The Lions' Pride

Agreed. The NCAA bluffed, Erickson folded. I hope it comes out in the discovery process.

Because he didn't know about Sandusky in 1999. To him, Sandusky was as the whole world saw him at that time.

Did you not read this thread? I don't know why you're even trying.

Rod Erickson is a good, smart guy who gets it. {rolling eyeballs}

I was being sarcastic about him knowing. My point was EVERYONE including Erickson, Joe, Spanier, Curley, and Schultz knew the same thing about Sandusky. Well Schultz knew more as he was part of the investigation.

It's funny you give Erickson the benefit of the doubt and the likelihood he knew was about the same as Joe's, yet Erickson gets promoted (after signing off on Sandusky's access) and Joe gets fired (who had absolutely nothing to do with Sandusky).

Hell, just for PR purposes Erickson should have been fired just because his signature was on the Sandusky papers. Funny how the media never got a hold of that one. The general public still thinks it was all Joe's doing - allowing Sandusky on campus. Rod is much more responsible for Sandusky being on campus than Joe.

You can keep typing until your fingures bleed I will never ever say Erickson is an innocent bystander in this. Like I said before there are people more responsible but Erickson is not totally absolved HE SIGNED THE F'NG DECREE without the authority to do it. PERIOD!

I will never change your opinion and you will never change mine. I belong to PS4RS and want every board member who was serving at the time Paterno was fired to either resign or get fired. Neither is happening except for the alumni seats.

Even though Erickson may not have been on the board on that day (close I don't remember when he was promoted) I put him in that category. We need to clean house and that includes him. Sorry. If you are his child, spouse, friend, whatever your connection is with him he needs to go.

I'll say it again. The only board memebers I don't blame are Lubrano, McCombie, and Taliaferro. Clemens is redeeming himself. Everyone else must go or speak the truth about the Freeh report.

You agree the Freeh report is biased crap, right?

I would venture to say that you are completely missing his point. This isn't a black or white issue. Does Erickson deserve blame? Plenty of it, actually. However, you are missing that he has absolutely no freedom to act on his own, as he is beholden to the BOT.

As for PS4RS, why do they focus on the night Paterno was fired? They've done that since the beginning of all of this. Why are they not focused on March 31st, 2011, when the Sandusky grand jury was leaked and was tied to PSU. Ganim's report that day should have lit some light bulbs in the heads of BOT members, yet most deny ever reading it. What about November 5th, 2011, when the grand jury presentation was leaked? That's the night all of this started in the public eye.

Someone stated this earlier, but that vote to fire Paterno was far from unanimous. I guarantee that. Anyone who has taken a Psych 101 class or followed politics for any period of time should be able to understand that. There are bad apples, certainly, but the entire tree isn't infected.

Lastly, Erickson signing off on Sandusky's retirement package is a useless piece of ammo against Rod. Erickson knew nothing of the investigation, and had no reason to suspect anything other than Sandusky was a truly upstanding citizen. And, for those who believe that Erickson had to have known or should be held accountable for signing off on the package, how is that train of thought any different than all the Paterno detractors who believe that he had to have known and should be held accountable?

I was looking for the PSU hockey thread, can anyone point me in the right direction?

Because he lied. Emmert, Erickson and Marsh said it was on the table. Ray never disputed their claims. His lie came like the day of sanctions or the day after, yet he never said that Emmert, Erickson or Marsh were wrong.

On a side note, I think it was Bilas that said he talked to a number on college presidents. Not one agreed to what Emmret did to PSU.

I think now that the anger has waned, more people are able to look at this thing logically and see that the NCAA not only overstepped their boundaries, but also bullied PSU through this process. Just as they did with Miami.

I agree that the root of the problem was the BOT giving Freeh too much lattitude. If we were to go with him, his job should have been to find compliance issues and just stop at that. Allowing him to render an opinion on the matter wouldn't have accomplished anything, even if he said "hey, this was all just a misunderstanding". The decision to not even view/dispute his findings is mind boggling. Despite the PR issues that undoubtly forced them into many decisions, that is something that cannot be forgiven in my mind.

I don't agree with you thoug that he was more involved with Sandusky than Paterno. Certainly not when it deals with what happened in 2001. As Joshlax says, Erickson signing off on Sandsuky's retirement package is usless information. Every organization has an approval path for these kind of things and Erickson just happened to be on it. As there is zero evidence that he knew anything about 1998, I cannot see how anyone can fault him for approving the package for someone who was seen as a pillar of the community.

Regardless of what the feeling is, the NCAA wanted the DP. It doesn't matter if the public is now on our side... if we didn't have football last year, it would be a long rebuilding process (at least 10 years just to be mediocre). And we wouldn't have a conference to play in. And we wouldn't have funding for our other sports.

I'm not saying that Paterno should have been fired. I think that both he and Erickson should have stayed. Clearly, Paterno's firing was a PR move backed by nothing but public outrage.