Discussion in 'Sports Zone' started by Holdenteller67, Jan 2, 2013.
Nothing to say, .. this history has already been written.
Have you read the Freeh report?
Have you read the Paterno report?
A lemming would follow what someone else told them to think. An intelligent person reads a report, not just the conclusion and not just someone else's recap of a conclusion and forms their own opinion.
I'm not a Penn State grad, not a Penn State fan and didn't really know Paterno in anything more than a friend of a friend of a friend way. I only care about the truth and not the spoon fed drivel that some of you want to swallow.
People who need instant gratification and let others think for them are what's wrong with this world. The truth takes time.
Again, please read the reports yourself, not what others who have only read conclusions tell you to think about them.
Freeh's comments the day the Paterno report was released about Paterno having time to talk to his biographer but refusing to talk to his investigators is directly contradicted in the Freeh report itself, so maybe he didn't actually read it either.
One of those pieces says Dick Thornburgh is biased because he shared a stage with Paterno at bowl game sendoffs. Seriously? Every Governor, of both parties, in Pennsylvania has done that since at least the early 70s. There's a camera so of course they'll be a politician chasing it.
Another admitted that he hadn't read the entire report because it's worse than a joke.
I have not read either report in their respective entireties. I have heard Joe Paterno's Son, Jay I think it was, speak on the matter. In listening to him, it seemed to me that he felt as if his Dad did not fully understand what was going on around him. Maybe was not fully cognizant of it all maybe?
I don't know, I just have a hard time believing that Joe could not have understood or known and if he did, then he had to do more to end the entire situation I think. I don't have any bad feelings for Paterno but I do think that this is the crux of why people will not give him the benefit of the doubt.
By Joes own words he knew the shower incident was of a sexual nature and he also admitted that he should have done more.
That by itself, by his own words...trump either report in my mind.
Obviously you don't know the meaning of the word lemming since you yourself have the ring in your nose.
So tell me. Have you read the Paterno report or are spouting off again with no knowledge?
Got a link to his own words saying he knew it was sexual and had the same details McQueary gave others?
His exact quote was "In hindsight, I should have done more".
In hindsight, anyone who had ever met Sandusky, helped at the Second Mile..... Hell, I should have done more.
I know it's an uncomfortable subject but read Clemente's portion of the Paterno report. It's really eye-opening, not about Penn State, but about abuse in general and the warning signs of predators.
It's in the Grand Jury presentation report. Paterno did state that he believed what McQueary described was of a sexual nature.
Obviously I was not there, and I don't know of anyone that was.
But from what I can gather, I don't think it should have stopped with Paterno.
I feel sure other coaches over the years turned their heads. If nothing else, probably common sense told them that something was wrong with Sandusky.
I bet a lot of them were squirming when this all came out.
I've read both reports and the grand jury investigation.
Paterno knew and did nothing about it.
It's typical straw grasping by the Paterno apologists. Instead of actually proving his innocence, they are going after Freeh Report. Make that look infallible and to them, it makes Paterno look innocent. But, any investigative report is going to have its flaws, possible things overlooked, people not questioned, etc. That doesn't mean it actually proves innocence.
And Paterno had a pattern of behavior. With all of the arrests that happened to PSU players and when finally questioned about it, Paterno called it a 'witch hunt' and left in a huff. Or the e-mails that former school Chief Disciplinarian, Dr. Vicky Triponey, has of her being told that Paterno wanted her dismissed because she felt that the school should punish players for arrests instead of Paterno. And Paterno reportedly threatened to stop all donations and school funding that he did until she was gone (which eventually happened).
That's all the Paterno family report did...poke some holes in the Freeh Report without actually showing evidence of Paterno's innocence. And we know why....Paterno knew and did nothing about it.
Oh I get the difference. I think Penn benefited in terms of recruiting/sales/ratings from the coverup by the administrators. Because of that I don't have a problem with what the NCAA did. I know I was considering applying to Penn State before the events played out. I used to be a Penn/Paterno fan before the lid got blown off.
Looks like we will just have to agree to disagree
but the lemmings will never believe it.
Stop assuming I haven't read the reports. I just found these guys summarized it better than I could.
I heard Jay say the same thing. Jay is wanting people to believe that JoePa was clueless. Every Paterno supporter talks about how JoePa was immensely involved in every aspect of a players life. If a players grades were faltering, JoePa knew about it and did something about it, but we are supposed to believe he didn't have a clue about his trusted defensive coordinator was accused of molestation in 1998 and that he was unaware that his "superiors" didn't do anything substantial about the 2001 incident.
Most of the Freeh report was based on Triponey's testimony. Her stated goal was to get rid of the football team as she felt there was no need for a purely male sport in a gender neutral college environment. And you wonder why she was fired and had an ax to grind in the Freeh report?
If Triponey's imaginary "Paterno threatened to stop fundraising" was a fact, why was he still raising funds as well as donating millions of his own money in the two years after the discipline issue and Triponey's dismissal?
I don't know what Paterno knew but I do know he knew less about ongoing abuse than Jim Boheim did, less than Syracuse officials did and less than all those Syracuse grads in Bristol did. They had taped admissions of abuse and sat on it. That's two sites that should be razed to the ground long before Penn State.
For me, personally, the problem I have with that is that I can't get to the point where I believe Joe didn't know or understand. This is not a religious divulgence but I'm going to say something here, Joe Pa was a Catholic. I am a Catholic. There is no way in the world that I could ever be oblivious to the subject of Child Molestation, because I am Catholic and all that has happened in the recent history of the Catholic Church. To say it dominates the religion is, IMO, an understatement. It is such a huge issue among all Catholics that I just can't wrap my mind around it being something that Joe Pa could have been oblivious to. For me, that's really the part I can not make right in my head.
I have heard that point brought up quite a bit this week and agree with you.
That is your opinion. Are you saying you disagree with the Freeh report with regards to Curley, Spanier, Schultz and most importantly Sandusky? Or is it just the Paterno part that is all wrong?
He was not oblivious to it, he just dealt with it in the same way that the Catholic church did.
Until it becomes public.