ADVERTISEMENT

Message from Scott


Wow. Just wow. These OGBOTers cannot stop themselves from spreading middle-school level lies. It's not like that tactic has worked well for them to this point....
The OGBOT just do not respect us enough to tell the truth.
The disdain toward the alums who show a capacity for thinking beyond what is fed to them is palpable at this point.
 
Dear Sue,

We apologize for firing your late husband over the phone back in November 2011. That was incredibly poor form: that news should have been delivered in a face-to-face conversation. We definitely could have waited until 10 AM Thursday instead of rushing to announce the news at 10 PM Wednesday, thus ensuring that face-to-face conversation had occurred.

We know this is years after the actual action, but we do feel the need to formally apologize for such.

Sincerely,

November 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees.

------------------

If that happened, would Sue/Scott accept?
 
Obviously a lie. Nobody at Penn State has been able to block in years.
Dear Sue,

We apologize for firing your late husband over the phone back in November 2011. That was incredibly poor form: that news should have been delivered in a face-to-face conversation. We definitely could have waited until 10 AM Thursday instead of rushing to announce the news at 10 PM Wednesday, thus ensuring that face-to-face conversation had occurred.

We know this is years after the actual action, but we do feel the need to formally apologize for such.

Sincerely,

November 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees.

------------------

If that happened, would Sue/Scott accept?

That's silly. That's not the apology they are looking for.
 
Dear Sue,

We apologize for firing your late husband over the phone back in November 2011. That was incredibly poor form: that news should have been delivered in a face-to-face conversation. We definitely could have waited until 10 AM Thursday instead of rushing to announce the news at 10 PM Wednesday, thus ensuring that face-to-face conversation had occurred.

We know this is years after the actual action, but we do feel the need to formally apologize for such.

Sincerely,

November 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees.

------------------

If that happened, would Sue/Scott accept?

well, that apology won't be forthcoming unless it has a contract attached, signed by the Paterno estate, dropping all charges and committing to make no further claims.
 
Dear Sue,

We apologize for firing your late husband over the phone back in November 2011. That was incredibly poor form: that news should have been delivered in a face-to-face conversation. We definitely could have waited until 10 AM Thursday instead of rushing to announce the news at 10 PM Wednesday, thus ensuring that face-to-face conversation had occurred.

We know this is years after the actual action, but we do feel the need to formally apologize for such.

Sincerely,

November 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees.

------------------

If that happened, would Sue/Scott accept?

I gather you don't know much about apologies. This is no shock.

You will likely do better in the long term if you learn something about apologies. JMO.
 
That's silly. That's not the apology they are looking for.

Well, they aren't getting the apology they are "looking for."

If he doesn't like it --- if he truly feels his father was aggrieved/screwed by the University --- he should file a direct lawsuit against Penn State.

Still waiting for that lawsuit (which would follow Graham Spanier's lead).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cruising Route 66
Dear Sue,

We apologize for firing your late husband over the phone back in November 2011. That was incredibly poor form: that news should have been delivered in a face-to-face conversation. We definitely could have waited until 10 AM Thursday instead of rushing to announce the news at 10 PM Wednesday, thus ensuring that face-to-face conversation had occurred.

We know this is years after the actual action, but we do feel the need to formally apologize for such.

Sincerely,

November 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees.

------------------

If that happened, would Sue/Scott accept?

I guess we won't know the answer to your question until the OGBOT apologizes. Perhaps the Trustees should do the right thing for a change and not try to control the outcome?
 
well, that apology won't be forthcoming unless it has a contract attached, signed by the Paterno estate, dropping all charges and committing to make no further claims.

Probably true.

Scott does seem to have a strategy of "100% total, complete victory ---- or nothing at all." That seems like a good way to ensure nothing at all.
 
Dear Sue,

We apologize for firing your late husband over the phone back in November 2011. That was incredibly poor form: that news should have been delivered in a face-to-face conversation. We definitely could have waited until 10 AM Thursday instead of rushing to announce the news at 10 PM Wednesday, thus ensuring that face-to-face conversation had occurred.

We know this is years after the actual action, but we do feel the need to formally apologize for such.

Sincerely,

November 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees.

------------------

If that happened, would Sue/Scott accept?

No, here is how it would have to read.

Dear Sue,

The University made a HUGE mistake 4 years ago in firing Joe with no evidence he did anything illegal or wrong. It was a horrible knee jerk reaction to Jerry's horrific crimes. Joe's 60 years of service absolutely deserved much better than what he received, but we were cowards and wanted to ensure this didn't blow back on us. We knew by firing Joe we could take the spotlight off us. Again, it was very immature and showed a real lack of leadership. There is no amount of money or statues that can walk back the damage we did to Joe. We were selfish cowards and held our petty gripes against Joe and made this personal.

We do sincerely apologize for being the group of cowards you know we are.

Sincerely,

November 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees.
 
Yep. That's part of the deal.

Scott seems to have a strategy of "100% total, complete victory ---- or nothing at all." That seems like a good way to ensure nothing at all.

Total victory or the complete truth? Only one side of this dispute has spent millions of dollars to keep a lid on its actions.So if you mean, the truth is the price of settlement.......I hope the Paterno Family holds out for "100%" total complete victory,"
 
No, here is how it would have to read.

Dear Sue,

The University made a HUGE mistake 4 years ago in firing Joe with no evidence he did anything illegal or wrong. It was a horrible knee jerk reaction to Jerry's horrific crimes. Joe's 60 years of service absolutely deserved much better than what he received, but we were cowards and wanted to ensure this didn't blow back on us. We knew by firing Joe we could take the spotlight off us. Again, it was very immature and showed a real lack of leadership. There is no amount of money or statues that can walk back the damage we did to Joe. We were selfish cowards and held our petty gripes against Joe and made this personal.

We do sincerely apologize for being the group of cowards you know we are.

Sincerely,

November 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees.

Not only a great suggested apology, but the truth as well.
 
Probably true.

Scott does seem to have a strategy of "100% total, complete victory ---- or nothing at all." That seems like a good way to ensure nothing at all.

Huh? Paterno's had to file a lawsuit to get the BoT and PSU to quit trashing the Paterno name. You would now expect Sue to call off the dogs because the BOT are just nice people that were confused? How naive are you? That's ridiculous.

So, you are seriously thinking that Paternos have gotten this far for any reason other than the lawsuit???
 
Yep. That's part of the deal.

Scott seems to have a strategy of "100% total, complete victory ---- or nothing at all." That seems like a good way to ensure nothing at all.

I'm thinking you're purposely missing the bigger issue here, and therefore misdirecting the focus.
To me it is a matter of an OGBOT / still current BOT member spreading a lie barely worthy of an 8th grader in order to manipulate the general alumni population into believing something that benefits their narrative while being 100% untrue. That is disingenuous and insulting to all alumni, regardless of which side of bigger issues you feel is 'right'.

How anyone can back the OGBOT after repeated nonsense like this is beyond me. They fail as Trustees at nearly every turn.

Your 'letter to Sue' was beneath you, Mich.
 
Well, they aren't getting the apology they are "looking for."

If he doesn't like it --- if he truly feels his father was aggrieved/screwed by the University --- he should file a direct lawsuit against Penn State.

Still waiting for that lawsuit (which would follow Graham Spanier's lead).


Well, to quote Bill O'Brien, " The lawsuits are not helping"........LOL
 
Total victory or the complete truth? Only one side of this dispute has spent millions of dollars to keep a lid on its actions.So if you mean, the truth is the price of settlement.......I hope the Paterno Family holds out for "100%" total complete victory,"

Joe Paterno's statement on Wednesday morning (the one where he said the BOT should not "spend a single minute discussing (his) status") was horrible. A form of suicide. Joe frankly deserved to get fired for that alone. Publicly spitting in your bosses' faces is not wise.

Part of Scott's problem --- he will refuse to admit his own errors. I'd say it's 85% likely that Scott had a significant role in writing that statement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUPALY
We are going to see increasing shenanigans over the next few months. Football lettermen will be arriving in SC to celebrate the 50th anniversary of JVP's first season as HC. It is going to be extremely uncomfortable for some who like to refer to themselves as "The University." JVP is going to be honored without them and perhaps that is the way he would have preferred it.
 
Joe Paterno's statement on Wednesday morning (the one where he said the BOT should not "spend a single minute discussing (his) status") was horrible. A form of suicide. Joe frankly deserved to get fired for that alone. Publicly spitting in your bosses' faces is not wise.

Part of Scott's problem --- he will refuse to admit his own errors. I'd say it's 85% likely that Scott had a significant role in writing that statement.

No it was not. His statement was fine and the BoT didn't fire him because of that. They fired him because they wanted this all to go away...PERIOD.
 
I'm thinking you're purposely missing the bigger issue here, and therefore misdirecting the focus.
To me it is a matter of an OGBOT / still current BOT member spreading a lie barely worthy of an 8th grader in order to manipulate the general alumni population into believing something that benefits their narrative while being 100% untrue. That is disingenuous and insulting to all alumni, regardless of which side of bigger issues you feel is 'right'.

How anyone can back the OGBOT after repeated nonsense like this is beyond me. They fail as Trustees at nearly every turn.

Your 'letter to Sue' was beneath you, Mich.

surprised Ganim hasn't run an exclusive based on this lie
 
Joe Paterno's statement on Wednesday morning (the one where he said the BOT should not "spend a single minute discussing (his) status") was horrible. A form of suicide. Joe frankly deserved to get fired for that alone. Publicly spitting in your bosses' faces is not wise.

Part of Scott's problem --- he will refuse to admit his own errors. I'd say it's 85% likely that Scott had a significant role in writing that statement.

Like blaming your spleen instead of the cancer.
 
Joe Paterno's statement on Wednesday morning (the one where he said the BOT should not "spend a single minute discussing (his) status") was horrible. A form of suicide. Joe frankly deserved to get fired for that alone. Publicly spitting in your bosses' faces is not wise.

Part of Scott's problem --- he will refuse to admit his own errors. I'd say it's 85% likely that Scott had a significant role in writing that statement.
The Trustees knew Joe had agreed to retire at the end of the season. It is therefore more propaganda that this statement swayed anyone. The decision had already been made by Surma. If the trustees were concerned with what Joe might say, they might have returned the requests for communication that the family made to them.
 
Joe Paterno's statement on Wednesday morning (the one where he said the BOT should not "spend a single minute discussing (his) status") was horrible. A form of suicide. Joe frankly deserved to get fired for that alone. Publicly spitting in your bosses' faces is not wise.

Part of Scott's problem --- he will refuse to admit his own errors. I'd say it's 85% likely that Scott had a significant role in writing that statement.
Your circle jerk troll tactics are now reduced to giving probabilities? Seriously, go suck on a tailpipe!
 
We are going to see increasing shenanigans over the next few months. Football lettermen will be arriving in SC to celebrate the 50th anniversary of JVP's first season as HC. It is going to be extremely uncomfortable for some who like to refer to themselves as "The University." JVP is going to be honored without them and perhaps that is the way he would have preferred it.

Joe wanted their money, not their two cents. :)
 
I'm thinking you're purposely missing the bigger issue here, and therefore misdirecting the focus.
To me it is a matter of an OGBOT / still current BOT member spreading a lie barely worthy of an 8th grader in order to manipulate the general alumni population into believing something that benefits their narrative while being 100% untrue. That is disingenuous and insulting to all alumni, regardless of which side of bigger issues you feel is 'right'.

How anyone can back the OGBOT after repeated nonsense like this is beyond me. They fail as Trustees at nearly every turn.

Your 'letter to Sue' was beneath you, Mich.

I see zero tangible evidence of a "bigger issue here."

"Athletic department source" --- someone who, of course, cannot be named.

OK, fair enough. But it means Scott's story has no tangible evidence.

But who knows. Maybe this evidence will "become tangible" when the Paternos' file their eventual direct lawsuit against Penn State.
 
No it was not. His statement was fine and the BoT didn't fire him because of that. They fired him because they wanted this all to go away...PERIOD.

Joe's Entire Statement:

"I am absolutely devastated by the developments in this case. I grieve for the children and their families, and I pray for their comfort and relief.

I have come to work every day for the last 61 years with one clear goal in mind: To serve the best interests of this university and the young men who have been entrusted to my care. I have the same goal today.

That's why I have decided to announce my retirement effective at the end of this season. At this moment the Board of Trustees should not spend a single minute discussing my status. They have far more important matters to address. I want to make this as easy for them as I possibly can.

This is a tragedy. It is one of the great sorrows of my life. With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more.

My goals now are to keep my commitments to my players and staff and finish the season with dignity and determination. And then I will spend the rest of my life doing everything I can to help this University."

Yeah, I don't think the BOT fired him for that.
 
o_O:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Well, they aren't getting the apology they are "looking for."

If he doesn't like it --- if he truly feels his father was aggrieved/screwed by the University --- he should file a direct lawsuit against Penn State.

Still waiting for that lawsuit (which would follow Graham Spanier's lead).
I'm sure Wick Sollers would appreciate your insight. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT