Exactly. And I remember all those press conferences of other coaches apologizing to the victims of player abuses. The article is such a pile of shit that's it's beyond reason.
FC: ESPN takes on Penn State once again
- Thread starter GulfCoastLion
- Start date
ESPN scapegoating Paterno for conduct involving a former coach and kids who were under the alleged control of a child protective agency based upon rank speculation, innuendo and hearsay while basically ignoring sexual misconduct involving coaches and players? Who the hell would have thunk it.
Were you born this biased, misinformed and stupid or did you just perfect it over your lifetime? Oh I forgot you are an Iowa fan where facts don’t matter. Just for starters, McQueary reported what ever he heard in the shower the next day to Paterno who immediately reported it to the AD. Paterno then did precisely what the NCAA mandated as proper protocol; report suspected abuse and then stay out of the investigation. The responsibility to report or not report to DPW resided solely with the person in charge of the University which was Spanier not Paterno.
10 years earlier Sandusky was investigated for an eerily similar incident separately by the police who did not bring charges and DPW. DPW had Sandusky undergo an evaluation which concluded he fit the classic profile of a groomer. For reasons known only to DPW, they had a second evaluation performed (over the objection of a Centre County Assistant DA) which concluded he was harmless. Guess which one was reported back to PSU Einstein? When Sandusky retired, his retirement package which granted him Emeritus status was negotiated by others, not Paterno. Nevertheless, the administration asked Paterno for his comments and he said, in writing, he was okay with granting Sandusky access to PSU facilities, but not with him bringing Second Mile kids on campus due to liability concerns (you can find this in an exhibit to the Freeh report if you are capable of reading) Paterno’s comment related to concerns over kids possibly getting injured. Nevertheless, the recurring false narrative about Paterno was that properly following protocol wasn’t enough because Paterno allegedly “ran” the University. Too bad they didn’t listen to the old man back then.
Your parents got married because they loved each other and wanted to start a family. I can only imagine their disappointment when you were born.
Bill Cosby doesn’t get this much investigative attention and he is still alive. People still care that much about Paterno? He has been dead for 10 years.
Yes, it damn sure does matter to a tremendous number of people who refuse to stand aside and let a very decent man be unjustly crucified by third parties who don't care about getting the facts straight. FWIW, I absolutely can't stand attitudes like yours. So smug, so uncaring, so dismissive.
Umm……I think you misunderstood what I said. Bill Cosby is still alive, actually committed crimes, and yet no one seems to care to dig too deeply into his past for clicks. Paterno has been dead for ten years, didn’t touch anyone, and ESPN thinks people still care about smearing him and the school. I was asking if there are really that many people who still want these types of stories ten years later or is this Just an ESPN goal? Seems odd.
What you may have missed is that there are many people who care about Paterno, on both sides of the issues. Those that believe Joe was "Saintly" will never change their minds and than there are the other two groups; those that believe Joe failed (most likely former Joe fans that lost their passion) and those that have always hated Joe and actually take great pleasure in his demise. There is also a small minority that actually believe Joe is evil and the children must be saved. These people are real kooks.
So, to sum it up, your post comes off as somewhat cavalier and therefore untrustworthy in your true feelings.
Wandering Spectator
Well-Known Member
I am a middle of the road guy on Joe. Great ambassador for the school and for the football program. A good man and a good coach on and off the field. He didn’t do anything wrong concerning Sandusky’s crimes and unfairly got blamed for them like he actually was Sandusky.
Now, what makes me middle of the road on Joe is that I do blame him for not stopping his head coach run way sooner, which made the fallout from the scandal worse. Specifically, from the early 2000s on, the general public outside of state college saw a football first guy who called his own shots. After the scandal broke, it was too easy for the media and public to turn that into a “football over kids” theme for anything associated with the school. When the scandal broke, Joe should have been at least a decade removed from coaching and that would have helped with a number of PR issues for both himself and the school. JMO.
Think you are 1000% correct.. also find it interesting from the article they are looking to produce a movie about the Karen ? and Irv Panky relationship…
I have to say it...this is all on the Penn State Board of disTrustees.
They didn't fight anything. They simply rolled over for the political narrative. They let the full state govt craft a narrative calling the entire university pedophiles and simply wrote a check so that they weren't stained. In the meantime, university after university skates on similar and worse issues.
ESPN figures "why not? I can write an article about dead people, nobody will push back, and I can make a few bucks!"
I'd love to see the BOD get together a write a book named "How to Ruin One of the USA's Great Universities".
They didn't fight anything. They simply rolled over for the political narrative. They let the full state govt craft a narrative calling the entire university pedophiles and simply wrote a check so that they weren't stained. In the meantime, university after university skates on similar and worse issues.
ESPN figures "why not? I can write an article about dead people, nobody will push back, and I can make a few bucks!"
I'd love to see the BOD get together a write a book named "How to Ruin One of the USA's Great Universities".
Minor update:
I would like someone else other than the BOD write the story. They cannot be trusted. Their actions were deliberate and damaging enough already.
Sorry that your third grading reading level didn't understand what I wrote. Take some more classes and get back to me.
For those who were wondering what the reported ESPN storyline (long storyline) would be a while back, here it is on the 10th anniversary of the Sandusky scandal from ESPN.
Before Jerry Sandusky, Penn State football had another serial sexual predator. This is the untold story of his crimes and the fight to bring him to justice.
When Jerry Sandusky's crimes came to light in 2011, the world thought it was the first time Joe Paterno and Penn State had faced a serial sexual predator in their midst. But that was not the case. This is the story of the predator who had come before.www.espn.com
EDIT: for those who are already upset, or not wanting to view/dignify ESPN (I understand), clique at your own risk. It’s not flattering and quite lengthy
Where was espn the last 30 years? Did they cover it up?
Three things from article that seem very contrived:
1) The assumed possible connection between Joe/ PSU and the judge to not immediately incarcerate the former player. Apparently the judge NEVER did this before or after...so logically it MUST be Joe behind the scenes "controlling the narrative" to avoid bad PR on a day when nobody was around which allows this guy to commit MORE crimes locally and on Long Island. Big jump.
2) The authors seemed to repeat many items multiple times as if it somehow doubled the violence and therefore culpability of Joe/PSU
3) The fact that guys like Kip Vernagl8a were supposedly unaware of what Hodne did both in State College and later on speaks to either his own unwillingness to be tied to the story, or the relative regionality of "news" during that time. This spree today would be a national news story...back then nobody seemed to connect the dots. With no Facebook, cell phones etc when Hodne left town he was pretty much forgotten (u til ESPN finds him and sends a full team to investigate and create content.
The victims were innocent people and deserve our respect. Their pain is real and continues to be so for those who are alive. Irv Pankey did what most of us wish we would do but may not have had the courage to actually follow through on.
There are bad people in the world and many stellar athletes often behave like entitled pricks. Hodne and Chisley are two psychotic wack jobs who happened to go through our program. Without Sandusky this is not a story that ESPN is investigating.
1) The assumed possible connection between Joe/ PSU and the judge to not immediately incarcerate the former player. Apparently the judge NEVER did this before or after...so logically it MUST be Joe behind the scenes "controlling the narrative" to avoid bad PR on a day when nobody was around which allows this guy to commit MORE crimes locally and on Long Island. Big jump.
2) The authors seemed to repeat many items multiple times as if it somehow doubled the violence and therefore culpability of Joe/PSU
3) The fact that guys like Kip Vernagl8a were supposedly unaware of what Hodne did both in State College and later on speaks to either his own unwillingness to be tied to the story, or the relative regionality of "news" during that time. This spree today would be a national news story...back then nobody seemed to connect the dots. With no Facebook, cell phones etc when Hodne left town he was pretty much forgotten (u til ESPN finds him and sends a full team to investigate and create content.
The victims were innocent people and deserve our respect. Their pain is real and continues to be so for those who are alive. Irv Pankey did what most of us wish we would do but may not have had the courage to actually follow through on.
There are bad people in the world and many stellar athletes often behave like entitled pricks. Hodne and Chisley are two psychotic wack jobs who happened to go through our program. Without Sandusky this is not a story that ESPN is investigating.
The 2 most egregious things that happened in the entire situation (to me) are 1) the initial judge letting him go free until sentencing and 2) Hodne getting out of prison after serving the minimum time for his crimes. Events that directly led to many more victims suffering at his hands.
Two wrongs do not make a right. This player was a total savage who should have been dealt with right up front.
Well stated, but I would alter the final sentence to say "Without ESPN's horrible misreporting on Sandusky, this is not a story that ESPN is investigating."
But Joe just had to have his "409". Good for him. He paid dearly for it - a ruined reputation. Karma is a bitch.
He only has a ruined reputation because of media malpractice. ESPN just wasn't getting enough clicks on Jerry's name alone so they dragged Joe's name into it when he did exactly what he should have with the information he had.
Wait, you think Paterno was right to tell his players not to talk to the police without his approval? Just stop. Disgusting
That's not what the article said, but nice try.
In fact, just the opposite: he demanded his players be truthful with law enforcement.
Did you actually read the article?
"Paterno had allowed his players to attend Hodne's pretrial hearing and then later had prohibited them from speaking to law enforcement without his permission."
That is a direct quote from the article.
I did read the article. Did you? You are using that quote out of context. He didn't want his players lying to LE (to defend their teammate) so he wanted to make sure they talked to him to be instructed to only tell the truth.
There is zero wrong with that and is quite admirable.
Go troll somewhere else.
He's not trolling. IIRC (read it yesterday) the article states that there was a group of players where Paterno asked that they not comment on it to police without speaking with him first, and there a separate conversation with one player where Paterno told him not to testify on behalf of Rodne.
It's to the same end. The quote in the article is out of context (as per usual for ESPN)
So also as usual, you lie. Then when confronted with your lie you deny or rationalize the fact that you lied.
You have a history of making false statements about what documents do or do not contain. Want to challenge the truth of statements? Fine, that is a debate. To deny their existence is beyond stupid. Which is what you just did.
Saying something is out of context is not denying it's existence. The article gets the context on many things wrong. The authors did some admirable research but the pooped the bed when insisted on trying to link it to PSU.
Please show me one historical example of me making a false statement. I'll wait (yawn).
"That's not what the article said, but nice try." - The article DID say exactly that. You might not agree with it but you go full on denying its existence. It is right there in black and white.
I really don't think you want to see more of your false statements but we both know there are more.
Semantics. The article makes a statement out of context to further the authors' false assertion.
Enlighten me. I may make statements you don't agree with but that doesn't make them false.
Enjoy the rest of your afternoon. Try hating PSU less.
Two reasons
1. Paterno pushed Penn State as "doing things the right way" so when anything goes bad those that he criticized by implying they weren't doing it the right way are going to attack. It's how people work.
2. It's easier to attack someone that is dead and can't defend themselves.
And, yes, people still care that much about Paterno. People love watching someone on top fall from grace.
IMO the article tries paint the picture that Paterno somehow could have stopped Hodne earlier. That seems to be crap.
I don’t know from the article that Paterno knew players were going to the preliminary hearing in support of Hodne - of course Hodne was entitled to the presumption of innocence and support of his friends and teammates at that point.
Once it was clear he was guilty it is also clear Paterno had less than zero interest in helping and in fact could be accused of witness tampering in the opposite direction in his statement that Hodne was guilty and the threat that if the player testified on his behalf he’d be off the team - a threat he apparently followed through with.
To me, the article wants to imply that Paterno’s call to Karen was to intimidate her but the only quote we got was, “Are you OK?” IMO hardly intimidating but I have no experience as a female victim of sexual assault.
I try not to be an apologist for Joe as I think he did what he should have but also believe he should have asked more questions or simply said, “I don’t want that guy around campus, period.” His referral to supervisors and hands off approach, while probably appropriate, seems short of what his true influence was.
I don’t know from the article that Paterno knew players were going to the preliminary hearing in support of Hodne - of course Hodne was entitled to the presumption of innocence and support of his friends and teammates at that point.
Once it was clear he was guilty it is also clear Paterno had less than zero interest in helping and in fact could be accused of witness tampering in the opposite direction in his statement that Hodne was guilty and the threat that if the player testified on his behalf he’d be off the team - a threat he apparently followed through with.
To me, the article wants to imply that Paterno’s call to Karen was to intimidate her but the only quote we got was, “Are you OK?” IMO hardly intimidating but I have no experience as a female victim of sexual assault.
I try not to be an apologist for Joe as I think he did what he should have but also believe he should have asked more questions or simply said, “I don’t want that guy around campus, period.” His referral to supervisors and hands off approach, while probably appropriate, seems short of what his true influence was.
