Bob Dole;1227121 wrote:I stopped reading at the first "not fair". It wasn't fair to the kids who continued to be molested while they played hush-up on campus.

Fab1b;1227165 wrote: Do you think any of the victims want PSU Football or athletics shut down?

Fab1b;1227165 wrote:Its not meant in that context yes I understand that but what is done is done! The kids and other potential victims I did list in my thoughts, perhaps it should have been at the top of list I was just adding things as I thought. Do you think any of the victims want PSU Football or athletics shut down?

reclegend22;1227163 wrote:That's the exact part that I have a difficult time wrapping my head around, only for different reasons than you. If Paterno actually knew firsthand -- or believed, which in my view Paterno chose not to -- that Sandusky was in fact sodomizing children on campus on a regular basis, he could have just gone to the police himself and there would have been zero penalty to him. In fact, in light of helping bring a serial predator to justice, Paterno would have been recognized as an even bigger hero and humanitarian than he already is.

Penn State would have had way more to lose by arranging a coverup than they had to gain. The only thing they would have gained by a coverup is escaping the embarrassment of Sandusky in the news. That would have eventually faded from memory, though, since no other parties were involved in Sanusky's activities, so the idea of a grand coverup just seems pointless. It doesn't make any sense. I think what Paterno, Shultz and Curley are most guilty of is pure negligence and not treating the matter as serious as they should have (i.e. misconstruing Mike McQueary's story as a mix-up).

WebFire;1227175 wrote:Yet, OSU had a weirdo sex offender get close to some recruits, and it cost them a recruit. And OSU did handle it. So I'm not sure I can agree with your statements.

Bob Dole;1227170 wrote:Does it matter? They're scarred for life. No amount of sanction will ever erase the hell that the University put them through.

Fab1b;1227075 wrote:2. Not fair to current/former players/current/former coaches who had no knowledge or involvement.
3. Not fair to the alumni and current/former students who paid $$$$$$ to attend PSU and support their athletics.
4. Not fair to the Big Ten
5. Not fair to all the future teams that have already have a scheduled game with PSU along with TV contracts.

FatHobbit;1227185 wrote:I agree with all of these, but how often does an NCAA penalty affect players/coaches/teams and conferences that had nothing to do with cheating.

The NCAA is so inconsistent I don't think anyone can accurately speculate what they are going to do. (and that's not a dig at people who are speculating. That's what we do on the internet. It's a shot at how inconsistent, unfair and hypocritical the NCAA can be.)

FatHobbit;1227185 wrote: The NCAA is so inconsistent I don't think anyone can accurately speculate what they are going to do. (and that's not a dig at people who are speculating. That's what we do on the internet. It's a shot at how inconsistent, unfair and hypocritical the NCAA can be.)

Fab1b;1227179 wrote: Peoples lives and careers are at stake

Bob Dole;1227241 wrote:Peoples lives were at stake for 14 years.

Fab1b;1227258 wrote:^vball its not letting me

Fab1b;1227258 wrote:^vball its not letting me

Fab1b;1227179 wrote:Yes it does matter. What about the people (and I'm sure this number is huge) that are employed by PSU regarding their athletic programs livelyhoods? They weren't involved but you are gonna shut down the program and take their jobs away too?? This goes beyond playing a game. Peoples lives and careers are at stake, shutting them down to me causes more harm than good!

reclegend22;1227267 wrote:The NCAA also shouldn't do anything at all based on a research paper. The Freeh Report, despite what the news media would have you believe, isn't the final say on this matter. For starters, the report doesn't include any interviews from anybody actually involved in the situation at all. Curley, Schultz and Spanier were not available for comment due to obvious legal restraints. Paterno also wasn't interviewed, nor was Mike McQueary, nor anybody of actual relevance. Out of the "millions" of documents that Freeh supposedly sifted through, the only pieces of information offering any real significance are a few ambiguous emails, that, while seemingly damning to Paterno, don't actually prove anything. Do not mistake "reasonable conclusions" for realities.

If the NCAA is going to make some sort of decision on this matter, it should wait until after the trials of Curley, Shultz and Spanier, or at least until these men are more thoroughly interviewed and can elaborate further on the context of the emails presented in the report.

Bob Dole;1227264 wrote:It let me. It's a good thing we have moderators around here who know what they're doing.

WebFire;1227277 wrote:How many employed at Enron were actually involved in the scandals? Not very damn many. Should they have just let Enron go on?

WebFire;1227278 wrote:I do agree with this. I think most would.

reclegend22;1227288 wrote:Would you also agree, then, that the media has inappropriately jumped to rash and severely damaging conclusions based on non-facts in its sensationalizing of Joe Paterno, the child predator accomplice?

I can't believe people. It's as if nobody actually read the report. If they had, they'd see that there are big holes in the information that are filled in with pure conjecture and (possibly) reckless guessing.

ESPN and Tom Rinaldi make me ill.