Psu should have got the death penalty like smu
What the 1976 event does is change the previous Paterno defense of "following chain of command." Paterno as the defenders would like to believe was just a coach that reported the event to his "higher-ups," AD, President head of campus police etc... In 1980 something happened that would change the chain of command and leave Paterno culpable within the chain of command. He became the AD. He was not just his boss as the head coach but also the head of the entire athletic department. Leaving Paterno responsible to make the very decision he shirked earlier."in 1987, a PSU Assistant Coach is alleged to have witnessed inappropriate contact between Sandusky and a child at a PSU facility; in 1988, another PSU Assistant Coach reportedly witnessed sexual contact between Sandusky and a child; and also in 1988, a child’s report of his molestation by Sandusky was allegedly referred to PSU’s Athletic Director."
Forget 1976. This is the part that should send shivers down the spines of the psu faithful. Of course, it won't.
It's funny how, in the end, it's always the insurance angle that winds up being the smoking gun.
This is definitely true, but to be fair, they're also known to do anything possible to avoid payment. Aside from this example, which involves a horrific pedophile, I can't think of any other situation where an Insurance Company was viewed as the moral good guys..Insurance companies don't care about things like protecting a football coach's image or postseason games. They care about who has to pay. They are very good at uncovering every detail to determine liability.
Yup. Especially health insurance companies. The stress they inflicted on me in my time of need, after approving surgery at MSKCC, and then withdrawing the approval 10 days before the scheduled surgery, was more painful than my initial diagnosis and dealing with what was an initially scary situation. They lied, denied, connived and did everything possible to worm out of their original commitment. Scumbags.This is definitely true, but to be fair, they're also known to do anything possible to avoid payment. Aside from this example, which involves a horrific pedophile, I can't think of any other situation where an Insurance Company was viewed as the moral good guys..
Why would PSU start this lawsuit, knowing that this crap could come out? No way they'll get their 60MM. Was it worth it?
This is definitely true, but to be fair, they're also known to do anything possible to avoid payment. Aside from this example, which involves a horrific pedophile, I can't think of any other situation where an Insurance Company was viewed as the moral good guys..
I said this to people privately last night.
Joe knew if a mosquito farted in the equipment room. He knew if they changed the brand of toilet paper in the chemistry building. He knew EVERYTHING on that campus. That campus, in its present state, doesn't even exist without Joe. For anyone, for one second, to suggest that Joe didn't know one of his longest serving, and most important assistants, was banging boys in the shower is about the most absurd position in the history of the human race.
Then Joe should burn in hell and PSU should have been given the death penalty.
Sadly, that red circle still extends to many parts of NJ, especially SJ.
This is the thing that makes the most sense to me. At some point, giving Paterno the benefit of the doubt, he hears about Sandusky and thinks that he can handle it in-house like he seemed to prefer when it came to other issues involving the football program. Whether malicious or just naïve, he realizes that is a mistake as additional Sandusky incidents start to come up. Now he has a dilemma...do you report Sandusky to the police and admit to not having done so in the past, or do you bury it and hope it stays hidden forever. He made the wrong choice and a lot of kids were abused because of it. As Randal says above: Paterno was no fan of Sandusky, yet he kept him around...seems awfully suspicious to me.paterno heard rumors, or perhaps a direct complaint, and did nothing. At that point you become complicit. You have to double down and continue to do nothing, because now you are legally at fault too. Blowing the lid off Sandusky is like admitting you were culpable too. So you bury your head in the sand and secretly (or openly, as was the case here) hate the guy and create distance between him and yourself and hope that you are dead before the chickens come home to roost. Unbelievable.
What about Paterno, based on what we now know, suggests he deserves any benefit?At some point, giving Paterno the benefit of the doubt,
Did Schiano know? Did Dick Anderson know?
You think it's over...check this out!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sandusky-overturn-conviction_us_5727bc77e4b016f3789333f2
I'd like to think that he didn't support Sandusky's behavior and that negligence turned into ultimately covering for someone he didn't like.What about Paterno, based on what we now know, suggests he desires any benefit?
I believed him. I genuinely thought that he was just in the wrong place at the wrong time and was betrayed by a friend that he trusted. I'm saddened that that seems to not be the case.
I believe they did, yes. Sick and sad, but true. I do believe they knew.
I haven't read the details, but if Penn State can show that the university administration didn't know about the previous abuse because Paterno kept it under wraps, couldn't they collect the insurance payments. Instead of one rogue employee (Sandusky) they had two rogue employees (Sandusky and Paterno) conspiring to commit criminal acts.
And from a 'protecting Paterno" perspective, does the Penn State administration really care (I'm talking about the actual people running the university, not crazy trustees like Lubrano), and do these revelations really matter. Paterno was fired in disgrace; he's dead; and the statue has been torn down. PSU fans will continue to worship Paterno and the rest of the world will think he's a creep. No amount of additional evidence or debate will make a marked change in those perceptions.
That would be admitting they did not have institutional control of the program. While maintaining a sexual predator within the program is not a violation of the NCAA rules, that definitely is, and often justifies the harshest penalties the group applies.No, the administration couldn't claim that, because Paterno was considered part of the administration.
I think he had it in for Joe.What did Sandusky have on Joe P.?
Concurrent with this new Sandusky timeline, there is a massive priest molestation scandal being uncovered in the Altoona diocese. I'm sure some ambitious reporter or prosecutor will be able to connect the dots.
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/r...-of-some-accused-priests/stories/201605040186
Man, Central PA must be a hellish place to raise a little boy.
Certainly doesn't seem to be the case.
I figur
Highly doubt they "knew". I doubt they ever witnessed it. I doubt there were ever told.
Like most people I know who were in Happy Valley in the 90s, I'm sure they heard rumors about Sandusky. That doesn't necessarily mean they knew, in my opinion.
Man, Central PA must be a hellish place to raise a little boy.
Philly too. The Catholic Church's worst deeds were in that state. And Cosby at Temple.
That entire state is a shame on the rest of the Northeast. It really is Alabama with two wasteland cities on each side.
I wish I had the zombie children photo. I would caption it: Everyone is Jealous of Our Football VictoriesI seriously don't think the current team should be punished with penalties.. just that the actual football program needs to be eliminated entirely. Phased out!
All of the raping continued to happen because the stupid group think of these people and the efforts put forth to protect a stupid football team. Thats what gets me so mad. I love rutgers football as much as anyone, but Im not allowing our state university, where our teens are supposed to mature into adults, become a place where we lower our moral standards to protect some sport, or anything else for that matter.
There is no way that both Anderson and Schiano, as close to all of this as they were, were not aware of Sandusky's actions, and the allegations of his deviant actions.
Just can't convince me otherwise. Same as any other full-time coach there while Sandusky was on staff. You don't think they knew and talked to each other?
So if so many coaches and people in the program were in the know for so many years.. why didnt anyone ever do anything about it? Not everyone who coached there had an allegiance to the place..
So if so many coaches and people in the program were in the know for so many years.. why didnt anyone ever do anything about it? Not everyone who coached there had an allegiance to the place..
I wish I had the zombie children photo. I would caption it: Everyone is Jealous of Our Football Victories