menu
Logo
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Sickening scandal at Penn State
Page: 13 of 14
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 7/19/2012 9:42 PM
Turney13 wrote:expand_more
God Complex.

I'm not clear to what extent you intended this as a serious answer, but I do think it could be a part of it. It is certainly plausible that Paterno honestly believed he could find a solution to any problem, even this one. For those that followed Penn State football, how often in his career did he call and report anything at all to authorities? I'm not saying it should be done often, but there are times when it needs to be done.
Maryland Bobcat
General User
Member Since: 12/28/2004
Location: Annapolis, MD
Post Count: 169
mail
Maryland Bobcat
mail
Posted: 7/20/2012 9:39 AM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
You are willing to accept the Freeh report as gospel truth. I am not. That is not to say I think the Freeh report is wrong, just that it could be wrong (or incomplete, or circumstantial) about what these people knew. That is a critical piece of information, and as I previously posted, a proper prosecution requires that accusation be thoroughly vetted before we start leveling penalties against these people.

But again, if you believe the Freeh report is factual, then you must believe that Paterno did anything to protect Sandusky, including forgiving child molestations in his own locker room. Why would Paterno be willing to do that? Why would Sandusky be worth that much to Paterno? So they were friends, but big deal. Child molestation would easily negate a friendship. Paterno could have told Sandusky to go away and never come back again. There would have been few questions asked, and all this would have never come out. But instead, as the story goes, Paterno hid Sandusky's behavior to protect PSU's reputation (and knowingly allowed Sandusky to continue to rape boys--in his own locker room). For me, that's a big stretch.


If the question is am I willing to look at evidence and facts and then make a determination, then yes, I am accepting the report managed by the former director of our nation's most powerful investigative branch.  As I stated, over 400 interviews and 3.5 million documents were reviewed.  Not ONCE was there any indication at any point - NOT ONCE - that Paterno or PSU did anything to protect those children.  Personally I don't really care why he did what he did.  Those victims don't care why - they only know it was done.  You think the actions of these folks was a stretch, and I agree and would hope so.  Most people wouldn't think anyone that has an ounce of moral fiber would do such a thing, but that doesn't change the fact that it was done.  Both the rapes and the cover up.  That's what makes this such a horrific story.  We put people on pedastals because they win football games and preach about integrity, and never believe they can do any wrong. 

We shouldn't be leveling penalties against "these people"?  Underprivaledged and less fortunate children were sent to PSU to try and make a better life for them, and they were not protected.  Sanduskly used the power of PSU to recuit these kids there, and "these people" used their power to cover it up.   "These people" stood by why the lives of these children were ruined by a monster, only attempting to protect that monster and the reputations of themeslves and the program.  There has not been one shred of eveidence found in the last year to indicate otherwise, so spare me the lecture on what is right and wrong.   
Last Edited: 7/20/2012 9:41:19 AM by Maryland Bobcat
Robert Fox
General User
RF
Member Since: 11/17/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039
person
mail
Robert Fox
mail
Posted: 7/20/2012 9:55 AM
You've clearly made up your mind, and nothing will cause you to reconsider. So be it.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,709
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 7/20/2012 10:01 AM
Maryland Bobcat wrote:expand_more
. . .We shouldn't be leveling penalties against "these people"?  Underprivaledged and less fortunate children were sent to PSU to try and make a better life for them, and they were not protected.  Sanduskly used the power of PSU to recuit these kids there, and "these people" used their power to cover it up.   "These people" stood by why the lives of these children were ruined by a monster, only attempting to protect that monster and the reputations of themeslves and the program.  There has not been one shred of eveidence found in the last year to indicate otherwise, so spare me the lecture on what is right and wrong.   


I just wanted to place a little emphasis on the bolded sentence.  Without going into details publicly, a member of my extended family was preyed upon by one of these monsters at a young age.  He is still dealing with the psychological trauma caused by these rapes.  I'm hoping that his latest therapist will be able to help him start to climb out of the dark abyss in which he has lived for nearly 20 years.  His childhood and his early adult years have been ruined, and if he's able to turn things around he'll still always carry the scar of these outrages.  In essence, what I'm trying to say here is that the term "lives ruined" is not an exaggeration.  It's not hyperbole.  
Tyler
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: AZ
Post Count: 894
mail
Tyler
mail
Posted: 7/20/2012 1:04 PM
KyleWvr13
General User
Member Since: 11/10/2010
Location: Pottstown, PA
Post Count: 503
mail
KyleWvr13
mail
Posted: 7/20/2012 1:56 PM
Youngstown Bobcat wrote:expand_more


I'll believe it when i see it.
Tyler
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: AZ
Post Count: 894
mail
Tyler
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 9:39 AM
The statue is down.

The NCAA will announce "unprecedented" penalties against Penn State tomorrow at 9AM. 

I really didn't think they could cancel the season this close to kickoff, but I don't know what else would be "unprecedented"
Last Edited: 7/22/2012 9:40:56 AM by Tyler
JSF
General User
Member Since: 1/29/2005
Location: Houston, TX
Post Count: 6,580
mail
JSF
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 9:57 AM
History in the making. Apparently this isn't coming from the sanctioning wing of the NCAA but the entire NCAA itself. That's never happened before.
MariettaCatFanatic
General User
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 417
mail
MariettaCatFanatic
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 10:00 AM
I am curious about this as well..makes me wonder what it will be considering we apparently have never seen sanctions this big before. I had a creative idea this morning that they could be possibly booted from Division 1 football to D2 or D3 for a set number of years and then have prove they're ready for big time football again down the road by cleaning up the culture at Happy Valley. Probably way off but it was a thought. We've seen the Death Penalty before, so that wouldn't be unprecedented.
Tyler
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: AZ
Post Count: 894
mail
Tyler
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 10:08 AM
But we've never seen the death penalty given so close to the start of the season.

Although Dan Wetzel tweeted "FWIW Source at school playing Penn State this season has heard nothing about season/game being cancelled"


EDIT: Joe Schad reporting that it won't be the death penalty.
Last Edited: 7/22/2012 10:13:37 AM by Tyler
MariettaCatFanatic
General User
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 417
mail
MariettaCatFanatic
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 10:17 AM
How is a bowl ban and loss of scholarships "unprecedented"?
First Street Forever
General User
Member Since: 12/19/2010
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Count: 247
mail
First Street Forever
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 10:24 AM
My crystal ball sees the loss of 2/3 of the football scholarships, harsh financial penalties and forced into being in the MAC for X number of years...
Tyler
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: AZ
Post Count: 894
mail
Tyler
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 10:39 AM
Make them play all their scheduled home games on the road. Peden would be crazy on September 1.
Last Edited: 7/22/2012 10:39:43 AM by Tyler
MedinaCat
General User
MC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Lakewood, OH
Post Count: 750
person
mail
MedinaCat
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 10:47 AM
Bowl ban, loss of scholarships and no TV. So if you want to see Bobcats win this game, you'll need a ticket.
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
person
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 10:53 AM
MedinaCat wrote:expand_more
Bowl ban, loss of scholarships and no TV. So if you want to see Bobcats win this game, you'll need a ticket.


Hope you're wrong on the TV ban. TV bans are f'ing horse-you know what.
Turney13
General User
T13
Member Since: 7/28/2010
Post Count: 364
person
mail
Turney13
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 12:10 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
God Complex.

I'm not clear to what extent you intended this as a serious answer, but I do think it could be a part of it. It is certainly plausible that Paterno honestly believed he could find a solution to any problem, even this one. For those that followed Penn State football, how often in his career did he call and report anything at all to authorities? I'm not saying it should be done often, but there are times when it needs to be done.


100% serious...


D.A.
General User
DA
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,198
person
mail
D.A.
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 1:39 PM
I always am confused by all things Big Tenelve, so can anyone clarify for me if Paterno was a Legend or a Leader?
ts1227
General User
T1227
Member Since: 2/28/2006
Location: Tallmadge, OH
Post Count: 880
person
mail
ts1227
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 1:52 PM
mf279801 wrote:expand_more
Bowl ban, loss of scholarships and no TV. So if you want to see Bobcats win this game, you'll need a ticket.


Hope you're wrong on the TV ban. TV bans are f'ing horse-you know what.


They haven't levied a TV ban since 1996, but a committee did recommend in 2010 that they start using them as a higher level punishment again since the revenue from TV has become so huge and it will send a very expensive message.

I would not be surprised to see it happen.
Last Edited: 7/22/2012 1:53:08 PM by ts1227
anorris
General User
Member Since: 7/7/2010
Location: Bristol, CT
Post Count: 2,262
mail
anorris
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 1:59 PM
ts1227 wrote:expand_more
Bowl ban, loss of scholarships and no TV. So if you want to see Bobcats win this game, you'll need a ticket.


Hope you're wrong on the TV ban. TV bans are f'ing horse-you know what.


They haven't levied a TV ban since 1996, but a committee did recommend in 2010 that they start using them as a higher level punishment again since the revenue from TV has become so huge and it will send a very expensive message.

I would not be surprised to see it happen.
Here's the thing about that though.  If you ban Penn State from TV, ESPN still gets to pick as many Big Ten games as they could before, and the money goes to the conference, not the school.  BTN money also goes to the conference.  Then it is distributed amongst the member schools.  IE, even if Penn State did not appear, they'd still make lots of $$$ from the contracts, unless that is stipulated, too (it ought to be, if that is part of the penalty).
Last Edited: 7/22/2012 1:59:46 PM by anorris
ts1227
General User
T1227
Member Since: 2/28/2006
Location: Tallmadge, OH
Post Count: 880
person
mail
ts1227
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 2:14 PM
anorris wrote:expand_more
Here's the thing about that though.  If you ban Penn State from TV, ESPN still gets to pick as many Big Ten games as they could before, and the money goes to the conference, not the school.  BTN money also goes to the conference.  Then it is distributed amongst the member schools.  IE, even if Penn State did not appear, they'd still make lots of $$$ from the contracts, unless that is stipulated, too (it ought to be, if that is part of the penalty).


There would have to be a stipulation along those lines, I would think, or there would be next to no point in the ban. I would think the NCAA would want those teeth added to it if they ressurrect it as a punishment.
Last Edited: 7/22/2012 2:15:12 PM by ts1227
Jeff Johnson
General User
JJ
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Post Count: 186
person
mail
Jeff Johnson
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 2:40 PM
anorris wrote:expand_more
Bowl ban, loss of scholarships and no TV. So if you want to see Bobcats win this game, you'll need a ticket.


Hope you're wrong on the TV ban. TV bans are f'ing horse-you know what.


They haven't levied a TV ban since 1996, but a committee did recommend in 2010 that they start using them as a higher level punishment again since the revenue from TV has become so huge and it will send a very expensive message.

I would not be surprised to see it happen.
Here's the thing about that though.  If you ban Penn State from TV, ESPN still gets to pick as many Big Ten games as they could before, and the money goes to the conference, not the school.  BTN money also goes to the conference.  Then it is distributed amongst the member schools.  IE, even if Penn State did not appear, they'd still make lots of $$$ from the contracts, unless that is stipulated, too (it ought to be, if that is part of the penalty).


We haven't heard from the Big10 yet, so they may well impose their own penalties on PSU.  Don't know what those might be, but it could certainly restrict the amount of revenues that PSU gets from the conference.  Also, given that the NCAA penalties will likely make PSU uncompetitive in the Big10 for some number of years, I could also see the Big10 suspending PSU or even throwing them out of the conference.
ohio9704
General User
O9704
Member Since: 2/11/2006
Post Count: 1,591
person
mail
ohio9704
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 3:23 PM
I think a cancellation of all non-conference games should also be on the table.  This is a major revenue source for Penn State (and the teams they pay to come to Happy Valley).  I believe it happened in basketball a few years back. Baylor?
C Money
General User
Member Since: 8/28/2010
Post Count: 3,420
mail
C Money
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 4:01 PM
Per Charles Robinson, it's a multiple year bowl ban plus major scholarship losses. The unprecedented part is the procedure used to impose the penalties. I have also read that Penn State will not appeal the penalties, so the university probably proposed the sanctions and the NCAA accepted them.
mf279801
General User
M279801
Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,486
person
mail
mf279801
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 4:12 PM
Thats good. It would have been a real pain to arrange any sort of 12th game for us at this late date.

The problem with TV-bans is that they punish every opponent.
Alan Swank
General User
AS
Member Since: 12/12/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,375
person
mail
Alan Swank
mail
Posted: 7/22/2012 5:20 PM
mf279801 wrote:expand_more
Thats good. It would have been a real pain to arrange any sort of 12th game for us at this late date.




I wonder what the posts on this board concerning this issue would be/would have been if we didn't have PSU on the schedule this year.   My guess is that there would have been many many people calling for at least a year with no football at PSU but since that would have meant who knows what for our 12 games schedule, the calls did not come.  This is exactly why I believe canceling their season needs to happen.  The only way we'll ever address the hero worship and lessen the emphasis placed on college athletics, is to affect many people in many places.  If PSU is simply  banned from a few bowls and loses some scholarships thus resulting in a mediocre program, it doesn't affect people far and wide and the general situation simply continues.
Showing Messages: 301 - 325 of 328



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)