Penn State Head Coach Joe Paterno FIRED *SuperMerge*

[MichaelWinicki]

Holy Cow

"Holy Cow" is right.

If there is even a smidgen of evidence that supports that article, then it makes the entire, very bad situation, 10x worse.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

If it comes out that Joe Pa knew of the 98' incident when he was informed of the 02' incident, then there's no defending him at that point. If the Cops won't do anything, go to the Press. Even if you just make it harder for him to operate, you can atleast say you did everything you could.

If he knew of 98', then seeing him on campus with children after the 02' event (at some point he saw him) should've made him do more than turn away.

I agree with you. If that's the case. But there is nothing to suggest that he did.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I've not seen anything yet to prove otherwise other than a bunch of ranters on a message board with no evidence of it saying he did.

Paterno has been lying.

He knews about Sandusky before the '02 incident. He's claiming he didn't.

When somebody lies about something like this, that is such a horrific crime...everything comes into question.

The reporter discussing the rumor is the same reporter who wrote this column: http://www.timesonline.com/columnis...cle_863d3c82-5e6f-11e0-9ae5-001a4bcf6878.html

It was written back in April, where Madden questioned the entire Grand Jury investigation about Sandusky and put 2 and 2 together and questioned the sudden retirement in 1999.

And if you look at the comments section, Madden was villified by Penn State loyalists over it.

It's more than some message board 'ranters' reporting this.






YR

 

[Cajuncowboy]

"Holy Cow" is right.

If there is even a smidgen of evidence that supports that article, then it makes the entire, very bad situation, 10x worse.

Well, let's see if it is true or just some writer wanting to get some pub on the back of a scandal.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

Paterno has been lying.

He knews about Sandusky before the '02 incident. He's claiming he didn't.

When somebody lies about something like this, that is such a horrific crime...everything comes into question.

The reporter discussing the rumor is the same reporter who wrote this column: http://www.timesonline.com/columnis...cle_863d3c82-5e6f-11e0-9ae5-001a4bcf6878.html

It was written back in April, where Madden questioned the entire Grand Jury investigation about Sandusky and put 2 and 2 together and questioned the sudden retirement in 1999.

And if you look at the comments section, Madden was villified by Penn State loyalists over it.

It's more than some message board 'ranters' reporting this.


YR

There are a whole lot of question marks in a story that is supposed to have facts.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I've not seen anything yet to prove otherwise other than a bunch of ranters on a message board with no evidence of it saying he did.

Cajon the problem I have with Joe not knowing about the 1998 incident, is that it was "too close to home" for him not to know.

Here Sandusky was his #1 coach.

Joe was his immediate supervisor. And being his immediate supervisor I can't see him not being informed that his #1 coach, and possible successor was in deep doo-doo.

I read in another article a quote from a former player "That Joe even knew when someone missed class".

I just can't fathom him not knowing about the 1998 incident. Especially under the light of Sandusky being informed shortly thereafter that he was not going to be Joe's successor and subsequently "retired".

 

[Eric_Boyer]

He did go to the campus police head. Did you read the indictment? On page 10 he went to schultz who was the head of the Campus police. He told Joe that he would investigate. He lied.

And I don't care how disgusted you are. I am not defending anyone who did anything illegal. I am defending someone who did what he was supposed t do.

supposed to do?

whatever. I was brought up to take more action to correct gross injustices.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

I agree with you. If that's the case. But there is nothing to suggest that he did.

there's nothing irrefutable, but it's niave in the least to suggest that it's not logical that Paterno was notified that a member of his staff was being investigated for child sexual abuse.

I've said all along that it would've been an unfortunate, but understandable lack of judgment if he believed the claims were false and went along his buisness back in 98'. But having new alegations surface 3-4 years later and not acting would make would be horribile to find out.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Well, let's see if it is true or just some writer wanting to get some pub on the back of a scandal.

Agreed.

 

[Concord]

Well, let's see if it is true or just some writer wanting to get some pub on the back of a scandal.

We'd say this is ridiculous, and that you should take it with a grain of salt. But Madden actually wrote about Sandusky for the Beaver County Times six months ago — long before the scandal blindsided everyone else this week.

Madden also claimed Sandusky was forced out of Penn State in 1999.

"I think you'll find out that Jerry Sandusky was told he had to retire in exchange for a cover up."


Seems to me he was out in front of the scandal.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

College coaches in small college towns know the police quite well. They have a good line of communication with them because they want to be the first to know when their players are mis-behaving or breaking the law.

But supposedly Paterno who 'is Penn State'...who 'is a God', is now suddenly the guy who never knew about Sandusky being in a shower and giving a bear hug to the boy in the shower when both were naked in 1998. That it was brought to the attention of the DA, but Paterno didn't have any contacts that had heard about the situation.

As a person with relatives and friends who are in law enforcement, that utter bullcrap.

And for Sandusky to just happen to retire immediately after the incident and Paterno to not know about the incident...it doesn't pass the laugh test.

Lastly, there's no way that Paterno 1st hear of this in '02 and took such a serious accusation without any proof or without even questioning Sandusky...the man with supposedly a squeeky clean reputation and a friend and right hand man of Paterno's for over *30 years*. There's no way he just took McQueary's word for it, with it being the first time he ever heard of this, and went right to the AD.

The only way he does that is if he knows it's true because he knew of prior incidents.











YR

 

[JBond]

I've not seen anything yet to prove otherwise other than a bunch of ranters on a message board with no evidence of it saying he did.

Except Sandusky admitted what he did in 1998. So your position is Joe Pa was just a stupid old fool with no power to stop his best friend, who he knew was a predator? Joe Pa was such an intellectual lightweight that when an eyewitness told him Sandusky was continuing to use Penn State facilities to rape children he just assumed it would be taken care of? His best friend and confidant of 30 years? Joe Pa did not even ask him?

Joe Pa must be the dumbest individual that has ever walked the planet.

Cajun...just so you know, I always liked Penn State and Paterno. The night the story broke I defended him when talking with my wife, but now that the facts are clear, there is no defense. Joe Pa is not a monster but he allowed one to continue to rape children at his facility. You go and look the kids in the eye and explain how the people knew but, well Penn State Football is more important so tough luck to "the victims, or whatever they are" as Joe Pa refers to them.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

How the **** could he have helped "several boys"? By going to the cops? Like was done in 1998? That helped the boy in 2002 didn't it?

I swear some of you people have lost your mind over the blind hate for Paterno.

All of you people who think Paterno is some kind of monster are some of the dumbest people I have ever seen on a message board and I have seen some real crazies.

Fact #1...Paterno was not a witness to anything. Another adult came to him and told him about the incident.

Fact #2... Paterno reported it to both his superior and to the local police authority head.

Fact #3...They lied to Paterno that they would do an investigation and then lied again and told him there was nothing to it.

Fact #4...Paterno should have gone to the State Police after the fact but how did he know that they weren't already involved in the original investigation?

Fact #5...The outrage of his firing is the testament to who and what the man is.

Fact #6...Sandusky and McQueary were the TWO adults involved who could have changed things. Sandusky the perp. McQueary the chicken crap adult afraid of his own shadow who could have stopped it.

And after all this people still think this was a fireable offense for Paterno.

The level of ignorance and stupidity of this position is beyond the pale.

You really should stop at this point.

When Sandusky continues to come on campus with children and nothing is done and Joe does not go and do something about it.

Canjun I honestly believe if this same circumstance happened at a different school where you had no ties to it, never met the coach and so on, you would be singing a completely different tune.

Joe himself says he should have done more. I think you yourself said he should have done more in past posts.

To completely to argue about things and basically call people stupid because they don't agree with your point of view only makes you look bad.

This actually goes against what I have seen many times from you in the past concerning other various topics over the years.

I think the only reason you are so vigorous in your defense of Joe is because you went to Penn State and you have met the man.

I could understand if he reported it and Sandusky never returned to campus.

However he did return to campus multiple times with children. At that point you just have to stop trying to defend Joe and acting like he did all that he could.

You don't let some child molester come around on campus with children over and not do something more.

 

[TNCowboy]

I don't have time to look it up, but I read an article that referred to a known molestor working for the Boston Red Sox. To the degree that Jim Rice, among others, was warning bat boys to stay away from him.

What is wrong with people? What kind of environment could possibly lead people to willfully turn a blind eye to this kind of thing?

Out of the whole mess, Mike McQueary puzzles me the most. How does he live with this for 10 years, knowing that he saw someone raping a little boy, and that the guy was not only not arrested, but was in the athletic facilities in the company of other children?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Circumstances were different obviously but Bear Bryant was every bit as big as this and bigger. In college football, it doesn't get any bigger then the Bear was IMO.

 

[Cajuncowboy]

there's nothing irrefutable, but it's niave in the least to suggest that it's not logical that Paterno was notified that a member of his staff was being investigated for child sexual abuse.

I've said all along that it would've been an unfortunate, but understandable lack of judgment if he believed the claims were false and went along his buisness back in 98'. But having new alegations surface 3-4 years later and not acting would make would be horribile to find out.

Again I will say this. If it is proven that Paterno knew about the incident in 1998 and he told Sandusky that was the reason he wouldn't be head coach, then I will say he deserves what he is getting now. That would tell me that he not only knew, but that he didn't take the 2002 allegation seriously.

From everything I know of Paterno, from personal experience with him, that would be totally out of character and it would completely counter to his way of doing things to cover something like this up.

I have sat down with Paterno, face to face several times for hours at a time talking about different things. This is not the person I know.

 

[Concord]

.....

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Again I will say this. If it is proven that Paterno knew about the incident in 1998 and he told Sandusky that was the reason he wouldn't be head coach, then I will say he deserves what he is getting now. That would tell me that he not only knew, but that he didn't take the 2002 allegation seriously.

From everything I know of Paterno, from personal experience with him, that would be totally out of character and it would completely counter to his way of doing things to cover something like this up.

I have sat down with Paterno, face to face several times for hours at a time talking about different things. This is not the person I know.

Fair enough, I'm pretty sure the truth will come out at some point over this investigation/trial.

 

[JBond]

You really should stop at this point.

When Sandusky continues to come on campus with children and nothing is done and Joe does not go and do something about it.

Canjun I honestly believe if this same circumstance happened at a different school where you had no ties to it, never met the coach and so on, you would be singing a completely different tune.

Joe himself says he should have done more. I think you yourself said he should have done more in past posts.

To completely to argue about things and basically call people stupid because they don't agree with your point of view only makes you look bad.

This actually goes against what I have seen many times from you in the past concerning other various topics over the years.

I think the only reason you are so vigorous in your defense of Joe is because you went to Penn State and you have met the man.

I could understand if he reported it and Sandusky never returned to campus.

However he did return to campus multiple times with children. At that point you just have to stop trying to defend Joe and acting like he did all that he could.

You don't let some child molester come around on campus with children over and not do something more.

I am also baffled by Cajun...

Very out of character for him based on past discussions.

You do not allow a predator free reign. To pretend Joe Pa was completely powerless to do something is less than naive. It borders on .....never mind I like cajun and think he will come around with a little time.

 

[Stautner]

From what I have read, he hugged the boy naked... in the shower...

Is that illegal? I really don't know in the state of Pennsylvania... I would assume so...

If not, it should be...

If it's true he hugged the kid naked in the shower that's a bit differen't. Like you, I'm not sure if that is actually illegal, but it damn sure should be.

I get that, I just think it should be a legal issue for 55 year old man to shower naked with a 10 year old kid.

Maybe it should, but law enforcement can't charge people on what should be, only what is.