I’ve been trying to avoid speculating, but this is basically how I feel. Great post.
Who the hell said they wouldn’t take a hit? I was addressing the idiotic “Penn State is going to wish they’d never heard of football” statement.
If their profits drop by $10 mill, they’re still making close to $50 mm per year. It’s going to sting, but that’s about it.
I seriously doubt most pediphiles are parading their vicims around at work, as Sandusky was doing. Most abusers are not quite as blatant about their behavior as he seems to have been.
There are people who write love letters to serial killers, too.
I’m not saying the guy wasn’t a good football coach. I don’t know and don’t care about football. It is a shame that an otherwise good career has to end like this. But it’s no fault but his. Good guys don’t ignore and cover up child sexual abuse.
If the $10M figure is correct that is only for one year’s revenue and doesn’t involve settlement and insurance costs. Stretch that over the next 10 years. It could get huge. Remember, don’t factor in spent money. It’s a matter of budgeting over the future. Of course, the soccer team, the thought of going D1 with the hockey program and the women’s programs will be the ones that suffer. It’s never the perps (the glorious football program). They just pass it off. Plus, as we’ve seen the football fans are clueless idiots. Maybe when they go to Hell they can get JoePa’s autograph.
Do you have any evidence that of this? If not, I would contend it is not fruitful to discuss.
There was no cover-up involving Paterno. There is no evidence that there was, nor would it make any sense for him to engage in one. Let’s go through this VERY SLOWLY so you can understand:
Step 1: GA sees Sandusky rapping a child in the locker room
Step 2: GA tells his father
Step 3: GA tells Paterno
Step 4: Paterno is convinced they cannot let this get out.
Step 5: Paterno tells two more people
Step 6: They all agree to not make an issue of it
At this point, 5 people now have to be convinced to cover this up. Two of whom are only involved because Paterno told them. What kind of shitty ass cover-up is he engaging in where he figures telling more people who may or may not be desirous to participate would be a good way to keep the story under wraps? Next, they continue to allow Sandusky to hang around PS and to bring boys on campus, increasing the likelihood they will have to cover up future incidents involving more and more people. That’s not even considering the victims whose suffering it’s begin contended they turned a blind eye to. Do you really think that sounds plausible?
More gigantic than it is now? I sincerely doubt it given that the time has allowed Sandusky to accumulate more victims, and a longer track record of malfeasance.
Actually, many pedophiles do “parade their victims” around since many take jobs and positions to be in direct contact with potential victims.
brickbacon, you’re overlooking the fact that Sandusky was warned about inappropriate behavior with boys in 1998. You can’t convince me Paterno wasn’t aware of it.
Brickbacon your are being an idjiot. Your basic arguement seems to be that folks always act like Vulcans. And secondly, any possible scandal will automatically be revealed as soon as possible because it will only get worse later one (which it generally does though).
Problem is, history is filled with people acting like idiots and people covering up scandals when a revelation sooner rather than later would have been obviously better. Hell, many times scandals are denied even long after its obvious that the time for denial/coverup has long since passed. Hell, Clinton still probably thinks the definition of “is” is still up for debate.
Why not? What makes you assume he was aware of it? Considering that he just gave testimony under oath, why do you think that issue would not have come up if there was any evidence that Paterno was aware of Sandusky’s proclivities or past infractions?
If he wasn’t aware of it, he wasn’t as good a coach as everyone seems to think he was.
Isn’t that when Sandusky “retired”? Even though he still had an office, and keys, and apparently the right to take a shower in the locker room with 10 year olds.
:dubious: How does this reflect on his coaching skills at all?
I am being an idiot? You are assuming there was a cover-up when there is scant evidence for it, nor does it seem to be in character for the main participant. I am actually pointing out the gaping holes in your logic, yet you just assume it has to be true because it makes for a better narrative.
True, but most of the time, the participants in a cover-up are involved and subject to legal ramifications or liability. There is not much of that in this case.
As Head Coach, I would assume (and I may very well be wrong, I know less than nothing about football) he is aware of the qualifications of his assistants. Since Sandusky was his assistant in '98 when he was warned about inappropriate behavior with children, I would think the Head Coach would be aware of that.
If he wasn’t, he doesn’t have any business being Head Coach.
I’m not using “cover up” as a loaded term. Call it what you want.
Whatever you want to call it, Paterno kept his mouth shut for years.
He was told in 2002 Sandusky had abused a child in the locker room shower. He knew Sandusky still had easy access to kids with The Second Mile for years afterward, including bringing them to the Penn State campus. He did nothing.
That is the best case scenario for Paterno, which is already horrible. But now look at some more facts:
Reports state that Paterno was in fact told Sandusky had raped a child in the showers in 2002. Do you believe those reports are lies?
In 1998 Sandusky was under police investigation and admitted hugging a child in the Penn State showers. The DA decided not to charge him. It is hard to believe Paterno knew nothing about this. In 1999 Sandusky retired from Penn State.
In 2000 Sandusky was witnessed abusing another child in the Penn State showers. Several employees were told. No report was filed. While not as likely as in 1998, it still seems pretty likely Paterno would have heard something.
To state the obvious:
Paterno got an extra 10 years of being the squeaky clean super coach by not bringing the scandal into the open.
That is arguably a fantastic outcome from an amoral point of view. For all he knew, it could have stayed hidden for more than 10 years. And he’s an old guy.
Knowing several folks who are… idealists. One of theirs biggest character flaws (besides being irritating as hell) is they tend to simply expect other folks are just like them, and don’t always notice those others aren’t until they get blindsided…
If Paterno was told “We’ll look into it.” He may well have expected them to do exactly that. Nor would he necessarily question them telling him that they had, and it was not as it appeared (Which many idealist would choose to believe, because they WANT to.)… or it was “still being looked into”, until he finally quit asking.
Knowing what I know about Paterno’s personality (I was at main in '84 and '85 you kind of get used to reading about the guy), “Don’t tell Joe, he’ll flip” may well have been the order of the day with folks who’s main concern was that the gravy train keep rolling.
Yes, it may well have.
Except that McQueary did tell Joe. And Joe didn’t flip.
Thank you for a comment that made clear a point I did not see clearly. Now we can return to the Pitting.
Who knew what about Jerry Sandusky? Conflicting stories will come down to credibility
Much more at source. Just when you think this whole sordid mess can’s possible get worse, it does so by the hour. Lots of heads still to roll. I believe it is going to take decades for PSU to recover from this…if it ever does.
Just a final excerpt from the above link:
With the sheer number of people involved, it’s all going to come down to who jumps ship first – lots of squealing ahead.
I have a question.
Why was Mike McQueary called before the grand jury to begin with? How did they know he had anything to say about Sandusky?