IN MY VIEW, that it happened to Penn State didn’t make it seem any less damning, only less likely. For years now, the Nitanny Lions have been held up as being all that’s good and pure about college football and no coach — not even Bear Bryant himself — has been so revered as the seemingly indefatigable Joe Paterno.
Paterno was a great coach and has the record to prove it. He ran a clean, recruiting-scandal-free program and has the record to prove that, too. And no coach — in my memory, at least — has enjoyed a press that not only was supportive of his program but often appeared to be awed by him, the person.
My years as a sports writer — a 15-year stint — ended long about the same time Paterno and Penn State played Darrell Royal and Texas in the Cotton Bowl. In fact, that 1972 bowl classic was the last football game I ever covered.
Now I already had some experience with the feelings the Eastern Press had for “Joe Pa.” But during that week preceding the Cotton Bowl game, I began to suspect that when they said the “Pa” part it wasn’t just an abbreviation of his name but, rather, a fatherly view of their idol.
Now it’s not unusual for writers to have their favorite among coaches. Shoot, I’ve had a bundle of them — JT King, Darrell Royal, Hayden Fry, Grant Teaff, John Conley — to name a few. But I did stay off my knees while mentioning any one of them by name…
WHAT I AM not doing is speculating on any, if any, degree of complicity that Paterno may have had in the many allegations surrounding the Jerry Sandusky case. Whether he reported whatever information he had to the appropriate parties has — at the time of this writing, at least — not been established. There has been too much written and said already and, despite the allegations against Sandusky, innocence prevails until guilt is established.
So what’s bothering me right now is the speculation about how far the punishment should be expanded, once guilt has been determined.
At this point, the case against Sandusky appears strong. And, evidently, the university’s governing board believed Paterno did not act either rapidly enough or fully enough to go unscathed. So they fired him, ignoring his announcement of a few hours earlier he would retire at season’s end.
At first glance — and to a degree, even now — I wondered if the board knew something not available to the public or — knowing first-hand how boards operate — was giving the outward appearance of being “properly proactive.”
My money is on the latter.
Then there is the matter of Paterno’s having put his home in his wife’s name. Was he trying to protect his property against a possible lawsuit, or was he simply getting his estate in order? Hey, the man does have lung cancer.
MANY YEARS AGO, back at a time when my hair was black, my stomach was flat and an unsophisticated nation remained in the hands of a naively pragmatic populace, a potentially embarrassing incident in the Tech athletic department happened suddenly and was disposed of in a silence that would not be possible today.
It involved a member of the Raider football staff — not the coaching staff but an ancillary position — and it had the athletic department and the university administration reeling for the short duration that separated its discovery and its disposal.
Nobody in the local media but me had any knowledge of what had happened. And I learned about it because of an indirect involvement. I was on vacation and, as was the case during my tenure as sports editor and daily columnist, I tried to solicit people connected to athletics to do a guest column during my absence.
Three or four days into my vacation, I got a call from Chas. A. Guy, my editor, asking me, one, if the fella doing my column had another one to run and, two, I’d better get my fanny out to Tech to learn why it can’t be published.
Mr. Guy said it’s something I can’t talk about on the phone.
At Tech I learned a football player had brought to the athletic director copies of letters he had received from the person in question that were more than suggestive (“Hell, they were out-and-out love letters,” one of my athletic department sources told me).
Just how rapidly and quietly Tech had handled the situation is attested by the fact that by the time I got out there that morning, he had been discovered, fired and been gone for a couple of hours. Where he went I never knew, and I’ve heard nothing of him ever since.
At the office later that afternoon, my boss told me he saw no need for me to write anything about it. Which was just as well, being as I wouldn’t have known what to say, anyway. As I mentioned, those were different times.
Today is the first time any part of that story has ever been in print.
OBVIOUSLY, THAT incident has no comparison to the Penn State scandal in that it had no lasting effect, no immediate damage (unless you consider the guy who was fired). And what concerns me about the situation at State College is the collateral damage that may be brought on by, of all things, the media.
I could not believe hearing a national broadcaster for a respected news channel imploring Penn State to turn down any bowl bids and, even further, give its football program the death penalty.
What am I missing here?
The football players, the student body and the university itself are not the perpetrators, why add them to the list of the real victims?
For the sake of argument, let’s say that everybody who’s been accused is guilty of all counts. Should their punishment, however appropriate, be shared by youngsters who signed on to play college football, students who were attracted there because of the Nittany Lions’ reputation and a university whose endowments and other contributions are brought about by that tremendous catalyst?
Again, what am I missing here?
The only so-called death penalty ever invoked was against the SMU football program. Even though many believed that to be overly extensive, part of the “crime” was committed by the players themselves. They accepted the signing bribes with full knowledge what they were doing was illegal.
If Sandusky is indeed guilty of a crime that hideous, that unthinkable, he should be punished even beyond the extent of the law. And all persons who knew about it but tried to cover it up should get the exact same medicine.
Clean house in the entire athletic department, if need be. But leave the players alone. Give them a new coach and let them do the thing that brought them to the Nittany Valley to begin with.
The Eastern Press will find a new hero.
It always has.
BURLE PETTIT IS EDITOR EMERITUS OF THE LUBBOCK AVALANCHE-JOURNAL. EMAIL: BURLEPETTIT@SBCGLOBAL.NET WITH THE WORD “COLUMN” IN THE SUBJECT LINE.
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment