In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 934
Online now 169 Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)
Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game
Buy, sell and swap tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I hate this guy..
"As for the criminal case against Sandusky, he said if the school had brought it forward in 1998 and separated itself at that time, the NCAA never would have been involved."
.. He obviously did NOT read the Freeh report.
Is it bad if I honesty hope he dies in a fire?
Sincerely and wholeheartedly? With my only pause for thought being that some poor firefighter will have to put out the flames?
This post was edited by RWC5113 19 months ago
Follow me on Twitter @rayraycotto
I'd feel bad for the blades of grass that got burned.
he's a complete tool. F- him...
I don't wish ill will against anyone but I do wish for severe bodily harm for mark emmert.
If graduating 87% of student athletes is bad culture, then I don't want to be part of a good culture
“As for the criminal case against Sandusky, he said if the school had brought it forward in 1998 and separated itself at that time, the NCAA never would have been involved. The ensuring years of cover-up, he implied, caused the NCAA action.”
I’d like to see an exact quote of what Emmert said because that sentence makes no sense. Penn State reported the 1998 incident to the proper authorities. Sandusky was fully investigated and cleared. What more does he think Penn State should have done regarding 1998?
It would not surprise me at all to find out that all he read were the summaries. It wouldn’t be the first time he popped off without being fully informed. After the USC sanctions were announced, he declared that the COI “got it right.” He later had to admit that he hadn’t read any of the papers filed in that case. Apparently, Mr. Emmert doesn’t need facts to know what’s right or wrong.
The rest of what he said is just a repetition of the same BS he’s been spouting since day one.
“Freeh Report was far more comprehensive than anything the NCAA could have done and was completed in far less time. Wrong. The NCAA could have vetted the Freeh report for accuracy and also could have used it to supplement its own investigation. And since when did time matter to the NCAA? (Hint: Since Emmert cared about PR.)
“They didn’t say, 'Fine' -- that would be an exaggeration -- but they said (it was) the least worst direction for the university and it will be best for the university, relative to all the other options available for us.” That sentence there shows that Erickson was threatened with something much worse – a sign or else situation. Something Emmert has been denying.
“The current president and the leadership there are working extremely hard to get this behind them and move on and fix their culture problem.” He continues to talk about the culture problem and just makes stuff up.
“You can’t have part of an organization that’s so revered and so powerful that not only can you not control it, you can’t even ask a question,” he said. “You can’t (even) go in there and say, 'So what happened here?' Well, the NCAA didn’t even try, did it? It makes the lie that much easier to tell.
He is such a dishonest, disingenuous, publicity-seeking, snake-oil selling megalomaniac I can’t even stand to see his picture or hear his voice.
As long as you have compassion for the firefighter, I see no problem with your sincere and wholehearted hope.
Emmert may burn in hell next to Sandusky.
I know where Joe is, and it's quite cool.
F the NCAA
F the BOT
I think it's safe to say that no PSU fans would care if Emmert died a painful death...
WE ARE! And we will always be...
I'm sure that Joe is sitting in heaven, eating a big plate of spaghetti, and laughing at Mark Emmert.
Clearly we should've castrated him back then even though there was no proof and he was cleared in the incident. I'm sure the NCAA wouldn't have batted an eye at us just randomly castrating our D coordinator back then.
We would have gotten in trouble for making false accusations... Technically..
Emmert’s claims that “the Freeh report was far more comprehensive than anything the NCAA could have done and was completed in far less time” are both a lie and a red herring.
The claim that the Freeh report was more comprehensive than anything the NCAA could have done is a lie because the NCAA could have used the Freeh report, and the underlying interviews and documents as a supplement to its own investigation.
If Emmert actually read the report as he claims (and I am skeptical that he read anything more than the summaries), he should have had some questions. Like “where is the evidence of an NCAA violation” or even “where is an allegation of an NCAA violation?” Or, “Most of the principal parties weren’t interviewed – maybe they’ll talk to us.” Or, “Mike McQuery wanted to talk to the Freeh group, maybe we should give him a call.” Or, “how does a group interview 430 people and review 3.5 million pieces of paper and then write a 267 page report without a single dissenting opinion?”
So clearly, the NCAA should have had questions after reading the report and absolutely could have done an investigation and wound up with a far more comprehensive and accurate picture than the Freeh report painted.
Next, Emmert mentions that the Freeh report “was completed in far less time” than an NCAA investigation could have been done. This is a complete misdirection.
Time has never mattered to the NCAA and was completely irrelevant (except for one reason) in this case. Why was time irrelevant? Paterno was dead, McQuery was gone, Sandusky was in jail, Schultz, Curley and Spanier had been separated from the university and there was no student-athlete on the campus that was there in 2001. So any punishment meted out by the NCAA was not going to fall on what they considered the principal actors. It was going to land on the university, the athletic department and innocent student-athletes. Given that, and the NCAA’s willingness to punish the innocent, taking a year to investigate would have made no difference at all.
Except to Emmert. He had an opportunity to grandstand and by the time the trials were over, the media frenzy about Joepa would have abated. So he had to act quickly in order to get maximum publicity for his sanctimonious media tour. That’s the reason time mattered.
Why has some journalist not challenged him on those 2 simple points? They just ask about the sanctions, he spouts the same BS and they let it go. You’d think that at least there would be reporters from Pennsylvania that would challenge him.
ever see Indiana Jones and the lost Arc? When that Nazi has his face melt.... #Femmerttditto
PENN STATE FOREVER
Did you pull that quote from the article? If so they've changed it to remove the 1998. The way it reads now makes it look like if they had called the cops in 01 the NCAA wouldn't have gotten involved.
Remember, this is the moron who presides over investigators who couldn't nail Auburn for buying Cam Newton where the trace of money could have been found by some six year old kid in Bangledesh and the same investigators who couldn't trace back all the fake grades for several student-athletes at UNC. No one at the NCAA is sharp enough to conduct investigations on their own, so they have to have someone else to do it.
Yea it's been changed... But that just brings up the question of why they vacated wins back to 98. Whatever. The bottom line is that this guy is scum and can kiss my you know what.
Dont disagree with any of that.
Commenting on the subject line....you have to make an unbelievable argument for me to buy he could spew anything but nonsense
Suck It Emmert!! and "Sorry for not being sorry for being a Penn Stater" - Philafan
no i agree ray. Kony 2012? emmert 2012.
A dry Emmert is an idiot
A Emmert covered in cream cheese is still an idiot
The bad culture Freeh alludes to is partially false. Penn State had/has a great reputation for graduating its athletes; however, whether you think Paterno did enough or not, Spanier did not do enough and it can be inferred quite easily by outsiders that there was a culture of silence - which was not reporting the egregious acts meted out to these young and highly impressionable kids. To many people, that was unforgivable. As president, Spanier had the ultimate responsibility in this case to ensure that the authorities had all the information and that there were no errors in communication between the parties at Penn State and local authorities. Emmert's unilateral handling of the Penn State matter was unprecedented. He never should have forced Erickson to take his ultimatum, which essentially was death penalty of four years or sanctions. This was a criminal, not an NCAA matter. The entire Sandusky debacle is such an incredibly complicated legal case which can be parsed and interpreted in many different ways - depending upon your connections to Penn State. One thing is certain, Penn State was held to a standard never before used, while North Carolina will get away with gross academic fraud.
This post was edited by wideout 19 months ago
Not that I think the sanctions will be reduced, but Emmert's comments about how good the new administration is doing to change the bad culture would be his basis for reducing the sanctions. Even if the Curley and Schultz trials come out favorable and the resulting PR concerning PSU is more favorable, Emmert will still say the sanctions were justified and they only being reduced because the new administraion has changed the culture
You're right about Spanier, but here's the kicker on that...
IT'S NOT AN ATHLETIC ISSUE, thus rendering the NCAA out of its jurisdiction. It's a Department of Education issue then.
This isn't, nor has it ever been an athletic department issue. The athletic department, and more specifically got slammed because Mark Emmerts very good friend Vicky Triponey, whom he had hired at UConn (What's their graduation rates for Basketball?) was a disgruntled former employee of Penn State.
I firmly believe, and no one will change my mind. Mark Emmert used his position to exact revenge for his friend, and show Penn State all about their culture, which Vicky Triponey said was out of whack.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports