GAMES- No Winners in the Penn State Crisis

The weeks and months ahead will reveal the legal outcome of shocking charges leveled against a former Penn State assistant football coach. The revelations came to light after reports surfaced in a Harrisburg newspaper about sexual abuse of young boys by Jerry Sandusky, a 32-year former Nittany Lion defensive coach known for developing outstanding linebackers.
Happy Valley is nothing but these days as media heavy weights line up to take shots at venerable Joe Paterno. Reports indicate the 84-year-old icon was made aware of an eyewitness account of Sandusky engaged in a sex act with a boy. According to grand jury testimony, Paterno immediately relayed the information to Penn State AD Tim Curley.
The debate about Paterno’s actions or lack thereof rages because Sandusky was, at that time, no longer working on the football staff. He was using campus facilities as part of his “Second Mile” program, which was, ironically, designed to assist at-risk youngsters.
Some have called for Paterno’s removal because they feel he did not act with enough authority and purpose when the accusations were raised. Supporters of Paterno argue that the head coach had no facts at the time and did what he was supposed to do, which was to notify his supervisor. Critics retort that Paterno should have followed up with Curley or other officials at State College to ascertain if there was merit to the allegations.
Interestingly, documentation also reveals that Paterno had previously confronted Sandusky about Sandusky’s status as heir apparent for the head coaching job at Penn State. Grand jury testimony by an alleged victim revealed that Sandusky was very emotional after returning from a meeting with Paterno in which the head coach indicated that Sandusky’s time was already committed to “Second Mile” and that leading the university’s football program required complete attention. Paterno allegedly told Sandusky he would not be considered as an eventual successor for the treasured Penn State job.
Paterno has long operated under old-school secrecy at Penn State. His own salary as a public employee of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was not willingly revealed until a claim was filed under the Open Public Records Act. Paterno keeps assistant coaches away from the media and team practices are not open to the public. These details place even greater scrutiny and criticism upon the devastating allegations.
While recent years have seen a handful of immature misdeeds by some Penn State players, nothing (we’re aware of) had risen to degree of offenses found at powerhouse programs such as the University of Miami or Ohio State, among others. Penn State players were assumed to be attending class and signing on at State College because of “Joe Pa” and the school’s academic programs, not because of free cars and other perks.
But any truth to the Sandusky allegations will destroy much of the hard-earned credibility Paterno generated over generations of devotion to the university. Guilt by association is often an unfair circumstance but it is inevitable. What this illegal, unfortunate and disgusting situation will accomplish is even more troubling. What Paterno knew and when he knew it may cause the ageless coach to perhaps lose the right to determine when he steps down as the head football coach.
Late Sunday night Curley took administrative leave and another administrator returned to retirement. Both face criminal charges for allegedly not reporting the accusations to law enforcement. Documentation says Curley only claimed to have been told that Sandusky and the youngster were “horsing around.”
Paterno built the team and the school’s reputation into a national power. He and his spouse, Sue, have donated millions to the university and its state-of-the-art library. He’s stood for all that was supposed to be right about high-level amateur athletics.
Penn State is a brand unto itself thanks to Paterno’s steady and disciplined hand.
The coach had a squeaky clean reputation and his link to Sandusky’s alleged behavior is grossly unfortunate but inescapable. Paterno has kept the public at arm’s length on a variety of relatively minor issues over the decades but nothing like these allegations of sexual abuse against children by a trusted colleague could have been imagined.
The argument that Paterno should have done more is a double- edged sword. It insinuates that he had the power to do more because it acknowledges how people perceive him. The bespectacled old man with the navy blue pants, and white socks is Penn State.
Forget the university athletic director and even the president. “Joe Pa” is the person who is believed to control things and he should have dealt with this situation in a forceful dictator-like manner. He should not have passed it on like a so-called “hot potato.”
As stated, Sandusky was no longer working for Paterno when the head coach became aware of the allegations, although Sandusky did maintain emeritus status with an office and access to university facilities.
It was reported that eight youngsters were allegedly subjected to Sandusky’s abuse dating to at least 1994. Does this startling information mean that Paterno’s legacy should be torn apart? Does this wipe out more than 60 years of devotion to an institution? Could he and should he have pursued the situation more vigorously? And will this crisis allow critics within the university to finally find a reason to show Paterno the door?
Sandusky is charged with unthinkable crimes and those who knew about the allegations will rightfully be punished for not stepping forward more forcefully. This was no situation in which to simply “pass the buck.” But it’s sad that Paterno’s legacy will include this huge asterisk. It is now highly unlikely that he returns in 2012 to the program he made famous.
Sports usually have winners and losers. In this case, it appears that everyone has lost.
Reach Rossi at joerossi61@comcast.net