Joe Paterno Dead

Good article. Although my curiosity was about the contention that Sandusky was pegged to be Paterno's successor. Yet, Sandusky retired in 1999 and Paterno was still coach in 2011. The article mentions it but doesn't explain it.

As far as Paterno's pros and cons, I can't think of anyone (religious, political, educational, military, whatever) who, regardless of their accomplishments, doesn't also generate a list of negatives. Paterno is certainly no exception there.

When I read that about Sandusky being successor, I wondered if Paterno actually had planned to retire at that time, which really didn't make sense--other sources say it was more that Sandusky had been the heir apparent until he wasn't.

RIP, Joe Paterno.
 
Bestwifeever said:
When I read that about Sandusky being successor, I wondered if Paterno actually had planned to retire at that time, which really didn't make sense--other sources say it was more that Sandusky had been the heir apparent until he wasn't.

RIP, Joe Paterno.

From the various sources I have read, Sandusky retired abruptly on his own. However, Coach Paterno had been increasingly vocal to Sandusky that he wasnt spending enough time with the football program and was spending too much time with his children's charity " The Second Mile". Right around this time, he was told that he would not be the eventual successor to Coach Paterno. I have never read with complete clarity, that all 3 points were related or just coincidentially about the same time, or who the person of authority actually told him he would not be successor, assuming that is even factual.
 
Just because he's the most famous doesn't make him the most responsible.

Actually, I think it does. He was in fact probably the one person that could have done something, with absolutely no fear of any reprisal from anyone that mattered.

Most everyone else involved, that are also guilty, had to at least weight the possible consequences to them personally of outing someone(Sandusky) in a powerful position in the organization.

Joe would have had no fears in that regard. So yes, he had more of an obligation to act, given the gravitas he carried, to do something about it. He didn't, not because he was worried about damage to him, he didn't because he was worried about the institution....not unlike all those priests and bishops that covered for, and enabled generation upon generation of kids to be preyed upon, for fear of damaging the institution.
 
What I've heard from those would seem knowledgeable about it is that Joe Paterno had tremendous influence and pretty much knew everything going on in Happy Valley, or at least if it had any impact on football. He had a boss on an org chart, but a few years ago the board of trustees tried to oust him and Joe fought them off. There have been plenty of stories, recently recounted in an ESPN article, that he subverted the legal/school process for his players at times. I can't find the article anymore due to the amount of articles since his death.

OTOH, when his team seemed out of control a few years ago, he had them all clean up trash in the stadium after a game (maybe more than one game) to get some peer discipline going so everyone would keep each other in line.

If you believe the stories, he either knew more about what was going on than he let on, or buried his hand in the sand so he wouldn't find out the whole story. He didn't have any true "superiors" to report it too.

Then again, maybe you don't believe he had that much power. I don't have anything to give full proof.

As far as Joe being unable to fathom man-boy child rape, I can't remember the timeline of the Catholic priest scandals becoming more widely known wrt to when he was told about Sandusky. Something should have stuck in his mind though, as those stories became very public and Sandusky continued bringing kids in.

In his final coaching days, he tried to maintain that power and call his own exit. I think that challenge to authority forced the trustees' hand.

As far as the OP that the lesson PSU students learned is that scapegoats will be found, I agree that's what they'll learn, but that isn't the right lesson. There's been a poor lack of focus on the harming of kids and the culture there that allowed it to continue.
 
He was in fact probably the one person that could have done something, with absolutely no fear of any reprisal from anyone that mattered.

Most everyone else involved, that are also guilty, had to at least weight the possible consequences to them personally of outing someone(Sandusky) in a powerful position in the organization.

.

I think you're leaving out the university president. Of everyone in the chain of events, he is the one who specifically had in his job description being responsible for and handling these types of situations. The university president can never assume another is handling a situation for which he is responsible. Once informed by Joe, his duty, beyond question, was to ensure the situation was totally investigated and appropriate action taken. From the moment he heard the news from Joe until the situation was completely taken care of, it was his duty to follow-up. This would include informing the bod.

When the president apparently did not take action and did not report any activity back to Joe, Joe should have questioned what was happening or should have taken it around the president, perhaps straight to the police.

I'm just a tad bit surprised that the university president's role isn't being discussed more in the media. He was much less a celebrity than Joe and I suppose of less interest to the media in terms of attracting readers/viewers. But if I was the parent of one of the children involved, my wrath would focus on the university president, Joe would be a close second and the others, including the young coach who witnessed the event but responded inadequately, would be a close third.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom