How could American culture grow so corrupt as to value a game over protecting children?

You see, deep underneath Penn State University a demon sleeps. This demon feeds off of the energy produced by American Football games, not Futbol, not Rugby, just American Football. If this demon was able to constantly feed off of the games it would one day awaken and end the world. However this demon can be contained by the continual sexual abuse of children, which act as a lullaby to it.

And that is why Penn State's football program and child molestation are one and the same. Goman is totally right, the program must be dismantled.

goman wrote:

Because it was to coverup the image of Penn St football. It was saying that football is greater than child rape. NCAA should get involved and kill the team. It would say that child rape is not greater than a football team. End of story.

Right, once again you're describing the actions of a finite group of people. Punish them accordingly. You're not saying why people who DID NOT say that football is greater than child rape should be punished. You are not saying why you can not separate the guilty people from people who are simply associated with an institution.

Question: "How are the people who did not participate in the coverup involved and deserving of punishment."

Answer: "Because it was to coverup the image of Penn State football."

Huh?

goman wrote:

1. It means you care about college football. There are many people in the USA that don't. Not one of them would agree with you.

You're fond of using "everyone" and absolutes with regards to entire groups of people (as well as your omniscience with regard to an entire population's thoughts). I care about college football, so that means I've no clear insight about this matter?

2. Yes.

I see. No rules violation, but they should punish all the players and coaches not involved in the least. Are you listening to yourself?

3. You are being naive.

Naive about what? I fully believe everyone involved should be fired/punished by law. I'm naive because I don't think innocent people should be punished?

datawang wrote:

Question: "How are the people who did not participate in the coverup involved and deserving of punishment."

Answer: "Because it was to coverup the image of Penn State football."

Huh?

Exactly. I'm glad he doesn't have his finger on the nuke button.

Yonder wrote:

You see, deep underneath Penn State University a demon sleeps. This demon feeds off of the energy produced by American Football games, not Futbol, not Rugby, just American Football. If this demon was able to constantly feed off of the games it would one day awaken and end the world. However this demon can be contained by the continual sexual abuse of children, which act as a lullaby to it.

And that is why Penn State's football program and child molestation are one and the same. Goman is totally right, the program must be dismantled.

Totally unfair. This really happened.. It is not a "demon" It is real.

Stop with the stupid analogies.

goman wrote:

1. It means you care about college football. There are many people in the USA that don't. Not one of them would agree with

I couldn't possibly give less of a sh*t about college football and I can definitely say that an entire organization should not be collectively punished for the actions of a few assholes.

Let's say my brother commits a crime. He shares the same last name as me. Let's say my sister, with the same last name, covers it up to protect our family name. Should I be punished as a member of the family? Because it was covered up to protect my name?

I think this is the point goman is trying to make. The coverup was in the name of Penn St. football, therefore Penn St. footbal is implicated. Am I getting this right?

Dr.Ghastly wrote:
goman wrote:

1. It means you care about college football. There are many people in the USA that don't. Not one of them would agree with

I couldn't possibly give less of a sh*t about college football and I can definitely say that an entire organization should not be collectively punished for the actions of a few assholes.

I think both positions are correct. I *do* think that Penn State put football before children's rights. I also don't think innocent people should be punished.

goman wrote:

Stop with the stupid analogies.

If you have a more intelligent analogy for why a program consisting of thousands of innocent people needs to be shut down for the actions of a dozen people, when an investigation could and is digging up the dozen guilty people then you go right ahead.

SallyNasty wrote:

I personally am disgusted at McQueary. This guy watched a man rape a child and went and called his dad rather than the cops? f*cking seriously? This was a 28 year old life long sports player, i.e. supposed badass, and he didn't walk in there are break the old rapist jaw? And he considers himself a man - and he gets to keep his job? That is WRONG.

Not only that, he continued to work with that disgusting pig for EIGHT more years. Seeing him everyday and presumably saying hello to him in the halls and in the locker room. Worst of all, sending kids to his camp. WTF was going on at that institution? Its like some kind of bad sci fi movie with a mutant family that protects each others dirtiest secrets.

Jeff-66 wrote:
goman wrote:

1. It means you care about college football. There are many people in the USA that don't. Not one of them would agree with you.

You're fond of using "everyone" and absolutes with regards to entire groups of people (as well as your omniscience with regard to an entire population's thoughts). I care about college football, so that means I've no clear insight about this matter?

2. Yes.

I see. No rules violation, but they should punish all the players and coaches not involved in the least. Are you listening to yourself?

3. You are being naive.

Naive about what? I fully believe everyone involved should be fired/punished by law. I'm naive because I don't think innocent people should be punished?

Do you think that there should never be a Football Death Penalty. Or just one against Penn St because it didn't violate an NCAA rule?

Your argument is that their are innocent people that are punished. There are plenty of fans and students that are innocently punished when a NCAA rule is violated. Why not when child rape is covered up?

Personally, I'm a fan of simply shuttering up the entire state of Pennsylvania. Something wrong happened within its borders; you'll all just have to move to Delaware.

Dr.Ghastly wrote:
goman wrote:

1. It means you care about college football. There are many people in the USA that don't. Not one of them would agree with

I couldn't possibly give less of a sh*t about college football and I can definitely say that an entire organization should not be collectively punished for the actions of a few assholes.

Tell that to the NCAA. They have a Death Penalty rule and have killed a program before. And it was for violating scholarship rules and recruiting rules. Not coverup of child rape.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

Personally, I'm a fan of simply shuttering up the entire state of Pennsylvania. Something wrong happened within its borders; you'll all just have to move to Delaware.

Ah yes. What is Pennsylvania State if not a representative of Pennsylvania state?

Yonder wrote:
goman wrote:

Stop with the stupid analogies.

If you have a more intelligent analogy for why a program consisting of thousands of innocent people needs to be shut down for the actions of a dozen people, when an investigation could and is digging up the dozen guilty people then you go right ahead.

When a significant portion of the student body rioted over Joe Paterno's firing, they really never had innocence. It is always about the football team. Never about the kids getting raped.

No need for analogies. Just state the facts.

goman wrote:

Tell that to the NCAA. They have a Death Penalty rule and have killed a program before.

To some extent goman is correct. The NCAA often has a "total kill" philosophy. Granted this is far more severe but they've laid the ban hammer to programs because of recruiting violations.

In the eyes of the NCAA, if you get caught, everyone gets punished.

I don't think they should punish the entire university but the football program should get whacked.

Bear wrote:
goman wrote:

Tell that to the NCAA. They have a Death Penalty rule and have killed a program before.

To some extent goman is correct. The NCAA often has a "total kill" philosophy. Granted this is far more severe but they've laid the ban hammer to programs because of recruiting violations.

In the eyes of the NCAA, if you get caught, everyone gets punished.

Fair enough. I was under the impression that this was a discussion of what should happen though, not what could.

I think there's a difference between a program wide policy (recruiting violations) and criminal acts. I think each should be punished by their respective bodies of the NCAA and state/federal law enforcement.

Bear wrote:

I don't think they should punish the entire university but the football program should get whacked.

Now these, most certainly, are one in the same. It will be interesting to see what transpires.

They just removed Paterno's name from the Big 10 trophy.

goman wrote:

When a significant portion of the student body rioted over Joe Paterno's firing, they really never had innocence. It is always about the football team. Never about the kids getting raped.

No need for analogies. Just state the facts.

A significant portion of ANY student body is filled with a bunch of kids who barely know how to put their pants on. I'm sure another portion would riot just for the sake of rioting.

I don't think they have a full understanding of the implications of Paterno's involvement.

The NCAA should not kill off Penn State football. I don't think it would be a terrible idea if Penn state quit playing football for two years in order to clean house and start fresh.

As it is, Penn State football is about to enter a 20 year decline. Recruits are already bailing. I would imagine we will see a large number of transfers out of Penn State (which the NCAA could encourage by allowing them to do so without penalty). this kind of exodus will take a long, long time to correct itself.

I don't think there is much reason for a lot of outrage anymore, as all of the things we think should happen, are basically occurring. Once the season is over, I expect to see some massive developments. As athletes avoid the school, alumni stop sending money, and everyone tied to the program is swept out, there will be some major changes. It's within the scope of possibility that Penn State could leave the Big 10.

Bear wrote:
goman wrote:

When a significant portion of the student body rioted over Joe Paterno's firing, they really never had innocence. It is always about the football team. Never about the kids getting raped.

No need for analogies. Just state the facts.

A significant portion of ANY student body is filled with a bunch of kids who barely know how to put their pants on. I'm sure another portion would riot just for the sake of rioting.

I don't think they have a full understanding of the implications of Paterno's involvement.

Exactly, and once they gained perspective they held a massive candlelight vigil and have done other things since then. That was just kids being kids: shoot first, ask questions later.

goman wrote:
Dr.Ghastly wrote:
goman wrote:

1. It means you care about college football. There are many people in the USA that don't. Not one of them would agree with

I couldn't possibly give less of a sh*t about college football and I can definitely say that an entire organization should not be collectively punished for the actions of a few assholes.

Tell that to the NCAA. They have a Death Penalty rule and have killed a program before. And it was for violating scholarship rules and recruiting rules. Not coverup of child rape.

Right. And both of those violations were directly related to the football program. Child rape, while more heinous, does not have a direct relation to the running of the program.

If it was a literature teacher, would you have said the school should stop teaching lit? Or science? Or whatever?

I think you're letting your anger and disgust (which I share) get the best of you in this.

lostlobster wrote:

Right. And both of those violations were directly related to the football program. Child rape, while more heinous, does not have a direct relation to the running of the program.

If it was a literature teacher, would you have said the school should stop teaching lit? Or science? Or whatever?

I think you're letting your anger and disgust (which I share) get the best of you in this.

I'm not so sure since most of the people involved were directly tied to the football program including the head coach. Lets not overlook the fact that he was told his DC was a child rapist and he didn't even fire him.

The NCAA might use this incident to make an example out of PSU.

I see the argument, I just don't know if I agree with it in this case. A football program is about more than the coaching staff and a grad student. NONE of the players, students, or fans had anything to do with this (as far as we know).

It's much easier when an entire team (coaches, players, recruiters, parents, etc.) is directly responsible for things.

Jayhawker wrote:

The NCAA should not kill off Penn State football. I don't think it would be a terrible idea if Penn state quit playing football for two years in order to clean house and start fresh.

As it is, Penn State football is about to enter a 20 year decline. Recruits are already bailing. I would imagine we will see a large number of transfers out of Penn State (which the NCAA could encourage by allowing them to do so without penalty). this kind of exodus will take a long, long time to correct itself.

I don't think there is much reason for a lot of outrage anymore, as all of the things we think should happen, are basically occurring. Once the season is over, I expect to see some massive developments. As athletes avoid the school, alumni stop sending money, and everyone tied to the program is swept out, there will be some major changes. It's within the scope of possibility that Penn State could leave the Big 10.

Yeah... if it is not going to be the NCAA, it will be the recruits or Penn St itself. Perhaps my opinion is moot. The recruits will stay away.

goman wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:

The NCAA should not kill off Penn State football. I don't think it would be a terrible idea if Penn state quit playing football for two years in order to clean house and start fresh.

As it is, Penn State football is about to enter a 20 year decline. Recruits are already bailing. I would imagine we will see a large number of transfers out of Penn State (which the NCAA could encourage by allowing them to do so without penalty). this kind of exodus will take a long, long time to correct itself.

I don't think there is much reason for a lot of outrage anymore, as all of the things we think should happen, are basically occurring. Once the season is over, I expect to see some massive developments. As athletes avoid the school, alumni stop sending money, and everyone tied to the program is swept out, there will be some major changes. It's within the scope of possibility that Penn State could leave the Big 10.

Yeah... if it not going to be the NCAA it will be the recruits or Penn St itself. Perhaps my opinion is moot. The recruits will stay away.

This I agree with entirely. There hopefully will be a lot of self-regulation/punishment.

For the most part I'm staying out of the 'how PSU should suffer for this' discussion since I'm obviously biased. But I did want to point out:

Bear wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I personally am disgusted at McQueary. This guy watched a man rape a child and went and called his dad rather than the cops? f*cking seriously? This was a 28 year old life long sports player, i.e. supposed badass, and he didn't walk in there are break the old rapist jaw? And he considers himself a man - and he gets to keep his job? That is WRONG.

Not only that, he continued to work with that disgusting pig for EIGHT more years. Seeing him everyday and presumably saying hello to him in the halls and in the locker room. Worst of all, sending kids to his camp. WTF was going on at that institution? Its like some kind of bad sci fi movie with a mutant family that protects each others dirtiest secrets.

This is FACTUALLY untrue. Sandusky did not work at Penn State in 2002 and was not there 'every day' saying hello to people in the locker rooms or halls. NO attacks in the Grand Jury report happened at PSU after 2002. Does not mean there weren't any, just that we have no evidence of it currently.

It's statements like these, made without knowledge of the situation and based mostly on visceral emotions and reactions on ANY side of this discussion that do not serve to give justice to the victims and tend to only bring more pain on anyone involved.

Edit: Reread the report to verify timing of PSU locker room attacks.

Jolly Bill wrote:

This is FACTUALLY untrue. Sandusky did not work at Penn State in 2002 and was not there 'every day' saying hello to people in the locker rooms or halls. The only incident at PSU after the 2002 attack in the Grand Jury documents happened late at night (was witnessed by a janitor, whose supervisor saw Sandusky drive back through the parking lot several times later that night).

It's statements like these, made without knowledge of the situation and based mostly on visceral emotions and reactions on ANY side of this discussion that do not serve to give justice to the victims and tend to only bring more pain on anyone involved.

How many days a week did he work on campus then? Because, if it were me, if I saw him walking free any day, I'd wonder "Huh, what's up with that?"

Jolly Bill wrote:

For the most part I'm staying out of the 'how PSU should suffer for this' discussion since I'm obviously biased. But I did want to point out:

Bear wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

I personally am disgusted at McQueary. This guy watched a man rape a child and went and called his dad rather than the cops? f*cking seriously? This was a 28 year old life long sports player, i.e. supposed badass, and he didn't walk in there are break the old rapist jaw? And he considers himself a man - and he gets to keep his job? That is WRONG.

Not only that, he continued to work with that disgusting pig for EIGHT more years. Seeing him everyday and presumably saying hello to him in the halls and in the locker room. Worst of all, sending kids to his camp. WTF was going on at that institution? Its like some kind of bad sci fi movie with a mutant family that protects each others dirtiest secrets.

This is FACTUALLY untrue. Sandusky did not work at Penn State in 2002 and was not there 'every day' saying hello to people in the locker rooms or halls. NO attacks in the Grand Jury report happened at PSU after 2002. Does not mean there weren't any, just that we have no evidence of it currently.

It's statements like these, made without knowledge of the situation and based mostly on visceral emotions and reactions on ANY side of this discussion that do not serve to give justice to the victims and tend to only bring more pain on anyone involved.

Edit: Reread the report to verify timing of PSU locker room attacks.

I think that over-reacting in the case of child rape is probably a lot better than under-reacting.