"(McQueary) was very upset and I said why, and he was very reluctant to get into it," Paterno said. "He told me what he saw, and I said, what? He said it, well, looked like inappropriate, or fondling, I'm not quite sure exactly how he put it. I said you did what you had to do. It's my job now to figure out what we want to do. So I sat around. It was a Saturday. Waited till Sunday because I wanted to make sure I knew what I was doing. And then I called my superiors and I said, 'Hey, we got a problem, I think. Would you guys look into it?' Cause I didn't know, you know. We never had, until that point, 58 years I think, I had never had to deal with something like that. And I didn't feel adequate.
"You know, he didn't want to get specific. And to be frank with you I don't know that it would have done any good, because I never heard of, of, rape and a man. So I just did what I thought was best. I talked to people that I thought would be, if there was a problem, that would be following up on it."
According to media reports in PA, JoPa never talked to Sandusky after firing him in 1999 and the Board was solely responsible for approving the foundation's access to the campus and providing office space on campus for the foundation. This whole thing was not a program endorsed by JoPa and there is no current information to indicate the football program conducted events or activities to support the foundation. Yes, there were former football players who were friends of Sandusky who served on the board. Bottom line is that this whole situation is totally the responsibility of the Board, who thus far has refused to accept partial blame, and was not any function of the football program or supported by JoPa. JoPa did what was required and presented the situation to appropriate official and they dropped the ball. He is being made the scape goat because the Board fails to recognize their responsibilities and it was a good political excuse to oust him as coach based on growing disatisfaction with the football program. I am not a Penn State fan or apologist; however, JoPa is a victim in this situation and the tide is really turning in PA against the Board and there is a huge ground swell to totally revamp the Board and institute some transparency and responsibility.
I disagree that he is a victim. I think any, and all, who were told,or saw it, should have made sure authorities knew. It's a sad day when a university is more important than a child. The victims are the kids.
This matter was duly reported to the AD, the Chief Administrative officer and ultimately the University President. This matter was not initiated by JoPa who had no responsibility for the foundation or it's presence on the University grounds. This reporting requirement was totally the responsibility of the President and Chief Adm. Officer and to a lesser degree the AD as the foundation was accessing Athletic Department facilities for some activities. All accesses were approved and under the auspice of the Board.
PoconoPony wrote:This matter was duly reported to the AD, the Chief Administrative officer and ultimately the University President. This matter was not initiated by JoPa who had no responsibility for the foundation or it's presence on the University grounds. This reporting requirement was totally the responsibility of the President and Chief Adm. Officer and to a lesser degree the AD as the foundation was accessing Athletic Department facilities for some activities. All accesses were approved and under the auspice of the Board.
So you say Paterno is a victim in this situation. I see you are from Pennsylvania.
"We will play man to man and we will pick you up at the airport." - Larry Brown
I'm not surprised Joe said this. People from that generation are usually those that haven't been around this kind of thing, haven't had the training to deal and are so uncomfortable that they don't know how to deal with it.
I know my dad - 3 years older than Joe - would have struggled with it. Doesn't make it right. But I can see how a person of his age would have reacted to it.
Should not the question be, "What would my father have done had I been the one in the shower?" Why is the answer to that inappropriate for his action to help any other child?
No Quarter wrote:Should not the question be, "What would my father have done had I been the one in the shower?" Why is the answer to that inappropriate for his action to help any other child?
Your father would have asked you what happened. Apples/oranges.
