Sure to piss off Ball & all his alts.....

[CWertz]

Originally posted by NovaUSMC01:
CWertz-

Would you agree that these despicable events were hidden and covered up to make sure the program was not impacted allowing those wins to occur?

Maybe but it does not logically make sense. If this were to be reported right away, then I don't think it would have impacted the program much at all so if that was their intent, it does not make sense.

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by Ninetynine5.0:
You dont see how defending Paterno's wins as more important than child raope is making an excuse? You're in deep. Better post another picture of the Lion taking a bow. It's a great day to be a Penn stater.

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by qwe015:

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by qwe015:
Paterno knew about the child rapes in 1998. He covered them up because he didn't want his program to suffer a competitive disadvantage by exposing the truth. He put football ahead of uncovering child rape.

CWertz, what is the debate here?

The guy was fired, the wins should not have been taken away. I don't like a lot of what was going on with the program but there is no reason to take away the wins.

Trying to figure out why you say the wins should not be taken away. I see three schools of thought. Which do you align with?

1. The games were played, the wins happened, wins should never be taken away (so calipari's final fours, or other teams that had wins vacated shouldn't have had their wins taken away)

2. Covering up child rate in order to avoid a competitive disadvantage is not the type of action that would warrant vacating wins, or

3. Never happened. JoPa is great. He knew nothing, saw nothing, and therefor had no obligation to say anything.

Which school of thought are you a part of?

4. The scandal had nothing to do with the wins.

 

[bmoneynova]

Originally posted by Mainliner II:
For what it's worth........a somewhat logical opinion that most of the media recognizes, but, as the article states, those jealous of the previous record and reputation of the school were happy to pile on. And, since it seems that this tragic situation is nearing it's conclusion, the administrators will get their just punishments, it is a good time to end the banter on the Sandusky era.

who in the HELL was jealous of Penn State? what a ridiculous notion

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by bmoneynova:

Originally posted by Mainliner II:
For what it's worth........a somewhat logical opinion that most of the media recognizes, but, as the article states, those jealous of the previous record and reputation of the school were happy to pile on. And, since it seems that this tragic situation is nearing it's conclusion, the administrators will get their just punishments, it is a good time to end the banter on the Sandusky era.

who in the HELL was jealous of Penn State? what a ridiculous notion

I don't agree with the article much but Pitt is certainly jealous of PSU and many were happy to pile on once this scandal took place.

 

[qwe015]

People are jealous about penn state? For what?

 

[qwe015]

Originally posted by Mainliner II:
For what it's worth........a somewhat logical opinion that most of the media recognizes, but, as the article states, those jealous of the previous record and reputation of the school were happy to pile on. And, since it seems that this tragic situation is nearing it's conclusion, the administrators will get their just punishments, it is a good time to end the banter on the Sandusky era.

Holy crap, this Christine flowers is as brain washed as they come.

 

[qwe015]

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by qwe015:

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by qwe015:
Paterno knew about the child rapes in 1998. He covered them up because he didn't want his program to suffer a competitive disadvantage by exposing the truth. He put football ahead of uncovering child rape.

CWertz, what is the debate here?

The guy was fired, the wins should not have been taken away. I don't like a lot of what was going on with the program but there is no reason to take away the wins.

Trying to figure out why you say the wins should not be taken away. I see three schools of thought. Which do you align with?

1. The games were played, the wins happened, wins should never be taken away (so calipari's final fours, or other teams that had wins vacated shouldn't have had their wins taken away)

2. Covering up child rate in order to avoid a competitive disadvantage is not the type of action that would warrant vacating wins, or

3. Never happened. JoPa is great. He knew nothing, saw nothing, and therefor had no obligation to say anything.

Which school of thought are you a part of?

4. The scandal had nothing to do with the wins.

I would say that falls into category #2

I guess you fail to see that JoPa was afraid of suffering a competitive disadvantage so he covered it up. If the scandal went public in 1998, penn state would have definitely suffered. But JoPa covered it up, so they were able to win more games than they would have if JoPa did not cover up the child rape.

 

[LizReed]

That article is not worth much.

 

[novabball2]

so this is ok?

we get it, he got his wins back. but PSU should quietly celebrate it considering the circumstances.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/24977850/psu-ad-calls-409-decals-inappropriate-and-insensitive

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by qwe015:

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by qwe015:

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by qwe015:
Paterno knew about the child rapes in 1998. He covered them up because he didn't want his program to suffer a competitive disadvantage by exposing the truth. He put football ahead of uncovering child rape.

CWertz, what is the debate here?

The guy was fired, the wins should not have been taken away. I don't like a lot of what was going on with the program but there is no reason to take away the wins.

Trying to figure out why you say the wins should not be taken away. I see three schools of thought. Which do you align with?

1. The games were played, the wins happened, wins should never be taken away (so calipari's final fours, or other teams that had wins vacated shouldn't have had their wins taken away)

2. Covering up child rate in order to avoid a competitive disadvantage is not the type of action that would warrant vacating wins, or

3. Never happened. JoPa is great. He knew nothing, saw nothing, and therefor had no obligation to say anything.

Which school of thought are you a part of?

4. The scandal had nothing to do with the wins.

I would say that falls into category #2

I guess you fail to see that JoPa was afraid of suffering a competitive disadvantage so he covered it up. If the scandal went public in 1998, penn state would have definitely suffered. But JoPa covered it up, so they were able to win more games than they would have if JoPa did not cover up the child rape.

You would be able to physically prove in a court of law that they would not have as many wins? Are you saying no one other than Joe Paterno covered up the Sandusky antics? This is what you just said above? How in the hell are you a successful attorney?

 

[qwe015]

A child rape scandal in the late 1990's would have negatively impacted the program. Not sure how anyone could deny that.

But it is not an issue of how much the scandal would negatively impact the program. This is where you are missing sight of the big picture. It is an issue of JoPa thinking that a child rate scandal would negatively impact impact the program and thus why he covered it up. JoPa thought it was a competitive disadvantage if it went public, and that's wy he covered it up, and that's really all that matters (as opposed to trying to calculate how many wins they actually gained by jopa's cover up)

Make sense to you yet?

 

[Ninetynine5.0]

So Penn State is blaming Pitt for 'piling on' about a child rape cover up? Perhaps not covering up the rape of numerous children might have avoided that.

This is exactly the mid set of the typical Penn State apologist. Forget the crime, blame the media for over covering it.

And btw - how should have this been 'properly reported'? Should they just focused on the children wearing all that suggestive clothing and not looked at Joe Paterno's role or Sandusky's role?


Unreal.


Burrs, you know why that school should be shut down? Because this is going to happen again. With a massive group willing to look the other way, this place is safe haven for pedophiles.




This post was edited on 1/19 2:40 PM by Ninetynine5.0

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by qwe015:
A child rape scandal in the late 1990's would have negatively impacted the program. Not sure how anyone could deny that.

But it is not an issue of how much the scandal would negatively impact the program. This is where you are missing sight of the big picture. It is an issue of JoPa thinking that a child rate scandal would negatively impact impact the program and thus why he covered it up. JoPa thought it was a competitive disadvantage if it went public, and that's wy he covered it up, and that's really all that matters (as opposed to trying to calculate how many wins they actually gained by jopa's cover up)

Make sense to you yet?

This is why I disagree with you, they are currently ranked 10th in National recruiting for 2015. Many of these recruits were picked up while they were still on probation and had less scholarships. So, even after this huge scandal, they are still recruiting top notch players. What you say, you cannot prove, what I say, I am proving.

I don't know what happened after Paterno told the administrators about Sandusky. This is where it gets pretty ugly as it seems many people dropped the ball.

Football Recruiting Rankings

 

[qwe015]

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by qwe015:
A child rape scandal in the late 1990's would have negatively impacted the program. Not sure how anyone could deny that.

But it is not an issue of how much the scandal would negatively impact the program. This is where you are missing sight of the big picture. It is an issue of JoPa thinking that a child rate scandal would negatively impact impact the program and thus why he covered it up. JoPa thought it was a competitive disadvantage if it went public, and that's wy he covered it up, and that's really all that matters (as opposed to trying to calculate how many wins they actually gained by jopa's cover up)

Make sense to you yet?

This is why I disagree with you, they are currently ranked 10th in National recruiting for 2015. Many of these recruits were picked up while they were still on probation and had less scholarships. So, even after this huge scandal, they are still recruiting top notch players. What you say, you cannot prove, what I say, I am proving.

I don't know what happened after Paterno told the administrators about Sandusky. This is where it gets pretty ugly as it seems many people dropped the ball.

Again, you keep missing the issue.

It is not about a debate over whether or not you think the scandal would have hurt the program. The issue is that JoPa felt it would hurt the program, and that's why he covered it up. JoPa put football ahead of child rate to avoid what he felt was a competitive disadvantage.

Understand?

 

[NovaNation1188]

Penn State Recruiting Classes (according to the link provided above):

2004 - #29
2005 - #25
2006 - #6
2007 - #24
2008 - #43
2009 - #24
2010 - #12
2011 - #35
---- SCANDAL
2012 - #51
2013 - #43
2014 -#24

I'm no rocket scientist, but it looks like they had their worst recruiting years in the last decade following the scandal. Seems to me like it hurt them.

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by qwe015:

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by qwe015:
A child rape scandal in the late 1990's would have negatively impacted the program. Not sure how anyone could deny that.

But it is not an issue of how much the scandal would negatively impact the program. This is where you are missing sight of the big picture. It is an issue of JoPa thinking that a child rate scandal would negatively impact impact the program and thus why he covered it up. JoPa thought it was a competitive disadvantage if it went public, and that's wy he covered it up, and that's really all that matters (as opposed to trying to calculate how many wins they actually gained by jopa's cover up)

Make sense to you yet?

This is why I disagree with you, they are currently ranked 10th in National recruiting for 2015. Many of these recruits were picked up while they were still on probation and had less scholarships. So, even after this huge scandal, they are still recruiting top notch players. What you say, you cannot prove, what I say, I am proving.

I don't know what happened after Paterno told the administrators about Sandusky. This is where it gets pretty ugly as it seems many people dropped the ball.

Again, you keep missing the issue.

It is not about a debate over whether or not you think the scandal would have hurt the program. The issue is that JoPa felt it would hurt the program, and that's why he covered it up. JoPa put football ahead of child rate to avoid what he felt was a competitive disadvantage.

Understand?

I already said in another thread that I don't know because Paterno did not keep it to himself, he did tell administrators.

 

[NovaUSMC01]

Originally posted by Mainliner II:
For what it's worth........a somewhat logical opinion that most of the media recognizes, but, as the article states, those jealous of the previous record and reputation of the school were happy to pile on. And, since it seems that this tragic situation is nearing it's conclusion, the administrators will get their just punishments, it is a good time to end the banter on the Sandusky era.

Jealously?! Wow.

Jealousy

 

[qwe015]

Jopadid tell others, and he to,d others to bury the issue because he felt that it would hurt the program.

Now you can argue all you want that a child sex scandal at oenn state would be a nothing event and that penn state would have keep moving without any bumps in the road, but again, that is not the issue. The issue is that JoPa felt it would hurt the program, and he buried it so that the school didn't suffer a disadvantage. And that's how jopa's actions are related to the wins. He put winning ahead if child rape.

All your argument does is take the stance that JoPa was stupid to cover up the child rape because he didn't have to because child rape at penn state would not hurt anything. Now I think most would disagree, but that is a straw man argument and not the real issue.

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by qwe015:
Jopadid tell others, and he to,d others to bury the issue because he felt that it would hurt the program.

Now you can argue all you want that a child sex scandal at oenn state would be a nothing event and that penn state would have keep moving without any bumps in the road, but again, that is not the issue. The issue is that JoPa felt it would hurt the program, and he buried it so that the school didn't suffer a disadvantage. And that's how jopa's actions are related to the wins. He put winning ahead if child rape.

All your argument does is take the stance that JoPa was stupid to cover up the child rape because he didn't have to because child rape at penn state would not hurt anything. Now I think most would disagree, but that is a straw man argument and not the real issue.

Then why is the NCAA backing down now? If they had all this proof, they wouldn't be backing down from what they originally handed down.

 

[Ninetynine5.0]

Originally posted by NovaUSMC01:

Originally posted by Mainliner II:
For what it's worth........a somewhat logical opinion that most of the media recognizes, but, as the article states, those jealous of the previous record and reputation of the school were happy to pile on. And, since it seems that this tragic situation is nearing it's conclusion, the administrators will get their just punishments, it is a good time to end the banter on the Sandusky era.

Jealously?! Wow.

Incredible piece. So much for just the minority.

 

[qwe015]

Apparently this is part of a compromise. Penn State threatened not to pay the $60 million to the charities unless the wins were restored. The ncaa figured that the money to the charities were more important than a historical footnote. The NCAA doesn't really have enough leverage to say no.

Truly a disgusting strong arm technique that is fitting of such a disgusting place.

Here is an article about the compromise:

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/tailgaters/Joe-Paterno-Penn-State-legacy-409-wins-all-that-matters.html

restore the wins or we won't pay the charities

 

[wcburrs87]

NB1188, they had their worst recruiting years because kids want to compete for conference titles, bowl game opportunities, and being on a team with a chance to win. Reduced scholarships made that virtually impossible. So, why would 4/5 star kids go there in those years? Makes no sense. The Sandusky part of it didn't influence recruiting. The penalties to the program did.

 

[Ninetynine5.0]

"He told me what he saw, and I said, what?"

Joe Paterno.

It was never reported to police or child welfare officials. Jerry Sandusky was allowed to use Penn State facilities for years following this statement.

He got his wins back. And they can now go to some bowl games. Justice.

 

[NovaNation1188]

Originally posted by wcburrs87:
NB1188, they had their worst recruiting years because kids want to compete for conference titles, bowl game opportunities, and being on a team with a chance to win. Reduced scholarships made that virtually impossible. So, why would 4/5 star kids go there in those years? Makes no sense. The Sandusky part of it didn't influence recruiting. The penalties to the program did.

I'm sorry, but have you been following this thread? That's exactly the reason why paterno decided to cover up the child rape -- he knew their would be sanctions which would hurt recruiting and future football success.

 

[wcburrs87]

NB1188, I got ya. I was just skipping through the comments. I missed your point.

Let me ask you this, though. If Paterno does the right/normal thing from the get-go, then isn't it reasonable to think that the program doesn't get penalized? That Sandusky gets arrested and the legal process begins.

 

[NovaNation1188]

Originally posted by wcburrs87:
NB1188, I got ya. I was just skipping through the comments. I missed your point.

Let me ask you this, though. If Paterno does the right/normal thing from the get-go, then isn't it reasonable to think that the program doesn't get penalized? That Sandusky gets arrested and the legal process begins.

If paterno did that, there would've been virtually no shame associated with the program. It would've been horrible press for 1-2 weeks, but most people recognize there are evil people in the world -- and love when they get brought to justice. I gotta believe paterno would've been seen as a hero by the country, not the villain.

It's one thing to not rat on your friend when he steals a bag of chips from WaWa. It's a completely different animal when you don't rat because he is raping children.

 

[wcburrs87]

I'm not sure if this was mentioned yet, but the PSU hockey team put the number 409 on the back of their helmets. Dmil, I thought you might be interested in that. The AD did call their actions insensitive and inappropriate. Not sure if further action was taken.

 

[qwe015]

Originally posted by wcburrs87:
I'm not sure if this was mentioned yet, but the PSU hockey team put the number 409 on the back of their helmets. Dmil, I thought you might be interested in that. The AD did call their actions insensitive and inappropriate. Not sure if further action was taken.

It is important to note that the ad didn't just come out and make that statement. Someone sent a tweet to her and complained, and then the ad responded.

What at happened to the person who initially complained? Their twitter acct had to be deleted. The cult if Joppa attacked her to the point if causing her to delete the account.

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by NovaNation1188:

Originally posted by wcburrs87:
NB1188, I got ya. I was just skipping through the comments. I missed your point.

Let me ask you this, though. If Paterno does the right/normal thing from the get-go, then isn't it reasonable to think that the program doesn't get penalized? That Sandusky gets arrested and the legal process begins.

If paterno did that, there would've been virtually no shame associated with the program. It would've been horrible press for 1-2 weeks, but most people recognize there are evil people in the world -- and love when they get brought to justice. I gotta believe paterno would've been seen as a hero by the country, not the villain.

It's one thing to not rat on your friend when he steals a bag of chips from WaWa. It's a completely different animal when you don't rat because he is raping children.

That's why it makes no sense because it really would not have affected any wins.

 

[Ninetynine5.0]

Like everyone else who defends Joe Pa, the actions of PSU hockey are sad and dangerous. Not to mention pathetic .
Attack the ones standing up for raped children. Sick sick people.

 

[qwe015]

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by NovaNation1188:

Originally posted by wcburrs87:
NB1188, I got ya. I was just skipping through the comments. I missed your point.

Let me ask you this, though. If Paterno does the right/normal thing from the get-go, then isn't it reasonable to think that the program doesn't get penalized? That Sandusky gets arrested and the legal process begins.

If paterno did that, there would've been virtually no shame associated with the program. It would've been horrible press for 1-2 weeks, but most people recognize there are evil people in the world -- and love when they get brought to justice. I gotta believe paterno would've been seen as a hero by the country, not the villain.

It's one thing to not rat on your friend when he steals a bag of chips from WaWa. It's a completely different animal when you don't rat because he is raping children.

That's why it makes no sense because it really would not have affected any wins.

But Jopa obviously thought there was some downside, which is why he didn't report it.

And that's the bottom line. Jopa had a chance to report it, but there was something negative in his mind about reporting it, so he didn't.

Speculating on how it would have negatively impact things is a secondary side issue to this discussion. The only issue that matters is Jopa brushed it under the rug for his perceived benefit.

 

[wcburrs87]

Cwertz, I don't buy the it makes no sense argument. Who knows what went thru Paterno's mind initially. A lot of years working side-by-side with this monster. There was more than likely a close relationship in play here. I doubt his wins were on his mind when he first learned of it, but other issues like his friendship/loyalty probably were. However, once a certain amount of time went by he knew he couldn't turn back and do the right thing.

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by qwe015:

Originally posted by CWertz:

Originally posted by NovaNation1188:

Originally posted by wcburrs87:
NB1188, I got ya. I was just skipping through the comments. I missed your point.

Let me ask you this, though. If Paterno does the right/normal thing from the get-go, then isn't it reasonable to think that the program doesn't get penalized? That Sandusky gets arrested and the legal process begins.

If paterno did that, there would've been virtually no shame associated with the program. It would've been horrible press for 1-2 weeks, but most people recognize there are evil people in the world -- and love when they get brought to justice. I gotta believe paterno would've been seen as a hero by the country, not the villain.

It's one thing to not rat on your friend when he steals a bag of chips from WaWa. It's a completely different animal when you don't rat because he is raping children.

That's why it makes no sense because it really would not have affected any wins.

But Jopa obviously thought there was some downside, which is why he didn't report it.

And that's the bottom line. Jopa had a chance to report it, but there was something negative in his mind about reporting it, so he didn't.

Speculating on how it would have negatively impact things is a secondary side issue to this discussion. The only issue that matters is Jopa brushed it under the rug for his perceived benefit.

But he did do legally what he was suppose to do, that's why he was not charged and the administrators were. I am surprised that a guy like you who always likes to gloat about legal issues keeps saying he did not report it.

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by wcburrs87:
Cwertz, I don't buy the it makes no sense argument. Who knows what went thru Paterno's mind initially. A lot of years working side-by-side with this monster. There was more than likely a close relationship in play here. I doubt his wins were on his mind when he first learned of it, but other issues like his friendship/loyalty probably were. However, once a certain amount of time went by he knew he couldn't turn back and do the right thing.

He reported it to the administrators, you guys keep missing this fact. If he reported it to someone, how can you say he didn't report it? From a legal standpoint, he did what he was suppose to do. The administrators didn't do enough legally. My initial response to this thread was to not take away the wins and that is what I stand by. I am not saying Paterno morally did the right things.

 

[qwe015]

The only reason Jopa was not charged was because he killed himself before they had all the information. Let's not go acting like he did what he was supposed to do. That's a sick excuse.

 

[CWertz]

Originally posted by qwe015:
The only reason Jopa was not charged was because he killed himself before they had all the information. Let's not go acting like he did what he was supposed to do. That's a sick excuse.

He was not going to be charged ever, the DA said so. I just find it funny that you call anyone sick because for the right price, you would defend someone like Sandusky. Talk about sick.

 

[wcburrs87]

He reported it to admin two days later. Joe Pa ran State Colkege, let's not be naive here. He fukking reported to no one. Also, let's not act like it's common folk like you and I going into our bosses. Do you really believe that Joe told these guys and they said thanks Joe, we'll take it from here. Ha ha ha ha. Too funny. I have zero doubt that the admin said, well Joe how do you want to handle it? His input was without a doubt heard.

 

[qwe015]

I have defended people who have done worse things than Sandusky. Difference between me and the penn state cult is that I know the person was in the wrong.

 

[Ninetynine5.0]

Originally posted by wcburrs87:
He reported it to admin two days later. Joe Pa ran State Colkege, let's not be naive here. He fukking reported to no one. Also, let's not act like it's common folk like you and I going into our bosses. Do you really believe that Joe told these guys and they said thanks Joe, we'll take it from here. Ha ha ha ha. Too funny. I have zero doubt that the admin said, well Joe how do you want to handle it? His input was without a doubt heard.

Burrs, Cwertz is giving you a wonderful insight into how the mind of the average PSU alum/fan works. They justify everything with a simple wave of the hand, place the blame on others, call out those who 'piled on', accuse people of 'being jealous' of Penn State (even if only God can remember their last relevant season) and call out the victims, their families and those who see the big picture and are willing to stand up to the enablers. (see USMC's video ).

It's very hard to fathom how an entire region of the country has been hypnotized by a mediocre football program and a long time coach. To the point where they will say " lay off Joe - he reported it to someone in the adm! he had no responsibility after that!" Very hard to fathom, but it's very real.

Ignores the fact that HE KNEW Sandusky was a monster and still let him parade kids to HIS OWN PRACTICES. Subsequent to Paterno being alerted of Sandusky, he WATCHED Sandusky bring CHILDREN around Penn State, and gave him access very few were given. He was an accessory. And he looked the other way - because hey, he did all he could do. He said something to someone in an office who like everyone else, reported to Joe Paterno.