I like football. People who help football teams win games contribute to the enjoyability of our popular culture and can be celebrated as such. Joe Paterno, as a coach, made Penn State football exciting and fun to watch. He knows football and is particularly talented as a coach.
So why should I look at JoePa any differently than, say, O.J. Simpson, an awesomely quick-thinking, strong, and agile running back who helped his teams win a lot of football games, too? Ben Roethlisberger took his team to the Super Bowl. Mark Chmura was a good tight end when he played for Green Bay who knew how to read Brett Favre’s mind six points at a time. Ray Lewis got a year for ditching evidence in a murder investigation in which he was implicated as the knife manguy. The list goes on, unfortunately, and forgiveness for serious moral misdeeds is too cheaply purchased in our culture with W’s on the field and charisma off of it. Football is a lot of fun; it’s not worth rioting over.
Why should I think of Paterno as any different than, for instance, Bernard Law or any of the terrifyingly myriad other Roman Catholic prelates who chose the Ostrich Strategy when confronted with credible evidence of child rape, or worse, going on under their watches? Joe Paterno was held of as a model of moral leadership. Then we found out this had been happening. Maybe Paterno was a good leader in other contexts, in other ways. But this is a failure significant enough that it had to end immediately.
The analogies aren’t perfect, but they’re good enough.
Well one reason is none of the others (excepting Chmura..who was, I believe, acquitted) were assaulting children. All committed heinous acts that they should have been punished for. But there is something extra special rotten about this and that is in large part because these were defenseless kids. But it is more than just that. The analogy you draw that is correct is the Catholic Church-THAT was worse. And one reason it was worse is that the church preached morality. In a lesser way so did Paterno. Should we let Paterno off the hook because OJ went free? Or Roethlisberger? Hardly.
That is 100% the opposite of what I thought Burt was saying. I don’t think he as saying “Paterno should get off like they did” but “I have no more reason to respect Paterno than I do to respect these other people.”
I realize no one is even accusing Paterno of actually diddling the little boys. But he is accused of abetting said diddling, and his ability to build and coach good football teams is irrelevant to the moral weight of that action.
Exactly! It seems many great men & women have displayed serious lapses in character & judgment. To be a great president, head coach, movie star, or CEO, e.g., unbelievable talent, focus, effort & ambition are required. Sometimes, all of these traits say nothing about their judgment & conduct in other aspects of their lives. So, we get a bright guy like Bill Clinton falling due to his judgment about getting involved with a female intern whose background investigation included a previous affair with a teacher & then blabbing about it. We get Nixon backing a third-rate burglary & taping the evidence including his profane & racist rants. And lest we forget, there was “clean-cut” John Kennedy sneaking Marilyn (et al) into the White House. And on and on and on. Maybe the intense focus on their primary goals results in too little attention to other important matters & the related morals & ethics. And, there is also the matter of how absolute power seems to be a corrupting factor.
The analogy I’d make is to Bob Knight. Bob of them, in addition to building winning teams, did a first-rate job of seeing that the kids on those teams left with an education in addition to a small shot at a career in pro sports. Both (we now know) had serious character flaws as well. But they did a lot more good to offset those flaws than any of the athletes Burt mentioned.