College Football 2011 thread

[EXOTICLEX]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo77g8kxC3w&feature=fvwrel[/ame]

 

[wofford29]

Glad the Freeh report is finally released. They did a good job with the investigation (outside of not including anyone from Paterno's family for questioning). A lot of questions answered and some not. It's worth reading if you find the time. It appears Paterno's biggest sin revolves around the 2001 incident and waiting until the next day to report it and then suggesting that if Sandusky cooperates that he recieves professional help instead of making it public. It appears that he was unfortunately a cog in a very poorly handled situation. It's clear when reading the document that this should have ended in 98 with the mom, the police, the PSU psychologist, the PSU president, and the DA. It's amazing the cluster ____ that situation turned into and NO cover up was involved from anyone and nothing ever came from it. In the end there was a lot of people who passed the buck and made missteps, and that's a damn shame.

 

[BadMoon]

Glad the Freeh report is finally released. They did a good job with the investigation (outside of not including anyone from Paterno's family for questioning). A lot of questions answered and some not. It's worth reading if you find the time. It appears Paterno's biggest sin revolves around the 2001 incident and waiting until the next day to report it and then suggesting that if Sandusky cooperates that he recieves professional help instead of making it public. It appears that he was unfortunately a cog in a very poorly handled situation. It's clear when reading the document that this should have ended in 98 with the mom, the police, the PSU psychologist, the PSU president, and the DA. It's amazing the cluster ____ that situation turned into and NO cover up was involved from anyone and nothing ever came from it. In the end there was a lot of people who passed the buck and made missteps, and that's a damn shame.

I would say his biggest sin was not calling the police or at the very least notifying the boys parents.

Sad day yet again to be a Penn State fan.

I would say his reasonable "conclusion" is closer to why things were handled the way they were.

Taking into account the available witness statements and evidence, it is more
reasonable to conclude that, in order to avoid the consequences of bad publicity, the
most powerful leaders at Penn State University – Messrs. Spanier, Schultz, Paterno and
Curley – repeatedly concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky’s child abuse from the
authorities, the Board of Trustees, Penn State community, and the public at large.
Although concern to treat the child abuser humanely was expressly stated, no such
sentiments were ever expressed by them for Sandusky’s victims.

 

[BadMoon]

And you deleted my post in the other thread. Suck mod 1000. It was the most appropriate post in there.

 

[EXOTICLEX]

Oh boy. Talking of taking JoePa's statue down now. Penn St won't recover from this for a long time.

 

[BadMoon]

Oh boy. Talking of taking JoePa's statue down now. Penn St won't recover from this for a long time.

They will remove everything "Paterno" from the campus. They pretty much have to at this point to appease the NCAA. Hell even the student leadership statement was very political and didn't even mention his name.

 

[wofford29]

I would say his biggest sin was not calling the police or at the very least notifying the boys parents.

Sad day yet again to be a Penn State fan.

I would say his reasonable "conclusion" is closer to why things were handled the way they were.

Well there is a chain of command you have to follow, but the delay and the reason for the delay is just bizarre. Remember McQuery didn't intervene so I don't think anyone but Sandusky knew who the kid was. Once Joe told the higher ups it should have never been addressed again with Joe. They should have turned it straight over and it should have been the end of their involvement. My next question I'd like to see answered in the current criminal case against the admin is who came up with the plan? Was it one, or all four? Did Joe present the plan to the other three? Did the others just check with Joe to see if he agreed with their plan? Was it a round table? The one thing I don't buy though is that it was about "bad publicity." His family, former players, collegues, etc. are all coming out and saying Joe didn't give a ____ about that so I think there's something a little deeper than that answer.

I hope their community and alumni can finally start to move on from this and I'm glad the trustees are vindicated for the grief they took when they stood up to Paterno and fired him. As for the statue I'd agree that it needs to go. They'll never be able to dissaccociate themselves from Paterno but you can't have a bronze statue in front of the stadium to promote him anymore. He's done a lot of good for a lot of people but he did make a very bad judgement call with this one. It's a shame he's not around to be heard.

 

[EXOTICLEX]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfiJedxrH5w[/ame]

 

[wofford29]

Another big piece of info that came out of the report is that Sandusky's being let go had nothing to do with the 98 event. Those plans were underway and on record well before that event ever happened.

Freeh's report about the janitors was really shocking as well. To have actually seen what they did and tell no one at all is crazy. The ineptness from everyone at all levels is just mind boggling.

 

[BadMoon]

. The ineptness from everyone at all levels is just mind boggling.

 

[Star Puffs]

I do not have time to pick through all your comments, but this disturbing section caught my eye:

It appears Paterno's biggest sin revolves around the 2001 incident and waiting until the next day to report it and then suggesting that if Sandusky cooperates that he recieves professional help instead of making it public.

No, any decent person finds their "biggest sin" not doing everything in their power to identify and make certain that the child was OK.

And since they had already decided to not to alert the proper authorities immediately, no one was in a better position that Paterno to make such an uncomfortable private demand of Sandusky, a man he had known for forty years.

And despite what you say later, their actions are very definition of a "cover up": not making something public that should either be public knowledge (e.g. a criminal act at a public university) or be reported to the police/child welfare authorities (e.g. any act of child abuse).

It appears that he was unfortunately a cog in a very poorly handled situation.

So we are to believe that the legendary coach who at the time could dictate when and if he had a job was a mere "cog" in a situation involving the football team. The Freeh report said it deliberately did not try and single-out any one individual, but it takes wilful denial to not see this decision shaped heavily by "Joe".

"Cogs" may be made of bronze but people that genuinely qualify as human cogs do not get bronze statues erected of them in time.


Edit. These two direct quotes from the report demolishes much of wofford29's spin:

"These men concealed Sandusky's activities from the Board of Trustees, the University community and authorities...".

["Concealed" being a synonym for deliberate cover-up.]

"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."

["striking lack of empathy" - Not just a "chain of command" issue or administrative "cluster ____" as wofford suggests, but failure as decent human beings.]

 

[user 1190]

Who let the troll back in?

 

[wofford29]

I do not have time to pick through all your comments, but this disturbing section caught my eye:



No, any decent person finds their "biggest sin" not doing everything in their power to identify and make certain that the child was OK.

And since they had already decided to not to alert the proper authorities immediately, no one was in a better position that Paterno to make such an uncomfortable private demand of Sandusky, a man he had known for forty years.

And despite what you say later, their actions are very definition of a "cover up": not making something public that should either be public knowledge (e.g. a criminal act at a public university) or be reported to the police/child welfare authorities (e.g. any act of child abuse).

So then you'd agree the mother who didn't do enough in 98 should shoulder the heaviest blame for being first and then followed by everyone else that heard and didn't do enough all the way until it reached Joe? And when we finally reach Joe why is that he should shoulder the blame and have been the one to go to authorities first when McQuery witnessed it? Should he not be the one to go to authorities before telling anyone? What's that? Oh you want to eat your cake too. It's obvious you're just looking for a scapegoat and chose the most significant one to attack in the ncaa thread. You try and pick a fight (always unsuccessfully) in just about every thread I've seen you participate in. This one is no different.

So we are to believe that the legendary coach who at the time could dictate when and if he had a job was a mere "cog" in a situation involving the football team. The Freeh report said it deliberately did not try and single-out any one individual, but it takes wilful denial to not see this decision shaped heavily by "Joe".

"Cogs" may be made of bronze but people that genuinely qualify as human cogs do not get bronze statues erected of them in time.


Edit. These two direct quotes from the report demolishes much of wofford29's spin:

"These men concealed Sandusky's activities from the Board of Trustees, the University community and authorities...".

["Concealed" being a synonym for deliberate cover-up.]

"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."

["striking lack of empathy" - Not just a "chain of command" issue or administrative "cluster ____" as wofford suggests, but failure as decent human beings.]

Once again nothing you post shows anything but your ass. Keep trying you may be remembered as Joan of Arc one of these days.

 

[Star Puffs]

Who let the troll back in?

Take it up with Shropt who locked the Paterno thread or wofford29 who began the discussion anew today.

Your post just shows you have nothing intelligent to add on this topic.

 

[user 1190]

Take it up with Shropt who locked the Paterno thread or wofford29 who began the discussion anew today.

Your post just shows you have nothing intelligent to add on this topic.

Nor do you but you the queen/king of google search it seems.

 

[Star Puffs]

So then you'd agree the mother who didn't do enough in 98 should...

Oh boy, here we are back to you blaming that mother. What is your fixation with that exactly? Here are her actions according to Tyler Kingkade's article at Huffington Post:

"On May 3, 1998, Sandusky sexually assaulted a young boy in the Lasch Building on Penn State's campus. His mother noted the boy was acting differently when he came home and called a psychologist about it, as well as the University Police Department."

"When the boy's mother confronted Sandusky on May 19, asking if Sandusky had touched the boy's "private parts," he said, "I don't think so ... maybe." Unknown to Sandusky, UPD Detective Ron Schreffler and a State College police officer were listening from another room."​

So she went to the authorities. She also showed concern for her child by going to a psychologist. She even confronted her son's abuser. Now she unlike the rest did everything lawful in her power. She cannot force the police to arrest someone, nor can she force a prosecutor to take it before a grand jury.

Your attacks on her are down right sick. Is there no depth to which you will not sink to deflect attention and blame from Paterno?


Edit:

You try and pick a fight (always unsuccessfully) in just about every thread I've seen you participate in.

If I am so "unsuccessful" why do keep responding to me again and again? You have had a rage on for me ever since I said Paterno should "burn in hell" when he died. In fact you are so pissed at me on a personal level you will not even acknowledge what the Freeh report actual said when I produce a direct quote. If you admitted the report's actual finding it would mean validating my argument and that is clearly something you will never do.

 

[Vader AL]

So like less than 50 days until college football starts!

 

[wofford29]

Oh boy, here we are back to you blaming that mother. What is your fixation with that exactly? Here are her actions according to Tyler Kingkade's article at Huffington Post:

So she went to the authorities. She also showed concern for her child by going to a psychologist. She even confronted her son's abuser. Now she unlike the rest did everything lawful in her power. She cannot force the police to arrest someone, nor can she force a prosecutor to take it before a grand jury.

Your attacks on her are down right sick. Is there no depth to which you will not sink to deflect attention and blame from Paterno?

Yet you couldn't show me one post where I place blame on her. Including the one you've cherry picked above. There is a difference in using someone as an example vs. placing blame. She was originally brought up in a response to one of your arguements as a theoretical of people who knew about this long before Joe. Blame was never placed, and you in fact even said that you would have gone even further than what she did when I questioned would you have done more if it were your child. Your response shows me that you knew clearly I wasn't placing blame but merely raising a point. I don't think she should shoulder any blame if you want it on your record. You don't want it on your record though. You just want to change pace again and stuff some more straw in your man (or woman likely for you). You don't have a real opinion on this issue and you clearly don't want to discuss it. I've come in here after I waited for and read the report and placed blame on Joe as well as the others involved. You've come in here, cherry picked a few lines that fit your non position and lay blame all on one person yet again. The report doesn't lie. All the info is there, any intelligent person can read and see the players and decide where fault lies. I've seen the information so you can save yourself the google searching.

If I am so "unsuccessful" why do keep responding to me again and again? You have had a rage on for me ever since I said Paterno should "burn in hell" when he died. In fact you are so pissed at me on a personal level you will not even acknowledge what the Freeh report actual said when I produce a direct quote. If you admitted the report's actual finding it would mean validating my argument and that is clearly something you will never do.

I forgot I need to spell things out for you. Unsuccessful in your arguements. You take the cake when it comes to starting them. The amazing amount of arrogance you've shown (for the second time I might add) in thinking anyone, in particular me, is effected by your posts or opinions is something to be commended. I don't know if you're lonely but I don't think about you. I don't think about your posts until I've seen one. They've never made me rage. They've made me sad, in a "people like this exist" kind of way, but I guess when you're on an island all by yourself and you take the rebel rousing approach so that people who want to participate in the thread have no choice but to communicate with you I could see why your head fills with self importance. If you can find someone, anyone, that agrees with you I'll address them as well. As to not responding to a direct quote. What would you have me do? If I respond, you'll change directions with another straw woman the next post or a freshly picked cherry hot off the pages of google news *tabbed last hour. Like I said above though. The information is there. I don't need to quote. I've read it, there is a lot of blame to be placed, including everyone but the victim dating back to 1998. It's a shame.

I'm done responding to you here. If you'd like to continue my pm is open but I'm not interested in clogging this thread any longer.

 

[Star Puffs]

Yet you couldn't show me one post where I place blame on her.

Actually we already discussed one last week in addition to the passage I mentioned:

"So what do you have to say to the mother of a victim and the police who had a confession back in 1998, years before anything involving Paterno knowing or not knowing, who did nothing?"

If saying she "nothing" in the end is not "blame" to you, then are beyond reason. I am sure you will dismiss the quote above as "cherry picking" or have some tortured explanation why her various actions (contacting the police, contacting a psychologist and confronting Sandusky face-to-face) amount to "nothing" in your estimation.

And for all your lengthy protesting about how little you concern have for me and my views, you have responded over and over to my posts. You obviously like to argue, stop pretending otherwise.

Are you a lawyer by any chance? You have the intelligent sophistry of a lawyer, but also that wilful refusal to admit to the truth. I am an accountant so the truth is not something to me that you can just drown in a sea of words.

 

[wofford29]

Star Puffs we're not going to agree on anything, so I'll just say no hard feelings and cheers.