Posted on 07/27/2012 12:47:44 PM PDT by FlJoePa
Gotham City (wrongly) believed in Harvey Dent.
Likewise, there are people who (wrongly) believed in NCAA president Mark Emmert.
The heavy sanctions levied by Emmert against Penn State in the aftermath of the Freeh report was a result of public pressure, the justification to satisfy our culture’s bloodlust and demand for instant gratification. Someone needed to get clobbered at Penn State; it didn’t matter who.
The report, a multi-million dollar project spanning eight months investigating Penn State’s (in)action into the Jerry Sandusky allegations, was designed to unearth exactly when and where university officials went wrong, as well as act as a recommendation for new university policy to prevent further malfeasance.
Instead, it became the basis for Emmert’s unprecedented ultimatum to interim PSU president Rodney Erickson: accept a $60 million fine, four-year postseason ban, scholarship reduction and five-year probation — not to mention vacated 111 vacated wins — or get the Death penalty. The whole process bypassed traditional NCAA investigative protocol so fast, it had SEC speed.
In this case, that was too fast. And that’s not just, like, my opinion, man. A member of the Freeh Group told The Chronicle of Higher Education that Emmert misused the Freeh report as a substitute for normal NCAA investigative steps. Below are just some of the quotes to the Chronicle:
“That document was not meant to be used as the sole piece, or the large piece, of the NCAA’s decision-making… It was meant to be a mechanism to help Penn State move forward. To be used otherwise creates an obstacle to the institution changing.” “The Freeh team reviewed how Penn State operated, not how they worked within the NCAA’s system… The NCAA’s job is to investigate whether Penn State broke its rules and whether it gained a competitive advantage in doing so.” “The NCAA took this report and ran with it without further exploration.”
Evidence of the NCAA’s rush to judgement is already tangible. While some coaches are claiming to take the high road of not actively recruiting Penn State players now free to transfer wherever they choose, others are much more open about it. Tennessee, USC, Illinois, Arizona and Kansas are among them.
That’s not a slight against any program pursuing a transfer — they’re doing exactly what they’re allowed to do — but in punishing Penn State officials’ criminal acts with athletic sanctions, the NCAA didn’t reprimanded the “football-first” culture in Happy Valley.
It pushed it elsewhere.
Would that have been avoided if the NCAA had gone through its traditional routine with a Notice of Inquiry, Notice of Allegations and Committee on Infractions hearing? Maybe not. The NCAA can only punish a program in so many ways because it lacks subpoena power. But at least there would have been another review, one the NCAA can directly point to as its own work rather than rely on another’s.
I’ve never been a fan of NCAA involvement with Penn State in this context, but I also realize it’s the governing body of over 300 Division 1 athletic departments. Something was inevitably going to be done.
Besides, the Sandusky story is one filled with missed opportunities and baffling dead ends to investigations that should have gone further. In an ironic twist, though, the NCAA dealt with a program that improperly shifted power to one individual by inflicting punishment in a similar fashion.
Now, anything’s possible with the NCAA outside its normal authority.
Believe it.
In the real world it’s very difficult to punish the guilty without also hurting some innocents. If my father were to injure somebody while driving drunk and he were to go to prison, then where would my family be?
I regret that the players are being made to suffer, but I can’t think of a way for the point to get across to a major institution like PSU without hitting them where it hurts.
tell it to those kids
That's only a small part of it. It will be the non-revenue sports that really suffer (as football funds the athletic department budget). Support staff will be reduced, travel will be restricted, investments in new equipment and facilities will be sacrificed, etc.
The reality here is, the NCAA punished 1000+ athletes who were watching cartoons when this disgusting cover-up occurred. Good work Mark Emmert.
So what you’re saying is that you have no proof. I at least expected some testimony or something from the factfreeh report. You came with espn headlines. Any 8th grader could do that.
Once again, I asked you if you read the freeh report and you didn’t respond (which immediately tells me you didn’t). Then I asked you to provide me with proof that Joe Paterno covered up the js scandal.
You did neither. You just called me names and recited the media. You fall easily to the narrative, and shouldn’t be proud of it.
Just because ESPN says it doesn’t make it untrue. Everything I said was well supported by the facts. I know facts count for little to a FANatic. Your namesake is a piece of sh*t. Enjoy the permanent stench of failure without honor.
Here is how it was reported:
In an email written to the paper, Spanier said: “For the next several months, as I transition to my post-presidential plans, I will be working on a special project for the U.S. government relating (to) national security. This builds on my prior positions working with federal agencies to foster improved cooperation between our nation’s national security agencies and other entities.”
Is it possible that this federal job is a figment of his imagination??? Is he getting ready to pull a Gricar???
The facts are pretty damning. The facts are that Paterno had personal knowledge of at least TWO reports of Sandusky in the shower with boys. One of them was made by someone he gave a job to for over a decade.
Either McQueary was a credible witness and Paterno believed what he said he saw in that shower - in which case he was a disgusting piece of feces for doing NOTHING for the next decade plus.
OR McQueary was not a credible witness and Paterno didn't believe what he said he saw in that shower - in which case he was an idiot for hiring a weirdo who makes up bizarre stories of pedophilia in the Penn State showers.
That was how it stood BEFORE the Freeh report. The Freeh report was even more damning because it made clear that this was the SECOND time Pedterno knew that Sandusky was showering with young boys in the Penn State athletic facilities. AND that he actively discouraged going to real authorities because it wouldn't be “humane”.
You did a good job fooling yourself - and you sure sound like a fool and a FANatic. But you ain't fooling anyone who isn't drunk on Penn State Kool Aide.
So you have no proof?
If you even *try* to take the remote control...
So you have no proof?...
...well, we do have Paterno telling a grand jury that he had no knowledge of a shower incident involving Sandusky in 1998, when everyone with a scintilla of intelligence knows cannot possibly true...Paterno, who was said to be so controlling of his football prgram that no player could so much as skip a class, claimed he was unaware of this incident regarding his executive officer Sandusky (which if true, means that he was actully a crummy, disconnected coach)...the Freeh report, as you know, uncovered the untruth of Paterno’s testimony...so that we have Paterno dissembling about the first incident, which, in conjuction with the second shower incident, should have caused even an insensate slug to connect the dots and realize there was almost certainly criminal behavior by someone with access to Paterno’s own program...you are, of course aware that Curley and Schultz are charged with lying to that same grand jury, the motive being to minimalize the behavior that went on in their facilities...
...ask yourself why Paterno would have lied about 1998 (thus risking the same charges that eventuall got Curley and Schultz)...why do such a thing? Possibly to minimalize, or, if you wish, to cover up his awareness of the criminal in his midst...
...think that might be a plausible conclusion to reach?
You got lost at the first sentence when you repeated an untruth, but I digress.
If Joe Paterno “covered up” the js scandal, why didn’t he just tell MM to keep his mouth shut? If Joe Paterno “ran the town”, why did he report it to his superiors?
MM testified that he was never told not to discuss the matter by anyone. Does that sound like a “cover up” to you?
Where’s the testimony or email or hand written note that says “Joe Paterno says to bury this! This could hurt our image!”
Where is it? And why would people think he would do such a thing anyway?
Hosting a child rape operation should be costly.
Sports has become too tolerant of all crimes committed by players and coaches. Character should count in sports.
Wow! I didn't read that particular report. I heard it on a local Philadelphia News radio station. But you might be onto something!
Interesting question. I'll underline that this is strictly conjecture on my part.
Remember Rene Portland? The Lady Lions basketball head coach? She basically got run out of town by the LGBT alliance for something that they really never proved she did -- ie. benched a player because that player was a lesbian. Portland had a team rule at one time but was told by Spanier that it was against university policy so she'd have to get rid of the team rule. Portland did. Then some troubled player outs herself and claims that Portland was runnining a hostile environment. The school sided with the student.
Now put yourself in Joe's shoes. He's survived a couple of attempts to 'retire' him during contract negotiation. Now he has this hot-potato dropped in his lap by Mike McQueary. What do you do when your boss is the most Gay-friendly university president in the nation? I suggest he did what every football coach does on fourth & long, he punts.
This is not to excuse Joe for anything. But I believe Joe was in effect saying to Spanier -- this is YOUR mess, Clean it up!
IMO, Graham Spanier has a lot to answer for.
It’s here along with his delusional denial:
http://www.masslive.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/07/former_penn_state_president_gr.html
Spanier has vehemently denied knowing anything about Sandusky molesting children. Spanier has not been charged with any crimes.
“The report is full of factual errors and jumps to conclusions that are untrue and unwarranted,” Spanier wrote to the Board of Trustees this week.
Earlier this week, Spanier told The Associated Press that he would not have hidden the abuse because he, too, was physically abused with harsh beatings at the hands of his father.
“It is unfathomable and illogical to think that respected family sociologist and family therapist, someone who personally experienced massive and persistent abuse as a child, someone who devoted a significant portion of his career to the welfare of children and youth…would have knowingly turned a blind eye to any report of child abuse or predatory sexual acts directed a children,” Spanier said in a July 23 letter to the board.
You got lost at the first sentence when you repeated an untruth, but I digress...
...you’ve got to love the internet and those who toss out lines like the above and blithely go on their way...bantering with these individuals is such fun, even when they accuse you of ‘repeating untruths’...
...my ‘untruth’ states that Paterno told an ‘untruth’ to the grand jury regarding a previous incident with Sandusky and a shower, in which he denied knowledge of said incident...granted, I may have been too specific by referencing the shower...but, I digress...
Date, January 12, 2011, asked by Ms. Jonelle Eshbach, of the witness Joseph V Paterno...
Q: Other than the incident that Mike McQueary reported to you, do you know in any way, through rumor, direct knowledge or any other fashion, of any other inappropriate sexual conduct by Jerry Sandusky with young boys?
Mr. Paterno: I do not know of anything else that Jerry would be involved in of that nature, no. I do not know of it.
...as all can plainly see, I certainly told a whopper in saying that Paterno denied knowledge of previous Sandusky involvement...
...as to the truth of his testimony, I said anyone with the intelligence of a slug knows that cannot be possible, or highly unlikely, that he would not know of this incident, not credible in the least. I said he lied because the Freeh report said so...of course I don’t know for sure if he did, as he’s dead, no one will ever truly know, but if you think he didn’t know about Sandusky, dream on...
An aggressive AG (and Pitt grad) praised Joe for his testimony and was perplexed as to why he was fired.
If Joe wanted to cover anything up, why did he report the incident the next day to his superiors (including Schultz - who oversaw the campus police department)?
Why didn’t Joe just tell MM to keep it to himself? MM testified that NO ONE from the University ever told him not to discuss the matter with ANYONE. That isn’t any way to run a cover up!
MM’s story changed over the course of years - if you can’t see that, than I’m not sure what you’re looking at. To me, THAT is the most important fact that has been lost on this whole investigation.
He said apples in 2001 and oranges in 2011.
js was unfortunately cleared by multiple agencies and police departments of any crimes in 1998. For Paterno to answer your question the way you wanted him to, would have been perjury.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.