I have no theory, just an observation. Seems to me that right around that time, individuals that were vocal and out front became quiet and meek or disappeared.
Trustees walked out on Lubrano today
- Thread starter Richard the LIONhearted
- Start date
I wanted him to retire too but not because of what he was doing, but because I didn't think he could take us to where I hoped the program would be. Your comments are ignorant at best. How did every coach do against OSU? And 2005, 2008 and 2009 proves your dark years comment incorrect.
You soundand understandably so....
I continue TO follow your lead.
Please expound on your thought about how it would be better to have had no review of the Freeh materials.
My thought is that they are bound by the court to not divulge details that fall under atty-client privilege. I could be wrong. There have been whispers on here that there is plenty of material to be found that destroys the Freeh 'opinion'. I (and probably most here) want those whispers to become shouts, of course, and made very public. If they can do that, great.
On the other hand, if the material confirms or supports Freeh's opinion, I believe the 'other' BOTers would have no issue with allowing all that material to be released, unless some of it touches them, of course. I want to know all that, as well. I also think that anything in that vein would have been included in the Freeh report, so my guess is that confirmation material is not to be found.
Still many unanswered questions beyond that, but 5 years running, and people paying dearly for all this.... let's take an action toward reuniting the PSU community with complete facts and truths and then a 'move on' mantra will make more sense. Had JVP's career ended normally, I believe we all would have moved on soon after, and as a mostly united group.
I think the A9 is working behind the scenes on being able to release the information found in some way or another, but I don't know the ins and outs of that.
I'm trying to stay engaged enough to make sure that something that has always been very important to me, i.e. my love affair with all things Penn State, remains that way to the fullest extent possible. It's becoming more and more of a challenge, thanks in part to the very people I depend on to help ensure that.
bwifan
Well-Known Member
Seems to me until we get a governor who cares about what is really going on at PSU nothing will change. The organized crime leaders have all the power and purse strings to fill their pockets. The only thing many alumni can do in this time of secrecy on the BOT is to continue to make the governor and state leaders aware of it and contribute your money elsewhere. Vote with your money. Granted it won't do a lot but hopefully make people feel like at least they are taking a stand .
To you winning football games is all that matters.
People that hate coaches because they don't win enough to satisfy their inflated egos are the real culture problem.
Actually, I believe Fiduciary failures of PSU's BOT that potentially fall on the wrong side of PA Trust & Fiduciary Law at NPOs is the province and auspice of the Attorney General in PA (in terms of initiating an Investigation and Prosecution of Findings if deemed criminal behavior has occurred - even mere "gross negligence" can be prosecuted under the "Prudent Man / Prudent Expert Rule" I believe), not the Governor. The AG does not need any special court-granted powers to initiate Investigations of this sort either as NPOs serve at the pleasure of the AG as the Hershey Trust situation has demonstrated many times over via GOP AGs since 1980.
We'll see how much he cares about PSU if the proposed casino comes to fruition. My understanding is that it will be a satellite casino from one of the existing Pa. casinos.
It will become VERY apparent who's running the show by who's casino is picked for State College. A casino near one of the country's largest universities with one of the largest football stadiums and huge allumni following would be extremely profitable.
Does anybody think that the guy who will benefit most is the one who some refer to as the King?
And isn't Dambly in the residential / hotel building business? (I'm not sure I remember that correctly). The casino and hotel will be a Valley Forge West, with Ira and Dambly making more money than they can count. Donating $5mm back to PSU here and there will be chump change for them, but the press releases will be making them out to be the Warren Buffet and Bill Gates of local philanthropy. Fun stuff.
Déjà poo....I have seen this $hitt before!
Yeah, Ranger is generally more measured than that particular post showed.
I for one, was excoriated at the time for my opinion and analysis, which I still believe to be true.
That is - that the A9 review of the materials, under the conditions set, was a trap that would effectively muzzle them on virtually all related topics, indefinitely. A trap of their own making.
They are still ensnared. They were warned.
This is why they are jokes. And then they pulled demlion in for good measure.
Why is this clown still posting on this board Tom?
Cannot argue with that conclusion, unless someone can show otherwise.
Although, it also proves the malevolence and sheer evil of those who set the trap and continue to manipulate the game, for-----what? For what reason? Whatever it is, it must be a big deal. And it is imperative that it remain hidden.
Yep, he didn't win enough football games to allow douchebags like you to puff out your chest and act tough so he deserves to have his reputation destroyed by a false narrative. Sounds about right. But it's all about the kids, eh?
Confused....so according to you, he put the program ahead of child molestation and then, at the same time, you suggest he didn't win enough games?
Fact is, Joe always put the good of the student ahead of athlete when it came to student-athletes. When other coaches went the way of the SEC, even in the B1G, Joe continued to adhere to the old-school approach that it was about the kids on the team. And this is why the NCAA, read emmert, hated him is because Joe kept pointing out that the NCAA's pursuit of revenue put kids in peril. The NCAA hated Joe for standing in the way of lengthening the season, expanding bowls, increasing practices, allowing onerous recruiting practices and not fulfilling heath care responsibilities.
Those are the facts.
AL promised something big is coming after Sept. 17 ...
Sept. 17, 2016
or
Sept. 17. 2017
or
Sept. 17, 2018
or
Sept. 17, whatever
Sadly, Penn State has been ill-served by it's leaders on all levels.
Sept. 17, 2016
or
Sept. 17. 2017
or
Sept. 17, 2018
or
Sept. 17, whatever
Sadly, Penn State has been ill-served by it's leaders on all levels.
Come on, you are definitely smarter than that... Governor Wolf and the state legislature are playing the same freaking game just wearing different colors. To get into the establishment you sell your sole, to stay in the establishment you enforce its boundaries. For the most part the world is rigged, you just need to stay clear of becoming a threat to those who have sold out so they don't bring you down. There is nothing they will not do to stay on the inside. Honesty and integrity be damned.
Also good to remember that Joe's lone and strong stance on pushing instant replay, including an uncharacteristic comment in the media that it should be looked at, was likely not appreciated by the Big 10. Some call Joe's stance on that leadership, but likely not the Big 10 or NCAA.
Honesty and integrity be damblyed.
Here's the full text of my comments at the BOT meeting yesterday:
July 21, 2017
President Barron, Chairman Lubert, fellow Trustees, more than 5 ½ years ago in January 2012, the leaders of this body promised the Penn State community that it would thereafter operate with openness, transparency and accountability. That promise remains largely unfulfilled and, as we today choose new leadership, I believe this Board remains secretive, sometimes purposely, and unaccountable. The Board’s self-appointed majority often acts in its own interests, ignoring the will of its alumni. Consequently, the Board is divided and more significantly the alumni are divided.
My remarks are often characterized by the majority as intemperate, possibly because sometimes my remarks are intemperate. Intemperate perhaps but always honest. Nonetheless, I have been here since this board acquiesced to guilt in mid-2012 and I have observed the extraordinarily expensive actions it has taken to pay for its self-imposed guilt.
I will cite just two of many examples where Board majority has acted, knowingly, to ignore the will of the University’s vast alumni.
In 2012 and by about a 10-1 ratio, trustees still in this room and many now long gone told Louis Freeh interviewers that board membership was much too large to achieve good board governance. By 2014, the trustees chosen by the alumni grew more active and sought answers to matters it deemed relevant in the boardroom. Alumni vote totals grew, though their representatives are still in the minority on this Board. The majority became less comfortable. And so, notwithstanding a board already hopelessly unwieldy at 32 members, the majority proposed to increase board size—except for its initial proposal to reduce the alumni’s representation on the board. We are now a cuddly 38 persons.
One need not be unduly intemperate to see that majority self-interest was imposed for its own selfish purposes by adding seats it could fill, without minority input. Self-interest superseded improved governance. Transparency?
Interestingly, Freeh chose not to recommend a reduced board size when board size was the clearest problem suggested to him. Not too big a surprise though-- much of what Freeh learned from interviewees never made it to the report. More disturbing is how much in the report has zero support in his investigatory notes. But that’s for another day.
The Freeh Report caused the destruction of the Penn State culture that I came to know and love, perhaps in perpetuity; it caused NCAA to impose unwarranted and Draconian sanctions; and as one obedient to his profession, Freeh created the wealth transfer of tens of millions from taxpayer and student pockets into the pockets of plaintiffs’ attorneys.
Much remains unsaid about Freeh’s Report because of the secrecy imposed by this board. Freeh’s destructive PSU indictment was never examined by this so called “accountable” body, nor by our outsized legal department. We were told by legal counsel, “Don’t look at that evidence; what if it is worse????” Not knowing was actually recommended -- I call that Purposeful Ignorance!!!
Purposeful Ignorance is an unnatural human condition and like most such conditions in this day and age, the product of lawyerly advice. Perhaps that advice fits into our contorted legal system—but legal or not, Purposeful Ignorance is not moral in my book. Millions were spent to keep those documents secret from the alumni of this university. Millions were spent to deny trustees the right to do their duty as they saw their duty. The majority chose to remain uninformed, then used taxpayer and student funds to preclude alumni trustees from gaining knowledge. In the end, more than $1.2 million was wasted.
--The majority knowingly and falsely informed us we had no duty to understand the Freeh investigation.
--After the majority forbid the minority to do its duty, seven, myself included, pursued that duty in the courtroom and not surprisingly won the case.
--The majority, in response to a private letter from the seven, chose to publicly rebuke the minority for its effort to gain access to information.
--President Barron chose to belittle the minority’s efforts publicly calling the information request “frivolous and damaging to the University”; where is seeking knowledge and truth frivolous?
--The majority purposely deceived the public saying we rejected a “compromise” to examine the Freeh data. Untrue yet published anyway.
--The majority indiscriminately paid lawyers for legal matters related to PSU and unrelated to PSU. We even paid the NCAA’s obligation to Senator Corman in a suit the NCAA LOST.
--The majority chose not to reimburse the duly elected members of this board for its legal fees associated with our effort to seek knowledge and truth but instead publicly and maliciously chastised and belittled our efforts. Fortunately, the three-person Commonwealth Court ruled otherwise and reminded President Barron our effort was indeed not “FRIVOLOUS.”
--The majority purposefully and deceitfully informed the public that Freeh interviewees had been promised confidentiality. Untrue. Freeh investigators explained to each interviewee their confidentiality could not be promised!!!
Worth mentioning is that President Barron reneged on his commitment to review the Freeh material noting that Freeh was not really relevant to the board’s work. Really not relevant to more than a quarter of a billion dollars and the university’s reputation?
The foregoing are simply not the actions of two board groups with valid differences of opinion. Generally though, that is how the majority characterizes differences. Differences we have, of course.
The actions I just cited reflect the actions of a majority imposing its self-interest—unlawfully--on the minority. Deception and majority self-interest are not okay.
James Madison was arguably the major contributor more than 230 years ago to the design of the Constitution of this country and its voting processes. His biggest fear, mitigated somewhat by the Electoral College, was the likely propensity of the voting majority to impose its will on the minority. He called it the tyranny of the majority. I better understand his fear.
The obligations of DUTY and LOYALTY of trustees are not determined by one of General Counsel’s many opinions, nor are they defined by the vote of the majority of trustees. Trustee obligations are individual and each must act according to his or her own conscience and sensibilities. This fact is well established and well understood in America—and by our self-selected legal subcommittee. Yet the committee and our leadership mislead us and they attempted to mislead the court.
Our lawyers, and the legal subcommittee have allocated hundreds of millions of dollars for which they should be accountable. This board and management long ago abdicated their responsibilities to lawyers. The money is gone. Sadly, so is our reputation. Obviously, all the kings’ horses and all the king’s lawyers cannot restore the pride and culture of a Penn State destroyed by our Purposeful Ignorance and perpetual passivity. We do not play offense or defense; we are inert.
I raise these matters again because silence is acquiescence. As I analyze our actions five years later I am more troubled than ever.
For 5 years I have imprecisely chosen the term “dysfunction” to describe this board. Board size alone causes the board confusion, incompetence, disorganization etc… that makes us dysfunctional. But dysfunction is prevalent on many not-for-profit boards. That is not the cause of our futility—the imposition of deceitful self-interest is the cause.
To be clear, the term deceitful is used to be precise. That its usage may be inflammatory and polarizing is unfortunate but true. Hundreds of thousands of alumni who care about our past and our future have been deceived and, in the process, disenfranchised.
Remember, we will never heal without truth and reconciliation.
Now Mark and Matt, I hope, I pray, that the two of you work together to help bring us back together.
Thank you.
July 21, 2017
President Barron, Chairman Lubert, fellow Trustees, more than 5 ½ years ago in January 2012, the leaders of this body promised the Penn State community that it would thereafter operate with openness, transparency and accountability. That promise remains largely unfulfilled and, as we today choose new leadership, I believe this Board remains secretive, sometimes purposely, and unaccountable. The Board’s self-appointed majority often acts in its own interests, ignoring the will of its alumni. Consequently, the Board is divided and more significantly the alumni are divided.
My remarks are often characterized by the majority as intemperate, possibly because sometimes my remarks are intemperate. Intemperate perhaps but always honest. Nonetheless, I have been here since this board acquiesced to guilt in mid-2012 and I have observed the extraordinarily expensive actions it has taken to pay for its self-imposed guilt.
I will cite just two of many examples where Board majority has acted, knowingly, to ignore the will of the University’s vast alumni.
In 2012 and by about a 10-1 ratio, trustees still in this room and many now long gone told Louis Freeh interviewers that board membership was much too large to achieve good board governance. By 2014, the trustees chosen by the alumni grew more active and sought answers to matters it deemed relevant in the boardroom. Alumni vote totals grew, though their representatives are still in the minority on this Board. The majority became less comfortable. And so, notwithstanding a board already hopelessly unwieldy at 32 members, the majority proposed to increase board size—except for its initial proposal to reduce the alumni’s representation on the board. We are now a cuddly 38 persons.
One need not be unduly intemperate to see that majority self-interest was imposed for its own selfish purposes by adding seats it could fill, without minority input. Self-interest superseded improved governance. Transparency?
Interestingly, Freeh chose not to recommend a reduced board size when board size was the clearest problem suggested to him. Not too big a surprise though-- much of what Freeh learned from interviewees never made it to the report. More disturbing is how much in the report has zero support in his investigatory notes. But that’s for another day.
The Freeh Report caused the destruction of the Penn State culture that I came to know and love, perhaps in perpetuity; it caused NCAA to impose unwarranted and Draconian sanctions; and as one obedient to his profession, Freeh created the wealth transfer of tens of millions from taxpayer and student pockets into the pockets of plaintiffs’ attorneys.
Much remains unsaid about Freeh’s Report because of the secrecy imposed by this board. Freeh’s destructive PSU indictment was never examined by this so called “accountable” body, nor by our outsized legal department. We were told by legal counsel, “Don’t look at that evidence; what if it is worse????” Not knowing was actually recommended -- I call that Purposeful Ignorance!!!
Purposeful Ignorance is an unnatural human condition and like most such conditions in this day and age, the product of lawyerly advice. Perhaps that advice fits into our contorted legal system—but legal or not, Purposeful Ignorance is not moral in my book. Millions were spent to keep those documents secret from the alumni of this university. Millions were spent to deny trustees the right to do their duty as they saw their duty. The majority chose to remain uninformed, then used taxpayer and student funds to preclude alumni trustees from gaining knowledge. In the end, more than $1.2 million was wasted.
--The majority knowingly and falsely informed us we had no duty to understand the Freeh investigation.
--After the majority forbid the minority to do its duty, seven, myself included, pursued that duty in the courtroom and not surprisingly won the case.
--The majority, in response to a private letter from the seven, chose to publicly rebuke the minority for its effort to gain access to information.
--President Barron chose to belittle the minority’s efforts publicly calling the information request “frivolous and damaging to the University”; where is seeking knowledge and truth frivolous?
--The majority purposely deceived the public saying we rejected a “compromise” to examine the Freeh data. Untrue yet published anyway.
--The majority indiscriminately paid lawyers for legal matters related to PSU and unrelated to PSU. We even paid the NCAA’s obligation to Senator Corman in a suit the NCAA LOST.
--The majority chose not to reimburse the duly elected members of this board for its legal fees associated with our effort to seek knowledge and truth but instead publicly and maliciously chastised and belittled our efforts. Fortunately, the three-person Commonwealth Court ruled otherwise and reminded President Barron our effort was indeed not “FRIVOLOUS.”
--The majority purposefully and deceitfully informed the public that Freeh interviewees had been promised confidentiality. Untrue. Freeh investigators explained to each interviewee their confidentiality could not be promised!!!
Worth mentioning is that President Barron reneged on his commitment to review the Freeh material noting that Freeh was not really relevant to the board’s work. Really not relevant to more than a quarter of a billion dollars and the university’s reputation?
The foregoing are simply not the actions of two board groups with valid differences of opinion. Generally though, that is how the majority characterizes differences. Differences we have, of course.
The actions I just cited reflect the actions of a majority imposing its self-interest—unlawfully--on the minority. Deception and majority self-interest are not okay.
James Madison was arguably the major contributor more than 230 years ago to the design of the Constitution of this country and its voting processes. His biggest fear, mitigated somewhat by the Electoral College, was the likely propensity of the voting majority to impose its will on the minority. He called it the tyranny of the majority. I better understand his fear.
The obligations of DUTY and LOYALTY of trustees are not determined by one of General Counsel’s many opinions, nor are they defined by the vote of the majority of trustees. Trustee obligations are individual and each must act according to his or her own conscience and sensibilities. This fact is well established and well understood in America—and by our self-selected legal subcommittee. Yet the committee and our leadership mislead us and they attempted to mislead the court.
Our lawyers, and the legal subcommittee have allocated hundreds of millions of dollars for which they should be accountable. This board and management long ago abdicated their responsibilities to lawyers. The money is gone. Sadly, so is our reputation. Obviously, all the kings’ horses and all the king’s lawyers cannot restore the pride and culture of a Penn State destroyed by our Purposeful Ignorance and perpetual passivity. We do not play offense or defense; we are inert.
I raise these matters again because silence is acquiescence. As I analyze our actions five years later I am more troubled than ever.
For 5 years I have imprecisely chosen the term “dysfunction” to describe this board. Board size alone causes the board confusion, incompetence, disorganization etc… that makes us dysfunctional. But dysfunction is prevalent on many not-for-profit boards. That is not the cause of our futility—the imposition of deceitful self-interest is the cause.
To be clear, the term deceitful is used to be precise. That its usage may be inflammatory and polarizing is unfortunate but true. Hundreds of thousands of alumni who care about our past and our future have been deceived and, in the process, disenfranchised.
Remember, we will never heal without truth and reconciliation.
Now Mark and Matt, I hope, I pray, that the two of you work together to help bring us back together.
Thank you.
Great speech. So how about that Freeh source material review?
Thank you Anthony, met you at the first PSU assembly outside of Old Main and will continue to say hello at the fall games as I have done since 2012. God speed. I truly appreciate your effort.
Let me guess, the same Casino Operator as the one running the Casino attached to the "Hershey Trust Owned Resort"?
Perhaps Barron left to get back to his review of the Freeh Report? It is more likely that a buffet was available in an adjacent room.
Ever wonder what the old mafiso syndicate evolved into? The product of the evaluation still has strong arm tactics, but subtle in it's convincing adversaries " to do the right thing".
Apostles of Frank Sheeran would recognize that a casino in town would fit right into the quid pro quo scenarios Frank always alludes to. We're due for a tome from the Irishman.
A casino would also align with Lubert's businesses. I wonder why he stepped down.
I'd love too see you tell Mike Mauti or Michael Robinson, Sean Lee, Paul Pozlusny, etc. to their faces that the program they played for was run into the ground. Then maybe I'll give you a thumbs up.
Then you tell me how the same guy could carelessly run a program into the ground while at the same time protecting a child molester to protect that same program.
I wouldn't have to tell them. Half of this board was saying he ran it into the ground and needed to go. How quickly we forget all of the discussions about Joe earning the right to go out his way. This board was filled with these posts. The media was saying it. It was THE topic of discussion for years.
I'm not making any predictions, but I'm willing to bet it won't be the one in NEPA that has Native American roots.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting 2025 LB target scheduled for Penn State OV in June- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
-