Friday afternoon, it was reported that the Paterno family, alongside a legal team, would release a counter to the Freeh report roughly 180 pages long.
Sunday morning, the family did just that.
“We conclude that the observations as to Joe Paterno in the Freeh report are unfounded, and have done a disservice not only to Joe Paterno and to the Penn State University community, but also to the victims of Jerry Sandusky and the critical mission of educating the public on the dangers of child sexual victimization,” the report reads.
You can read the entire report HERE, but here are some highlights of the critique (which are being updated as we go through it):
- The critique comes right out swinging: “[The]
Freeh report is deeply flawed in its investigative processes and methodology, in its
access to information, and in its reasoning based on the record, and that ultimately it draws
unreliable, unfair and incorrect conclusions as to Joe Paterno.”
- Specifically, the counter states the Freeh did not properly support its findings concerning Paterno’s knowledge the 1998 and 2001 incidents involving Sandusky. Even more specifically, it attacks the Freeh’s documentation of a 1998 email thread and the ambiguity of the word “coach”, presumably Paterno, as a microcosm for poor fact-finding and confirmation.
- The report claims that the entire Penn State community, including Joe Paterno, was “fooled” by Jerry Sandusky and his pedophilia. It goes so far as to say that Paterno “fell victim to effective ‘grooming'” from Sandusky.
- The cirtique brings up a fair criticism: the Freeh group did not interview athletic director Tim Curley or VP Gary Schultz. Only former president Graham Spanier.
Regarding the 2001 incident between Sandusky and Victim 2, the money quote has been and continues to be the email from Curley to Schultz and Spanier on Feb. 27, 2001:
“After giving it some more thought and talking it
over with Joe yesterday — I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps.” The critique states that the Freeh report made the assumption that Paterno altered the path of what was to be done about the incident.
- Regarding the 2000 incident where a janitor saw Sandusky molesting a victim, the critique says there is no link that the witness would have lost his job over reporting what he saw because of Paterno’s power within Penn State.
- The portion of the review written by Dick Thornburgh actually does a persuasive job of poking holes in the Freeh group’s technique. As our good friend Kevin McGuire of the Examiner pointed out earlier today, if you were to present the Freeh report and the Paterno report in a court of law, where proving something beyond a reasonable doubt is the goal, the Paterno report would probably have an edge.
- Thorburgh counters that Paterno put football above the safety of others. “The assertion that Mr. Paterno lacked empathy for children and/or victims of child abuse is contradicted by his long history of charitable work and dedication to the development of young men,” Thornburgh states.
- The report throws the blame of how the 2001 incident was handled on Mike McQueary. “In my opinion, based on investigating, consulting on, and studying thousands of similar cases, it is more reasonable to conclude that these five men did not understand the true nature of Sandusky’s actions because McQueary did not convey what he thought he had conveyed to them.”
- The critique says the Freeh report “mischaracterized” the 2001 emails sent among Curley, Schultz and Spanier where a more “humane and upfront” approach was discussed in handling the accusations against Sandusky. “Hence, there was no change in plans,” the report states. “[Paterno] was not an intervening cause in any change of plans… with regard to conditionally notifying the DPW. Therefore, there was no conspiracy or any agreement to conceal.”
- The tone, from start to finish, was that there is no evidence to support claims that Paterno knew of Sandusky’s pedophilia, or that he made a concerted effort to cover it up if he did know. There is also a direct implication in the critique that the Freeh report deliberately chose what to include and what not to include in its report to fit its findings.
Watch out Big 12, because West Virginia has a very dangerous combination confirmed to be returning in 2018. Days after quarterback Will Grier announced his intention to return to Morgantown for another season, his top wide receiver says he will be there too. David Sills V announced his decision to return for the 2018 season on Monday, giving West Virginia the most potent passing combo in the Big 12 heading into next season.
“After talking with my family and my coaches and taking time in prayer, I have decided to return for my senior season at West Virginia University,” Sills said in a released statement. “I look forward to our bowl game and having another year with my teammates here in Morgantown. It is important to me to finish what I started in the classroom and help our program win a Big 12 championship. WVU holds a special place in my heart, and I am looking forward to seeing what this team can accomplish next year.”
Sills V caught 60 passes for 980 yards and a nation-leading 18 touchdowns this season for West Virginia, leading to being named a finalist for the Biletnikoff Award and multiple All-American nods.
“David proved this year that he can be one of the best receivers in college football,” West Virginia head football coach Dana Holgorsen said. “Another season will help him improve in all areas, and I know our fans will be excited to see him team up with Will Grier for another year.”
Alabama has long been considered the favorite to win the national championship in college football according to Bovada this season, and that is not exactly changing with the College Football Playoff here. But if the Crimson Tide get paired up with Oklahoma, Alabama could be playing the role of underdog.
The latest odds released for each possible College Football Playoff national championship scenario have been updated by Bovada, and they continue to bode well for Alabama if they end up facing Georgia in Atlanta. Alabama is a 7/2 favorite against Georgia, while Georgia has been given 25/4 odds to beat the Crimson Tide. Georgia also has 13/2 odds against Clemson, while the Tigers have been given 4/1 odds against the Bulldogs.
The odds continue to bode well for Baker Mayfield and Oklahoma, however. The Sooners have been given 6/1 odds against Alabama and 7/1 odds against Clemson should Oklahoma get by Georgia in the Rose Bowl semifinal to play for their first College Football Playoff national championship.
Here are the different odds for the College Football Playoff national championship as updated by Bovada on Monday morning;
- Alabama over Georgia – 7/2
- Alabama over Oklahoma – 4/1
- Clemson over Georgia – 4/1
- Clemson over Oklahoma – 6/1
- Georgia over Alabama – 25/4
- Georgia over Clemson – 13/2
- Oklahoma over Alabama 6/1
- Oklahoma over Clemson – 7/1
Which bet do you like the most?
For about as long as anyone can probably remember at this point, Temple has been flirting with the idea of building an on-campus football stadium to serve as the home of the Owls. With the current lease agreement to play games in Lincoln Financial Field now set to expire at the end of the 2019 season, the idea of building an on-campus stadium has reached a point where it may be now or never.
According to a report from The Philadelphia Inquirer, Temple is expected to provide an update on the potential plans for an on-campus stadium during a board of trustees meeting on Tuesday. With the construction of a possible 35,000-seat stadium structure expected to take between 18 and 24 months, time is beginning to be more of a factor moving forward. If plans for an on-campus stadium fail to move forward soon, then Temple must work with the Philadelphia Eagles to secure Lincoln Financial Field as a site for home games. According to a previous report from Philly Voice, the Eagles had been asking for a 30-year lease at $2 million per year and $12 million upfront. Temple has been paying $1 million per year for use of the NFL stadium and has called it home since the building opened in 2003. The original lease was a 15-year agreement with two options to tack on two additional seasons.
Temple’s on-campus football stadium has lacked the support from the Temple community and the surrounding neighborhood the stadium would potentially be constructed, making this a decision that does not come easily for the Owls and the university. Despite some recent good seasons out of the Temple football program, the Owls historically have not fared well with packing stadiums for games. Unless Temple is hosting Penn State or Notre Dame, Temple has struggled to be a draw that brings in many fans. The thought is having an on-campus stadium may make it more accessible for the Temple community for less-marquee games, but that is not a fail-proof strategy at this time for Temple either.
Temple’s issues with an on-campus stadium are not unique to the Owls. Even Miami has similar issues with playing home games in an NFL stadium off campus. Despite a strong season of football, Miami took a while to fill the seats until they were playing Notre Dame in November. But Miami has many advantages that Temple does not. And simply having an on-campus stadium does not immediately translate into national success. South Florida plays in an NFL stadium and they have fared well the past few years. Cincinnati has an on-campus stadium, yet they have continued to struggle. Regardless of where the team plays, it all comes down to simply having the best combination of staff and players. Having the best facilities possible is a big factor in recruiting both.
An on-campus stadium for Temple has its perks, but it is not a perfect plan according to those with concerns in the community. We’ll see if anything comes out of this latest board meeting, if the stadium idea remains on the agenda.
Oregon may have dropped the first game of the Mario Cristobal era on Saturday, but the Ducks came out of the weekend with reason to feel energized about the future of the program. According to a report from Bruce Feldman of Sports Illustrated, Oregon has reached a deal with defensive coordinator Jim Leavitt to keep him on the staff through the 2021 season.
As reported by Feldman, Leavitt will be paid $1.7 million per year for the next four seasons, making him one of the highest-paid coordinators in the country. LSU defensive coordinator Dave Aranda is paid $1.8 million and Clemson defensive coordinator Brent Venables is paid $1.7 million according to a record of coaching salaries compiled by USA Today. Leavitt had been the 12th highest-paid coordinator in college football prior to this significant bump in pay to make him the third highest-paid coordinator in the country.
Keeping Leavitt in Eugene is a big win for Cristobal as he takes over the job as head coach. Leavitt had been expected to be a target of former Oregon head coach Willie Taggart as he assembles his new staff at Florida State. Leavitt had been discussed as a potential target for other jobs as well, with one report suggesting he may have been sought after as a replacement for Bill Snyder at Kansas State.
Leavitt played a big role in turning the Oregon defense around in just one season. Inheriting a defense that ranked 115th in the nation in 2016, Leavitt transformed the Ducks into the 32nd-best defense in the country this season.