Quote Originally Posted by ELDubarino:
Why was Penn State not given a similar penalty to what SMU received in the 80's? What am I missing? 
Why are they all of sudden reinstating there bowl eligibility now after the season has already started? Would this have happened if they had started 0 - 2? And is it just a coincidence that this release happened on the same day as the Ray Rice Stuff? Perhaps trying to fly under the radar?
Unfortunately, you and a lot of others are missing a lot in your dislike of Penn State that pre-dates the Sandusky scandal. SMU committed football crimes. Penn State did not commit any football crimes. Here are some facts (and these are facts, not interpretations):
1. Per the NCAA policy on reporting sexual assaults, Joe Paterno did exactly what the NCAA said someone in the athletic department should do. Look what the NCAA put out regarding handling campus sexual assaults the other week for yourself. Paterno did just that.
2. The famous "kid in the shower" that Mike McQueary saw ? Did you know he had a statement to the police that he was NOT molested by Sandusky on that night McQueary thought he saw a molestation incident ? Did you know that Sandusky was NOT convicted of "rape" on that charge ? What got people going was the grand jury presentment that Mcqueary "saw and anal rape" and told Paterno. Well, McQueary NEVER testified as such. That was the attorney general writing the presentment and blatantly lying.
3. Did you know that one of Paterno's grandkids was over Sandusky's house for one of Sandusky's kid's birthday parties in 2011 ? IF anyone in the Paterno family thought Sandusky was a pedophile, do you really think they would want their little child / grandchild there ?
4. Paterno and Sandusky did not get along and did not socialize after Sanduskys' retirement in 1999 ?
5. Did you know that when asked by his superiors in 1999 about Sandusky's retirement package, Paterno said that Sandusky should not be allowed to bring his kids from his charity into football facilities because of "liability issues." Well, guess who nixed that idea and allowed access ? Rodney Erickson, the guy was recently the interim president.
6. Did you know that not one incident with Sandusky and children was on Penn State's campus following the McQueary incident in 2001 ? Not one. The media and Louis Freeh made it seem like kids were being "raped" from 2001 and before all the way to 2011 on campus. Not true. He also was not convicted of any "rape." The word "rape" outrages people and is purposely thrown around to sensationalize the story.
7. a 1998 incident regarding Sandusky and a boy in a shower was investigated by the DA and no charges filed because they did not make a molesting finding. Since there were no charges, it would have been illegal for anyone in that investigation to even tell Paterno about it! That's why he never knew about it.
8. The Board of Trustees fired Paterno and then had to hire someone to write a report to justify it - otherwise, they would look like idiots. So, they got Freeh to grandstand (calling a press conference on the Monday of baseball all-star week when there are no sporting events that day) and promote these myths that have gotten the haters and a lots of others so worked up.
9. The grand jury presentment purposely got the date of the McQueary incident wrong (they have it occurring in 2002) so that they could sneak in charges against the PSU administrators within the statute of limitations - - the record has been corrected to reflect that the actual date of the McQueary incident is March 2001. Outside of the statute and a legal issue in the case.
10. Sandusky was not employed by Penn State in 2001 - he was employed by his charity, the Second Mile. He had been retired from PSU for 2 years in 2001. Somehow, no one sued the Second Mile and the press didn't care because it's not as juicy as Paterno and Penn State.
11. You do realize that things like the Freeh Report and grand jury presentment are one-sided documents that are not cross-examined and no defenses offered ? It is like going to a trial, hearing the prosecution side, but hearing no evidence or anything from the defense. In that case, everyone would look guilty. The public did not receive the benefit of the other side because of this irresponsible rush to judgment by the media which feeds the masses.
13. Paterno told his superior what McQueary told him. McQueary talked to the AD and VP. The AD talked to the Prez. The AD told Sandusky's employer. McQueary testified that no one told him to keep quiet. How in the world is that a cover-up ?? In cover-ups, you don't tell people stuff. The simple fact of the matter is that the PSU AD talked to Sandusky about what McQueary said he saw, and then believed that Sandusky was not a molester. That's why no one went to the police. Adoption agencies let this guy adopt 6 kids. His charity knew he showered with a boy, and didn't think he was a molester but maybe had boundary issues that needed to be addressed. People got fooled. But the media and others would rather believe that people knew and covered it up rather than being rational and seeing that child molesters are in our midst every day, and we can't easily see that. That scares people and pisses them off.
14. The NCAA had no business sticking their nose in this. The crimes were by a retired football coach in a non-football matter. This is not even close to SMU.
There is so much more to this, and it is so complex.
Hate on Penn State all you want, but they did not commit any crime. The only criminal in this was an ex-employee, Sandusky, who is in jail for life.
Established in 1995,
Hot Forum Topics
