Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

Close Penn State Down

JR4AU

  • ****
  • 9989
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #60 on: November 11, 2011, 09:13:10 AM »
In a sense, it's like bitching about "playcalling".  NONE of us KNOW why they called the play they did, we're just certain that we'd have called it differently despite the fact we don't have the knowledge they have at the time they had it. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Kaos

  • *
  • 29221
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #61 on: November 11, 2011, 09:23:11 AM »
You still don't get it, chopper.

You've already said you'd be leading the charge if this happened at Alabama, so you can save all the "taking away the emotion and thinking objectively" bullshit for another argument.  You are biased towards Joe Paterno because you believe him to be above this type of behavior.  He's not, and he's getting what he deserves for being a coward.

Yeah.  Because what I know of Saban and Bryant doesn't give me any indication to think that they'd be above it.  You're right. 

Who it is makes a difference.  If this were Dennis Rodman or Phil Spector, I wouldn't have much trouble with the concept. 

Paterno?  Doesn't make sense.  Doesn't jibe.  That leaves me with either blindly accepting what's on the surface or trying to figure it out by looking at the entire picture. 

I think I specifically said I'm trying to figure out how a guy with Paterno's established credibility and integrity could get caught up in something like this.  And I'm formulating rational and reasonable -- non-emotional -- reasons for how it could have reached this point. 

It doesn't make sense to me and I'm trying to look at it objectively and understand it in the context of the world we actually live in as opposed to the utopian one where everybody always does what's morally and ethically right regardless of the circumstances.  What did he know, what was he told when he made the decisions that he did? 

You're a cop for god's sake.  You know better than anybody the kind of heinous shit people try to keep buried in their own familes, in business, in schools -- for reasons far less valid than this. 

All I'm saying is that I can see how a guy who is his good friend, his confidant could convince him that what the GA termed "some sex stuff maybe in the shower" or whatever was completely misconstrued.  I can see him wanting to believe and accepting the explanation. I'm saying that you, in the same situation, DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY TOLD, might could be convinced by your favorite uncle that what some other guy THOUGHT was sexual horseplay was nothing of the sort.  No way. 

That door is closed to you.  I understand.  It's not entirely closed to me until and unless somebody tells me for an absolute undeniable concrete fact that Paterno unquestionably knew the extent and there was no room for doubt. 

Don't make the mistake of thinking I said he did what he should have done, did all he could do, or did what was acceptable to me.  I'm just trying to come up with a plausible reality that fits who we all knew Paterno to be before the other day. Would that guy honestly try to cover up (as has been shouted here as if it were an absolute) anal rape of a child!!!  The only guy we KNOW covered that up is McQueary. 

I'm not willing to make my final determination on Paterno based on "he must have"  or "he had to" or "IMO he did" or "there's no way he didn't" or "I believe" or "I'm sure he" or "you can't tell me he didn't" or any of that.  Every single ounce of that is speculation.  What are the FACTS? 

It's illegal and worth condemnation to point that out?  Speculating on what he "should have" known is okay, but speculation on how he may have gotten there without being a closeted, enabling pervert is verboten?  What's fair about that?

I understand that the abuse of a child is the worst possible offense.  Sandusky (All I'm trying to do is keep the horror over what Sandusky did from impacting my view of the facts in relation to the actions of others.  It's hard to separate because this is the worst thing ever.  The disgust and revulsion over what Sandusky did carries over to everybody else no matter how little they may have known about it.  Every single person on that campus, everybody who ever played there is now looked at with a twinge of suspicion.  How could that have gone on and they didn't see or hear anything?

That goes to my argument that institutions are often irreparably harmed by allegations of this nature.  Sex scandal at the college no matter who reports it?  College becomes "that place where they were raping kids."  Your best friend, business associate and partner is raping kids?  Even if you're the whistleblower people will still wonder what you knew, how long it went on, why you didn't come forward sooner.  Just happens.  You become "the law firm where that guy was raping kids."     

When there's a definitive answer to what Paterno knew and when, or if something else comes out (and it may, but that's not a given either)  THEN decide what his ultimate fate is.  He's been removed from his job and is the target of public scrutiny.

Call me whatever you want, but a 60-year history of (from all we know) doing things the right way qualifies the guy for at least the possibility that things are not as they appear on the surface and that maybe we're not seeing something or that we're seeing something we need to see to find an outlet for our collective rage. 

There's the strong possibility that as this goes on and we learn more details I'll pick up rocks, too.  I'll throw some with you if it's proven that he was as complicit as most of you have already decided he was.  I just want to know and I want it to be without "must have" or "had to" speculation.

Before you go on a rampage, I'm not saying this is on the same scale at all, but how many times were we subjected to the argument that Cam "must have" known this, that or the other?  We all accept that he lived in the same house with his father, was invested in the life decisions that were being made and had no knowledge of his dad's activities at all.  That's perfectly plausible. 

But now I'm Satan for suggesting that it's possibly plausible Paterno had limited knowledge (whether it was willfully limited or not is another discussion)?  Not that it excuses his actions, but at least it puts some semblance of order to them and helps me understand?  For that "I'm not the person you knew?"  Hmmm.  That's curious to me.  I have no response to that. 

Right now, PSU took steps to protect its image.  Was firing Paterno an effort to help any of the kids? No, it was an effort to save face.  That pisses me off.  They fired him hoping that things will go easier on them down the road if more comes out.  That's what bothers me, I guess.

If it was as widespread as it seems are the three or four who are gone the ONLY people who could have known? 

Did McQueary not ever speak of it again except to his dad?  Did the janitors not tell their wives or girlfriends?  Tell somebody over drinks at the bar? 

It's an awful, horrible thing.  The focus on Paterno as if he is the devil incarnate and the only person capable of stopping this years ago is where I begin to lose grips with it. 

friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

JR4AU

  • ****
  • 9989
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #62 on: November 11, 2011, 09:26:34 AM »
Yeah.  Because what I know of Saban and Bryant doesn't give me any indication to think that they'd be above it.  You're right. 

Who it is makes a difference.  If this were Dennis Rodman or Phil Spector, I wouldn't have much trouble with the concept. 

Paterno?  Doesn't make sense.  Doesn't jibe.  That leaves me with either blindly accepting what's on the surface or trying to figure it out by looking at the entire picture. 

I think I specifically said I'm trying to figure out how a guy with Paterno's established credibility and integrity could get caught up in something like this.  And I'm formulating rational and reasonable -- non-emotional -- reasons for how it could have reached this point. 

It doesn't make sense to me and I'm trying to look at it objectively and understand it in the context of the world we actually live in as opposed to the utopian one where everybody always does what's morally and ethically right regardless of the circumstances.  What did he know, what was he told when he made the decisions that he did? 

You're a cop for god's sake.  You know better than anybody the kind of heinous shit people try to keep buried in their own familes, in business, in schools -- for reasons far less valid than this. 

All I'm saying is that I can see how a guy who is his good friend, his confidant could convince him that what the GA termed "some sex stuff maybe in the shower" or whatever was completely misconstrued.  I can see him wanting to believe and accepting the explanation. I'm saying that you, in the same situation, DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY TOLD, might could be convinced by your favorite uncle that what some other guy THOUGHT was sexual horseplay was nothing of the sort.  No way. 

That door is closed to you.  I understand.  It's not entirely closed to me until and unless somebody tells me for an absolute undeniable concrete fact that Paterno unquestionably knew the extent and there was no room for doubt. 

Don't make the mistake of thinking I said he did what he should have done, did all he could do, or did what was acceptable to me.  I'm just trying to come up with a plausible reality that fits who we all knew Paterno to be before the other day. Would that guy honestly try to cover up (as has been shouted here as if it were an absolute) anal rape of a child!!!  The only guy we KNOW covered that up is McQueary. 

I'm not willing to make my final determination on Paterno based on "he must have"  or "he had to" or "IMO he did" or "there's no way he didn't" or "I believe" or "I'm sure he" or "you can't tell me he didn't" or any of that.  Every single ounce of that is speculation.  What are the FACTS? 

It's illegal and worth condemnation to point that out?  Speculating on what he "should have" known is okay, but speculation on how he may have gotten there without being a closeted, enabling pervert is verboten?  What's fair about that?

I understand that the abuse of a child is the worst possible offense.  Sandusky (All I'm trying to do is keep the horror over what Sandusky did from impacting my view of the facts in relation to the actions of others.  It's hard to separate because this is the worst thing ever.  The disgust and revulsion over what Sandusky did carries over to everybody else no matter how little they may have known about it.  Every single person on that campus, everybody who ever played there is now looked at with a twinge of suspicion.  How could that have gone on and they didn't see or hear anything?

That goes to my argument that institutions are often irreparably harmed by allegations of this nature.  Sex scandal at the college no matter who reports it?  College becomes "that place where they were raping kids."  Your best friend, business associate and partner is raping kids?  Even if you're the whistleblower people will still wonder what you knew, how long it went on, why you didn't come forward sooner.  Just happens.  You become "the law firm where that guy was raping kids."     

When there's a definitive answer to what Paterno knew and when, or if something else comes out (and it may, but that's not a given either)  THEN decide what his ultimate fate is.  He's been removed from his job and is the target of public scrutiny.

Call me whatever you want, but a 60-year history of (from all we know) doing things the right way qualifies the guy for at least the possibility that things are not as they appear on the surface and that maybe we're not seeing something or that we're seeing something we need to see to find an outlet for our collective rage. 

There's the strong possibility that as this goes on and we learn more details I'll pick up rocks, too.  I'll throw some with you if it's proven that he was as complicit as most of you have already decided he was.  I just want to know and I want it to be without "must have" or "had to" speculation.

Before you go on a rampage, I'm not saying this is on the same scale at all, but how many times were we subjected to the argument that Cam "must have" known this, that or the other?  We all accept that he lived in the same house with his father, was invested in the life decisions that were being made and had no knowledge of his dad's activities at all.  That's perfectly plausible. 

But now I'm Satan for suggesting that it's possibly plausible Paterno had limited knowledge (whether it was willfully limited or not is another discussion)?  Not that it excuses his actions, but at least it puts some semblance of order to them and helps me understand?  For that "I'm not the person you knew?"  Hmmm.  That's curious to me.  I have no response to that. 

Right now, PSU took steps to protect its image.  Was firing Paterno an effort to help any of the kids? No, it was an effort to save face.  That pisses me off.  They fired him hoping that things will go easier on them down the road if more comes out.  That's what bothers me, I guess.

If it was as widespread as it seems are the three or four who are gone the ONLY people who could have known? 

Did McQueary not ever speak of it again except to his dad?  Did the janitors not tell their wives or girlfriends?  Tell somebody over drinks at the bar? 

It's an awful, horrible thing.  The focus on Paterno as if he is the devil incarnate and the only person capable of stopping this years ago is where I begin to lose grips with it.
willful blindness is far easier to do than actually committing the crime.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Kaos

  • *
  • 29221
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #63 on: November 11, 2011, 09:36:17 AM »
Here's where I get hung up. 

He wasn't good at it.  After reading the entire Grand Jury report, he was caught multiple times over multiple years doing something inappropriate with a child.  Perhaps not anal sex, but strange, inappropriate behavior that was "in a sexual nature." 

He was caught laying face to face with a boy late at night by the elementary school wrestling coach.

He was caught by the assistant principal of a high school. 

He was caught by victim 1's mother.

He was caught by a graduate assistant. 

He was caught by Detective Ralph Ralston admitting to doing inappropriate, sexual acts in a shower while apologizing to the mother of the child.  (Interesting part here - He was subsequently forced to "retire" and told he was no longer the successor to Joe Paterno.  That was in 1998/1999.) 

He was caught giving oral sex to a boy in a Penn State athletic department building by a janitor.

He was caught caught caught caught caught.  This isn't a matter of "they had to have known."  They did know.

Joe Paterno's treatment isn't contingent upon whether or not he was told Sandusky was anally raping a boy. 

It's the fact that in 1998/1999, Sandusky had been caught by police and Paterno subsequently relieved him of his coaching duties for seemingly no reason.   

It's the fact that prior to 1999, Sandusky had numerous boys attached to him on bowl trips, at football games, at practices, at team dinners, and at his house.  It doesn't take a crime detective to say, "Hey, you know what?  I bet something was weird about Sandusky having those boys attached to his hip all those years.  And then he gets caught doing some weird, sexual things to boys?  Hmmm." 

It's the fact that despite Paterno (and the rest of the Penn State officials) being aware of Sandusky's inappropriate behavior towards a child in 1999, he was still having access to Penn State facilities. 

In 2002, it's reported to Joe Paterno that Sandusky is doing some "horse play" in a "sexual nature" to a boy. 

Then in 2005, Sandusky is bringing another reported victim to Penn State preseason practices. 

Then in 2009, Sandusky is still allowed to host his little boy camps on Penn State campuses. 

They all knew at the very least that Sandusky was an ill-reputable character who had a history (albeit to them, very small history) of inappropriate behavior with children. 

As for the legality of the matter?  Who gives a shit?

Anyone with a lick of common sense can make an inference.  Anyone could infer that this Sandusky guy (especially if Paterno was that close with him for so many years coaching) had a problem.

I'm getting sick of being the devil, but allow me to retort. 

All of those things were separate self-contained instances.   You're making the illogical leap that each "must have" known about the other when there's no evidence to support it.  You're connecting dots that were only connected when the Grand Jury began putting them together. 

The wrestling coach didn't tell McQueary.
McQueary told Paterno something, but we don't know what.
The assistant principal didn't tell.
Detective Ralston didn't bother to notify anybody at PSU.

And so on. 

You've heard the story of the blind men describing an elephant?   I think that's what we have here. 

YOU can see how all of the pieces fit together.  But when you only have one piece and you're walking around not knowing what pieces everybody else has?  You don't see the puzzle. 

You have no way of knowing how Sandusky explained away the little escapades to Penn State.  It's out of the realm of possibility that he convinced the people in power that it was just some routine horseplay?  That in 1998/99 they did what they thought was the honorable thing and cut him out of the loop even when there was no actual evidence of anything? 

And then four years later -- with no other reports -- there's some vague allegation (again because you don't know what the GA told anybody).  And he explains it away again? 

And you look at the work he's doing with the foundation?  The thousands of kids who were helped?  The awards, accolades and honors he got for his work there?  And in your mind you just can't possibly see that maybe, just maybe it was a mistake?  That the guy you know COULDN'T be that kind of person.  Just no way. 

You're assuming what people "should" have known or guessed.  Nobody's ever fooled you?  You've never had somebody turn out to be something you thought they weren't?  You've never been shocked to find out that somebody was able to lie to you with a straight face and dupe you?  Never had somebody you stood up for turn out to be unworthy of your support?

Predators and addicts are extremely good at lying to themselves and to others.  They're skilled at escaping and maintaining the facade. 

But whatever. 

I'm the devil here.   Boogety fucking boogety. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Kaos

  • *
  • 29221
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #64 on: November 11, 2011, 09:40:12 AM »
willful blindness is far easier to do than actually committing the crime.

And I'll have a problem with that if that's what happened. 

I'm still waiting for somebody to definitively show me exactly what Paterno knew. 

I'm waiting for somebody to deny that it's possible Sandusky convinced him it was all a big ass misunderstanding and he was just helping the kid get soap out of his eyes or something inane like that. 

Fuck it.  Tired of the debate.  Went a lot further than I intended it to, but the lynch mob mentality was interesting to me and I wanted to explore it a little.  It's pretty ugly. 

Most people here are convinced Paterno was either ass raping children himself or at least videotaped it and didn't share.  Of course the facts don't fit that, but who cares?

Boogety boogety. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

The Six

  • ***
  • 4353
  • Leaning on a broken fence b/t past & present tense
    • My Linktree
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #65 on: November 11, 2011, 09:51:57 AM »
Boogety boogety. boogety. amen.

FIFY
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"I'm sick of following my dreams...I'm just going to ask them where they are going and hook up with 'em later." - Mitch Hedberg

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13667
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #66 on: November 11, 2011, 10:09:54 AM »
I'm still waiting for somebody to definitively show me exactly what Paterno knew. 


Here's all you should need to know:

In 1999 Paterno, as HC, canned the guy who was widely regarded as the heir apparent to his position.  The firing was in response to the investigation into sexual abuse by Sandusky.

Sandusky was allowed to remain in and around the football complex.

In 2002 Paterno is told, at a bare minimum, that Sandusky was in the showers engaging in some sexual activity with a young boy.

Sandusky is allowed to remain in and around the program until very recently.

All the other allegations and reports of abuse are just piling on, but the above is enough to make Paterno an enabling shit.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

War Eagle!!!

  • ****
  • 8292
  • The Original Backwards Hat
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #67 on: November 11, 2011, 10:29:47 AM »
Here's all you should need to know:

In 1999 Paterno, as HC, canned the guy who was widely regarded as the heir apparent to his position.  The firing was in response to the investigation into sexual abuse by Sandusky.

Sandusky was allowed to remain in and around the football complex.

In 2002 Paterno is told, at a bare minimum, that Sandusky was in the showers engaging in some sexual activity with a young boy.

Sandusky is allowed to remain in and around the program until very recently.

All the other allegations and reports of abuse are just piling on, but the above is enough to make Paterno an enabling shit.

This.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Saniflush

  • Pledge Master
  • ****
  • 21656
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #68 on: November 11, 2011, 10:31:57 AM »
And I'll have a problem with that if that's what happened. 

I'm still waiting for somebody to definitively show me exactly what Paterno knew. 

I'm waiting for somebody to deny that it's possible Sandusky convinced him it was all a big ass misunderstanding and he was just helping the kid get soap out of his eyes or something inane like that. 

Fuck it.  Tired of the debate.  Went a lot further than I intended it to, but the lynch mob mentality was interesting to me and I wanted to explore it a little.  It's pretty ugly. 

Most people here are convinced Paterno was either ass raping children himself or at least videotaped it and didn't share.  Of course the facts don't fit that, but who cares?

Boogety boogety.

Paterno can't tell you what he knew.  He may not can tell you his own name.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Hey my friends are the ones that wanted to eat at that shitty hole in the wall that only served bread and wine.  What kind of brick and mud business model is that.  Stick to the cart if that's all you're going to serve.  Then that dude came in with like 12 other people, and some of them weren't even wearing shoes, and the restaurant sat them right across from us. It was gross, and they were all stinky and dirty.  Then dude starts talking about eating his body and drinking his blood...I almost lost it.  That's the last supper I'll ever have there, and I hope he dies a horrible death."

Kaos

  • *
  • 29221
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #69 on: November 11, 2011, 10:42:53 AM »
Here's all you should need to know:

In 1999 Paterno, as HC, canned the guy who was widely regarded as the heir apparent to his position.  The firing was in response to the investigation into sexual abuse by Sandusky.  Assuming facts not in evidence.  Logical to assume, but never explicitly stated.

Sandusky was allowed to remain in and around the football complex.  True and typical response unfortunately

In 2002 Paterno is told, at a bare minimum, that Sandusky was in the showers engaging in some sexual activity with a young boy. Possibly sexual?

Sandusky is allowed to remain in and around the program until very recently. Can't be around children, right?  No kids with him any more?

All the other allegations and reports of abuse are just piling on, but the above is enough to make Paterno an enabling shit.

Not Paterno.  Penn State.  The entire thing enabled him. 

The fact that they let him stay around leads me to believe that somebody either didn't know the full extent or something.  Something doesn't make sense.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Snaggletiger

  • *
  • 44139
  • My Fighting Pearls
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #70 on: November 11, 2011, 10:44:06 AM »
Paterno can't tell you what he knew.  He may not can tell you his own name.

Paterno's so old, his Social Security number is 1.

He's so old, someone told him to act his age and he died.

He's so old, he knew Mr. Clean when he had a comb over.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
My doctor told me I needed to stop masturbating.  I asked him why, and he said, "because I'm trying to examine you."

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13667
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #71 on: November 11, 2011, 10:56:37 AM »
Not Paterno.  Penn State.  The entire thing enabled him. 

The fact that they let him stay around leads me to believe that somebody either didn't know the full extent or something.  Something doesn't make sense.

Paterno.  He was the football program.  The rest of the administration is guilty as well, but Paterno is the man at the top with whom the buck presumably stops.

I get it, you like Joe.  But fuck Joe.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Saniflush

  • Pledge Master
  • ****
  • 21656
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #72 on: November 11, 2011, 10:58:54 AM »
Paterno.  He was the football program.  The rest of the administration is guilty as well, but Paterno is the man at the top with whom the buck presumably stops.

I get it, you like Joe.  But fuck Joe.
just so we are clear....
It's ok to fuck Joe.  He's of age.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Hey my friends are the ones that wanted to eat at that shitty hole in the wall that only served bread and wine.  What kind of brick and mud business model is that.  Stick to the cart if that's all you're going to serve.  Then that dude came in with like 12 other people, and some of them weren't even wearing shoes, and the restaurant sat them right across from us. It was gross, and they were all stinky and dirty.  Then dude starts talking about eating his body and drinking his blood...I almost lost it.  That's the last supper I'll ever have there, and I hope he dies a horrible death."

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13667
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #73 on: November 11, 2011, 11:11:33 AM »
just so we are clear....
It's ok to fuck Joe.  He's of age.

Butt fuck him, even.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Saniflush

  • Pledge Master
  • ****
  • 21656
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #74 on: November 11, 2011, 11:12:09 AM »
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Hey my friends are the ones that wanted to eat at that shitty hole in the wall that only served bread and wine.  What kind of brick and mud business model is that.  Stick to the cart if that's all you're going to serve.  Then that dude came in with like 12 other people, and some of them weren't even wearing shoes, and the restaurant sat them right across from us. It was gross, and they were all stinky and dirty.  Then dude starts talking about eating his body and drinking his blood...I almost lost it.  That's the last supper I'll ever have there, and I hope he dies a horrible death."

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13667
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #75 on: November 11, 2011, 11:13:34 AM »
In the shower.

Or some other very uncomfortable place.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Kaos

  • *
  • 29221
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #76 on: November 11, 2011, 11:14:49 AM »
In the shower.

At least it would be somewhat lubed. 

And I don't necessarily like Joe.  I really don't have a strong opinion on him one way or another. 

I just always thought he was basically a good guy in a sea of assholes.  Can't reconcile this. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Tiger Wench

  • ******
  • 10352
  • Does this armour make my ass look big?
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #77 on: November 11, 2011, 11:17:13 AM »
Paterno.  He was the football program.  The rest of the administration is guilty as well, but Paterno is the man at the top with whom the buck presumably stops.

I get it, you like Joe.  But fuck Joe.

The highlighted part is ultimately the answer.  Many times the boss takes the fall when an employee under his direction fucks up royally (Nutt/Boone at Ole Miss and that was only heinous football not heinous crimes). 

In this instance, there is no dispute that Paterno was in sole control of the football program at Penn State and it was his employee that continually performed criminal actions at, in, around and associated with JoePa's football program.  Even if no one had EVER said ANYTHING to JoePa, he would at a minimum have been retired at the end of the season because this happened at his program and on his watch.  Because there is credible testimony that the GA specifically DID tell JoePa about what he saw, and because there is credible evidence to support the theory that this is not the first time JoePa had ever heard anything skeevey about Sandusky, JoePa and his bosses were immediately terminated.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Saniflush

  • Pledge Master
  • ****
  • 21656
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #78 on: November 11, 2011, 11:26:08 AM »
Or some other very uncomfortable place.

Like the back of a Volkswagon?
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Hey my friends are the ones that wanted to eat at that shitty hole in the wall that only served bread and wine.  What kind of brick and mud business model is that.  Stick to the cart if that's all you're going to serve.  Then that dude came in with like 12 other people, and some of them weren't even wearing shoes, and the restaurant sat them right across from us. It was gross, and they were all stinky and dirty.  Then dude starts talking about eating his body and drinking his blood...I almost lost it.  That's the last supper I'll ever have there, and I hope he dies a horrible death."

Kaos

  • *
  • 29221
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Close Penn State Down
« Reply #79 on: November 11, 2011, 11:30:56 AM »
The highlighted part is ultimately the answer.  Many times the boss takes the fall when an employee under his direction fucks up royally (Nutt/Boone at Ole Miss and that was only heinous football not heinous crimes). 

In this instance, there is no dispute that Paterno was in sole control of the football program at Penn State and it was his employee that continually performed criminal actions at, in, around and associated with JoePa's football program.  Even if no one had EVER said ANYTHING to JoePa, he would at a minimum have been retired at the end of the season because this happened at his program and on his watch.  Because there is credible testimony that the GA specifically DID tell JoePa about what he saw, and because there is credible evidence to support the theory that this is not the first time JoePa had ever heard anything skeevey about Sandusky, JoePa and his bosses were immediately terminated.

And I think Paterno has largely been a figurehead, much like Bryant was for the last eight or ten years of his career. 

People started doing things AROUND Paterno instead of through him.  I figure that's been the case for at least 15 years. 

But I'm assuming and that has no place here.  If you can't assume what he was told, I can't assume his diminished level of power.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.