(09-06-2013 04:31 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 02:31 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  If we were talking about the Joe Paterno of the 80s, I'd agree with you...but we're talking about the Joe Paterno in the '00s. Didn't he fall asleep at one of his "games" up in the booth ones? At one time, Joe Paterno was every bit the man you described...but that was long in his past by the 00s when this noise started coming about.

Agreed to a point. Where he really became mortal? After the losing season of 2000. The "Joe must go" faction started to emerge after 2001. The guy was untouchable all up until then. I have to wonder, if nothing ever happened there, would he have been given his walking papers in '03. At the time, the extension came off as a self-serving, career-protecting move by Spanier and Curly to not be "the guys who ran out Paterno." Of course, who knows anymore why they really kept him around. No doubt to still cover themselves, but for different reasons.

Then again, I thought he had a stroke sometime between 2009-10 after his injury. It was certainly the worst, most affective intestinal virus I've ever seen. Administration could have told him to stay home after that, too. That they didn't...his power or the cover-up...who knows?

Didn't they show up at his house to basically fire him sometime in the '00's and he threw them out of his house and continued to coach?

(09-06-2013 02:04 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  In my opinion since he was a man from a different era when covering up stuff like that was the norm, he did what he has always done. Sweep the trouble under the rug and continue to perpetuate the idea that PSU is as clean as a whistle and does everything the right way. He almost got away with it too. A few more months and he would have been dead before all of this came out.

I think the two were related, this scandal and his death. He was sick for sure, but I think the hit to his legacy caused him to give up the will to fight. The will to fight is very important IMO to fighting thru bad health and disease. I've seen it with my own eyes.

(09-06-2013 06:08 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 02:04 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  In my opinion since he was a man from a different era when covering up stuff like that was the norm, he did what he has always done. Sweep the trouble under the rug and continue to perpetuate the idea that PSU is as clean as a whistle and does everything the right way. He almost got away with it too. A few more months and he would have been dead before all of this came out.

I think the two were related, this scandal and his death. He was sick for sure, but I think the hit to his legacy caused him to give up the will to fight. The will to fight is very important IMO to fighting thru bad health and disease. I've seen it with my own eyes.

But that would have bought him a few more months, not a few more years. Joe was already on his way out.

(09-05-2013 03:04 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 08:56 PM)Cardinals Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 07:26 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  Anyone who is a public employee knows that you report incidents to superiors.

And Paterno's quote was "With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more." And Paterno and Sandusky were not friends. FWIW.

I want the guilty to pay as much as anyone; I just don't think Paterno deserves the full brunt of the outrage.

If it's a child being raped in a shower, you let it slowly go up the line of command until it's forgotten about? No, violent crimes require an immediate call to law enforcement, not a buck being passed from person to person until somebody who's too busy to think about it puts it in a file cabinet to gather dust.

If a "public employee" sees somebody threatening somebody with a gun on public property, do they wait until the next day when their superior is back from vacation to do something, or do they call the police? Was the crime that was witnessed in the showers really less of a crime than somebody brandishing a weapon?

Paterno wasn't the witness. Your gripe is against Mike McQueary. Don't confuse the issue.

Why didn't McQueary step in the shower and deck Sandusky on the spot to help the kid. Why didn't he call the police right away. Why didn't Joe turn Sandusky into the police right away. Why didn't Joe's "bosses" turn Sandusky in right away. Why didn't McQueary, Paterno, and his bosses see to it that the kid got medical attention right away. They all turned their backs on the situation and the VICTIM IN THE SHOWER that day FOR THE SAKE OF PENN STATE FOOTBALL. The whole situation was a cover up from day one. PENN ST IS LUCKY TO TO HAVE GOTTEN OFF SO LIGHTLY WITH THE SANCTIONS THEY RECEIVED AND THE PALTRY 120 MILLION PAID OUT SO FAR. JOE'S STATUE SHOULD NOT JUST BE STORED AWAY FOR ANOTHER DAY - IT SHOULD BE MELTED AND BURIED AT SEA WHERE NO ONE CAN EVER FIND IT OR SEE IT AGAIN EVER.

(09-05-2013 03:10 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 07:54 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 07:26 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  Anyone who is a public employee knows that you report incidents to superiors.

This Penn St fantasy that Curley was Paterno' superior is a fiction. Curley was a former Penn St QB for Paterno. (So was McCready. Sandusky also played for JoePa).

Where did the meeting between McCready and Paterno take place? Paterno's house. A day later, where did the meeting between Curley and Paterno take place? Paterno's house.

Paterno was the Pope of Penn St football. Curley his Cardinal. Priest McCready witnessed Archbishop Sandusky molesting a boy. He went to the Pope. The Pope then called his Cardinal in for a meeting on how to handle it. Priest McCready was later promoted to Bishop for keeping his mouth shut.

Opinion. A popular one with those who have followed the headlines but haven't followed the facts of the case.

Paterno WAS PSU football. However, this was not a football related event.

This was a crime. Paterno is NOT the State College police department (who let Sandusky free in 1998)...or the Attorney General (who sat on his case from 2007 to 2011, allowing Sandusky to roam free until it was politically relevant to bring it to light.).

Football-blinded people will argue that Paterno is bigger than the government and law enforcement...but that's kind of silly. It simply supports an outlandish narrative that CSI/LawAndOrder minds just love.

Are you Joe Paterno's son trying to sell this bull**** so you can keep selling Paterno memorabilia and keep milking the cash cow in the pasture. I know your sales are down but your statements are pure horseshit.

PSU will forever be a POS program with delusional fans in my book. If I was a PSU grad I would burn my sweatshirts and literally shun that program from my life. How you all can go there each week and root for the program and act like either nothing happened or even worse justify/argue for your program is beyond me. You shouldn't even have a team right now. Ped State is all that wrong with college sports in the most horrific way.


As far as that loser Jo Pa...I don't care if he won 35 national championships and was voted the greatest coach ever living...he died a POS old man who allowed boys to be raped on his watch all so he could keep the machine going.

Joe was known for saying "nobody is bigger than the program"...apparently he didn't think this applied to him or his coaches. What an efin loser. And what's worse is idot fans who are so brainwashed that you can't see reality in all this...or perspective.

Here's a little hint for you ped state fans: the rest of the nation thinks you guys are losers for justifying your child rapist program. You have zero respect in all this. And when you all did that big march for Joe it was criminal. I would have had the swat team there dispersing you guys with rubber bullets and tear gas.

(09-06-2013 01:19 PM)lofi Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 12:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Can someone please explain how any parent would let their child go to PSU? How is Pitt not out-recruiting them?

It might be because Pitt has had 14 coaches in the last three years.
I kid.

No, that is absolutely true.

(09-05-2013 03:04 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 08:56 PM)Cardinals Wrote:  

(09-04-2013 07:26 AM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  Anyone who is a public employee knows that you report incidents to superiors.

And Paterno's quote was "With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more." And Paterno and Sandusky were not friends. FWIW.

I want the guilty to pay as much as anyone; I just don't think Paterno deserves the full brunt of the outrage.

If it's a child being raped in a shower, you let it slowly go up the line of command until it's forgotten about? No, violent crimes require an immediate call to law enforcement, not a buck being passed from person to person until somebody who's too busy to think about it puts it in a file cabinet to gather dust.

If a "public employee" sees somebody threatening somebody with a gun on public property, do they wait until the next day when their superior is back from vacation to do something, or do they call the police? Was the crime that was witnessed in the showers really less of a crime than somebody brandishing a weapon?

Paterno wasn't the witness. Your gripe is against Mike McQueary. Don't confuse the issue.

So, you agree that McQueery should have called the police.

And Paterno, as McQueery's immediate supervisor of course told him that, right? And Paterno of course counseled McQueery that even though he had let 24 hours go by, he should call the police ASAP so that they could begin their investigation immediately without any further time being lost and so they could get help to the victim post haste, didn't he?

The fact that Paterno had an obligation to refer this report up the chain of command in no way conflicts with the fact that immediate action needed to take place and the fact that he was in a position to see that immediate action did in fact occur.

You are confusing this incident with reports that come to a school teacher or medical professional or other mandated reporter where there is no direct knowledge of the incident. In such cases, an investigation is required because even a report by the alleged victim is not always accurate and can in fact be fabricated. But that was not the case here, was it? We have a mandated reported with direct knowledge of the situation, a first hand eyewitness report. There was no investigation needed on the part of the institution. What was needed was action. Mc Queery delayed action and Paterno only compounded the problem as did those above him. To this day, that poor kid has never gotten any help.

(09-06-2013 04:36 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 04:31 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 02:31 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  If we were talking about the Joe Paterno of the 80s, I'd agree with you...but we're talking about the Joe Paterno in the '00s. Didn't he fall asleep at one of his "games" up in the booth ones? At one time, Joe Paterno was every bit the man you described...but that was long in his past by the 00s when this noise started coming about.

Agreed to a point. Where he really became mortal? After the losing season of 2000. The "Joe must go" faction started to emerge after 2001. The guy was untouchable all up until then. I have to wonder, if nothing ever happened there, would he have been given his walking papers in '03. At the time, the extension came off as a self-serving, career-protecting move by Spanier and Curly to not be "the guys who ran out Paterno." Of course, who knows anymore why they really kept him around. No doubt to still cover themselves, but for different reasons.

Then again, I thought he had a stroke sometime between 2009-10 after his injury. It was certainly the worst, most affective intestinal virus I've ever seen. Administration could have told him to stay home after that, too. That they didn't...his power or the cover-up...who knows?

Didn't they show up at his house to basically fire him sometime in the '00's and he threw them out of his house and continued to coach?

Yes, he did and that is well documented.

Now the question becomes, "What did Joe say to them that would cause them to leave his porch so quickly and never again ask for his resignation?"

For the sake of argument, is it really all that difficult to believe that he threatened to go public with the Sandusky scandal? I think he likely said something like, "If you push me out the door, I'm taking you two bums with me and telling everyone about Sandusky."

"I'm also telling everyone that I wanted to report it but you two wouldn't let me."

Spanier and Curley aren't idiots. They knew who people would believe if it came down to a he said/he said type of deal.

Guys, the students tried to burn the town to the ground when Paterno was fired for allegedly hurting children. How insanely would they have responded if the man had been fired for allegedly trying to help children?

I just have no idea how anyone could have watched how things played out in State College and somehow still believe that Paterno was somehow powerless in a scandal involving his football program? That seems completely insane to me.

Guys, the man had people praying at his house and hugging his statue and much of that nonsense came BEFORE he passed away.

Do you think people are going to carry on like that when Curley bites the dust or when Spanier meets his maker?

There is no question Paterno was the most powerful human being involved in that equation and frankly, it's a bit like me opining that Michael Jordan was the best player on those legendary Chicago Bulls teams or that Alabama has been the best college football program of the past five years.

There is no doubt whatsoever in any of those statements and why anyone would insist otherwise is beyond me?

Paterno was a great college football coach and he may have been a great man too. Nobody knows that second one because NONE OF US KNEW HIM OR HIS CHARACTER. However, we do know that his involvement in the Sandusky scandal completely obliterates all of that. This scandal will forever define his legacy and frankly it is 100 percent deserved for what he and others allowed to happen to all of those poor children under their watch. They will get no sympathy from this man whatsoever.

I had thought since 1968 that Paterno was a bitter, angry, arrogant, hypocritical, egotistical, two faced, self serving, vindictive jacka$$.

Some people told me all along that I had him all wrong............

(09-07-2013 09:32 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:19 PM)lofi Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 12:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Can someone please explain how any parent would let their child go to PSU? How is Pitt not out-recruiting them?

It might be because Pitt has had 14 coaches in the last three years.
I kid.

No, that is absolutely true.

Did he get lucky and hit the exact number? Or are you just agreeing with the general sentiment of the original statement? There have been multiple staff adjustments, including the one that never came to fruition. It seems like the total number of coaches should be a little higher, like around 20...

(09-05-2013 12:05 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 11:36 AM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 08:43 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  To state that Joe did not know something was amiss with Sandusky is complete BS. He, essentially, willingly turned a blind eye to the atrocities; others would later blame it on the police for not doing enough to stop the evil bastard. Some in the Penn State crowd need to get their priorities in order!

"getting their priorities in order." That, right there, is the reason I was hoping for a suspension of Penn State football. Two years without their program would have provided that segment of the crowd a much needed reality check.

This was not a football issue. This was an administrative failure (above Joe Paterno). According to your logic, banning all PSU sports would also be a valid way to teach PSU to "get its priorities in order."

Now, some of you will circle back to NOTHING WAS ABOVE JOE PATERNO. We will then reply CITY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS WERE ABOVE JOE PATERNO. If they did nothing and/or failed, why is Joe held to a higher standard? The prosecution of Sandusky's case saw ZERO blame to point towards Paterno...but many of you--with nothing to gain except a lingering angst--want to keep the righteous indignation way up high.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/opinio....html?_r=0

This was not a football issue???

If Sandusky was not part of the football program, what was he doing there? If the head coach isn't responsible for members of the football program, who is?

Paterno was the highest paid person at the university, probably the highest paid state employee. If he can't handle this situation and has to bump it upstairs, why is he being paid all that money?

Apparently you think, that football issues are only those related to team performance, student athletes and management of the program. I wonder if Paterno would have so circumscribed his job responsibilities when it came to negotiating his contract. To so limit his range of responsibilities and his level of authority totally contradicts the stature he was accorded both informally and formally within the institution. This is not an intramural coach we're talking about here. Or even the coach of a minor sport. The LAX coach at Duke was fired for far less even when the information at hand proved tone unreliable. The fact that Paterno had far greater standing within the PSU community doesn't mean that he should be held to less of a standard; it means that he should be held to a higher standard.

(09-07-2013 10:34 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 12:05 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 11:36 AM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 08:43 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  To state that Joe did not know something was amiss with Sandusky is complete BS. He, essentially, willingly turned a blind eye to the atrocities; others would later blame it on the police for not doing enough to stop the evil bastard. Some in the Penn State crowd need to get their priorities in order!

"getting their priorities in order." That, right there, is the reason I was hoping for a suspension of Penn State football. Two years without their program would have provided that segment of the crowd a much needed reality check.

This was not a football issue. This was an administrative failure (above Joe Paterno). According to your logic, banning all PSU sports would also be a valid way to teach PSU to "get its priorities in order."

Now, some of you will circle back to NOTHING WAS ABOVE JOE PATERNO. We will then reply CITY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS WERE ABOVE JOE PATERNO. If they did nothing and/or failed, why is Joe held to a higher standard? The prosecution of Sandusky's case saw ZERO blame to point towards Paterno...but many of you--with nothing to gain except a lingering angst--want to keep the righteous indignation way up high.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/opinio....html?_r=0

This was not a football issue???

If Sandusky was not part of the football program, what was he doing there? If the head coach isn't responsible for members of the football program, who is?

Paterno was the highest paid person at the university, probably the highest paid state employee. If he can't handle this situation and has to bump it upstairs, why is he being paid all that money?

Apparently you think, that football issues are only those related to team performance, student athletes and management of the program. I wonder if Paterno would have so circumscribed his job responsibilities when it came to negotiating his contract. To so limit his range of responsibilities and his level of authority totally contradicts the stature he was accorded both informally and formally within the institution. This is not an intramural coach we're talking about here. Or even the coach of a minor sport. The LAX coach at Duke was fired for far less even when the information at hand proved tone unreliable. The fact that Paterno had far greater standing within the PSU community doesn't mean that he should be held to less of a standard; it means that he should be held to a higher standard.

CHILDREN under the care of Pennsylvania State University were molested on campus, during university sanctioned camps held on campus, by a longtime university employee (JoePa's top asst. coach), who still had access to university facilities long after questions about his character surfaced and he was fired by the university. There is no defense for that, and Federal laws were broken in the committing and cover up of each offense, no matter the number...

Any defense of that is uncivilized and stupid, and anyone who can't understand that has some serious mental problems...

(09-07-2013 10:43 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-07-2013 10:34 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 12:05 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 11:36 AM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 08:43 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  To state that Joe did not know something was amiss with Sandusky is complete BS. He, essentially, willingly turned a blind eye to the atrocities; others would later blame it on the police for not doing enough to stop the evil bastard. Some in the Penn State crowd need to get their priorities in order!

"getting their priorities in order." That, right there, is the reason I was hoping for a suspension of Penn State football. Two years without their program would have provided that segment of the crowd a much needed reality check.

This was not a football issue. This was an administrative failure (above Joe Paterno). According to your logic, banning all PSU sports would also be a valid way to teach PSU to "get its priorities in order."

Now, some of you will circle back to NOTHING WAS ABOVE JOE PATERNO. We will then reply CITY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS WERE ABOVE JOE PATERNO. If they did nothing and/or failed, why is Joe held to a higher standard? The prosecution of Sandusky's case saw ZERO blame to point towards Paterno...but many of you--with nothing to gain except a lingering angst--want to keep the righteous indignation way up high.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/opinio....html?_r=0

This was not a football issue???

If Sandusky was not part of the football program, what was he doing there? If the head coach isn't responsible for members of the football program, who is?

Paterno was the highest paid person at the university, probably the highest paid state employee. If he can't handle this situation and has to bump it upstairs, why is he being paid all that money?

Apparently you think, that football issues are only those related to team performance, student athletes and management of the program. I wonder if Paterno would have so circumscribed his job responsibilities when it came to negotiating his contract. To so limit his range of responsibilities and his level of authority totally contradicts the stature he was accorded both informally and formally within the institution. This is not an intramural coach we're talking about here. Or even the coach of a minor sport. The LAX coach at Duke was fired for far less even when the information at hand proved tone unreliable. The fact that Paterno had far greater standing within the PSU community doesn't mean that he should be held to less of a standard; it means that he should be held to a higher standard.

CHILDREN under the care of Pennsylvania State University were molested on campus, during university sanctioned camps held on campus, by a longtime university employee (JoePa's top asst. coach), who still had access to university facilities long after questions about his character surfaced and he was fired by the university. There is no defense for that, and Federal laws were broken in the committing and cover up of each offense, no matter the number...

Any defense of that is uncivilized and stupid, and anyone who can't understand that has some serious mental problems...

THERE IT IS!!!

(09-07-2013 10:27 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-07-2013 09:32 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:19 PM)lofi Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 12:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Can someone please explain how any parent would let their child go to PSU? How is Pitt not out-recruiting them?

It might be because Pitt has had 14 coaches in the last three years.
I kid.

No, that is absolutely true.

Did he get lucky and hit the exact number? Or are you just agreeing with the general sentiment of the original statement? There have been multiple staff adjustments, including the one that never came to fruition. It seems like the total number of coaches should be a little higher, like around 20...

No, I'm just agreeing that coaching turnover just decimated that program and Pitt is paying for it this year and will next year and the year after as well.

A lot of Pitt fans refuse to face that reality but it is our reality nonetheless.

When you keep firing entire coaching staffs, you lose out on all of their recruits as well. And that isn't even counting all of the kids who transfer out because of personality conflicts/system changes/etc.

As a result, when Pitt released its two-deep for last week's Florida State game, it featured 23 players playing their first collegiate game. That number didn't include RS SR Tom Savage, who was playing his first game in three years or true FR James Conner, Pitt's leading rusher. It also didn't include the fact that all five starting OL were making their first start at their position. The tackles were a newly converted DE and a RS FR and the Gs were last year's starting OTs. The C was a former walk-on who is undersized by feisty.

No sane Pitt fan expected Pitt to win that game and very few were surprised it was as ugly as it was. Also, we're going to be on the wrong end of several more arse kickings this year as we try to straighten out the absolute mess created by Steve Pederson, the Teflon AD.

(09-07-2013 10:34 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 12:05 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 11:36 AM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 08:43 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  To state that Joe did not know something was amiss with Sandusky is complete BS. He, essentially, willingly turned a blind eye to the atrocities; others would later blame it on the police for not doing enough to stop the evil bastard. Some in the Penn State crowd need to get their priorities in order!

"getting their priorities in order." That, right there, is the reason I was hoping for a suspension of Penn State football. Two years without their program would have provided that segment of the crowd a much needed reality check.

This was not a football issue. This was an administrative failure (above Joe Paterno). According to your logic, banning all PSU sports would also be a valid way to teach PSU to "get its priorities in order."

Now, some of you will circle back to NOTHING WAS ABOVE JOE PATERNO. We will then reply CITY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS WERE ABOVE JOE PATERNO. If they did nothing and/or failed, why is Joe held to a higher standard? The prosecution of Sandusky's case saw ZERO blame to point towards Paterno...but many of you--with nothing to gain except a lingering angst--want to keep the righteous indignation way up high.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/opinio....html?_r=0

This was not a football issue???

If Sandusky was not part of the football program, what was he doing there? If the head coach isn't responsible for members of the football program, who is?

Sandusky was a retired coach in 2001. As a retiree he had access to university facilities. Paterno was NOT responsible for him at that point in time. Noone knew what he had done in 1998 at the Alamo Bowl until the last year or so.

Paterno was the highest paid person at the university, probably the highest paid state employee. If he can't handle this situation and has to bump it upstairs, why is he being paid all that money?

The football coach is NOT the police chief. He had NO business handling it. It needed to go to those responsible for the police and for retiree access to facilities. He absolutely did the right thing-at first. It was later he failed when nothing was done.

Apparently you think, that football issues are only those related to team performance, student athletes and management of the program. I wonder if Paterno would have so circumscribed his job responsibilities when it came to negotiating his contract. To so limit his range of responsibilities and his level of authority totally contradicts the stature he was accorded both informally and formally within the institution. This is not an intramural coach we're talking about here. Or even the coach of a minor sport. The LAX coach at Duke was fired for far less even when the information at hand proved tone unreliable. The fact that Paterno had far greater standing within the PSU community doesn't mean that he should be held to less of a standard; it means that he should be held to a higher standard.

I hate these ridiculous emotional comments. There's no excuse for everyone's lack of action at Penn St. But blaming people for the wrong things is just silly. Unless you believe that Paterno was actively stopping things going forward, he was only guilty of a serious sin of omission, turning a blind eye to likely crimes. But he did everything he was legally required to. Morally is a totally different issue and Paterno understood that. Spanier, Curley and Schultz are the ones who may go to jail and they are the ones with the biggest failures. They are the ones who most likely failed their legal obligations in addition to possible perjury.

(09-07-2013 12:15 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(09-07-2013 10:27 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-07-2013 09:32 AM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 01:19 PM)lofi Wrote:  

(09-06-2013 12:43 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Can someone please explain how any parent would let their child go to PSU? How is Pitt not out-recruiting them?

It might be because Pitt has had 14 coaches in the last three years.
I kid.

No, that is absolutely true.

Did he get lucky and hit the exact number? Or are you just agreeing with the general sentiment of the original statement? There have been multiple staff adjustments, including the one that never came to fruition. It seems like the total number of coaches should be a little higher, like around 20...

No, I'm just agreeing that coaching turnover just decimated that program and Pitt is paying for it this year and will next year and the year after as well.

A lot of Pitt fans refuse to face that reality but it is our reality nonetheless.

When you keep firing entire coaching staffs, you lose out on all of their recruits as well. And that isn't even counting all of the kids who transfer out because of personality conflicts/system changes/etc.

As a result, when Pitt released its two-deep for last week's Florida State game, it featured 23 players playing their first collegiate game. That number didn't include RS SR Tom Savage, who was playing his first game in three years or true FR James Conner, Pitt's leading rusher. It also didn't include the fact that all five starting OL were making their first start at their position. The tackles were a newly converted DE and a RS FR and the Gs were last year's starting OTs. The C was a former walk-on who is undersized by feisty.

No sane Pitt fan expected Pitt to win that game and very few were surprised it was as ugly as it was. Also, we're going to be on the wrong end of several more arse kickings this year as we try to straighten out the absolute mess created by Steve Pederson, the Teflon AD.

Well somebody up there likes the current situation, since Pitt recently gave him an extension. What's up with that?

(09-06-2013 04:36 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Didn't they show up at his house to basically fire him sometime in the '00's and he threw them out of his house and continued to coach?

Kind of? Between the 2003 and 2004 seasons, Curley and Spanier apparently approached Paterno about retiring or making some changes on his staff (in other words: fire people), or else Curley, with Spanier's backing, would be playing the role of "bad guy" and making the decisions for Joe. That's when he tossed them out.

And, this is why that contract extension, which happened AFTER that incident, if I'm not mistaken, always seemed so utterly insane to me. The result of it all was that he gets this extension, and *nobody is fired.* No, correction, I think a conditioning coach was let go. They hire Galen Hall as an offensive coordinator, but in practice, offensive play-calling stops becoming a Paterno-and-son job, to become son-and-Hall, who can be vetoed by Joe. Whoop-dee-doo.

In the aftermath of it, Curley and Spanier spun it to the public that the three of them all acted in this bad way, like any misunderstanding, and then "figured it out."

Quote:Spanier and Curley aren't idiots.

You're too kind.

I said it in another thread: PSU was lucky this was only football. It's not like this Sandusky issue was Curley and Spanier's only "flub." How Renee Portland, the "beloved" bigot ex-hoops coach, was able to not just "resign with distinction," but still be given this hero's welcome of sorts at the school, despite being a total t*** and a terror on student athletes...no, it's not just a football culture at Penn State. Even if Paterno was himself a fan of hers. It's pretty much an athletic culture in general.

(09-07-2013 12:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-07-2013 10:34 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 12:05 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 11:36 AM)jdgaucho Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 08:43 PM)Ned Low Wrote:  To state that Joe did not know something was amiss with Sandusky is complete BS. He, essentially, willingly turned a blind eye to the atrocities; others would later blame it on the police for not doing enough to stop the evil bastard. Some in the Penn State crowd need to get their priorities in order!

"getting their priorities in order." That, right there, is the reason I was hoping for a suspension of Penn State football. Two years without their program would have provided that segment of the crowd a much needed reality check.

This was not a football issue. This was an administrative failure (above Joe Paterno). According to your logic, banning all PSU sports would also be a valid way to teach PSU to "get its priorities in order."

Now, some of you will circle back to NOTHING WAS ABOVE JOE PATERNO. We will then reply CITY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS WERE ABOVE JOE PATERNO. If they did nothing and/or failed, why is Joe held to a higher standard? The prosecution of Sandusky's case saw ZERO blame to point towards Paterno...but many of you--with nothing to gain except a lingering angst--want to keep the righteous indignation way up high.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/opinio....html?_r=0

This was not a football issue???

If Sandusky was not part of the football program, what was he doing there? If the head coach isn't responsible for members of the football program, who is?

Sandusky was a retired coach in 2001. As a retiree he had access to university facilities. Paterno was NOT responsible for him at that point in time. Noone knew what he had done in 1998 at the Alamo Bowl until the last year or so.

Paterno was the highest paid person at the university, probably the highest paid state employee. If he can't handle this situation and has to bump it upstairs, why is he being paid all that money?

The football coach is NOT the police chief. He had NO business handling it. It needed to go to those responsible for the police and for retiree access to facilities. He absolutely did the right thing-at first. It was later he failed when nothing was done.

Apparently you think, that football issues are only those related to team performance, student athletes and management of the program. I wonder if Paterno would have so circumscribed his job responsibilities when it came to negotiating his contract. To so limit his range of responsibilities and his level of authority totally contradicts the stature he was accorded both informally and formally within the institution. This is not an intramural coach we're talking about here. Or even the coach of a minor sport. The LAX coach at Duke was fired for far less even when the information at hand proved tone unreliable. The fact that Paterno had far greater standing within the PSU community doesn't mean that he should be held to less of a standard; it means that he should be held to a higher standard.

I hate these ridiculous emotional comments. There's no excuse for everyone's lack of action at Penn St. But blaming people for the wrong things is just silly. Unless you believe that Paterno was actively stopping things going forward, he was only guilty of a serious sin of omission, turning a blind eye to likely crimes. But he did everything he was legally required to. Morally is a totally different issue and Paterno understood that. Spanier, Curley and Schultz are the ones who may go to jail and they are the ones with the biggest failures. They are the ones who most likely failed their legal obligations in addition to possible perjury.

The fact that you dismiss my remarks as "emotional" shows how out of touch with reality you are. Any normal person is obviously "emotional" about child rape. The fact that you claim not to be speaks volumes about you.

The fact that Sandusky was "a retired coach" with privileges is irrelevant. He was part of Paterno's football family. He was only on campus because of his connection to the football program. To dismiss it as not football related shows once again that you are out of touch with reality and compartmentalizing events in a way that allows you to turn a blind eye to what happened and to what Paterno's responsibilities were to his subordinate, McQueery he witnessed the rape. That's not an emotional reaction, it's simply a fact that i know as someone who worked in the administration of a public institution.

I don't believe for a minute that Sandusky's activities in 1998 were not known to Paterno at the time of the McQueery report. You can believe what you want, but reading between the lines, it seems patently obvious to me thatthe 1998 incident and others earlier are precisely why Sandusky was "retired" when he was. It has "deal" written all over it.

Your claim that Paterno did everything he was required to do is what you want to believe. So you latch on to this latest quote. Louis Freeh had a different opinion, one that is every bit as legitimate. We'll see what happens when the lawsuit gets settled.

(09-07-2013 08:32 PM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(09-07-2013 12:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-07-2013 10:34 AM)Melky Cabrera Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 12:05 PM)allthatyoucantleavebehind Wrote:  

(09-05-2013 11:36 AM)jdgaucho Wrote:  "getting their priorities in order." That, right there, is the reason I was hoping for a suspension of Penn State football. Two years without their program would have provided that segment of the crowd a much needed reality check.

This was not a football issue. This was an administrative failure (above Joe Paterno). According to your logic, banning all PSU sports would also be a valid way to teach PSU to "get its priorities in order."

Now, some of you will circle back to NOTHING WAS ABOVE JOE PATERNO. We will then reply CITY AND STATE GOVERNMENTS WERE ABOVE JOE PATERNO. If they did nothing and/or failed, why is Joe held to a higher standard? The prosecution of Sandusky's case saw ZERO blame to point towards Paterno...but many of you--with nothing to gain except a lingering angst--want to keep the righteous indignation way up high.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/opinio....html?_r=0

This was not a football issue???

If Sandusky was not part of the football program, what was he doing there? If the head coach isn't responsible for members of the football program, who is?

Sandusky was a retired coach in 2001. As a retiree he had access to university facilities. Paterno was NOT responsible for him at that point in time. Noone knew what he had done in 1998 at the Alamo Bowl until the last year or so.

Paterno was the highest paid person at the university, probably the highest paid state employee. If he can't handle this situation and has to bump it upstairs, why is he being paid all that money?

The football coach is NOT the police chief. He had NO business handling it. It needed to go to those responsible for the police and for retiree access to facilities. He absolutely did the right thing-at first. It was later he failed when nothing was done.

Apparently you think, that football issues are only those related to team performance, student athletes and management of the program. I wonder if Paterno would have so circumscribed his job responsibilities when it came to negotiating his contract. To so limit his range of responsibilities and his level of authority totally contradicts the stature he was accorded both informally and formally within the institution. This is not an intramural coach we're talking about here. Or even the coach of a minor sport. The LAX coach at Duke was fired for far less even when the information at hand proved tone unreliable. The fact that Paterno had far greater standing within the PSU community doesn't mean that he should be held to less of a standard; it means that he should be held to a higher standard.

I hate these ridiculous emotional comments. There's no excuse for everyone's lack of action at Penn St. But blaming people for the wrong things is just silly. Unless you believe that Paterno was actively stopping things going forward, he was only guilty of a serious sin of omission, turning a blind eye to likely crimes. But he did everything he was legally required to. Morally is a totally different issue and Paterno understood that. Spanier, Curley and Schultz are the ones who may go to jail and they are the ones with the biggest failures. They are the ones who most likely failed their legal obligations in addition to possible perjury.

The fact that you dismiss my remarks as "emotional" shows how out of touch with reality you are. Any normal person is obviously "emotional" about child rape. The fact that you claim not to be speaks volumes about you.

The fact that Sandusky was "a retired coach" with privileges is irrelevant. He was part of Paterno's football family. He was only on campus because of his connection to the football program. To dismiss it as not football related shows once again that you are out of touch with reality and compartmentalizing events in a way that allows you to turn a blind eye to what happened and to what Paterno's responsibilities were to his subordinate, McQueery he witnessed the rape. That's not an emotional reaction, it's simply a fact that i know as someone who worked in the administration of a public institution.

I don't believe for a minute that Sandusky's activities in 1998 were not known to Paterno at the time of the McQueery report. You can believe what you want, but reading between the lines, it seems patently obvious to me thatthe 1998 incident and others earlier are precisely why Sandusky was "retired" when he was. It has "deal" written all over it.

Your claim that Paterno did everything he was required to do is what you want to believe. So you latch on to this latest quote. Louis Freeh had a different opinion, one that is every bit as legitimate. We'll see what happens when the lawsuit gets settled.

Your emotionalism is why your comments aren't worth taking seriously. You didn't even read my comments. I said the quote from the prosecutor was meaningless and shouldn't change anyone's opinion. He simply stated what everyone with any sense already knew. There was no evidence Paterno covered things up. That doesn't mean he didn't, but there is simply no evidence. You have to make assumptions about what really happened either way.

Your thinking Paterno didn't do everything he was required legally to do is emotional and without basis. Paterno did not witness the event. He was not responsible for the police. He was not responsible for Sandusky being on school property. That was a university policy. And as I said and your emotionalism blinds you, morally is a very different issue from legally.

The people who think everything was covered up in a conspiracy with the AD in 2000 are a whole lot more nuts than the students who were rioting. Paterno didn't control the county police. Did Paterno have suspicions and that is why Sandusky retired, maybe. But the prosecutor being killed or committing suicide because he was pressured to let Sandusky go? Get real.