Monday, July 30, 2012

Bad Defense

Today's piece for the Daily Banter takes a look at some of the fallout from the recent NCAA punishment of Penn State -- not the fallout from the sex abuse scandal itself, but the reaction from some of the Penn State faithful to the severe penalties levied against the school and its football program and to the hostility expressed by many against Joe Paterno.

Here's the line that kind of sums up the entire argument made in the column:

"What those who defend Penn State and Joe Paterno against all comers — who look for mitigating circumstances and concoct ridiculous rationalizations for the sins of their idols — don’t seem to understand is that it’s exactly this kind of thinking that allowed Sandusky to get away with what he did for so long."

Read the Rest Here


howdidIgethere said...

Quote from Philadelphia Inquirer re NCAA penalty for Penn State: David La Torre told the Associated Press that university president Rodney Erickson had little choice. "We had our backs to the wall on this," Erickson told the Centre Daily Times, the daily newspaper based in State College. "We did what we thought was necessary to save the [football] program."

Question I posed on my FB page: Isn't that what got them into this problem to begin with? "Doing what [they] thought was necessary to save the [football] program"?

Matt said...

I have disassociated myself from a number of people due to their blind faith that their beloved "JoePa" couldn't have been involved. The only response from me that got any traction was "What if it had been your child?".