Never said that, I'm just saying that he held the program hostage for his own selfish reasons.
My challenge to the Paterno haters and their BS logic
- Thread starter TenerHallTerror
- Start date
Just absolutely and undeniably wrong. The BOT had nothing to do with any conversation with Joe in 2004, and the owner of this site -- Phil -- can very easily confirm all the details you wish to know.
I was at the Michigan game when '2 seconds' were added to the time clock for the Michigan pass play into the end zone to win the game.
I never had a problem with Joe as a coach until near the end when he suffered several TIA's and was treated at Thomas Jefferson Hospital in Phila. and other locations. Unfortunately no one, coaches, colleagues, friends or family could convince him to retire, even though evidence was mounting and available to anyone who could research and ask questions.
Unfortunately LaJolla, there are many who have relied on 'headlines' rather than knowing anything about Penn State -- just read my letter-to-the-editor in last weeks CDT.
I am an alum from many years ago and my oldest daughter is a University Scholar, and will always support Penn State and the former Admin people I still know.
BTW -- my BWI handle is 'retsio'. Contact me if you wish.
Sincerely,
C. Ronald Oister
Naples, FL
Penn State '66
Marketing Services, President
www.yellowpages.com, founder
around-a-city -- research for current domain names
Ellival -- research for 23 sports betting sites
(a new International web site -- 4th quarter, 2017)
To anyone familiar with employment practice, the board's handling of Paterno will remain the most egregious employment error we'll see in our collective lifetime -- and likely of all time.
To humiliate an employee by terminating her/him publicly -- without any good faith attempt to resolve the issue privately -- is, by itself, a demonstration of remarkably poor business judgement.
But to then conduct an equally public "objective" investigation to determine if the aforementioned public firing was justified?
To humiliate an employee by terminating her/him publicly -- without any good faith attempt to resolve the issue privately -- is, by itself, a demonstration of remarkably poor business judgement.
But to then conduct an equally public "objective" investigation to determine if the aforementioned public firing was justified?
Last edited:
You are so far off first base; you just got picked off. Do a lot of reading, especially Blehar Blog.
I'm sure they consider the end of Lloyd Carr and Rich Rod as their dark period. And that's the point. Outside of OSU in the very early 2000's, this conference was wide open.
I agree that the BoT went miles beyond the line. But Paterno didn't help the situation. Clearly there was a very broken relationship. Regardless of who you are, you don't tell you're employer how to handle your employment in a public letter in such a volatile scenario. Joe (or his son) was wrong there. Both parties could have and should have handled the situation in a more professional manner.
You were on the site stating he was gone in 04, is that not correct? In fact you were very emphatic about it unless I have the handle wrong. Nitfan was the other who was adamant about it and maybe it was him talking about the BoT...if so , my bad, but one of you two certainly hinted at it. I do recall you saying over and over again he would be gone. I don't need your credentials or need to contact Phil....but you can certainly state why you thought he was gone in 04 now...could you not.
Last edited:
The burden of leadership falls to the leader, and the board is solely responsible for its conduct -- especially in this matter when it imposed itself.
Nothing Joe did or said prevented the board from resolving the matter correctly. They simply chose not to do so.
You clearly don't know what you are talking about. Do your homework or STFU. Actually just STFU.
It appears you are reading way too much into his message. But that's what
crybabies do.
That is blasphemy. St Joe was never selfish nor did he engage in nepotism. For 61
years he never made a mistake. The wrath of the cult will fall upon you.
No need for the language. I have my opinion, you have yours. I'm not attacking Joe. But he is not above criticism either.
I disagree. It's just my opinion, but I think Joe could have done more to cultivate a better relationship with the BoT.
the end of L Carr?...he retired in 2007. what are you saying....if Paterno retired after the 05 season (which was supposed to be his last), and let's assume Tom Bradley took over, would we have won more than 1 Big Ten championship (05 was Paterno's)?......I don't know....maybe.
I guess Bradley would've benched Morelli for Clark in 07 (probably lose 1-2 games that year max), and recruiting would've been better to help us in the consequential years. but obviously, we won 08....so to predict much more after that is tough.....2011, D-Day happened....so we're talking about 06, 07, 09, '10. 2007 & 2009....you might have something there.....but obviously, no guarantees.
to go back to your main point....I agree, Joe stayed way too long. not sure when the right time was....probably after the 1999 season, he should've bowed out.....though, he knew that season ended in a whimper.
after what happened in 05....gosh, who wouldn't have been re-energized after that (though, what a way to go out...if he chose to do so.....talk about going out on top).....had a great run from 05-09.....but the bad recruiting led to the on-field downfall in 2010.....kinda got lucky in 2011...def overachieved.
I just stated my opinion. Neither you nor Blehar knows what really took place. And while I like and respect Ray, his forecasts and predictions have been wrong more than once during this saga.
I don't disagree with your opinion of Joe's actions; it just doesn't validate or rationalize the board's egregious failure.
Agreed...was not trying to defend BoT...they failed miserably and in far more damaging ways than Paterno.
The BOT should have listened to Joe and stood behind Spanier.
Do your homework. Joe tried to communicate with them and was rebuffed. That's not subject to opinion. You're entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts. So like I said...just shut up. You'll be better off.
And if JVP knew back in the 70s why did he let his kids (and later grand-kids) play with JS? Anyone just has to apply the slightest amount of logic and knows that JVP did nothing illegal or immoral. There are three reasons this is still the way it is:
- Tearing down an icon gets a lot more press than saying he followed the rules.
- Stupid sheeple that simply listen to what the click-driven media puts out.
- Haters that want to believe JVP couldn't really conduct Success with Honor.
that hits to the heart of my OP.
people seem to be falling all over each other to see who can condemn Joe in the strongest terms.
but their reasons and logic fail almost instantly.
Here's another question that none of the imbeciles can answer...Why would Joe know something from the 70s, keeps it quiet until 2001, and has a sudden change of conscience with "My God what a fool I've been" and reports it.
Illogical and completely asinine.
That's probably accurate. The BOT wanted to replace Joe after a couple of losing seasons, Joe didn't want to retire, and the BOT didn't have the courage to force the issue. They were afraid of how fans, donors, etc. would respond.
Some BOT members grew bitter but it was them who lacked the courage to do what was right.
4. For reasons that are still unclear, the board has stubbornly refused to be held to account for their egregious error in dealing with Paterno in November of 2011, which has misled the public into believing that the public termination was somehow justified.
I'm talking over years and years of time...not just in the immediate aftermath of the GJP. Neither you nor I know what transpired over the years between the BoT and Joe. Telling me to shut up is just rude and childish.
The BOT could have let him go anytime they wanted. The notion that he "held them hostage" is preposterous.
Maybe they should have listened. But one can speculate that they did not listen because the relationship had become so strained over the years. We will never know. I'm of the opinion that pride was a factor in what ultimately happened to Joe...and I don't think that it was all one-sided.
In 2007, PSU was 9-4 and beat Tamu in the bowl game.
In 2008, PSU was 11-1 and lost to USC in the Rose Bowl.
In 2009, PSU lost to only Iowa and tOSU, beating LSU in the bowl game
In 2010, PSU was 7-4 and lost to FL in the bowl game (FL scoring 17 points in the fourth quarter after trailing 24-20).
In 2011, PSU was undefeated when Paterno was fired. That year, PSU was honored as the best academic football team (based on graduation rates) of any bowl team.
Tell me again how Paterno was selfish, held the school hostage and left the football program in shambles?
Joe would have left the program in great shape if not for the JS debacle. O'Brien inherited a lot of talent including 3 very good LBs. Just think if that team also had Redd, J. Brown, Fera, etc.
But that's not the point. Joe was feeble, didn't make recruiting trips, etc. I think he should have retired after 2005. I think he was recruiting based on reputation but I still think he stayed too long.
That's twice you used the word "crybaby" today. Using your "Word of the Day Toilet Paper" to wipe your a$$, eh?
One slight correction, PSU was 8-1 when Paterno was fired, not undefeated. But your point remains. And what's maybe even more relevant is that PSU was well on its way to signing a top 10 recruiting class the following February. So to hear some of the geniuses tell it, Paterno had totally diminished the program by the time he was fired, yet some of the very best players in the country, who could have gone to most any school they wanted, willingly jumped on board a sinking ship. And that makes sense? Just angry, ugly haters, pure and simple.
Your point, that you insist on repeatedly making, isn't a good one. Since you don't like being told...will you please just shut up on this point? I said please.
Ultimately it wasn't Joe's decision....they could have fired him if they wanted to or if they truly thought it was the best move for the program, which they obviously didn't.
