Sandusky told the AD "I will not shower will children again."

Ok just give us your lockerroom keys and do it off campus next time.

I didn't give much thought to shutting down the football program initially, and kinda rolled my eyes when it was suggested, but I am coming around to it now. I'm starting to think it's a good idea.

When i was 2 or 3 i was afraid of the shower and showered with my dad.

the federalis could get involved because Sandusky took kids out of state to bowl games.

I don't think he was intending to bowl games with them; more like nude water sports.

man never liked car washes as a 3 year old the brushes were big red and they spun around and u were like trapped in the car and these huges red brushes surrounded u like u were t in a fire f in horrible. didnt like the sound of aluminum foil either like when you take a big piece out of the roll and tear it just awful sound would cry and scream.

I heard that one of the mothers was called in to pick Sandusky from a lineup. She claimed she couldn't get a good look at the guy who had a little boy in front of him.

Most teenagers are sociopaths. And many 20-year-olds still are. So this isn't super surprising to me.

Me too. To this day, I'm still scared of your dad.

Interesting article from si.com that considers the distinct possibility of criminal charges against Paterno.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...rno/index.html

Basically, the death penalty is the only solution.

Dereliction doesn't even begin to describe the program.

I think a 20 year death penalty would be fair.

Defiling kids just isn't ok, despite what those at Penn St. think.

Deification of Joe Pa brought the program down.





Make an example of them.

A safe haven for pedophiles is unacceptable.

Diddling kids isn't the primary purpose of a university.

The audacity of Joe's press release this morning makes me wonder if the BoT did fire him would we be treated to the spectacle of him being physically prevented from the facility.

Of course not. Taking their money is.

thanks jared

I'm not sure if this is how the BoT is thinking... but if I were a BoT member, charged with taking control of the situation and bringing order to the institution... Paterno's audacious press release would sink him.

The press release just underscores the idea that Paterno thinks he's the one in control, and gets to do whatever he wants and on his timetable. And that's the very heart of the issue at hand: that there was no institutional oversight.

Will be very interesting to see what BoT ends up doing tonight wrt Paterno...

Cuts both ways. If Paterno thought he had the voice of God, is it not reasonable that he would believe that his report would be properly handled. If so, is it not reasonable for him to assume that the investigation was legitimate and that nothing came of it?

I am not advocating that Paterno should be excused, I am just commenting on how that statement can be used.

What are they #1 in?

What he said to the AD that Sunday and how he said it will certainly have a lot to do with potential future legal action against him.

The Keystone state becomes The Keyster state?

They know they've passed up Big Rape in RORR.

These are separate concerns I think from the BoT's POV today. (If I'm understanding you correctly...)

The view of Paterno has been set in stone, there's no way around it and I doubt the BoT cares anymore - Paterno has been convicted in the court of public opinion - legally not a criminal, but morally a monster. And any further action against Paterno is a criminal matter. They're done with him, and just trying to figure out when exactly to get rid of him.

The BoT's only agenda, I would think, is to show that they are fully in control of the situation and taking actions to prevent anything like this from happening again. Paterno's press release (setting his own timetable for when he gets to leave) undermines the BoT's goals of showing the world they are the ones in control today, and could be a factor in them firing Paterno (imo).

My only concern is for the safety of their ice cream class

100% correct. I am sure it must be appreciated that what ended up happening is terrible and must be addressed. I am a little disturbed at the call for action "right now," as this is a complicated situation and it must be dealt with correctly. There is still the potential for a lot of damage beyond the scope of where it should properly go.

The damage to the kids has been done (of course, emotionally, it is ongoing); I don't think there is any reason under these circumstances to think that their welfare will not be the actual number one concern once the facts are known and a plan is put in place (even the most cynical onlooker will have to concede that there are too many eyes on this for it to go any other way). For the children to be the number one concern does not mean that the other issues must be ignored, especially since they are time-sensitive.

You would think so, right?

If this does not constitute "lack of institutional control", that phrase has absolutely no meaning whatsoever. This is probably the clearest example of "lack of institutional control", from top (Spanier, Paterno) to bottom (McQueary, janitors), EVER.

Yes, we must ensure that the next Ben and Jerry are free to make delicious ice cream