absolutely nothing to do with him not doing enough in the Sandusky matter. I suppose one could say he was a better football coach than he was a person.

I respectfully disagree. I think the issue was covered up because being the all time winningest coach was very important to Paterno and what was done (or not done) was to keep the NCAA from leveling sanctions.