Penn State AD and Sandusky Charged

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
19,229
Alamogordo

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Cognitive dissonance.

The most apt example might be Nixon. There was a core who just could not wrap their minds around the obstruction of justice and all those impeachable offenses.

The interesting aspect of this will be what that irreducible core will turn out to be percentage wise. In Happy Valley and immediate environs, I believe the percentage will be shockingly (to the rest of us) high
 

Lose Remerswaal

Missing an “R”
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Doesn't matter. Until someone has been convicted, you go with "alleged." Frankly, I'd go with "Victims 1-8 allege that Sandusky ..." rather than refer to a person as an "alleged victim." It's just better writing and removes the "he said/he said" from the conversation.
Exactly. The victims are victims. The perps are "alleged"
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
48,068
New York City
I read this earlier, while ESPN had a headline that basically said "Penn St returns to football as they try to heal the wounds" or something.

I have never so desperately wanted a fan base to lose, and with the way I feel like ESPN is borderline defending the program I am tempted to remove their bookmark from my computer.

This whole thing is disgusting.
ESPN has been disgusting the whole way through and this doesn't surprise me at all.

ESPN's ombudsman's agree. This column was linked already in this thread, but it's germane now: ESPN Stumbled and Failed
 
Sep 27, 2004
5,576
Your worst nightmare
Yes, you are right. The victims are not technically victims until it has been determined in a court of law that Sandusky raped them in a public shower or blew them on road trips or whatever else he did. That said, most news stories are probably using the term "victims" partly out of habit and partly because that is how they are identified in the grand jury report and there's no way to get their names, as they were minors, so it's convenient short hand.
 

J.McG

lurker
Aug 11, 2011
204
You know, if I were in Joe Pa's shoes, and I heard about a child being raped, I think that logic is right. I would pass on the responsibility to other people who were better placed to deal with it.

Like the fucking police. Not another civilian whose image would be tarnished by this information coming out.
Thank you. Those defending or rationalizing the actions of Paterno and McQuery seem to think that since the rape involved a former coworker and occurred on the property of their employer, Penn State, simply reporting it to their supervisors is completely understandable. What they fail to realize is the victim was a 10 YEAR OLD BOY who was in no way a part of the organizational structure of the football program, athletic department or the university.

I really don't want to go here, but the only way I could even entertain the thought of understanding why McQuery would go to his superior over the police is if you substitute the boy with say a PSU cheerleader or something. Then at least there's potential to make a dubious argument about the consent of the victim. A 10 year old cannot provide consent to ANY activity that could be seen as sexual in nature. What McQuery claims he saw was a crime, there is no grey area. The information Paterno says he relayed to his superiors was significantly watered-down, but still constituted a crime. If neither of them broke the law by withholding this information from police for fear of anything short of their own physical safety, then that is fucked up and needs to be changed ASAP.

Let me frame this into the closest possible thing to an analogous situation I can think of:
After a long night at the office, you walk in on your former boss raping a 10 year old in the break room. Do you run away, keep quiet, and wait until the next morning to tell your manager? And do you still not go to the police or follow up with management as your former boss continues to bring children around the office?

It's absolutely preposterous to think that McQuery and Paterno's actions would be at all understandable in normal everyday society. But therein lies the issue. Happy Valley is far from normal society. Sadly that's what makes the Sandusky narrative explicable, not understandable. This tragedy will justifiably cause us to reevaluate how we handle issues of child abuse. But it will be a huge missed opportunity if we fail to confront the issue that fostered an environment where this was allowed to go on; the prevalence of false idolatry and hero-worship in this country, particularly in athletics. Otherwise I guarantee something like this happens again sooner rather than later.
 

uscchris

lurker
Jul 19, 2005
6
Yes, you are right. The victims are not technically victims until it has been determined in a court of law that Sandusky raped them in a public shower or blew them on road trips or whatever else he did. That said, most news stories are probably using the term "victims" partly out of habit and partly because that is how they are identified in the grand jury report and there's no way to get their names, as they were minors, so it's convenient short hand.
You might want to clarify. With your logic, Nicole Simpson is not a victim because a court of law never determined O.J. killed her. I understand what you are trying to state, but in this case, "victim" is quite appropriate (as is "alleged" when referring to various PSU coaches).
 

Ananias

lurker
Mar 29, 2006
193
You might want to clarify. With your logic, Nicole Simpson is not a victim because a court of law never determined O.J. killed her. I understand what you are trying to state, but in this case, "victim" is quite appropriate (as is "alleged" when referring to various PSU coaches).
There was legal evidence to clearly indicate Nicole Simpson was murdered, whether or not Simpson was the perpetrator. There is no independent evidence that the victims were abused (unless there are private medical reports or the like) apart from the testimony implicating Sandusky. I think Sandusky is as guilty as hell and if I heard he died in a grisly accident I would have a hard time feeling bad about it, but using "alleged" for victim and/or perpetrator is a valid editorial decision.
 

DLew On Roids

guilty of being sex
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
13,845
The Pine Street Inn
Meanwhile, for corporate sponsors hoping to avoid having to invite a toxic Penn State program to their bowls, today's results couldn't have gone better. If Northwestern beats Minnesota next week and if Purdue can beat either Iowa or Indiana, the Big Ten will have 10 bowl-eligible members. As long as Penn State doesn't win the Big Ten championship, they could be bypassed by the other eight bowls with Big Ten ties.
 

jonb5

lurker
Nov 10, 2011
4
I think it's cynical to assume that when Paterno informed his superiors, he was doing it to satisfy some legal requirement. Paterno doesn't strike me as someone who would even be aware of such a legal requirement. He's a football coach.
If Paterno passing a first-hand eye witness account of child rape up the chain of command as if it had the same urgency as a player skipping class doesn't invite some cynicism, please tell us what does. If you saw the Nazis stuffing people into railroad cars like cattle, would you optimistically assume they were going on an all expenses paid vacation?

The point is: he failed by not informing the police directly, but I don't think this failure was intentional or one that he was fully aware of (that he was failing the children by not informing the police). Like I've said and explained, I think his failure is something that is more innocent in nature, and not due to selfishness or an intention to preserve his football program or whatever. I think that's being far too cynical.
You know, I've got this great bridge for sale. Let me know if you're interested.

Why can't he just be someone who made a mistake? Why does he have to be characterised as evil or selfish? Given his history and his noted character, maybe he just views himself as a football coach? That's his life. That's how he's lived for 50 years. That's who he is. He told McQueary to tell the school administrators because they're the ones that deal with this type of stuff. I don't see how you can construe his actions as protection of himself. What is he protecting himself from? It's equally likely that because he views himself strictly as a football coach, and because the allegation had nothing to do with the football program in and of itself, that it wasn't his responsibility to deal with it forcefully, so he passed it on to someone else whose job it was to deal with it.
I'd like to see Paterno's lawyers try and use this defense in all the civil suits he will most definitely be named in. He better have negotiated a retirement package a hell of a lot better than Sandusky's.

It's been discussed in this thread that the nature of these crimes causes people to act weirdly. It's not like you're witnessing a murder, in which the response that the majority have is similar. Crimes of a sexual nature have different effects on people. The fact - well, I'm assuming it's a fact - that Paterno stopped McQueary from describing the incident in all its detail seems to support what I'm saying.
...
Paterno knew of one incident which the DA decided not to press charges, and then was informed that 'something of a sexual nature' occurred in the locker room. He then passed on this information to his superiors. His actions, given what he knew, doesn't sound like someone who wanted to ignore it to protect his football program. It just sounds like someone who felt that there were people better placed to deal with it. He failed the kid by not informing the police, but he at least informed someone else. That's why I view it as an innocent mistake. He didn't ignore it or swept it under the carpet.
If I ever get raped, I better hope you're not the only one who sees it.
 

Tartan

lurker
Aug 20, 2008
361
MA
I read this earlier, while ESPN had a headline that basically said "Penn St returns to football as they try to heal the wounds" or something.

I have never so desperately wanted a fan base to lose, and with the way I feel like ESPN is borderline defending the program I am tempted to remove their bookmark from my computer.

This whole thing is disgusting.

This article made me want to punch my monitor. I know, I know. The football players on Penn State weren't in on the scandal, and fans are shellshocked and all that.


But this?

While jobs and reputations may not survive, Penn State will. That was obvious Saturday. When the clock expired, everyone in the stadium broke into polite applause. As Penn State players approached the best student section in college football, the cheers grew louder. Then one side of the stadium screamed.

We are!
The other side responded.​
Penn State!
We are!
Penn State!
"I felt today," Bradley said, "that just maybe the healing process has started to begin."​
[font="verdana][size="2"]

[/size][/font]
Juxtaposed with that article about the man with the signs (signs that did nothing but speak the truth), are these really the best fans in football, Andy Staples? I don't doubt at this point that they're the most passionate, and that's not really a good thing.
To be fair, I don't expect Penn State's players and fans to do anything other than showing team and school unity. That's a given. But the fan base deserves no media reverence. The esteem to which they hold that football program was part of the problem. And football is not going to heal the fucking horror show that happened.
 

Infield Infidel

teaching korea american
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,463
Meeting Place, Canada
Meanwhile, for corporate sponsors hoping to avoid having to invite a toxic Penn State program to their bowls, today's results couldn't have gone better. If Northwestern beats Minnesota next week and if Purdue can beat either Iowa or Indiana, the Big Ten will have 10 bowl-eligible members. As long as Penn State doesn't win the Big Ten championship, they could be bypassed by the other eight bowls with Big Ten ties.
Not exactly. Wiki #1
he Big Ten Conference has eight bowl tie-ins.[4]
#1 Bowl Championship Series. As of the 2011 season, the winner of the Big Ten Championship Game gains an automatic berth to a BCS bowl game, preferentially the Rose Bowl.
#2 The Capital One Bowl receives the second choice from the Big Ten, but must choose from remaining teams with the best overall record, or within one win of the best overall record. Starting in 2011, it may choose to take the runner up of the Big Ten Championship Game should its record be better than the league champion.
#3 The Outback Bowl receives the third choice of Big Ten teams.
#4 The Gator Bowl receives the fourth choice of Big Ten teams.
#5 The Insight Bowl receives the fifth choice of Big Ten teams
#6 The Meineke Car Care Bowl of Texas receives the sixth choice of Big Ten teams.
#7 The TicketCity Bowl receives the seventh choice from the Big Ten.
#8 The Little Caesar's Pizza Bowl will take the eighth choice from the Big Ten; if no remaining teams are available, the bowl will choose a Sun Belt team.
Wiki #2
The Capital One, Outback, and Gator Bowls can select any eligible team except a team that has two fewer wins or two more losses than another eligible team. The Insight, TicketCity, Texas and Little Caesar's Pizza Bowls have no such restrictions, However, the bowls cannot select a 6–6 team if a 7–5 or better team is not selected by a Big Ten-affiliated bowl
If Penn State is 9-3 or 8-4, those last four would have to take Penn State if there isn't a 7-5 team available. The worst they could finish is 8-4. Now Penn State could turn it down, which would be understandable given the situation and also because a new coach is probably coming in. But if they don't turn it down, I don't think the Big Ten would let a bowl out of its contract to pick a lower team or a team from another league instead of Penn State. It would be even harder if the Big Ten has 2 BCS bids, which would give them 9 spots to fill, but that seams unlikely given they have no teams in the top 10.

I think the Big Ten will have 10 teams with 6 wins, but to bypass Penn State all 10 teams would need seven wins and Penn State has to not finish 10-2. I don't think Northwestern or Purdue, who both have 5 wins, will get to 7 wins. NW plays Minnesota and Mich St, Purdue plays Iowa and Indiana. Iowa, Illinois and Ohio St also need one more win to reach seven
 

Greg29fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
19,613
NC
good stuff from Bo Pelini after today's game.

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/bo-pelini-psu-game-shouldnt-have-been-played-29900
 

JimBoSox9

will you be my friend?
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
16,614
Mid-surburbia
Man, I don't know. I was leaning most of the week towards thinking the game should be cancelled. Whatever collateral damage to players, commerce, etc that a cancellation would cause isn't as important as a clear unambiguous signal that nothing matters next to figuring out NOW how to fix the systemic problems in the program. The closest analogy I could think of (strictly from a PR standpoint - trust me I know it's not a perfect comp) is a product recall because of a discovered defect. You'd think admitting a mistake publically would be bad PR, but it's mitigated by the company accepting a loss to ensure
safety. Canceling the season would have similarly a move
that helps restore public trust that the unversity isn't valuing football above else.

The article about the protesting father and some of the "<3 JoePa" signs were bad, as was ESPN's phony narrative, but between the blue-out and the prayer and some of the interviews, and the candlelight vigil previously, I've seen a lot of good too and don't know if I still vote for cancellation. The good may not be the explicitly 100% condemnation we outsiders would like to see, but I get that. There's.a sad minority of folks who are blindly and loudly trying to avoid any blame being cast on Saint Joe and the Program, but te majority of what I see are folks just painfully trying to reconcile a lifetime of devotion to an institutio with what has happened in the past week. That shit ain't easy. For many of them, Penn State is their strongest source of identity outside of family. They're human and under mental duress and circling the wagons, which can produce some real visceral backlash against 'attacks' from outside, but the progress is there. If there a chance gathering together to watch the game and chant PENN STATE! helps them cope and understand, then maybe it isn't such a bad thing to play out the season. I dunno.
 

J.McG

lurker
Aug 11, 2011
204
Well firstly, Sandusky didn't continue working on his staff. He was already gone by that time.

Secondly, Paterno told McQueary to report it to the higher-ups, which McQueary did. Paterno's already been quoted as saying that he stopped McQueary before he was able to reveal all the details - for whatever reason - and asked McQueary to report it to the higher-ups.
You seem to be deliberately ignoring and misconstruing portions of the grand jury presentments to suit your argument. Simply saying Sandusky was "gone" conveniently leaves out the fact that he held an office and was a regular presence on campus up until the day he was arrested. How do you so easily dismiss the very real possibliity that Paterno may be covering his ass here? It makes me wonder what your end game is. You're really stretching the truth, if not being flat out dishonest, in order to excuse his behavior. According to the grand jury, McQuery told Paterno the full details, i.e. he saw Sandusky having anal sex with a young boy.

Now here's my version of the conspiracy theory (emphasis on theory - not claiming this to be either probable or factual):

If Paterno in fact tried to cut off McQuery before getting the full details, it's arguably the most damning piece of evidence implicating him in a cover-up. It would at least make it abundantly obvious that he was trying to maintain plausible deniability should the allegations ever become public.

Paterno never told McQuery to report the story to higher-ups, in fact he had reason not to - he wanted control over the story. If Paterno did tell him to go up the chain on his own, please give the source of this information. It isn't in the grand jury presentment. I don't recall reading that Paterno told McQuery to do anything at all.

Paterno gave his own version of McQuery's alleged full account to Curley and Schultz a day later, "fulfilling his legal obligation". It may have been an inaccurate and/or ambiguous representation, but it was not false. Again it gives the appearance that he was controlling the message as he separated himself away from the situation.

McQuery was not asked about the rape again until he was called to a meeting with Curley and Schultz a WEEK AND A HALF later. Paterno was not present. Since Paterno had already given Curley and Schultz a watered down report, they could theoretically claim that the details of McQuery's version of events conflicted Paterno's to the point that it was no longer credible. Or that they became so intertwined they could no longer separate one from the other. Either way, it gives a reason, however weak that reason may be, to not go to the authorities.

They bring their version of the story , which at this point has become so intentionally diluted and convoluted, to Spanier who could reasonably claim that he had no reason to act on it. Yet he approves the decision to ask Sandusky to stop bringing children to the football facility... seems he must have known of at least one or more prior incidents and was worried Sandusky was getting too brazen.

So that leaves Paterno as the only guy who could really play either side of the fence depending on how the story leaked out. He could claim that he passed along the full version of events and McQuery would support that assertion. He could also claim that he received a less serious version, and those further up the chain would back him.

Once it became clear that McQuery had been flipped by the state investigators, Paterno had no choice but to go with the downplayed version. The scheme fell apart when Curley and Schultz couldn't get their stories straight. They both played it down, but did it in completely different ways, ruining their credibility and casting serious doubt on Paterno in the process.

Since Curley, Schultz and Spanier would not have heard each other's testimony, they may have thought that they had all stuck to the same story, giving them less too worry about. When the presententments were made public, they realized someone fucked up and started freaking out, thus the total mismanagement of the situation in the days immediately following.

This all seemed batshit crazy to me a week ago. But I'm now having a pretty hard time totally dismissing the possibility that Joe Paterno was the Keyser Söze of PSU. If anything more than pure speculation starts coming out indicating that the 1998 investigation was compromised, I think the consider conspiracy theory gains some real legitimacy.
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god and the penis of
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
12,879
California. Duh.
If Paterno passing a first-hand eye witness account of child rape up the chain of command as if it had the same urgency as a player skipping class doesn't invite some cynicism, please tell us what does. If you saw the Nazis stuffing people into railroad cars like cattle, would you optimistically assume they were going on an all expenses paid vacation?

.
.
.

If I ever get raped, I better hope you're not the only one who sees it.
In both of these examples, you are arguing that an eyewitness has a responsibility to report an incident. Paterno was not an eyewitness.

There are plenty of arguments to make that Paterno should have done much more than he did, but when you post non-relevant examples, you're only undercutting yourself. Replace Paterno with McQueary in your post, and it would be valid.

(And before anyone flips out, this is in no way of a defense of Paterno, just a criticism of the logic in the above post.)
 

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,679
Peabody, MA
Good article in the Times today. Ross Douthat runs through the comparisons between JoePa and the Cardinals at the Catholic Church. I think that it's softer on the kind of person that JoePa is than many in here are, but is still critical of his choices.

They believed in their church. They believed in their mission. And out of the temptation that comes only to the virtuous, they somehow persuaded themselves that protecting their institution’s various good works mattered more than justice for the children they were supposed to shepherd and protect.I suspect a similar instinct prompted the higher-ups at Penn State to basically ignore what they described as Jerry Sandusky’s “inappropriate conduct,” and persuaded Paterno that by punting the allegation to his superiors he had fulfilled his responsibility to the victimized child. He had so many important duties, after all, and so many people counting on him. And Sandusky had done so much good over the years ...

...

No higher cause can trump that obligation — not a church, and certainly not a football program. And not even a lifetime of heroism can make up for leaving a single child alone, abandoned to evil, weeping in the dark.
 
Good article in the Times today. Ross Douthat runs through the comparisons between JoePa and the Cardinals at the Catholic Church. I think that it's softer on the kind of person that JoePa is than many in here are, but is still critical of his choices.

[/size][/font]
The NY times had a good article about the current PA governor and his interest in the case as attorney general. He also noted the similarities between Penn State and the Catholic church.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
9,509
Washington, DC
The NY times had a good article about the current PA governor and his interest in the case as attorney general. He also noted the similarities between Penn State and the Catholic church.
By chance, the week before this story broke I read a fairly recent Rolling Stone article about the Catholic church child abuse scandal in Philadelphia specifically. I don't know Corbett's involvement in that case but the similarities are quite easy to see.

Article: http://m.rollingstone.com/?redirurl=/culture/news/the-catholic-churchs-secret-sex-crime-files-20110906
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
19,681
Newton
Just saw Governor Corbett on Meet the Press -- and when David Gregory asked him whether there were more criminal charges coming, he totally froze before giving a fairly generic answer. Given that he was the AG who originated this case, you have to think that he knows a lot about what's in Second Miles's closet.
 

slowstrung

lurker
Jul 18, 2005
46
Alexandria, VA
good stuff from Bo Pelini after today's game.

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/bo-pelini-psu-game-shouldnt-have-been-played-29900

I guess I like Bo Pelini's general sentiment that the game is trivial compared to everything else. But saying all this post-game rings a bit hollow. I understand forfeiting or refusing to coach isn't a viable solution for grown-ups who (unlike Paterno) have actual bosses who can tell them what to do. Still, some kind of formal protest or making the same statement before the game would have carried a lot more weight, to me anyway.

More importantly, I wish everyone pontificating on the game would stop with the fucking sappy joint-prayer between teams shit. Are we really supposed to think this has some deep spiritual meaning? Like, until we all knew about a decade of child rape and coverups, individual prayers sufficed? Good thing they did it out on the field so we can all see how devout they are. Fucking opportunists.
 

WayBackVazquez

white knight against high school nookie
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
8,294
Los Angeles
But if the alleged actions didn't take place, then the accusers aren't actually victims. Both the victims and the perps are "alleged" until proven otherwise (in the legal sense).
A victim is a victim. There's no need for a conviction of the perpetrator to have a victim. When a baby gets shot and killed in a drive-by shooting, is he an alleged homicide victim, even if the police never convict the perpetrator or even find a suspect? You're right that if the actions didn't take place, they aren't victims, and there are occasions where someone claims a rape occurred and subsequently recants. But there are also crimes where for a variety of reasons convictions don't follow. I'm not sure in what "legal" sense you mean that these boys are "alleged" victims other than that they are allegedly Jerry Sandusky's victims. But that once again just refers to Sandusky's responsibility. Ron Brown and Nicole Simpson are still murder victims, even though OJ was not convicted.
 

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,679
Peabody, MA
Apparently the judge who released Sandusky on unsecured bail is a Second Mile volunteer, according to Deadspin

When Jerry Sandusky was initially arraigned, prosecutors requested $500,000.00 bail and that Sandusky be required to wear a leg monitor. District Judge Leslie Dutchcot, however, ordered that Sandusky be freed on $100,000.00 unsecured bail. She ordered that Sandusky be freed and pay nothing unless he failed to show up for a court hearing.
...
Of course, also according to her profile, Judge Dutchcot is a volunteer for Sandusky's group, The Second Mile.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
26,799
Wow.

That may not rise to the level of an ethical violation, but it sure raises an appearance of possible inappropriateness. Should have reclused.
 

Dave Stapleton

Just A Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2001
7,899
Boston, MA
Published reports are out there that Sandusky was recruiting for Penn St. as recently as this year. In addition to further bolstering the ridiculousness of this and the programs knowledge and participation it would also be a violation.
 

mabrowndog

Ask me about total zone...or paint
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
39,676
Falmouth, MA
I guess I like Bo Pelini's general sentiment that the game is trivial compared to everything else. But saying all this post-game rings a bit hollow. I understand forfeiting or refusing to coach isn't a viable solution for grown-ups who (unlike Paterno) have actual bosses who can tell them what to do. Still, some kind of formal protest or making the same statement before the game would have carried a lot more weight, to me anyway.

More importantly, I wish everyone pontificating on the game would stop with the fucking sappy joint-prayer between teams shit. Are we really supposed to think this has some deep spiritual meaning? Like, until we all knew about a decade of child rape and coverups, individual prayers sufficed? Good thing they did it out on the field so we can all see how devout they are. Fucking opportunists.
Agreed 100%. Excellent post. The second paragraph hits it out of the park.


 

DLew On Roids

guilty of being sex
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
13,845
The Pine Street Inn
Not exactly. Wiki #1

Wiki #2
If Penn State is 9-3 or 8-4, those last four would have to take Penn State if there isn't a 7-5 team available. The worst they could finish is 8-4. Now Penn State could turn it down, which would be understandable given the situation and also because a new coach is probably coming in. But if they don't turn it down, I don't think the Big Ten would let a bowl out of its contract to pick a lower team or a team from another league instead of Penn State. It would be even harder if the Big Ten has 2 BCS bids, which would give them 9 spots to fill, but that seams unlikely given they have no teams in the top 10.

I think the Big Ten will have 10 teams with 6 wins, but to bypass Penn State all 10 teams would need seven wins and Penn State has to not finish 10-2. I don't think Northwestern or Purdue, who both have 5 wins, will get to 7 wins. NW plays Minnesota and Mich St, Purdue plays Iowa and Indiana. Iowa, Illinois and Ohio St also need one more win to reach seven

I read the same thing, and I interpreted it to mean that the other bowls didn't have to consider record in choosing a team. The wording is vague and the citation link is dead. I went back and found the original source here, however, and it turns out to be that the article misstated what the ESPN blog reported. The actual text is, "However, no 7-5 or better Big Ten team can get pushed out of the Big Ten's bowl lineup by a 6-6 team." So Northwestern and Purdue would have to win out to make it possible for Penn State to get bypassed, and Illinois would have to avoid complete implosion.



The more I read about it, however, the more academic this all seems.
 

ThePrideofShiner

spooky action from a distance
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,517
Idaho
Oh my.

That is one damning story and makes the police and investigators look extremely poor.

Despite the fact that Sandusky might continue to have contact with young boys through The Second Mile, despite the explosive possibility that a legendary Penn State coach might have committed repeated sexual assaults, only one state trooper was assigned to the case.
It wasn’t until early 2011 that The Second Mile — which Attorney General Linda Kelly said Sandusky used to find his victims — was officially notified by authorities of a child abuse investigation, according to The Second Mile.

Sandusky had already been barred from participating in Second Mile activities with kids. Why? Because Jerry Sandusky himself volunteered to Second Mile officials that he was under investigation more than two years earlier, in November 2008.

When The Patriot-News broke the story of the investigation in March of this year, officials from the Clinton County school district where Sandusky had allegedly spent time with Victim One had still not been subpoenaed.

Penn State Coach Joe Paterno, Athletic Director Tim Curley and Vice President Gary Schultz did not testify before the grand jury until February 2011.

Second Mile CEO Jack Raykovitz testified in April 2011.

Investigators never asked the lead detective in the Ray Gricar case for the prosecutor’s files.

Gricar’s former staff members were not interviewed until after March 2011.

And Jerry Sandusky’s home was not searched until this summer — two and half years after the investigation began.

“Assuming Sandusky was aware, for a few years, of the investigation, then he would have had plenty of time to destroy potentially incriminating evidence,” said Beth Karas, a former prosecutor, and current correspondent for "In Session" on the truTV network.
 

mabrowndog

Ask me about total zone...or paint
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
39,676
Falmouth, MA
Charity president resigns

On Monday, The Second Mile's president resigned, saying he hoped his departure would help restore faith in its mission. The group also announced it had hired Philadelphia's longtime district attorney as its new general counsel.

Jack Raykovitz, a practicing psychologist, had led the group, which was founded by Sandusky in 1977, for 28 years.

Raykovitz had testified before the grand jury that recommended indicting Sandusky on child abuse charges. The panel said Sandusky found his victims through the charity's programs.

Also from that link, the judge who released Sandusky on an unsecured bond not only volunteered for Second Mile, but was a financial donor along with her husband.

Annual reports show how widely popular the charity was before the scandal hit. Hundreds of corporations, community groups and individuals donated each year.

Among them was State College District Judge Leslie A. Dutchcot, who set Sandusky's bail earlier this month. She and her husband donated between $500 and $999 to The Second Mile in 2009, and she volunteered for the group, according to annual reports and her website.

The judge set bail for the 67-year-old Sandusky at $100,000 unsecured -- meaning he did not have to post collateral to be freed but would have to post $100,000 if he ever failed to show up for a hearing.

Dutchcot did not immediately respond to a question on whether she will recuse herself from the case because of those past ties to The Second Mile. She has also removed the mention of The Second Mile from her website.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
I don't think the judge's comparatively modest donations to The Second Mile or her volunteer work there are a conflict of interest. No reasonable person could conclude a judge could be corrupted by such a limited connection to an organization that is associated with a party in her courtroom. Now, if she knows Sandusky personally, that's a different story; I presume she does not.

I question her judgment -- the conditions of Sandusky's bail are much too lax -- but that's not the same as implying she's corrupt.
 

JBill

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 17, 2001
2,028
It was as though the players and coaches had devised some sort of new training regimen to get past the awful reality of what had happened. Prayer as a new form of two-a-days. Jesus is my strength coach. Contrition in the context of a football game seemed almost obscene in its obvious vanity.
...
There will now be a decade or more of criminal trials, and perhaps a quarter-century or more of civil actions, as a result of what went on at Penn State. These things cannot be prayed away. Let us hear nothing about "closure" or about "moving on." And God help us, let us not hear a single mumbling word about how football can help the university "heal." (Lord, let the Alamo Bowl be an instrument of your peace.)
Charles Pierce, razor sharp and on point:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7233704/the-brutal-truth-penn-state
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
48,262
Charles Pierce, razor sharp and on point:

http://www.grantland...ruth-penn-state
Every time anyone tries to bring religion into the public sphere, people feel duty-bound to shout them down. I don't think anyone involved in that public prayer thought it was in lieu of any other moral or legal obligation. Also, the out-of-context Gospel quotes are disingenuous and inapposite and smack of someone saying I know you're religion better than you do.
 

WayBackVazquez

white knight against high school nookie
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
8,294
Los Angeles
I don't think the judge's comparatively modest donations to The Second Mile or her volunteer work there are a conflict of interest. No reasonable person could conclude a judge could be corrupted by such a limited connection to an organization that is associated with a party in her courtroom. Now, if she knows Sandusky personally, that's a different story; I presume she does not.
I'm inclined to disagree. The donations alone might not bother me, but donating money AND volunteering her time signals a pretty strong connection to the organization that this man founded. Let's say you were involved in civil litigation against this man and you learned of the judge's ties to the organization. Would you have no problem with her presiding? I just don't understand why she wouldn't beg off the case to avoid the mere appearance of potential conflict. The indictment discusses the Second Mile, and she knows her involvement with the charity. At best, she's a glory whore for not recusing herself.
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
31,061
Southwestern CT
That's a pretty outstanding article. And his comments about the pregame prayer hit home for me. It seemed absurdly self-indulgent at the time, a feeling that has not passed.
 
Sep 27, 2004
5,576
Your worst nightmare
I don't know legally whether the judge's connections to the charity rise to the level of canonical violations, but certainly, it does show that she has positive view of the organization and that's troubling when you also consider that she had to know who Sandusky was, if not personally, then professionally.

Regardless, it looks bad in the context of the tentacles PSU and this organization appear to have wrapped around this backwater and will be one more reason why the feds need to step in.
 

DLew On Roids

guilty of being sex
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
13,845
The Pine Street Inn
Every time anyone tries to bring religion into the public sphere, people feel duty-bound to shout them down. I don't think anyone involved in that public prayer thought it was in lieu of any other moral or legal obligation. Also, the out-of-context Gospel quotes are disingenuous and inapposite and smack of someone saying I know you're religion better than you do.
I think you're making assumptions about Pierce's perspective, at least in saying that it's disingenuous. I assume you're implying that he's using the tool of Christianity against it without actually believing any of it. I don't know Pierce's religious beliefs, but I do know many Christians who consider public displays of piety to be, at best, borderline blasphemy. Matthew 6:5-6 is hardly an obscure passage (it's from the Sermon on the Mount, after all), and it's directly related to what happened on Saturday. I can't understand how it could be considered out of context. In the end, you make have more luck taking on his logic than his motives.

I thought the prayer was a bit peculiar, but I suspect it was a sincere effort to show that both teams were thinking about the victims. It's the vernacular of most of the players' and coaches' lives, which is very different from mine. I was a lot more concerned with Bradley's comment after the game that he hoped the day's events could start the healing process. Whose healing is he talking about? Does he think Penn State should be healing from something right now? Penn State should be begging those boys for forgiveness and doing everything to help them, not worrying about its own healing, whatever the hell that would mean.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
48,262
I think you're making assumptions about Pierce's perspective, at least in saying that it's disingenuous. I assume you're implying that he's using the tool of Christianity against it without actually believing any of it. I don't know Pierce's religious beliefs, but I do know many Christians who consider public displays of piety to be, at best, borderline blasphemy. Matthew 6:5-6 is hardly an obscure passage (it's from the Sermon on the Mount, after all), and it's directly related to what happened on Saturday. I can't understand how it could be considered out of context. In the end, you make have more luck taking on his logic than his motives.

I thought the prayer was a bit peculiar, but I suspect it was a sincere effort to show that both teams were thinking about the victims. It's the vernacular of most of the players' and coaches' lives, which is very different from mine. I was a lot more concerned with Bradley's comment after the game that he hoped the day's events could start the healing process. Whose healing is he talking about? Does he think Penn State should be healing from something right now? Penn State should be begging those boys for forgiveness and doing everything to help them, not worrying about its own healing, whatever the hell that would mean.
I don't want to sidetrack into religion, but - at least in the Catholic tradition where public and joint prayer is a fundamental principle of the faith - that passage is read as interdicting hypocritical 'show' prayer (and charity). That is, going through the motions publicly so you can have your "reward" in the respect and adoration of the community, rather than earnestly giving and praying privately to ensure your reward in the next life. I don't think there's anything in Jesus' teachings (and as you note, this is from the Sermon on the Mount) that looks down on earnest public group prayer. I thought the quote was disingenous because he seems to be saying the prayer session was Kabuki Theather and inappropriate, and maybe it was, but not just because it happened out of doors. Misappropriating a Bible quote seemed snarky, as if he's trying to beat the praying players 'at their own game.' For that purpose, the cite missed the mark.

As for your second point, I don't think it's unreasonable that some of the players and staff and PSU community want to heal as well. Yes, they're not the tragic figures here. Yes, the molested boys have it far worse. But, does that mean that their emotions and turmoil are completely meritless? I imagine a lot of people are suffering out there for many different reasons and on many different scales. They don't fall into absolute groups of people who can and cannot be justifiabily upset. The only people who don't deserve "healing" right now are Sandusky, McQueary, Paterno and that lot.
 

behindthepen

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
6,236
Section 41
I'm still waiting for someone to explain why Sandusky left coaching when he did, with the Emeritus title and the $59k/year pension.
 

Delicious Sponge

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2003
1,083
Boston
I thought the prayer was a bit peculiar, but I suspect it was a sincere effort to show that both teams were thinking about the victims. It's the vernacular of most of the players' and coaches' lives, which is very different from mine. I was a lot more concerned with Bradley's comment after the game that he hoped the day's events could start the healing process. Whose healing is he talking about? Does he think Penn State should be healing from something right now? Penn State should be begging those boys for forgiveness and doing everything to help them, not worrying about its own healing, whatever the hell that would mean.
Goddam right.

I mean, this accountability stuff is so much easier to *talk* about - can't we just move on? PSU is showing itself to be one of the most full of shit organizations in the country and I suspect we're just seeing the beginning of it.
 
Nov 20, 2009
139
I don't want to sidetrack into religion, but - at least in the Catholic tradition where public and joint prayer is a fundamental principle of the faith - that passage is read as interdicting hypocritical 'show' prayer (and charity). That is, going through the motions publicly so you can have your "reward" in the respect and adoration of the community, rather than earnestly giving and praying privately to ensure your reward in the next life.
Isn't this exactly what people are complaining about? After all that happened, through all of the levels of instutitional involvement from the very top down to the fairly small crowd rioting after Paterno's firing, there has been barely any true apologetic feeling flowing out of State College. What has come has been quiet, individual sorrow expressed largely amongst a larger crowd of people discussing Paterno's legacy or yelling "Dorsett went to Pitt!" This continued at the game, where PSU was presented with an opportunity to make some kind of public display of affection, sympathy, and regret over those who were hurt, and essentially the only thing shown is a group prayer at the beginning of the game bookmarked by roarous chants of "We are... Penn State!" There were even kids yelling out during a moment of silence.

It's not like it was some quiet moment between the teams before the game where they could gather together and acknowledge what happened, acknowledge the victims and dragging the Nebraska players, coaches and fans through it all, either. They walked out to the goddamn 50 yard line and were led in a prayer, with the guy leading the prayers visibly shouting, making it seem as if he were barely audible from the large open space and the humongous crowd. Some of the people "participating" in the prayer walked out slowly to the group, some either not hearing what was being said or completely indifferent, as they milled around the outside of it, standing, walking, not quite knowing whether to take part or not. How is this anything but grandstanding, a 'show' prayer for the victims of a 'show' charity? Even if you are someone who believes in the efficacy of prayer, it's not some kind of physical act which you can do more of and pray with more effort in order to make up for some egregious deeds. Prayer is something you should carry through your whole life, a meditation which helps you bring to cognition that what you are unsure about, if you are doing the right thing, who you have wronged, what you can do better. You can't live around something like this Sandusky thing and then go, shit, I really need to pray tonight, because obviously it's not going to do anything. You would just be advertising yourself as some wholesome, well-bred individual on live television, and, ironically, if anyone at PSU had spent time praying while this was all going on, they might have been able to help put a stop to it earlier.

The only reason I'm not quite upset about it, even though I did roll my eyes when I saw it happening, was because the guy leading it -- a Michael-Jordan bald black man -- apparently was with the Nebraska team and runs some religious group. So it was just everyday, ho-hum religious grandstanding, and not as much cashing in on other people's suffering religious grandstanding. I'm also glad they did something, just anything, to recognize it all, and it did give the TV crews a moment to show some people visibly upset and tearing up during the silence. It's definitely nice to be reminded someone there cares.