The End of JoePa in Penn State

Dodge

me-skywalker wrote: »

How is reducing the scholarship going to help poorer students getting an education and avoid falling out of the system and into petty crime, organised crime or other criminal related activities. How exactly does this punish the University?

So everyone on a scholarship is destined for a life of crime? There's 20 less football scholarships in the NCAA system (where there's about 15,000 each year).

By vacating all the wins does that mean the NCAA think that the players/coaches cheated used illegal drugs?

Oh my god

Rented Mule

me-skywalker wrote: »

I agree with some of the penalties and not others, some of the others.

How is reducing the scholarship going to help poorer students getting an education and avoid falling out of the system and into petty crime, organised crime or other criminal related activities. How exactly does this punish the University?

By vacating all the wins does that mean the NCAA think that the players/coaches cheated used illegal drugs?

If they are good enough to play NCAA football for Penn State, then there should be dozens of other schools lined up to offer them scholarships.

Again, the vacating the team wins is more a slap at Joe Paterno than anything else. They take away the right to market him as the 'winningest coach in NCAA history'.

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

If they are good enough to play NCAA football for Penn State, then there should be dozens of other schools lined up to offer them scholarships.

Again, the vacating the team wins is more a slap at Joe Paterno than anything else. They take away the right to market him as the 'winningest coach in NCAA history'.

This is seriously p1ssing me off and I wish people would do their homework before sprouting nonsense. Players can't just up and leave and find a new school. The player must ask to leave and another school must come in and ask for the player. Also other schools are limited to 25 in their recruiting class and 85 overall so that means other schools if already 85 will have to cut someone in order to fill a spot for a Penn State player or signed recruit. The NCAA have allowed the scholarship to carry over without penalty but the restrictions on numbers allowed are still in place. Seriously do your homework.

Now take all of the above into account it wont be easy for players to find new schools contrary to what people assume. Don't forget Penn State have varying levels as will other schools so the big names will probably find schools willing to take them but the more you move down the pecking order the less players will find new schools willing.

Dodge

CoachTO wrote: »

Now take all of the above into account it wont be easy for players to find new schools contrary to what people assume. Don't forget Penn State have varying levels as will other schools so the big names will probably find schools willing to take them but the more you move down the pecking order the less players will find new schools willing.

You're assuming they all want to leave. Plenty of players will want to stay as Penn State is still a good college academically. Any NFL bound players will either move, or remain there knowing that their play will stand out regardless of how many bowls the school goes to. Look at all the d2 playesr who make the draft.

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

This is seriously p1ssing me off and I wish people would do their homework before sprouting nonsense. Players can't just up and leave and find a new school. The player must ask to leave and another school must come in and ask for the player. Also other schools are limited to 25 in their recruiting class and 85 overall so that means other schools if already 85 will have to cut someone in order to fill a spot for a Penn State player or signed recruit. The NCAA have allowed the scholarship to carry over without penalty but the restrictions on numbers allowed are still in place. Seriously do your homework.

Now take all of the above into account it wont be easy for players to find new schools contrary to what people assume. Don't forget Penn State have varying levels as will other schools so the big names will probably find schools willing to take them but the more you move down the pecking order the less players will find new schools willing.

If they are good enough to play elsewhere, teams will find a home for them. We're talking about the NCAA here.

Let's us also reiterate the fact that Penn State will be playing football as scheduled next season. Every one of these players are having their scholarships honored during the time that they play for the University.

Syferus

The removal of the wins seem to be that, yeah. Some way of trying to get back at someone long gone from their reach. The collateral damage of that alone is tough for the players who played in the years between 1998 and 2011, being wrote out of history because of something that had no relation to what happened on the field.

Beyond every other sanction, the rest of which are at least morally (if not legally) just, that's a little heavy-handed. It sets a very strange precedent.

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

If they are good enough to play elsewhere, teams will find a home for them. We're talking about the NCAA here.

Let's us also reiterate the fact that Penn State will be playing football as scheduled next season. Every one of these players are having their scholarships honored during the time that they play for the University.

Yes I know they are playing games but the fact of the matter is most of the student athletes that go to a school like Penn State is because of the size of the program the fact they are top football school and the fact they can hold their own up there with the best. This then gets them better exposure due to TV and the media and the fact if they make a big impact at the highest level in a school Like Penn State they draw interest by scout which ultimately leads to the NFL.

Penn State as it stands now is going to be a shadow of its former self in the next couple of years and the worst place to be for most of those guys who strive to go Pro.

And stop banging out the if you are good enough line. Plenty of guys good enough but caps on the amount of scholarships allowed in a roster spot will mean plenty of schools even if they want Penn state players wont be able to house them.

As for the education side of things lets face it most of the D1 players education is 2nd on their mind to going pro.

me-skywalker

Dodge wrote: »

So everyone on a scholarship is destined for a life of crime? There's 20 less football scholarships in the NCAA system (where there's about 15,000 each year).

Ok well that was probably a stupid example and a tenous link, but the point is there. Who really is it punishing?

CoachTO

Dodge wrote: »

You're assuming they all want to leave. Plenty of players will want to stay as Penn State is still a good college academically. Any NFL bound players will either move, or remain there knowing that their play will stand out regardless of how many bowls the school goes to. Look at all the d2 playesr who make the draft.

Small % of guys go to D1 schools for the academics. And I think you will find the majority of the non D1 guys in the Draft are FCS schools or D1AA as it used to be called and out of what near 400 players only around 20 of them are non D1. Most of them are there because of the team they played for at a lower level. Teams that dominate the lower divisions with big reputations which actually leads to my point.

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

Yes I know they are playing games but the fact of the matter is most of the student athletes that go to a school like Penn State is because of the size of the program the fact they are top football school and the fact they can hold their own up there with the best. This then gets them better exposure due to TV and the media and the fact if they make a big impact at the highest level in a school Like Penn State they draw interest by scout which ultimately leads to the NFL.

Penn State as it stands now is going to be a shadow of its former self in the next couple of years and the worst place to be for most of those guys who strive to go Pro.

And stop banging out the if you are good enough line. Plenty of guys good enough but caps on the amount of scholarships allowed in a roster spot will mean plenty of schools even if they want Penn state players wont be able to house them.

As for the education side of things lets face it most of the D1 players education is 2nd on their mind to going pro.

It is ironic that Penn State tied with Stanford for the highest graduation rates amongst Top 25 D-1 football programs.

I also understand that it is the dream of a lot of these guys to go pro. Pro Scouts have been watching most kids since they were in high school. 1-AA is also an option for some of these kids.

In saying all of that, what better way to show that you are pro-ready than by standing out on a horse**** team in one of the better conferences in the nation.

I still think you are going to find other NCAA programs cherry-picking a good bunch of the starters at Penn State. They may not all be ranked programs, but they'll be places for them.

davyjose

Rented Mule wrote: »

Legacies outlive all of us. The university will never be able to 'market' the Joe Paterno legacy as the 'winningest coach in NCAA football history'.

And yet my point about regular ball players legacies being wiped off the records is BS? You're contradicting yourself. Why is Paterno's legacy the only one that matters?

davyjose

Rented Mule wrote: »

The writing was on the wall. These players knew what was coming. If football is the only reason that they were at Penn State, then they should have been prepared for the worst.




Any player of this level is going to have multiple universities interested in them. They'll have no problem finding a high profile program to play for.



That's honestly laughable. How does the record being vacated effect someone ten years later ? It doesn't.

I will post this again. The NCAA just gave every single Penn State football player the greatest gift in the world. Every one of these football players can get up and walk away from the greatest sports scandal to ever happen in college sports. They can attend the college/university of their choice. They can continue to play football. They get to graduate from a university and receive a diploma that doesn't have Penn State University on it. They get to go to job interviews for the rest of their lives and not have to put Penn State University on their resumes. It's Christmas in Happy Valley Pa. if you are a football player.

I'm aware the School fired paterno and co. but if the writing was on the wall surely a decision on the players future could have been expedited.

Guys, nobody here thinks that what happened is acceptable. But the punishments doled out this week affect the innocent students as much, or more, than the guys at fault here.

matthew8

The thing is if the NCAA gives out 20 less scholarships to Penn State, the players who would've been going to Penn State may be able to get one elsewhere, but at some point down the line, and it could be anywhere in the nation, 20 kids are going to miss out on scholarships because of Joe Paterno and Jerry Sandusky. That's not right.

There's also the issue that the Penn State academic departments will be damaged because this punishment is ruining the popularity of Penn State. The 60 million dollar fine isn't the end of the monetary cost for Penn State either. They will be getting less ticket and TV money than they used to.

Rented Mule

matthew8 wrote: »

There's also the issue that the Penn State academic departments will be damaged because this punishment is ruining the popularity of Penn State. The 60 million dollar fine isn't the end of the monetary cost for Penn State either. They will be getting less ticket and TV money than they used to.

The TV money is still there. They'll still reap the windfall from the conference contract and the Big Ten Network.

As far as ticket revenues, that's up to the 'fans' of Penn State to decide. You may be surprised to see more visiting team fans traveling to Happy Valley since tickets may be available now.

Edit - scratch that - Home games against Navy, Temple. Northwestern. Indiana and Wisconsin. They would have issues drawing without the sanctions.

Rented Mule

davyjose wrote: »

I'm aware the School fired paterno and co. but if the writing was on the wall surely a decision on the players future could have been expedited.

Guys, nobody here thinks that what happened is acceptable. But the punishments doled out this week affect the innocent students as much, or more, than the guys at fault here.

We're all on the same page with that.

I'm not sure what the NCAA could have done to expedite this ruling. With the majority of the sanctions being based on Penn State's own internal investigation.

Rented Mule

davyjose wrote: »

And yet my point about regular ball players legacies being wiped off the records is BS? You're contradicting yourself. Why is Paterno's legacy the only one that matters?

I am in no way contradicting myself.

Paterno's name was a money maker for the university for decades. By vacating the wins he no longer is the 'winningest coach in NCAA history' They can no longer cash in on his name in that regard.

Name one player in that time frame that is going to lose money/football career over the decision to vacate those wins ?

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

Edit - scratch that - Home games against Navy, Temple. Northwestern. Indiana and Wisconsin. They would have issues drawing without the sanctions.

I fail to see what gives you the impressions those home games will fail to draw people without sanctions:

Temple are in Philly and they draw big crowds when they play each other. 53,000+ went to see them in Lincoln Financial field last year. It will be the home fans that let them down but they will easily get 50% of the stadium full if not more. For the record in 2009 and 2010 they had 100k+ at the corresponding fixture.

Northwestern: 2010 attendance 100k+

Navy: I couldnt be arsed going back to find when they last played.

Indiana: Always get good crowds pre sanction for this game also. In 2010 they played in Fedex Field to a near 79,000 capacity.

Wisconsin are one of the biggest Big Ten schools and Highly doubt they will have a problem getting a big crowd at it as they always did before sanctions.

So whatever about looking into the future and assuming the attendances will drop which they most likely will. But saying they would have problems without the sanctions when history tells otherwise is silly. Again you really should have looked it up.

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

I fail to see what gives you the impressions those home games will fail to draw people without sanctions:

Temple are in Philly and they draw big crowds when they play each other. 53,000+ went to see them in Lincoln Financial field last year. It will be the home fans that let them down but they will easily get 50% of the stadium full if not more. For the record in 2009 and 2010 they had 100k+ at the corresponding fixture.

Northwestern: 2010 attendance 100k+

Navy: I couldnt be arsed going back to find when they last played.

Indiana: Always get good crowds pre sanction for this game also. In 2010 they played in Fedex Field to a near 79,000 capacity.

Wisconsin are one of the biggest Big Ten schools and Highly doubt they will have a problem getting a big crowd at it as they always did before sanctions.

So whatever about looking into the future and assuming the attendances will drop which they most likely will. But saying they would have problems without the sanctions when history tells otherwise is silly. Again you really should have looked it up.

My point was that, if the alleged fans of Penn State were not going to show up, as pointed out by a previous poster, then there may possibly be more road teams fans traveling to Happy Valley. Some of the teams they are playing, are not known for having large touring fans bases.

Is it that hard to figure out?

JaMarcus Hustle

Rented Mule wrote: »

We're all on the same page with that.

I'm not sure what the NCAA could have done to expedite this ruling. With the majority of the sanctions being based on Penn State's own internal investigation.

You don't think the Freeh Report was an internal investigation, do you?

Have you read it?

JaMarcus Hustle

Rented Mule wrote: »

My point was that, if the alleged fans of Penn State were not going to show up, as pointed out by a previous poster, then there may possibly be more road teams fans traveling to Happy Valley. Some of the teams they are playing, are not known for having large touring fans bases.

Is it that hard to figure out?

Lol @ your use of the word alleged.

You're questioning their fandom now? You do realise that Penn State have already sold more season tickets for 2012 already than they did for 2011? You do realise they have the largest alumni association of any college in the world? And you do realise that is no difference between the freshman enrollment figures of last compared to this year?

Of course you're not. I think you know absolutely nothing about Penn State tbh.

Rented Mule

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

You don't think the Freeh Report was an internal investigation, do you?

Have you read it?

Are you serious ? Do you have any idea who commissioned the Freeh Report ?

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/20120723/21207233

As a result of information produced from the Sandusky criminal investigation and the Freeh Report, which Penn State commissioned and also agreed to its findings, it became obvious that the leadership failures at Penn State over an extended period of time directly violated Association bylaws and the NCAA Constitution relating to control over the athletic department, integrity and ethical conduct.

Rented Mule

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

Lol @ your use of the word alleged.

You're questioning their fandom now? You do realise that Penn State have already sold more season tickets for 2012 already than they did for 2011? You do realise they have the largest alumni association of any college in the world? And you do realise that is no difference between the freshman enrollment figures of last compared to this year?

Of course you're not. I think you know absolutely nothing about Penn State tbh.

It was in regards to a statement that the original poster who stated that they would lose money on tickets and television revenues. You can scroll up and see what I was responding to.

JaMarcus Hustle

Rented Mule wrote: »

Are you serious ? Do you have any idea who commissioned the Freeh Report ?

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/20120723/21207233

As a result of information produced from the Sandusky criminal investigation and the Freeh Report, which Penn State commissioned and also agreed to its findings, it became obvious that the leadership failures at Penn State over an extended period of time directly violated Association bylaws and the NCAA Constitution relating to control over the athletic department, integrity and ethical conduct.

Wow, seriously? You think because Penn State commissioned the report, it's therefore an internal report? Do you know what an internal report even means?!

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

My point was that, if the alleged fans of Penn State were not going to show up, as pointed out by a previous poster, then there may possibly be more road teams fans traveling to Happy Valley. Some of the teams they are playing, are not known for having large touring fans bases.

Is it that hard to figure out?

Oh I am sorry for reading your post at face value wrong. You clearly said:

Edit - scratch that - Home games against Navy, Temple. Northwestern. Indiana and Wisconsin. They would have issues drawing without the sanctions.

Had Penn State not got hit with any sanctions Im almost sure they would draw the same crowds they always have.

But ok lets play your game. You can take Temple off your list as they are in Pennsylvania and travel well. Navy are in Maryland so not that far too travel and Naval officers and Alumni and students tend to travel to games better than they do at home. Indiana's and Wisconsin fans travel well according to a friend who is a Badger Alumn I just text and for the amount of seats they are given always come close to filling their allocation in most stadiums. Wisconsin usually have around 4-5k students and alum go to their bigger games.

But remember this Penn State have always depended on their home fans anyways as 95k of those fans are home fans usually home fans. They usually have between 3-10k away fans there from the away team depending on the size of the college and the importance of the game.

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

Are you serious ? Do you have any idea who commissioned the Freeh Report ?

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/20120723/21207233

As a result of information produced from the Sandusky criminal investigation and the Freeh Report, which Penn State commissioned and also agreed to its findings, it became obvious that the leadership failures at Penn State over an extended period of time directly violated Association bylaws and the NCAA Constitution relating to control over the athletic department, integrity and ethical conduct.

I'm failing to see what you are trying to conclude by pointing out that Penn State commissioned the report. They have to commission to allow any investigation happen. It shows they were willing to be transparent by allowing an independant report to be created by Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan LLC. It was nowhere near being an internal investigation. Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan have nothing to do with Penn State other than the fact they investigated the University and the Sandusky case at the request of the college. Doesn't make it "internal"

JaMarcus Hustle

CoachTO wrote: »

I'm failing to see what you are trying to conclude by pointing out that Penn State commissioned the report. They have to commission to allow any investigation happen. It shows they were willing to be transparent by allowing an independant report to be created by Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan LLC. It was nowhere near being an internal investigation. Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan have nothing to do with Penn State other than the fact they investigated the University and the Sandusky case at the request of the college. Doesn't make it "internal"

He clearly hasn't even bothered to read the report, or even glance at it. If he did, he might just have seen Page 11.

Internal report :pac:

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

Oh I am sorry for reading your post at face value wrong. You clearly said:.

The term is 'out of context'. I was referring to the fans of these road teams. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.

Had Penn State not got hit with any sanctions Im almost sure they would draw the same crowds they always have.

I do not question that at all. I would agree 100% that these fans would still support this program after all of the allegations and the Freeh report.

But ok lets play your game. You can take Temple off your list as they are in Pennsylvania and travel well. Navy are in Maryland so not that far too travel and Naval officers and Alumni and students tend to travel to games better than they do at home. Indiana's and Wisconsin fans travel well according to a friend who is a Badger Alumn I just text and for the amount of seats they are given always come close to filling their allocation in most stadiums. Wisconsin usually have around 4-5k students and alum go to their bigger games.

But remember this Penn State have always depended on their home fans anyways as 95k of those fans are home fans usually home fans. They usually have between 3-10k away fans there from the away team depending on the size of the college and the importance of the game.

Indiana doesn't travel well (especially late in the season with nothing on the line), nor does Northwestern. Ohio U ?They are the three that jumped off the page when I read the schedule.

I'll take your word on Temple. I've never thought of them as a 'football powerhouse'.

Wisconsin and Ohio State obviously travel well.

JaMarcus Hustle

In other news...

"In a twist of bitter irony, NCAA punishes Penn State by pretending the last thirteen years didn't happen; "Touche," mutters the ghost of Joe Paterno."

:pac:

Rented Mule

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

He clearly hasn't even bothered to read the report, or even glance at it. If he did, he might just have seen Page 11.

Internal report :pac:

CoachTO wrote: »

I'm failing to see what you are trying to conclude by pointing out that Penn State commissioned the report. They have to commission to allow any investigation happen. It shows they were willing to be transparent by allowing an independant report to be created by Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan LLC. It was nowhere near being an internal investigation. Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan have nothing to do with Penn State other than the fact they investigated the University and the Sandusky case at the request of the college. Doesn't make it "internal"

Every major news source in North America has described the Freeh Report as Penn States Internal Investigation

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8157705/penn-state-nittany-lions-joe-paterno-defends-football-program-pre-death-letter

The results of Penn State's internal investigation into the Sandusky scandal are set to be released Thursday in a report that should answer many of the troubling questions swirling around one of the worst scandals in sports history.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444330904577537793122568460.html

An internal investigation by former FBI Director Louis Freeh found that Garban was briefed twice about developments in the Sandusky case but didn't share what he knew with the entire board, depriving trustees of a chance to prepare for the worst crisis in Penn State's 157-year history.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/12/us/penn-state-report-excerpts/index.html

(CNN) -- Here are some key passages from a report on an internal Penn State review into how the school handled allegations of child sex abuse by assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/12/report-by-former-fbi-director-finds-that-penn-state-disregarded-children/

Hall of Fame coach Joe Paterno, right, and other senior officials "concealed critical facts" about Jerry Sandusky's child abuse because they were worried about bad publicity, according to an internal investigation into the scandal. (AP)

Rented Mule

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

In other news..:pac:

That's a good one. That was funny.

I like the one where they mention that Paterno's name will remain on the library to remind everyone to 'remain silent'.

Rented Mule

JaMarcus Hustle wrote: »

He clearly hasn't even bothered to read the report, or even glance at it. If he did, he might just have seen Page 11.

Internal report :pac:

Actually, I have read page 11 in the past. It is honestly, the one saving grace of the entire investigation. I really respect Frazier and everything that he has stated from the beginning, all the way up to the announcing of the Freeh report findings.

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

Every major news source in North America has described the Freeh Report as Penn States Internal Investigation

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8157705/penn-state-nittany-lions-joe-paterno-defends-football-program-pre-death-letter

The results of Penn State's internal investigation into the Sandusky scandal are set to be released Thursday in a report that should answer many of the troubling questions swirling around one of the worst scandals in sports history.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444330904577537793122568460.html

An internal investigation by former FBI Director Louis Freeh found that Garban was briefed twice about developments in the Sandusky case but didn't share what he knew with the entire board, depriving trustees of a chance to prepare for the worst crisis in Penn State's 157-year history.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/12/us/penn-state-report-excerpts/index.html

(CNN) -- Here are some key passages from a report on an internal Penn State review into how the school handled allegations of child sex abuse by assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/12/report-by-former-fbi-director-finds-that-penn-state-disregarded-children/

Hall of Fame coach Joe Paterno, right, and other senior officials "concealed critical facts" about Jerry Sandusky's child abuse because they were worried about bad publicity, according to an internal investigation into the scandal. (AP)

Yeah but the American media will sensationalise everything to make it news worthy or try look for the conspiracy in something. Even if it wasn't commissioned by Penn State I bet you anything the American media would have found a link to Penn state somehow.

JaMarcus Hustle

Rented Mule wrote: »

Actually, I have read page 11 in the past. It is honestly, the one saving grace of the entire investigation. I really respect Frazier and everything that he has stated from the beginning, all the way up to the announcing of the Freeh report findings.

Well I would think ESPN, CNN etc. are factually incorrect to call this an internal investigation. The fact that the report sets aside a module on it's independence means it's just lazy journalism. Most universities have internal audit offices for HR - if this were an internal report, that staff would have presented this report. The fact that the report sets aside a module to present it's independence is enough for me.

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

Yeah but the American media will sensationalise everything to make it news worthy or try look for the conspiracy in something. Even if it wasn't commissioned by Penn State I bet you anything the American media would have found a link to Penn state somehow.

Oh, it's the Americans. That's what it is. All of those Americans coming down on an American university for ratings.

So what about this one ?

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2011/11/sandusky_cover_up_why_is_kenneth_frazier_leading_the_investigation_at_penn_state_.html


Penn State University trustee and Merck CEO Kenneth Frazier will chair the internal committee investigating the Sandusky case

Late last week, the university’s trustees announced they would conduct their own “full and complete” investigation into the matter. The probe will be headed, though, by a man with a track record of protecting powerful institutions from the consequences of their inaction: the chairman and CEO of the Merck pharmaceutical company, Kenneth C. Frazier. A Penn State alum and Harvard-trained lawyer, Frazier is best known for his phenomenal success in defending a sordid chapter in Merck’s recent past—its years-long silence about the safety problems of the popular painkiller Vioxx.

Seriously. Give over. The Freeh Report is Penn State's Internal Investigation.

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

Yeah but the American media will sensationalise everything to make it news worthy or try look for the conspiracy in something. Even if it wasn't commissioned by Penn State I bet you anything the American media would have found a link to Penn state somehow.

Who is looking for a conspiracy now ? lol

I understand what you are trying to say though.

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

Oh, it's the Americans. That's what it is. All of those Americans coming down on an American university for ratings.

The fook are you talking about. The American Media are notorious for looking for stories behind anything. Anything for a news story. You would want to be stupid or naive or both to believe otherwise.

So what about this one ?

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2011/11/sandusky_cover_up_why_is_kenneth_frazier_leading_the_investigation_at_penn_state_.html


Penn State University trustee and Merck CEO Kenneth Frazier will chair the internal committee investigating the Sandusky case

Late last week, the university’s trustees announced they would conduct their own “full and complete” investigation into the matter. The probe will be headed, though, by a man with a track record of protecting powerful institutions from the consequences of their inaction: the chairman and CEO of the Merck pharmaceutical company, Kenneth C. Frazier. A Penn State alum and Harvard-trained lawyer, Frazier is best known for his phenomenal success in defending a sordid chapter in Merck’s recent past—its years-long silence about the safety problems of the popular painkiller Vioxx.

This proves nothing. In fact it was him and another who brought Freeh and his associates in. You can call it internal all you like but you are sounding more and more like fox news. Freeh and his team are an independent body hired by the Investigation committee which Frazier headed.

Seriously. Give over. The Freeh Report is Penn State's Internal Investigation.

Yeah alright :rolleyes: I actually asked you earlier why you brought this up and you avoided the question. I fail to see the relevance of saying it is an internal investigation. If it was they have done a horrible job protecting the school considering how stupid the school looks and how much the NCAA raped them.

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

Who is looking for a conspiracy now ? lol

I understand what you are trying to say though.

Looking for conspiracy? Yes that is what I am doing. But that is common knowledge with at least one of the news sources you mentioned i.e Fox. As I say you would want to be stupid or naive to think the American mainstrem media doesn't report ****e for the sake of it and are always linked with nonsense conspiracies.

frostie500

It is my understanding that the Freeh report was commissioned by Penn State but was an independent investigation to get the full facts of the case to come to light. The university paid for the investigation so I can understand how it can be seen as an "internal investigation" but it was not done by University officials and was instead done by a highly regarded third party

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

Yeah alright :rolleyes: I actually asked you earlier why you brought this up and you avoided the question. I fail to see the relevance of saying it is an internal investigation. If it was they have done a horrible job protecting the school considering how stupid the school looks and how much the NCAA raped them.

Protecting the school ???

The idea of the investigation was transparency. It was the entire University coming clean. It had nothing to do with 'protecting' the university (as Paterno and company tried to do) it was about getting the truth out.

I honestly am at a loss with your statement. Are you saying that an 'internal investigation' should have been used as a 'cover-up' ?

Rented Mule

frostie500 wrote: »

It is my understanding that the Freeh report was commissioned by Penn State but was an independent investigation to get the full facts of the case to come to light. The university paid for the investigation so I can understand how it can be seen as an "internal investigation" but it was not done by University officials and was instead done by a highly regarded third party

The University considers this as their investigation. I've quoted five different sources to prove this point.

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

Looking for conspiracy? Yes that is what I am doing. But that is common knowledge with at least one of the news sources you mentioned i.e Fox. As I say you would want to be stupid or naive to think the American mainstrem media doesn't report ****e for the sake of it and are always linked with nonsense conspiracies.

I quoted the major news sources. I will 100% agree that Fox news is a steaming pile, but in the interest of fairness, I added them along with the others.

frostie500

Rented Mule wrote: »

The University considers this as their investigation. I've quoted five different sources to prove this point.

On the FreeReportPSU.com website it seems pretty clear that Penn State consider the report to be an independent report that they commissioned given the fact that it clearly states on the homepage:

The independent report by Louis Freeh and his law firm, Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, into the facts and circumstances of the actions of The Pennsylvania State University surrounding the child abuse committed by a former employee, Gerald A. Sandusky.

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

Protecting the school ???

The idea of the investigation was transparency. It was the entire University coming clean. It had nothing to do with 'protecting' the university (as Paterno and company tried to do) it was about getting the truth out.

I honestly am at a loss with your statement. Are you saying that an 'internal investigation' should have been used as a 'cover-up' ?

If it were true about it being an Internal Investigation it would have been as transparent as a brick wall. Guys like Frazier are guys who will do everything in their power to give the idea of transparency but also control the damage done by making sure nothing else comes to light that will destroy the Universities reputation even more than needs be.

Had Frazier written or controlled that report I guarantee you it wouldn't be as detailed as it was and you can guarantee they would have stuff still hidden away or manipulated to suit Penn State. When a company hires guys like Frazier an internal investigation is all about making the company look rosey and sh1t at the same time.

Hence why I say if it was an internal investigation they did a horrible job by letting the full truth come out in the Freeh report. Frazier only role was to head the committee which lead to the hiring of Freeh.

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

If it were true about it being an Internal Investigation it would have been as transparent as a brick wall. Guys like Frazier are guys who will do everything in their power to give the idea of transparency but also control the damage done by making sure nothing else comes to light that will destroy the Universities reputation even more than needs be.

Had Frazier written or controlled that report I guarantee you it wouldn't be as detailed as it was and you can guarantee they would have stuff still hidden away or manipulated to suit Penn State. When a company hires guys like Frazier an internal investigation is all about making the company look rosey and sh1t at the same time.

Hence why I say if it was an internal investigation they did a horrible job by letting the full truth come out in the Freeh report. Frazier only role was to head the committee which lead to the hiring of Freeh.

So, are you saying that the University should have hid all knowledge/destroyed all records of the cover-up ?

eagle eye

Rented Mule wrote: »

So, are you saying that the University should have hid all knowledge/destroyed all records of the cover-up ?

How on earth do you make that out from his post

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

So, are you saying that the University should have hid all knowledge/destroyed all records of the cover-up ?

I didn't say they should have done anything. I re-read what I wrote just to be sure I didn't say something wrong or confusing but nope seems clear to me and no mistakes made. No idea where you got any of that from.

Rented Mule

eagle eye wrote: »

How on earth do you make that out from his post

CoachTO wrote: »

Hence why I say if it was an internal investigation they did a horrible job by letting the full truth come out in the Freeh report.

That's what I am reading in to .

Rented Mule

CoachTO wrote: »

I didn't say they should have done anything. I re-read what I wrote just to be sure I didn't say something wrong or confusing but nope seems clear to me and no mistakes made.

OK. I apologize then for misinterpreting what you were trying to say.

CoachTO

Rented Mule wrote: »

That's what I am reading in to .

Are you kidding me? that sentence only works in the context of the whole piece I wrote. Easy to take it out on its own and make it look like something completely different. Talk about taking something out of context.

JaMarcus Hustle

I think people should read the module of the report that specifically refers to it's independence. That should clear it up 100%. I would copy and paste it in here, but that damn Louis Freeh has prevented it from being copyable!

(There are ways around that of course, but he's a lawyer - I shall not risk it! :pac:)