Online Now 955

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

On this Board 710
Record: 4947 (7/23/2012)

Online now 1075
Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)

Boards ▾

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell and swap tickets

Reply

Question for PSU fans...

  • This post is for members of Lions247 or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    spartyspart2

  • http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/andy_staples/07/02/penn-state-jerry-sandusky-ncaa/index.html?eref=twitter_feed

    Read that it'll explain everything you need to know

    signature image

    'Just to make it clear, I'm not transferring, I like it here too damn much to leave.' Jordan Kerner

    ejb5212

  • spartyspart2 said...

    (not trolling, I know how sensitive the mods can be, but I just have an honest question)...IF Joe is found to be overruling the University President, V.P., and A.D. ... then is that not the DEFINITION of LACK of Institutional CONTROL ?!? I, for one, hated to see Joe go out the way he did. He did a lot of good, but overruling his (handpicked, btw) Pres., VP, and AD to help cover-up these crimes is just terrible. I hate to say it, but its pretty clear - these look like MAJOR violations. No loopholes to save PSU. It is sad to see.

    No, it is not. Unless it pertains to athletics.

    MTayl72

  • No...please don't tell us that something is the definition of LOIC when you clearly haven't even read the NCAA by-laws that explain the rule.

    PSU12 ●

  • spartyspart2 said...

    (not trolling, I know how sensitive the mods can be, but I just have an honest question)...IF Joe is found to be overruling the University President, V.P., and A.D. ... then is that not the DEFINITION of LACK of Institutional CONTROL ?!? I, for one, hated to see Joe go out the way he did. He did a lot of good, but overruling his (handpicked, btw) Pres., VP, and AD to help cover-up these crimes is just terrible. I hate to say it, but its pretty clear - these look like MAJOR violations. No loopholes to save PSU. It is sad to see.

    I knew before I read the question, the correct answer would be: No, you're an idiot. And I was right. What does LOIC refer to with regard to the NCAA? Isn't it the inability of the athletic department to enforce NCAA rules about recruiting and competition? What does Sandusky have to do with the NCAA rule book?

    This post was edited by psujmc1992 on 7/2/2012 at 2:38 PM

    signature image

    “We need to keep this (expletive) together,” Mauti and Zordich to Hill

    psujmc1992 ●

  • common sense tells you things werent exactly in control. regardless, the hacks at CNN will keep pushing this until there is such a public outcry that the NCAA is forced to punish PSU, regardless if there is LOIC or FTM, etc.

    spartyspart2

  • spartyspart2 said...

    (not trolling, I know how sensitive the mods can be, but I just have an honest question)...IF Joe is found to be overruling the University President, V.P., and A.D. ... then is that not the DEFINITION of LACK of Institutional CONTROL ?!? I, for one, hated to see Joe go out the way he did. He did a lot of good, but overruling his (handpicked, btw) Pres., VP, and AD to help cover-up these crimes is just terrible. I hate to say it, but its pretty clear - these look like MAJOR violations. No loopholes to save PSU. It is sad to see.

    1st - Joe did not pick Spanier at all...

    2nd - there was definitely a loss of institutional control here and it may have lead to the admins breaking some LAWS for which they are being charged. BUT it had nothing to do with the football team or the breaking of any NCAA rule or reg.. Thus the governing body for the State Laws are prosecuting them and the NCAA has no business being involved.

    3rd - doesn't matter what Joe said to the AD and Pres - it was their responsibility to handle the situation no matter what Joe had to say or thought they should do.. The burden to report this falls to the superior - President Spanier - under the law he needed to make sure it got reported no matter what his subordinates said or thought (and those emails, what has been leaked so far anyway, hardly prove what was said or thought by Joe)...

    This has nothing to do with the NCAA or the football team. IE: If Joe committed a murder the NCAA would not sanction the football team - the police would arrest and charge him with murder. I really don't understand why this is so hard for people to get??

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by ShotofEspresso on 7/2/2012 at 3:25 PM

    ShotofEspresso

  • spartyspart2 said...

    common sense tells you things werent exactly in control. regardless, the hacks at CNN will keep pushing this until there is such a public outcry that the NCAA is forced to punish PSU, regardless if there is LOIC or FTM, etc.

    Lol obviously things weren't in control....which is why the POLICE are on the matter, not the NCAA

    PSU12 ●

  • spartyspart2 said...

    (not trolling, I know how sensitive the mods can be, but I just have an honest question)...IF Joe is found to be overruling the University President, V.P., and A.D. ... then is that not the DEFINITION of LACK of Institutional CONTROL ?!? I, for one, hated to see Joe go out the way he did. He did a lot of good, but overruling his (handpicked, btw) Pres., VP, and AD to help cover-up these crimes is just terrible. I hate to say it, but its pretty clear - these look like MAJOR violations. No loopholes to save PSU. It is sad to see.

    Gee, when you put your highly speculative hypothetical question that way, it sounds really bad.

    Too bad none of that is based in fact.

    Here is a question for you: If we find out it's true that Mark Dantonio bought crack cocain for some recruits, don't you think that would be a major violation? How can you possibly support him knowing this?

    HolyLion

  • And if my aunt had balls...

    I find it funny how the public perception of Joe's power has changed after all this came out. Before, people said he'd been just a figurehead for the last decade and couldn't even coach the team. Now, he'd supposedly been in charge of staffing and controlling the leadership at PSU, controlling the district attorney, and should have been omnipotent in all aspects of this case. It's a lot of conclusions to jump to from 4 lines of the GJ report and 4 words in an email that has been leaked, but not actually released.

    NitsAndNats

  • Ban them all from being near college athletics & take their names from the records...

    But why punish the players? They did no wrong.

    signature image signature image signature image

    PENN STATE FOREVER

    philafan ●

  • love the "not trolling" visiting fan making his third post. I doubt this even a MSU fan.

    POV ●

  • spartyspart2 said...

    (not trolling, I know how sensitive the mods can be, but I just have an honest question)...IF Joe is found to be overruling the University President, V.P., and A.D. ... then is that not the DEFINITION of LACK of Institutional CONTROL ?!? I, for one, hated to see Joe go out the way he did. He did a lot of good, but overruling his (handpicked, btw) Pres., VP, and AD to help cover-up these crimes is just terrible. I hate to say it, but its pretty clear - these look like MAJOR violations. No loopholes to save PSU. It is sad to see.

    LOL! Sometimes I feel like I'm watching Jerry Springer by how much stupid I read on these boards.

    I was kinda wondering if this was a serious post or not, until I saw the poster make a follow-up post.

    BoulderFish

  • Might as well drop a nuke on Happy Valley. That's the ONLY way to get everybody to shut the eff up about this. Calling Iran in 3, 2, 1.............

    signature image

    PSUjosh11

  • Ultimately the blame is going to fall on spanier. Whether joe had pull or not, the reality is spanier is the one who ultimately decided to do nothing

    signature image signature image signature image

    white_out ●

  • Gotta love a good post starting with "not trolling." Inevitably, almost all are doing exactly that.

    signature image

    #DicedPineapples

    shavisimo2 ●

  • spartyspart2 said...

    (not trolling, I know how sensitive the mods can be, but I just have an honest question)...IF Joe is found to be overruling the University President, V.P., and A.D. ... then is that not the DEFINITION of LACK of Institutional CONTROL ?!? I, for one, hated to see Joe go out the way he did. He did a lot of good, but overruling his (handpicked, btw) Pres., VP, and AD to help cover-up these crimes is just terrible. I hate to say it, but its pretty clear - these look like MAJOR violations. No loopholes to save PSU. It is sad to see.

    Can you tell me with MAJOR violations you are referring to? Please feel free to be specific.

    "One man didn't build this program and one man sure as hell cannot tear it down."

    LaJollaLion

  • HolyLion said...

    Gee, when you put your highly speculative hypothetical question that way, it sounds really bad.

    Too bad none of that is based in fact.

    Here is a question for you: If we find out it's true that Mark Dantonio bought crack cocain for some recruits, don't you think that would be a major violation? How can you possibly support him knowing this?

    Not sure if the question is hypothetical but here's one that might be more applicable. If a team has a history of multiple kids getting arrested for smoking marijuana, wouldn't that show a lack of control? Should the NCAA get involved?

    signature image

    “We need to keep this (expletive) together,” Mauti and Zordich to Hill

    psujmc1992 ●

  • psujmc1992 said...

    Not sure if the question is hypothetical but here's one that might be more applicable. If a team has a history of multiple kids getting arrested for smoking marijuana, wouldn't that show a lack of control? Should the NCAA get involved?

    Yes and Yes.

    Try to fathom the hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured .but not prove they're a citizen

    sneakypete

  • Three questions:
    1. Where did you learn that Joe Paterno hand picked the university president or had any role in his hiring?
    2. Where are you getting your definition of lack of institutional control? Clearly, there were major problems but that alone means nothing as it relates to the NCAA or its definition of LOIC.
    3. Where are you reading that Joe Paterno overruled anyone or had the authority to overrule everyone?

    I'm honestly curious - I think you'll find Penn State folks are tired of discussing this b/c so many people who come to the board show a complete lack of understanding of facts and instead run with their own biases/misperceptions and make random and inaccurate accusations. Provide some honest answers to these questions and maybe we can have a productive conversation. Without honest answers to these, it's difficult to do so.

    DC Lion ●

  • I honestly don't see anyway that it is ever proven that Joe Paterno overruled the intentions of three men who at least in title were his superiors.

    (1 Joe's dead. He can't testify anymore, and his previous testimony isn't really that relevant anymore due to the fact that he did tell his superiors about an issue with McQueary... that is where he gets cut out of any criminal investigation.

    (2 Since they have verified that he had a telephone conversation with Curley after the initial conversation... Complete shocker that Joe and Curley would have phone conversations or that Curley would discuss his thoughts about the situation with Joe... The only person that can verify what was said in that conversation is Curley. Will Curley be asked to testify as to what the conversation consisted of?.. it helps neither the prosecution nor the defenses case.

    (3 Curley, Spanier, and/or Schultz could attempt to pin the blame on Joe as being the driving force behind not taking McQueary's accusation to the proper authorities, but that only undermines their case and authority in the position they were in.

    What ever you believe... It is very unlikely that you get any answers about what Joe did or didn't say in regards to Sandusky. What we have are his dying words that he removed himself from the situation - which could have been the content of the phone call and the e-mails/future testimonies of 2 soon to be 3 alleged perjurers.

    VinegarBased636

  • Vinegar-Based said...

    I honestly don't see anyway that it is ever proven that Joe Paterno overruled the intentions of three men who at least in title were his superiors.

    (1 Joe's dead. He can't testify anymore, and his previous testimony isn't really that relevant anymore due to the fact that he did tell his superiors about an issue with McQueary... that is where he gets cut out of any criminal investigation.

    (2 Since they have verified that he had a telephone conversation with Curley after the initial conversation... Complete shocker that Joe and Curley would have phone conversations or that Curley would discuss his thoughts about the situation with Joe... The only person that can verify what was said in that conversation is Curley. Will Curley be asked to testify as to what the conversation consisted of?.. it helps neither the prosecution nor the defenses case.

    (3 Curley, Spanier, and/or Schultz could attempt to pin the blame on Joe as being the driving force behind not taking McQueary's accusation to the proper authorities, but that only undermines their case and authority in the position they were in.

    What ever you believe... It is very unlikely that you get any answers about what Joe did or didn't say in regards to Sandusky. What we have are his dying words that he removed himself from the situation - which could have been the content of the phone call and the e-mails/future testimonies of 2 soon to be 3 alleged perjurers.

    Question for you. One of the emails said:

    "I would be more comfortable meeting with the person and tell them about the information we received and tell them we are aware of the first situation,"

    Would that make Joe's testimony perjured testimony since he said he didn't know about this before MM?

    This post was edited by sneakypete on 7/2/2012 at 3:14 PM

    Try to fathom the hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured .but not prove they're a citizen

    sneakypete

  • sneakypete said...

    Yes and Yes.

    If that is the case the NCAA should get involved with every single sport at every single college/university.

    Sloepoke20 ●

  • sneakypete said...

    Yes and Yes.

    I must have missed the Dantonio story. If true, he should be in jail and never allowed to coach in college again.

    Sneaky, what should the NCAA do about teams with a lot of kids who get caught smoking pot? I assume the second yes means you think they should get involved.

    signature image

    “We need to keep this (expletive) together,” Mauti and Zordich to Hill

    psujmc1992 ●

  • Sloepoke20 said...

    If that is the case the NCAA should get involved with every single sport at every single college/university.

    I understand that.

    Try to fathom the hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured .but not prove they're a citizen

    sneakypete

Penn State
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports