• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Penn State Cult (Joe Knew)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Zurp said:
Cool map. Thanks.
So one of the things those poo-faces like to whine about is how the Big Ten didn't back them up in 1994 - not just the Ohio Voters. So, according to your map, the voters in the states with Big Ten teams (I'm not going to research whether they have any affiliation with any team - just whether their symbols are in Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin, or Iowa (Pennsylvania will be another category)) voted in favor of Nebraska 10-4. (There's one vote on the border between Iowa and Nebraska - I'm counting that as in Nebraska. Please correct me if that's wrong.) Penn State got 28.5% of those first-place votes. Pennsylvania voted in favor of Nebraska by 2-1. The rest of the country voted in favor of Nebraska 49-5 (with one tie). Pennsylvania got 9.3% of those first-place votes. The Big Ten voters did 3 times as well as the rest of the country. According to people on BWI, though, the Big Ten was the reason Penn State didn't get the votes.

End even if those 10 votes in the Big Ten go to Penn State, as well as the 2 from Pennsylvania, the vote would be 37-17, in favor of Nebraska. Give Penn State that one guy's split vote, and it's 37-18. Assuming Penn State gets 37 second-place votes, and Nebraska gets 18 second-place votes, Nebraska edges out Penn State 1357 to 1338.

You still need to find 11 people to change their votes to get the 1994 national championship to the greatest team ever.
Click to expand...
Fairly certain that's Omaha.

And yes, apparently fairly simple math is an overlooked subject out that way. They can count to 409 but that's about it.
 
Upvote 0
One more good one. My emphasis below:

88
MyFanPage
Add Buddy
Ignore
Re: What is Urban saying that most people disagree with?Reply


Originally posted by Carl Spackler:
Originally posted by nitlion6:
Yes the system is flawed. Yes, if it was PSU that was on their way to being undefeated there would be many PSU fans screaming of the unfairness of the situation and how this is the best Penn State team since before Paterno. That would not change the fact that Penn State would have beaten 4 nobodies from out-of-conference and, assuming Ohio State in this "what if sceaniro" was like Penn State currently is (not very good), the Big-10 from a quality perspective is a freaking joke.

Guess what - next season it is still going to flawed. There will be two SEC teams, neither will necessarily be the conference champion and two others.

Using next season's 4 team format and this year's teams - lets assume Auburn beats Alabama and both finish with one loss, and FSU, OSU and Baylor all finish undefeated. There will be a huge push from the SEC to have Alabama included because well we all know the SEC is a minimum of a magnitude better than all the other conferences. So it would not be all that outlandish to have the 4 teams end up Auburn, FSU, Baylor and Alabama and I guarantee the SEC would also demand Bama be the 3rd seed because it just would not be fair to have the two SEC teams play each other before the championship game.

IMO, it is good for the Big-10 to get what they perceive as screwed - if the Big-10 demands fixes be made fixes will be made. I personally would rather see Ohio State be the team that gets screwed that points out the need for corrections than Penn State be in that position. I agree with you but you possibly don't realize that PSU was in that situation in 68, 69, 73 and 94. Paterno shouted loud, long and consistently for a playoff system, to deaf ears of the $$$$ bowl system and big conferences like the big 10. Ohio voters in 94 voted PSU down the week after we destroyed a ranked OSU team so it is sweet to see/hear the crying of buckeyes now, particularly Meyer who selectively exhibits disdain for the "flawed system" he used a few years ago without the same level of consternation. The 1994 screw job by Ohio voters in the AP poll will long be remembered by PSU fans. Even if it did not make the final difference enough to provide the votes to give PSU a NC the fact that the OHIO voters did that is more than enough to dispel any semblance of conference loyalty we heard so much about prior to joining. PSU would have rather played UN on the field in 94 than have a vote by flawed voters anyway. The playoff system was championed by Paterno and PSU at least since the mid 1960's due to the inequity of the voting system. A 16 team playoff would be about the best all around way to select the NC and I hope it happens some time in the future. Now it is still a voting nightmare that only proves opinion is the champion, not effort, heart or actual performance on the field against a championship opponent. At 53 I am old enough to remember.

1968 an undefeated Ohio State got the championship. Turns out that was the last time a Big-10 team played for a national championship until Penn State joined the Big-10. Seems to me if the Big-10 was completely hapless for 25 years starting in 1969, the rot probably started in 68 and Penn State most likely was the best football team in the country.

1969 I recall Nixon anointing UT the national champion.
I also believe instead of playing UT in the Cotton Bowl, since everybody assumed Ohio State would again be undefeated and be annointed the team champion, the team decided to play in the Orange Bowl and bypass the bullcrap northern teams still had to put up with concerning black players and that enlightened and well educated point of view that radiated throughout the south. Didn't Notre Dame also beat the UT in the Cotton Bowl, after UT had been declared the national champion?

1973 PSU was 12 and 0 and ranked 5th.

1994 2/3s of the Big-10 region voters voted Nebraska national champion. Beno Cook voted Nebraska number 1 with this reasoning, Penn State is obviously a better team, on a neutral field Penn State wins by 3, maybe 4 touchdowns but I had Nebraska ahead of Penn State at the beginning of the year so I am voting for Nebraska. Of course many others through out the country voted Nebraska because Tom did not have any championships yet and Joe already had 2. And let us not forget the Kordell Hail Mary pass that allowed Colorado to beat Michigan which meant when Nebraska beat Colorado that was a big win and when we beat Michigan that was a watered down victory. The incompetence and poor quality of the Big-10 cost us big time in 1994.

So yes, I am aware of the screwing Penn State and Coach Paterno received over the years, which is why I would rather watch the Buckeye nation take the screwing this time.
This post was edited on 11/19 4:06 PM by nitlion6
Click to expand...
http://bwi.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=36&tid=168575125&mid=168575125&sid=890&style=2


Just points to the bubble they live in over there, because clearly those Ohio State and Michigan teams through the 70's were just awful.
 
Upvote 0
Uuhhhhhh........

http://bwi.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=36&tid=168597674&mid=168597674&sid=890&style=2

SIMONS96
post #1930
MyFanPage
Add Buddy
Ignore
Seeing JFK tomorrow: relevant quote to PSUReply

Taking my stepson, the aspiring filmmaker, to see Oliver Stone's JFK tomorrow

Just reflecting on the pivotal quote of the film from Donald Sutherland:

Well that's the real question, isn't it? Why? The how and the who is just scenery for the public. Oswald, Ruby, Cuba, the Mafia. Keeps 'em guessing like some kind of parlor game, prevents 'em from asking the most important question, why? Why was Kennedy killed? Who benefited? Who has the power to cover it up? Who?

So isn't that the real question at PSU? A horrific crime occurred, but why was Penn State blamed?

who benefited from this?

Who had the power to cover it up?

Start making a list . . . the crimes of Jerry Sandusky have lined a lot of pockets . . .
Click to expand...

Let me see..... my answers, in order are: Joe, Joe and Joe
 
Upvote 0
AJHawkfan said:
Uuhhhhhh........

http://bwi.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=36&tid=168597674&mid=168597674&sid=890&style=2
So isn't that the real question at PSU? A horrific crime occurred, but why was Penn State blamed?
who benefited from this?
Who had the power to cover it up?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Blarg! Why do I read these low-lifes? I know I'm not the sharpest spoon in the shed, but these are easy things to answer. And they remind me of a converation I had with a cousin yesterday, who just found out that there are conspiracy theories about the Sandy Hook Massacre. (For the record, neither of us believe the conspiracy theories.) I explained the simple version of Occam's Razor, that whatever the simplest explanation is, it's usually the correct one. I think it fits here.

Which is a simpler explanation? That JoePa found out about the goings-on of Jerry Sandusky, and he thought that this would hamper his recruiting, so he covered it up? Or that he knew nothing of what was going on, but everyone else did, and they only pinned it on the poor old man after his death? I think that a lot more work would be involved if "they" have to cover it up, as opposed to if "he" has to cover it up.

Back to the questions you quoted: Why was Penn State blamed? It's been shown that 4 top guys within Penn State covered this up to prevent a loss in recruiting power. This wasn't a couple of players receiving improper benefits. This was the bosses of the school actively deciding not to get Sandusky to stop.

Who benefited from the cover-up? Joe Paterno and Penn State

Who had the power to cover it up? I don't know that anyone had the power to cover it up, outside of those 4 guys.
 
Upvote 0
Main Entry: moral bankruptcy
Part of Speech: n
Definition: the state of being devoid of morality and ethics, used esp. for business and political entities
Example: A complete lack of morals is moral bankruptcy.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top