After almost two months of a public kabuki dance marked by Board of Regents meetings, authorizations authorizing prior authorizations and accidental web postings of press releases, Missouri has finally been officially invited to be the third group of Tigers in the SEC.  Most people that have followed college conference changes closely over the past year (like most of the readers here) understand that it was pretty much a no-brainer move for Missouri.  When I first started writing about conference realignment in connection with Big Ten expansion, I urged people to “Think like a university president and not like a sports fan.”  In many ways, Missouri moving to the SEC is the ultimate example of this way of thinking (and why, as Andy Staples aptly points out in, a lot of fans not attuned to the business issues at hand have a hard time understanding it).  Missouri is giving up several rivalries that have lasted over 100 years (including its most important one with Kansas), a Midwestern culture that most of the state’s population is a part of (even if certain parts such as Branson, AKA “Vegas for people without teeth”, might be more southern in nature) and Texas recruiting grounds all the while joining a meat grinder of a football conference.  To many sports fans, this is insanity for Missouri to leave for the SEC.  To university presidents that are looking for financial stability over everything else, though, the only insane choice would’ve been for Missouri to stay in the Big 12.  It comes down to this: if you had to wager your life savings on whether the SEC or the Big 12 would be around in 10 years, which would you choose?  Seeing how many times the Big 12 was placed on its deathbed over the last 18 months, it’s pretty simple to see that Missouri had to take a lifeline to head south.

In tandem with the Missouri news, West Virginia and the Big East are slapping each other with lawsuits with respect to the Mountaineers’ move to take the Tigers’ place in the Big 12.  The core issue is the 27-month notice period that the Big East requires for schools that leave the conference.  Now, as a lawyer that has the Lt. Kaffee “So this is what a courtroom looks like?” approach to litigation, I see the word “buyout” whenever I come across any long notice period in a contract.  In practicality, most parties that intend to end a business relationship want to get it over with ASAP.  At the same time, the law generally favors the payment of monetary damages as compensation for a breach of contract instead of specific performance.  Putting aside the fact that West Virginia’s lawsuit against the Big East looks like it was written in crayon (this complaint is really about WVU trying to avoid having to pay any monetary damages at all, which won’t fly), there’s absolutely no freaking way that the school will be forced to stay for that entire 27-month period (which prevent a move to the Big 12 until the 2014 season).  The Big East has to take a hardline posture on the notice period publicly in order to preserve its leverage against West Virginia (and, for that matter, its defectors to the ACC of Syracuse and Pittsburgh), but this is exactly the type of situation that calls for a financial settlement instead of specific performance.  I could see the three Big East defectors staying for the 2012 season if the conference isn’t able to add its own expansion targets prior to that time (in which case, specific performance is necessary as a result of the Big East not having enough members to exist as a football league in 2012 if those defectors left at that time).  However, with the expectation being that the “new Big East” would be in place in 2013, there’s little reason why West Virginia, Syracuse and Pitt would need to stay beyond that point provided that they pay monetary damages.  (Note that while Syracuse and Pitt seem to be publicly quiet on the notice period issue, no one should take that to mean that they accept it.  Rest assured, they’re trying to get out of the Big East with the same amount of urgency as West Virginia.)

Speaking of the Big East expansion targets, my football-only Big Country Conference dream has taken another step forward with the Idaho State Board of Education approving Boise State taking steps to join the Big East (although that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re joining as of yet).  Boise State president Bob Kustra (who was actually Lt. Governor of Illinois under the Jim Edgar administration in the 1990s) actually had to be very forthright with the Board regarding the possible domino effect of the school’s potential move as it could very well impact the University of Idaho’s home of the WAC (which the Board also oversees).  He noted that WAC members Louisiana Tech and New Mexico State could head to Conference USA while Utah State and San Jose State may end up in the Mountain West.  That would mean that Idaho would be left behind with only newly admitted members Texas State and Texas-San Antonio.  With all of the political issues with separating and/or joining schools in other states (i.e. Texas politicians forcing Baylor and Texas Tech into the Big 12, the Virginia legislature forcing UVA to get Virginia Tech into the ACC, the binding of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, etc.), it’s interesting to see that the Idaho State Board of Education is willing to send the Vandals’ entire athletic department to the intensive care unit so that Boise State can get an AQ conference football-only invite.

As I’ve stated in previous posts, I actually like the Big East’s intended expansion (adding Boise State, Navy and Air Force as football-only members and Houston, SMU and Central Florida as all-sports members) as a form of AQ status triage.  If the Big East could get BYU to join as a football-only member, it would be an absolute coup.  However, one major impediment (outside of BYU catching Notre Dame-itis in its view of its self-importance as an independent) is the widely rumored belief that Comcast/NBC may go after the Big East’s TV rights next year.  (From everything that I’ve seen, this rumor is completely blog and message board speculation without any backup, so we must assume that it’s true!)  Seeing that the entire reason why BYU left the Mountain West for independence was to get away from Comcast, I have a hard time seeing BYU joining the Big East if a Comcast deal is on the horizon.  In turn, I also can’t see the Big East foreclosing any future media rights opportunities simply to add BYU.  As with the Big 12, BYU’s TV rights situation is going to be the real issue with the school being an expansion target for the Big East as opposed to the red herring of Sunday play (which wouldn’t even apply in the case of a football-only invite).

Finally, we’ve gotten to the point in conference realignment where I hear “San Diego State is a Big East candidate” and don’t even flinch.  Frankly, I like the Aztecs as much as any non-BYU western candidate for the Big East.  The Big Country Conference is destined to be born.

(Follow Frank the Tank’s Slant on Twitter @frankthetank111 and Facebook)

(Image from In 10 Words)

About these ads
  1. Jeepers says:

    Let’s Go Orange!

  2. Denogginizer says:


  3. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    GEAUX #1 LSU Fightin’ Tigers!

    • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

      Thoughts from Tuscaloosa:

      1. Those upper decks in the end-zones are really high and the steps are very steep.
      2. Tuscaloosa’s finest need to come to Baton Rouge to learn how to move post-game traffic. It took me 5 hours to drive from Baton Rouge to Tuscaloosa before the game, and almost 4 hours to drive from Tuscaloosa to Birmingham after the game. My daughter and two of her friends are touring Samford tomorrow.
      3. I’ve never seen so many grown men shaking pom-pons in my life.
      4. The Nick Saban statue in Alabama’s Walk of Champions looks a lot like Andy Griffith.
      5. The Bear Bryant museum is a must-see for any college football fan.
      6. The Bama fans were very gracious in defeat.
      7. Alan from Baton Rouge is now 4-1 in Tuscaloosa.

      I skimmed through the FTT comments (mostly critical) regarding the LSU/Bama game. Now I know that those of you watching at home had better seats than me, but I thought the game was great. Not just because LSU won, but because it was 3-plus hours of tension-packed drama with the outcome in doubt on every play.

      A defensive struggle can be a classic too. Just like the old baseball saying “good pitching beats good hitting”, it can also be said that ” a good defense beats a good offense”. LSU and Bama’s offenses don’t suck. Prior to this game, the LSU was averaging 39.25 points per game, and Alabama was averaging 39.38 ppg.

      Also, with two teams so closely matched, the game usually always comes down to who makes a big play and who makes the most mistakes. LSU made a couple bigs plays and won the field position battle, while Bama made a few too many mistakes.

      • Brian says:


        I skimmed through the FTT comments (mostly critical) regarding the LSU/Bama game. Now I know that those of you watching at home had better seats than me, but I thought the game was great. Not just because LSU won, but because it was 3-plus hours of tension-packed drama with the outcome in doubt on every play.

        The atmosphere makes all the difference. I’m sure you were feeling the tension, but most viewers were just watching bad offense. If that was a B10 game, everyone would have been decrying how bad the B10 offenses are instead of praising the defenses.

        Gene Wojciechowski said it well:

        “Classics don’t have four interceptions, four missed field goals, 13 penalties, one fumble, one botched punt return and zero touchdowns. A punter shouldn’t be the best player on the field in a classic.

        Bottom line: Only a classic is worthy of a Jan. 9 rematch in New Orleans. And this wasn’t one of them.”

        A defensive struggle can be a classic too. Just like the old baseball saying “good pitching beats good hitting”, it can also be said that ” a good defense beats a good offense”. LSU and Bama’s offenses don’t suck. Prior to this game, the LSU was averaging 39.25 points per game, and Alabama was averaging 39.38 ppg.

        A low scoring game can be a classic, but it can’t be mistake-riddled and have no touchdowns. That’s bad offense. Good pitching beats good hitting, but it doesn’t usually get a no hitter.

        LSU and AL have good running games and great athletes. LSU has no QB and AL’s is inexperienced. Much of their offensive output is set up by defense and special teams (directly scoring or setting up a short field). Fatigue from the other defenses also has played a role.

        A M pointed out, several teams have done much better against those defenses than AL and LSU did. OR and WV looked great compared to AL’s offense, yet AL has the best scoring offense in SEC play even after this game.

        Also, with two teams so closely matched, the game usually always comes down to who makes a big play and who makes the most mistakes. LSU made a couple bigs plays and won the field position battle, while Bama made a few too many mistakes.

        The problem is that nobody made any big plays on offense, especially the QBs. A game like that should come down to a few plays, but some of them have to be made by the offense for it to be a great game. A great game features big plays from all 3 phases of both teams. Think back to the classic Miami/FSU games. Those were great offenses and defenses going at each other. LSU and AL looked like they both brought their scout team offenses.

        • duffman says:

          I like games in the trenches, and they always have the cameras focus on the offensive backfield. I thought it was a good game and would be low scoring. All things being equal a great team will have all the parts, and Alabama failed at the kicking part. Not having the best kicker in place did not just occur in this game, but extended to an earlier period when this scenario should have been done in advance.

          Alan, congrats on your Tigers, you know I have thought they would do it before the season started. Get through the next two games and watch out for the trap game with Arkansas. Who would you rather see play your Tigers in January?

          Oklahoma State?
          Boise State?

          • Michael in Raleigh says:

            I can’t speak for Alan, but if my team was LSU, I would least want to see a healthy Stanford. Oklahoma State has a relatively weak defense, although I believe their poor rankings in total yardage surrendered makes it look worse than their D actually is. Boise’s D is better but not great. Both teams’ offenses appear to be, for lack of a better term, somewhat finesse, which LSU has already proven capable of shutting down rather handily against Oregon.

            With a strong defense and a very physical offense, Stanford is built more like Alabama and therefore ought to be able to give LSU a tougher game than Ok. State or Boise. Alabama’s defense and its running game are superior to Stanford’s, but Stanford is still very strong in those areas. What Stanford has is a passing offense, led by the best quarterback by a longshot in college football, that is much more capable of giving LSU fits than Alabama is.

      • Bamatab says:

        Alan, congratulations on the Tiger’s win. For the second year in a row, Miles out coached Saban on the field. LSU has a hell of a football team and would probably kill either Ok St or Stanford in the BCSCG.

        People just don’t understand good defense anymore, or the affects there of. The reason that neither team scored a TD is because both coaches realized it would be a defensive battle so they went conservative.

        Your kicking game decided the outcome, and is why you guys have a more complete team (and thus a better team) than we do. Congrats on a great win.

        • redwood86 says:

          “Both coaches realized that it would be a defensive battle so they went conservative.”

          Are you saying that both coaches are stupid? The way to beat a great defense is to show some imagination on offense. The one time Bama did, they almost got the ball to the 1-yard line. How do you think Oregon and WVU scored 20 on LSU? And even Florida put up a score on LSU.

        • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

          Bamatab – thanks. Bama and LSU are two evenly-matched teams that would probably split a 10 game series. The atmosphere in T-town was great.

  4. greg says:

    Go Hawks!!

  5. Christian says:

    Hook ‘em

  6. monty says:

    Dr. Kustra and Boise realize how temporary the Big East is. He wants a candidate that covers Boise’s weakness. Air Force doesn’t do that SDSU does: research university, good overall program, big market, Cali recruiting; Boise does what SDSU doesn’t: big time football. There is and should be an effort to tie the Aztec step pyramid to the Boise Donkey. They both can help each other move onto the bigger prize.

  7. Trey says:

    If BYU turns down the Big East and Nova blocks Temple from rejoining, Hawaii becomes a pretty attractive option as a Western football only school…

    • OT says:

      Nope. San Diego State makes more $en$e to the BIG EAST than Hawaii from a TV market perspective.


      Furthermore, Hawaii is another school with its own TV baggage in tow a la BYU and Texas.

      Hawaii signed only a 2-year deal with the Mountain West as a football-only member, with a provision that Hawaii cannot have its own pay-per-view home TV deal with Oceanic Time Warner Cable during the deal so that the Mountain West, CBS, and Comcast can attempt to push the mtn. onto Oceanic Time Warner Cable in Hawaii.

      Hawaii will live to regret that decision. Why? Hawaii took a TV pay cut to join the Mountain West and there is no guarantee that Oceanic Time Warner Cable will carry the mtn. We are looking at another BYU-style debacle come 2012, when Honolulu residents won’t be able to watch the Hawaii Warriors on cable TV.

      Hawaii should have gone independent in football and cut its own TV deals instead. The BYU model makes much sense for Hawaii.

  8. vp19 says:

    Remember, a few months ago someone asked why Missouri would be a good fit for the SEC and I replied with one word — “Branson!” It hardly is next door to Columbia as Nashville’s country music hotspots are to Vanderbilt, but I’m sure many SEC visitors will try to make it a twofer.

  9. Michael in Raleigh says:

    That Andy Staples column is excellent. His self-disclosing story make the complexity of conference realignment easy for anyone to relate to.

    • bullet says:

      Its a good writeup, but he misses some complexity. He wasn’t going to have to pay 1 to 2 times his annual salary (exit fees) to get a job that might very well pay less the next 12 years, and, unless he was successful in a more difficult environment, would lose potential moonlighting jobs that paid double his salary (i.e. ticket sales and donations). He’s secure that his company will still be around in 12 years, but is he better off? He doesn’t have to worry his wife (board of curators) will chew him out for making a “risky” decision, but its not necessarily the best one. He’s still got the risk that his income may be slightly lower the next 12 years and his moonlighting income may be much lower, while still being out his headhunter (exit) fees. Also, instead of being #3 in the company, he is well down in the company hierarchy.

      • Andy says:

        Bullet, you’re full of it. Missouri is not going to have to pay 1 to 2 times their annual earnings to get out of the Big 12. Missouri will make 50 to 70% more in the SEC than they made in the Big 12, certainly not less. Where do you get this stuff?

  10. frug says:

    Curly and Schultz are forced to step down.

    The fact this comes ONE DAY after President Spanier offered them his full and unconditional support pretty much guarantees that Spanier will soon be joining them.

    • frug says:

      And I’ll add that this is going to push the Baylor Basketball Scandal for ugliest event in NCAA history. Really despicable stuff if true.

    • Brian says:

      I’m guessing McQueary will have to move on, too.

      With a new AD, I suspect there will at least be pressure on JoePa to set a retirement date of some sort. At worst the new AD wants a clean slate and uses this scandal as an excuse.

      • PSUGuy says:

        Why would the only two guys who apparently did what they were supposed to do in this situation be forced to move on?

        • Brian says:

          McQueary because he is quickly becoming known as the guy that saw Sandusky balls deep in a 10 year old. Every recruit’s parents are going to have questions for him about it. The story won’t ever go away as long as he is there. He needs to go somewhere else and make a clean start. Plus, a new AD won’t want to keep anyone associated with the scandal around. It is the best thing for everybody more than forcing him out.

          That said, very few non-PSU fans seem to think McQueary did all he was supposed to do. He called his dad that night, then talked to JoePa the next morning. JoePa talked to the suits the day after that. The suits talked to McQueary 10 days later. Nobody ever called the police or a child protection agency. JoePa has 50 years of loyalty built up with the community, but McQueary doesn’t.

          As for JoePa, I didn’t say anything about forcing him out. But a new AD is going to come in to an 84 year old coach on an expiring contract. Everyone else may have put up with it, but this scandal gives that AD the leverage to require Joe to make a decision on when he’ll retire. It doesn’t even have to be soon, but I’m betting the new AD will require a plan. Plans can change based on health and success, but I doubt the new AD wants to deal with FB coach questions every year.

          • PSUGuy says:

            Listen, I’m no fan of McQueary and agree it would probably be best for him to start fresh somewhere, but what’s it say about the university as an institution of its willing to force a person out who reminds them of their failure to act in accordance with their ideals?

            As for doing all he could…I don’t want to throw the guy under the bus when it appears he immediately brought it up to folks in leadership and that leadership failed him. Have you ever dealt with the military? I’ve worked with them for 8 years now and the chain of command is sacrosanct…you simply do not go outside it. Now I’m not saying that thought process is correct in all instances (most notably this one), but when you’re in an organization that says “bring problems up to leadership and we’ll take care of it the right way” aren’t you doing the right thing by doing exactly that? Besides, as I’ve posted elsewhere Schultz (who McQueary talked to) was in a position above the Police Department. No its “not the same”, but I’d certainly see it as the same if I were in McQueary’s shoes. Point being, I’d like to think when I was 28 I’d have what it takes to do more than what McQueary did, but I just don’t know so it makes it hard for me to judge.

            And as for Paterno, I see what you’re saying and agree.

          • Brian says:


            Listen, I’m no fan of McQueary and agree it would probably be best for him to start fresh somewhere, but what’s it say about the university as an institution of its willing to force a person out who reminds them of their failure to act in accordance with their ideals?

            I don’t think they would have to force him out. He’s going to get sick of the questions about this really quickly, and he can’t avoid them when they come from recruits, parents and HS coaches. He’ll want a fresh start, PSU will want a clean slate and JoePa certainly won’t want the issue to keep coming up.

            If he didn’t want to leave, I think PSU might force him out but with JoePa giving him a recommendation and helping him find a good job. It’s partially for their image, but also for the sake of the students. PSU needs this story to get off the front page and stay off of it. Having McQueary around will draw negative attention.

    • mushroomgod says:

      Joe: “might have harmed young people to this extent…” Is Joe saying he thought JS molested only one or two? Or he didn’t know the nature of the molestations? How could he let this guy use a university office and bring young kids in there? I know it wasn’t his “call”, but he should have insisted.

      The President, obviously, has to go. But I think Joe should as well.

      • mushroomgod says:

        I’ll add that this smacks not only of croniism, but also political correctness as well. After all, JS had never been convicted of anything….they were probably concerned about a lawsuit if they terminated him without benefits……….

      • PSUGuy says:

        I’ve read a $h!tt ton on this subject (for obvious reasons).

        The only incident Paterno knew about (from what I’ve read anyway) was the 2002 incident after which Sandusky was no longer permitted on campus with children. Maintaining an office/etc was Curly’s (as AD) call.

        Also, read this:

        before blanketly calling for someone (everyone’s) head. The more I read of this, the more I think Curly (AD) and Schultz (PSU Police) blatantly failed in their stated duties and lied to those around them to cover up a problem.

        Oh, and just because so many people can’t seem to grasp this let me be explicit…

        Gary Schultz oversees the PSU Police. Which means the matter WAS brought by Paterno to “the police”, but they failed (or refused) to act.

        • Brian says:


          I’ve read the pdf. Joe still took a day to even tell the suits about Sandusky in 2002 despite saying the GA was extremely upset about what he saw. He couldn’t be bothered to talk to them on that same day? He didn’t ask if the GA had called the cops? He didn’t call the cops? He didn’t call Sandusky?

          Joe’s legally in the clear, but his actions do leave some questions.

          Schultz has financial oversight of the police, but he isn’t part of the police. Nobody would confuse talking to him with going to the police.

          • PSUGuy says:

            No one would? Obviously McQueary did.

            In any case, speaking to someone who has institutional authority over the police (like Schultz apparently did) should indicate that the relevant persons will be involved. I mean, I talk to my boss if I have a problem with a co-worker and when he says he’ll look into it… isn’t that his job?

            As for same day…listen I’m a “do something” kind of guy and when @#$% has landed on my lap in life I tend to take a deep breath then start to deal with it. I can understand where a person might need a day to “steel” himself for the problems to come…and in fairness, McQueary saw the incident at night and talked to his father immediately then talked to Paterno the next morning.

            I agree Paterno waiting a day is the strange thing.

        • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

          Come on Brian it was merely a grown man having some good old fashioned naked horse play with a 10 y/o as far as JoePa knew so it’s all good….

          He’s a real hero.

          • Brian says:

            It’s healthy. The ancient Greeks did it. Damn puritanical Americans and their laws against anal sex with young boys.

            In all seriousness, I’m not surprised or upset that JoePa went to his superiors first. That’s understandable for someone of his generation. It’s that it took a day and that he never called the police that bothers me somewhat.

            I’m much more upset about McQueary. A 28 year old eye and ear witness has no excuse not to call the police. I’m fine with him calling JoePa first, but that didn’t happen until the next day. If it takes more than 5 minutes to call the cops you are playing with that boys life.

            I expect a little better from self-ordained leaders of young men.

    • Peter says:

      Spanier has been President since 1995. The entire mess in the grand jury testimony occurred on his watch; he’ll be forced out for that alone.

      JoePa is going to leave and the coaching staff will as well. The only question is if JoePa and the assistant who was the GA leave before the end of the season – or coach on Friday. That’s almost difficult to imagine with how things are shaping up.

      The Penn State Police may well also get nuked. Departure of anyone who was arguably involved and I could see something like this resulting in it ceasing to be an independent sworn police department.

      • PSUGuy says:

        Spanier might be forced out on the “buck stops here” mentality, but the only incident he might have been aware of was the 2002 incident and his knowledge would have been in inverse proportion to how much Curly told (or lied) to him.

        Paterno immediately informed his direct supervisor (Curly) and “the Police” (Gary Schultz oversees police matters for the PSU police) on the only incident he appears to have knowledge of (the 2002 incident).

        Why would a coaching staff who has been mostly assembled after the “main” incident and has not had any part of the incidents be forced out on general rule?

        PSU police should get nuked. They dropped the ball in 1998 (when the parent’s of a child filed a complaint) and again in 2002. Although it should be mentioned in the 1998 case the guy in charge (Chigah or something like that) I’ve heard is a hard-on type of cop. If he thought there was something to nail Sandusky with he would have done it, and been happy doing so.

        Honestly, your statements seem like the rest of the nation…an emotional response whose sole goal seems to be immediate self satisfaction and it doesn’t matter who is negatively effected by these events so long as the said satisfaction is achieved.

        • Peter says:

          The coaching staff is gone because JoePa is gone. Coaching hires at this level normally bring their own staff, and this destroys any reason to deviate from that. The only way any of them stay is if this prevents getting an A-list hire & so it needs to be a less-regarded “Penn State family” hire/promotion. And you are kidding yourself if you believe THIS of all things is going to encourage “keeping it in the family.”

          Otherwise, the coaching staff gets flushed for the same reason all non-planned successions result in the coaching staff being flushed.

        • bullet says:

          Is JoePa finally retiring? It seems like he should. He’s coaching from the box so much because of health issues.

          • Peter says:

            JoePa is 85 years old, is obviously not physically capable of doing the job, and has no contract. The odds of him being back next year were like 5% to start with. This just drops them to zero.

          • greg says:

            Seeing Joe sitting in the press box without a headset on makes me wonder WTF he is doing at the game.

          • SideshowBob says:

            I actually think these events makes it paradoxically more likely for Paterno to be back in 2012, not less. The way things were headed, most folks expected Paterno to retire quietly after this season (without making an announcement ahead of time to avoid the hoopla of a “farewell tour”). There was a lot of rumbling to that effect.

            Now, I think there may be added resolve on Paterno’s part to stay another year to let this scandal settling down and blow over a bit so that his legacy is less tainted. If he leaves now, it’s “because” of the scandal which implies he is culpable. If he sticks around, the story returns more to one of him being old and less capable of fulfilling the duties of head coach.

            And I don’t think the school could/would force him out, especially if he’s not charged or implicated in any wrong doing. At this point, the Attorney General’s office actually indicated that he did the right things and has been cooperative in the investigation. The only grounds for forcing him out would be a sense of him not fulfilling “moral duties” in the issue, which is murky especially without having all the possible information (e.g. we don’t know what follow up Paterno did regarding the 2002 incident; it’s quite possible he inquired about it and was told investigations were ongoing or that no credible evidence was found to press charges or such at which point I’m not sure what else he could/should have done).

            So, oddly, I think Paterno is more likely to retire the less he is implicated in this scandal.

          • PSUGuy says:


            I wouldn’t be surprised at all if that were to happen.

            The only other thing I could see is him taking over the Athletics Director gig and stepping down as the head coach to try and “right the ship on his way out”.

          • frug says:


            Curley and Schultz were both charged with perjury and failure to report suspected abuse.


          • Eric says:

            I agree SideshowBob. Leaving right now would make it seem to be because of the scandal and that’s the last way he wants to go out.

        • Phil says:

          So you’re going with the story that Sandusky leaving 1999 was just a coincidence, had nothing to do with the 1998 investigation of him and therefore Paterno knew nothing about that one???

          Even in the unlikely event the 2002 incident was the only thing Paterno knew about, his watching Sandusky continue to hold children’s overnight camps for the next 7 years and saying nothing doesn’t bother you???

          • M says:

            I don’t know why Sandusky left in 1999 and neither does anyone else on this blog. I think that his continuing presence bothers everyone, but look at it from Paterno’s perspective. One time, a GA came to him and said he saw something happen involving a look term colleague. He tells the AD and head of the local police about it, and they come back and say they looked into it and found nothing. Paterno didn’t know about the earlier report in 1998, and Sandusky had founded an organization that had a decent reputation at helping low income youth.

            I’m not saying he couldn’t have done more or followed it up more doggedly, but I at least understand Paterno’s line of thought. What went through Curley and Schultz’s mind (let alone Sandusky’s) is incomprehensible to me.

          • Phil says:

            So McQueary witnessed a boy being raped in 2002 and Paterno heard about it , but some people on this board absolve them of responsibility because they each went to a supervisor (not the actual police) about it.

            Sandusky continued to use Penn St facilities and, according to the indictment, was collecting new victims as late as 2005/2006.

            It bothers me most about the lives of these later victims being ruined by a guy that at point shouldn’t have been walking the streets but, then again, I’m not a big Penn State fan.

          • Peter says:

            The correct response to seeing someone raping a ten-year-old boy in the shower is to smash the rapist’s skull against the shower wall and then kick him in the face and chest until he stops moving. Then call the police and wait for them to arrive for the boy and what’s left of the rapist.

          • Phil says:

            “The correct response to seeing someone raping a ten-year-old boy in the shower is to smash the rapist’s skull against the shower wall and then kick him in the face and chest until he stops moving.”

            Evidently that is isn’t the case at Penn State, at least if you ever want the chance to get promoted from grad assistant to WR Coach/Assistant Recruiting Coordinator.

          • M says:

            Schultz is the police. The Penn State police have jurisdiction in that area, and Schultz runs that department.

            No one is happy about the result, but you’re expecting Paterno to be both psychic and a police detective.

            As for your immediate response, I’ve found no braver and more decisive people in this world than anonymous internet commentators.

          • Peter says:

            Schultz is not a cop. He is administration and overseas the department.

            As far as defending not stopping the pedo…

            You. Are. Pro. Rape.

          • Peter says:

            Actually let me get this straight…M is defending McQueary leaving a 10-year-old who is being ACTIVELY SEXUALLY ASSAULTED to his fate as opposed to either (a) beating the hell out of the late 50′s pedo and rescuing the child, (b) calling 911, or (c) doing both of the above?

          • Mike says:

            Schultz is charged with not reporting the crime to the police. Based off of that I don’t think we can call him “the police.”

          • Phil says:

            Can the Penn State people in the future do us the public service of letting us know when they refer to Joe Paterno whether they are referring to:

            A- Joe Paterno the iconic figure who is setting all time wins records, building libraries and serving as the public face of Penn State university during its rise in prestige over the last several decades, or

            B-Joe Paterno the mid-level employee of a Pennsylvania state academic institution who followed the letter of the law by reporting an incident of inappropriate behavior to his immediate supervisor and was let down by their failure to perform, let alone complete, an investigation?

          • Phil says:

            Mike McQueary was a 28 year old man who witnessed Sandusky raping a 10 year old boy at a PSU facility , then saw Sandusky continue to utilize PSU facilities as a free man, now spends his days telling parents Penn State is the best place to send their kids.

          • PSUGuy says:

            Schultz was NOT charged with not reporting to the police…he, along with Tim Curly, was charged with perjury. Saying reporting to Schultz is not reporting to the police is like saying reporting to the Chief of Police isn’t really reporting to the police since he’s a political figurehead and not a guy walking the streets.

            I have read more information on this topic that I care to admit. As sad, frustrating, and downright unbelievable as it is, it appears Jerry Sandusky’s actions, while frequent, went largely unknown.

            The only reason I can see is because those incidents that were discovered tended not to be widely public. The mid-90′s incidents culminated in a police action in 1998 that apparently did not in any way involve university personnel. As a quick aside, per the AG report, Sandusky was told he would not be head coach after Paterno BEFORE the 1998 incident. In the spring of 1999 Sandusky was the lead candidate to be head coach at a newly established PSU football team in Altoona. Financing (and thus the Altoona team) fell through and suddenly in July 1999 Sandusky announced his retirement. The timing could be based on prior knowledge or it could be based on Sandusky getting fed up with waiting for a head coaching job at PSU that wasn’t coming.

            The 2000 incident was observed by low level janitorial staff who did nothing.

            The 2002 incident was observed and reported, but those responsible for action (Curly Schultz) did nothing.

            After the 2002 incidents, other incidents took place from differing high schools in much differing locations.

            And through it all the most frequent location of occurrence appears to be in Sandusky’s own home.

            But in the end…none of these apparent facts make things any better.

          • frug says:


            Curley and Schultz were both charged with perjury and failure to report suspected abuse.


          • Phil says:

            PSU Guy said- “The 2002 incident was observed and reported, but those responsible for action (Curly Schultz) did nothing.”

            Maybe Curley and Schultz were the only ones legally responsible for reporting. Most people feel that ANYBODY that had any knowledge, detailed or otherwise, of this kind of behavior possibly going on had a moral and ethical responsibility to report, notify, pester, nag, harangue, etc. the authorities until an investigation was done and the truth was discovered, just in case there were innocent minors being taken advantage of and brutalized.

            The fact that you don’t speaks volumes about you.

          • Brian says:


            Schultz was NOT charged with not reporting to the police

            Did he or did he not get a summary charge of failure to report in addition to the perjury charge?

            Saying reporting to Schultz is not reporting to the police is like saying reporting to the Chief of Police isn’t really reporting to the police since he’s a political figurehead and not a guy walking the streets.

            No, Schultz is more like the comptroller. He has financial oversight of the police but is in no way, shape or form part of the police. He was senior VP and treasurer before he retired and then returned to that job. Nobody in their right mind would consider him the police.

          • Mike says:

            The Chief of Police is still a sworn police officer. I doubt that Schultz ever was a sworn police officer, hence the charge of failure to report.

          • PSUGuy says:

            The Attorney General’s report on the Grand Jury made no mention of “failure to report”, thus my statement. I’m seeing lots of reports (including the one posted) now and apparently I was wrong.

            As for Schultz being a “sworn officer”. No, he is not by any information I can find a sworn officer. His position is however, the head of the Finance and Business organization at PSU of which the University Police fall under.

            So yes, my original analogy was incorrect. It’s more like going to the Mayor instead of the Chief of Police…

          • greg says:

            It’s more like going to the Mayor instead of the Chief of Police…

            No, its more like going to Sally the accountant at City Hall.

          • PSUGuy says:

            Except Sally has no institutional authority…unlike Schultz.

        • frug says:

          If Spanier is forced out (and he probably will be) it should be because he felt it was appropriate to allow two men charged with covering up the sexual assault of a child on campus property by former employee to continue to hold positions that put them in positions of authority over minors.

    • frug says:

      It keeps getting worse:

      According to Dan Wetzel of Yahoo! Sports, and citing multiple sources within the program, Sandusky “work[ed] out multiple times in the team’s weight room just last week.”

      From same article:

      Pennsylvania governor Tom Corbett said Monday he will attend a special meeting of the the school’s Board of Trustees Friday. Corbett gave a “no comment” when asked if he would ask for Spanier’s resignation at the meeting.

      • Brian says:

        Hey, at least PSU finally banned him from campus. It’s only been 13 years since the first allegation was known to some of the suits, and 9 years since a GA witnessed it. You wouldn’t want them to rush into anything.

        • Phil says:

          Well, PSU Guy above said the uproar was “an emotional response whose sole goal seems to be immediate self satisfaction and it doesn’t matter who is negatively effected by these events so long as the said satisfaction is achieved.”.

          Yeah, the important thing is that we don’t hurt the coaches and administrators feelings or anything, not that PSU let a guy continue to molest kids for years after he could have been stopped.

          • PSUGuy says:

            I see a lot of people with no connection in any way shape or form to the situation at hand responding in an emotional way to such an extent as to be considered near hysterics by any rationally thinking mind.

            I want to calmly and rationally consider all the information at hand, understand what went wrong and where things can be changed for the better, and then bring those responsible to a justice the likes of which should appall all those currently raging at the initial information.

            I simply see too many people who want to burn the whole world down over this. I just want to set the people who deserve it on fire.

          • Phil says:

            No. it just people get annoyed at those fixated on what certain people at Penn St were legally supposed to do, defending them on that narrow basis, and ignoring what morality should have gotten them to do.

            The PA state Police Commissioner said it better today:

            –Paterno may have fulfilled his legal requirement to report suspected abuse by former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, state police Commissioner Frank Noonan said, “but somebody has to question about what I would consider the moral requirements for a human being that knows of sexual things that are taking place with a child.”

            He added: “I think you have the moral responsibility, anyone. Not whether you’re a football coach or a university president or the guy sweeping the building. I think you have a moral responsibility to call us.” –

          • @Phil – You’ve pointed out the main issue that I’ve been grappling with. I’m really trying to find a way to give JoePa the benefit of the doubt, but it’s impossible in my mind. When I speak to employees about meeting workplace standards, compliance is only the bare minimum of complying with the law. Being an ethical person goes beyond compliance in terms of taking the extra step to do the right thing. What Paterno did was the bare minimum to comply with the law. That’s simply not good enough, particularly for someone in his position where he really had more influence and power in practicality than his supervisors. A phone call, action or demand from JoePa carries more weight at Penn State than anything that could’ve been done by his “superiors”. He had the ability to stop Sandusky in his tracks from continuing on for almost another decade of preying on children in a way that no one else at the university could have done. Paterno’s failure to act in an ethical and moral manner (not just mere compliance with the law) resulted in more young lives being ruined by a monster.

            I greatly respect Penn State as a university and understand that it is natural for alums to come to its defense. The actions (or maybe more appropriately, inaction) of the school’s leaders should not be imputed onto its students, alums or even the football program itself outside of the particular coaches involved (as the student athletes are not culpable). It should be clear, though, that this is one of the most horrific stories that most of us have ever seen associated with sports (whether college or pro). That’s why nearly all of us are seething in reaction to what has happened.

          • PSUGuy says:

            @Phil & Frank

            All I have to say is I understand and agree with the idea about the unacceptable merits of fulfilling the “legal minimums”. Whatever the case may be.

            But to that I respond what makes you judge and jury on what these people experienced and did when its obvious the entire facts have not been heard?

            For all we know trusted and respected individuals (Curly and Schultz) flat out lied to create a cover-up. How does a person anticipate that? How does a person act “morally” after anticipating the deception in the first place? If Paterno/McQueary are found (via further proceedings) to have been negligent of deficient in their duties, then line them up for the firing squad.

            Until then, the simple fact is no matter what or how bad you feel, the allegations show those emotions are shallow feelings based on fear unless, I admit, you, or someone close to you, has had something similar occur to them…I do not include myself in this discussion because I have had 2 individuals in my life be the victims of underage rape.

            In my mind the mentality exhibited here shows a disturbing willingness to assume without fact.
            I’ve said it before here and I’ll say it again…

            I want to calmly, rationally, and unemotionally understand all the facts of the situation then ensure those responsible receive a punishment (I prefer not to go into the details of said punishment here) and I simply see far too many people being reactionary in this situation.

            The time for torches and pitchforks will come and those deserving will see the justice they deserve and more. Until that time, keep an open, and remembering, mind and more importantly be willing to follow through on your convictions. Its been my experience that the “angry public” is all too willing to forget their “righteous indignation” once the spectacle of the event is passed…

          • Phil says:

            PSU Guy-

            I’s hard for people to keep hearing that we should all calm down and let things take their course, when even the small amount of detail released in the indictment makes a strong case already that people or people at Penn St seemingly let things go on for years longer than they should have and let Sandusky create new victims long after he should have been locked up.

            I can understand the tone of your messages, which is a hope that in the end this will mainly fall on Curley and Schultz, and the great thing built at Penn State won’t be destroyed.

            However, something had already created a climate of fear where McQueary and the janitor were conflicted (which is not normal) about coming forward after witnessing an abominable crime. Sandusky was a coach with access to Penn St and a charity involving kids since the 70′s and it is unlikely he started being a monster in his mid-50′s in 1998. With the publicity of the case and the possibility of EARLIER victims or ex-employees coming forward, this thing has a much more potential to get a lot worse rather than get better.

            The unspoken best case of yours where this tragedy can be passed off an aberration due to the failures of a few people rather than an institutional problem is a train that left the station in 2002, or 1998, or earlier.

  11. Mack says:

    Of course Its all about the money. Only a West Virginia court is going to be able to get WVU to play in the Big East (specific performance). A Rhode Island court can say the Big East can keep all of WVUs share of the conference money to be distributed. That is why the Big East filed in Rhode Island, along with it being a more friendly venue.
    Although Pittsburg and Syracuse may want to exit for 2012, I am not sure the ACC wants them until 2013. The ACC shcools have no pressing need to rework their football schedules. The Big 12 does. All of these schools have ZERO probability of playing in the Big East in 2013/14.

  12. herbiehusker says:


    • mushroomgod says:

      I saw that one of the PSU officials is on “administrative leave”……does anyone know if it’s paid leave?

      • PSUGuy says:

        Tim Curly has been granted administrative leave. Gary Schultz was retired and filling in as interim. He has also been given leave.

        I have no clue what the rules are on administrative leave, but my understanding from other industries is it is a “no pay” status.

        • Anthony London says:


          I have long admired your posts on this blog. While I commend you for remaining rational through your responses and in defending your institution, I have to tell you that I’m extremely disappointed in you. In all of your former posts, you come across as a man of honor and integrity, but your defending this situation is reprehensible. I agree that the facts need to come out, but even if only 10% of what’s reported is true, this is truly a despicable situation, and I won’t post what should happen to Mr. Sandusky, but my favorite phrase from pulp fiction, uttered by Ving Rhames after a similar scene, comes to mind….

          Regardless of how this shakes out, minor boys were sexually assaulted while an entire administration did nothing,not to mention the fact that university property was being used to perpetrate this heinous crime. Whether you believe people were legally or morally obligated to act, nothing was done to protect the truly innocent. As bad as the incidents involving Miami, Auburn, OSU and USC were, this incident trumps all of those by a wide margin. I will grant you that I may be more sensitive to child molestation because we are expecting our first in two months, but crimes against children are the absolute worst, and quite honestly, are unforgivable.

          I have been to Happy Valley many times and I’ve really enjoyed myself, but I can no longer root for PSU in any way, shape or form. In my humble opinion, everyone at that institution has to go…. Unfortunately that included Joe Paterno, and his legacy will be tainted by this regardless of whenever he leaves.

          If this causes you to put me in the “irrational” camp, then so be it. But understand that defending your school in this situation puts you in a “camp” too. I feel badly for you, because this will get worse before it gets better.

          Regards, while shaking my damn head……

          • PSUGuy says:

            I appreciate your consideration and I really do hope nothing of what I have posted has put you off reading what I write here…specifically what I just posted to Frank (and another) above.

            In the end, while I am not a father, I have had 2 very important individuals in my life be the victims of underage rape. I am perhaps more sensitive to these issues than I should be, but my sensitivity causes an initial reaction of distant observation rather than visceral emotional response. The reason is simply I need to know the truth. I need to know facts. And in my life’s experience, facts and truth are only clouded by emotion.

            Too many people are spouting opinion. Anthony London, you have your opinion, and are welcome to it, but I think you would admit you don’t have all the information.

            I know I do not.

            The only thing I urge (to all, including myself) is regardless of opinion (which you are welcome to hold) to keep an open mind. Listen to everything. Think clearly, rationally, and unemotionally.

            And more importantly, in a couple months when all the facts start to be aired…do not go anywhere. Don’t be like the rest of the world and forget about it, other than as a joke, because the spectacle has gone away.

            That’s what I rail against here…the spectacle that draws the gawkers and rubberneckers unconcerned by anything other than seeing someone famous strung up.

            I’ve said it before and will say it again…if Paterno is found lacking I want him to enjoy the same punishment as Sandusky. If he could have done more, but didn’t I want him gone.

            I just don’t want innocent individuals (if they exist) surrounding this occurrence to be forever tainted because the “angry mob” has demanded blood.

          • Brian says:


            I’ll give you credit for trying to keep a level head while the rest of the world seems to be against your school because someone you held in high esteem apparently did horrible things. Having gone through the media storm against OSU, I can sympathize.

            I think most of us can agree to a few simple statements, assuming the GJ testimony is roughly true:

            1. Sandusky is the lowest form of life and deserves whatever punishment he gets.
            2. The actions of the AD and VP, and maybe even the president, are highly questionable at best.
            3. JoePa and McQueary didn’t break the law.
            4. Nobody did as much as they could have to stop this from happening again, and that’s a tremendous shame.
            5. Everybody involved is going to get some undeserved blame due to the magnitude of the outrage people have at what occurred. It’s human nature.

            Now as for my opinion:

            If JoePa could look me in the eye and honestly say he has a clear conscience about his treatment of this event, then I would accept that. He didn’t do nothing, he didn’t actively cover it up, and he was 75 years old. I doubt he was highly versed on child abuse statutes, so he did what he would have for any major scandal – tell his boss. I’d like to hear him explain why he waited a day, but I can believe he had a decent reason. His behavior was not above reproach, but nobody is perfect. He’s done enough good things at PSU that I will accept his conscience as the final judge.

            I have yet to hear anyone provide a plausible excuse for McQueary not calling the police. I could understand if he instinctively called Joe first, but any delay of more than a few minutes is unacceptable to me. Calling his father is a strange response at best. He was 28 years old and training to be a leader of men. His father’s advice is despicable to me, because he was clearly trying to protect the program. My dad would have yelled at me for not already calling the police. From his own testimony, it is clear that he was not confused about what he saw and heard. He heard the sounds of sexual intercourse and then saw it happening. He knows that is a crime, but he didn’t call the police. Since there was no threat to him, I can see no justification for his lack of calling the police.

  13. bullet says:

    For mascots, the SEC now has 3 tigers, 1 wildcat, 2 bulldogs, a collie, a pig, an alligator, a chicken, an elephant and 3 guys in funny hats.

    • bullet says:

      And actually Auburn can’t make up its mind whether its a tiger, a bird or a guy in a funny hat.

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        bullet – One of the guys in a funny hat (Col. Reb) is now a Louisiana Black Bear in a funny hat.

        • bullet says:

          I know it changed this year, but 3 guys in a funny hat sounds better.

          Its a “Louisiana” black bear? They have to borrow an animal from a neighboring state? I knew Mississippi was poor, but….

  14. M says:


    I really want all this to end up with a Big East-West division and a South Eastern Conference- North West Division. Also, an Atlantic Coast Conference- Several Hundred Miles from the Atlantic Coast would be fun too (Pitt, Syracuse, VT, Clemson, FSU, GT, ?).

  15. swesleyh says:

    Bullet, your jealousy of the SEC knows no limits. Big Twelve mascots are a cow, a bird, a teddy bear, a wagon, a masked rider, a cowboy, a wildcat, a country hick, a toad and a big storm. Nice match up.

    • bullet says:

      So you’re saying The Big 12 has 3 guys in funny hats as well as a wagon for them to ride away from the big storm that noone cares about.

      BTW, I’m a Wildcat and a Bulldog fan as well as a Longhorn. The SEC has some special rivalries. I hate to see it messed up by getting supersized.

    • vp19 says:

      Actually, Iowa State’s mascot is not a cyclone but a cardinal (Cy), for the school colors of cardinal and gold. (The Southern Cal of the Midwest!)

  16. swesleyh says:

    I would really like the B1g and the ACC to go to divisions EAST/WEST where I could remember which school belongs to which. Legends, leaders, atlantic and coastal. ????

    • greg says:

      Your beloved SEC’s geographic divisions are about as geographic as the Big Ten. B10 has NW and SE divisions, just with bad names.

      • footballnut says:

        So the Big 10 (12) has a funny looking guy with a goofy big head, a bird, 3 small nasty animals, the obligatory lion and wildcat, a train, a nut…and to top it off, the ghost of an indian chief and whatever a hoosier is.

        All you guys need is a leprechaun to top it off.

  17. bullet says:

    Link found on Mr. SEC’s site: SC President says SEC to 9 games-and no guarantee of any extra money to SEC or SC by expansion (but he expects some eventually).

    Those 12 cancelled games will yield some opponents for the BE if they lose WVU.

    • ccrider55 says:

      “The move currently hasn’t guaranteed more money for the university and the SEC, Pastides said, but he expects the move to eventually profit USC.

      “Money does matter at a time when resources are so constrained,” he said”

      Currently being the operative word, in my uninformed opinion. Is there a concern that without expansion revenue would be reduced? Watch what they are doing, or have done. It’s more instructive than public pronouncements.

    • redwood86 says:

      9 conference games! This is the best news yet! I bet that came at the behest of ESPN.

    • frug says:

      I guess this means UF will have to start leaving the state more than 3.5 times a year.

    • Brian says:


      The article also had this tidbit:

      “The president also guaranteed USC would keep its annual matchup with Arkansas.”

      So it looks like many of the theories about the annual games were wrong, unless they lock 2 opponents.

      • bullet says:

        I don’t see that (2 locked). Maybe that was part of what took so long. Missouri was negotiating for A&M, not Arkansas. Now there will be noone they play who cares about them, but it might give them a better chance to keep getting some Texas recruits.

        • zeek says:

          This is what I was saying before.

          Everyone was saying Missouri wanted to play Arkansas, but why would either side really care about that? Texas A&M is a much more attractive opponent from the perspective of getting an angle on Texas recruiting (which is the lifeblood of the Pinkel program).

          Arkansas probably cares a lot more about playing Texas A&M and LSU from the perspective of history.

          Unlike A&M, Missouri has no natural rivals in the SEC, they’re like Nebraska but without the “natural” Iowa rivalry. I don’t consider Missouri-Arkansas to be as natural a fit as Nebraska-Iowa. Missouri and Arkansas are like two different regions…

          • John says:

            the southern 1/3 of MO (everything south of I-44) is very similar to Arky. Saying that the two states are like two different regions is very much a stretch.

          • greg says:

            John, that likely means that 20% of MO’s population is similar to AR. I’d say the two states are more different than alike.

          • bullet says:

            You can sure see the difference in the highways. You’ve got these narrow two lane roads winding around the hills. Cross the state line and you’ve got straight 4 lane roads blasting through the hills.

          • John says:

            I was talking about “regions” and look n feel of the states. You are using % population to determine what makes up Missouri as compared to Arky? Sure that will make your point, but you also then don’t need to go any further than STL/KC metro areas as that would be “Missouri” to you. Sure that’s not like Arkansas, but that’s b/c Arkansas doesn’t have cities! :)

            As someone from Missouri (not KC/STL), I can see almost as much rural similarities between Missouri and Arkansas as I can Missouri and Iowa, and would argue that those parts of the state have much more to do with who Missouri is than your % pop would give credit to.

          • Brian says:

            zeek (and others),

            What some seem to forget is that the University of Arkansas is in Fayetteville, in the extreme northwest corner of the state. Little Rock, in the middle of AR, is 189 miles away. Branson is 100 miles away. Springfield, MO is 149 miles away. KC is 239 miles away.

            I’d say that UA is plenty like MO.

          • Wes Haggard says:

            Texas A&M – LSU is a very natural rival with a lot of history. Could be this game will replace the Longhorn – Aggie game on Thanksgiving Day unless Texas revisits their no play A&M policy.

      • bullet says:

        If true about 9 games, it is not just to protect rivalries, but it is also their effort to get more money out of the TV deals. Frankly, A&M and Missouri don’t do much when you are starting with the SEC’s base and going from 12 to 14. With 9 games, they’ve got more to offer. Not sure where ESPN would put it. But they are going from 48 conference games to 68. And those conference games have much more TV value than Western Kentucky, New Mexico State and the Citadel.

        Now it may be just one president’s opinion. I would think UK, Vandy, Ole Miss and MS St. would want an extra win for bowl eligibility and UF, LSU, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn and UGA would be loathe to give up the home date. Since he’s talking 2012, we’ll find out pretty quick.

        • duffman says:


          I am guessing UK vs WKU would sell better PPV than UK vs MU just because it is an in state game, and WKU bleeds into Tennessee where it is located.

        • Andy says:

          Bullet, you’re a longhorn fan so obviously you don’t want to give your rival Aggies any credit, and you certainly don’t think much of Mizzou. But to any objective observer it’s clear why adding MU and A&M helps the SEC financially. First, they add two top 30 football programs. Second, they increase the population footprint of the SEC by 30-50% by adding Houston, St. Louis, and half of KC along with east Texas and central and southern Missouri. Third, they add an additional 8 conference games to the inventory. Fourth, if going to 14 triggers a move to 9 conference games, that’s an additional 7 conference games to the inventory for a total of 15 additional conference games. Fifth, the increased inventory will enable the creation of an SEC network, which will likely make over $100M per year. When it’s all said and done, the SEC will make a huge profit by adding these two schools. That is why they did it. Your sour grapes arguments don’t hold water.

          • PSUGuy says:

            Your sweet grapes are not based in reality…

          • bullet says:

            #1 I’ll believe the SEC network when it happens.
            #2 The Big 10 network doesn’t make $100 million a year. The SEC certainly isn’t anytime soon.
            #3 Pro sports towns-KC, SL, Houston, DFW don’t have the penetration for the college game that the state of Alabama has. Its more people, but its not a proportional advantage. College sports are more important than pro sports in all of the SEC’s territory with the exception of south Florida (and yes they are more important in Atlanta).
            #4 SEC already gets pretty good ratings in Texas. In fact, they’ve been getting better ratings in Houston than A&M recently.
            #5 SEC has 6 top 20 programs and 8 top 30. A&M and Missouri lower the average. As I said, “given the SEC’s base.” A&M and Missouri both have great potential, but haven’t realized it. They weaken the SEC competitively.

            The SEC wouldn’t have done it if they didn’t believe it added value. But I doubt its much under the current contracts.

          • Andy says:

            You both hope that the SEC made some kind of a mistake. I for one will be shoked if they don’t end up making a bundle on this deal. Time will tell.

          • duffman says:


            I think TAMU was a great add for the SEC, not as sure about MU. From what I can tell the SEC thrives on fans that treat their teams like pro teams. While UT may be the bigger dog in the state, the TAMU folks seem pretty fanatical. Not sure about MU as I said all along they fit the B1G way better than the SEC, and not sure at all if MU can deliver STL and KC. We shall see, but MU may have just signed on to be the new cellar dweller in all sports in a conference crazy about sports.

          • ccrider55 says:

            If carriers give an SECN a similar deal to what the P12N got then the whole state of MO will be on basic, whether fanatical or not. Good deal for the conference. It remains to be seen if good competitively for MU, but from a presidents perspective a good move.

            Bullet, do you doubt an SECN is comming at all, or just saying it must wait until current contract runs out?

            I believe the BTN is over 100 mill by quite a bit, but aprox 50% goes to Fox. Seems like last year it distributed a few 100k less per school than the primary contract did, if memory serves.

          • hinode says:

            The mistake the SEC made – and this is all purely in hindsight – was not inviting A&M/Mizzou, but signing a godfather deal with ESPN to put all the content that would’ve made a SEC Network a BTN-level cash cow onto ESPNU and an ESPN-controlled syndication package instead. Now they’re going to either have to buy the rights back from ESPN somehow (possibly by giving ESPN control, and much of the profits from the network) or wait more than a decade for the rights to revert back.

          • bullet says:

            From what I’ve read, I think an SEC network before 2023 would be very hard to do (but I haven’t seen any detailed analysis of the ESPN contract). I’m also skeptical they do one at all. A&M is planning their own, not a conference network. Schools other than Vandy, Missouri, MS St and Ole Miss are going to have to be convinced its more profitable than keeping it themselves. UK, Florida, Alabama and LSU are doing very well on their own with their 3rd tier rights.

          • bullet says:

            Also, regarding those markets: The Big 10 picked Nebraska with 1.8 million people and a slower growth rate than Missouri’s 6.0 million. They picked a school who’s AAU membership was at risk vs. one who, for the time, seems quite secure. I think we’ve found brands matter a lot more than markets. Alabama doesn’t deliver Kansas City. Missouri would have to deliver it before Alabama can make a dent.

          • Andy says:

            The SEC is quite intent on starting an SEC Network soon, and sold Mizzou on the idea as an inducement for getting Mizzou to join the conference. They believe it will be profitable.

            As for Nebraska, they’re not just a brand, they’re the third winningest football program in history. There are very few of those, and even fewer that would switch conferences. Getting a top 30 program that is the only program in a state of 6M is pretty good. And for all the talk of Mizzou not delivering St. Louis and KC, that’s nothing more than talk. Look at Mizzou’s tv ratings in those two cities. In St. Louis they are excellent, literally 5 times higher than Illinois. In KC they are less strong but still stronger than any other school.

            If joining the SEC brings some added excitement to Mizzou’s program they could increase their market share in both cities.

            After Mizzou completes their $160M facilities upgrade over the next four years they’ll be more on par with the other SEC schools. I expect they’ll perform similarly to Arkansas and South Carolina, with some good seasons and some bad seasons but generally in the upper half of the league and regularly going to bowl games. All of this talk of Mizzou being a doormat has no basis in reality. Mizzou has been to bowl games in 6 out of the last 7 seasons. Up until this year they were averaging 10 wins per year for the past 4 years. Their average attendance is in the top 25 in the country. There’s no reason they can’t hold their own in the SEC East. Any talk to the contrary is wishful thinking by Mizzou’s rivals.

            Will Mizzou win the SEC any time soon? Probably not. Did they win the Big 12 either? No. So what difference does it make? Their schedule next year will actually likely be easier than it was this year. The SEC East is weaker than the Big 12 right now.

          • Mack says:

            A&M and Mizzou are good additions to the SEC and detract from the B12. WVU would have been a better cultural fit for the SEC than Mizzou but did not have the TV sets (academics do not factor into SEC decisions).
            As careful as the SEC has been, I cannot believe it provided any inducements (grounds to sue if it does not happen) to Missouri about a SEC network. I think this was all Mizzou SEC supporters trying to convince other Mizzou fans. Mizzou did not need convincing. Both Mizzou and A&M made their decisions to leave the B12 in early 2010. They just needed a place to go.
            GA gets as much or more from 3rd tier as FL, AL, LSU, KY. and TN does not do bad either. A&M is not going to give up its market after seeing what Texas got. Even if they could get out of all the ESPN agreements, a SEC netowrk seems like a tough sell to the current schools.
            Texas gets better ratings in Houston than A&M. A&M plays better with the “redneck” crowd than Texas. That is fairly well distributed all over Texas. The only market A&M owns is Bryan.

            NFL competition (Chiefs, Rams, Texans, and Cowboys) weakens college ratings. The reason Rice and SMU were once major college programs (they sold out 70K seat stadiums in the ’50s) was they were the top level football in Houston and Dallas. The NFL came to town (initially playing at the Rice and SMU home stadiums) and the attendance died within 5 years. These small schools did not have enough alumni, the casual fan switched to the pro teams, and they got relegated to the WAC. Texas has enough TVs that even with NFL competition A&M will add to the SEC. Mizzou needs more market development to reach its potential. The proof is the talk of an even split SEC network. If Mizzou could deliver its market, it would be like A&M and not want to share 3rd tier rights.

          • duffman says:


            Not sure about MU being in the top 25 in attendance as we looked at that here back in the spring of 2010 when we were discussing schools on Frank the Tank. Top 30 – 35 maybe, but it drops pretty quickly after the first 20 schools. I think 9 of the 12 SEC schools were in the top 25 with Arkansas and Kentucky ahead of Missouri. When we were discussing Kentucky to the B1G back then it was amazing how consistent UK football attendance was over the 40 year life of Commonwealth Stadium considering how bad their football teams have been.

            Can you link this 140 million upgrade for Missouri? If it was in the works already, I am surprised Delany did not get more aggressive with MU. On being competitive in the SEC we will have to wait and see. It took Arkansas and South Carolina about a decade just to be “average” and both schools have had 20 years head start. Arkansas, Mississippi State, and Kentucky all have several hundred million dollar upgrades in their plans. I think the Arkansas one is around 300 – 350 million in facilities upgrades.

            The bigger question is how will MU recruit with the loss of Texas recruiting? If they suddenly go from much exposure in Texas via the B12 to a game every other year that will be much less exposure. If they get Arkansas as their cross division rival instead of TAMU it will mean no exposure at all in Texas. Kentucky and Tennessee do not produce in state kids in big numbers and have to recruit Georgia and Florida. Columbia is far from these states, and kids generally go to a school within 250 miles from their homes.

          • bullet says:

            Missouri is currently a South Carolina/Arkansas level program. The question is whether they can maintain their Texas recruiting pipeline or replace it. And from the Georgia ADs remarks, it hasn’t been decided who the cross-division rivals are yet, so Missouri may be playing A&M in Texas once in 12 years. Arkansas used to compete for the top Texas players and were one of the top programs in the nation. They were 2nd in the AP poll points for the decade of the 60s, 10th in the 70s and 20th in the 80s. Then they joined the SEC and now are an afterthought in Texas recruiting. The last two decades they have been 42nd and 37th in poll points.

          • Andy says:

            Mack: Academics were a factor for the SEC. Saying they weren’t doesn’t make it so. And they do plan to create an SEC network, whether you want them to or not. Go ahead and doubt it but you’ll see it for yourself soon enough.

            duffman: Multiple reports have come out, including one from ESPN about a month ago, that Mizzou is about to invest around $160M in facilities.

            Why didn’t Delaney go after Missouri? My theory is that if they added Missouri then they didn’t have anyoen good to add as school #14. They could add Rutgers, but that wasn’t considered good enough. If they could have added Mizzou plus, say, Texas A&M or Texas or Notre Dame or Virginia or someon like that theyd do it, but they couldn’t get a good #14.

            Mizzou was ranked 25th in attendance last year. Look it up. It’s true. Mizzou averages around 64,000 per game.

            bullett: Mizzou’s recruiting should improve, if anything. Their cross divisional rival has been set. It’s Texas A&M. Plus they play two schools from Tennessee so they should be able to recruit Memphis better. And they play Florida and Georgia every year. How many schools get to play every year in Texas, Florida, and Georgia? Only one that I know of. Recruiting will be fine.

  18. Adam says:

    Now that the Big East is trying to get to 12, what’s to say the Big 12 won’t do the same?
    Maybe Louisville ends up in the Big 12 after all along with BYU and the Big East is left to add ECU and either Temple or Villanova along with the invites they’ve already “allegedly” sent to Boise St., Houston, SMU, UCF and Navy.

  19. Gopher86 says:

    Internal OU emails. It’s a pdf, so it is searchable. LOTS of good stuff. Emails by Beebe, Ken Starr, Bob Dole and other big time boosters.

    • Mike says:

      Warren Metcalf should avoid Provo.

    • bullet says:

      Some thoughts-Joe Castiglione looks like he was really out of the loop.
      Page 55-getting info from Orangebloods
      Page 82-getting info on President Boren’s comments from Texas Tech AD
      Page 143-wondering whether Purple Wildcat’s ND/UT to Big 10 rumour was true
      Page 155-getting signals on Scott’s intentions through the media

      Page 132-Pete Thamel thinking Pac 12 wasn’t too enthused on September 13 in e-mail to Boren. NYT Thamel had close ties to OU. (I seem to recall-but I’m not certain-some really anti-UT commentary from NYT-now we know their sources).

      Almost all OU fans wanting them to leave them to leave the conference-reasons could be summed up as: “I hate Texas so you should leave the Big 12.”

      Page 10-A&M President Loftin-AFTER A&M had already decided to leave the conference-was stirring up trouble, trying to get Bowen to believe there was an ESPN/UT conspiracy because of WOMEN’s basketball scheduling (for those of you who don’t follow WBB, A&M won the national championship and Baylor was in final 4 and one of the favorites this year). Its hard to believe Loftin actually got a Phd at Rice.

      • Gopher86 says:

        It looks like he went to Lee H. Berke to see if the Purple Book Cat theory passed the sniff test. It didn’t according to LHB, because of the courting procedure.

        Berke is a consultant for TV networks– he was involved in the YES Network, among other things:

    • Mike says:

      Page 42 – Its not just ESPN

      I thought you might be interested in this is information as you all consider membership
      possibilities. Your league office will be contacted by Fox to advocate San Diego State’s candidacy. If
      you have any questions please give me a call at 509-432-6824.

    • Mike says:

      Who is “Rob” on page 116? Interesting discussion on SMU and Big 12 politics.

    • frug says:

      Here is the collection of emails from Okie State. Haven’t read them all the way, but it seems to show that OU and OSU were caught off guard by the PAC-12 decisions despite their public statements. (OSU was already forming a committee to make realignment arrangements)

    • ccrider55 says:

      Who got ahold of these? will there be more? Why do they end just as OU talked to UT right before either (1) the Pac Presidents steped hard on the brakes in spite of Larry Scotts preference, or (2) Scott got wind that Boren was using the potential Pac 14 simply as leverage in negotiation with UT while planning to remain, and informed the Presidents who pulled the rug from under Boren. I was hoping for some insight as to how that may have gone down.

      • bullet says:

        Note that none of them were FROM Boren. He either got attorney-client privilege or simply didn’t use e-mail for precisely this reason.

        • Redhawk says:

          the only few comments from Boren were down in email chains as others replied.

          And yes, Boren doesn’t use university/public email. (and before anyone asks, yeah I know what they use, and it’s pretty cutting edge….something that wouldn’t be thought of to ask for in information request)

    • frug says:

      Wow. Notre Dame and UT jointly presented a proposal to the Big 10 that would have resulted in both joining the conference.

      ESPN has, for self-serving purposes, drastically exaggerated the lean of Texas to the Pac12 conference in nearly all commentary. ESPN has essentially waged a propaganda campaign to drive support among the Texas stakeholders to the Pac12 conference. ESPN has gone so far as to attempt to accelerate the disintegration of the Big XII to pressure Texas into making an immediate conference change decision. Texas has steadfastly resisted change, and will do so until the appropriate time occurs for Texas to stand in a strong position to renegotiate television contracts, including with ESPN.

      In reality, the preference expressed by Texas’ relevant leadership is to depart the Big XII for the Big Ten at the time that gives Texas the greatest leverage in negotiating a new television rights deal. The Big Ten and Texas agreed that Texas should do what is best for Texas, which they also both agree is a move by Texas to join the Big Ten Conference. Delaney’s top priority has been to create an environment for Texas and Notre Dame to join the conference on mutually benefical terms.

      If this is accurate it looks like A) a Super Big 10 was closer than anyone thought and B) ESPN has their hands all over realignment even more than originally thought.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        I believe that is just a C&P of Purple Cat’s post.

        • frug says:

          I meant to add that I didn’t really believe it, but it is pretty sensational if true.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            It was discussed at length here after it was first posted on the Northwestern board.

            FWIW it looks like Castiglione forwarded it to Lee H. Burke who is the only one I found so far who commented on it…

            “Thanks. It’s tempting, but I don’t see Notre Dame & Texas making a joint presentation
            to the Big Ten and awaiting their response, with the deal terms made public that
            night. If it ever happens, it would be the Big Ten courting each school separately, with
            the process being kept much more confidential. Big Ten did a pretty good job of
            keeping the specifics of their expansion negotiations out of the media last time

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Hmm looks like the original post was deleted from the Wildcats board. The active post here when it went up is:


          • frug says:

            Yeah, now I remember that discussion and thinking it was crap, but the fact that Castigilione was concerned about it caught my interest.

      • ccrider55 says:

        Yea, right. ESPN pushed UT toward the PAC and to disintegrate the Big 12 by paying it 5 times the actual worth for the LHN, the primary obstical to joining the PAC and the reason to keep their own private harem, err, conference.

    • frug says:

      Ok read the whole thing, and the best part is easily Ken Starr kissing Boren’s ass on page 170:

      For decades, you have had – and continue to win — my deepest respect and highest admiration. Watching you in Washington was to see a rarity in modern public life – a true statesman. I know that, by God’s grace, your statesmanship can preserve this conference.
      My Sunday morning pre-worship thought is this: You, an acclaimed Governor, Senator and university president for seventeen years, have been summoned to serve for a time like this.

      Great stuff.

  20. Brian says:

    I mentioned this on the previous post not long before Frank put up this post, so I’ll mention it again here:

    B10 TV schedule for 11/12


    Nebraska at Penn State, ESPN
    Michigan State at Iowa, ESPN2
    Ohio State at Purdue, Big Ten Network
    Rice at Northwestern, Big Ten Network

    3:30 P.M. ET

    Michigan at Illinois, ABC regional (ESPN in outer markets)
    Wisconsin at Minnesota, Big Ten Network

    ABC must have maxed out on allowable NE or PSU games, because there is no way MI/IL is a bigger game. With the news out of PSU now, they’d have to want to make that the big game. Maybe Matt Millen will be doing that game.

    They also released the times for next week’s games:

    B10 TV schedule for 11/19


    Nebraska at Michigan, ESPN or ESPN2*
    Wisconsin at Illinois, ESPN or ESPN2*
    Indiana at Michigan State, Big Ten Network
    Iowa at Purdue, Big Ten Network
    Minnesota at Northwestern, Big Ten Network

    3:30 P.M. ET

    Penn State at Ohio State, ABC regional (ESPN in outer markets)

    *-Final designation made after Nov. 12 games

    Unless MI and NE both lose this week, I have to think NE/MI will be the ESPN game.

    • Eric says:

      Make the choice of Nebraska-Minnesota all the more questionable. Either that, or they really are trying to move more and more of the bigger games to ESPN (remember the bowls).

      • Brian says:

        Perhaps they had to fulfill a 1 game per team requirement for MN and chose that. I don’t remember that being on ABC.

  21. Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

    Speaking of lawsuits….

    ‘Jeff Anderson, a plaintiff’s attorney who has represented thousands of sexual abuse plaintiffs over the past 28 years, told OKTC this afternoon that he’d already been in contact with some of the alleged victims of Jerry Sandusky. “Right now we are working on this,” Anderson said, “that much I can tell you. We’re receiving calls from family members of the victims and consulting with them.” Asked whether a civil complaint against Penn State, coaches and administrators was forthcoming, Anderson declined to comment further.

    But he did discuss in great detail the unfurling scandal at Penn State and the potential fallout of any civil lawsuit. “This situation is perfectly analogous to all the Catholic church cases I’ve litigated,” Anderson said. “People at the top protected the institution at the peril of children. Here the coaches and administrators of Penn State were acting just like the bishops, cardinals, and archbishops of these dioceses. The same moral and legal quagmire exists. Penn State protected the football program’s reputation instead of the children.”

    He said that Sandusky’s alleged acts, just like the Catholic priets, were both “cunning and careful.”

    As a result, Anderson said, “They (Penn State) clearly face severe legal exposure for institutional failure. They are liable for these incidents.”‘

    • acaffrey says:

      I spent some time trying to rationalize Joe Pa on this one. Maybe he didn’t have a moral duty to call the police and so on. At the end of the day, I just cannot do it. He should step down.

      • jj says:

        Here’s what makes no sense. Joepa gets told something horrible about one if his coaches that he seems to believe is plausible and reports it. Yet he never confronts one of his coaches about it and they just keep on working together? Bull. These two have discussed this.

        • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

          I also find it very hard to believe that none of the previous incidents were never mentioned to him (especially ’98 & the two in ’00).

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Stupid double negative. Grrr.

          • SideshowBob says:

            I’m pretty sure that no one knew about the 2000 incident until recently, as the janitor was fearful to come out about it.

          • mushroomgod says:

            GJ report says Schultz knew about the 1998 investigation by the “child protection agency”, that the incident was investigated by the university police, and that univeristy counsel Wendall Courtney was also aware of the invertigation….

            As to Sandusky retiring, Schultz testified that “Paterno felt it was time to make a coaching change…”

        • bullet says:

          If its really bad maybe he wanted the police and others to deal with it. He reported it but not to the police, but he didn’t actually see it. This is someone who was 76 in 2002. Things like this, if not rarer when he was younger, weren’t discussed as openly as now.

          I haven’t read the whole summary, but so far I don’t see anything JoePa did wrong.

          • acaffrey says:

            I guess that’s my point. If he cannot make the important decisions because he is 76, then he cannot be in that position of authority. You have to encourage the Grad Asst and the AD to make a report.

            In the end, a good man goes down because he did not seek justice against a bad man. That is a shame, but it was Joe Pa’s decision. A few more kids were abused because Joe Pa did not see this through.

          • SideshowBob says:

            “A few more kids were abused because Joe Pa did not see this through.”

            Or more correct, a few more kids were abused because Curley and Shultz were apparently assholes who failed to do their jobs. Especially Shultz who was aware of the past allegations of Sandusky and was in charge of the campus police force (under whom’s jurisdiction the 2002 incident was committed).

            I’m really not comfortable with the blanket media portrayal of Paterno being so horribly wrong in all this. I mean, I get the point that he could have — and perhaps should have — done more (though we really don’t know the full story at this point of what actions he did take). But:

            1. He didn’t molest anyone
            2. His didn’t witness anyone being molested
            3. He didn’t bury the information, but arranged for the information relayed to the proper authorities equipped to address it.

            Paterno is a lynchpin because he’s a big name and famous, but his involvement was incidental and he did the right thing when confronted with the horrible information. His failure seems to be that he didn’t follow up in ensuring that other people did their job and fulfill their obligations. That doesn’t seem to me to be the most horrible of human errors (even though the actual crime being committed of pedophilia is just terrible). There are actual monsters involved here and directly the attention on Paterno deflects it from the real perpetrators.

          • Brian says:

            What JoePa did wrong (IMO):

            1. He waited a day to tell the AD and VP. The GA saw it on Friday night. He told Joe Saturday morning. Joe met with the suits on Sunday. He says the GA didn’t tell him the details, but was clearly distraught, etc. This is OK to put off until tomorrow?

            2. He never asked any questions. I understand not wanting every detail of the incident, but how do you not ask enough to know what happened in general? How do you not ask the AD about why Sandusky is still in the building and bringing kids around? How do you not ask Sandusky about it? Why do you stop at one conversation where you pass on a vague description of what happened?

            3. He did the bare legal minimum after a career of teaching people to be better than that. That isn’t legally wrong, but it sure strikes a sour note after years of telling everyone else to do it the PSU way. He’s supposed to be a leader, not a follower.

          • acaffrey says:

            I made that argument all day. But then I just came to the conclusion that there is no real defense of this. Even if you agree that AD should report. You then ignore it?

            I could see if the fry guy at McDonalds defers to the manager… but you are damn near a supervisor yourself if you are the head football coach. You don’t follow up to ensure that it was properly reported? You don’t ever ask “So what happened with the Sandusky thing”? Or “Hey, why is Sandusky still running a camp that allows him access to minors in MY LOCKER ROOM?”

            And what could the GA have told Paterno that placated him? Sandusky and the victim were in the shower.

            Too much. I think this will get worse over time too.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            If you are aware that your long time friend & subordinate is sodomizing children at your place of business the ‘right thing’ is not to pass the buck and then spend the next 9 years waving good morning to him in the hallway everyday.

            No JoePa’s actions are by far not the worst among this sorry cast of characters…but they are still deserving of condemnation.

          • jj says:

            I don’t know the man, but I bet it ate at him. He does seem like a great guy. Maybe he thought he acted right. Who knows. I just think he knows more than what is being reported. It impossible for me to believe otherwise.

          • SideshowBob says:

            Curley reported to Spanier (PSU president) and to The Second Mile (the charitable organization that Sandusky was involved with) that “the information had been internally reviewed and that there was no finding of wrongdoing” regarding the 2002 incident. I suspect he told Paterno the same thing.

            At that point, what could expect Paterno to do? He probably thinks an investigation has been done and there is nothing to pursue. Why would he call the cops then?

            I think it’s a lot easier to condemn this with the information we have today, which is overwhelming. But we have to look at it from the prospective of 2002 Paterno who knows far less. Painting it as “he allowed a known pedophile to attend practices” but that implies that Paterno has certainty of guilt versus what was surely a huge conflict going on in his mind.

          • Jeepers says:

            “Curley reported to Spanier (PSU president) and to The Second Mile (the charitable organization that Sandusky was involved with) that “the information had been internally reviewed and that there was no finding of wrongdoing” regarding the 2002 incident. I suspect he told Paterno the same thing.”

            But if that’s the case, why would JoePa have McQueary on as WR coach? Either you have a pedophile using your campus, or you knowingly hired someone who makes up serious accusations about people in the program. Come on. There is no way in hell JoePa didn’t know about all this.

            Plus. JoePa is old school. I’d image he’s like that hardass teacher we all had growing up. Guys like that, when presented with “Coach I saw something…” would immediately sit you down and say “Son, tell me EXACTLY what you saw.” Not “Hold that thought, let me talk to the AD.”

  22. duffman says:

    Cart before Horse,

    Still unsure of JoPa in all this, but is there a faction planning to try to get Urban Meyer by getting JoPa out?

    • jj says:

      You start talking about raping kids and most people, myself included, just want to hit people. Not sure anyone’s as machiavelian (sp?) as you’re pondering. Then again, people do unbelievable stuff.

      I can’t believe none of the dads haven’t beat the crap out of these guys.

      I can’t believe what’s happened to 2 of my favorite b10 coaches.

      • jj says:

        Meaning joepa and tressel.

      • duffman says:


        If it is me and Sandusky in a room, I may be old, but I would still beat the crap out of that piece of crap (apology for the cussing, but it makes me mad)

        I have a friend with a kid on scholly at PSU, and another they are recruiting, and until now it would never occur such a thing could happen, but I know it is on his mind now.

    • Brian says:


      I doubt there are many people in that group yet, but it will grow as they get over the shock. They’ll start to see it as the silver lining to the scandal.

  23. hinode says:

    New York Times article from George Vescey, not someone who normally covers college football, blaming the cover-up in part on college football’s culture. I expect a lot more articles will come from writers, sports or otherwise, who don’t normally cover college football, and they will be more harshly critical about everyone involved than columnists and beat writers who have longstanding relationships with the Penn State athletic department.

    This story is going to get a lot bigger and uglier in the upcoming months, for Penn State and probably college football in general.

  24. m (Ag) says:

    I don’t want to talk about the current football season right now. (sigh)

    I certainly don’t want to think about anything that may have happened around Penn State.

    What else can I talk about?

    -SD State is more of a market, but I think Fresno State is the better national name out of California. I’ve thought those 2 schools would make a better pair for the Big East than the service academies. BYU and Hawaii are 2 other names that get some attention from the non-BCS schools. The Big East could form a western football division that also functioned as a separate basketball league.

    -I’m surprised it looks like Arkansas and Missouri won’t be playing each other annually. From A&M’s perspective, however, Missouri works fine as an annual opponent.

    -Congratulations to A&M’s Women soccer team, who won the Big 12 soccer tournament on Sunday, scoring the only goal in the championship game with 7 seconds left in the game. A&M finishes 16 years in the Big 12 with 7 regular season titles and 5 tournament titles.

    -The NCAA soccer tournament starts this week, with A&M playing LSU in the first round. This makes at least 3 different NCAA tournaments (soccer, softball, men’s tennis) in the past year where the 2 schools have faced off. We also met LSU in national track meets and played them in our Bowl game last year. The Longhorns may not play us any more in any regular season sport, but I’m guessing we’ll be in the same bracket all the time in tournaments starting next year.

    • Brian says:

      m (Ag),

      I don’t want to talk about the current football season right now. (sigh)

      How about we talk about the first half of games only, and why CFB games should be shortened to 30 minutes?

      I certainly don’t want to think about anything that may have happened around Penn State.

      Yeah, that gets old really quickly. Unfortunately the case could take months or even years to be resolved.

      -I’m surprised it looks like Arkansas and Missouri won’t be playing each other annually. From A&M’s perspective, however, Missouri works fine as an annual opponent.

      @Matt_HayesSN Matt Hayes
      TAMU and Missouri will be permanent crossover partners; every other permanent cross remains.

      TAMU/MO makes tons of sense for both schools.

      The most surprising thing to me is, the way the SC president said it made it sound like he felt SC fans were worried about losing AR as an annual rival. I had never gotten that sense before. I’ve only seen it described as utter indifference before. Has anyone from AR indicated they cared about keeping this game? I would have thought AR would prefer MO for the shorter trip and potential recruiting.

      I’m a little surprised that FL and LSU didn’t use this opportunity to split up their annual game. Both sides have wanted out of it. Maybe everybody else told them it was too valuable to the conference.

      Also, there’s this:

      According to an SEC PR guy, the SEC is staying at 8 games

  25. Brian says:

    Not to be the harbinger of doom or anything, but …

    2009 – MI
    2010 – OSU
    2011 – PSU

    Every year another B10 king goes down and the scandal has gotten worse each time. That doesn’t bode well for NE in 2012. All the WI fans that want WI to be treated like the big boys might want to hold that thought until after 2013, too.

  26. Brian says:

    In hopes of inspiring some less nauseating discussion, how about a prediction thread? We’ve been talking about the B10 division winners for a while, but lets get down to the details. Predict each game that will impact the division races as well as the CCG.

    NE @ PSU
    MSU @ IA
    OSU @ PU
    MI @ IL
    WI @ MN

    NE @ MI
    WI @ IL
    IN @ MSU
    IA @ PU
    PSU @ OSU

    11/26 ish
    IA @ NE
    OSU @ MI
    PSU @ WI
    MSU @ NW

    CCG matchup and winner:

    As an aside, I think it’s great to see so many games potentially have an impact on the races each week.

    • Brian says:

      NE @ PSU – NE (anger after a loss trumps rallying during a scandal, but it’s close)
      MSU @ IA – MSU
      OSU @ PU – OSU
      MI @ IL – MI (should be a good game, I could easily see IL win)
      WI @ MN – WI

      NE @ MI – NE (I think NE’s defense is too much for Denard, but they are up and down)
      WI @ IL – WI
      IN @ MSU – MSU
      IA @ PU – PU (I had to pick an upset sometime, PU is decent and IA struggles on the road)
      PSU @ OSU – OSU (home field advantage and emotional fatigue from the scandal)

      11/26 ish
      IA @ NE – NE (home field and better defense wins)
      OSU @ MI – OSU (I expect a dinged Denard and OSU’s defense does just enough to win)
      PSU @ WI – WI (home field and much better offense over the better defense)
      MSU @ NW – MSU

      CCG matchup and winner:
      OSU over MSU (it was close the first time and OSU has players back and more QB experience)

      • Ross says:

        So you expect Michigan to lose out?

        • Brian says:

          No, I picked them to beat IL. I think they have a tough finishing stretch, though, and Denard is starting to show signs of nagging injuries and/or fatigue. MI faces 3 tough defenses down the stretch which could exacerbate the problem.

          I might change my mind if MI plays a lot better this week, but I based my guesses on past performances. MI has played 3 AQs with winning records and lost 2 of 3 by barely winning at home over ND and losing at MSU and at IA.

          I expect MI to beat IL, but IL is always a tough place to play, especially with the wind blowing. I think MI is an underdog against NE and OSU. They could certainly win either or both of those games, but I’m giving them a 40% chance to win each of those games. I don’t think that’s unreasonable. If I was looking big picture only, I’d expect MI to split the NE and OSU games, but when picking the individual games I have them losing both.

  27. Brian says:

    So let’s speculate a little here:

    Both OSU and PSU may be looking for new coaches for next year. If they both are looking, how much does it complicate the search to have two kings so near each other both looking at the same time? Are they looking for different enough people that it doesn’t matter that much? Does one job outshine the other, or is it more about fit and roots in the area?

    If OSU is in the market, who do they target?
    Would PSU stay in house or want a clean slate?
    How many candidates would be on the short list for both jobs, and which way would they lean?

    • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

      Brian – I’m just guessing here, but I think Ohio State checks Urban Meyer’s level of interest first, while Penn State goes after Nick Saban.

      Meyer is an Ohio native, and Saban may have the five-year-itch.

      • Alan from Baton Rouge says:

        Lot’s of talk in Baton Rouge about Saban’s agent reaching out to Penn State through back channels. I sure don’t know if its reliable, but it makes some sense.

        This is his 5th year at Bama and he’s getting real criticism for the first time. Being a West Virginia native, Penn State was the dominant program in his region while he was growing up. Like Bill Parcels, Saban likes reclamation projects. Penn State looks to be a reclamation project.

        Here’s Saban’s resume since graduating from Kent St. in 1971.

        Kent St. – GA & Asst (72-76) 5 years
        Syracuse – Asst (77) 1 year
        West Virginia – Asst (78-79) 2 years
        Ohio St. – Asst (80-81) 2 years
        Navy – Asst (82) 1 year
        Mich St. – DC (83-87) 5 years
        NFL Oilers – Asst (88-89) 2 years
        Toledo – HC (90) 1 year
        NFL Browns – DC (91-94) 4 years
        Mich St. – HC (95-99) 5 years
        LSU – HC (00-04) 5 years
        NFL Dolphins – HC (05-06) 2 years
        Alabama – HC (07-11) 5 years

    • acaffrey says:

      Penn State: Greg Schiano. Has Rutgers bowl eligible for 6 of past 7 seasons. Team has been academically sound. No indication that he does not run a tight ship.

      As a Syracuse fan, I have no great desire for Schiano to do good. But I admire what he has done in building that program from nothing to something. And doing it the right way.* The academic success speaks for itself.

      * As far as we know.

      • Brian says:

        My only concern with Schiano is that Rutgers has regressed the past few years. Would PSU fans accept that?

        Maybe Al Golden decides to escape Miami and the coming sanctions?

      • vp19 says:

        But just remember — people in College Park felt the same way about Randy Edsall, who’s looking to be the worst fit as a Terrapins coach since Bob Ward in the late 1960s.

  28. Brian says:

    Apparently the SEC PR guy was right.

    UGA’s AD says the SEC will stay at 8 games (at least in the near term). He expects they will meet again in 2 weeks to finalize the schedules for 2012.

    • wmtiger says:

      14 teams in a conference and you only play 8 of them? Wow.

    • bullet says:

      Note that he says he only “hopes” they will be playing Auburn and Alabama playing Tennessee. “You can’t assume anything.”

      It surprised me they would go that easily to 9 as the SC President said.

    • m (Ag) says:

      If the SEC wants to go to 9 games, they won’t announce it publicly until the networks sign a contract.

      They’re renegotiating right now with the extra inventory they have with 2 new teams. Adding a conference game reduces the inventory a bit (assuming they each give up a ‘buy’ game) while increasing the number of desirable games. Even if they all want 9 games, they won’t fully commit to it until they come to an agreement with the networks.

      • Mike says:

        I thought networks only actually “paid” for conference games when determining the value of conference contracts? Therefore, wouldn’t inventory (to the networks) be greater?

      • ccrider55 says:

        Or the conference isn’t necessarily looking for the 9th game to be contracted for. Holding back a significant amount of desirable inventory for the conference network is what Scott/Weiberg did.

        • greg says:

          PAC-12 was negotiating a brand new contract when they held back inventory.

          SEC is attempting to renegotiate an existing contract. I doubt they are able to change those terms.

          • ccrider55 says:

            You are correct. They managed the 3 bil contract while holding back inventory. I’m simply saying that a significant amount of new inventory is incentive for flexability in re-negotiating. Or it may be a sign that they don’t expect it and are happily making plans to open a new, wholy owned source of revenue. BTN reaches primary contract level in four years. P12N guaranteed profitable year one (simply based on the first 4 carriers. More carriers and advertising to follow). Seems a model the SEC would explore.

  29. Michael in Raleigh says:

    I am stunned and borderline devastated that it’s Joe Paterno who responded this way. 60 years at one school doing things the “right way” as well as anyone in the game had put him above reproach in my mind. Sure, his ability to make the football program the strongest it can be probably passed several years ago, but I’ve still been encouraged that he has remained in the game because, for many valid reasons, he has represented true integrity in college sports. I’m not saying that (prior to these allegations) that I viewed him as some sort of saint, but I could at least feel pretty certain that he would do things the right way.

    Now, trying to wrap my mind around the fact that Paterno, of all people, was so negligent in protecting these kids–it’s just making my head spin. For Penn State fans, I imagine it’s heartbreaking that JoePa, their idol, failed so miserably to intervene. The majority of them cannot remember JoePa not being the head coach, and probably 95% cannot remember PSU without JoePa at least on the staff.

    But no amount of charity, status as a legend, or good reputation is enough to excuse a failure of this magnitude. More lives have been ruined because Paterno chose to do the bare minimum.

    • dchorn says:

      I’m stunned that they cancelled the press conference…State College is officially in “bunker” mode…This makes me concerned that we don’t know the “whole” story yet…The national media has yet to even begin to “dig”…I don’t know what to think, since I think the story is still developing…

      • frug says:

        The thing that is surprising to me about the press conference cancellation is that it was Spanier’s office that made the decision not Paterno. Looks like JoePa wants to clear the air but Spanier is desperate to try and gain control of the story.

        • Peter says:

          Spanier is going to be terminated and is desperately & in-vain trying not to be.

          Either that or he is a lot dirtier than we know & this is some sort of legal preservation in his mind.

          • frug says:

            I agree. Spanier’s fate was sealed the moment he publicly gave Schultz and Curley his full and unconditional support instead of immediately putting them on leave.

      • Brian says:


        For once Wetzel and his ilk can put their talents to good use. Rather than trying to ferret out NCAA violations, how about they they find more victims and witnesses?

    • Purduemoe says:

      Just another reminder that all men have feet of clay. These allegations are horrible, and I really hope Penn State does the right thing, cleans out everyone involved, and pays restitution to victims. Also, while I don’t think it is an excuse, I also understand why Paterno wouldn’t have gone any further with this than he did. He had a grad assistant who comes to him and says he saw something. What the GA told Paterno we don’t know. Paterno then sends it up the chain to get investigated, and they tell him nothing happened. Remember that the accused was someone who worked closely with Paterno for 30 years, and was probably a friend. He didn’t want to believe it was true, and when he was told it wasn’t by the higher ups he just accepted that and probably told himself that the GA didn’t see what he thought he saw and it was a misunderstanding. Not an excuse, but an understandable reaction to the situation. Now if Paterno knew more than he is letting on, I hope he burns like everyone else, but we don’t know that yet.

      • greg says:

        I don’t get this “up the chain” crap. What if this was a murder that was seen? Would you report it to the AD and a VP? or would you call the real police?

        How about if a coach was raping a 30 year old woman in the showers? Report to AD/VP, or call the real farkin police?

        • Purduemoe says:

          If you see the murder, you call the cops. If someone comes and tells you they saw something, you go to someone who has the authority and ability to investigate. Joe Paterno is not a police officer, and does not have investigative authority. If the initial witness is unwilling to go to the cops, what grounds does he have to go to them?

          • greg says:

            You tell McQuery to call the cops. WTF. The world has gone crazy to defend how this was handled.

            Why are you assuming the witness was unwilling to go to the cops? He was scared and needed guidance of the most powerful man in State College.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            “I don’t think I’ve ever been associated with a case where that type of eyewitness identification of sex acts taking place where the police weren’t called. I don’t think I’ve ever seen something like that before.”

            —PA State Police Commissioner Frank Noonan (who spent 30 years in the FBI & in the attorney general’s office)

          • metatron5369 says:

            That’s a good point, why didn’t the grad student go to the police?

            I’m not absolving him, but I think JoePa’s high profile makes him an focus for people looking to blame someone.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Why didn’t anyone call the police? Including Paterno.

            Personally I think his profile & standing make people go out of their way to defend him.

            It used to be a similar situation for Jerry Sandusky.

          • Brian says:


            You tell McQuery to call the cops. WTF. The world has gone crazy to defend how this was handled.

            Why are you assuming the witness was unwilling to go to the cops? He was scared and needed guidance of the most powerful man in State College.

            He called his dad first. Why the hell didn’t his dad tell him to call the cops immediately instead of waiting until the next morning to tell JoePa? Something is wrong with the McQueary family.

          • metatron5369 says:


            I’ve hardly seen anyone defend Joe Paterno. Pretty much every voice I’ve heard wants to hang him.

            Don’t get me wrong, I think he had a huge failing and I think he should step down, but it seems like people are acting as if he was the rapist. Maybe I just don’t have all the facts.

          • Michael in Raleigh says:

            @Scarlet Lutefisk,

            I haven’t seen people defending Paterno either. I’ve just heard people trying to wrap their minds around the idea that someone who has such a well-earned, sterling reputation have a failure of this magnitude. For me, it’s like I can’t believe my own eyes.

            Scandals, to be quite honest, are not as shocking when they happen at certain schools with a lesser track record and with coaches who are quite as morally reputable. They’re also less shocking when their nature is more along the lines of academic misconduct, player misconduct, and improper benefits (in other words, NCAA issues rather than violent crime). The fact that this scandal is 1,000 times more egregious and is occurring at Penn State, of all places, is just very hard for some people to believe. It’s hard not to give Paterno the benefit of the doubt because he’s earned that.

            But Paterno’s inaction, barring some explanation that for some reason he hasn’t shared yet, isn’t defensible.

          • 48-14 says:

            >You tell McQuery to call the cops.

            One set of actors in this is dirty. Maybe there was a payoff …

        • bullet says:

          You call the cops and they ask you, “What did you see?” The answer is he saw nothing and has nothing to report to the police. He reported it to the relevant authorities. It wasn’t his job to interrogate the GA. He didn’t know what actually happened so he wouldn’t be challenging everyone about it. If, as someone on the board mentioned, he was told it was reported and there was nothing to it, he had no reason to continue to challenge it.

          Paterno’s moral responsibility was to tell those responsible, which he did, and to tell the GA he needed to make sure he talked to those responsible and the police. I don’t think we know what he told the GA. He didn’t see the action and didn’t know that anything actually took place. This person was retired and did not report to him. Unless there is something else to come out, IMO its totally inappropriate to blame Paterno for this. Its just the something terrible happened so we must blame as many people as possible for it mentality.

          • greg says:

            The GA told him he saw the rape of a 10 year old boy. At that point, Joe should tell the GA to call the cops, not start an administrative investigation.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            “You call the cops and they ask you, “What did you see?” The answer is he saw nothing and has nothing to report to the police. He reported it to the relevant authorities. It wasn’t his job to interrogate the GA. He didn’t know what actually happened so he wouldn’t be challenging everyone about it. ”

            —I hope to god you are never in a position of responsibility regarding children.

          • bullet says:

            As I said, he should have told the GA to report it to the police in addition to the authorities.

            We don’t know what he told the GA.

            Joe wasn’t in a position of authority with regard to Sandusky in 2002. The others who were indicted were in such a position. Joe probably had respect for those two who are now indicted and couldn’t have imagined they were ignoring it. Talking to too many people can also result in damaging the evidence and possibly putting some of those young boys at risk of threats.

            I’d like to hear Joe answer questions. However, the Penn St. attorneys obviously don’t want him saying anything that could put PSU at more liability.

          • Scarlet_Lutefis says:

            “As I said, he should have told the GA to report it to the police in addition to the authorities.”

            —That is not what a leader does. He doesn’t bury his head and ask someone else to fix it.

            “Joe wasn’t in a position of authority with regard to Sandusky in 2002.”

            —Again really think about what you are saying. “Well yeah I was told he was raping a child but he didn’t directly work for me right then, even thought he was doing it in my office, so that’s why I notified HR and never called the police. ”

            “Why did I have lunch with him every day for the next several years?.”

  30. greg says:

    Penn State Said to Be Planning Paterno’s Exit Amid Scandal

    STATE COLLEGE, Pa. — Joe Paterno’s tenure as coach of the Penn State football team will soon be over, perhaps within days or weeks, in the wake of a sex-abuse scandal that has implicated university officials, according to two people briefed on conversations among the university’s top officials.

    The board of trustees has yet to determine the precise timing of Paterno’s exit, but it is clear that the man who has more victories than any other coach at college football’s top level and who made Penn State a prestigious brand will not survive to coach another season. Discussions about how to manage his departure have begun, according to the two people.

    • Purduemoe says:

      I have to say this is the right decision. Greg, also, don’t take my responses as trying to defend Paterno. I am merely trying to say that I understand why he did what he did(or failed to do what he should have). That doesn’t mean I think it was right, or what he should have done. I think you are right that he should have told McQueery to go to the cops.

    • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

      If the board had any integrity at all Paterno would be escorted out of the building today.

    • redwood86 says:

      This is LONG overdue. And I am surprised that nobody is willing to portray Paterno as the completely selfish man that he must be. Anyone who continues to coach long beyond his prime to the detriment of his program clearly thinks about himself, first, last, and always before even beginning to consider others. Paterno should have followed John Wooden’s example.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        I think that most people just don’t realize what a completely incestuous mess the entire administration at Penn State is. Not only did Sandusky and McQeuary play for Paterno so did Tim Curley (and the latter two both played for the former!).

        That’s the primary reason so many negative stories have been quashed over the year…essentially they’re all in on it. That’s not to say it’s a planned grand conspiracy it is just a byproduct of having a completely insular society with little outside oversight.

        • Peter says:

          The blatant institutional corruption at Penn State is going to require complete housecleanings at the coaching staff, AD’s office, President’s office & PSU Police. That’s the only way this sort of toxic culture will ever be killed.

          The coaching staff is a foregone conclusion now because JoePa *is* leaving, but the other purges still need to happen.

          • Brian says:

            Don’t forget that the then PSU counsel was also the legal advisor for the charity back in 1998 when the first accusations came out and he still works for the charity. The ties among the people in this are amazing.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Thanks for pointing that out Brian, I had missed that connection.

  31. Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

    The first new victim claimant steps forward….I am sure he won’t be the last:

  32. dchorn says:!/ScottPa…964938396975105

    Why do I have a sinking feeling about this…We may be entering “OJ territory” here….This is truly a circus with both Nancy Grace and Tom Rinaldi in attendance…

    • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

      You knew people were going to start throwing one another under the bus at some point. The Paternos just seem blithely unaware that those wheels are going to be rolling over them soon as well.

  33. Playoffs Now says:

    Guess you can cross Urban Meyer off the PSU list. Probably not a good idea right now to bring in a coach named after a pope…

    • Sportsman says:

      I’m sure it’s been posted elsewhere (I haven’t caught up with all of the posts), but President Spanier and Joe Paterno have been fired from PSU, effective immediately. I watched the news conference on ESPN News.

      What I’ve been wondering is, with such a hideous scandal forcing Paterno out, what does this do to the status of being the Head Coach at Penn State? Is it still a prized job, at this point in time, or do their preferred candidates not want to touch the university with a ten-foot pole?

  34. Andy says:

    I’ll post this again at the bottom as it is currently lost about 100 posts up:

    Mack: Academics were a factor for the SEC. Saying they weren’t doesn’t make it so. And they do plan to create an SEC network, whether you want them to or not. Go ahead and doubt it but you’ll see it for yourself soon enough.

    duffman: Multiple reports have come out, including one from ESPN about a month ago, that Mizzou is about to invest around $160M in facilities.

    Why didn’t Delaney go after Missouri? My theory is that if they added Missouri then they didn’t have anyoen good to add as school #14. They could add Rutgers, but that wasn’t considered good enough. If they could have added Mizzou plus, say, Texas A&M or Texas or Notre Dame or Virginia or someon like that theyd do it, but they couldn’t get a good #14.

    Also, Mizzou was ranked 25th in attendance last year. Look it up. It’s true. Mizzou averages around 64,000 per game.

    bullett: Mizzou’s recruiting should improve, if anything. Their cross divisional rival has been set. It’s Texas A&M. Plus they play two schools from Tennessee so they should be able to recruit Memphis better. And they play Florida and Georgia every year. How many schools get to play every year in Texas, Florida, and Georgia? Only one that I know of. Recruiting will be fine.

    • bullet says:

      Since the Georgia AD isn’t sure he’s going to play Auburn every year, you can’t be sure Missouri will play A&M every year.

      As for Memphis, I took a quick glance at Tennessee’s roster. Not many players are from Tennessee and most of those are from Knoxville. I only saw two Memphis players. There’s not much talent in Tennessee. And Missouri isn’t going to get Georgia kids or Alabama or Mississippi or Louisiana. They won’t go that far north. Florida is possible.

      Missouri may be successful, but its going to be a lot harder to recruit now. They have less ties to Texas and will have to supplement with recruiting against everybody east of the Mississippi in Florida. In addition, A&M may open up Texas to Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, etc., making it harder for Missouri in Texas. Before, the Big 12 had Texas locked up (except for 2 or 3 annually going to LSU and the few who just want to go see the country). There’s a path to success for Missouri, but its anything but easy.

      • bullet says:

        As for how hard Florida is, during the Mackovic era at Texas (now Mackovic was no Mack Brown as far as recruiting) they tried Florida and just couldn’t get any kids to come to Texas. By contrast, they got some very good talent out of Southern California, Ricky Williams being the most notable.

        • Andy says:

          bullet, it’s fair to say that Mizzou will have to alter its recruiting strategy. They’ll no longer be able to get 8-10 Texas kids per year. I think 4-5 is realistic. Mizzou’s assistant AD said Mizzou’s cross divisional rival would “most likely” be Texas A&M and several other sources have confirmed over the last couple of days, but that won’t be enough of a presence in Texas for Mizzou to rely heavily on. They will need to recruit Georgia and Florida as well. There may be a transitional period as they build up contacts there for the next couple of years.

          • bullet says:

            And there is one other path to success, but Notre Dame and Tennessee are the only ones who have successfully done that, which is to recruit the entire country.

    • metatron5369 says:

      They married out of desperation, I just hope they don’t regret their decision in the time to come.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        While it isn’t a blockbuster I don’t think either party will be unhappy with it in the long term.
        Missouri gets to join conference that will provide long term stability & the SEC adds a solid institution that will raise the academic profile and overall footprint for the conference.

        It’s still a win win…even if it isn’t a huge one.

        • Andy says:

          It’s yet to be determined what kind of a win it will be. At worst the SEC improved their academics and footprint and added what might become the 9th or 10th best football program in their league down with Kentucky and Ole Miss. At best Mizzou’s program is invigorated by the move and rises into the top 5 or 6 alongslide Georgia and Tennessee. Time will tell.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Your best case scenario “they become a mid pack team” isn’t really much of a win.

          • Andy says:

            Right now Mizzou is at the bottom of the top third of the Big 12, a lesser league than the SEC. Best case Mizzou rises to the bottom of the top third of the SEC, a superior league. Thus it is a win.

        • metatron5369 says:

          Sure, I’ll buy that.

          But I still think they were on the Big Ten’s short list when they expand again. I wonder if Missouri would betray their new friends if the opportunity ever came to move up north.

          • greg says:

            Missouri probably was on the Big Ten’s short list. But the presidents apparently had no desire to expand.

          • Mack says:

            One of the benefits Missouri has from the SEC is no exit fee and no notice period to quit. I think they will leave if they ever got a B1G invite, but Mizzou was not willing to wait around in the B12 for an invite that may never come.

          • metatron5369 says:


            If this were a business decision, sure. These aren’t businessmen though, they’re state appointed bureaucrats who have to answer to an emotional and unstable populace.

            If the past few years have taught us anything, it’s that realignment is a messy divorce.

    • footballnut says:

      The stadium was built to hold 65,000. Last year, to increase the capacity to 70,000 , they shortened the seat width in the student section on the east side to cram in 5,000 more. Let me tell you, it’s like a being in a can of sardines over there. Plus they sell seating on the grass and on temp seats on the north end zone.

      They plan to build lux boxes on top of the east side like the ones on the west. If SEC teams truley bring 10-15 thousand fans, good luck getting a seat in that place. They need to just blow it up and start all over. It really is a big bucket of concrete crap. They’ve done as much as they can with it. All they’re doing now is putting lipstick on a pig.

  35. Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

    “Why didn’t Delaney go after Missouri? My theory is that if they added Missouri then they didn’t have anyoen good to add as school #14.”

    —You have it backwards. Why did Slive go after Missouri? Because they didn’t have anyone good to add as #14.”

    • Peter says:

      Missouri *is* a #14. That’s the problem with them.

      • Andy says:

        I fail to see how that’s a problem. Mizzou is good enough to be added to most any league as long as it has a good partner to join with. Mizzou isn’t strong enough to carry a Rutgers, but pairing them with a Maryland might work. Basically any expansion you get you want to end up with an even number of teams, and you want the average addition to be about an 8 out of 10. Mizzou is about an 8 out of 10, so it would need a partner that is also at least an 8 to make it worthwhile. Rutgers is more of a 7. Maryland is more of an 8. A&M is more of a 9. So is Nebraska. Texas, North Carolina, Notre Dame, those are 10s. Mizzou + A&M averages an 8.5 which is plenty good enough. The Big Ten couldn’t put together a good combo in this round.

        • greg says:

          Andy, Missouri is below average in the B10 in academics, athletics, football attendance and a number of other measures. There is no reason to add them other than expansion fever.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            To be fair there are only 2-3 schools that are even remote possibilities that aren’t below average football attendance for the B1G or SEC.

            For the record Missouri was #26 in 2010 not #25 (which was Kentucky).

          • Andy says:

            Not true. Academics? Yes. That’s fair. Mizzou is at best on par with the bottom schools in the Big Ten academically. It isn’t as far back as some say, but it definitely isn’t average.

            Athletics? Which Big Ten schools arguably have better athletics than Mizzou? Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Nebraska for sure. Who definitely has worse athletics than Mizzou? Northwestern, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota. Michigan State and Iowa are about equal to Mizzou. All three have their ups and downs in sports, but generally are about on the same level. So I’d rate Mizzou right in the middle of the Big Ten athletically.

            Attendance: Mizzou ranks right in the middle there too. Similar to Michigan State and Iowa.

            Mizzou would be an average Big Ten school. There’s nothing wrong with that. And if the Big Ten adds, say, Maryand and Mizzou then they go south a big and add around 12M more people and a few new metro areas to their footprint, which would likely be very profitable for them.

            But they couldn’t pull it off so now the SEC gets those benefits.

          • Andy says:

            Scarlet, I checked and you’re right, they fell to 26 in 2010. They were in the top 25 in prior years though.

          • greg says:

            The mainstream university ranking systems all would put Missouri behind everyone but Nebraska.

            Attendance is not similar to MSU or Iowa. Missouri 61.5k, MSU 73.5k, Iowa 70.5k. Missouri would be 8th in the conference.

            Athletics? Going by director cup finishes, Missouri would be a little below average.

            Below average + below average + below average != average

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            “So I’d rate Mizzou right in the middle of the Big Ten athletically.”

            —Going by Director’s Cup standings over the past few years Missouri never finished higher than 8th in comparison to current B1G members.

            “Attendance: Mizzou ranks right in the middle there too. Similar to Michigan State and Iowa.”

            —In 2010 Missouri would be in the bottom half of the conference attendance wise (specifically 7th)…by “similar to” you mean “less than” Sparty & Iowa.

            “But they couldn’t pull it off so now the SEC gets those benefits.”

            —There was nothing to ‘pull off’. There was no interest in Missouri. Not when they begged last year and not now.

          • Andy says:

            Director’s cup weights water polo equal to football. Not a good measure. Big Ten schools soponsor more sports than Big 12 schools thus they tend to rank higher in the Director’s cup standings.

            Big Ten attendance is augmented by being in the Big Ten. Big 12 fans don’t travel as well as Big Ten or SEC. Put Mizzou in the Big Ten or SEC and bring in more visiting fans and Mizzou’s attendance would be as high or higher than Iowa and Michigan State. As it is with Mizzou in the Big 12 it’s awfully close, thus Mizzou’s attendance is about average for teh Big Ten.

            If the Big Ten could have gotten Texas A&M and Mizzou they would have takent them. Or Mizzou and Texas. Or Mizzou and Notre Dame. Or maybe even Mizzou and Maryland. But they didn’t pull it off. Now the SEC has more population than the Big Ten and will have an SEC network. The Big Ten was the top money making league. Within 1 to 2 years that will no longer be the case.

          • Andy says:

            Greg, Mizzou’s 61.5k last year was a dip from previous years. They had been averaging 65k. With a Big Ten or SEC schedule that would likely bring in an extra 5-10k visiting fans per conference game that average would rise to 70k just like Iowa and MSU.

          • bullet says:

            Big 12 era (1996-2010) Missouri is 30th. Last 4 years average, Missouri is #28.

          • Andy says:

            It’s hard to draw a 70k average when your home schedule is McNeese St, San Diego St, Miami OH, an abysmal Colorado, #1 Oklahoma, and a .500 KSU team. KU, which would have been a decent draw in Columbia, was at Arrowhead Stadium in KC.

            That was Mizzou’s schedule in 2010.

            It’s no wonder their attendance suffered.

            In 2012 the home schedule will look something like: Southern Illinois, Arizona State, Tennessee, Georgia, Texas A&M, South Carolina. They’ll probably sell out every single one of those except Southern Illinois.

    • Andy says:

      Scarlet, I’m sure the SEC would have loved to have added North Carolina, Virginia, Texas, and Oklahoma. They may end up with North Carolina State, Virginia Tech, Texas A&M, and Missouri instead, but that’s still pretty damn good.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        Virginia Tech and NC State are not coming. That’s why Missouri got the invite instead.

        • Andy says:

          You might be right about Virginia Tech, but NC State likely would join the SEC today if invited, but Mizzou was rightly considered to be the better option at this time due to academics, athletic success, and fan support. TV markets are similar.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            “NC State likely would join the SEC today if invited”

            —So the UNC Tarheels board of governors would send their constituent school off to the SEC if invited eh?

            “Mizzou was rightly considered to be the better option”

            —Have a source for that claim?

          • Andy says:

            This is what’s being said in SEC circles right now. Several schools wanted Mizzou’s spot, including WVU, NCSU, Clemson, and Louisville. VT was not interested. Mizzou was considered the strongest option among those choices and that’s who they went with.

          • Mack says:

            You missed lutefish’s point. There is only one board of regents in North Carolina. The president of NCSU needs to get the approval of the University of North Carolina board (which is also his board) to change conferences and that was just not going to happen in North Carolina. The SEC would have taken NCSU if available since it is a better geographic and cultural fit. UNC will NEVER let it happen. MIssouri was picked over WVU and Louisville, and both of these schools wanted a SEC invite. Not saying that 90% of the student body, ADs, etc. of NCSU did not want to go to the SEC, just that it never could happen because the board of regents would never allow it and the SEC recognized that.

          • Mike says:

            Mizzou was the best of anyone that would say yes. That was limited to the Big East, Big 12 (sans OU and UT) and the non-AQs.

          • Andy says:

            and a few of the southern ACC schools apparently.

          • Mike says:

            I may have misspoke a little. There was a lot of talk about ACC schools by fans and pundits, but there was never any indication that any ACC school the SEC had any interest in had any interest in the SEC. By all indications, the SEC was surprised how little interest it got from schools it wanted outside of Mizzou.

            The fact that West Virginia was the fall back plan to Missouri should tell you all you need to know that no one of value to the SEC was leaving the ACC.

  36. Brian says:

    Now seems like a good time to remind ourselves of the B10 tiebreakers and how they would apply:

    “Here’s the basic one: When two teams tie atop the division, the winner of their head-to-head matchup goes to the league title game.

    It gets more complex when three or more teams tie atop a division. The following seven methods will be used, in order, to determine a champion or reduce the group to two teams, where a head-to-head tiebreaker then can be used:”

    1. Records of the tied teams are compared with each other

    2. Records of the tied teams are compared within the division

    3. Records of the teams are compared against the next-highest teams within the division

    4. Records are compared against all common conference opponents

    5. The team ranked highest in the BCS standings after the regular season goes to the league championship game unless it is ranked within one spot of another tied team. In this case, the head-to-head result of the two teams determines the division champion

    6. The team with the highest overall win percentage (outside of exempted games)

    7. The division champion will be chosen by random draw

    For the most part, head to head will solve the issue. If three teams are tied, you use the tiebreakers to eliminate one of them and then use head to head (unless that tiebreaker eliminates 2 of the 3).

    First, you see if they all split 1-1 or not. If they did, you check the division record. If that’s the same, you compare how they did against #4 in the division and then against #5. At this point, the only tie possible is if everybody went 4-1 in the division and they split the round robin 1-1 (like the B12 South did recently). The next step is to consider common opponents from the other division. Failing that, it goes to the BCS standings to pick the best team (unless another team is only 1 spot behind them, in which case head to head would apply instead). If even that fails to decide it, then the overall record is used. Failing that, they use a random draw.

    My big question is with #5. If you have to use the BCS standings, and at some point I suppose you do, rather than picking the winner of a 3 way tie why don’t they use it to eliminate the lowest ranked team and then use head to head to pick the winner? That way people feel like the games really decided the outcome. That was the biggest complaint from the B12 South, that the order of the losses ended up deciding the champ instead of the head to head winner of the Red River Rivalry.

    • bullet says:

      Did any of you see the BCS show? SEC has basically the same 3 way tie rule as the current Big 12 rule. BCS standing looks like the tiebreak unless the teams are within 5 places of each other when head-to-head of the top two counts. We could possibly have another Nebraska 2001 situation if UGA/South Carolina were to upset the west champ and Ok St or Stanford lost. The team not going to the SEC championship could end up in the BCS championship game.

      ESPN talking heads were indirectly stumping for SEC rematch. They all wanted voters to pick the two “best” teams. My thought is that the team that lost head-to-head already had its shot. And with limited interconference games, our opinion of the “best” is based on limited information. At this point, I definitely pick an 11-1 OU over an 11-1 Alabama to play a 13-0 LSU. I’d give a 12-0 Boise (but not Houston) a shot over an 11-1 Alabama.

      • Brian says:


        Did any of you see the BCS show?

        I refuse to watch that drek. The numbers are on the internet almost instantly and that’s all I care about.

        SEC has basically the same 3 way tie rule as the current Big 12 rule.

        I think everybody has a pretty similar version of that rule. You run out of options after a while.

        BCS standing looks like the tiebreak unless the teams are within 5 places of each other when head-to-head of the top two counts. We could possibly have another Nebraska 2001 situation if UGA/South Carolina were to upset the west champ and Ok St or Stanford lost. The team not going to the SEC championship could end up in the BCS championship game.

        They could, but I doubt it unless everybody else loses. First, the CCG loss will hurt them in the computers. Second, if UGA beat LSU, why would most voters assume AL is much better than UGA? Maybe what it means is Boise is better than most people think since they spanked UGA in the opener.

        I think if AR beat LSU, LSU would still win the tiebreaker by being close enough to AL in the BCS to win by head to head result.

        ESPN talking heads were indirectly stumping for SEC rematch. They all wanted voters to pick the two “best” teams.

        I’m surprised they even bothered to be indirect about it.

        My thought is that the team that lost head-to-head already had its shot. And with limited interconference games, our opinion of the “best” is based on limited information. At this point, I definitely pick an 11-1 OU over an 11-1 Alabama to play a 13-0 LSU. I’d give a 12-0 Boise (but not Houston) a shot over an 11-1 Alabama.

        The obvious NCG slots go in this order:
        1 13-0 LSU
        2. 12-0 OkSU
        3. 12-0 Stanford

        If LSU is in:
        4. 11-1 OU
        5. 12-0 Boise
        6. 11-1 AL
        7. 11-1 OkSU
        8. 11-1 Stanford

        If LSU loses to UGA:
        4. 11-1 OU
        5. 12-0 Boise
        6. 11-2 UGA
        7. 11-1 OR
        8. 11-1 AL

        If LSU loses to AR:
        4. 11-1 OU
        5. 12-0 Boise
        6. 11-1 AL
        7. 11-1 LSU
        8. 11-1 OR

      • ccrider55 says:

        You thought that was indirect? I almost lost my dinner listening to them. When a team has not won it’s conference it shouldn’t be elligible for the championship game. Period. Often the second best team meets the best before the finals in many sports (which shows the uncertanty with seeding, which is what the BCS is…a seeding committee, seeding only two). The only FB rematches should be the occasional unavoidable CCG. I could almost swallow LSU/Oregon as it would be separated by a whole season, and they would both be conference champs. However OkSU, OU, etc as one loss conference champs would be preferable to that, or, as you said, an undefeated Boise St.

        • bullet says:

          I’m not even convinced LSU and Alabama are among the two best teams anymore after seeing that game, although LSU clearly has the best resume out there with their OR, WVU and AL wins. Northwestern State LA is the only team who scored less against LSU than Alabama did. Alabama only held two teams-Vandy and UNT to fewer points in regulation. And Arkansas is the only team with even a decent offense that Alabama has played.

          Their defenses are definitely very good and may slow down OSU/Stanford/Boise/OU like Bama did Arkansas, but I’m not sure their offenses could keep pace.

  37. Brian says:

    The Stagg family is considering asking to have their name removed from the B10′s trophy. I think the B10 has to seriously consider just awarding the Stagg Trophy this year.

    • jj says:

      I was just thinking that.

      Also, I bet you the forthcoming duty to report rules/laws will be the “Penn State Rule” or “Paterno Rule”. Talk about you 180s.

      • Brian says:

        As a silver lining, I never liked having every trophy with 2 names. They all should just be tied to one person, and none of those people should be active.

    • mushroomgod says:

      just going after his 15 minutes of fame……take his name off if they don’t want it on there.

  38. Brian says:


    The number has gone from 8 to 9 to close to 20 in one day.

    Has anyone heard anything from all his foster and adopted kids? A defense? A denial that he did it to them? Anything?

  39. Brian says:

    Matt Zemek at CFN says PSU should let JoePa coach out the rest of the season and then retire unless it comes out that he knew more than has been stated so far. More interestingly, he suggests removing all pomp from this weeks game including no band and 15 minutes of silent reflection for halftime. He then says PSU should play out the season, including the CCG if they make it, but refuse a bowl game.

    His game day ideas are interesting, but unlikely, but I see no reason to punish the players by skipping a bowl. They did nothing wrong. If you want to punish people, take perks away from the coaches who were involved and don’t fly out all the administrators and such.

  40. Brian says:

    To lighten the mood, check out Andy Staples’ power rankings. He has a muppet theme this week (except for PSU). Make sure to go down to #21 OSU and watch the video. It’s worth it.

  41. PSUGuy says:

    From PSU’s alma mater:

    “May no act of ours bring shame
    To one heart that loves thy name,
    May our lives but swell thy fame,
    Dear old State, dear old State.”

    Zemek’s ideas would show a concerted and genuine effort at acknowledging, as an organization, we have failed to uphold the ideals and standards we set for ourselves while at the same time make it clear to those outside PSU that the organization truly is dedicated toward those ideals and standards by proceeding in a thoughtful and unified way. Not everyone at PSU was culpable in this, but all of PSU will be required to right these wrongs and ensure they never happen again.

    I, for one, fully endorse the article.

    • mushroomgod says:

      OK with the band not being there.

      OK with just playing the game, with none of the usual activities, other than recognizing the seniors.

      Don’t turn down the bowl game. The bowl game is for the players, who did nothing wrong.

      Let Joe coach through the regular season…have he and Big Red reside after the regular season, before the bowl game.

      • Anthony London says:

        Joe Paterno needs to step down now. Those kids that suffered the abuse at the hands of JS were not given a reprieve, Joe shouldn’t get one now.

        While the emotions surrounding this incident are complicated, what needs to happen now is not complicated. If Joe can’t speak to reporters, he should not be allowed to coach.


        • bullet says:

          Paterno wants to speak to the reporters. Supposedly the President does as well. Its the university’s attorneys telling everyone to be quiet. And that’s not to protect Paterno or the President. That has to do with the university’s liability in this situation.

        • mushroomgod says:

          imo, his body of work is such that he should be able to coach through the end of the regular season. I’m not interested in a gesture to appease the masses.

          • Anthony London says:

            This is really not about appeasing the masses. What Joe Paterno did not do in 2002 is reason enough for him not to coach, but what was allowed to happen since 2002 warrants his immediate dismissal. Whether he speaks or not, this situation is just reprehensible, and a lifetime of good deeds (his body of work) will not make up for it.

          • mushroomgod says:

            I see it as a question of whether to further humiliate an old man who has done a lot of good things, and one very stupid thing, for no good purpose.

  42. Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

    Who is Scott Paterno? A guy who won’t shut up…

  43. Brian says:

    PSU’s Board of Trustees is meeting by phone tonight and will meet in person tomorrow night. I’m guessing we’ll know a lot more about Joe’s future by the weekend.

    • bullet says:

      I suspect JoePa is one of the smaller issues. They’ve got a lot of problems to deal with.

      • Brian says:

        Legally and financially, yes, but from a PR standpoint it is all about Joe right now. If they do nothing about him, it will be seen as tacit approval of JoePa and his actions.

        • bullet says:

          Well they’ve still got the President of the university who was apparently informed at some point. The other two are now gone. Not sure about McQueary.

        • bullet says:

          Joe needs to retire anyway. He’s clearly got difficulties doing his job when he’s having to spend so much time in the press box.

  44. Ron says:

    If you think about it, the fact that Penn State was stuck with an 84-year-old coach that no one can apparently tell to step down was a pretty sad commentary in itself. The people above Paterno were pretty weak-kneed in how they’d exerted authority. A reasonable rule of thumb I’ve seen for hiring a new college football coach is that they need to be under 50 so they can handle the on-going demands of the job over the next 5 to 7 years. That “You can’t fire me, I’m a living legend” stance is a pretty poor excuse for running the football side of a major university athletic program.

  45. M_in_PHX says:

    Air Force and Navy would be smart not join the big country conference.
    They’d probably be a victim of their own popularity.
    If the Big Country becomes more popular, the non-service academies
    would get more recruits and become better, but the service academies
    would get left behind.

    What about Hawaii for the BigEast?
    With a 9 game conf schedule, the western division teams would still be
    able to have 4 non-conf games every other year.

    Hawaii, SDSU, Boise, BYU, Houston, SMU, Memphis
    Louisville, Cinci, UConn, Rutgers, ECU, UCF, USF

    Wait 4 years for the Big12 to steal Louisville and Memphis,
    then add UMass and Temple

  46. Brian says:

    The BoT released a statement after their conference call. At their regular meeting on Friday they will appoint a special committee to investigate everything. They still are meeting in person tomorrow.

    Now the ESPN crawl is saying Joe Schad has a source close to the BoT that says there is a chance JoePa will be allowed to finish the season but it’s unlikely he will return next year.

    • Michael in Raleigh says:

      Yeah, the people who have believed that Joe Paterno has earned the right to retire when he chooses ought to be convinced by now that he’s lost that right.

      Watching someone who’s basically stood for what’s right in college football going all the back to 1950, the year after my 80-year-old grandmother graduated from high school, end his illustrious career in utter disgrace and shame… it’s stunning. (And we thought Bobby Bowden’s exit from Florida State was ugly.)

      Having said that, I finally decided to read that grand jury report. What a collective failure by everyone. As I mentioned before, I work regularly with children and I find it mortifying that something could have been done to prevent further harm being done to more kids. They essentially gave Sandusky a sense of invincibility by choosing not to go to police. Sandusky must have thought to himself, “If Joe Paterno won’t do anything to stop abuse in State College, other than the minimal amount to keep himself out of prison, then I can do whatever I want with these boys with no fear of consequences.”

      I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a story related to sports as sad, disappointing, heartbreaking, depressing, and all around bad as this one. I’m not even a Penn State fan and I know no one in the community who was directly affected by this, yet I feel betrayed. It’s just so ugly.

    • metatron5369 says:

      That would be a major distraction for the team and garner PSU a lot of hostility in the public eye.

      He should just step down.

  47. frug says:

    The strange story of Ray Gricar, the DA who declined to prosecute Sandusky back in 1998 then vanished. Truly bizarre story:

    • Scarlet_Lutefis says:

      Why do all of these stories continually fail to mention that his brother Roy committed suicide in Dayton several years earlier by using virtually the exact same scenario?

      The continual incompetence shown by journalists never fails to amaze me.

  48. GreatLakeState says:

    A heartfelt resignation, unprompted, would help save his reputation. If he’s believable in his ignorance (before more facts emerge) the public will give him the benefit of the doubt. People want to believe Joe. But If he hangs around and an investigation reveals he looked the other way, it’ll get ugly -and rightfully so. Right now, if he didn’t know, its the equivalent of a Woody Hayes punch. But within days he could be seen as an unindicted co-conspirator, of sorts, in the biggest, most reprehensible scandal in sports history. In the end, the facts will be known, but how hard they dig for those facts, in regards to Paterno’s negligence, will depend on wether he’s still hanging around the crime scene. He needs to go, now.

    • acaffrey says:

      I agree. The more people support him when he resigns, the more support he will always have. The longer he waits, the more support he will lose. And the more facts come out, the more likely he will lose that support forever. This is going to get worse.

        • EZCUSE says:

          Not bad… actual statement:

          I am absolutely devastated by the developments in this case. I grieve for the children and their families, and I pray for their comfort and relief.

          I have come to work every day for the last 61 years with one clear goal in mind: To serve the best interests of this university and the young men who have been entrusted to my care. I have the same goal today.

          That’s why I have decided to announce my retirement effective at the end of this season. At this moment the Board of Trustees should not spend a single minute discussing my status. They have far more important matters to address. I want to make this as easy for them as I possibly can. This is a tragedy. It is one of the great sorrows of my life. With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more.

          My goals now are to keep my commitments to my players and staff and finish the season with dignity and determination. And then I will spend the rest of my life doing everything I can to help this University.

  49. greg says:

    AP reporting Joe retiring at season’s end.

    • EZCUSE says:

      Too little & too late.

      • Purduemoe says:

        Nothing he does will ever clear him in the minds of most. He missed his chance to handle this thing the right way 9 years ago. Now it is just which bad option he takes.

    • jj says:

      Should be now and a total clean house. Football is not more important and that’s the message this sends. Feel bad for the current players, but that’s life.

      • jj says:

        I would think the NCAA would let anyone that wanted to transfer and give them their year back.

      • hinode says:

        Imagine if Paterno coaches the Nebraska game but doesn’t attend the press conference. That would leave the players to answer every single question the media ask, and you can bet that every single one of them is going to be about this scandal rather than the footbal game – why Coach isn’t answering questions, what do they think about the alleged incidents, what they would do if they found out a younger brother of theirs had been one of their victims, etc. Imagine what a fiasco that would turn into.

        For the sake of their players, Penn State needs to keep anyone involved in this scandal (Paterno and McQuery) far away from the Nebraska game this Saturday, in my opinion. That’s the only chance they have to convince the media not to make the scandal the exclusive topic of discussion at the press conference.

    • zeek says:

      Everyone needs to be fired from Spanier down (through the football program).

      Put an interim president in place, find a new AD after the season, and hire a coach to bring in an entirely new staff. Almost no one should be heldover among the coaching staff.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        And not just the coaching staff…the entire athletic department needs to be cleansed.

        “Success with honor”?

        • metatron5369 says:

          Yes, because clearly track and field coaches must be held accountable for their bosses sins.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Given how insular & incestuous the athletic department is at PSU it’s really the only way. No that doesn’t mean every coach of every sport…but it does mean the entire administrative infrastructure.

          • metatron5369 says:

            Why don’t we find out who’s responsible first and punish people from there, okay?

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Ultimately someone needs to step up and look at what needs to be done for the term health of Penn State. That includes both helping to ensure that this type of crime never happens again and just as importantly that when crimes do happen the current infrastructure which has served as an enabler will no longer be in a position to do so. The surest way to ensure that is to remove it root & branch.

            Jerry Sandusky, Tim Curley & Gary Schultz will all have their day in criminal courts. They will also eventually make their way through the civil court process. Others including Mike McQueary, Graham Spanier & Joe Paterno will likely be heard in one or both of the above venues as well.

            Those individual outcomes are aside from that the University itself needs to do to not only keep the same mistakes from being made in the future but also to protect itself as best it can for the litigation it is going to face itself at some point.

            Making sure that those responsible face the proper legal consequences of their actions is a very different issue than what Penn State the institution needs to do to protect itself not only civilly but in the court of public opinion (which does matter).

          • mushroomgod says:

            Yes, it’s silly season…fire that track and field coach

          • Peter says:

            I don’t know why people are so hung up on the assistant football coaches. A coaching hire at this level chooses his own staff. That’s just how the business works. The only way any of the current PSU assistants would have been staying *before* this is if the hire was internal. Yeah, fat chance of that happening now…

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Keep setting up straw men to tear down if it makes you feel better fungi…it doesn’t change what Penn State needs to do.

          • EZCUSE says:

            Well, I’d say a new AD would have to have some leeway to clean house. But no need to throw out the good with the bad. A new AD with a new football coach would create a vastly different dynamic–even if the same people stick around. It’s no longer “business as usual,” and the employees would know it.

            I’d say the leaders going down is plenty.

      • EZCUSE says:

        All they need to do is hire a new President, a new AD, and a new football coach (not from among the assistants). Perhaps the new football coach would keep some of the old staff, perhaps not. That would be his decision.

        Really not that hard. New leadership, new era.

    • frug says:

      From JoePa’s statement:

      That’s why I have decided to announce my retirement effective at the end of this season. At this moment the Board of Trustees should not spend a single minute discussing my status. They have far more important matters to address.

      Paterno still trying to dictate to the university that he’s going to leave when he damn well feels like it.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        The most repulsive thing is that he wasn’t coming back next year anyways.

        • frug says:

          Yeah, I hope people realize that this wasn’t in any way shape or form Paterno taking responsibility or sacrificing for the university. This just him confirming what we all knew before this scandal broke.

  50. Anthony London says:

    I have always been an ardent fan of college sports. I love the passion and pagentry that collegiate sports provides. Reading and participating is this blog has been a rewarding and fulfilling experience as well as, a perfect complement to other media coverage for me, But today, I’m really sad and angry about what has transpired at Penn State. Those feelings are getting stronger as time passes.

    I feel bad for the victims and the current student-athletes. I wonder if any of the current players on either the PSU team or Nebraska have had to deal with this in their personal lives. How are the student-athletes feeling and dealing with this? What is in their best interest at this point?

    I also wonder if we are the problem. Are we so consumed with college sports and our teams that we, either directly or indirectly, create an environment where this kind of cover-up is allowed to be created and maintained to protect the reputation of an institution/coach over ten year old kids? Does winning and being competitove really mean that much? Does a man’s body fo work equal to or greater than the destruction of nine lives or the subjection of those nine lives (at least for now) to a future of counseling, medication, and internal torment?

    For me, the answer to that question, is an unequivocal “Hell NO!” Like it or not, Penn State represents the belief that Joe Pa is worth more than the lives of innocent boys. The level of institutional failure is beyond comprehension.

    Again, is winning football games worth all of that? Is that where we are?

    Just a sad, sad day. Do the right thing PSU, cancel the game. It’s not the time or place for a game on Saturday. It’s no fair to the victims, to the student-athletes, to college football in general, to the public, to everybody…

    • metatron5369 says:

      Yes, that’s the appropriate response: punish the students and give the university a loss of several million dollars.

      I feel like objectivity has left us.

      • jj says:

        First of all, they Van afford it and this is exactly the thinking that got this result.

        Pulling the plug is the right thing to do. Or, get a temp staff for the end of the year.

        Either way, those guys need out.

        I can’t believe anyone gives a crap there if they win this game or not. And nebraska won’t show them anything by rolling them. Frankly, psu’s putting them and the rest kf their schedule in a weird spot.

        All for one and one for all. Pulling the plug is the right thing to do.

        • metatron5369 says:

          No it’s not. It’s an emotional response to a really bad situation.

          • jj says:

            Maybe it is. The fans and local busineses deserve their due i suppose.

            But maybe psu should donate the proceeds to an appropriate charity. Maybe they should do anything other than express regret.

          • Brian says:


            On top of the huge economic impact that game has for the area (stores, hotels, restaurants, gas stations, etc), don’t forget all the game day workers that count on the money (security, janitorial, concession sales, etc). In this economy, that is punishing a lot of innocent people. The other thing to remember is that PSU cancelling that game has a huge impact on the B10 race. I don’t think they want to be responsible for hurting the chances of MSU, MI and IA to win their division by giving NE a free W in what should have been a tough contest. If they want to make themselves ineligible for the Leaders, that’s their business, but they should play all the games.

            Giving the profits to child protection charities is a good idea. With JoePa retiring he is going to be there for Senior Day and his last home game, but hopefully without any fanfare for Joe. I wouldn’t want McQueary there, but he may be an integral part of the their game day system and the players shouldn’t get punished for him not having a spine. If there isn’t an appropriate GA who can step in and take his place, then he should be there.

      • Anthony London says:

        Yes, it did. That happened in 2002, at the latest.

    • EZCUSE says:

      Penn State needs to play the game so that the country can root for Nebraska to win. A colossal failure by Penn State, the AD, and Paterno… not only 9 years ago, but this week. Just failures across the board.

      And if Black Shoe Diaries is even close to representative, the decisions of those entities remain well supported. Apparently, it’s a JoePa witch hunt. Egad.

    • bullet says:

      “We” aren’t the problem. I don’t know what happened at Penn St. But there are situations in business where things get swept under the rug. Enron is a prime example of fraud being tolerated. And of course, the Catholic Church hid things as well. Its an organizational thing, not a sports thing.

      What happened at Penn St. had nothing to do with protecting Paterno. Maybe they were protecting a friend. Maybe they couldn’t believe he would do it. Maybe they were trying to protect the university. We’ll probably never know what they were thinking since they aren’t likely to testify, at least honestly.

    • mushroomgod says:

      Geez, man up or go on Oprah. You’re being a tad melodramatic.

  51. dchorn says:

    Question….Just thinking from left field….Could this happen anywhere??…If so, have major college athletic departments become to “big” for the brand to “fail”…Has the job of athletic director over time matured so that it is greater than one individual??….Is it time to seperate college athletics from the colleges themselves to reduce liability on the academic side, as well as empowering an additional board of trustees for athletics from a combination of stakeholders to act as a watchdog of the athletic program? Has the job of a college’s board of trustees gotten too big in scope to handle the academic and athletic side??

  52. GreatLakeState says:

    The question is who will watch the watchmen?
    Who decides who gets the axe if the President and board were also aware of it?
    College campuses are like small towns. I have a hard time believing they weren’t
    all aware of it on some level. And yet, why on earth didn’t they turn this guy over
    to the cops the moment he was caught? Why would they risk the integrity of the
    entire institution for one assistant coach? I guess it’s possible Paterno was oblivious
    (or deliberately kept out of the loop) if it was only a small circle of people who knew,
    but unlikely.

    • metatron5369 says:

      Uh, well, it’s a state institution, so I’d imagine the public overseers? Or failing that, the police and the public.

    • Peter says:

      Penn State reports to the Pennsylvania legislature. The BoT want nothing to do with being seen as not aggressive enough in purging this. Spanier is apparently being terminated today.

  53. bullet says:

    On another light note, Neinas has some interesting comments in Dodd’s column about conference realignment and the BCS. A&M possibly moving later? I’ll probably see A&M playing Big 12 football games in 2012 the same day I see pigs fly.

    • ccrider55 says:

      Remember 2008 and that swine flu….?

    • bullet says:

      Hard to see the conferences or bowls buying into the 10 team no AQ scenario, especially with conference championship games in 4 of the big 5. But they certainly should do something to stop driving the Big East nonsense. If not for the AQ issue, I don’t see them inviting Boise, BYU, SDSU, etc. TV alone wouldn’t be enough to invite Boise. You probably still see UH and SMU in the east and maybe Air Force coupled with Navy, but no further.

      • Brian says:

        I agree something needs to change, but Neinas’s ideas are too much.

        I’m fine with no AQs, but the real problem is that an AQ equals guaranteed money. The BE (and ACC to a lesser extent) don’t want to miss out on that $20M paycheck. Based on all the realignment moves, maybe they still promise the top 6 conference champions in the rankings regardless of affiliation plus any independent in the top 10 to placate ND (and BYU). Then let the bowls choose the second conference teams in the top 10. That should fill 8-10 of the spots. I think a third spot has to be earned by being well above the next available second team (at least 5 places), and still is limited to once per conference every 4 year contract.

        You need some mechanism to promise money to every conference, maybe a split to each conference based on the computer rankings with a cap since the top conferences will also get appearance money from the games.

  54. bullet says:

    Caught a couple minutes of the game last night-Toledo 66 W. Michigan 63. That follows Toledo’s loss last week to Northern Illinois 63-60. Neither game went to OT. And yes, both were football.

  55. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    At this point, I haven’t read anything about exactly what Joe Pa actually knew and when he knew it. If he did know what was happening, Joe Pa could be prosecuted as an accessory after the fact.

    Black’s Law Dictionary defines an accessory after the fact as a “person who, knowing a felony to have been committed by another, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the felon, in order to enable him to escape from punishment, or the like.”

    My thought and prayers are with the victims and their families.

    While the all-time win record is not really important at all, relative to the pain and suffering of the victims and their families, it’s also a shame that Joe Pa (if he aided in the cover-up) recently passed Eddie Robinson for all-time win record.

    As far as I’m concerned, Eddie Robinson will always be the greatest.

    • EZCUSE says:

      What is the “least” that Paterno could have known? That Sandusky showered with a boy? If there was something that compelled this to go beyond Paterno, it was something that compelled more than handling this internally.

      Again, I spent an afternoon defending Paterno and the lack of details, before realizing that… no… there is nothing that he could have been told that Saturday that would explain his response. None. Showering is not OK. Fondling is not OK. Whatever language was used to describe what the GA saw was absolutely NOT acceptable. Criminal investigation was required.

      If Paterno had not called the police, but someone else had, this would not be an issue. But nobody saw it through. And given that Paterno was one of several people that could have seen it through, he goes down too.

      On the other side of the spectrum… why didn’t this go farther back in 2002? Assume that PSU knew about Sandusky earlier–either 1998 or before. If Sandusky remained around (i.e. PSU accepted the “I was wrong and I will never do it again” that the investigators may have), then PSU knew that the 2002 incident would expose the dirtiness of the earlier knowledge. Now the 2002 incident would blow everyone up. And THAT is a reason to keep the 2002 incident quiet. Not a valid reason. But a logical reason.

      I cannot think of another. Why else would Paterno allow a pedophile to continue to use his facilities? At any time, any victim could come forward and blow things up. The only logical answer was that doing the right thing would also cause a blow up.

      So… my gut is that this is going to get worse before it gets better. Gotta figure that the GA will roll on JoePa if it comes down to it. He has to earn a living for 20+ yers. And the AD and Schultz are not about to go to jail if they can pin it on Joe Pa. Loyalty is one thing, but we are talking jail. If there is dirt, it is going to come out.

      • Eric says:

        I disagree. I’m not saying JoePa knew little though that his responses were justifiable, but I also don’t think we know enough to say that they weren’t.

        He was not told about this right after it happened, but at least a day afterward (maybe several, can’t remember anymore). It’s quite conceivable that if they couldn’t come forward to JoePa for several days, that his presentation wasn’t very good either. Maybe he said something like, “I saw Sandusky in the locker room with a kid. I’m not sure what the kid was here for or who he was, but something didn’t feel right and I wanted to let you know just in case.”

        If JoePa heard something like that, then reporting to the next level (which included Schultz the head of the University Park Police) and letting them investigate without assuming guilt wouldn’t have been unreasonable. We don’t even know that they didn’t come back to him and say it was nothing.

        Again, I’m not saying that’s how it went down or even the most likely scenario, but I don’t think we know enough to say it wasn’t either and I hate burying these guys before all the facts are out.

        • greg says:

          Eric, Joe was told the next morning. Here is Joe’s grand jury testimony.

          Joseph V. Paterno testified to receiving the graduate assistant’s report at his home on a
          Saturday morning. Paterno testified that the graduate assistant was very upset. Paterno called
          Tim Curley (“Curley”), Penn State Athletic Director and Paterno’s immediate superior, to his
          home the very next day, a Sunday, and reported to him that the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy.

        • EZCUSE says:

          Can you think of ANY acceptable circumstance for a grown man and a 10 year old to be showering together? Why did they run??? I agree that there are facts that can make it look better for Paterno. But what is the possible “oh, so that is why the grown man was showering with the kid in our locker room”?

          If the GA lied to JoePa, and then told a different story to the grand jury, then Joe Pa might look better. But he is never going to look good…

    • mushroomgod says:

      You have to do more than Joe did to amount to aa the fact……..there must be an element of actual aid……..otherwise any time you didn’t report any crime you could be charged……that doesn’t happen.

    • bullet says:

      Like Boise. And of course SMU is the only death penalty case out there. Can Houston, Navy and Air Force be far behind?

  56. Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

    “US Education Department to investigate Penn State’s handling of child abuse case.”

    Per the AP

  57. wmtiger says:

    I hate how this PSU talk is populating every other discussion on here.

    • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

      It is arguably the largest scandal to ever hit college football. It’s going to dominate every discussion on every venue for awhile.

    • Peter says:

      You have one of the all-time football kings with an institutional cover-up of almost unbelievable criminal activity by a legendary former assistant. THE legendary head coach at said institution being involved with both the administration and the assistant. All of whom involved were previously believed to be saints…

      This is really big news. It would be big news if you had any BCS administration being effectively destroyed in less than a week; that it is Penn State of all places just makes it gigantic.

    • jj says:

      Would you rather talk about Mizzou? I wouldn’t.

  58. Brian says:

    An interesting look inside PSU’s BoT. Factions are developing as some members feel like others are hoarding information and trying to protect people.

    I’m sure the Governor being there Friday won’t politicize things at all, despite his appearance being scheduled months ago.

    I hear they are talking about appointing Tom Ridge as the new president. I doubt he’ll have too many ties to Joe Pa and that group.

    • Peter says:

      Word is that that position will be open as of Friday. Spanier is going to be resigned tonight after the emergency BoT meeting.

  59. duffman says:

    Burning witches at the stake and modern media

    Some observations :

    Crimes against children are some of the worst crimes out there. I am not defending Penn State or what has happened, but must ask why is there not such outrage when the crimes are greater but the principals less famous. Why do we care about sexual misconduct in another state, but fail to raise such outrage in our own state, or local city?

    When children are sold into prostitution as sex slaves why do we not show the same outrage?

    When children are killed for drugs or political ideology in other countries where are we then?

    Are a few now to be offered up as witches to be burned at the stake before we lose interest in the media circus and move on to the next thing? Will we still care when it is our local turf, and the players not as famous or the kids less appealing? Will we be more forgiving when it is “us” and not “them” ?

    I do not have the answers, but I do that when the circus leaves town there are still kids that need to be cared for after the spotlight has been turned off. Will we still care about them?

    • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

      A lot of it has to do with the power of the individuals involved. A small suburban family hiding abuse is one thing….a day care center is worse and would gain more attention. The administration of the flag ship university of the state of PA covering up a serial rapist for at least a decade? That’s significantly more shocking.

    • ccrider55 says:

      Agreed. Read about a 13 year old shot dead last night with uninterested ear witnesses who didn’t bother to go out back and investigate. Wasn’t discovered til this am by grade school kids going to school. Went to look at the article a few hours later and it is already buried in archives.

      Humans have failings, always have and always will. My private opinion on this matter is just that, mine and private. I feel I have neither the insight or knowledge about the current matter to make a public expression. Have any of the multiple shelter and/or outreach organizations had a sudden influx of volunteers and donations? Hopefully the expressed outrage is being directed in constructive directions. Crimes like those being discussed, unfortunately, occur daily all over the country and know no demographic boundary. Sadly, most don’t make for good continuing media attention.

      If one good thing comes of this it won’t be the tarnishing of an institution or individuals, but hopefully a bit of awareness that lingers after the spotlight moves on to the next big thing. I hope to not post on this subject again.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        I think it should also be mentioned that those ‘smaller’ stories do tend to have just as large an impact within their local community as the Penn State story is having nationally, it’s just a matter of scale.

        Ultimately though, children being abused is horrible whenever it happens and irregardless of who is doing it.

      • redwood86 says:

        “Have any of the multiple shelter and/or outreach organizations had a sudden influx of volunteers and donations.”

        You mean like Second Mile?

  60. Brian says:–20111109,0,3915981,full.column

    Teddy Greenstein’s new odds for teams to win their division:

    MSU 4-1 – 50% (last week – 50%) Reasons – NE loss helped, but now IA and NW look tougher
    IA 3-2 – 20% (2%) Reasons – control their own destiny but tough schedule
    MI 3-2 – 15% (25%) Reasons – tough loss and tough schedule
    NE 3-2 – 15% (23%) Reasons – tough loss but scandal may help against PSU

    OSU 3-2 – 40% (30%) Reason – tiebreaker over WI
    WI 3-2 – 35% (34%) Reasons – look dominant but need OSU and PSU to lose
    PSU 5-0 – 25% (35%) Reasons – scandal and tough schedule

    • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

      I just have such a hard time seeing Sparty pull it out.

      • Brian says:

        In general I agree. I’m just so used to them pulling a Sparty. But I think they already did at NE and NE let them back in the race. Do you see IA pulling off another upset? NW in the last game? IN at MSU?

        MSU could lose any of those games, but they’ll be a big favorite in each of them.

        • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

          I could see Iowa and/or Northwestern knocking them off….Indiana not so much.

          So of course they’ll easily handle both and somehow botch it against the Hoosiers.

      • greg says:

        Sparty has a 50-50 game this week in Iowa City. If they win, I think they win the division. So 50% for them is right, in my book.

        Iowa still hasn’t won a game on the road this year, and would have to win at Purdue and Nebraska. 20% is probably high.

  61. Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

    Penn State football legend Roosevelt ‘Rosie’ Grier – “University must clean house to survive the Jerry Sandusky scandal”.

  62. Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

    Penn State Board of Trustees press conference is live…

    Paterno is done

    Bradley the interim HC

    • Brian says:

      But McQueary still has a job. Apparently being young and failing to stop child molestation is less bad than being famous and not being more assertive about it.

      • bullet says:

        The cynic says he’s the one who can get Penn St. nailed to the wall in the lawsuits by the victims, so he’s still employed by Penn St.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        Anyone really expect to see him on the sidelines Saturday?

        • Brian says:

          I’d like to think the interim AD or interim coach would let him go or at least move him to video coordinator or something. How can he stay as the recruiting coordinator and receivers coach?

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            To be honest I don’t know how he can even stay in Happy Valley right now. At some point one or more of these idiots is going to get it into their head to go after him.

        • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

          It looks like I was wrong.

          Bradley just announced in his presser that McQuery will coach on Saturday. They’ll decide at gametime whether to have him on the sidelines or up in the coaches box.

          That’s probably a decision that is going to backfire.

  63. greg says:

    Live feed of BoT presser, Joe supposedly OUT.

  64. greg says:

    Philly newshead reporting Joe out:!/Jim_Gardner

    Jim Gardner
    Jim_Gardner Jim Gardner
    Penn State Provost, Rodney Erickson has been named interim President. #PSUcharges.
    3 minutes ago
    Jim Gardner
    Jim_Gardner Jim Gardner
    #Paterno is out. #PSUcharges
    15 minutes ago
    Jim Gardner
    Jim_Gardner Jim Gardner
    Assistant coach, Tom Bradley is interim coach. #PSUcharges
    16 minutes ago
    Jim Gardner
    Jim_Gardner Jim Gardner
    Action News source says #JoePaterno will not coach another game. #Spanier has resigned. #PSUcharges
    17 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

  65. EZCUSE says:

    Wow…. in the dictionary after “denial,” they can put this blog and its comments as Example 1:

    • bullet says:

      So they are saying the 1 eyewitness, who never reported it to the police, is allowed to stay????? McQueary is still there.

      I understand the boards need to remove Paterno and anyone else connected. But not McQueary?????

      There has been a real vacuum of leadership at Penn St. They’ve just shut down and said nothing until tonight. These moves are just to quiet the uproar, not to fix anything.

      • bullet says:

        Little did Frank know when he set this up what type of lawsuits people would be talking about.

        McQueary is the one person who seems to be most at fault in this and is still there (other than Sandusky of course). Is he there so Penn St. doesn’t get thrown under the bus in the many lawsuits that will be coming? There’s nothing about the way the board has handled this that gives me any faith they are doing anything other than CYA stuff.

        • Brian says:

          Joe Pa got fired for PR reasons. McQueary wasn’t famous enough for them to deal with. I’m guessing that either the interim HC, interim AD will have to fire him in the next couple of days or else the backlash will force the BoT to deal with him on Friday.

          The students are going to go nuts, especially if McQueary stays around.

          • EZCUSE says:

            Look. McQueary was a young guy who sought out Joe Pa for advice. If the head coach (your boss), the AD (JoePa’s boss), and the President of the University do not think this is reportable for some reason… it’s awful hard to not go against it. While everyone talks about how we don’t know what McQueary told Joe Pa, nobody knows what he was told. If McQueary’s story is that he was forbidden from reporting, can PSU fire him for following instructions, however immoral?

            I think he is doomed anyway. But JoePa was also doomed, but was continuing to be the lightning rod for this issue by not being fired or resigning. That ends today. Now PSU can start putting the pieces back together. McQueary is irrelevant to putting the pieces back together.

          • bullet says:

            EZ-are you going to allow McQueary the Nazi prison guard excuse?

          • Brian says:


            McQueary was 28. That is more than old enough to know that he should stop a rape in progress and call the police immediately.

          • EZCUSE says:

            What are you talking about? McQueary is going down. But on the list of things the BoT needs to address, how is HE a priority??? There are three guys paid huge money to run the school, the athletic department, and the football program… those were the BoT priorities.

            And who else is around to fire him? AD–gone. President–gone. Joe Pa? Is JoePa going to fire McQueary? How would that look? And that option just ended anyway.

            Get some perspective. McQueary is irrelevant. Might as well focus on the janitor(s) that saw things happening and did nothing too. And the janitor’s supervisor.

            The PR disaster was because of the failure of PSU leadership… not because of the failure of PSU low-level employees.

          • Brian says:


            What are you talking about?

            You should probably indicate who you are replying to with that.

            McQueary is going down.

            According to whom? He still has a job right now while the Pres and HC are fired, the AD is on leave and the VP is re-retired. Bradley could fire him, or the interim AD could, but there is no guarantee. Maybe they aren’t firing him for legal CYA reasons.

            But on the list of things the BoT needs to address, how is HE a priority??? There are three guys paid huge money to run the school, the athletic department, and the football program… those were the BoT priorities.

            Well, I specifically said he wasn’t important enough for them to deal with, but the media backlash may force them to deal with it before Saturday if the coach or AD don’t do it first.

          • EZCUSE says:

            Not you.

          • Brian says:

            Fair enough.

          • bullet says:

            “If McQueary’s story is that he was forbidden from reporting, can PSU fire him for following instructions, however immoral?”

            That’s the Nazi prison guard excuse. “I was just following orders.” At the Neurenberg trials, they didn’t look to kindly on that excuse.

          • Mack says:

            Any normal person who witnessed this (even if afraid or too small to intervene) would have called 911 immediately and reported a rape in progress at x location where the victim appeared to be a minor. Would not even have to provide identification of self or perp, although that also would have been the right thing to do. Do you think the police would fail to respond to such a call? Calling his father (made a call, just the wrong one) that night, not calling 911 after that call, sleeping on it, and discussing the situation with his boss were all failures on his part. If you do not ask your boss for permission how can he prohibit you (if he did)?

          • EZCUSE says:

            NO, you don’t get it. This has nothing to do with criminal or civil repercussions against McQueary. He will get what is coming to him.

            But as to whether Penn State should fire him… there is an argument that Penn State is the one that told him what to do. That makes it harder for Penn State to fire him. We didn’t see Nazi leaders firing Nazis for following directions, did we?

            Now… when the new regime takes over, McQueary is screwed. But the new regime is not in place yet. The old guard didn’t fire him. Those that took over Germany did not start with the grunts, they started with the Nazi leadership.

            What does it matter anyway? Paterno has been properly and justly fired. Whether anyone else is also fired and when is irrelevant to that issue discussion. Joe Paterno failed.

          • Michael in Raleigh says:

            @Bullet & EZCUSE,

            “If McQueary’s story is that he was forbidden from reporting, can PSU fire him for following instructions, however immoral?”

            I pray that if I were in those same shoes that I would have gone forward anyway. Some things you have to be willing to lose your job for. One of those things is sparing children from being raped and from suffering permanent psychological and social damage.

            I know of one man who would have done the right thing if confronted with a moral crisis, and that is my father-in-law. In the early 80′s he was relatively early in his banking career. He had already worked about ten years in the industry and had made the investment of completing a Master’s degree at Northwestern via distance learning from North Carolina, but he also was low on the company food chain and had a lot to prove. He was only a few years older at the time than McQuaery was in 2002. He also had a three-year-old (my wife) and his wife was pregnant and did not work. In other words, he had important people other than himself who needed him to succeed in his job.

            One day a very, very wealthy client who carried tremendous influence in the community and with his bosses approached him with a proposal that put up a lot of red flags for him. The client requested, and then demanded, that my father-in-law transfer a large amount of funds in a very illegal way. I don’t recall what the details were but it would have been legally and morally wrong; however, the transfers would have supposedly been done in a way that they would not have been possible for authorities to detect. My father-in-law explained that doing so would violate several laws and that he could not do it, but the client then proceeded to threaten to pull out all of his accounts if he did not comply. Not only that, the client also tried to blackmail him by threatening to make every effort to ruin his reputation to his superiors all the way up the company chain. (This client was a longtime friend and business partner with high-ranking people in the company, and they very well could have valued the man’s word over his and the man’s business over his job.) But he indeed put his job, perhaps his reputation as a banker, and, to some degree, his family’s well-being on the line and refused to follow the client’s demands. Indeed the man did pull out all of his accounts and went to my father-in-law’s superiors far up the chain of command to tell them how horrible he was. Fortunately, it turned out that his superiors believed him and affirmed that he did the right thing, in spite of the fact that the bank took a hit in a way that cost several employees their bonuses. They evidently shared his sense of ethics, but again, my father-in-law did not know whether they would or not. All he knew was that he could not sleep at night if he bowed to the pressure to do illegal activity, no matter what it cost him.

            My father-in-law put an awful lot on the line just in order to protect things like his conscience, maybe some other clients assets, and the remote possibility that he could eventually get have gotten caught. If these people at Penn State, particularly McQuaery, could have had 1% of the courage my father-in-law had, any willingness to put their own reputations at risk in order to protect something far more significant than client assets, it could have saved so many more children. What a tragedy.

          • Brian says:


            But as to whether Penn State should fire him… there is an argument that Penn State is the one that told him what to do. That makes it harder for Penn State to fire him.

            To answer what I think you question is, it is still easy for PSU to fire him. You do it for the exact same reasons you fired Joe, it is in the best interests of PSU not to continue to employ someone as a leader of young men after he made a very questionable moral decision of such magnitude and with such wide ranging consequences.

            For your WWII analogy, you are expected to know that you do not need to follow illegal orders. If he was ordered not to call the police, he should have called them and told the investigators that he was ordered not to report it. PSU then couldn’t fire him because if they did, their order would come out and their civil liability would be huge.

          • bullet says:

            We don’t know that he was told not to report to the police. But even if he was, he violated the law. And it can be difficult to choose. Those Nazi guards might have been shot if they didn’t obey orders. It still wasn’t a valid excuse.

          • Brian says:

            Michael in Raleigh,

            “If McQueary’s story is that he was forbidden from reporting, can PSU fire him for following instructions, however immoral?”

            I pray that if I were in those same shoes that I would have gone forward anyway. Some things you have to be willing to lose your job for. One of those things is sparing children from being raped and from suffering permanent psychological and social damage.

            If he was told not to report it, I don’t think his job would be in any danger at all. They’d need to buy his silence since he could expose that he had been ordered not to report sexual abuse of a child to the police, and PSU would face huge civil liability since it never got reported. Even though it would be he said/she said about the reason for the firing, he firing right after the incident would be good circumstantial support for his claim.

          • EZCUSE says:

            Again… who was going to fire him? The AD? Joe Pa, the guy that promoted him in between all of this? The President? The BoT? If those guys told him not to report, why would they fire him???? Nazis didn’t fire Nazis.

            Instead, the people who took over Germany did that. So… when a new regime is in place, McQueary will face the music.

            The BoT just got rid of the leaders. And perhaps they sensed that the fact that McQueary may have been following orders–rather than making them–would have been worse from a PR standpoint. Or, perhaps they were advised by the police not to do anything with McQueary right now because he will be a key witness against Sandusky.

            This whole McQueary thing is a diversion. It is separate from Paterno.

            While Joe Pa may not have actually run PSU, there is a sense that he did. He was told to resign by AD/President… said no… and won that battle. Nobody thinks McQueary runs PSU.

            Should he have reported anyway? Absolutely. As Michael from Raleigh describes it perfectly.

            But firing him this week was not in any way as mandatory as canning Joe Pa.

          • EZCUSE says:

            Also, I have not seen any media backlash regarding McQueary. The only place I see it is in people rationalizing why Joe Pa should not have been fired or to demonstrate that the BoT somehow erred.

            The two made similar mistakes. But canning McQueary placates few. Spanier? Yawn. Canning Joe Pa has articles being written praising PSU for finally doing the right thing.

          • Brian says:



            The backlash is starting. JoePa was the higher priority target, but with him gone the focus is shifting to McQueary. Especially since Bradley just announced that he will be coaching Saturday, I expect it will hit a fever pitch by tomorrow.

  66. Playoffs Now says:

    Really impressed how the Big Ten Network totally whiffed on covering this news conference.

    But then it is Delany’s job to downplay any skeletons.

  67. frug says:

    IF you turn on CNN right now you can see the crowds gathering in the streets of State College.

  68. frug says:

    Does anybody have a link to the BoT press conference?

  69. Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

    If you aren’t following Greg Doyle’s tweets…you really should. He’s on fire tonight (he’s wandering among the Penn State crowd).

  70. Peter says:

    Apparently there will be worse information coming out in the next few days. It’s heavy Twitter chatter with the media.

  71. Brian says:

    I understand the tendency to gallows humor at a time like this, but this is all kinds of wrong.

  72. frug says:

    I’ll give the PSU rioters this much, they have some how managed to do even more damage to the school’s reputation.


    • Brian says:

      If the media reports of something really bad coming out by Saturday, then I doubt the students will have had any impact on PSU’s reputation.

      It was disappointing to see that some students were thinking they could protest/riot enough to change the BoT’s decision. That shows a complete lack of understanding of the situation. I wonder how many will end up in legal trouble after the police review all the video footage since everyone was on their cell phone camera.

      • metatron5369 says:

        I think it was anger more than anything.

        Judging from the blogs, there are a lot of people who feel that JoePa was given up as a sacrificial lamb. As one person wrote: “we as a society have descended into the media equivalent of the French Terror. Mob rule at it’s worst.”

        Without knowing all the facts behind his firing, I can’t agree or disagree. The explanations of the Board of Trustees however, did little to convince people otherwise.

        • Brian says:

          The BoT was very clear. It’s in the best interests of PSU.

          I understand they wanted to duck any specifics for legal reasons, but they need a spokesperson that’s better with coachspeak (the language of saying a lot that actually says nothing).

        • bullet says:

          The Board of Trustees several days ago needed to say we are going to investigate and clean house and make sure everyone in the system understands what their legal and moral duties are. Instead, they cancelled news conferences and noone could talk. Its even ok to say because of legal reasons there is a limited amount we can say at this time. But you have to say something.

          Based on Paterno’s grand jury testimony (and obviously there may be a lot we don’t know), Paterno didn’t fail the legal requirements, and IMO didn’t fail the moral requirements. He clearly didn’t do all he could have and I’m sure he regrets it, but that was (again based on the info we have) IMO an understandable mistake. But I agree the Board had to remove him. He knew about something that wasn’t taken care of and it was one of his former long-time assistants who did it and the AD and Admin VP who didn’t report it were closely connected to him (former players?). The taint had to be separated from the university.

          Perhaps the students wouldn’t be so angry if the board did a better job explaining things. Also, the reports indicate they basically picked up the phone, called him and told him he was fired. That’s just a poor way of doing things. So the board messed up by being silent and messed up by not explaining their actions, generating the student anger. Maybe if they brought Paterno in (and there’s no indication they ever did that) and talked to him, he would have understood why he had to go immediately.

          • EZCUSE says:

            Perhaps the students should get a clue. This is a football coach, however iconic. If they had a clue, they would have been protesting the poor response by the entire group of failures (from President to AD to Paterno to GA) for allowing this to happen on their watch and then go unpunished. That lack of punishment led to new victims. Those victims will, in turn, be statistically more likely to create future victims of their own. And so on.

            For what? Because the details of the showering were unclear? Because “fondling” falls short of penetration? Because it was Sandusky and not the janitor?

            People can disagree… but this would be a no brainer decision for anyone other than Paterno. If this as Al Golden at Temple… gone. Paterno bought himself an extra several days because of his good name. He then tarnished his legacy more by daring the BoT to fire him and making this a JoePa issue. Well, mission accomplished. Now Joe Pa is the victim.

            That is just f***ing insane. Joe Pa and the students are not victims. There are real victims here… and their status as a victim was contributed to by PSU and Joe Pa.

          • Peter says:

            Picking up the phone and telling him he is fired is an appropriate response to him deciding to take the decision away from the poor overburdened board by resigning at the end of the season.

  73. Brian says:

    Jerry Palm predicts WI to win the B10 and MI to make the Fiesta Bowl with OkSU missing out. You can find his picks on CBS’s college football page (I don’t want 2 links).

    He explains his thought process in his blog:

  74. metatron5369 says:

    I heard on the radio that Joe Paterno was fired, and I thought to myself, he’s either incredibly guilty or he’s just made himself a big martyr.

    I guess it’s the latter.

    • Brian says:

      The story was too big and he’s the face of PSU. Guilt has very little to do with it. He was part of it, and that was enough. Notice that nobody has done anything about McQueary yet since he’s anonymous.

      • metatron5369 says:

        That’s what I’ve been saying since the beginning.

      • jj says:

        If it was one of your kids you’d want both their heads. McQ will get the same.

        • Brian says:

          I agree. I’m not saying PSU was wrong, but I actually think the BoT should have gone farther. Firing Spanier was easy and obvious. Nobody cares that much about the president. Once they decided that Joe had to go now rather than after the season, though, they should have committed 100%.

          I would have liked to see them do the following after firing Spanier and Paterno:

          1. Fire everybody involved – Curley, McQueary and anybodyelse still around from the 1998 or 2002 incidents.

          2. Make a more emphatic statement, focusing on the suffering of the victims and what PSU stands for. Most people don’t care about the best interests of PSU right now. Tell me you did this in the best interests of the victims, and that PSU football and the university in general are not bigger than that suffering. Say that in order for PSU to rebuild trust in the community, it has to be clear that there is new leadership in all aspects. Make it clear that the interim hires will not be candidates to fill the permanent positions as outside perspectives are needed to fix any remaining problems in the system.

          3. Assure people that the special investigative commission will suggest new training procedures for all staff and students on dealing with child abuse and other crimes, focused on proper reporting.

          4. Announce that all trustees will not stand for re-election when their current terms expire or ever again. It would be reckless to replace everyone at once, but this would have an all new elected BoT in 3 years. They can’t do anything about the governor’s appointed members, but they should tell the governor they also want to be term limited.

          5. Announce a special fund for child abuse charities and direct a certain portion of athletic funds into it every year. Have fundraising events for it as well, perhaps every homecoming. Provide ways for alumni to donate to that fund, so people can see how much PSU cares about the issue.

          6. Offer full academic scholarships to PSU to any proven victims and/or their children.

          7. Create at least one full scholarship for a victim of child abuse every year.

          • jj says:

            Agree totally Brian. McQ deserves a public beatdown as well.

          • Brian says:

            Instead, his new boss just announced he will coach Saturday. How is McQueary untouchable when Joe Pa wasn’t?

          • greg says:

            They could easily fire Paterno because he didn’t actually coach.

            They keep MM because they want to win Saturday.

          • bullet says:

            Penn St. keeps McQueary who saw it and didn’t go to the police.
            It allows the Admin VP who was over the police who didn’t report it to retire again.
            It has the AD who didn’t report it and allowed Sandusky back on the property to go on administrative leave.
            It allows the President to resign.
            It fires Paterno.

            So they fire the 1 of the 5 with the least responsibility in the mess. That doesn’t strike me as a serious effort to deal with the problem. They’re just dealing with PR issues. They fired the most visible.

          • Brian says:


            I largely agree that it is PR based, but we all know resigning = getting fired in this case. They probably let them retire for legal reasons (no fighting over compensation issues, etc). that doesn’t bother me, since making it be a firing would also be purely for PR.

            Having Curley on paid leave and McQueary on staff bothers me.

      • Bob in Houston says:

        McQueary made a career decision in a split second. He went to Paterno, who runs Penn State. He went through channels. He kept his job. When he is fired, he is more likely to get another one than Abar Rouse has, who taped and brought down Dave Bliss.

        Rouse can’t get hired. He can’t be trusted. But McQueary went to the boss.

  75. duffman says:

    Observations from the outside:

    1) A man close to 30 years old witnessed the rape of a minor, did nothing, went home and slept on it. In the following decade he never pursued it in the Penn State community or the law enforcement community. All of what is going on right now begins and ends with this person. If somebody else can point out were I am incorrect, feel free to enlighten me.

    2) Listening to the head of the board of trustees say he does not have all the facts and yet he has made a decision means the media and lawyers are driving the bus. We are still the USA, and unless the lawyers on this board can tell me the laws of due process have been removed, it seems the response is based more on the media circus than the actual data.

    3) As with Ohio State, the loudest voices seem to be coming from opponents of the institution. There are serious issues indeed, but digging the knife deeper with a personal grudge seems the sure sign of overstepping the lines of reporting. Watching the ESPN folks covering the crowd scene last night and egging on a situation was reporting for ratings at its very worst.

    4) I am not negating the severity of the situation in any way, but I am not at “ground zero” and feel my response is limited to my limitations. If all this is an attempt to bow to public pressure and no long term solutions are formed going forward, then we have all been duped. In the modern world of “fear of being sued” overrides the world of common sense or right behavior we are all being shortchanged.

    5) Similar to a divorce, folks are taking sides. The pro JoPa camp will batten down, and the anti JoPa folks will close ranks as well. The actual truth may favor neither side, but I have a feeling it will be lost in the din of shouting by both sides. Lynch mobs are against the law for a reason, as I suppose it allows a “cooling off” period for justice to prevail.

    • bullet says:

      I think you’re totally right on all points duffman.

      I’ve been on a couple of child abuse juries. Nasty cases, worse than this. And much more difficult cases than this with no eye-witnesses or confessions. It made you sick hearing about it. It also made you sick thinking you could punish someone who wasn’t guilty and destroy many lives or that you might let someone go who was guilty and potentially destroy others. Noone wanted to be in that situation. And you have to remember that Joe Paterno didn’t do this. He did report it to the AD and the person responsible for the police department. We don’t have any information that he did anything to stop the process going forward, only that he didn’t follow through to make sure his superior, the adminsitrative VP did his job. I’m not ready to condemn him based on that limited information.

      • jj says:

        The bottom line is that Jor either knew what was going on or he kept and promoted a coach that told him that his heir apparent was molesting kids at the school. Does that latter scenario make any sense? Really?

        • jj says:

          I for one salute the school for not playing around. I think those kids on tv one day will look back at how asinine they looked over a football game.

        • EZCUSE says:

          Find me a logical reason why ANY head coach would NOT want a guy accused of even fondling a child in his locker room to be criminally investigated? And why would same coach be placated by silence on the issue for 9 years? After 9 days, I’d want to know the status. Completely set aside compassion for the victim… what if the victim came out and reported it… how much worse would it have looked for PSU? How could Paterno logically justify/rationalize a non-investigation here?

          The only logical explanation I can think of is fear that the 1998 incident would come out. Are there any others?

          • greg says:


            My own theory is that Joe knew of the 1998 investigation and then forced him out in 1999, yet they allowed Sandusky to retain an office and facility access. After the 2002 incident, then they realized they “couldn’t” let the news leak that they abetted a child rapist, so the coverup began.

            “Success with Honor”.

        • jj says:

          I’m a lawyer and I’ve been on a jury. due process and “the system” is great and all, but if you go to court looking it the truth, you will be disappointed more than not.

        • Brian says:


          The bottom line is that Joe either knew what was going on or he kept and promoted a coach that told him that his heir apparent was molesting kids at the school. Does that latter scenario make any sense? Really?

          This is the big problem for me. One of two things has to be true:
          1. McQueary did witness Sandusky molesting a child
          2. McQueary did not witness Sandusky molest a child but claimed that he did

          If 1 is true, you have to deal with it. If you trust your coaches, then you help him report it to the police. If 2 is true, you have to fire someone for making false allegations like that.

          I’m guessing Joe went with
          3. McQueary was mistaken or exaggerating what he saw

          The problem is, that is not Joe’s place to decide. That’s what investigators are for. You have to call the cops.

          The scary thought is option 4, which I’ll call the Reagan scenario. Perhaps Joe wasn’t with it enough to really understand what he was being told and was incapable of understanding its significance. I don’t buy this, but at his age it’s a slim possibility.

          • EZCUSE says:

            What about the #5 that Greg and I are talking about?

            Joe Pa refers it to the AD to be the one to tell McQueary that “Look, we had some idea this guy was capable of doing this in the 1990s. That’s why he resigned. He promised to get help and never do it again. This is disappointing, but we have to deal with this internally. If everyone found out about the past, they would crush the program. If he doesn’t get help this time, we’ll go to the police. For now, let’s keep it quiet. And let’s keep Joe insulated from this for now.”

          • Brian says:


            What about the #5 that Greg and I are talking about?

            Joe Pa refers it to the AD to be the one to tell McQueary that “Look, we had some idea this guy was capable of doing this in the 1990s. That’s why he resigned. He promised to get help and never do it again. This is disappointing, but we have to deal with this internally. If everyone found out about the past, they would crush the program. If he doesn’t get help this time, we’ll go to the police. For now, let’s keep it quiet. And let’s keep Joe insulated from this for now.”

            That to me is just the worst way of dealing with case #1 (McQueary did witness Sandusky molesting a child). If so, there are at least 4 conspirators to a cover up of sexual abuse of a child (McQueary, Paterno, Curley and Schultz) and they are all at risk of lengthy prison sentences. One could add McQueary’s dad to the list since Mike told him what happened and he also did nothing about it. I prefer to not believe in the conspiracy theory until some evidence is presented, however. I’m not saying it didn’t or couldn’t happen, but I’ll wait until someone spills the beans before accusing anyone of that level of depravity.

          • indy doug says:

            Reagan scenario? Really?

    • EZCUSE says:

      Several people knew about the abuse (whether it was fondling or penetration) of a child on the Penn State campus. None of them reported it to the police. They are all responsible for that. The fact that some of them can claim that they legally complied by passing it upstream is of little consequence when all of them were ultimately aware that the passing upstream did not result in a criminal investigation. Those must upstream are now gone.

      The two remaining are Paterno and McQueary. Was there any doubt in McQueary’s mind that no police officer or child protection service person ever questioned him? Was there any doubt in Paterno’s mind that he was never asked to verify the details of what McQueary told him that next day? If McQueary told him A and told the police B, the Sandusky defense team would certainly have tried to rely on that to impeach McQueary. The police certainly would have investigated Paterno to confirm that corroboration and lack of impeachment potential. Remember–hearsay is admissible for impeachment purposes. The lack of questioning by police or CPS is an rather plain and obvious indicator that this went nowhere near being reported properly.

      Do those folks have a legal obligation to double-check their “superiors”? Probably not. But the overwhelming majority of disinterested, objective folks believe that this was a rather obvious moral flaw. Whether Joe Pa is 20% responsible or 1% responsible for the future victims is for someone else to say. But sure as heck is not 0% responsible, according to the overwhelming majority outside of PSU fans.

      If child abuse cases are so nasty, all the more reason to put those that abuse away.

      And if people keep defending Paterno, they really just tarnish his legacy. Because this just makes the majority MORE compelled to point out the utter hypocrisy of suggesting that he has been victimized by this in any way shape or form.

      • bullet says:

        When it comes to horrible crimes like this there aren’t many “objective” people. The fans are emotionally attached to their coach and their institution. “Disinterested” people are emotionally attached to seeing everyone remotely connected and the institution that allowed this to happen and continue be punished. I see articles saying Paterno should go to jail. If the truth is as Greg suggests above that he knew in 1998, that’s fair. But its pretty ridiculous IMO based on the facts we have today.

        • EZCUSE says:

          But he knew that something inappropriate happened in 2002. And he also knew that (a) he (and probably McQueary) were never questioned by the police; and (b) Sandusky was still walking the streets. Not the streets, the campus halls. Never did any further digging to see what happened?

          “Oh hey, there is that guy I have been friends with for 30 years who was accused by a player/coach of mine of fondling a kid in my locker room, I wonder whatever happened with that? Ah well, off to the film room.”

          • EZCUSE says:

            Let me state it this way. Is this someone capable of being entrusted with the program? This is a glaring lack of either (a) supervision of what is going on; or (b) caring about what is going on. Either way, he has to go. Whether it is fired for specific misconduct or fired because it is clear that he cannot monitor the program sufficiently…same result.

            The next guy might not be Joe Pa, but he’ll at least more closely monitor what happens. As I said elsewhere, this could have been a booster issue just as easily. If you cannot monitor the locker room, how can you monitor all your players everywhere? Whether it is age or fatigue or whatever… he had to go.

          • bullet says:

            We don’t know that he didn’t ask questions. Was he told by people he trusted it was dealt with and there was no issue? Or did he stick his head in the sand? We don’t know.

    • Brian says:


      1) A man close to 30 years old witnessed the rape of a minor, did nothing, went home and slept on it. In the following decade he never pursued it in the Penn State community or the law enforcement community. All of what is going on right now begins and ends with this person. If somebody else can point out were I am incorrect, feel free to enlighten me.

      One slight addition. He called his dad right away, and together they decided that he should sleep on it. Apparently raping a child isn’t important enough to even wake up Coach Paterno to tell him what happened right away. I’m quite mad at the dad, too.

      2) Listening to the head of the board of trustees say he does not have all the facts and yet he has made a decision means the media and lawyers are driving the bus. We are still the USA, and unless the lawyers on this board can tell me the laws of due process have been removed, it seems the response is based more on the media circus than the actual data.

      It came across really poorly as he went back and forth from “we don’t have all the facts yet” to “we know all we need to know” to fire people. Both statements may well be true, but he did a terrible job explaining that.

      3) As with Ohio State, the loudest voices seem to be coming from opponents of the institution. There are serious issues indeed, but digging the knife deeper with a personal grudge seems the sure sign of overstepping the lines of reporting. Watching the ESPN folks covering the crowd scene last night and egging on a situation was reporting for ratings at its very worst.

      I can’t take any news story seriously if Stuart Scott is going to anchor the coverage. I was waiting for him to booyah.

    • mushroomgod says:

      The BOT had to consider the effect of it’s decision on 2 different mobs.

      The first is the media-fed frenzy mob that was hell bent on Paterno’s destruction.

      The second was the Joe-loving mob, student and otherwise, which turned over the van and is raising hell about his firing.

      The most politically-correct mob to feed was the former. The BOT took the easiest way out by firing JP before the end of the regular season to appease this mob. This has nothing to do with what is “right”, and everything to do with what was expedient. Anyone who doubts that should consider exactly how the firing was accomplished.

      • EZCUSE says:

        Not at all.

        If Joe Pa had resigned immediately under the guise of moving on to devote his life to helping these victims (without even admitting fault) and similar victims, it would have turned the tide way back toward him. Using whatever value of his good name was still left to help mitigate a problem that he contributed to. The Joe Paterno man of ethics would have been restored.

        By digging in, he emboldened Mob #1. And fueled the fire in Mob #2. He chose to be gasoline, rather than a fire extinguisher.

        That’s not on the BoT.

  76. Big Ten Jeff says:

    It appears that with the departure of JoePa, The B1G no longer has any King caliber coaches, or at least any who have won national championships. Not a good look… Among the group presently constituted, could you even imagine any of them acquiring one?

    • jj says:

      “kings” aside, I could see Iowa, Msu or Wisconsin pulling one off. I think Fitzgerald is a great coach too.

    • Peter says:

      Wisconsin just needs slightly more physical talent so they stop dropping road clunkers in conference play.

      There’s no reason Ohio State or Michigan should not be competing for B1G titles and going undefeated for a NC berth. Ohio State needs a new coach, but Hoke is the real deal and its Michigan. They can get the talent to rebuild.

      Nebraska has no shot so long as they are running a gimmick offense.

    • Big Ten Jeff says:

      I don’t mean to disparage any of the coaches; I think we have some good ones, as you’ve mentioned. However, to complete for national titles, recruitment is a big part of the chicken/egg factor, and the star power of a Saban, Meyer, Pete Carroll (not anymore), Spurrier, or Miles is something we’re now missing as a compliment to our great universities.

      • Peter says:

        Saban, Spurrier & Miles are all some of the worst oversigning offenders in history. Their good recruitment is not surprising in that respect. A whole other extra class of 4-5 star players in Saban’s case lets you weed out the overrated & injury busts.

        • mushroomgod says:

          This oversigning BS just shows how impotent the NCAA is…..everyone knows it’s wrong, but the NCAA is unwilling to take on these cheating SECers……this is an example of why I’ve said ND would be wise to join the BIG for “political” reasons. There needs to be a power base ouitside the south to deal with some of these issues…..ND allied with the BIG allied with the PAC allied with the ACC should be able to get something done…….

        • Big Ten Jeff says:

          Peter, those guys oversign because the universities and conferences allow it. That’s not part of our culture.

          • bullet says:

            There was a reason the SWC and SEC were the only conferences with limits on partial qualfiers. The Pac 10, ACC and Big 10 knew it wouldn’t be abused. The SWC and SEC knew it would be. The Big 8 and Big East didn’t care.

        • wmtiger says:

          And Houston Nutt, Bobby Petrino, Sylvester Croom, etc…

    • mushroomgod says:


      • mushroomgod says:

        To follow-up, I think UM is in good shape with Hoke going forward. Brett B. at WIS is a butthead but a very competent one. With his system he’s got a shot, but he needs more skilled players in the back 7 of his D. Mark D. at MSU seems very competent, but to this point doesn’t seem to be able to recruit good enough to be a serious NC threat–just looking at his class for 2012–not good enough to get to that level.

        I’ve only watched NEB closely for this year, but I don’t “get” Bo. Like Brett B, he seems like a first class butthead, but I don’t see the competence Wisky shows—everything seems disjointed. I’m very impressed with Pat F. at NW, but you can’t win a NC there. Kirk F. has peaked…again no realistic shot there. PSU and OSU are in chaos. No need to discuss IU, PUR, and Minnesota.

    • Big Ten Jeff says:

      There is a reasonable possibility that three of our Kings (tOSU, Nebraska and PSU) could be looking for new coaches at/by year’s end. Any thoughts about great candidates available and possibly interested? Meyer’s and Greg Schiano have been early mentions for Penn State.

  77. Mike says:

    I hope this isn’t true…

    Pittsburgh talk show host Mark Madden, who wrote an article seven months ago that foretold of the events that have unfolded over the last week, made an explosive allegation Thursday morning on a Boston radio station.

    “There is a rumor … Jerry Sandusky and The Second Mile were ‘pimping out’ kids to rich donors,” Madden said on WEEI-AM.

    • Mike says:

      Even worse

      “Jerry Sandusky was told he had to retire in exchange for the cover-up.”

    • Brian says:

      In general, the experts will tell you that where there is one pedophile there are many. They are drawn to vulnerable children, so someplace like Second Mile would be irresistible. Unfortunately, there are a lot more adults that want to have sex with children than we want to know. This is one of those rare topics on which I can say that convicted felons have the right idea.

    • metatron5369 says:

      They were right, I am horrified.

      Jesus Christ.

  78. GreatLakeState says:

    Just when you think this scandal can’t get any more repulsive -or worse for PSN, comes this.

  79. greg says:

    Random thought I read elsewhere…

    Maybe MM wasn’t fired to avoid whistle blower laws.

    • EZCUSE says:

      Interesting. If you blow the whistle and nobody hears it… and you don’t blow it again. Did you blow the whistle.


      If anything, just another reason to hold off on firing him this week.

    • Brian says:


      If he blew the whistle, the GJ report would have mentioned it and more charges would have followed. Everyone agreed on the gist of his testimony that he told JP and the suits. The only difference is about the level of detail. I don’t think that would qualify as a whistle blower case.

  80. Brian says:

    The media is starting to turn on McQueary. I’m guessing he doesn’t make it to Saturday as a PSU coach.

    One very important detail came out in this video that I wasn’t aware of – McQueary’s dad was good friends with Jerry Sandusky. That’s the same dad that said to not call the police and instead talk to Joe tomorrow morning. If he was friends with Sandusky, that really throws another kink into the story.

    • zeek says:

      I still don’t get why they’re even allowing the McQueary bit to drag out…

      I mean you basically just got rid of all the key players and you’re letting him sit in there to keep the story rolling? No idea why Bradley doesn’t just get rid of him pronto.

      The sooner this story gets past the media frenzy phase, the better for all involved. That can’t happen until McQueary is gone.

  81. Brian says:

    McQueary’s dad says Mike wants to talk, but can’t because of the investigation.

    That is, of course, compete crap since all people want to hear are the answers to some simple questions:

    1. Why didn’t he stop the rape?
    2. Why didn’t he call the police immediately?
    3. Why did he wait until the next morning to tell Joe?
    4. What exactly did he tell Joe that morning?
    5. What exactly did he tell the suits when they talked with him?
    6. Did anyone ever suggest that he not call the police?

    He is always allowed to tell the truth about what he heard, saw and did. His lawyer may not want him to, but that’s different from can’t.

  82. zeek says:

    darrenrovell darren rovell
    POLL RESULTS (FIRST 300 VOTES): Should Mike McQueary be on coaching Saturday? 97.6% NO, 2.4%. YES Most lopsided poll ever.
    59 minutes ago

    I mean seriously, what are they thinking over at Penn State. Now McQueary is going to be all that people are talking about until he’s gone. If JoePa is done at Penn State, then surely McQueary should be done at Penn State.

    This whole thing has been a debacle.

  83. Brian says:

    Just to change the subject, here are this weekend’s predictions for B10 games from the ESPN bloggers.

    They agree on:
    NW over Rice
    NE over PSU
    OSU over PU
    WI over MN

    They are split on:
    MSU at IA
    MI at IL

    • Brian says:

      CFN officially sides with IA over MSU, but the majority of their staff favor MSU. The staff also pick MI over IL, and picked PSU over NE (probably before the scandal got huge).

      • bullet says:

        The latter is a game NOT to bet on. Penn St. may win by 50 or lose by 50.

        • Brian says:

          They have probably pulled it from the boards by now.

          Regardless, PSU loses either way if McQueary is coaching for it.

          Dave Pasch, Chris Spielman, and Urban Meyer have the bad luck of having to cover the game. Meyer will just crawl back into his X’s and O’s probably, but you know Spielman will have something to say. I wonder if they bring up interim coaches and ask Urban about him leaving UF?

          • greg says:

            Spielman always speaks his mind. He’d better watch his tongue this weekend before he crosses the line…

            I wish Spielman was the guy who caught Sandusky in the shower.

          • Brian says:

            I predict he’ll piss off all the OSU fans by making all sorts of comparisons to Tressel (losing a legend to scandal) and Earle Bruce (the emotion of playing after the coach is fired). If he pulls out Woody too, there may be a lot of broken TVs in Ohio.

        • Eric says:

          I think Penn State would have put their heart and soul into this one with it being JoePa’s final home game. With him gone, I think their will be a lot more anger and a lot more focus and Nebraska wins it handily. Reminds me a lot of when Sampson was out of Indiana.

          • Brian says:

            I expect them to fall apart for games 2 and 3, but they might ride the emotions this week. It really depends how the game starts. If things go their way early, they might roll. If things go NE’s way, PSU may implode.

  84. bullet says:

    Neinas is for 10. OU still for 12 in Big 12:

    From this and Neinas earlier comments, Louisville seems a lock for #11 is they do go to 12.

    • zeek says:

      I think they can just wait for BYU at this point. BYU + Louisville + CCG probably pays for itself over, and that’s really what you want for 11-12.

    • Brian says:

      I can understand his preference for 10 in a generic sense, and I agree that the cupboard is getting bare. That said, I believe the source that said adding UL was needed for the good of WV is completely right. If they really want stability, then everyone needs to be happy. WV will never be happy on an island. I think their real problem is #12. UC doesn’t add much and BYU doesn’t want it. I’d suggest they add UL and try to grab Boise for FB only before the BE does. That seems like their best bet if BYU is unwilling.

      • bullet says:

        You could go to 12 with a 9 game schedule w/o a championship game. But I don’t think it would make financial sense (at least with the logical assumption you couldn’t get Ohio St., Michigan, USC, UCLA, Notre Dame…). I think the size issue is a factor also. When two are at 14 and the other two have big population advantages and have 12, its hard to stay at 10 with OK, KS, IA and WV as your states other than TX. Colorado St. would be ideal if they had a decent program, but of course, they don’t now that Sonny Lubick is retired. Its pretty much down to BYU, Louisville and Cincinnati if BYU can’t work.

        I don’t think Boise would maintain in the Big 12. They don’t have the resources. I’m concerned TCU will start on a downward spiral in a few years going head to head consistently with Texas and Oklahoma. I think they had a better chance to thrive in the Big East. But they had to accept and they do have more alumni $ than Boise.

    • ccrider55 says:

      “The more we can get people to start talking about the greater good, the more stable this conference can become.”
      The Big 12 source said”
      Hasn’t “the greater good” recently been shown to be UT having a conference with OU in it, regardless of numbers?

      Really? BYU will need ND treatment plus some other considerations. Why haven’t they already jumped at the chance so many said was an offer they couldn’t refuse? Money is not their primary concern.
      CCG is already being payed for even though it does not happen. That was part of the deal saving the Big12 in 2010.

      • zeek says:

        That wasn’t really true CCG money though. That was just extra money on an undervalued contract.

        It’s a fine point but important nonetheless.

        In the new Big 12 contracts, say they’re getting $170M for 10 schools (with both contracts new). A CCG would pay an extra $10-15M above that number.

        The old CCG money they’re still getting was on severely undervalued contracts, so it didn’t really cost anything to keep that going.

  85. Brian says:

    Some scary facts to consider (especially for PSU fans):

    1. Sandusky turned 50 in 1994, when the first reported contact with a victim occurred
    2. It is highly unlikely that Sandusky suddenly started molesting boys at 50
    3. Sandusky started at PSU in 1969 (age 25) after playing from 63-65 and being a GA in 66
    4. Sandusky has 6 adopted kids
    5. Sandusky took in at least 20 foster kids
    6. Sandusky started The Second Mile in 1977 to help kids
    7. Based on the GJ report, he had at least 8 victims in 15 years (94-08)

    Simple math says that should be at least 20 kids at that rate, and these are only the known cases. We know #9 has come forward, and multiple places have put the number at close to 20 already. Now you have the rumors of Second Mile basically being used to pimp out kids. On top of all the direct victims, experts say many abused kids become abusers themselves so there will be secondary victims.

    • zeek says:

      The longevity and loyalty of the Paterno group is what made such a dark scandal such a possibility.

      You’d never get a multi-decade scandal like this anywhere else because of coaching turnover.

      In one sense, that’s typically a good thing, but in another, it’s a part of what makes this one of the worst college sports scandals to have happened.

  86. Brian says:

    When it rains it pours for the B10. OSU is now facing a failure to monitor charge for the non-Tressel related violations that came to light this year (payments for charity appearances, overpayment for jobs), so they have self-imposed a 5 scholarship penalty over 3 years (5 total, not 5 per year).

    • Eric says:

      Self-imposed…I really, really wish the NCAA would just come out with a ruling sometime soon. Everytime I start to really get into the football season, it seems this stuff comes back and drags out all the joy.

      • Brian says:

        The rough expected timeline was between Halloween and Thanksgiving. As complex as it has gotten with the more recent BS, the more I expect them to rule in late November or even after the CCG.

    • Brian says:

      OSU will reappear before the Committee on Infractions on 12/10, but has asked to do it a week earlier by teleconference (before the CCG).

      I’m not sure why that would matter since you still have to wait for the ruling in many/most cases, but maybe this set of infractions is much simpler to adjudicate (if OSU and NCAA agree on all the facts, they can skip most of the meeting) and the NCAA might just accept the self-imposed penalty.

      • Eric says:

        My guess is they really want to know if there will be a post season ban (non-exempt games technically) so that they get it out of the way this year and really start fresh next year with new coaching staff with this behind us.

  87. Brian says:

    From twitter:

    Award for tackiest sound bite on PSU incident—Bielema. Talks scandals at PSU, UM & OSU & says, “guess it’s a good time to be a Badger fan”

    Stay classy, Bret.

    • Peter says:

      Bielema and Dantonio are the two “I don’t give a F” coaches in the B1G.

    • Kevin says:

      That’s a misquote and taken out of context. He was asked about all the scandals in college football including Miami, OSU, USC etc…. His response “I guess, during this time just enjoy and embrace being a Badger fan”

      It was in reference to try and tune out all the things wrong with with college athletics etc..

  88. zeek says:

    And now it starts:

    Pat Forde: Why is Mike McQueary still coaching?

    Seriously, there’s going to be an article about this every day until he stops coaching. Can we please be done with this?

    • Brian says:

      There are many audio and video clips from ESPN saying the same thing. Nobody understands it. I’m amazed nobody at PSU foresaw how bad this would look. If they have a legal reason why they can’t fire him, they need to say so and then not have him at the game.

      • jj says:

        Well. You and i know the right move. Fire him and take the wrongful termination suit. He’ll look like an ass pursuing it and they can afford it.

        That leaves one conclusion – man knows something.

        • Brian says:

          Is it possible PSU’s lawyers have said he might have whistleblower status, since his testimony has a lot to do with the charges against the AD and VP?

          • Gopher86 says:

            That was my thought. If he has whistleblower status, any retaliation by the administration would balloon their problems.

    • Michael in Raleigh says:

      Since when is Pat Forde with Yahoo?

  89. GreatLakeState says:

    Queasy alert:
    Here’s an interview of Sandusky talking about his charity. His choice of wording makes this the creepiest two minutes I’ve seen in awhile.

    • EZCUSE says:

      Guy is creepy anyway. JoePa couldn’t tell something was wrong with this guy.

      /takes off 20/20 hindsight glasses.
      // still feels that way.

  90. Brian says:

    Outside the Lines throws some fuel on the Willie Lyles/UT story. Apparently Lyles hit up a booster for money to ensure a player would visit UT, then later UT hired the scouting service Lyles worked for at the time. There may not be much to it from a violation standpoint, but it looks bad.

    OR had their latest Lyles admissions last week and now it’s UT. LSU may want to be careful since they were also a client.

  91. drwillini says:

    JoPa relied on the “chain of command” communciation to free him from moral culpability. The problem is that JoPa is clearly the biggest authority figure at PennSt. He clearly flouted the chain of command for years at PennSt, there was no doubt that the AD worked for him, and not vice versa. For years JoPa enjoyed being a larger than life figure, and in the end we know that he is far from it.
    I’ll defend McQueary ever so slightly. There is no defense for him seeing what was going on in that shower and running away to call his Daddy. But having done that, you can pretty easily see how a GA would place his trust in this mythic figure to do the right thing before some local prosecutor. JoPa can’t have it both ways. You can’t enjoy being this mythic figure and then rely on the chain of commad to deflect the responsibility.
    The thing that I just cannot get through my head is that many many people at PennSt should reasonably have known that something was horriblly wrong here, and they continued to watch this pervert bring kids to campus for years. This does not add up. These were smart people. They did seemingly incredibly stupid things. Contradictions cannot exist, if you think you have found one check your premises. There is a lot more going on here than we know.

  92. greg says:

    This was released two hrs ago, I don’t know if anyone has posted it here.

    PSU trustees: Keep McQueary off field

    By Andrew McGill and Sam Kennedy — The Morning Call (Allentown, Pa.)

    Posted: 8:07pm on Nov 10, 2011; Modified: 8:10pm on Nov 10, 2011

    Penn State’s board of trustees have asked the university’s head football coach to keep Mike McQueary, the assistant coach at the center of a child sex scandal, off the field during Saturday’s nationally televised game against Nebraska, according to one of the trustees.

    The trustee told The (Allentown, Pa.) Morning Call in an exclusive interview that the board made the request out of concern for McQueary’s safety.

    The board does not plan to fire McQueary or ask him to step down, according to the trustee, who asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitive nature of the matter.

    McQueary was thrust into the spotlight of national media attention this weekend after grand jury testimony revealed him as the eye witness to an alleged sexual assault by former assistant Penn State coach Jerry Sandusky.

    McQueary told the grand jury that he saw a boy about 10 years of age with his hands against a shower room wall, while a naked Sandusky forced anal sex on him. A distraught McQueary fled and reported the incident the next day to head coach Joe Paterno, who in turn reported it other school officials.

    Read more:

  93. greg says:

    This was released two hrs ago, I don’t know if anyone has posted it here.

    PSU trustees: Keep McQueary off field

    By Andrew McGill and Sam Kennedy — The Morning Call (Allentown, Pa.)

    Posted: 8:07pm on Nov 10, 2011; Modified: 8:10pm on Nov 10, 2011

    Penn State’s board of trustees have asked the university’s head football coach to keep Mike McQueary, the assistant coach at the center of a child sex scandal, off the field during Saturday’s nationally televised game against Nebraska, according to one of the trustees.

    The trustee told The (Allentown, Pa.) Morning Call in an exclusive interview that the board made the request out of concern for McQueary’s safety.

    The board does not plan to fire McQueary or ask him to step down, according to the trustee, who asked to remain anonymous because of the sensitive nature of the matter.

    McQueary was thrust into the spotlight of national media attention this weekend after grand jury testimony revealed him as the eye witness to an alleged sexual assault by former assistant Penn State coach Jerry Sandusky.

    McQueary told the grand jury that he saw a boy about 10 years of age with his hands against a shower room wall, while a naked Sandusky forced anal sex on him. A distraught McQueary fled and reported the incident the next day to head coach Joe Paterno, who in turn reported it other school officials.

    • Brian says:

      And the right short term result is finally happening, thanks to some knuckleheads. Due to multiple threats against McQueary, he will not be at the game on Saturday. It’s a sad day when idiots making threats can achieve the right ends because a university administration is so screwed up that it can’t make an obvious decision without threats of bodily harm.

      And just to show the passing the buck culture is alive and well at PSU, the article has this gem from the interim HC:

      When asked if he felt McQueary should remain on Penn State’s staff, defensive coordinator Tom Bradley, who was appointed Penn State interim coach in the wake of a shakeup that has claimed the jobs of Joe Paterno and other university leaders, said Thursday, “That decision is up to (interim athletic director) Mark Sherburne.”

      How long until Sherburne passes the buck to the interim president?

      • Brian says:

        More interesting details:

        Then 28, McQueary was “distraught” after witnessing the alleged 2002 assault, according to the indictment. Yet it appears he may have continued to participate in fundraising events with Sandusky – including one held less than a month later.

        Sandusky was a coach at a March 28, 2002, flag-football fundraiser for the Easter Seals of Central Pennsylvania, and McQueary and other Penn State staff members participated by either playing or signing autographs, according to a “Letter of special thanks” published in the Centre Daily Times.

        The paper also reported that McQueary was scheduled to play in The Second Mile Celebrity Golf Classic in 2002 and 2003. The Second Mile is the charity Sandusky founded in 1997 to provide education and life skills to almost 100,000 at-risk kids each year.

        And in 2004, the Centre Daily Times reported that McQueary played in the third annual Subway Easter Bowl Game, an Easter Seals fundraiser that was jointly coached by Sandusky.

        So he was distraught about what he saw, but less than a month later he was doing charity work with the guy he saw raping a boy and continued to do charity events with him. I’m pretty sure I’d avoid being around a man like that, not spend my free time with him.

      • Brian says:

        McQueary’s future seems to be still up in the air right now. Apparently the trustees talked about him in a closed door meeting today. The interim president said the university could take action on McQueary late tonight or tomorrow morning. The former AD’s status was not discussed.

        As for more buck passing, this is pretty close:
        When asked who could comment on Mr. McQueary’s future, Mr. Sherburne responded “I’m not sure of that right now.”

        Really? Now the AD doesn’t know who can comment on McQueary’s status? How is he the AD if he doesn’t have knowledge of the status of his employees.

        • A very plausible theory that I’ve heard: McQueary is the most important witness that the prosecution has in the Sandusky case. Therefore, the state attorney general may well have told Penn State that they need to keep him employed. If McQueary has his job, he has an incentive to continue to cooperate. If McQueary is fired, though, he may end up getting his own lawyers that will tell him to not provide any more information, which is something the prosecution doesn’t want to happen. Effectively, McQueary is being provided immunity for his ongoing cooperation and him keeping his job is a part of that.

          • jj says:

            Maybe. But there are other ways to keep him cooperative.

            Death knell to the program in keeping him I think. No way I’d send my kid there.

          • Brian says:


            Even if that’s true, McQueary cannot do his job anymore. How can he remain as the WR coach recruiting coordinator when most of the CFB fans in the nation want to kick his ass for letting a boy get raped? He can’t even be at the game since so many people hate him. I can understand that he may not get fired, but you have to transfer him to a job that doesn’t interface with the public. Make him video coordinator and let him do the behind the scenes part of being recruiting coordinator, but he can’t be a coach or actively involved in recruiting.

          • Brian says:

            Also, how much of a threat is he not to testify? Only by him testifying can Sandusky get busted for 2002. Now that his name is out there, would he be willing to not testify about a child rape that he witnessed? That would put him at serious risk of being hurt. All the AG has to do is announce that McQueary is refusing to testify and he’ll be persona non grata everywhere.

            The only way his life ever returns to near normal is for Sandusky to get a long prison sentence. Then he won’t catch as much grief for not going to the cops. He has to testify for his own sake. What other school would ever hire him if he refuses to testify? Clearly the next head coach won’t keep him, so he’s got to be planning for his future. My guess is he is done in coaching CFB and will have to try to get a pro job.

        • Further to my last point, Sherburne actually *doesn’t* know the status of McQueary any more because it’s completely out of the hands of the athletic department now. Under what I believe is occurring, what happens to McQueary is now a matter between the Penn State Board of Trustees and the attorney general.

          • Brian says:

            Then he does know who could comment on it, so he lied.

            All I’m saying is he could say that the BoT told the interim guys not to make any personnel changes without their approval, so at least it would look like someone is actually in charge. Right now it looks like all the interim guys are just keeping chairs warm but not actually doing their jobs.

  94. Brian says:

    Now TX is investigating whether Sandusky broke the law at the 1999 Alamo Bowl based on the info in the GJ report. Now, I don’t know the legal punishment in TX for child molestation, but based on their twice a week execution policy I’m guessing it isn’t lenient.

  95. Alan from Baton Rouge says:

    Brian – I would guess that Texas’ penalty is similar to Louisiana’s. In Louisiana, what Sandusky is accused of is aggravated rape (rape when the victim is under 13) and punishable by life imprisonment at hard labor, without the benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.

    • Brian says:

      And everyone knows the other prisoners really like child rapists, too. It would serve him right, but I’m guessing PA never lets him go. They have plenty of charges to keep him behind bars forever.

      • Phil says:

        I saw pointed out elsewhere how this Alamo bowl thing was pivotal.

        First, Sandusky was still an active Penn St employee at the time. Second, this allows the feds to get involved in the case because Sandusky transported a minor across state lines for illegal purposes.

        • greg says:

          Why would the feds get involved? I think we’ve established that child rape jurisdiction fully falls on university police.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            There was already talk about prosecution under the Clery Act (failure to disclose). Now we’re looking potential charges under the Mann Act (transportation across state lines for immoral purposes).

            There is also the matter of whatever steps the state of PA decides to take because the campus cops abrogated their responsibilities.

          • bullet says:

            What are you referring to with the campus police? 2002 wasn’t reported.
            1998 apprently went to the DA and was dismissed.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            bullet – The Department of Education has publicly stated that they are investigating to see if Penn State violated the Clery Act in regards to the abuse case. Obviously the details of that investigation aren’t going to be known for quite some time but I would hazard a guess that Penn State could be found in non-compliance for not recording any allegations of sexual abuse that reached their office. So if the ’02 case (or any other) was never properly recorded they can be charged.

          • EZCUSE says:

            As I note in my blog, this scandal helps the feds. Congress can demand hearings on the NCAA and sports. If it cannot police itself, we must. Seems pretty garden-variety when it comes to Congressional meddling with things. I mean, if STEROIDS justified inquiries, who will oppose this.

            And then the tax thing. The IRS is always going to be circling college athletics. This incident is a glorified Exhibit A for how college sports operates as big business.


  96. PSUGuy says:

    While this process is far from over and I still maintain emotional responses to the situation need to be tempered until all information is known, it is obvious Penn State, as an institution, and certain members of it have failed to live up to the ideals and standards we all espouse.

    I am happy say though that Penn State, as a family, is not just an organization, or some few individuals, and at least some of that family are more than willing to show what “being a Penn Stater” is really about.

    Without prompting. Without official sanction or encouragement.

    In the end, even if the goal is achieved it will not be enough, but at least it will be a start.

  97. EZCUSE says:

    Shifting somewhat back to sports momentarily. Munson suggests that one possibility would be for PSU to drop football for a few years:

    Setting aside the low likelihood of that happening. Let’s assume that it did.

    What, if anything, would the Big 10 do? Is there a situation where the Big 10 would kick PSU out? I mean a self-imposed death penalty would be pretty bad for the conference and be a long-term black-eye.

    I know that the knee-jerk reaction is that there is no need to analyze the impossible. But what if?

    • EZCUSE says:

      How about this for irony? The Big 10 kicks out Penn State. A neutered Penn State joins the Big East–sans Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, and Boston College.

      • greg says:

        PSU isn’t going to drop football and B10 ain’t going to kick them out.

        I do think PSU is going to have to completely clean house, and that includes NOT hiring a PSU guy like Al Golden or Greg Schiano. They need to hire someone who has never been in the football program to start anew.

        • EZCUSE says:

          I don’t disagree with you. But that’s not an answer. We have no idea how deep this will get. Suppose there actually was a cover-up?

          • Brian says:

            Even if there was a cover up, PSU isn’t dropping FB. It’s a stupid idea that only a writer would think is reasonable. PSU dropping FB would mean them dropping a whole bunch of other sports, too (mostly women’s), plus tens if not hundreds of local businesses going bankrupt without merchandise and game day sales to balance their books. Hundreds of people would lose their jobs, student enrollment would shrink, donations would drop off, etc.

        • Michael in Raleigh says:

          Predictions for remainder of the season:

          Big Ten Leaders: Penn State will finish with a 3-game losing steak against Nebraska, tOSU, and Wisconsin. Ohio State will defeat Purdue and Penn State but lose to Michigan. Wisconsin will win out against Minnesota, Illinois, and Penn State.

          Final standings:
          1. Wisconsin (6-2 BT, 10-2 overall)
          2. Ohio State (5-3 BT, 8-4 overall)
          3. Penn State (5-3 BT, 8-4 overall)

          Big Ten Legends: Nebraska defeats Penn State and Iowa but loses to Michigan. Michigan State loses to Iowa but beats Indiana and Northwestern. Michigan wins out against Illinois, Nebraska, and Ohio State. Iowa beats Michigan State and Purdue but loses to Nebraska.

          Final standings:
          1. Michigan State wins the division (6-2 BT, 9-3 overall)
          2. Michigan (6-2 BT, 10-2 overall)
          3. Nebraska (5-3 BT, 9-3 overall)
          4. Iowa (5-3 BT, 8-4 overall)

          Big Ten Championship Game: Wisconsin over Michigan State. Wisconsin enters Rose Bowl at 11-2. Michigan State finishes 9-4.

          ACC Coastal: Virginia Tech wins the division with one more win and/or a loss by Virginia to either VT or FSU. In other words, the Hokies are most assuredly going back to the ACC Championship game, and they’ll carry an 11-1 record into it.

          ACC Atlantic: Clemson wins the division with a win this weekend vs. Wake Forest. They also defeat NC State and South Carolina to enter the ACC title game at 11-1.

          ACC Championship Game: Clemson over Virginia Tech. (Game in Charlotte will easily sell out, by the way.) Clemson enters Orange Bowl at 12-1. VT finishes 11-2.

          SEC East: Georgia wins the division, enters SEC title game at 10-2 or 9-3, depending on outcome of Georgia Tech game.

          SEC West: LSU wins the division, enters SEC title game at 12-0.

          SEC Championship Game: LSU over Georgia

          Pac-12: Stanford wins out against Oregon, Cal, Notre Dame, and Arizona State in the conference title game. Oregon finishes 10-2.

          Big 12: Oklahoma beats Oklahoma State and gets the automatic berth to the Fiesta Bowl.

          Big East: Cincinnati finishes 9-3 or 10-2 and goes to he Orange Bowl.

          Others: Boise State and Houston both finish season undefeated.

          • Michael in Raleigh says:

            ^^^^^ I meant to put the above post on its own, not in response to the thread. My bad…

            Anyway, these are my BCS bowl predictions:

            Rose: Wisconsin (11-2) vs. Oregon (10-2)
            Fiesta: Oklahoma (11-1) vs. Boise State (12-0)
            Sugar: Alabama (11-1) vs. Michigan (10-2)
            Orange: Clemson (12-1) vs. Cincinnati (9-3 or 10-2)
            BCS Title Game: #1 LSU (13-0) vs. #2 Stanford (13-0)

            As far as I’m concerned, Michigan would REALLLLLLLLY be benefiting enormously from its brand name and size of its fan base. Oklahoma State, at 11-1, and Virginia Tech, at 11-2 and losing to only one team, would be getting a pretty raw deal. But the most undeserving team of all would be Cincinnati. Cincinnati’s entry into the BCS would take much more heat from Ok. State and Virginia Tech than Michigan, though, despite the fact that the bowls purposely chose Michigan while they were forced to take Cincinnati

            I guess one thing the Big East will be able to argue in keeping its AQ status is that, if nothing else changes about the BCS structure, then there will no longer be annual non-AQ’s in BCS games. In effect, this year, only one team among its remaining members, Boise State, and Houston could take up a bowl spot, which in effect would open up a spot for Oklahoma State or Va. Tech.

          • Brian says:

            Michael in Raleigh,

            1. I think you are giving MI way too much credit. What have they done to make you think they will beat NE and OSU? The only decent team they have beaten is ND. Because of that, I’d say OSU (9-3, 6-2) and WI (10-2, 6-2) win out and OSU wins the Leaders via the head to head tiebreaker.

            2. I don’t think IA is that great. To me, you have an inflated view of IA because you think MI is good so that win must be meaningful. I think MSU wins at IA in a close game, and MSU (10-2, 7-1) wins out to take the Legends while NE (10-2, 6-2) is just behind.

            3. That leads me to OSU over MSU in the CCG, so (10-3, 7-2) OSU goes to the Rose to face OR while MSU (10-3, 7-2) misses a BCS game.

            4. I agree the ACC is Clemson over VT.

            5. I agree the SEC is LSU over GA.

            6. As I snuck in above, I think OR (12-1) beats Stanford (11-1) to win the P12 and go to the Rose Bowl.

            7. I agree the B12 is OU (11-1) over OkSU (11-1).

            8. UC is the best guess for the BE right now with a 2 game lead.

            9. I agree that Boise goes undefeated, but I think Houston may choke in their CCG. It doesn’t matter as 12-0 UH still won’t make the BCS since Boise will take the non-AQ spot.

            Rose: Wisconsin (11-2) vs. Oregon (10-2)
            Fiesta: Oklahoma (11-1) vs. Boise State (12-0)
            Sugar: Alabama (11-1) vs. Michigan (10-2)
            Orange: Clemson (12-1) vs. Cincinnati (9-3 or 10-2)
            BCS Title Game: #1 LSU (13-0) vs. #2 Stanford (13-0)

            Clearly I have different picks. The real question is the NCG since I have OkSU and Stanford losing. I’m guessing the voters will take 12-0 Boise over 11-1 AL for a rematch. If not Boise, then I’d guess 11-1 OU.

            NCG: LSU/Boise
            Rose: OSU/OR
            Fiesta: OU/NE
            Sugar: AL/OkSU
            Orange: Clemson/UC


            NCG: LSU/OU
            Rose: OSU/OR
            Fiesta: OkSU/Boise
            Sugar: AL/NE
            Orange: Clemson/UC

          • bullet says:

            Houston actually has a fair shot at getting a BCS bid even if Boise wins out. Houston has 3 losable games ahead, but if they do win out, they are top 10 BCS and maybe as high as 5th or 6th with some upsets.

            The top 14 qualify and only two from a conference. Most likely that means you get the 6 champs, Boise, a 2nd SEC and a 2nd Big 12 team, leaving 1 spot open. Right now Arkansas and KSU are top 14 and the #3 teams. Right behind them are UGA and UT, also beyond the top 2 from a conference. The only other qualified teams right now would be Oregon and the Clemson/VT loser. Today both would be picked over Houston, but some of those top 10 BCS teams are going to have additional losses.

            I think the Big 10 teams are going to keep beating each other and only 1 will be eligible. There’s a good chance Clemson could lose to South Carolina and VT. Bowls don’t like teams that finish slowly. Oregon would clearly beat out UH for a Rose (if Stanford is #1 or #2) or Fiesta bid. But depending on the matchups, UH could be viewed as a better choice for the Sugar or Orange. The Sugar could sell enough tickets with Alabama and might think a matchup vs. an unbeaten team with the QB with about all the all-time passing records would be more interesting than an Oregon team at 10-2 that got thrashed by LSU and Stanford or a 9-3 Clemson. Similarly the Orange wouldn’t invite another ACC school and might be reluctant to invite a team from the west coast.

          • Brian says:


            Houston actually has a fair shot at getting a BCS bid even if Boise wins out.

            I strongly disagree. The only shot they have is Boise losing and Houston stealing the mandatory non-AQ conference champ spot since they will be way ahead of UC. Nobody wants UH in their BCS bowl, so they won’t choose them if they can avoid it.

            Houston has 3 losable games ahead, but if they do win out, they are top 10 BCS and maybe as high as 5th or 6th with some upsets.

            UH isn’t getting to 5 or 6.

            The top 14 qualify and only two from a conference. Most likely that means you get the 6 champs, Boise, a 2nd SEC and a 2nd Big 12 team, leaving 1 spot open. Right now Arkansas and KSU are top 14 and the #3 teams. Right behind them are UGA and UT, also beyond the top 2 from a conference. The only other qualified teams right now would be Oregon and the Clemson/VT loser. Today both would be picked over Houston, but some of those top 10 BCS teams are going to have additional losses.

            The P12 #2 will be way above UH barring huge upsets. The B10 or ACC #2 would get picked before UH if eligible, too. Houston would need OR, Clemson and VT to lose 2 games to have a chance. Every 10-2 AQ in the top 14 will be chosen before UH. That’s basically everyone except #3 teams from the SEC and B12 barring huge upsets.

            I think the Big 10 teams are going to keep beating each other and only 1 will be eligible.

            I doubt they will all lose a game. MSU, NE and WI have pretty easy schedules with PSU collapsing (an assumption). IA (MSU & NE) and MI (NE & OSU) are the main spoiler possibilities. OSU and MI play so one has to lose. I’m guessing 4 teams win out (MSU, NE, WI and OSU) but probably 1 or 2 of them get upset.

            There’s a good chance Clemson could lose to South Carolina and VT.

            SC has no offense and Clemson crushed VT the first time. They could lose 1, but I don’t think they’ll lose both.

            Bowls don’t like teams that finish slowly.

            They like them better than UH, though.

            Oregon would clearly beat out UH for a Rose (if Stanford is #1 or #2) or Fiesta bid. But depending on the matchups, UH could be viewed as a better choice for the Sugar or Orange.

            No, they couldn’t.

            The Sugar could sell enough tickets with Alabama and might think a matchup vs. an unbeaten team with the QB with about all the all-time passing records would be more interesting than an Oregon team at 10-2 that got thrashed by LSU and Stanford or a 9-3 Clemson. Similarly the Orange wouldn’t invite another ACC school and might be reluctant to invite a team from the west coast.

            They’d take a P12 team over UH any day. UH will not be chosen unless there is literally no other choice, and then they’ll shipped to the Orange Bowl to get crushed by an actual defense and the Orange will again have horrible TV numbers. UH will manage to make UC seem desirable, which is no small feat.

          • Mack says:

            Agreed up to the point where you said UH made UC look good. Any of the bowls would chose an undefeated UH over UC, and about 4 other 2 loss shools over either one. They just do not get that choice, so UC will be in a BCS bowl if they win the Big East. The only shot UH has is if TCU upsets Boise State tomorrow and they win out.

          • Brian says:


            Obviously nobody really wants UC right now, but they could be 11-1 by the end of the year. They are #23 right now, and I bet they draw more TV eyeballs than #11 UH. I think the taint of being non-AQ is so strong that the bowls would all prefer the BE champ, even with a 10-2 or even 9-3 record, than UH. Houston just reminds everyone of a Hawaii team that really didn’t belong.

            Almost nobody believes UH is really the 11th best team in the country, they have just played such an easy schedule that they haven’t lost yet.

            The only way we’ll know for sure would be if it comes down to the Orange and Sugar with UC and UUH as the last 2 picks. If the Sugar takes UH, you’re right. If the Sugar takes UC, I’m right. Not that I expect it to come to that.

          • Mack says:

            That will prove nothing. If Cincinnati and Houston are left the Big East AQ MUST be chosen (that is what Automatic Qualifier means) and the bowl will be stuck with them. BCS busters have more BCS success than Big East champions. BCS busters have gone 4-1 against BCS oppositon with Hawaii the only loser. TCU beat Wisconsin 21-19 last year in the Rose Bowl; Utah beat Alabama 31-17 in the Sugar Bowl, Boise State beat Oklahoma 43-42 (OT) in the Fiesta Bowl and Utah beat Pittsburg 35-7 in the Fiesta Bowl. The draw is the underdog does good. It does not always occur, and I believe that Houston would be clocked if it got in a BCS bowl. The alternative is a 14-0 Houston beating a weak opponent in the Liberty Bowl and more complaints about how the BCS system does not give teams like Houston a fair chance. Boise State also beat TCU when the BCS paired two busters together in the FIesta Bowl. Putting two nobodies together does not work, which is why Houston has zero chance unless Boise State loses. If the BE expansion goes as expected Houston may be the lame BE AQ in a few years.

          • Brian says:


            That will prove nothing. If Cincinnati and Houston are left the Big East AQ MUST be chosen (that is what Automatic Qualifier means) and the bowl will be stuck with them.

            Read closer next time. 2 teams, 2 bowl slots. The Sugar could choose either one and stick the Orange with the other.

            BCS busters have more BCS success than Big East champions.

            Who cares? BE teams make the bowls more money than teams like Hawaii or Houston.

            The draw is the underdog does good.

            Boise serves that purpose. Nobody cares about Houston.

            The alternative is a 14-0 Houston beating a weak opponent in the Liberty Bowl and more complaints about how the BCS system does not give teams like Houston a fair chance.

            So what? The bowls couldn’t care less. They’ll follow the rules and avoid UH like the plague.

            Putting two nobodies together does not work, which is why Houston has zero chance unless Boise State loses.

            Every bowl will have an AQ champ this year. The B12, P12 and SEC all have strong replacements for a champ in the NCG, and the ACC, BE and B10 don’t have to worry about that. The SEC will definitely get 2 teams. The B12, P12, B10 and ACC all could get 2.

            Houston has zero chance because there will be at least 9 eligible AQs plus Boise. Boise crushed likely SEC East champ UGA in Atlanta. Houston barely beat 5-4 UCLA. Houston is Hawaii all over again and no bowl wants that.

          • bullet says:

            Bowls really don’t want Pac 10 teams either. They don’t travel well. Unless you are USC or UCLA or have the top draft pick and Heisman trophy winner, they aren’t interested. Now with Oregon being in the championship game last year, they will generate some interest. It doesn’t matter how good they think the teams are (see Notre Dame), its how they think the game will play on TV and the stands. With the economy, they probably won’t bet on many Ducks coming east. The Sugar or Orange still probably would pick a 2 loss Oregon over an unbeaten Houston (assuming Boise in the Fiesta), but I don’t think that’s anywhere near as certain as you do. It depends on the matchups.

          • bullet says:

            We came real close today to the ACC championship game being Wake Forest vs. VT/UVA winner. Orange would have been in a real quandry if Wake held their lead against Clemson and managed to win the ACC championship.

            I wonder if ND moves up enough to qualify if they win out. MD and BC don’t help much, but matching MSU with a Stanford win in their final game could really jump them up.

    • Brian says:


      It is never going to happen, but if it did:

      1. PSU wouldn’t go anywhere. They’d be a member without a FB team for a while and the B10 would be back to 11 teams.

      2. PSU might well get sued for choosing to end FB and thus eliminating the CCG and hurting the TV deals, depending on the contract language.

      3. If PSU was out of CFB long term, the B10 would expand to 12 again. There wouldn’t be a home run this time, but it would lay the foundation for going to 14 when PSU returned.

  98. Penn State Danny says:

    Tough week. Make it stop. I want to go back to debating BYU vs Temple for Big East Admission.

    Frank: you bring up a great point. So many of us Penn Staters are so ashamed. With all the guilt that we have and WE didn’t do or know anything, how could the people who knew of Sandusky’s actions keep it a secret???

    • bullet says:

      Notice how quiet the BE expansion has been. That suggests two things:
      1) its getting serious
      2) it may be serious, but there are roadblocks. UCF, UH, SMU expected it done before now. Boise and the West or the TV contracts are the issues.

      • footballnut says:

        UCF gettting bad press these days. UH doing great, SMU doing whatever it is they do. I think the Big East is hunkered down trying to develop that Western region and getting Air Force/Boise on board. Pretty unintersting, nationally, compared all the other things going on. I think more people are interested in where Pujols will play next year & who will coach the cubs and cards, rather than who’s playing in the Big Least.

        • bullet says:

          But there doesn’t seem to be much speculation on the school boards I’ve looked at either. Its just very quiet.

          • Phil says:

            Knowing the Providence mafia, Big East football expansion is probably tabled until April so it doesn’t draw attention away from basketball season.

    • bullet says:

      With the AD and VP its hard to figure out what they were thinking. I’ve got a couple of theories.
      1) Sandusky was their friend and they didn’t want to believe it was a continuing problem. They let him explain it away as being less than McQueary thought and he promised never to do anything like it again. They told the charity and washed their hands of it pretending in their minds it never happened. It was ugly and awful and they didn’t want to think about it.
      2) The more sinister is that it had all happened before in 1998 and they knew about it. They were trying to keep it under wraps and “protect” the university and themselves. They just told Sandusky to keep that stuff off university grounds and didn’t really care what he did elsewhere. They didn’t push it because it would expose 1998.

      McQueary’s really hard to understand and with what Brian posted about the charities, its pretty bizarre.

      A lot of people would like to wrap explanation #2 around Paterno. But I find it hard to believe someone who would willingly take $1.5 million less than market in salary would act that way. That’s more like the actions of a corporate executive who’s making $25 million bonuses while laying off thousands of employees. Unless more comes out, some version of #1 makes more sense, coupled with him believing the AD and VP would deal with it as Sandusky and the police were their responsibility. And maybe he was even told there was no problem and it was all reviewed.

      • EZCUSE says:

        I could see (1), but I am leaning towards (2).

        Also… see this @ ESPN:

        The abuse is alleged to have occurred for 10 years after the first victim stepped forward. But The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, which first reported the story of the Sandusky investigation in early 2010, said Friday that the earliest documented report of possible abuse goes back to 1995 and involved Sandusky’s now-legally adopted son. The boy was a teenage foster child in his home at the time.

        So now we are talking a report in 1995. While this one does not involve PSU… it does call into question how many other people in the community knew about his propensities.

      • PSUGuy says:

        The more I think about this, the more I want to believe Sandusky is a sociopath. Someone with no empathetic connection to other living beings and acts solely in his own self interest. This classification is important because unlike “typical” sexual predators, sociopathic behavior has other well known behavioral traits. Being master liars and having chameleon-like ability in being able to make themselves appear similar to those around them being the most important traits.

        If a sociopath was able to integrate himself into a close knit group of indivuals (like PSU has been under the Paterno) the person would find impecable “cover” as the “base” for his actions. IE: “no one would ever think to look for something like this here”.

        What’s more, by having “deep and meaningful relationships” with people in power and authority a sociopath would find his lies are all the more believed in the event of discovery. I mean what’s more likely…a man you’ve known for decades as a quality, upstanding man who’s “the perfect neighbor (Matt Millen’s words from ESPN interview) was raping children or that same man (who probably admitted to this) was “doing something innapproriate” (showering with boys), but in the end “wasn’t doing anything wrong”.

        Its the only way (at this time) I can resolve the disparity between the lack of action taken against Sandusky despite the number of incidences without everyone who was involved being as evil as he is.

        And before anyone jumps on the “BS McQueary saw it all” bandwagon, run what I said above through the thought process again. “Did you really see what you thought you saw Mike? It was late and you were probably tired. And how long did you see it? A fraction of a second? Are you sure they weren’t just ‘horse-ing around’? I mean we all know Sandusky…how could he ever do that…”

        I mean sure, I’d call BS, but I don’t have many friends in this world because I know I can’t trust most people. What would the “trusting souls” of the world believe?

      • Eric says:

        I agree with 1 and think it’s probably the best explanation. They didn’t want to believe it and were easily persuaded to accept his explanation. It’s the only reason I can easily buy that he was still on campus a lot afterward. If they knew a lot more, I can’t believe the falling out wasn’t bad enough that he wouldn’t be on campus anymore even if they didn’t report.

  99. GreatLakeState says:

    According to (I believe the WSJ) Penn state is looking at between 100 and 200 million in damages being paid out in lawsuits. Without football they lose a major revenue stream. With that said I believe the school will (preemptively ) drop football for a 2-3 year period as a way of preserving the long term viability of the institution. They know the NCAA sanctions will cripple the program anyways, and until society (as a whole) feels they have paid their due penance, and have their priorities straight, they’ll drag the chains of this scandal around like Marley’s ghost – forever.
    The football-only crowd will think this is ridiculous but I don’t think the BOT would bat an eye if it meant saving their 160 year old university. It’s going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better and in time a three year football ban will be seen as a necessary cleansing period if they are even to return to glory.

    • bullet says:

      Football is only peripherily involved here. Its a retired coach, accidentally witnessed by a graduate football assistant, reported to his boss, the head coach.

      At that point the athletic director who allowed him to use the facilities and the adminstrative VP (finance, police and other admin) and the President of the university were involved. Its a Penn St. University wide problem, not a football program problem.

      I don’t see how this involves the NCAA at all. Its a criminal and civil matter.

      Most of these costs are probably borne by insurance. But they will probably spend $50 million on attorneys fees dealing with this mess.

      If the people involved and all connected with them are gone, there won’t be much thought of it 10 years down the road. When Baylor nearly made the final 4 last year, how many people were talking about Dave Bliss and murder on the basketball team and blaming it on Baylor University?

      A knee jerk football ban would drag out the association of these horrible acts with PSU for decades. See SMU and their death penalty. It would be one of the worst steps Penn St. could make.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        “I don’t see how this involves the NCAA at all.”

        –Right now it isn’t but I am sure the NCAA is going to sift through all the documents that get produced during the various trials and see what has been shaken loose. Emmert has already said as much.

        There are also (very unsubstantiated) rumors that Second Mile was used to funnel money to recruits, players etc etc.

        • Boomershine says:

          In addition to what Scarlet_Lutefisk wrote, the NCAA could consider the fact that Penn State covered up the incidents in 1998 and 2002, and kept Sandusky around, as keeping Penn State in a positive light with recruits. If these facts had come out years ago, Penn State would have been somewhat tarnished in the eyes of potential recruits. As we know, Penn State prides itself on having “Success with Honor” (no major NCAA infractions, etc.). Being a university that does things “the right way” has been part of their recruiting narative. See the attached letter from McQueary to a potential recruit as proof.

          In some ways, the NCAA could consider this to be a recruiting violation.

          • EZCUSE says:

            Abuse at bowl games too. Not going to help that cause.

            Most importantly, however, it is this type of issue that could get the federal vultures circling.

            What Congressman would be opposed in calling for hearings as to whether college sports can police itself? Meanwhile, the IRS could say “see, we told you they were big business–they’ll cover up anything to protect the revenue stream.”

            This scandal could lead to major reformations in college sports. If the NCAA sees that momentum starting to build, doesn’t it have to find some way to act???

    • Purduemoe says:

      People might not want to hear this, but Pennsylvania has sovereign immunity, and it might apply to Penn State as a state institution. I know in Indiana it would. In Pennsylvania a suit against the government has to fit into certain areas and is limited in the amount it can recover. Here is a page I found on this. This is a big issue in Indiana right now with the State Fair Stage Collapse, where the more than 40 different injured persons, and 7 dead people’s estates have to split 5 million from the state. 100 million to 200 million is reasonable if they were a private institution, and there may be holes in the sovereign immunity of Penn State (It may not even apply) but it is something that needs to be considered. It will piss a punch of people off, and it should , but it is an issue that will come up.

      • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

        That’s an issue that people have been nipping the edges of a bit. In the past Penn State has gone to great lengths in legal matters to state that it is not a state owned entity but rather a private one that is state supported.

        Remember how hard they fought FOIA requests regarding Paterno’s salary using that as a defense?

        • Mike says:

          Penn St and FOIA

          Yesterday, I submitted a lengthy list of public records requests to Penn State seeking e-mails and other documents related to Sandusky. I received a brief reply this morning from Amy Elizabeth McCall, the school’s assistant general counsel, denying all of my requests:

          While the Pennsylvania State University (University) recognizes the current public interest in the requested information, please be advised the University is not a “Commonwealth agency” as defined under Pennsylvania’s Right to Know Law (RTKL), 65 P.S. § 67.701 et seq.

          Not a Commonwealth agency, even though the university spends $290 million in state money? What does that make State College, then? A neighborhood in East Berlin? I was shocked to learn that Pennsylvania open records law used to be even more restrictive. Until 2009, every record was considered closed. Then the Right to Know Law was passed. But a handful of schools that take public money managed to preserve their non-agency status: Penn State, Temple, the University of Pittsburgh, and Lincoln.

      • @Purduemoe – Extremely important point to examine. The Pennsylvania public universities are a bit different in structure where there might be arguments that they aren’t really state entities (unlike most other states, where it’s very clear that they are arms of the state government). As a result, whether sovereign immunity applies here is going to be a key question.

      • Peter says:

        (1). As pointed out, Penn State has an unusual status that is probably not sovereign.

        (2). If they do have sovereign immunity, it can be waived. Given that the shitstorm Penn State has received is 10x more crippling to the brand than any financial penalties will be, them not waiving it is pretty inconceivable.

  100. greg says:


    Article on Iowa-MSU series. Last year was the only game I’ve ever remotely thought Ferentz may be running up the score.

    • jj says:

      Thanks. Iowa City still freaks me out. Hope it’s a good one and that winner wins out. Let’s put the “kings” in their place!

      • greg says:


        Kinnick is a big advantage. It should be a close, very physical game. Hopefully we end up with a couple more points and get the W.

        14 hrs till the last Hawkeye home game of the year. I’m excited yet sad.

  101. GreatLakeState says:

    What do you know, ESPN is finally covering the Big Ten.

  102. Brian says:

    PSU finally woke up and figured out they have an issue. McQueary is now on paid leave. The decision was made by the interim president in consultation with the interim AD.

    “It became clear that coach McQueary could not function in this role under these circumstances,” Erickson said. He said he reached the decision to place McQueary on leave with acting athletic director Mark Sherburne.

  103. duffman says:

    Okay I know this not football and not PSU, but IU is playing Stony Brook in what I feel will be a snoozer. Anybody watching the MSU vs UNC game tonight? While I think it would have been cool to see it played on the high seas, it still seems pretty cool, and I do have a man crush on Izzo.

    Anybody going to watch? Any predictions?

    • zeek says:

      My guess is UNC-MSU 56-50.

      I have no idea how to read this game. The players could come out nervous and miss a lot, or they could come out clutch. Regardless, I think this will be a low scoring affair.

    • @duffman – I’ll be watching. I think UNC will win handily, although I really hope I’m wrong (as Izzo is one of my favorite coaches). Carolina is experienced and loaded this year – they have 3 or 4 guys that would be in NBA right now if it weren’t for the lockout scaring off a lot of last year’s top underclassmen. Ohio State is going to be a beneficiary with Sullinger coming back, too.

    • jj says:

      Let’s just rename the conf the Big Izzo.

      • duffman says:

        To much rim rattle for MSU so far, and wishing a certain kid from washington was playing in the B1G. I think if a few had dropped for Sparty it would be closer.

    • Brian says:

      I won’t watch because there is FB on and I expect the game to stink. UNC wins 83-54.

      • Brian says:

        Well, I had MSU’s lack of scoring correct. UNC was well on their way to a 29 point lead the last time I flipped to the game, then they went scoreless for a while.

        Typical B10 sporting event, looking bad on a national stage against an elite OOC opponent. I’ll just go ahead and predict UF beating OSU now rather than wait for the game.

  104. Brian says:

    And now JoePa is officially hiding behind his lawyer. I hope he records everything he knows about this somehow (written, audio, video) because there is a really good chance he dies before the legal process is complete. It would be interesting to read his thoughts and opinions about Sandusky in addition to his factual account of the two meetings.

    • hinode says:

      I’m worried that the legal process itself is going to be really bad for Paterno’s health. Considering how close Sandusky had been to him, I suspect that he will take every single victim testimony personally, even the cases where there was no chance that he (or anyone else at Penn State) could’ve stopped Sandusky.

      • Brian says:

        The loss of FB plus all the horrors he’ll hear or read about will both take a toll, I expect. Just being 84 and waiting for a several year legal process makes his odds low enough.

        • hinode says:

          Imagine how emotionally devastating it will be for Paterno to meet one of the alleged victims or their parents face to face during the legal process. He’s made serious mistakes, but he’s no sociopath like Sandusky, so they are going to weigh heavily on him – especially without a job to focus on. If he survives both the criminal and civil cases, I suspect he will end up a broken man, self-flagellating himself every day out of guilt.

          I’d like to see Paterno spend the rest of his life doing what he can to help out the victims, but legal obligations will probably block him until the court is finished, and like you I don’t think he’ll survive all the way through. Hopefully he will instruct his heirs to do so, at least.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            Actions (or in-actions) have consequences.

            If Paterno’s moral failings leave him a shattered broken man…I can live with that just fine.

  105. duffman says:

    I am trying to get a handle on this

    1998 – The point where District Attorney drops the ball

    2000 – PSU drops the ball via janitor

    2002 – PSU drops the ball via the grad assistant

    In a four year span where was the District Attorney doing follow up on the 1998 charge?

    • Brian says:

      This article explains the timeline in a little more depth:

      To answer your question, he did nothing. Once he decided there would be no charges, he closed the case and moved on.

      Gricar knew the results of the sting before he made his decision not to prosecute.

      The Centre County Office of Children and Youth Services also was investigating that case.

      Investigator Jerry Lauro said this week he didn’t feel there was enough evidence for abuse charges solely based on interviews with the boys.

      “At that time, the information that we had wasn’t sufficient enough to substantiate a case,” Lauro said. “I don’t want [the mother)] to think we didn’t believe their kid back then. We did, but we didn’t have enough.”

      Lauro said Schreffler never told him the details of Sandusky’s confession at the victim’s house.

      “I remember my last conversation with him concerning him hiding in that room,” Lauro said. “He didn’t tell me details. All he said was, ‘There’s nothing to it — we’re going to close our case.’ And I said, ‘That’s fine, I’m going to close my case, too.”

      They never had another call regarding Sandusky, Lauro said.

      The DA disappeared in 2005 and his computer files have been tampered with, so we’ll never know what he may have been hiding. The disappearance sounds sinister, but apparently his brother committed suicide in a very similar way a few years earlier.

      • bullet says:

        I can understand the DA’s office deciding their wasn’t sufficient evidence. But how could Sandusky have access to all these children if the Office of Children and Youth Services was also involved. The burden of proof is a lot lower for them than for a criminal case.

        There are a lot of people other than Penn St. that failed. Most groups now don’t allow adults alone with a child. Yet it was happening with 2nd Mile and at the High School where he was “volunteering.”

        • Brian says:

          And a couple of people at the HS said they found his behavior with Second Mile boys odd. PSU people saw this guy daily for 30 years and nobody ever noticed anything? Gossip from the janitors never got noticed? McQueary never talked to any of the other coaches or staff? The Second Mile people, who should be on high alert for child abuse, didn’t notice anything? I just don’t believe Sandusky was that good of an actor.

          • greg says:


            The grand jury document seems to show the late night shower thing as a pattern. Football coaches work notoriously long hours. I would think they’d notice something over time, especially since PSU has very low coaching turnover.

          • duffman says:


            What I was trying to point out is that sex offenders are repeat offenders! Even if they dropped the case, the DA and the state should have kept Sandusky on the sexual predator radar, especially if they had the “confession conversation” on record. I am of the opinion that college football is big money, and corporate issues may have over ridden personal ones. The fact that law enforcement dropped the ball leads me to question why? Coaching staffs are hired to coach, and may not be as aware as law enforcement on what to do. If I was one of the parents of one of the kids, my first step would not be Penn State, but the law enforcement and state attorneys involved.

            Granted, I think the grad student did the absolute wrong thing, I was not aware that the law knew what was going on 4 years before. The DA could drop the 98 case, but to not flag Sandusky as a person of interest baffles me! I have known folks that get pulled over for suspicion of driving under the influence, and they get flagged for future observation. Surely child welfare is much higher on the law enforcement radar.

          • PSUGuy says:

            Agreed, unless Sandusky always simply waited until after the other coaches were gone. He was “just the hardest working coach in the business”…

            If you can, try and find my comments about sociopath above (I don’t have the heart to repeat them). If a person thought to be a “perfect neighbor” admits to doing something innappropriate, but insists there was no intended malice and agrees it was a mistake why would he be put on a watch list? “Everyone can make a mistake in judgement, right?”

            I don’t know if the whole 15+ years of abuse can be so easily covered up by that, but its kind of scary to think it could (especially if the incidents occur in non-overlapping circles of society).

          • bullet says:

            DA’s offices have limited resources, a lot of crimes and some constitutional restrictions. Its really the Children & Youth Services that should be keeping a file.

          • Brian says:


            The problem is that nobody ever complained to the cops again. They could think of him as a person to watch all they want, but if there are no future complaints they can’t do anything. I have no beef with the police here.

            The DA is a different issue. He didn’t fully share his info with the CPS and declined to prosecute a case that the police seemed surprised he wouldn’t pursue. But his computer files have been tampered with and he has disappeared, so there’s no way to know what he knew. He may very well have been dirty (another pedophile or just willing to be bribed). According to his son, the DA grew to dislike PSU and its teams so he doesn’t think his dad would have protected anyone at PSU. It makes me wonder if he did cover it up and that’s why he grew to dislike PSU (I don’t know when the dislike started, so the timeline might not work).

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            For the record his hard drive was missing from the laptop when it was found in the water. A hard drive was later found nearby that they believe was Gricar’s. They were unable to pull any data off the drive during forensic recovery. That is entirely consistently with being submerged in a water environment for approximately six months. I haven’t seen any information released that investigators believe the data was deliberately tampered with (beyond the laptop & drive being thrown in the river).

          • Brian says:


            I used the word “tampered” because one of the stories I read used it. It sounds like corrupted would be a better word.

            Did he not have another computer (ie was this his personal or work laptop?) they could check? No backups of vital legal files? No paper files that might say something?

          • duffman says:


            We can agree to disagree on the cops, but in a smallish town, folks in law enforcement really do know what is going on. The question is usually how they deal with it. If PSU is the biggest employer in the city they may have been discouraged to proceed and this is not unlike any company town operating in their best interest.

            As for the DA we may never know, but if there was a bigger and darker element at work, then these same folks will move to close ranks and limit the damage. You raising the point of him being a pedophile as well would be interesting. He would have a vested interest in protecting PSU, while still disliking PSU for knowing his own demons. If he did commit suicide, it would be an understandable outcome for someone who felt trapped in either direction.

            I do tend to believe that Sandusky was not that clever, so somebody had to be looking away when necessary. The two questions at that point are who? and why?

          • Jeepers says:

            Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I really do think there is something to the Gricar case. I would like to know, statistically, how often people copycat the suicide of family members. And how often the bodies of suicide victims aren’t found. I’d really like the FBI to get involved, simply for the Gricar aspect alone.

            Supposedly, ashes were found on Gricar’s passenger seat. He was anti-smoking and didn’t let people smoke in his car. Yes, they found “how to destroy a harddrive” search results on his home computer, but maybe the person (theorizing here) with him performed those searches. If he were going to commit suicide, why would he destroy his files on the same day? Wouldn’t you lead up to that decision and rid yourself of the files way before you offed yourself? It seems rushed. Like something happened the day of the “suicide.”

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            OK…you’re a conspiracy theorist. :)

            If someone murdered Gricar to protect Sandusky…the question is why?

            That would imply that Gricar had intentionally covered up the 98 case. If he had done so then why kill him seven years later? He was already entwined in the cover-up and couldn’t re-open an investigation without implicating himself. So what is the motivation to make him disappear then?

            If anything it is more likely that a family member of the molested child would want to see him dead for letting Sandusky stay free but if that were the case then Sandusky would have been a target as well.

          • Brian says:


            We can agree to disagree on the cops, but in a smallish town, folks in law enforcement really do know what is going on. The question is usually how they deal with it.

            It doesn’t matter what they know or think they know. If nobody files a complaint, they can’t act. They can’t follow him 24/7/365 for years because they are suspicious. They can’t arrest him. The DA said the case was closed, so they had to drop it. That’s why I don’t blame the cops.

            What exactly did you expect them to do after being ordered to drop the case? Anything they did would be harassment.

          • Jeepers says:

            With suicide, I’d doubt the guilt would eat away at him for 7 years until he did it. If somehow Gricar found out about the 2002 incident (meaning the police were in on the coverup) then he would have killed himself only 3 years later. “I should have done something in 1998…” That sounds more likely. I don’t know the answer, obviously. I just feel like something is very fishy about the Gricar case and it must be related, in some way.

          • duffman says:


            I am not saying they follow him 24 / 7 / 365, but as an old guy in the age before the internet and twitter there was the thing known as the grapevine. While you may laugh, I can tell you it worked pretty well. The grapevine found my moms stolen car before the cops did. The population listed for PSU is about 10,000 today, and the whole MSA that covers many communities within the entire county is around 150,000 today. I am guessing 15 years ago there were even fewer people, and words and rumors spread around. If the janitors saw it, I am guessing they could not keep secrets with those close to them and word would eventually get around.

            I guess I am saying nothing works in an absolute, and if they are going to hold the administrative side of PSU to task, they should hold the governmental side to task as well. Without the state university to enrich the coffers of Centre County the state side of the equation would be out of a job. If the year round population of the specific area is under 25 – 50 thousand that is still a pretty small town. If it was between 50 – 100 thousand it is still small enough to have a pretty effective grapevine. Especially with as little turn over as there has been in the football community there.

            If say this happened around Columbus and say 2 million people that is a little different because there will be more churches, schools, neighborhoods, etc to choose from. If there is a common hamburger joint that the janitors and cops share, the probability is greater that things get spread around the community as a whole. It is not harassment, but it is keeping your eyes and ears open. Which in a smaller community is not that hard to do. I think there is a rush to blame some, but if you are really going to get to the bottom, you have to consider everybody.

          • Brian says:


            I don’t get your point. Let’s say everyone in the police heard rumors. So what? What do you expect them to have done about it, rough him up in a dark alley sometime just because they heard rumors?

            The DA told them to drop it in 1998. Nobody else ever filed a complaint. There was nothing the police could legally do.

            The DA is missing and now legally declared dead, so he can’t be punished.

            Exactly who are you saying should have done more that can still be punished for it?

          • duffman says:


            No I am not expecting them to “rough him up” but just like any cop in any small town they keep tabs on certain behavior, and proceed when things come up over and over again. There is more to being a cop than just eating doughnuts, and the cops get paid to do their job. You have heard the saying where there is smoke, there is fire! In a small town involving crimes against children cops pay attention to that stuff, and if they were not, my question is why not? I understand the DA is dead, but the local cops are not, nor are the folks in the DA’s office. It seems like some minimal follow through from the 1998 incident, this would have been caught about a decade earlier, and with fewer victims.

            I am just saying if I am going to put the university through the ringer in all this, I am not going to give law enforcement a free pass.

          • Brian says:


            No I am not expecting them to “rough him up” but just like any cop in any small town they keep tabs on certain behavior, and proceed when things come up over and over again.

            Maybe I’m just dense, but how can the police legally keep tabs on someone for years after being told to drop a case? The behavior was never reported to them again. It didn’t come up over and over again. It never came up until the HS reported it in 2008. Nobody is even saying they had heard rumors, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt since that seems odd to me too.

            Please explain precisely what you mean the police should have done. What actions does keeping tabs on the behavior entail? Who was going to pay for an indefinite investigation into someone suspected once of a crime? What is it that they were supposed to do after being told to drop a case?

            There is more to being a cop than just eating doughnuts, and the cops get paid to do their job. You have heard the saying where there is smoke, there is fire! In a small town involving crimes against children cops pay attention to that stuff, and if they were not, my question is why not?

            They had one potential crime that a prosecutor told them wasn’t a case. It’s not like they had a string of reports about an unknown child molestor and didn’t pursue Sandusky. If nobody ever complains to them again, it would look like an isolated incident that was perhaps mischaracterized by the mother.

            I understand the DA is dead, but the local cops are not, nor are the folks in the DA’s office. It seems like some minimal follow through from the 1998 incident, this would have been caught about a decade earlier, and with fewer victims.

            The local cops received a legal order to drop the case. Any further investigation could well have led to harassment charges. The DA said to drop it. What are the other people in the office supposed to do about it? What is this follow through they were supposed to do? Unless new evidence comes to light, a dead case stays dead.

            I am just saying if I am going to put the university through the ringer in all this, I am not going to give law enforcement a free pass.

            You can perhaps blame the DA. He might have had good legal reasons to drop the case, but we’ll never know.

            You can blame the PSU administration for not doing more.

            You can blame the janitors for not reporting.

            You can blame the charity for not noticing.

            You can perhaps blame the lawyer who was counsel for PSU and Second Mile but didn’t really warn Second Mile about Sandusky (I don’t know what he could legally say).

            You can’t blame the victims, but the police can’t investigate crimes that aren’t reported.

            You just seem to want to blame the police. Unless you have some evidence the rest of us lack, though, I don’t see any basis for blaming them.

      • EZCUSE says:

        I call bullshit. I really do.

        As a judicial clerk for the Court of Appeals here in Michigan, I reviewed several cases where people were convicted based solely on the statements of children. In some cases, very young children. You think this stuff is disgusting, it actually has a few extra levels of disgusting to go.

        If Sandusky was a welder, he’d be in jail. If he was an auto mechanic, he’d be in jail. As an up and coming football coach, people looked the other way.

        It’s one thing to look another way when the 19-year old from the projects in the Bronx has a Navigator. It’s another to ignore child abuse. AT THE VERY LEAST, as you all have noted, he should have been under such scrutiny that it would have been virtually impossible to commit future crimes.

        I don’t want to ever hear any Big 10 school look down on the SEC again. Your “KING” and its community did something far worse than any SEC school has ever done.

        • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

          “I don’t want to ever hear any Big 10 school look down on the SEC again. Your “KING” and its community did something far worse than any SEC school has ever done.”

          -Spare us the sanctimonious bullshit.

        • Purduemoe says:

          How the hell does this even become a conference thing? I think a lot of us would just as soon kick Penn State out over this crap. They definitely aren’t our king. The Penn State Situation isn’t about football on the field at all, it is about people not being decent human beings and passively allowing a predator to attack more children. To conflate that with something as relatively meaningless as college football is misguided.

          The reason we shouldn’t look down at the SEC is the crap that is going down at Ohio State.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            “The reason we shouldn’t look down at the SEC is the crap that is going down at Ohio State.”

            —Actually what has happened at Ohio State is exactly why we should look down on the SEC.

            There isn’t a school out there that hasn’t had issues crop out relating to athletics, what matters is how they handle it.

            The administration has done a horrific job of handling the public relations aspect of the whole fiasco but the fact remains that everything that has happened was discovered by the compliance department & turned over to the NCAA. Without the direct investigative actions of Ohio State the NCAA would not have had the necessary information to penalize the school, Jim Tressel would still be the head coach, Terrelle Pryor would be the starting QB right now and no one would be the wiser.

            THAT is the difference between how cases are generally handled by B1G universities vs SEC athletic departments.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            That is of course a broad generalization…some SEC ADs (Georgia, Florida, Vandy) tend to behave more responsibly while there are B1G schools that have had more issues (Minnesota).

          • EZCUSE says:

            I get it. It is fine for the B1G to look down at the SEC… but nobody dare look down on the B1G.

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            That has to be the single most asinine comment I’ve seen thus far on the blog.

            Clearly the ACC is dirty because of the questionable decision of adding a school tainted by officials accepting bribes in exchange for deceiving their students with bad information on what companies to take out student loands with.

            I mean given that Syracuse is such a dirty program it means the ACC must be as well.

        • bullet says:

          You’re right that the testimony can be sufficient. I was on a jury that convicted a father based on the testimony of his 6 year old daughter with no other evidence. But do we know what the boys’ testimony was? It may not have been consistent. It may have been about something that could be interpreted several ways. Their behavior may not have been consistent. Its a very difficult case without complications.

        • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

          “Your “KING” and its community did something far worse than any SEC school has ever done.”

          —-Syracuse Assistant Bernie Fine Being Investigated For Child Molestation…

          • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

            And as I stated in regards to the Citadel story. If the PSU scandal is getting victims of abuse at other institutions (not just Universities but wherever) to speak up and be heard then I am glad that some good will be accomplished.

    • ccrider55 says:

      And 2005 the DA disapears…..

  106. Brian says:

    I was reading something on another blog and it seemed like a good question for here. Someone asked who is PSU’s Nile Kinnick, and someone else responded that nobody else has a Nile Kinnick because he died in the military (a training flight, FYI).

    Who else has a Nile Kinnick? By the strictest definition, nobody else does as far as I know. Have any other Heisman winners died in military service?

    I threw out 2 rough equivalents:

    1. OSU – Don Scott
    Don Scott was a 2 time All-American at QB at OSU (back when you could only play 3 years) before dying in a bomber training flight in England in 1943. The biggest difference is that OSU has had a multitude of great players so Scott isn’t at the top of OSU’s list while Kinnick is at the top of Iowa’s list. That led to Kinnick being mythologized while Scott wasn’t.

    2. ASU – Pat Tillman
    A great player, and he died in combat. This was too recent for mythologizing to have happened, and Tillman wasn’t an elite player like Kinnick.

    Who else might fit the bill?

    • Well maybe not idolized but the Ohio State airport is named after Don Scott

      • Brian says:

        Yes, and he made OSU’s All-Century Team, too (1 of 5 QBs). But his number isn’t retired and won’t be, so he’s in that next tier of OSU’s greats.

    • Scarlet_Lutefisk says:

      A number of members from Ohio State’s 1942 championship team died in combat during WW2.

      Maj Ray Mendoza wrestled for Ohio State in the early 90′s and was killed in Iraq. He was close friends with Maj Doug Zembiec who was a two time All American wrestler at Annapolis who was also killed in Iraq.

      • Brian says:

        The hard part is finding elite players who died in service. Don Scott is very close, but not quite.

        • bullet says:

          Jack Chevigny of Notre Dame who later coached at Texas. He was the one who scored the TD in 1928 in the win one for the gipper game. He was expected to be Rockne’s successor but got passed over as he was still young when Rockne died. He ended up coaching at Texas and guided Texas to an upset win over ND in 1935 that helped put SWC football on the map. A Rice upset of Purdue (when else has that happened?) the same day was also key. Chevigny died on Iwo Jima. There’s a story, probably equivocal, that the pen used by the Japanese admiral to sign surrender papers was his, one with an inscription that said “an Old Notre Damer who beat Notre Dame.”

        • bullet says:

          Texas had a 1941 team that was ranked #1 and featured on the cover of life magazine before tying Baylor and losing to TCU. They would have been invited to the Rose Bowl (which ended up being in Durham when Duke was invited and Pearl Harbour made them afraid to hold it on the west coast) but refused to cancel a late game because the Rose Bowl was afraid they would lose (they beat Oregon 71-7). They lost several members of that team in WWII. One, Chal Daniel, was an All-American guard who died in a bomber crash.

  107. Eric says:

    I’ve been thinking about the BCS and really think the official disappearance of AQs is likely. They are too easy to attack and not really needed to maintain the current conferences positions (outside of maybe Big East). I’ve modified my original idea on this a little and think the BCS might look something like this in the next cycle (assuming no plus one).

    1. Top 5 conference champions (limit 1 per conference) are in regardless of conference affiliation (so its possible this year that would include Boise State and Houston depending on final rankings). Top 4 teams in final BCS rankings are in the BCS every year if they didn’t already qualify as conference champ.
    2. Top two teams go to BCS National Championship.
    3. If Bowls miss out on their tie-ins because they weren’t a top 5 champion (say ACC champ is the #7 highest conference champ for example) they have the option of taking their tie-in champ provided they are in top 18. If champ doesn’t qualify, they have the choice of taking another conference team provided one is in the top 18 (almost never will both of these be an issue).
    4. BCS bowls that lost champs to national championship have the chance to take replacements first and get first dibs at a replacement from their conference if there is room.
    5. Any team in the top 18 can be chosen for an at large with a limit of 2 per conference except for once every four years when 3 can be taken (all must be in top 8).
    6. While some money (a few million) is given each year based on appearances in a given year, most will based on a rolling 10 year formula that would take into account appearances, ratings, fans traveling, etc.

    • Brian says:


      It mostly makes sense. My issue would be with point 6. The whole purpose of AQs is to justify giving the ACC, BE, B10, B12, P12 and SEC a lot more money than everyone else. None of those schools are looking for a more “fair” formula to spread the wealth. They want a large, known, steady stream of cash that the non-AQs can’t get. In addition, your formula sounds much top complicated.

      • Eric says:

        I see what you are saying, but I think this would benefit them and at 10 years would be consistent enough to let them rely on it being fairly steady. In this set-up at least the 5 tie-ins would probably all have a bid each year. They will also generally bring more fans and at least the big names will be the ones producing the biggest ratings. I think this set-up would effectively probably keeps things the same, but it wouldn’t be as easily subject to the arguments that it unfairly benefits the power conferences (not that I ever gave much weight to those, but I’m sure the BCS would like them gone). The conferences which don’t have as many teams making every year would likely be making something, but considerably less. They’d also suffer in they weren’t bringing ratings.

        It is complicated, but this is the one part of the formula I think the BCS might benefit from being complicated (so long as the rules don’t cost them money).

        • Brian says:


          First, I don’t think you can get enough data to do anything with the number of fans and the like. Besides, the little guys won’t agree to it.

          Second, I don’t think the BCS is worried at all about future complaints. They can always go back to the old system that would reduce non-AQ access, so I don’t see a threat there.

  108. Brian says:

    Carve it in stone. WI versus MSU for the B10 title.

    Luke Fickell just assured himself of getting fired after the season if it was still in doubt. Special teams cost OSU a game again, and then he played for OT and lost. I know it’s not his fault the OC is an idiot, but he’ll pay the price. At least it will finally let OSU get rid of the deadweight offensive coaches.

    • Peter says:

      Bielema can bungle big games, but he does know how to make sure the Badgers do not lose to scrubs. Hammer them into the dirt and extinguish all hope. It’s what that system does.

      Ohio State has always let junk hang around with what was formerly known as Tresselball. Suspend/boot enough of their talent and you start to see why that isn’t a good idea. Their offense can’t always put the foot down when they need to. Most of their games this year have been inexplicable losses or close wins,and the only reason their record looks somewhat acceptable is the miracle/defensive screw-up with WI.

      • Brian says:

        I have consistently bitched about Tresselball since he was hired. An elite team should strive to be elite in all facets of the game, not just defense and special teams. The lack of offense and unwillingness to be aggressive in building a lead has cost OSU multiple times. I’m sure the Tresselball approach won some games, too, but it brings a lot of risk.

        Many/most OSU fans have wanted OC and OL coach Bollman fired for a long time. This game will be the final straw that makes sure that happens, so that’s a nice silver lining.

  109. zeek says:

    Big Ten could have 10 bowl eligible teams. Purdue and Northwestern are now both 5-5 with Iowa/Indiana and Minnesota/Michigan State remaining respectively.

    Michigan State @ Northwestern will also likely be interesting for its impact on the Big Ten Legends division race with the winner of Nebraska-Michigan likely needing a Michigan State loss in that game.

    • Peter says:

      Minnesota is playing significantly harder this year. Kill is managing to light a fire under some really sub-par talent. They didn’t stand a chance against the Badgers (or Michigan, or Nebraska…) but they at least seem to be trying. Wasn’t the case last year.

      Northwestern would still be favored to get bowl eligible next week, imo. Of course, Northwestern could also could beat Michigan State and cause untold misery for them…

      Indiana is capital B Bad. They will lose that game to Purdue.

  110. Mike says:

    The other side of Bo Pelini. He didn’t think Nebraska – Penn St. should have been played. If you think Bo is a raving lunatic, watch the first five minutes or so of his post game press conference.