If the Sandusky scandal hadn't become widely known this year, if Joe Paterno had finished the season, announced his illness and possibly retirement, and died, this would be a very different conversation.
Then if, say a few months or years later, we found out about the Sandusky scandal and Paterno's (and others', including Curley's and Schultz') lack of doing as much as they could have, I wonder what we'd be saying now.
Would Joe Paterno be discussed as having any more blame for not doing enough than the others who apparently knew? Would the higher-ups to whom it was reported and who failed to take action be more of our focus? Would this conversation be primarily about Sandusky and other predators who have access to youngsters, or would it be primarily about Joe Paterno?
I'm thinking the conversation would have focused more on Sandusky and predators, and on Curley and Schultz, to whom Paterno did report the incident, but perhaps since Paterno's name is well known and theirs aren't, maybe not.
Obviously "If" isn't what happened.....just pondering.
Good question. When I first heard it reported I thought immediately, "wonder how much Joe Paterno knew?" Could be that was the slant already in the report I'd heard, or it could be that was my natural reaction - I honestly don't remember. But I don't think that whether Joe Paterno was alive or dead at the time the story broke makes a significant difference (except maybe to the victims*) - he was the Head Coach at Penn State at the time the events took place there, so naturally there would be questions surrounding his involvement or lack of.
I still have a lot of questions about how things transpired over the years, and honestly don't understand why people want to continue to sweep this under the rug instead of exposing it completely. If there were no problems with Sandusky's coaching ability, why all of a sudden in 1999 - following a police investigation in 1998 which supposedly did not yield enough info to prosecute him - did Joe Paterno find it necessary to "encourage" Sandusky to resign from his coaching position? If Sandusky's involvement with The Second Mile, which he founded in 1977, wasn't a concern during all the years he was on the coaching staff, why did Paterno use it as the reason he "encouraged" Sandusky to retire in 1999? Why upon his resignation was Sandusky bestowed "coach emeritus" status and allowed continued access to the facilities? Why was he not highly recommended to other college football programs, when his age and his on-field resume made him a prime candidate for a head coach position elsewhere? Why did the people in that football program as well as throughout the community not see anything wrong with, or deliberately turn blind eyes to, him bringing young boys with him to practically every event - including Penn State football events - during which overnight visits the young boys stayed in his hotel rooms? Why after the 2002 allegations was he told only that he could not bring young boys to the facilities anymore, instead of more strongly reprimanded? If they knew enough to keep young boys away from Sandusky then, WHY in God's name didn't ANYONE do anything more to stop the monster? Why why why ... there are so many questions that remain, many that will never be answered, but it's so unfair to the victims to not at least try.
The reason I believe that Joe Paterno's involvement, and complicity if that's what it actually turns out to be, is so much more disturbing than anyone else's is because Joe Paterno was the head of the football program. By virtue of both his title and the reverence bestowed upon him by the community, he had the influence to sway the decisions of the Board of Trustees. Evidence for that is in the fact that they tried to remove him as Head Coach in 2004 but he was able to easily dismiss their actions. Head Coaching positions have inherent power; Joe Paterno had more than most because of his legacy, the support he had in the community, and the millions of dollars his program brought to the university. But with that power comes great responsibility - not only did he not live up to it, from some appearances he actually sacrificed it along with the victims for the sake of the football program.
* I wonder what Sandusky's victims would think of your question. Going back to the pedophile priest scandal in Boston, several of the principal members of the archdiocese who were implicated in the cover-up pre-deceased the exposure. The victims then said that they felt justice was incomplete and forever would be, because when those people died they were celebrated as good men without anyone acknowledging publicly anything different.
