ADVERTISEMENT

Joel Myers is Unsuitable Homecoming Marshal

B_Levinson

Well-Known Member
Jun 27, 2014
679
956
1
Tell the Homecoming Committee what you think! I did!


The U.S. Military Academy’s Honor Code says that a cadet shall not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do. Violation of these rules is an act of moral turpitude that disqualifies an individual from a leadership position.

Joel Myers scapegoated Joe Paterno on 11/9/2011 (a form of lying) and, even worse, was a party to the Board's statement of March 2012 that Paterno was fired for "failure of leadership." Board Chairman Keith Masser later had to testify in a deposition that Paterno was not fired for anything he had or had not done, but rather for public relations reasons. This makes Myers the kind of person whom the U.S. Military Academy would wash out on the spot as being unfit to command the trust, leadership, or respect of superiors, peers, or subordinates.

Here are the specifics. Mr. Myers was a party to the following statement by the Board in March 2012.

"While Coach Paterno did his legal duty by reporting that information the next day, Sunday, March 3, to his immediate superior, the then Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley, the Board reasonably inferred that he did not call police. We determined that his decision to do his minimum legal duty and not to do more to follow up constituted a failure of leadership by Coach Paterno. …At about 9 pm, we unanimously made the difficult decision that Coach Paterno’s failure of leadership required his removal as football coach."

This statement by itself indicates that every single Board member who was a party to this statement is incompetent, dishonest, or both. Joe Paterno was not supposed to call police, noting especially that Mike McQueary later testified under oath that he did not see anything he deemed reportable to police. He was supposed to report the issue to the appropriate person, which he did, and then keep his hands off the ensuing investigation, which he also did. This is also the NCAA's current written policy: you report the allegation to the designated person, and then keep your hands off. You do not "do more," "follow up," or run your own investigation.

Here, meanwhile, is Mr. Masser's deposition. “The decision to remove Coach Paterno had nothing to do with what he had known, what he hadn’t done. It was based upon the distraction of having him on the sidelines would have caused the university and the current football team harm. It had nothing to do with what Coach Paterno had done, or hadn’t done.”

If Paterno was removed not for anything he had or had not done, he was not removed for failure of leadership, which makes Joel Myers along with every other individual involved (including Mr. Masser himself) a liar or a party to a lie, as in "tolerate those who do."

I am copying this to the Board, Sandy Barbour, and Coach Franklin because they need to know that Myers' presence at Homecoming in the capacity of anything but a spectator will be a disgrace to the University and a deliberate insult to the entire Penn State community.


William A. Levinson, B.S. ‘78
 
Tell the Homecoming Committee what you think! I did!


The U.S. Military Academy’s Honor Code says that a cadet shall not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do. Violation of these rules is an act of moral turpitude that disqualifies an individual from a leadership position.

Joel Myers scapegoated Joe Paterno on 11/9/2011 (a form of lying) and, even worse, was a party to the Board's statement of March 2012 that Paterno was fired for "failure of leadership." Board Chairman Keith Masser later had to testify in a deposition that Paterno was not fired for anything he had or had not done, but rather for public relations reasons. This makes Myers the kind of person whom the U.S. Military Academy would wash out on the spot as being unfit to command the trust, leadership, or respect of superiors, peers, or subordinates.

Here are the specifics. Mr. Myers was a party to the following statement by the Board in March 2012.

"While Coach Paterno did his legal duty by reporting that information the next day, Sunday, March 3, to his immediate superior, the then Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley, the Board reasonably inferred that he did not call police. We determined that his decision to do his minimum legal duty and not to do more to follow up constituted a failure of leadership by Coach Paterno. …At about 9 pm, we unanimously made the difficult decision that Coach Paterno’s failure of leadership required his removal as football coach."

This statement by itself indicates that every single Board member who was a party to this statement is incompetent, dishonest, or both. Joe Paterno was not supposed to call police, noting especially that Mike McQueary later testified under oath that he did not see anything he deemed reportable to police. He was supposed to report the issue to the appropriate person, which he did, and then keep his hands off the ensuing investigation, which he also did. This is also the NCAA's current written policy: you report the allegation to the designated person, and then keep your hands off. You do not "do more," "follow up," or run your own investigation.

Here, meanwhile, is Mr. Masser's deposition. “The decision to remove Coach Paterno had nothing to do with what he had known, what he hadn’t done. It was based upon the distraction of having him on the sidelines would have caused the university and the current football team harm. It had nothing to do with what Coach Paterno had done, or hadn’t done.”

If Paterno was removed not for anything he had or had not done, he was not removed for failure of leadership, which makes Joel Myers along with every other individual involved (including Mr. Masser himself) a liar or a party to a lie, as in "tolerate those who do."

I am copying this to the Board, Sandy Barbour, and Coach Franklin because they need to know that Myers' presence at Homecoming in the capacity of anything but a spectator will be a disgrace to the University and a deliberate insult to the entire Penn State community.


William A. Levinson, B.S. ‘78

This is the only way the OGBOT can lash out at their critics.... Appoint an asshole to be the Homecoming Marshal......

Laugh it off.
 
We are obligated to ensure that this decision is rescinded in similar fashion as the Heim decision. This is crucial. Engage the administrators responsible in a professional manner but let them know that this won't stand.
It is my understanding that this decision was made by the Penn State Homecoming Executive Committee, which I believe is made up entirely of students (16 total). If I am correct, I think there is little chance of having this misguided decision rescinded. That is not to say we should not try but it may be difficult.
 
It is my understanding that this decision was made by the Penn State Homecoming Executive Committee, which I believe is made up entirely of students (16 total). If I am correct, I think there is little chance of having this misguided decision rescinded. That is not to say we should not try but it may be difficult.

I give you [students] these 15 (crash), these 10 candidates to choose from.

Fifteen+Commandments.jpg


(Students heard murmuring) Who knew so many people had the same name?
 
It is my understanding that this decision was made by the Penn State Homecoming Executive Committee, which I believe is made up entirely of students (16 total). If I am correct, I think there is little chance of having this misguided decision rescinded. That is not to say we should not try but it may be difficult.
If you think 16 current students independently pulled Myers' name out of a hat...........


Remember, we were initially told the Heim deal was a "committee decision" as well.

When some organization plays the "it was a committee decision" card - for an obvious FUBAR move - you can be pretty comfortable that "committee decision" is bureaucracy-talk for:

"Ain't nobody gonna' fess up for creating this bag of shit"


FWIW - IMO - this Myers thing, RELATIVELY speaking, is a molehill to a mountain, compared to the Heim deal (not that that makes his "appointment" A-OK)

Others are free to have different opinions/priorities, but in the Heim case you have one of the c$cks$ckers who was among the most directly responsible for creating the dumpster fire that engulfed the University
Who then sat back and watched the inferno burn

Myers is "just" a pathetic, piss-boy lackey who - after the fact - bent over like a $5 hooker for any decision that he thought might allow him to stay in the Scoundrel Club
A low-life sycophant.....more so than a truly responsible, overtly evil, bastard
 
Last edited:
IMHO those of us pushing for accountability from Penn State's board would be better servered by ignoring distractions like homecoming and focusing on our objective.
Or........... another option may be to pursue "accountability" at EVERY opportunity
At least in situations like this one - where pursuing accountability does not require the expenditure of any limited resources

Actually, I think that pursuing accountability at every opportunity isn't just "another option".....
In fact, I don't think it is only a better option....
The more I think about it :) it ought to be a REQUIREMENT........

And every "opportunity" to pursue accountability - that instead yields a shrug and a yawn, or any other flaccid form of acquiescence, is an opportunity wasted - and only makes the pursuit of accountability for the "worthy" issues all the more difficult


Yes. Now that I think about it - I am DAMN sure that is the case

But maybe that's just me?
No, now that I think about it - it's not just me
It is simply the right thing to do
 
  • Like
Reactions: bytir and eloracv
Tell the Homecoming Committee what you think! I did!


The U.S. Military Academy’s Honor Code says that a cadet shall not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do. Violation of these rules is an act of moral turpitude that disqualifies an individual from a leadership position.

Joel Myers scapegoated Joe Paterno on 11/9/2011 (a form of lying) and, even worse, was a party to the Board's statement of March 2012 that Paterno was fired for "failure of leadership." Board Chairman Keith Masser later had to testify in a deposition that Paterno was not fired for anything he had or had not done, but rather for public relations reasons. This makes Myers the kind of person whom the U.S. Military Academy would wash out on the spot as being unfit to command the trust, leadership, or respect of superiors, peers, or subordinates.

Here are the specifics. Mr. Myers was a party to the following statement by the Board in March 2012.

"While Coach Paterno did his legal duty by reporting that information the next day, Sunday, March 3, to his immediate superior, the then Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley, the Board reasonably inferred that he did not call police. We determined that his decision to do his minimum legal duty and not to do more to follow up constituted a failure of leadership by Coach Paterno. …At about 9 pm, we unanimously made the difficult decision that Coach Paterno’s failure of leadership required his removal as football coach."

This statement by itself indicates that every single Board member who was a party to this statement is incompetent, dishonest, or both. Joe Paterno was not supposed to call police, noting especially that Mike McQueary later testified under oath that he did not see anything he deemed reportable to police. He was supposed to report the issue to the appropriate person, which he did, and then keep his hands off the ensuing investigation, which he also did. This is also the NCAA's current written policy: you report the allegation to the designated person, and then keep your hands off. You do not "do more," "follow up," or run your own investigation.

Here, meanwhile, is Mr. Masser's deposition. “The decision to remove Coach Paterno had nothing to do with what he had known, what he hadn’t done. It was based upon the distraction of having him on the sidelines would have caused the university and the current football team harm. It had nothing to do with what Coach Paterno had done, or hadn’t done.”

If Paterno was removed not for anything he had or had not done, he was not removed for failure of leadership, which makes Joel Myers along with every other individual involved (including Mr. Masser himself) a liar or a party to a lie, as in "tolerate those who do."

I am copying this to the Board, Sandy Barbour, and Coach Franklin because they need to know that Myers' presence at Homecoming in the capacity of anything but a spectator will be a disgrace to the University and a deliberate insult to the entire Penn State community.

William A. Levinson, B.S. ‘78

Is there anything concerning Penn State that you guys don't whine about?
 
Myers is "just" a pathetic, piss-boy lackey who - after the fact - bent over like a $5 hooker for any decision that he thought might allow him to stay in the Scoundrel Club
A low-life sycophant.....more so than a truly responsible, overtly evil, bastard

You may not always be right, but God, when you are... Those words, its like a piece of art! Beautiful!! Thank you for taking the words out of my heart!
 
Tell the Homecoming Committee what you think! I did!


The U.S. Military Academy’s Honor Code says that a cadet shall not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do. Violation of these rules is an act of moral turpitude that disqualifies an individual from a leadership position.

Joel Myers scapegoated Joe Paterno on 11/9/2011 (a form of lying) and, even worse, was a party to the Board's statement of March 2012 that Paterno was fired for "failure of leadership." Board Chairman Keith Masser later had to testify in a deposition that Paterno was not fired for anything he had or had not done, but rather for public relations reasons. This makes Myers the kind of person whom the U.S. Military Academy would wash out on the spot as being unfit to command the trust, leadership, or respect of superiors, peers, or subordinates.

Here are the specifics. Mr. Myers was a party to the following statement by the Board in March 2012.

"While Coach Paterno did his legal duty by reporting that information the next day, Sunday, March 3, to his immediate superior, the then Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley, the Board reasonably inferred that he did not call police. We determined that his decision to do his minimum legal duty and not to do more to follow up constituted a failure of leadership by Coach Paterno. …At about 9 pm, we unanimously made the difficult decision that Coach Paterno’s failure of leadership required his removal as football coach."

This statement by itself indicates that every single Board member who was a party to this statement is incompetent, dishonest, or both. Joe Paterno was not supposed to call police, noting especially that Mike McQueary later testified under oath that he did not see anything he deemed reportable to police. He was supposed to report the issue to the appropriate person, which he did, and then keep his hands off the ensuing investigation, which he also did. This is also the NCAA's current written policy: you report the allegation to the designated person, and then keep your hands off. You do not "do more," "follow up," or run your own investigation.

Here, meanwhile, is Mr. Masser's deposition. “The decision to remove Coach Paterno had nothing to do with what he had known, what he hadn’t done. It was based upon the distraction of having him on the sidelines would have caused the university and the current football team harm. It had nothing to do with what Coach Paterno had done, or hadn’t done.”

If Paterno was removed not for anything he had or had not done, he was not removed for failure of leadership, which makes Joel Myers along with every other individual involved (including Mr. Masser himself) a liar or a party to a lie, as in "tolerate those who do."

I am copying this to the Board, Sandy Barbour, and Coach Franklin because they need to know that Myers' presence at Homecoming in the capacity of anything but a spectator will be a disgrace to the University and a deliberate insult to the entire Penn State community.


William A. Levinson, B.S. ‘78

Truer words never spoken!
 
Or........... another option may be to pursue "accountability" at EVERY opportunity
At least in situations like this one - where pursuing accountability does not require the expenditure of any limited resources

Actually, I think that pursuing accountability at every opportunity isn't just "another option".....
In fact, I don't think it is only a better option....
The more I think about it :) it ought to be a REQUIREMENT........

And every "opportunity" to pursue accountability - that instead yields a shrug and a yawn, or any other flaccid form of acquiescence, is an opportunity wasted - and only makes the pursuit of accountability for the "worthy" issues all the more difficult


Yes. Now that I think about it - I am DAMN sure that is the case

But maybe that's just me?
No, now that I think about it - it's not just me
It is simply the right thing to do
Picking fights with students doesn't further the mission nor does it help our optics.
 
Tell the Homecoming Committee what you think! I did!


The U.S. Military Academy’s Honor Code says that a cadet shall not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do. Violation of these rules is an act of moral turpitude that disqualifies an individual from a leadership position.

Joel Myers scapegoated Joe Paterno on 11/9/2011 (a form of lying) and, even worse, was a party to the Board's statement of March 2012 that Paterno was fired for "failure of leadership." Board Chairman Keith Masser later had to testify in a deposition that Paterno was not fired for anything he had or had not done, but rather for public relations reasons. This makes Myers the kind of person whom the U.S. Military Academy would wash out on the spot as being unfit to command the trust, leadership, or respect of superiors, peers, or subordinates.

Here are the specifics. Mr. Myers was a party to the following statement by the Board in March 2012.

"While Coach Paterno did his legal duty by reporting that information the next day, Sunday, March 3, to his immediate superior, the then Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley, the Board reasonably inferred that he did not call police. We determined that his decision to do his minimum legal duty and not to do more to follow up constituted a failure of leadership by Coach Paterno. …At about 9 pm, we unanimously made the difficult decision that Coach Paterno’s failure of leadership required his removal as football coach."

This statement by itself indicates that every single Board member who was a party to this statement is incompetent, dishonest, or both. Joe Paterno was not supposed to call police, noting especially that Mike McQueary later testified under oath that he did not see anything he deemed reportable to police. He was supposed to report the issue to the appropriate person, which he did, and then keep his hands off the ensuing investigation, which he also did. This is also the NCAA's current written policy: you report the allegation to the designated person, and then keep your hands off. You do not "do more," "follow up," or run your own investigation.

Here, meanwhile, is Mr. Masser's deposition. “The decision to remove Coach Paterno had nothing to do with what he had known, what he hadn’t done. It was based upon the distraction of having him on the sidelines would have caused the university and the current football team harm. It had nothing to do with what Coach Paterno had done, or hadn’t done.”

If Paterno was removed not for anything he had or had not done, he was not removed for failure of leadership, which makes Joel Myers along with every other individual involved (including Mr. Masser himself) a liar or a party to a lie, as in "tolerate those who do."

I am copying this to the Board, Sandy Barbour, and Coach Franklin because they need to know that Myers' presence at Homecoming in the capacity of anything but a spectator will be a disgrace to the University and a deliberate insult to the entire Penn State community.


William A. Levinson, B.S. ‘78
What better person to honor on homecoming (when alumni come back to the University) than a man who was so soundly run off his position on the BoT by the alumni!
 
What organization is responsible for homecoming?

See Keyser's post.

Who (not "what organization") is responsible for "Myers"?

As you illustrated, you are not gullible enough to believe that was a "student" decision......so why would opposing it (in whatever way one chooses to do so....just for the record, I am "on record" as stating that the "Myers" thing - while certainly "wrong", and worthy of contempt and opposition - isn't the biggest issue we face) be considered "picking a fight with students"?
 
See Keyser's post.

Who (not "what organization") is responsible for "Myers"?

As you illustrated, you are not gullible enough to believe that was a "student" decision......so why would opposing it (in whatever way one chooses to do so....just for the record, I am "on record" as stating that the "Myers" thing - while certainly "wrong", and worthy of contempt and opposition - isn't the biggest issue we face) be considered "picking a fight with students"?
You and I both know that this is picking on a student decision from an optics perspective.

Is Joel a bad choice? Of course he is.
Were they encouraged to select him? Of course they were.

So what's the end game? We pressure them into rescinding the offer? "Alumni group bullies homecoming committee into changing marahalls"

Part of winning a war is choosing your battles. This is not one in which we need to be engaging.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDLion
You and I both know that this is picking on a student decision from an optics perspective.

Is Joel a bad choice? Of course he is.
Were they encouraged to select him? Of course they were.

So what's the end game? We pressure them into rescinding the offer? "Alumni group bullies homecoming committee into changing marahalls"

Part of winning a war is choosing your battles. This is not one in which we need to be engaging.
As I've mentioned before.....I don't think this is on the Top Ten lists of issues to address.

That said.....when a group starts to worry about "optics", as opposed to doing the righteous thing.....any battle for "truth", "righteousness" or any other ideal we would like to pretend we hold dear......is lost.

The "end game"? (whatever that means).
Simple.....do the right thing.
None of this stuff was EVER hard.......we - well, some of us - have made it so.

Alas.
 
As I've mentioned before.....I don't think this is on the Top Ten lists of issues to address.

That said.....when a group starts to worry about "optics", as opposed to doing the righteous thing.....any battle for "truth", "righteousness" or any other ideal we would like to pretend we hold dear......is lost.

The "end game"? (whatever that means).
Simple.....do the right thing.
None of this stuff was EVER hard.......we - well, some of us - have made it so.

Alas.
This is begining to feel like the dogged obtuseness that tends to come with message board discussions.

You wanna fight the homecoming committee? Have at it.
 
This is begining to feel like the dogged obtuseness that tends to come with message board discussions.

You wanna fight the homecoming committee? Have at it.
If there is any "obtuseness", it certainly doesn't originate from moi.

I may be the least obtuse person I have ever met.......and I doubt that - for better or worse - many folks would disagree with that premise.

"Do the right thing"......it ain't obtuse (there are any number of ways that "concerned citizens" may choose to pursue that goal, in this particular case. I am not going to suggest to anyone what particular strategies they may or may not want to employ.....but certainly a few phone calls to any number of entities within the University could be appropriate).

And the failures - time and again (and again and again and again........) - of the elected reps on the BOT, to "do the right thing" are not obtuse either.
 
If there is any "obtuseness", it certainly doesn't originate from moi.

I may be the least obtuse person I have ever met.......and I doubt that - for better or worse - many folks would disagree with that premise.

"Do the right thing"......it ain't obtuse (there are any number of ways that "concerned citizens" may choose to pursue that goal, in this particular case. I am not going to suggest to anyone what particular strategies they may or may not want to employ.....but certainly a few phone calls to any number of entities within the University could be appropriate).

And the failures - time and again (and again and again and again........) - of the elected reps on the BOT, to "do the right thing" are not obtuse either.


Just curious if this BOT has EVER done the right thing? They seem (at least from my distant perspective) to defy the odds in being able to make the worst possible decision for PSU in every action they take.
 
You and I both know that this is picking on a student decision from an optics perspective.

Is Joel a bad choice? Of course he is.
Were they encouraged to select him? Of course they were.

So what's the end game? We pressure them into rescinding the offer? "Alumni group bullies homecoming committee into changing marahalls"

Part of winning a war is choosing your battles. This is not one in which we need to be engaging.

It's just amazing that nobody has the fortitude to stand up and say "no." To any of this. Amaechi, Joel, Freeh report, et al. I wouldn't trust these people with anything. They'd be the people who would kick you off their boat while storming Normandy, then turn the boat around and leave.
 
Tell the Homecoming Committee what you think! I did!


The U.S. Military Academy’s Honor Code says that a cadet shall not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do. Violation of these rules is an act of moral turpitude that disqualifies an individual from a leadership position.

Joel Myers scapegoated Joe Paterno on 11/9/2011 (a form of lying) and, even worse, was a party to the Board's statement of March 2012 that Paterno was fired for "failure of leadership." Board Chairman Keith Masser later had to testify in a deposition that Paterno was not fired for anything he had or had not done, but rather for public relations reasons. This makes Myers the kind of person whom the U.S. Military Academy would wash out on the spot as being unfit to command the trust, leadership, or respect of superiors, peers, or subordinates.

Here are the specifics. Mr. Myers was a party to the following statement by the Board in March 2012.

"While Coach Paterno did his legal duty by reporting that information the next day, Sunday, March 3, to his immediate superior, the then Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley, the Board reasonably inferred that he did not call police. We determined that his decision to do his minimum legal duty and not to do more to follow up constituted a failure of leadership by Coach Paterno. …At about 9 pm, we unanimously made the difficult decision that Coach Paterno’s failure of leadership required his removal as football coach."

This statement by itself indicates that every single Board member who was a party to this statement is incompetent, dishonest, or both. Joe Paterno was not supposed to call police, noting especially that Mike McQueary later testified under oath that he did not see anything he deemed reportable to police. He was supposed to report the issue to the appropriate person, which he did, and then keep his hands off the ensuing investigation, which he also did. This is also the NCAA's current written policy: you report the allegation to the designated person, and then keep your hands off. You do not "do more," "follow up," or run your own investigation.

Here, meanwhile, is Mr. Masser's deposition. “The decision to remove Coach Paterno had nothing to do with what he had known, what he hadn’t done. It was based upon the distraction of having him on the sidelines would have caused the university and the current football team harm. It had nothing to do with what Coach Paterno had done, or hadn’t done.”

If Paterno was removed not for anything he had or had not done, he was not removed for failure of leadership, which makes Joel Myers along with every other individual involved (including Mr. Masser himself) a liar or a party to a lie, as in "tolerate those who do."

I am copying this to the Board, Sandy Barbour, and Coach Franklin because they need to know that Myers' presence at Homecoming in the capacity of anything but a spectator will be a disgrace to the University and a deliberate insult to the entire Penn State community.


William A. Levinson, B.S. ‘78

Absolutely disagree. I know Joel Myers. When you create a $100 million company let me know. I have no respect for your opinion.
 
Just curious if this BOT has EVER done the right thing? They seem (at least from my distant perspective) to defy the odds in being able to make the worst possible decision for PSU in every action they take.
Random chance would indicate that they'd make the right decision once in a while, even if by accident.

Since the right decision is NEVER made, then there's nothing random about it. It is completely on purpose. A giant middle finger raised to every Penn Stater by the OGBOT.
 
Absolutely disagree. I know Joel Myers. When you create a $100 million company let me know. I have no respect for your opinion.
Mafia Dons create $100MM enterprises all the time. So do drug lords.

Business success has NOTHING to do with good judgement, decorum, or whether they are respectable in any way.
 
Just curious if this BOT has EVER done the right thing? They seem (at least from my distant perspective) to defy the odds in being able to make the worst possible decision for PSU in every action they take.
If they ever did, it would be purely coincidental

Coincidental to serving their own self-interests.......since that is the "guiding principle" that drives their decision actions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ILLINOISLION
You and I both know that this is picking on a student decision from an optics perspective.

Is Joel a bad choice? Of course he is.
Were they encouraged to select him? Of course they were.

So what's the end game? We pressure them into rescinding the offer? "Alumni group bullies homecoming committee into changing marahalls"

Part of winning a war is choosing your battles. This is not one in which we need to be engaging.

It needs to be made clear that Joel Myers is not welcome at any Penn State event except as a visitor or spectator. He cannot be allowed to escape the consequences (opprobrium and ostracism) of what he did.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT