409fold
All-American
I glossed over the parsing out of the language in my other post as you replied, as this really cuts to the quick. The inescapable fact is PSU, as you admit, is the only party to a contract with FSS. In this instance (and I don't know the Statute of Limitation for contract actions in Pennsylvania - in Ohio it is 8 years) PSU's silence constitutes some degree of an acknowledgement that FSS did nothing in breach of their contract. Admittedly, the "carefully worded statement" could well be so as to not foreclose future action against FSS, but as you concede, they do not seem inclined to pursue the same. Until PSU files a breach of contract action, the assumption must be that there was no breach, not some other parade of horribles.
In this respect, it must be also noted that the BoT is the entity responsible for making decisions on behalf of PSU. Now... PSU people can question their decisions and come up with any manner of conspiracy they wish. Nonetheless, the BoT acts in the best interest of the University. The failure of "cultists" to recognize this fact is .... well.. ridiculous. Which is to say, the assumption in law is that the BoT is performing it's function appropriately, failing evidence to the contrary.
And, that's the thing isn't it... evidence to the contrary... For us, out here in the public, we see things and we make up our minds about what the BoT should do. But... the plain reality is the BoT is privy to information that we, the public, are not. Their silence in this matter, to me, is not an indictment of their decision making... instead it is an informed decision on information held by them in the best interest of PSU - the UNIVERSITY, not the football team or some fucking coach.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I find that most "cultists" don't understand the difference. They see football.. really, they see a zombie icon... and they assume one that does not, even a PSU BoT member him or herself.. is nefarious. That, my friend, is they height of hero worship.
Good post, and a perfectly fair post.
Penn State leadership's strategy since July 2012 has been "always play nice with the NCAA, even if there are reasons to feel that they wronged us." And that's a perfectly reasonable and sane strategy during the heart of the sanctions, of course! And one I supported.
Sanctions are over now, though. I have no issues with poking at either FSS or the NCAA if Penn State leadership has a belief that they were wronged by either.
The Paterno vs. NCAA case is still out there. For better or worse, it is personal between those two. Which means this will likely go the distance: there will be no pre-trial settlement. Maybe it's hopeful wishing from Paterno Loyalists, but I've heard rumors more than a few times that the Paternos have a one-time NCAA member who has "flipped" to their side for the trial. I'm not a conspiracy guy or a JoeBot, but I do think there is some smoke on this one. Julie Roe Lach is an interesting candidate to be that person. She was in on all the conversations back in July 2012. Emmert fired her back in 2013. Fall-out from the NCAA bungling things with the Miami investigation. James Isch is the one who SHOULD have been fired for that. Emmert did sort of throw Lach under the bus on that one. Lach is still around, she is now the Horizon League Commissioner.
It may take a while, but I do think my question (why exactly were the NCAA and FSS communicating as early as December 2011) gets answered eventually.
Last edited:
Upvote
0