ESPN reports McQueary will not attend NE game

Donate To GopherHole
Tater

Tater

f.k.a. "Tubtastic"
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
1,144
Reaction score
14
Points
38
Just heard this on the VT GT halftime report.
 

They said it was due to threats on his life.
 


Good. I am shocked that he is still able to stick around after WALKING IN ON THE ACT as a 28 year-old man and not stopping it.
 




Personal Career...

I feel sorry for McQueary.

Sadly, there is not a place near Happy Valley low enough for McQueary to lie. Is there a good place for him to land?

Never defer in basic moral judgment to "great" men. Few men have been in McQueary's situation. How many would fail the test?
 

GoldenRodents said:
I feel sorry for McQueary.

Sadly, there is not a place near Happy Valley low enough for McQueary to lie. Is there a good place for him to land?

Never defer in basic moral judgment to "great" men. Few men have been in McQueary's situation. How many would fail the test?
Click to expand...

How can you possible feel sorry for him? The guy should not have a job right now. Doesn't make any sense.
 

GophersInIowa said:
How can you possible feel sorry for him? The guy should not have a job right now. Doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

Do you know the details of EXACTLY what McQueary saw? Have you seen the reports that the PSU Board of Trustees or the grand jury read? I am personally not sure what McQueary saw, but everyone ASSUMES he saw a little boy in the act of being raped by Sandusky. He may not in fact have seen this happening. Maybe he saw Sandusky in the same shower with the kid and nothing more. ***OBVIOUSLY*** these are both very disturbing things that he should have addressed (and he did to an extent), but you cannot deny that there is a huge difference between the two scenarios.

My main point is that there are people in the know who are more aware of the situation than all of us who have not fired McQueary yet, and there is a reason. Maybe we shouldn't jump to conclusions and assume things about the situation.
 



mattw1067 said:
Do you know the details of EXACTLY what McQueary saw? Have you seen the reports that the PSU Board of Trustees or the grand jury read? I am personally not sure what McQueary saw, but everyone ASSUMES he saw a little boy in the act of being raped by Sandusky. He may not in fact have seen this happening. Maybe he saw Sandusky in the same shower with the kid and nothing more. ***OBVIOUSLY*** these are both very disturbing things that he should have addressed (and he did to an extent), but you cannot deny that there is a huge difference between the two scenarios.

My main point is that there are people in the know who are more aware of the situation than all of us who have not fired McQueary yet, and there is a reason. Maybe we shouldn't jump to conclusions and assume things about the situation.
Click to expand...
If Joe Pa got fired for not reporting what McQueary told him, why should McQueary not be fired for not reporting what he saw?
 

mattw1067 said:
Do you know the details of EXACTLY what McQueary saw? Have you seen the reports that the PSU Board of Trustees or the grand jury read? I am personally not sure what McQueary saw, but everyone ASSUMES he saw a little boy in the act of being raped by Sandusky. He may not in fact have seen this happening. Maybe he saw Sandusky in the same shower with the kid and nothing more. ***OBVIOUSLY*** these are both very disturbing things that he should have addressed (and he did to an extent), but you cannot deny that there is a huge difference between the two scenarios.

My main point is that there are people in the know who are more aware of the situation than all of us who have not fired McQueary yet, and there is a reason. Maybe we shouldn't jump to conclusions and assume things about the situation.
Click to expand...
Paterno got fired for not reporting what he heard. McQueary actually SAW what happened, but still responded the same way that Paterno did and still has his job? That isn't right at all.
 





The only excuse McQuerry might have, and a weak on at that would be if taking it to Coach Paterno he was given assurance that he had done the right thing and that the Coach would take care of it. Again McQuerry is a former player idolized Joe Pa. But that is after the fact. How he could come up on this in the lockers and not say Stop it Jerry, I' m calling the cops at the very least is beyond me. That is his critical lapse in judgement. To interceed and physically stop it, that probably would be to much to ask but is not unreasonable to expect. But having witnessed it in 2002, and seeing that nothing was done how could he stand idly by and say nothing for nearly 10 years. That is beyond me. How he could not have replayed the incident in his mind at least once a day for 10 years would have driven anyone to report it after the fact. Something. Maybe to a campus cop, maybe to a game detail for Coach Paterno, maybe in town. Mc Querry had an opportunity to make it right for the kid, and he was silent. While technically he reported it to his superior, he failed on a moral level for which he should be criticized. The misplaced anger at Penn State with Mc Querry is not that he failed to alert proper authorities, rather because he absolved himself by telling Coach Paterno. And in doing so, brought down the face of the University. But don't kid yourself, Mc Querry did just what Coach Paterno wanted. In short, Mc Querry needs to exit stage left. He will not be on the staff next year and this is a good time to get out of town.
 


mattw1067 said:
Do you know the details of EXACTLY what McQueary saw? Have you seen the reports that the PSU Board of Trustees or the grand jury read? I am personally not sure what McQueary saw, but everyone ASSUMES he saw a little boy in the act of being raped by Sandusky. He may not in fact have seen this happening. Maybe he saw Sandusky in the same shower with the kid and nothing more. ***OBVIOUSLY*** these are both very disturbing things that he should have addressed (and he did to an extent), but you cannot deny that there is a huge difference between the two scenarios.
Click to expand...

Um...what? The exact details of what McQueary saw are explicitly laid out in the grand jury report, available for you to read in only about 543,000 different places on the interwebs. Since you can't seem to find it (or read) here's the gist: he testified, under oath, to seeing a boy of about ten years of age with his hands spread on the wall of the shower, getting sodomized by Sandusky. Then what did this scumbag do? He ran out of the locker room and called his daddy. Leaving the old pedophile with the boy to complete the rape. He waited until the next day to inform Paterno of what he saw.

There is no wiggle room here. He ran away from a boy being raped by a 60 year old man in a shower. What kind of human is this? What kind of culture at Penn State makes this ok? It's been 9 years and up until last week they all still interacted with this man. I hope they all burn in hell.
 

Studwell55 said:
Do you realize he was a full-time student at the time?
Click to expand...

He was a 28 year old man. Old enough to know.
A former starting QB in the Big Ten. Should have enough confidence.
I'm guessing 6'4" and 240 athletic lbs. he could have handled it.
 

That's one of the most problematic things, what it says about the culture. He can't have been physically afraid of him, McQueary was a former player and in his 2007. Sandusky was nearly 60. He didn't even have to detain Sandusky, just get the kid out of there and call the police. But he didn't even do that, he called his father, as if he had to make some agonizing choice. How twisted must the culture be if this is such a dilemma?

The options that make the most sense was that he feared retaliation or that there was a general attitude within the program of covering things up. Some people insist that Paterno disciplined players, do there can't be cover ups. But disciplining players doesn't mean that coaches were being held accountable.
 

I have to assume there are legal reasons why he's still there. I just don't see one reason why it would be good for either party for him to continue coaching there, let alone the fact that it appears (I stress APPEARS), that he saw the incident and pretty much is in the same boat with the rest of the crew.
 


Outside of Sandusky himself, McQueary is the person most responsible for this whole mess.

He should've been fired before anyone.

But he's not a big name, so they wouldn't get the big PR splash by canning the WR coach.
 

Studwell55 said:
Do you realize he was a full-time student at the time?
Click to expand...

Studwell55, you continually defend McQueery, Paterno and from what we can infer, Sandusky too. You defended your Catholic church on the OT board for years when it came to their involvement in molesting children. Birds of a feather?

You're sick and need help.
 

GoGoGophers said:
Um...what? The exact details of what McQueary saw are explicitly laid out in the grand jury report, available for you to read in only about 543,000 different places on the interwebs. Since you can't seem to find it (or read) here's the gist: he testified, under oath, to seeing a boy of about ten years of age with his hands spread on the wall of the shower, getting sodomized by Sandusky. Then what did this scumbag do? He ran out of the locker room and called his daddy. Leaving the old pedophile with the boy to complete the rape. He waited until the next day to inform Paterno of what he saw.

There is no wiggle room here. He ran away from a boy being raped by a 60 year old man in a shower. What kind of human is this? What kind of culture at Penn State makes this ok? It's been 9 years and up until last week they all still interacted with this man. I hope they all burn in hell.
Click to expand...

Thank you. It's obvious who's read the report and who hasn't.
 

The guy won't be able to attend a game the rest of the year. If he can't coach, then why is he around? The only possible thing is the legal side.
 

I've got some sympathy for McQueary. He has to live with the anguish of leaving that lockerroom in 2002 without that kid. He relied on the two men for whom he has the most admiration, respect, and trust for guidance on what to do, his father and Joe Paterno, and they both failed him miserably. When the investigator came sniffing around campus, presumably, he was the only one man enought to step up during interviews and say, "there is something I need to tell you".

I don't know the man and so it is complete speculation, but I don't think he walks out of that lockerroom without that kid if he doesn't recognize the assailant. He must have been so shocked and terrified that he simply froze. He made the wrong choice.

Perhaps none of that means he should still have a job, but I can understand why someone might feel sorry for him. Glen Mason knows him personally and expressed some sympathy for him on the Barrerio show the other day.
 

kellyleeks said:
Studwell55, you continually defend McQueery, Paterno and from what we can infer, Sandusky too. You defended your Catholic church on the OT board for years when it came to their involvement in molesting children. Birds of a feather?

You're sick and need help.
Click to expand...

I realize how hard this must be for you. To hear your "Daddy Bear" called such horrible things!
 

badgergopher said:
I've got some sympathy for McQueary. He has to live with the anguish of leaving that lockerroom in 2002 without that kid. He relied on the two men for whom he has the most admiration, respect, and trust for guidance on what to do, his father and Joe Paterno, and they both failed him miserably. When the investigator came sniffing around campus, presumably, he was the only one man enought to step up during interviews and say, "there is something I need to tell you".

I don't know the man and so it is complete speculation, but I don't think he walks out of that lockerroom without that kid if he doesn't recognize the assailant. He must have been so shocked and terrified that he simply froze. He made the wrong choice.

Perhaps none of that means he should still have a job, but I can understand why someone might feel sorry for him. Glen Mason knows him personally and expressed some sympathy for him on the Barrerio show the other day.
Click to expand...

I listened to the Mason/Barreiro interview as well and Mason really sympathized with McQueary and the situation he found himself in. It's easy for any one of us to sit in our throne on Mr. Olympus and say what he should have done or what we would have done, but we weren't there and we weren't in McQueary's situation at that moment in time.

Ideally, he would have put a stop to the situation and confronted Sandusky and been far more clear in his description of what he witnessed to Paterno and the athletic director. As badgergopher has pointed out, he'll live the rest of his life knowing what he failed to do in a critical situation and that while that has to weigh on him heavily, he has to take his share of the blame in not putting an end to Sandusky's web of deceit and pattern of destruction.

Mason gave an example of how he handled a somewhat different situation that involved one of his players (this wasn't at Minnesota) and misbehavior toward a female student. The parents of the young woman came to him to register their complaint. He brought in the athletic director and a secretary immediately to witness the complaint and make a record the proceedings at the meeting.

We don't know what McQueary did, but we are getting a good picture of what Paterno didn't do.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Outside of Sandusky himself, McQueary is the person most responsible for this whole mess.

He should've been fired before anyone.

But he's not a big name, so they wouldn't get the big PR splash by canning the WR coach.
Click to expand...

Thing is, if McQueary was fired in 2002, perhaps the smoke would have been extinguishede and we'd have never known anything.

I'm not defending McQueary, but the higher ups would have found a way to bury this deeper than Saddam Hussein's bunkers given the opportunity.
 

There are now two known published reports going back to last March and April regarding Sandusky accusations/grand jury investigation (outlets in Harrisburg and near Pittsburgh). And nobody picked up on it. Not ESPN/ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, Yahoo, et al ... nobody.

The Patriot News wrote an editorial in response to all the "why didn't you uncover this" criticisms. Not only did they write about it as far back as March, it was met with criticism for "sensationalism."
 

SelectionSunday said:
There are now two known published reports going back to last March and April regarding Sandusky accusations/grand jury investigation (outlets in Harrisburg and near Pittsburgh). And nobody picked up on it. Not ESPN/ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, Yahoo, et al ... nobody.

The Patriot News wrote an editorial in response to all the "why didn't you uncover this" criticisms. Not only did they write about it as far back as March, it was met with criticism for "sensationalism."
Click to expand...

I don't want to pick on ESPN too much, but they are obviously so tightly tied to the jockocracy that they won't breathe a word of criticism against much of anyone (unless it's piling on). Of course, they will run a highly-advertised six-hour special about the case after the cows are out of the barn. That station has zero integrity.

No excuse for the others either.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom