UPDATE: NCAA Penn State Sanctions
__________________
Actions have consequences.
Legendary figures are not exempt from that reality.
From the Chicago Tribune:
Penn State removed the statue of former coach Joe Paterno outside Beaver Stadium on Sunday in advance of NCAA sanctions that could cripple the football program for years.
The NCAA, a methodical and procedural organization not known for tipping its investigative hand, has scheduled a Monday morning news conference at which it stated it will levy "corrective and punitive measures" against the school in the wake of a child sex-abuse scandal that led to the conviction of former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky.
The penalties will be disclosed at the organization's Indianapolis headquarters by NCAA President Mark Emmert and Ed Ray, chairman of the NCAA's executive committee.
Penn State removed the statue of former coach Joe Paterno outside Beaver Stadium on Sunday in advance of NCAA sanctions that could cripple the football program for years.
The NCAA, a methodical and procedural organization not known for tipping its investigative hand, has scheduled a Monday morning news conference at which it stated it will levy "corrective and punitive measures" against the school in the wake of a child sex-abuse scandal that led to the conviction of former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky.
The penalties will be disclosed at the organization's Indianapolis headquarters by NCAA President Mark Emmert and Ed Ray, chairman of the NCAA's executive committee.
...Dawn broke Sunday at Penn State with the removal of Paterno's 7-foot, 900-pound statue, built in 2001 to commemorate the coach's record-setting 324th victory.
Workers barricaded the streets and nearby sidewalks and covered Paterno's likeness with a blue tarp. A bulldozer lifted Paterno's statue off its moorings as an estimated 100 to 150 students chanted, "We are Penn State."
Here's video of the statue being removed, and reaction from a Penn State student and an alumna:
Student Jeremie Thompson believes the university buckled under outside pressure. He considers the unannounced removal of the statue on Sunday to be part of the university's problem - covering up and a lack of transparency.
Penn State alumna Leslie Bleggie was angry about the statue's removal, saying that all the facts about the scandal aren't known. She thinks it's a knee-jerk reaction to hearsay and caving in to pressure. Bleggie says, "We're letting the haters run the university."
I can't relate to what they're saying, but I'm not a Penn State student or graduate.
To me, taking down the statue seems like the right thing to do.
...Joe Paterno's family, in an issued statement, objected to the statue's removal and the continued assault on Paterno's legacy.
"Tearing down the statue of Joe Paterno does not serve the victims of Jerry Sandusky's horrible crimes or help heal the Penn State community," the statement read in part. "We believe the only way to help the victims is to uncover the full truth. The Freeh report, though it has been accepted by the media as the definitive conclusion on the Sandusky scandal, is the equivalent of an indictment — a charging document written by a prosecutor — and an incomplete and unofficial one at that."
The family does have a point.
The report is being accepted as a definitive account of the scandal. That's not right.
Although it's painful for the university to remove the statue of Paterno, it's not as if it's being melted down and destroyed.
In time, perhaps it will be put back. (Personally, I think that would be a mistake.) But for now, the university couldn't allow it to stand. It would be wrong to leave it. That would appear dismissive of the seriousness of the scandal.
This has to be painful for the Paterno family and the Penn State family.
Of course, the statue's removal isn't nearly as painful as what the victims endured.
10 comments:
"I can't relate to what they're saying..."
Well, think of it like this. How would you react if your Governor were accused of hiring kids of major contributors, providing kickbacks, harboring felons on his staff, and running a campaign out of his elected office?
That's how they feel about Paterno.
Do you get what Paterno did?
Do you understand the cover-up of the child abuse?
Seriously, do you get it?
It certainly seems like you don't.
Do you get what Walker did?
Do you understand corruption?
Seriously, do you get it?
It certainly seems like you don't.
Obviously, you really don't get what Paterno did.
Paterno's cover-up led to horrific crimes being committed against children.
Aren't you a parent?
Your attempt to put Paterno on the same plane as Scott Walker speaks volumes.
I know this is "just the Internet," but think about what you're saying.
I'm NOT saying what you're saying I'm saying. Nowhere did I say "Walker and Paterno, nor thier sins, are morally equivalent." You know, it IS possible to compare apples and oranges; both are fruit. And mountains and molehills are both elevated earth relative to surrounding area. What I'm saying is that Paterno fans cannot see the glaring imperfections in their hero just as Walker fans are bind to his obvious flaws. I am not comparing the flaws, I am comparing the fans.
The problem with your argument is you can't compare the "fans" without considering the "flaws" connected with the "hero."
There is a significant difference between a molehill and a mountain, so much so that their extremely limited similarity becomes irrelevant.
The behavior of the "fans" is related to the "flaws."
Consider that what you view as Walker's "obvious flaws" may, in reality, be nothing but trumped up Left-wing spin.
It's ridiculous to compare Paterno supporters, excusing the cover-up of child rape, with Walker supporters.
Two words: Brian Deschane. I had my reason for recall when that story broke. Anyone who condones such action lacks moral character entirely. If someone from my side did something like that, I'd be first in line to run 'em out of office.
Funny, you've never mentioned that name. Care to now? My guess is no.
You think the hiring (and later firing) of Deschane was reason to recall Walker?
Did you hold Doyle to such standards?
My guess is no.
I'm glad Deschane was fired. However, I certainly don't think a member of Walker's cabinet hiring him can be compared to someone covering up child rape for years.
"You think the hiring (and later firing) of Deschane was reason to recall Walker?"
Yes. I do. And Deschane wasn't fired. He was demoted to a slightly less ridiculously paying job for which he was unqualified but quit.
"Did you hold Doyle to such standards?"
As far as I'm aware, there was no need to as I don't recall him hiring the unqualified kids of donors. If I'm mistaken, please, correct me.
"However, I certainly don't think a member of Walker's cabinet hiring him can be compared to someone covering up child rape for years."
Again, I'm not comparing the two.
Deschane was forced out of his job. I call that "fired."
Doyle was utterly corrupt. His pay-to-play politics is part of his disgraceful legacy. Apparently, you have no problem with the way Doyle conducted himself, the litany of "favors" he dished out to his large contributors.
Hypocrite.
Post a Comment