[skeeter]

A no-name in Paterno's position wouldn't be accused of the same things Paterno is being accused of. No one would think twice about their role.

So you make MY point. I guarantee half the people out there hearing these reports share your opinion that Paterno was 'protecting' the rapist. Even though there is no such evidence.

[ClearBlueSky]

A ‘no name’ in his position wouldn’t have had the gravitas to keep things under wraps!
How can one be the ‘big man’ and literally ‘run’ a university and yet not be responsible for what happens there? So he gets the CREDIT when things are wonderful-thus the ‘icon’ status, but bears no blame when things turn to crap on his watch?

Situational ethics- the enabler is the victim. Sorta sums up a lot of what’s wrong these days.
What about the boys RAPED in HIS university, HIS domain, by HIS buddy, using the reputation for trust of HIS athletic program?
So where , exactly DOES the ‘buck’ stop if not with Paterno?

[NewinTexsas]

I guarantee half the people out there hearing these reports share your opinion that Paterno was 'protecting' the rapist. Even though there is no such evidence.

We know that Paterno knew that he was a child molester in 1998.

We know that Paterno knew he was a child rapist in 2002. Did Paterno stop Sandusky. NOPE. He protected him while Sandusky raped for years. If Paterno had stood up like a man countless littles boys would not have been raped. Instead, he let it happen again and again ...