Penn State

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Michigan State, I don't recall alumni and students coming to the defense of the perpetrators. It was universal revulsion.

At Penn State, their football-obsessed alumni spent years defending the perpetrators, especially Joe Paterno the coach who facilitated and protected Sandusky. And it wasn't just a few crazed fans, but was a majority opinion for years among alumni in surveys. That's the troubling legacy at Penn State.

And of course, it is a lackluster school academically.

Oh, please. You're conflating Sandusky and Paterno in order to smear Penn State alumni. Sandusky was immediately and universally condemned. A lot of people wanted to believe Paterno when he said he had no idea what Sandusky was up to. That was almost certainly wishful thinking, but it wasn't facially implausible for anyone whose familiarity with the matter was limited to a few headlines. Paterno had been an institution at the school for decades, with a glowing reputation. Of course it took longer for a lot of people to accept that he knew and failed to stop or report it.

WTH? Why are you minimizing Paterno's role? Former FBI Director Louis Freeh led a comprehensive investigation into child abuse at Penn State and reported on more than a decade of very active involvement by Paterno in "actively concealing" the child abuse by his top coach and friend. It's page after page of detail about Paterno's role. But here we are almost a decade later and Penn State alumni continue to push to revive Paterno's godlike role at Penn State. Beyond messed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Michigan State, I don't recall alumni and students coming to the defense of the perpetrators. It was universal revulsion.

At Penn State, their football-obsessed alumni spent years defending the perpetrators, especially Joe Paterno the coach who facilitated and protected Sandusky. And it wasn't just a few crazed fans, but was a majority opinion for years among alumni in surveys. That's the troubling legacy at Penn State.

And of course, it is a lackluster school academically.

How is it lacklustre? I’ve heard that for some programs/majors it compares to the ivies and/or is better.

What program or major at Penn State is comparable, or better than, the Ivies? Doesn't exist. It's an underfunded land grant university that has big budget and enrollment concerns. Things are looking down there, not up.

[Anonymous]

I live in PA. Pitt, at least at our public, has slightly higher stats. Penn State still gets tons of kids from our high school. Most end up starting in the Summer. So, that is like an extra $8000. Main campus seems to be easier to get into OOS.

The branch campuses aren't really a draw. If kids get branched they will likely go elsewhere.

The business school is brutal to get into. But it is weird because our smart kids aren't interested in it. It is the borderline kids that want to be finance bros.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Michigan State, I don't recall alumni and students coming to the defense of the perpetrators. It was universal revulsion.

At Penn State, their football-obsessed alumni spent years defending the perpetrators, especially Joe Paterno the coach who facilitated and protected Sandusky. And it wasn't just a few crazed fans, but was a majority opinion for years among alumni in surveys. That's the troubling legacy at Penn State.

And of course, it is a lackluster school academically.

Oh, please. You're conflating Sandusky and Paterno in order to smear Penn State alumni. Sandusky was immediately and universally condemned. A lot of people wanted to believe Paterno when he said he had no idea what Sandusky was up to. That was almost certainly wishful thinking, but it wasn't facially implausible for anyone whose familiarity with the matter was limited to a few headlines. Paterno had been an institution at the school for decades, with a glowing reputation. Of course it took longer for a lot of people to accept that he knew and failed to stop or report it.

WTH? Why are you minimizing Paterno's role? Former FBI Director Louis Freeh led a comprehensive investigation into child abuse at Penn State and reported on more than a decade of very active involvement by Paterno in "actively concealing" the child abuse by his top coach and friend. It's page after page of detail about Paterno's role. But here we are almost a decade later and Penn State alumni continue to push to revive Paterno's godlike role at Penn State. Beyond messed up.

Try reading the chain again. Nobody's trying to minimize Paterno's role or rehabilitate his rep. You're the one who implied there was no "universal revulsion" at Penn State when there absolutely was, and immediately--to Sandusky; it took longer with Paterno for obvious reasons. You can't seriously expect the initial reaction to the two to be the same. And it's pretty rich to suggest coverup by and everlasting taint to the broader university community in reliance on a report commissioned by the Penn State Board of Trustees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in PA. Pitt, at least at our public, has slightly higher stats. Penn State still gets tons of kids from our high school. Most end up starting in the Summer. So, that is like an extra $8000. Main campus seems to be easier to get into OOS.

The branch campuses aren't really a draw. If kids get branched they will likely go elsewhere.

The business school is brutal to get into. But it is weird because our smart kids aren't interested in it. It is the borderline kids that want to be finance bros.

Ha! Most of the finance bros I know IRL are pretty mid, TBH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Michigan State, I don't recall alumni and students coming to the defense of the perpetrators. It was universal revulsion.

At Penn State, their football-obsessed alumni spent years defending the perpetrators, especially Joe Paterno the coach who facilitated and protected Sandusky. And it wasn't just a few crazed fans, but was a majority opinion for years among alumni in surveys. That's the troubling legacy at Penn State.

And of course, it is a lackluster school academically.

Oh, please. You're conflating Sandusky and Paterno in order to smear Penn State alumni. Sandusky was immediately and universally condemned. A lot of people wanted to believe Paterno when he said he had no idea what Sandusky was up to. That was almost certainly wishful thinking, but it wasn't facially implausible for anyone whose familiarity with the matter was limited to a few headlines. Paterno had been an institution at the school for decades, with a glowing reputation. Of course it took longer for a lot of people to accept that he knew and failed to stop or report it.

WTH? Why are you minimizing Paterno's role? Former FBI Director Louis Freeh led a comprehensive investigation into child abuse at Penn State and reported on more than a decade of very active involvement by Paterno in "actively concealing" the child abuse by his top coach and friend. It's page after page of detail about Paterno's role. But here we are almost a decade later and Penn State alumni continue to push to revive Paterno's godlike role at Penn State. Beyond messed up.

Try reading the chain again. Nobody's trying to minimize Paterno's role or rehabilitate his rep. You're the one who implied there was no "universal revulsion" at Penn State when there absolutely was, and immediately--to Sandusky; it took longer with Paterno for obvious reasons. You can't seriously expect the initial reaction to the two to be the same. And it's pretty rich to suggest coverup by and everlasting taint to the broader university community in reliance on a report commissioned by the Penn State Board of Trustees.

You're just proving my point. And the Paterno defenders still downplay what happened--to this day. Paterno's otherwise completely unqualified son was elected to the board by the alumni--by the most votes ever received by any board candidate--for the first time, and multiple times since then, to try to restore Joe Paterno's reputation. The school had to not only remove a statue of Paterno from the football stadium--because it became a rallying point for students and alumni supporting him, but has had to literally hide the statue from fans obsessed with putting it back in front of the stadium.

And you think the board deserves credit for having hired Freeh to investigate the crimes at Penn State? The investigation came only after the arrest of Sandusky and the revelation of a university-wide campaign over more than a decade to protect Sandusky from prosecution and to allow him continued access to children.

The continued hero-worship by so much of the Penn State community of Sandusky's chief enabler and protector, even a decade after the disclosures, is so wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Michigan State, I don't recall alumni and students coming to the defense of the perpetrators. It was universal revulsion.

At Penn State, their football-obsessed alumni spent years defending the perpetrators, especially Joe Paterno the coach who facilitated and protected Sandusky. And it wasn't just a few crazed fans, but was a majority opinion for years among alumni in surveys. That's the troubling legacy at Penn State.

And of course, it is a lackluster school academically.

Oh, please. You're conflating Sandusky and Paterno in order to smear Penn State alumni. Sandusky was immediately and universally condemned. A lot of people wanted to believe Paterno when he said he had no idea what Sandusky was up to. That was almost certainly wishful thinking, but it wasn't facially implausible for anyone whose familiarity with the matter was limited to a few headlines. Paterno had been an institution at the school for decades, with a glowing reputation. Of course it took longer for a lot of people to accept that he knew and failed to stop or report it.

WTH? Why are you minimizing Paterno's role? Former FBI Director Louis Freeh led a comprehensive investigation into child abuse at Penn State and reported on more than a decade of very active involvement by Paterno in "actively concealing" the child abuse by his top coach and friend. It's page after page of detail about Paterno's role. But here we are almost a decade later and Penn State alumni continue to push to revive Paterno's godlike role at Penn State. Beyond messed up.

Try reading the chain again. Nobody's trying to minimize Paterno's role or rehabilitate his rep. You're the one who implied there was no "universal revulsion" at Penn State when there absolutely was, and immediately--to Sandusky; it took longer with Paterno for obvious reasons. You can't seriously expect the initial reaction to the two to be the same. And it's pretty rich to suggest coverup by and everlasting taint to the broader university community in reliance on a report commissioned by the Penn State Board of Trustees.

You're just proving my point. And the Paterno defenders still downplay what happened--to this day. Paterno's otherwise completely unqualified son was elected to the board by the alumni--by the most votes ever received by any board candidate--for the first time, and multiple times since then, to try to restore Joe Paterno's reputation. The school had to not only remove a statue of Paterno from the football stadium--because it became a rallying point for students and alumni supporting him, but has had to literally hide the statue from fans obsessed with putting it back in front of the stadium.

And you think the board deserves credit for having hired Freeh to investigate the crimes at Penn State? The investigation came only after the arrest of Sandusky and the revelation of a university-wide campaign over more than a decade to protect Sandusky from prosecution and to allow him continued access to children.

The continued hero-worship by so much of the Penn State community of Sandusky's chief enabler and protector, even a decade after the disclosures, is so wrong.

I have no connection with Penn State, but I do have a pretty good understanding of the matter, and you're just gaslighting ("reverse-gaslighting"?) at every turn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Michigan State, I don't recall alumni and students coming to the defense of the perpetrators. It was universal revulsion.

At Penn State, their football-obsessed alumni spent years defending the perpetrators, especially Joe Paterno the coach who facilitated and protected Sandusky. And it wasn't just a few crazed fans, but was a majority opinion for years among alumni in surveys. That's the troubling legacy at Penn State.

And of course, it is a lackluster school academically.

Oh, please. You're conflating Sandusky and Paterno in order to smear Penn State alumni. Sandusky was immediately and universally condemned. A lot of people wanted to believe Paterno when he said he had no idea what Sandusky was up to. That was almost certainly wishful thinking, but it wasn't facially implausible for anyone whose familiarity with the matter was limited to a few headlines. Paterno had been an institution at the school for decades, with a glowing reputation. Of course it took longer for a lot of people to accept that he knew and failed to stop or report it.

WTH? Why are you minimizing Paterno's role? Former FBI Director Louis Freeh led a comprehensive investigation into child abuse at Penn State and reported on more than a decade of very active involvement by Paterno in "actively concealing" the child abuse by his top coach and friend. It's page after page of detail about Paterno's role. But here we are almost a decade later and Penn State alumni continue to push to revive Paterno's godlike role at Penn State. Beyond messed up.

Try reading the chain again. Nobody's trying to minimize Paterno's role or rehabilitate his rep. You're the one who implied there was no "universal revulsion" at Penn State when there absolutely was, and immediately--to Sandusky; it took longer with Paterno for obvious reasons. You can't seriously expect the initial reaction to the two to be the same. And it's pretty rich to suggest coverup by and everlasting taint to the broader university community in reliance on a report commissioned by the Penn State Board of Trustees.

You're just proving my point. And the Paterno defenders still downplay what happened--to this day. Paterno's otherwise completely unqualified son was elected to the board by the alumni--by the most votes ever received by any board candidate--for the first time, and multiple times since then, to try to restore Joe Paterno's reputation. The school had to not only remove a statue of Paterno from the football stadium--because it became a rallying point for students and alumni supporting him, but has had to literally hide the statue from fans obsessed with putting it back in front of the stadium.

And you think the board deserves credit for having hired Freeh to investigate the crimes at Penn State? The investigation came only after the arrest of Sandusky and the revelation of a university-wide campaign over more than a decade to protect Sandusky from prosecution and to allow him continued access to children.

The continued hero-worship by so much of the Penn State community of Sandusky's chief enabler and protector, even a decade after the disclosures, is so wrong.

I have no connection with Penn State, but I do have a pretty good understanding of the matter, and you're just gaslighting ("reverse-gaslighting"?) at every turn.

NP. I am not connected to Penn State and remember a lot of cover up as things were coming to light. Not sure why you have this huge beef with PP. Those if us who remember arr parents to college age kids. It probably impacts for some people.

And, I don't know if it's you or someone else who tried to inject Mich State which was also awful, but it seemed like a means of trying to falsely accuse PP of not caring about girls and forcing a pivot, which is just callous to victims at both places.

Can we move on now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Penn State lost its luster and prestige over a decade ago and still trying to climb back.

Why?

Sandusky (and Paterno).

After the scandal, the state ramped up its requirements for clearances such as being a parent volunteer. The nickname for this was ‘Sandusky Clearance.”

And you think any of the kids who are there now have any idea who Sandusky or Paterno were? You're dating yourself, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Michigan State, I don't recall alumni and students coming to the defense of the perpetrators. It was universal revulsion.

At Penn State, their football-obsessed alumni spent years defending the perpetrators, especially Joe Paterno the coach who facilitated and protected Sandusky. And it wasn't just a few crazed fans, but was a majority opinion for years among alumni in surveys. That's the troubling legacy at Penn State.

And of course, it is a lackluster school academically.

Oh, please. You're conflating Sandusky and Paterno in order to smear Penn State alumni. Sandusky was immediately and universally condemned. A lot of people wanted to believe Paterno when he said he had no idea what Sandusky was up to. That was almost certainly wishful thinking, but it wasn't facially implausible for anyone whose familiarity with the matter was limited to a few headlines. Paterno had been an institution at the school for decades, with a glowing reputation. Of course it took longer for a lot of people to accept that he knew and failed to stop or report it.

WTH? Why are you minimizing Paterno's role? Former FBI Director Louis Freeh led a comprehensive investigation into child abuse at Penn State and reported on more than a decade of very active involvement by Paterno in "actively concealing" the child abuse by his top coach and friend. It's page after page of detail about Paterno's role. But here we are almost a decade later and Penn State alumni continue to push to revive Paterno's godlike role at Penn State. Beyond messed up.

Try reading the chain again. Nobody's trying to minimize Paterno's role or rehabilitate his rep. You're the one who implied there was no "universal revulsion" at Penn State when there absolutely was, and immediately--to Sandusky; it took longer with Paterno for obvious reasons. You can't seriously expect the initial reaction to the two to be the same. And it's pretty rich to suggest coverup by and everlasting taint to the broader university community in reliance on a report commissioned by the Penn State Board of Trustees.

You're just proving my point. And the Paterno defenders still downplay what happened--to this day. Paterno's otherwise completely unqualified son was elected to the board by the alumni--by the most votes ever received by any board candidate--for the first time, and multiple times since then, to try to restore Joe Paterno's reputation. The school had to not only remove a statue of Paterno from the football stadium--because it became a rallying point for students and alumni supporting him, but has had to literally hide the statue from fans obsessed with putting it back in front of the stadium.

And you think the board deserves credit for having hired Freeh to investigate the crimes at Penn State? The investigation came only after the arrest of Sandusky and the revelation of a university-wide campaign over more than a decade to protect Sandusky from prosecution and to allow him continued access to children.

The continued hero-worship by so much of the Penn State community of Sandusky's chief enabler and protector, even a decade after the disclosures, is so wrong.

I have no connection with Penn State, but I do have a pretty good understanding of the matter, and you're just gaslighting ("reverse-gaslighting"?) at every turn.

Not PP, but there was no gaslighting by the critic of Paterno and his defenders. This is a great summary of the shameful response at PSU, written in my favorite online sports mag: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1256931-penn-state-football-scandal-now-we-know-what-joe-paterno-knew

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With Michigan State, I don't recall alumni and students coming to the defense of the perpetrators. It was universal revulsion.

At Penn State, their football-obsessed alumni spent years defending the perpetrators, especially Joe Paterno the coach who facilitated and protected Sandusky. And it wasn't just a few crazed fans, but was a majority opinion for years among alumni in surveys. That's the troubling legacy at Penn State.

And of course, it is a lackluster school academically.

Oh, please. You're conflating Sandusky and Paterno in order to smear Penn State alumni. Sandusky was immediately and universally condemned. A lot of people wanted to believe Paterno when he said he had no idea what Sandusky was up to. That was almost certainly wishful thinking, but it wasn't facially implausible for anyone whose familiarity with the matter was limited to a few headlines. Paterno had been an institution at the school for decades, with a glowing reputation. Of course it took longer for a lot of people to accept that he knew and failed to stop or report it.

Please take your talk over to another forum. As one PP said, kids applying this cycle may know about the fiasco or they don't.

[Anonymous]

My kid loves Penn State.

He feels academically challenged, easily met a variety friends (dorm, classes, rush, friends of friends) and is having a ball (likely too much fun) College should be fun with hard work mixed in

He wasn't rah rah school spirit in high school, but has gotten way more involved in college. More than I would have expected.

[Anonymous]

For a Big 10 school, Penn State has one of the more rural, remote locations. State College, PA is cute but tiny. Compared to Columbus or Ann Arbor or Madison or Bloomington… No wonder Pitt is surging. PSU is a school for football fans only.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stigma still exists.

Just among homophobes.

Nope, because coach raping football players in the locker room will always wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stigma still exists.

Just among homophobes.

Nope, because coach raping football players in the locker room will always wrong.

Obviously, but he was arrested almost 14 years ago.