The Lions' Pride

What the hell does 04 have to with anything? Remind you almost anything you say is going to be speculation. But whatever that passes for fact nowadays.

You don't give Joe the benefit of the doubt when reports have said after reading the gj report he was shaken by the contents and that he couldn't believe that was what mcqueary was trying to tell him in 02.

Thanks. Shakespeare thanks you as well.

Just in case we have to deal with this again, as I'm sure we will, can we just go ahead & CHANGE this law right now, so that if you do see a 60 year old man raping a pre-teen boy/girl in the shower, that you have to either beat his ass so bad on the spot, until you either watch him take his final breath or you leave him lying there on the brink of his final breath, or at the very least, call 911 before you run the other way & tell your 75 year old boss?

I want to side with the Penn State faithful so badly & agree with them on the media, b/c every damn one of you knows that once a story breaks, if the media can turn it into either a reoccurring clip on it's nightly news, or a marathon event of breaking news which people watching won't be able to turn off, & will go to ANY lengths in order to accomplish this, even if that is making a legend of a coach out to be no better than a child predator, b/c the child predator isn't famous enough to cover the story otherwise. Not to mention, I want to believe that Joe couldn't have had any inkling about any of this b/c he had nothing to lose by throwing Sandusky to the wolves if he had just turned him in immediately.

The only thing that keeps eating at me is the comments Joe has made since this whole event started & the way he's treated the last several weeks while getting the record, finally allowing it all to sink in as if he truly could be retiring now. All he would have to do is come out and defend his actions, throw the damn blame on whoever he thinks deserves it, and explain why he felt like he was under the impression that Sandusky was, in fact, cleared of all these charges. Because, otherwise, it means either his GA who's now still with him & has moved up on his staff, was lying that night, or Sandusky was, and he's allowed both of them to remain close to the program, if not a direct part of it.

Thank you for sharing. I'm going to sleep so much better tonight.

Hey guys, I got a ton of crap for stating this today but I really think that JoePa was the victim of a rush to judgement. Not necessarily because he did or did not do anything wrong, but because there are a few key unanswered questions in this situation. I've felt that the vitriol directed towards JoePa is because people have a natural tendency to believe a person like Sandusky must have gotten help, or somebody let it happen, for some reason that ire turned to JoePa because he was the man on top and he reported the incident. I've noticed there are two leaps of judgement being made.

1. Joepa knew about the 1998 incident. While it would be hard to imagine he didn't, there is no evidence pointing that he did.

2. What was he told after MM met with AD/VP? People assume that since there was no "action" after that meeting, he should have taken matters into his own hands. Personally I believe he was told that it was all a big misunderstanding and thus he left it at that. He had no reason to go Perry Mason.

Dunno what you guys think of this, but I'd love to get your opinion.

It is astonishing how uninformed people are. Not that it's any if their faults, there is just SO much misinformation being spewed. Believe me folks, specifically outsiders, you have not received the full, correct story.

Any ideas what the full and correct story might be?

Just ask Paterno if, when told by McQueary that it was his own grandson being assaulted by an unknown individual, would he have gone to the police?

That's all you need to know.

Wrong or inaccurate? Your line about what Joe was told is inaccurate because we don't know what Joe was told.

How about you go read the grand jury report. He was told something was going on, and if there was a 1 in a million chance a 10 year old boy was being raped, you call the police. And to bring up "your board" is about as retarded as it gets. This is a case that effects everyone in this country, so to think that anyone should stay on their "board" to discuss it is asinine and immature.

undoubtedly did great things for 60 years, agreed. The FACT is that he did not do what he should have done. That is why its in the news. It being in the news is why he is fired. A big time university can not and will not have there name associated with this for months on end to allow a coach to finish gracefully. Sadly money talks and universities are a business. The almighty dollar trumps 60yrs of allegiance.

Thanks for the name calling and personal attack, very mature. Was it you helping tip the news van?

and for the record, plenty of you enjoyed our troubles. I have even seen the neat tshirts you guys had made.

So you haven't read the grand jury report. Thats all you had to say. And you explaining law to me is a hilarious thought. I understand you're upset at the situation, i know the fan base is in shock, I understand loyalty, but your blind faith and loyalty can only go so far in this situation. Not to mention your discussion tactics lack any kind of cooth. The man was told about something happening to a 10 year old boy and did nothing but tell his boss. If there was a 1 in a million chance it was something like its turned out to be, he should of called the police immediately. I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about that.