Negative Recruiting/PSU chatter (LJ Sr. Thread split)

[Taosman]

So, it looks like the powers that be want this thread to go away. Buried in the "Reference Locker".
Can't say anything negative about a great recruiter. Someone who will help the team win. Winning at all costs.
Gee! What a shock!

 

[jlb1705]

Can't put anything past you.

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

I blame the wikilluminati.

 

[Taosman]

So what if he turned his back on the abuse of little boys for a decade, he was "loyal".

 

[jlb1705]

 

[jwinslow]

So what if he turned his back on the abuse of little boys for a decade, he was "loyal".

In a long line of embarrassing and foolish posts from you, this might take the cake.

Accusing a Buckeye coach of knowingly enabling the rape of boys with zero evidence to back up your bile.

When you're embarrassing yourself by refusing to back up your opinions with facts from what is happening, it's one thing. When you're bashing current Buckeyes with the latest installment of randomness pulled from your hat, it's quite another.

 

[Taosman]

I am not alone in seeing this hire as wrong. We have a huge thread on the whole Penn State cult going and that seems to be fine. It seems hypocritical to suddenly defend a coach who was there for over a decade and most likely had knowledge of what was going on just because he is now an employee of the football program. I'm not saying he's not a good coach. I'm not saying he's not a great recruiter. I am saying this was a hire we should have passed on. Anyone with a little common sense would naturally believe he knew exactly what was going on in that shower and elsewhere. As a teen I witnessed the enabling of a pedophile by a family, a church and a community. I find it disgusting. I want the football program to be better than that. I want this community to be better than that. How can we ever be better if we don't discuss it? How can we ever stop the enabling if we don't acknowledge it?

 

[jwinslow]

You didn't find fault with the hire. You launched into your usual nonsensical, grabbed from the ether drivel and declared that he actively ignored child rape.

We have very strict rules about how you criticize a Buckeye player or coach after his in game performance. You accused a Buckeye of enabling arguably the worst offense imaginable, preying on children sexual and you had zero evidence to back it up, like usual.

Clearly you do not value this website or what it stands for given your continued defiance and arguments that proximity and assumptions prove his guilt.

Had you approached the conversation in a civilized manner, you might have found out that I'm one of many who are conflicted about the hire given the recruiting race stuff. But you didn't and clearly are making your bed with this drivel. So be it.

 

[jlb1705]

A grand jury and Louis Freeh apparently disagree with your suppositions being common sense, because Coach Johnson's name doesn't appear once in the findings of either investigation.

The conversation that you have been having in this thread is not the one that you say has been taking place. It is not about shining a light on abuse or its enablement. It has been about trashing the reputation of a man on the basis of wild assumptions and conspiracy-theorist logic. The kind of discussion that has taken place in this thread does nothing to advance the cause of justice for victims of abuse. Carelessly throwing around baseless accusations makes it more difficult to get justice against offenders whose crimes are prosecuted with valid evidence.

This thread is not an extension of the Penn State thread. Ever since that scandal went public, that thread has always been about ridiculing the people who were directly involved and the culture among fans and alumni who defended those people. That thread was never about Coach Johnson. A quick Google search of that thread shows two instances of posters here "connecting" Coach Johnson to the crimes that were committed. Neither of those posts offered any proof, only the same kind of "common sense" being employed in this thread.

This conversation in its current direction has no place on these forums and will not continue.

 

[Deety]

So what if he turned his back on the abuse of little boys for a decade, he was "loyal".

I share your concern, but there does not seem to be a basis for a definitive statement like that. We know that it was pretty well known around campus that Sandusky was "off," and from what I've ready, I'd bet that anyone on the staff had to think he was weird. This wasn't one of those cases where people claimed to be shocked when the truth came out.

On the other hand, it seems unlikely that anyone openly discussed incidents of pedophelia, what with the people involved covering it up and all. There's a continuum there - from unaware, to generally aware that he was odd, to specifically suspicious of child abuse, to knowledgeable of heinous offenses. There's a point at which inaction becomes unforgivable, but we have no way of knowing where he fell on that scale. Hopefully, it was discussed seriously and thoroughly in interviews before an offer went out and OSU was satisfied that he was not aware of Sandusky's abuse of children.

Sounds as though he'll be an excellent coach, but personally, I would be more comfortable passing on anyone connected to PSU for the next decade or two regardless of resume. However, assuming he was thoroughly vetted before hire, and knowing that everyone from that hellhole will receive extra scrutiny for the rest of their careers whether or not it is deserved, we've probably got ourselves a coach who will be out to prove himself both personally as well as in the job, and with some reservations, I think I am okay with that.

 

[Deety]

This conversation in its current direction has no place on these forums and will not continue.

I think discussion of whether or not people coming out of PSU that closely connected to Sandusky have clean hands or not is a valid one. Concern about being connected to child abuse, either in reality or perception, ought to supersede Buckeye bashing rules. But the tone is one that I agree should not continue - you can't point at someone and say he knew when there is no evidence that is true.

 

[jlb1705]

I think discussion of whether or not people coming out of PSU that closely connected to Sandusky have clean hands or not is a valid one. Concern about being connected to child abuse, either in reality or perception, ought to supersede Buckeye bashing rules. But the tone is one that I agree should not continue - you can't point at someone and say he knew when there is no evidence that is true.

I think that's what I meant by "current direction", but you said it much better than I did.

 

[Onebuckfan]

Obviously Urban and Gene made a decision to hire ..we can discuss and question it but in the end we should not personally attack the person without some direct evidence. If he had been fired with Joe that would be another thing...

 

[MaxBuck]

I haven't known anyone who has been closely connected to child abuse. I have, however, known people closely connected to massive felonies (e.g., Enron and National Century Financial) whom I am entirely certain didn't "know" what was happening until indictments started coming down on people they regarded as friends. In all cases, the people I knew took a good long time before they could believe their colleagues had done what they were accused of.

We humans are able to persuade ourselves that people we like and work with are good people, even at the time objective evidence suggests otherwise to the disinterested. I've read commentary from many that coaches around Sandusky "must have known." But my own experience with people associated with the massive felonies above suggests that people's ability to hide themselves from the ugly truth is pretty impressive. Sad, but true. And saying that people "should have known" ignores human nature IMO.

I really doubt that Johnson knew what Sandusky was up to, and honestly I think Paterno convinced himself for many years that the accusations levied against Sandusky were the result of animosity toward Sandusky that was unrelated to pedophilia. Unfortunately felons take advantage of the rest of us by playing on this tendency to believe the best of our friends.

 

[WyoBuck]

A grand jury and Louis Freeh apparently disagree with your suppositions being common sense, because Coach Johnson's name doesn't appear once in the findings of either investigation.

The conversation that you have been having in this thread is not the one that you say has been taking place. It is not about shining a light on abuse or its enablement. It has been about trashing the reputation of a man on the basis of wild assumptions and conspiracy-theorist logic. The kind of discussion that has taken place in this thread does nothing to advance the cause of justice for victims of abuse. Carelessly throwing around baseless accusations makes it more difficult to get justice against offenders whose crimes are prosecuted with valid evidence.

This thread is not an extension of the Penn State thread. Ever since that scandal went public, that thread has always been about ridiculing the people who were directly involved and the culture among fans and alumni who defended those people. That thread was never about Coach Johnson. A quick Google search of that thread shows two instances of posters here "connecting" Coach Johnson to the crimes that were committed. Neither of those posts offered any proof, only the same kind of "common sense" being employed in this thread.

This conversation in its current direction has no place on these forums and will not continue.

It's pretty doubtful the the Freeh report uncovered every person that knew or at least had an inkling of what was going on during Sandusky's tenure at PSU. I'm not privy to whether or not Johnson did or didn't know that the guy he worked under for a decade was raping kids, but, the bigger issue is that he was a part of that culture that enabled and protected that behavior for 18 years. That in and of itself would be enough for me to not even look at the guy's resume. I don't care if he can recruit the heavenly host, I don't want the guy anywhere near the program. It's too much baggage. Call it guilt by association, or whatever you want, some stink just doesn't wash off. When you combine that with the fact that the recruiting tactics that he employed while at PSU, in which he used unsubstantiated race baiting claims to sour kids perception of OSU, while recruiting them in to a culture bereft of any ethical or moral practices, again, I'll pass on interviewing him. Finally, it appears, on the surface at least, that going to OSU was less about making a positive impact in kids lives at this place, and more about giving the finger to PSU for not making him the head coach, which for me calls his personal reasons for coming to OSU in to question. He basically made a sideways career move. I'm sure he recieved a pay raise as well, and a virtually meaningless title, but he's never going to be the head coach at OSU either, so in the end, it's just about the money. In my eyes, at best, he is no more than a mercenary.

Jlb, I quoted you because you were responding to Taos, and I belive that what he is saying is what a lot of us feel, but can't prove, that it is likely that more people knew more about what was going on there for a longer period of time than what the Freeh report uncovered. If there is even a possibility that Johnson knew anything about it, I don't want him here. Since there is no way to know for sure, I would have preferred that the Smith and Meyer err to the side of caution and not even entertain the notion of that particular hire. It appears to be a "win at all costs" move. It also bothers me that Meyer had indicated at some point in time that one of the reasons that he burned out at Florida was the negative recruiting practices in the SEC, so he brings a guy in to the fold that has been documented to use racially charged, negative rucruiting tactics against, specifically, OSU. If you don't like that sort of tactic, then why hire a guy like that?

As far as this board is concerned, I have been a member here for almost 9 years, and one of the things that I have enjoyed is that the moderation on this board has been, usually, pretty fair. In this case, I think you're wrong about the need to bury the thread because people are discussing some uncomfortable things. So far, I haven't seen anyone level a personal attack at Johnson and only 1 wholesale, unsubstantiated, accusation. Johnson's reputation preceded him. We don't have an obligation to protect it or change the narrative. He is who he is. People have every right to not like this hire, and a person's opinion is always going to be subjective, but to threaten to silence people for having an opinion that doesn't match yours seems a bit harsh. I think we also have a right to discuss the "I don't care what he did in the past, as long as he wins" mentality that appears to be the predominant majority now. Personally, I'd rather the team lose with integrity than win without it. At the end of the day, it just feels wrong.