Mike McQueary

McQueary to file whistleblower suit against Penn State


The legal ramifications for Penn State stemming from the Jerry Sandusky child-sex abuse scandal continues six months after the ex-defensive coordinator’s arrest, with another former assistant on Joe Paterno‘s coaching staff setting in motion a lawsuit against the university.

The Centre Daily Times reported Tuesday evening that Mike McQueary has begun the process of filing what’s described by the paper as a whistleblower lawsuit.  The Daily Times wrote that “[t]he attorney for McQueary filed a writ of summons for a civil case in county court today”, which serves as notice to the university that they are being sued.

Because of its designation as a whistleblower lawsuit, the paper notes, McQueary will be seeking damages outside normal arbitration limits.

The specifics of the suit, including the amount of monetary damages McQueary will be seeking, are unclear at this time.

Early last year, McQueary testified in front of a grand jury investigating allegations made against Sandusky by multiple alleged victims who were underage at the time of the sexual assaults, claiming that he witnessed some type of incident involving a naked Sandusky and a naked 10-year-old boy in a Lasch football building shower on the PSU campus in 2002 (more on that date in a bit).

After speaking to his father from a phone in the football building immediately following the alleged assault, McQueary and his dad took the information to Paterno the following day, with then-athletic director Tim Curley, former vice president Gary Schultz — whose job also included serving as head of the campus police department — and former president Graham Spanier also informed of the alleged assault.  How those PSU officials handled the allegations led directly to the firing of Paterno and Spanier, as well as charges against Curley and Schultz.

McQueary was placed on administrative leave shortly after the allegations came to light last November.  The former wide receivers coach remains on the payroll at Penn State, the Patriot-News confirmed.  It had previously been hinted that federal whistleblower laws prevented the university from cutting ties with McQueary.

In other news related to the Sandusky case, which is scheduled to go to trial June 5, and also involving McQueary, the Patriot-News reported this morning that a judge has changed the date of the alleged sexual assault in PSU’s football building that we mentioned above.

According to the paper, the “[c]riminal paperwork in the case against Sandusky no longer says that the alleged crime happened in March 2002. Instead, Judge John Cleland allowed prosecutors to say it happened Feb. 9, 2001.”

McQueary had previously stated he witnessed the incident prior to the start of spring break in 2002.

The attorneys for Curley and Schultz pounced on the change, saying in a statement that “[n]ow, it is clear that Mike McQueary was wrong in so adamantly insisting that the incident happened the Friday before Spring Break in 2002.”  McQueary’s credibility in recalling and recounting the events of that night has already been called into question in the past.

The statement ended with the attorneys claiming one charge against their clients will be dropped on a technicality.

“Whether or not Mr. McQueary’s insistence was the result of faulty memory, or questionable credibility, there is no dispute that the statute of limitations has expired on (the failure to report charge), and it will be dismissed.”

Both men have been charged with failure to report and perjury, the latter stemming from their appearance in front of the grand jury.

An attorney not involved in the litigation told the Associated Press that the change in date should have no impact on the Sandusky case.  Maybe.

“If all the other facts match up to be identical, I think it’s just an error without any harm for the prosecution,” Scranton defense lawyer Joseph D’Andrea told the AP. “However, if there are other inconsistencies, it gives the defense a reason to create some doubt about the credibility, sincerity, honesty and true recollection of what McQueary had to say.”

A gag order has been issued by the judge presiding over the Sandusky case, so neither prosecutors nor defense attorneys will comment on today’s developments.

Bud Foster says he is too invested in Virginia Tech to leave Hokies

Bud Foster

For years there was a thought that Virginia Tech defensive coordinator Bud Foster would one day be the successor to longtime head coach Frank Beamer. With Beamer announcing his decision to retire at the end of the season, there was never any word about Foster being handed the keys to the program. Instead, Virginia Tech has found a coach with an offensive identity in the hiring of Justin Fuente from Memphis. Given the way coaching changes can tend to go, nobody would have blamed Foster for being a tad miffed at not getting the job in Blacksburg, but he will remain the defensive coordinator of the Hokies as a key member of Fuente’s new staff. He says he has put in too much work to leave now.

“I’m rooted in here. We put a lot of blood, sweat and tears in this place,” Foster said Monday. “It wasn’t hard. I wouldn’t have stayed here for as long as I’ve had if I didn’t feel like we had the opportunity to win at the highest level. I feel that more than ever right now.”

Fuente being able to keep Foster on the staff is a huge advantage. Foster not only ensures Fuente will have a dependable coach managing the defense, which should remain one of the top defensive units in the ACC as long as he stays put. Keeping Foster on the staff also allows for some tremendous stability during the transition, which can always be key when a coach with no previous ties to the university takes over a program. Foster can help Fuente get acclimated to his new surroundings and also keep valuable recruiting ties alive and well during the change.

Foster acknowledged he would love to one day be a head coach, and that dream will continue, but for now he is more interested in contributing at Virginia Tech.

“I always wanted to be a head coach. This would be a dream job. I’m happy with where I am. I’ll never be bitter. I won’t cry myself to sleep wishing “what-ifs” and they type of thing. My goal is to be the best football coach I can possibly be. I want to help this program be the best football program it can possibly be.”

Maryland wasting no time getting in touch with Mark Richt

Mark Richt

On Monday morning Georgia head coach Mark Richt said he was absolutely going to continue coaching even though his days at Georgia are coming to an end. If that is the case, Maryland would like to make that a reality for Richt.

According to a report from Inside MD Sports, Maryland has made first contact with Richt and a meeting could come as soon as tomorrow. Maryland is looking to fill a head coaching vacancy after firing Randy Edsall during the season. Richt will not be the only potential candidate to interview for the Maryland job. The Washington Post reported Monday interim head coach Mike Locksley was also given a chance to interview for the job on a permanent basis. That interview was reportedly set to happen Monday.

It would make sense for Maryland to make a call to Richt. With Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank looking to help build the Maryland program, there are sufficient funds to make a splashy hire for the program, which is showing signs of a well-structured future with plans to improve the football program. The Maryland job has some good potential in the long-term and competes in the same division as some tough opponents. That would include at least two coaches Richt is very familiar with; Ohio State’s Urban Meyer and Penn State’s James Franklin. Richt faced Meyer when the Buckeyes head coach was at Florida, and Franklin of course coached at Vanderbilt. All three were in the same SEC East Division down south. Could they be reunited in the Big Ten East in 2016?

Whatever the case may be, if Maryland can land Richt as its next head coach, it would be a tremendous hire for the Terrapins. Heck, he already has the attire for it.

Unlike Missouri, 5-7 Nebraska will jump at opportunity to go bowling

Cethan Carter

Nebraska will be first in line to accept a bowl invitation when it arrives in the mail, despite going 5-7 this season. The Huskers, who are first in line among 5-7 candidates based on APR scores, will reportedly accept a bowl invitation to fill the first vacancy left to fill once all bowl-eligible teams are slotted into the postseason mix.

Missouri released a statement earlier today saying it will not accept a bowl invitation following a 5-7 season. The Tigers would have been the second team among 5-7 teams to receive a bowl invitation based on APR scores. According to a report by Brett McMurphy of ESPN.com, Kansas State would be next in line, followed by Minnesota, San Jose State, Illinois and Rice.

Missouri and Nebraska would appear to have different agendas of course. Nebraska is coming off the first season under new head coach Mike Riley, while Missouri is in the midst of a full coaching search. The decision not to go to a bowl game allows Missouri’s coaching staff in place under the now retired Gary Pinkel to pursue new opportunities without having bowl preparations get in the way.

Maryland sack master Yannick Ngakoue entering NFL Draft

Yannick Ngakoue, Christian Hackenberg

Maryland will have a new head coach in 2016. Whoever that head coach ends up being will have to find a way to replace one of Maryland’s best players. Defensive lineman Yannick Ngakoue says he will skip his final year of eligibility with the Terrapins and declare for the 2016 NFL Draft.

Ngakoue was the second in the Big Ten with 13.0 sacks this season, trailing only Penn State defensive lineman Carl Nassib. Ngakoue’s sack total is a Maryland school record and was one of the few reasons for optimism for Maryland’s dreadful football season, which ended with just three wins.