Skip to content

Paterno’s alma mater next to soften connection to longtime coach

Joe Paterno, Thomas Derrick AP

Nike was the first to distance themselves from former Penn State coach Joe Paterno following the release of the Freeh report by removing the coach’s name from the child development center on its Beaverton campus. A pair of Penn State students followed by renaming Paternoville “Nittanyville.”

Now, Paterno’s alma mater, Brown, is next to place some distance between itself and Paterno’s image.

Brown’s athletic website announced Friday it had decided to remove Paterno’s name from an award given out annually to the school’s outstanding male freshman athlete. Paterno’s name has been attached to the award since 1993, but his name was taken off this past spring. Now, it sounds like it’s staying off for good. Here’s the statement:

“Since 1991, the Department of Athletics and Physical Education has presented an award to this year’s outstanding male freshman athlete. In 1993 that award was renamed to honor Brown alumnus Joe Paterno ’50. In the spring of 2012, the Department of Athletics and Physical Education presented the award as it was originally created, honoring the year’s outstanding male freshman athlete but without Joe Paterno’s name attached. Now that the Freeh report has been released, the University will make a decision about the naming of the award in future years.”

(Hat tip: Providence Journal

Permalink 20 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Big Ten Conference, Penn State Nittany Lions, Rumor Mill, Top Posts
20 Responses to “Paterno’s alma mater next to soften connection to longtime coach”
  1. roundup5 says: Jul 17, 2012 10:25 AM

    Bravo to Brown Univ. for doing what is right!

  2. florida727 says: Jul 17, 2012 10:29 AM

    The problem with naming awards after people is that people are all with faults, obviously some much more serious than others. Learned a long time ago, people will always disappoint you. That’s why the whole ‘role model’ thing always made me laugh. If I want a role model, it would be a teacher or a pastor from my church (and even they’ve proven not to be without fault obviously), not some clown that gets paid millions for stuffing a ball through a hole 10′ off the ground or running 40-yard sprints to something called an ‘end zone’.

    Try making your PARENTS your role models. More often than not, you’ll be safe with that choice.

  3. warhawk04 says: Jul 17, 2012 10:48 AM

    Wasn’t the Big Ten the first to distance themselves when they took Paterno’s name off the conference championship game trophy?

  4. 700levelvet says: Jul 17, 2012 11:02 AM

    What a grandiose gesture, i mean i am no Paterno apo0ligist, he should burn in hell, but why would such an academic university even have a male outstanding freshman athlete?….Unless to cash in, and then when the produce soured, they simply throw it away, what a fraudalent asshole, lets get some publicity move….He weant to to be a lawyer, as per his father’s wishes, and he dies a lawyer………Or a LIAR

  5. moochzilla says: Jul 17, 2012 11:30 AM

    This is an example of the “never name anything after people until they’ve been dead at least a decade” rule.

  6. geo4444 says: Jul 17, 2012 12:20 PM

    This is a continued a cross of the mob mentality and nuclear chain reaction as it relates to Joe Paterno.

    I’m not claiming his innocence but oh so many of you (you must therefore be correct) are way over-reacting to Joe Paterno’s involvement and accountability.

    You also want to nuke a city instead of strategically strike the involved parties. You want to kill everyone instead of holding to appropriate levels of accountability.

    You use each other’s comments and mob support to back up your (unfounded) assertions and cries for justice on Joe Paterno.

    Then you hold guilty by association the university in almost any and all capacities on a level of accountability not really relevant to the transgressions performed.

    What do you all say we shut the American banking system down due to Tim Geithner’s (limited) knowledge of the libor price setting? Not the whole government, just the complete financial sections of it. We should cancel anything he has accomplished during his tenure as Treasury Secretary. Hell, ever, for that matter.

  7. tlmoon2112 says: Jul 17, 2012 12:54 PM

    Apparently GEO4444 doesnt give a rats anus about the victims.

  8. rcbn says: Jul 17, 2012 1:26 PM

    Lighten up GEO4444! You are only finishing your first year of law school at PSU. You have 3 more to go…….

  9. mgmac says: Jul 17, 2012 1:32 PM

    geo4444 = enabler of pedophilia, sandusky and paterno

  10. geo4444 says: Jul 17, 2012 1:37 PM

    Yes, of course…

    1) I obviously don’t “give a rats anus about the victims”. Thank you for that…tlmoon…

    2) I’m not actually in law. I am, however, an independent thinking individual that takes the time to review “supporting documentation”, weigh said available information and make my own assessments without the aid of the “oh so misdirected” mob mentality of the media and you fine folks.

  11. geo4444 says: Jul 17, 2012 1:39 PM

    And, alas, yes…mgmac, because I differ with you on something or will not find someone guilty of your assessment (when the facts do not currently support it) then I must be a supporter of that thing.

    I guess any judge or jury that found someone innocent of charges (either due to lack of evidence or facts to the contrary) are also supporters of said crimes.

    Your logic is infallable, thank you.

  12. stoutfiles says: Jul 17, 2012 3:00 PM

    geo4444, do you have any affiliation with PSU? Are you or have you ever currently been a fan of the PSU football team?

  13. davereckon says: Jul 17, 2012 3:01 PM

    Geo444, how is it that all opinions contrary to yours are “mob mentality”? You continue to allude to researching all the facts and coming to your conclusions based on that information. Why do you assume the rest of society did not do that, and hense they are wrong?

    Your opinion is obviously colored a bit by your personal experience. You continue to defend actions that are indefensable, because it was “Paterno”. You clearly have placed him on a pedestal. The problem with pedestals are that they give an opportunity for a large fall. When you are the moral compass for a “clean” program, you need to be held to that standard. This is where the problem starts for “Paterno”.

    Before this happened, i could be considered a Paterno supporter. But there a few significant, irrefutable incidents that have changed my opinion, as I’m sure it has for many others.

    Before you retort with select information that could reside in a grey area, please respond tothe following:

    When “Paterno” testified to the grand jury that he had no prior knowledge of Sandusky’s inappropriate contact with children prior to 2001, was that statement truthful?

    When “Paterno” was made aware of the now 2nd incident involving children in 2001, should moral compass recommend him for a job involving children?

    Does a person (“Paterno”), whose employer and fanbase found him deserving of a halo in the university funded mural, get away with lying to a grand jury (felony), recomend a 2 x suspected pedofile for a job with children, and satisfy his MORAL obligation by reporting the crime to the minimum standards? Maybe that’s the part you are not getting, that everyone else is. They called him St. Joe.

    Yes its true that “Paterno” was very generous and giving to may charities and to the university. What you don’t leave room for is this. Many times, people that perform bad acts are very giving in other areas to assuage their guilt. While “Paterno” is not guilty of molesting children, he did allow it to happen. On his watch, in his buildings, on his sacred grounds of Happy Valley.

    Could you realistically sit face to face with one of the post 2001 victims, explain your point, and look them in the face and tell them “Paterno” did the right thing? Had he done what a person seemingly worthy of a halo would have done, none of them would have been molested. Think about that.

  14. geo4444 says: Jul 17, 2012 3:16 PM

    The following is for you, davereckon. I am also amused that because we talk about these topics (or that I take a different stance than you) it means I don’t care about the victims or that I think no wrong was done. Funny…same logic applies to your discussions here.

    Anyway, the following is for you to review, davereckon:

    —————-

    The following comments are based solely upon the Freeh report (FR), its findings and supporting documentation found within said report.

    The findings by Freeh as they relate to Joseph V. Paterno (JVP) do not just appear inaccurate but constitute gross negligence on the part of said lead investigator and his investigative support team.

    Second paragraph of FINDINGS:

    …and Head Football Coach Joseph V. Paterno – … concealed Sandusky’s activities from the Board of Trustees, the University community and authorities…

    This is one of the most striking attack comments to JVP. And it has no basis on information supplied in the FR. When, if ever, did JVP meet with the Board of Trustee’s (BOT)? I am not aware of any time for JVP to do so. In the course of his work career or during these investigations. JVP did in fact notify the university community and authorities. The head of the campus police. Yes, this is apparently a small print item as per The Clery Act and yes he was wrong to not contact that respective Clery Act person. But as per the report, people were not trained or were grossly untrained on the proper procedures of The Clery Act. This lack of training falls on the university not JVP. Yes, JVP was probably guilty of not having the knowledge the university should have properly implemented.

    The second paragraph of FINDINGS continues with:

    …They exhibited a striking lack of empathy for Sandusky’s victims by failing to inquire as to their safety and well-being, especially by not attempting to determine the identity of the child…

    As per the reported quote that follows, it sounds very responsible and an excellently well-balanced decision by JVP to put the investigation and procedural steps in the hands of the people with the proper expertise (head of police):

    Paterno told a reporter that “I didn’t know exactly how to handle it and I was afraid to do something that might jeopardize what the university procedure was. So I backed away and turned it over to some other people, people I thought would have a little more expertise than I did. It didn’t work out that way.

    Why would or should JVP perform an investigation into something he knew little about and whose skillset was certainly not performing (police) investigations?

    Continue to consider that JVP may have pushed for the opposite results the FR was indicating. The exact emails between Spaniar and Curley have the following quote within it that seems to possibly indicate that Curley didn’t want to go the direction JVP discussed with him. At a minimum, we don’t know what Curley did or did not discuss with JVP. If Curley was trying to minimize the impact of all this, who is to say he told JVP next to nothing? The FP gives no indication on why Freeh drew the conclusions he did on JVP.

    Curley: “After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday—I am uncomfortable with what we…” (who is we…Joe & Curley or Spanier & Curley?) “…agreed were the next steps. I am having trouble going to everyone, but the person involved.” (did JVP suggest going to everyone?)

    Now Curley’s communication (information shared) with JVP may have been limited, at best…we don’t know. Freeh does not know either.

    So where is the takeaway that JVP was suggesting burying any of this? Where?

    Undoubtedly, Freeh took some serious liberty with drawing the conclusions he did on Joseph V. Paterno, and it clears up little as far as his involvement. If there is more evidence then supply it, but it is certainly not in the Freeh Report.

  15. davereckon says: Jul 17, 2012 4:12 PM

    Yeah, i saw this the last timenyou posted it. Nothing new here. These items represent your opinion, not fact.

    Stick to the topic. You avoid my questions with the same opinion as before.

    Where in my previous post do i reference your caring, or lack there of, for the victims. That has nothing to do with your mis guided interpretation of the report.

    “Paterno” achieved icon status at PSU. as such, he became a one word name. When students, employees, or athletes at that campus say the name Joe, is there any doubt who they are taking about? Does Cher need a last name, or do we know who she is. When any of the above mentioned says the name “Coach”‘ is there any doubt who they are talking about? You know as well as i do, that out of respect in prior years, NO ONE on that campus was called coach, or Joe, out of respect.

    Now I am left to assume that your lack of response to my questions means that you have no answer. There is an answer, you just can’t bring yourself to type it.

    In retort to one of your points, i will ask this also. “Paterno” is excused by you for reporting to university police, because they would be better qualified to handle the situation. And you are ok with that. However, since the university police are primarily responsible for campus safety, and last I checked there were no minors attending PSU, what exactly would they be better qualified to handle? It would seem that the “real” police have come up against situations like that before, and would be much more qualified.

    The answer to that is that he reported to the university police, because he could controll the outcome. In 98′ it was reported to the police, and political influence took care of the charges. If he had reported it to the real police in 2001, the chances of this getting out are much greater.

    Not behavior of someone worthy of a halo in my opinion. You just can’t get over the fact that the very reputation that you feel “Paterno” earned throughout his career, is the very reputation that puts him to a higher standard.

    Now please, if you want to debate this topic, then lets do that. But also have the courtesy to answer opposing questions before you recycle prior posts.

  16. j0esixpack says: Jul 17, 2012 4:17 PM

    Brown and every other school should refrain from naming anything after anyone until long after they are dead and it’s confirmed that they have no skeletons in their closet…

    … such as enabling child abusers

  17. mogogo1 says: Jul 17, 2012 4:31 PM

    Anybody else think that sounds like kind of an oddball award to begin with? The top male freshman athlete of the year…not the best overall male athlete, not even the best freshman athlete, just the best male freshman. Do they have similar awards for sophomores, juniors and seniors? Do the ladies have their own set of awards?

    Given Brown isn’t exactly an athletic powerhouse, there must have been years when the recipient wasn’t even particularly good.

  18. brianbosworthisstonecold says: Jul 17, 2012 6:35 PM

    I have an idea. PA state legislators should hire Browns BoTs!

  19. phillyfanmatt says: Jul 17, 2012 11:12 PM

    FYI to the poster who said that the university police are responsible for campus security. PSU university police have the same jurisdictional authority as as township police department in the state. So they are supposedly qualified to lead an investigation of the affairs. Now I said supposedly because they may not have the officers with the right credentials to complete a thorough investigation but are as capable under the law to complete such an investigation as any township or borough police department in the state of pa.

  20. charlescub80 says: Jul 18, 2012 3:44 AM

    @ geo
    How sad, when something happens that stares you in the face and is so horrific, you just want to turn your head and shove your thumb up your ass. Sounds like someone… I think his name was Joe.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!