ADVERTISEMENT

Paterno--HBO

WP76

Sooner starter
Oct 4, 2001
3,820
1,494
113
There's been no discussion on this board so I'd like to hear thoughts of anyone who did watch. IMO Al Pacino did a nice job and you have to remember that it's fictionalized history so not everything in it can be taken at face value. (Sorry for the long post.)

Personally, until the mid-1980s, I thought Paterno was an overbearing blowhard. His comment that "he didn't want to leave college football to the Barry Switzers and Jackie Sherrill's of the world" just reinforced that perception. However, before OU beat Penn State in the 1986 Orange Bowl, Paterno was asked about his Barry Switzer comment of six years earlier. When Joe recanted on his snarky remark about Barry (not Jackie, I might add), I gained some respect for him because it takes a strong person to admit you were wrong. (http://newsok.com/article/2132659).

As an aside, in the late 90s, I attended a Penn State vs. Ohio State football game. I don't know if I've ever heard a louder chant in my life than 100,000 plus people cheering "WE ARE...PENN STATE!" It was literally like a tidal wave of noise sweeping over everyone in the stadium. I came to appreciate what Penn State football meant to the people of that state.

When the scandal broke, I really wanted to give Paterno the benefit of any doubt. Between his philanthropy, graduation rates, and image I just didn't see a way that he could be complicit or cover for Sandusky's monstrous acts. That said, one can only conclude that if he didn't know, he had a responsibility to know; he had the responsibility to find out. His legions of loyal followers stridently contend that Joe's moral culpability ended when he passed the fuzzy report (given to him by Mike McQueary) to the athletic director. Do you think any PSU fan could honestly answer yes to the question, "If one of Joe's grandkids had been in the shower, do you honestly believe he would've done nothing more than send the report to the athletic director and walk away?"

Bottom line: There's no logical standard by which Penn State fans can have it both ways. If he didn't know, he's not the man he was portrayed to be for over 45 years. If he did know, the conclusions become much more sickening.
 
There's been no discussion on this board so I'd like to hear thoughts of anyone who did watch. IMO Al Pacino did a nice job and you have to remember that it's fictionalized history so not everything in it can be taken at face value. (Sorry for the long post.)

Personally, until the mid-1980s, I thought Paterno was an overbearing blowhard. His comment that "he didn't want to leave college football to the Barry Switzers and Jackie Sherrill's of the world" just reinforced that perception. However, before OU beat Penn State in the 1986 Orange Bowl, Paterno was asked about his Barry Switzer comment of six years earlier. When Joe recanted on his snarky remark about Barry (not Jackie, I might add), I gained some respect for him because it takes a strong person to admit you were wrong. (http://newsok.com/article/2132659).

As an aside, in the late 90s, I attended a Penn State vs. Ohio State football game. I don't know if I've ever heard a louder chant in my life than 100,000 plus people cheering "WE ARE...PENN STATE!" It was literally like a tidal wave of noise sweeping over everyone in the stadium. I came to appreciate what Penn State football meant to the people of that state.

When the scandal broke, I really wanted to give Paterno the benefit of any doubt. Between his philanthropy, graduation rates, and image I just didn't see a way that he could be complicit or cover for Sandusky's monstrous acts. That said, one can only conclude that if he didn't know, he had a responsibility to know; he had the responsibility to find out. His legions of loyal followers stridently contend that Joe's moral culpability ended when he passed the fuzzy report (given to him by Mike McQueary) to the athletic director. Do you think any PSU fan could honestly answer yes to the question, "If one of Joe's grandkids had been in the shower, do you honestly believe he would've done nothing more than send the report to the athletic director and walk away?"

Bottom line: There's no logical standard by which Penn State fans can have it both ways. If he didn't know, he's not the man he was portrayed to be for over 45 years. If he did know, the conclusions become much more sickening.

Not 100% on all, but a very strong post overall.
 
If Paterno knew of the seriousness of Sandusky's actions and did nothing....and for so many years, it seems to me to be the worst example of a "win at all cost" mentality ever.
Pacino was brilliant in this movie. His portrayal revealed Paterno as a man half senile, half in denial and completely worn out from both the years of coaching and the stress of facing such a scandal.
I found it disturbing that so many supported Paterno in this tragedy. Yet another "win at all cost" example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WP76 and iasooner1
If Paterno knew of the seriousness of Sandusky's actions and did nothing....and for so many years, it seems to me to be the worst example of a "win at all cost" mentality ever.
Pacino was brilliant in this movie. His portrayal revealed Paterno as a man half senile, half in denial and completely worn out from both the years of coaching and the stress of facing such a scandal.
I found it disturbing that so many supported Paterno in this tragedy. Yet another "win at all cost" example.

If you want to experience a universe in which any sense of reality or logic is suspended, lurk the Penn State Rivals board sometime. All wackiness and cultishness aside, if I had a dollar for every time a PSU fan wrote, "I just want the truth to come out," I'd be a lot richer than I am now. The reality is they want is something/anything that exonerates Joe Paterno. Needless to say, I'm not holding my breath.
 
There's been no discussion on this board so I'd like to hear thoughts of anyone who did watch. IMO Al Pacino did a nice job and you have to remember that it's fictionalized history so not everything in it can be taken at face value. (Sorry for the long post.)

Personally, until the mid-1980s, I thought Paterno was an overbearing blowhard. His comment that "he didn't want to leave college football to the Barry Switzers and Jackie Sherrill's of the world" just reinforced that perception. However, before OU beat Penn State in the 1986 Orange Bowl, Paterno was asked about his Barry Switzer comment of six years earlier. When Joe recanted on his snarky remark about Barry (not Jackie, I might add), I gained some respect for him because it takes a strong person to admit you were wrong. (http://newsok.com/article/2132659).

As an aside, in the late 90s, I attended a Penn State vs. Ohio State football game. I don't know if I've ever heard a louder chant in my life than 100,000 plus people cheering "WE ARE...PENN STATE!" It was literally like a tidal wave of noise sweeping over everyone in the stadium. I came to appreciate what Penn State football meant to the people of that state.

When the scandal broke, I really wanted to give Paterno the benefit of any doubt. Between his philanthropy, graduation rates, and image I just didn't see a way that he could be complicit or cover for Sandusky's monstrous acts. That said, one can only conclude that if he didn't know, he had a responsibility to know; he had the responsibility to find out. His legions of loyal followers stridently contend that Joe's moral culpability ended when he passed the fuzzy report (given to him by Mike McQueary) to the athletic director. Do you think any PSU fan could honestly answer yes to the question, "If one of Joe's grandkids had been in the shower, do you honestly believe he would've done nothing more than send the report to the athletic director and walk away?"

Bottom line: There's no logical standard by which Penn State fans can have it both ways. If he didn't know, he's not the man he was portrayed to be for over 45 years. If he did know, the conclusions become much more sickening.

Well said WP. Sums up a lot of my feelings about the movie, the man, the program and the tragedy. Pacino does a fantastic job as Joe Pa and being an outsider, I thought it was a fairly accurate depiction of the events that led to the scandal breaking and the aftermath. I went to the PSU board last night and there is some talk about the movie, but not quite as much as I imagined. The pro-Joe side is strongly represented and only a very small handful felt he should have done more. Even then, they did not condemn him.

What I took away was that Joe was completely focused on football and he didn't follow up. As a result, he was indirectly responsible for allowing Sandusky to stick around, which allowed the abuse to continue. He felt by informing his "superiors" of what he'd been told by an unreliable report from McQueary, then his responsibility ended there and he was then able to focus on his football team. I also took that Joe Pa so totally focused on football that the scandal was a great distraction to him and that in his mind, he did what he was supposed to do and why was he being involved in something he had nothing to do with?

As I said, I'm an outsider and have my perception of what happened, but I'm sure there are many PSU fans who would love to tell me their version of events, which would most likely exonerate Jo Pa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WP76 and iasooner1
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT