I keep telling myself to just get over the whole Penn State thing.
It’s still painful to even think about: a rogue former coach who didn’t molest anyone in the Penn State locker room back in 2002 (see Sandusky verdict, not guilty on that charge) brings down an entire university and a Board of Trustees basically oversees the demolition of its reputation, the football program, and the legacy of a great man. And the guy who did most of the damage appears to be clueless.
In case you missed it, Mr. Emmert was holding court the other day up in Detroit, and basically confirmed my worse fears: he really doesn’t seem to know what he’s talking about. The guy who leaped in and nuked PSU did so with absolutely no facts in hand, and yet nobody seems to call him on it. Ever.
Pearl of wisdom #1:
“As for the criminal case against Sandusky, he said if the school had brought it forward when the initial claims of abuse began and separated itself at that time, the NCAA never would have been involved. The ensuring years of cover-up, he implied, caused the NCAA action.”
Yes, you read that right. Here’s the truth, from PS4EVER:
“This bombshell exposes a basic, but colossal error in Emmert’s, and therefore, the NCAA’s understanding of the Penn State case: the first claim of abuse against Sandusky was in 1998, and it was, in fact, Penn State police who sent the case to the Centre County District Attorney at that time. The case was handled by Centre County Children and Youth Services (CYS) and the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (DPW), involving interviews with Sandusky by two separate psychologists, and the eventual notification of officials at The Second Mile. The conclusion was that Sandusky exhibited no criminal or pedophile behavior and the District Attorney, Penn State Police, State College Police, CYS and DPW had done the investigation thoroughly and cleared Sandusky.”
“Further demonstrating the lack of knowledge Emmert seems to have about even the basic details of the Penn State case, he also shared with his audience of business professionals that the Freeh Report was “more exhaustive” than anything the NCAA could have done. In one of the largest inaccuracies of his presentation, Emmert indicated that Louis Freeh “had subpoena power at the University,” which is grossly inaccurate, and one of the universal criticisms of the report. In fact, no one interviewed was legally compelled to tell the truth, or to even participate in the Freeh investigation. None of the major names in the Penn State case was interviewed for the report — including Joe Paterno (although he offered), Tim Curley, Gary Schultz or Mike McQueary – leaving many legal experts to strongly condemn the overall validity of its findings.”
Emmert said one of the biggest issues at Penn State was coach Joe Paterno’s power over university administrators.“You can’t have part of an organization that’s so revered and so powerful that not only can you not control it, you can’t even ask a question,” he said. “You can’t (even) go in there and say, ‘So what happened here?’ …
And finally, the nail in the coffin:
Finally, Emmert told his Detroit Economic Club audience that Penn State University officials said they were not disputing the facts in the Freeh Report, “so we had the facts,” Emmert said.
I didn’t even want to post this because writing it makes me sick to my stomach…I’m starting to lose hope because it is starting to appear this case is indeed hopeless because no one who should care is doing anything about it.
Just don’t call me a “Joe Apologist.”
Nothing to apologize for.