STATE COLLEGE, PaJoe Paterno is out at Penn State. So are Graham Spanier, who served as president, Tim Curley, the one-time athletic director, and Gary Schultz, a former vice president of business and finance.
And yet, amazingly, receivers coach Mike McQueary remains affiliated with Penn State football and a university in the grips of a scandal he helped create. How that makes sense to anyone, including the schools trustees who evidently decided not to remove McQueary, is difficult to fathom. Its also indefensible.
On Thursday, Tom Bradleywho began his coaching career at Penn State in 1979 and succeeded Jerry Sandusky as defensive coordinator in 2000was introduced as the Nittany Lions interim head coach. Bradley said he was watching film in advance of Saturdays home game against Nebraska when the phone rang shortly before 10 p.m. on Wednesday night. Thats when he was asked to take over for Paterno, and he accepted.
Bradley was questioned about various topics on Thursday. When the conversation turned to what Bradley did or didnt know about allegations that Sandusky sexually abused at least eight boys over 15 years, Bradley essentially declined comment.
Due to the ongoing investigation, he said several times, Im not going to answer that matter.
Which brings us back to McQueary. More than once, Bradley was asked why McQueary remained employed by the university when so many others associated with the scandal have already been ousted. And, more than once, Bradley said it wasnt his call.
Thats a decision thats up to the Board of Trustees and Penn State, Bradley said. Its not my job to make that decision. I have a job to do and Im going to do that job.
News
To be clear, I asked Bradley whether he knew of any conversations, had taken part in any discussions, or had considered in any way removing McQueary or preventing him from coaching on Saturday. Bradley didnt hesitate.
Absolutely not, he said.
I find that hard to believe. McQuearylike Paterno, Spanier and othershas been a major person of interest to reporters, students, and outsiders following the still-developing and shocking scandal. And in the midst of an ever-growing controversy thats included high-profile arrests, an emergency meeting of the Board of Trustees, and subsequent firings, Bradley didnt hear anything about anyone in a position of power discussing McQuearys job? Even if thats true, and I have serious doubts about the veracity of that statement, how can that be? How can the Board of Trustees and the remaining football coaches not have discussed McQuearys status? Considering the Grand Jury report, that scenario seems implausible.
In the report, McQueary is identified as a graduate assistant who was then 28 years old in 2002 when he witnessed an alleged incident between Sandusky and a 10-year-old boy in the shower at Lasch Football Building. This next part is taken directly from the report, and if you havent read it yet, you should be warned that its graphic:
The graduate assistant, who was familiar with Sandusky, was going to put some newly purchased sneakers in his locker and get some recruiting tapes to watch. It was about 9:30 p.m. As the graduate assistant entered the locker room doors, he was surprised to find the lights and showers on. He then heard rhythmic, slapping sounds. He believed the sounds to be those of sexual activity. As the graduate assistant put the sneakers in his locker, he looked into the shower. He saw a naked boy, Victim 2, whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky. The graduate assistant was shocked but noticed that both Victim 2 and Sandusky saw him. The graduate assistant left immediately, distraught.
Distraught or not, the operative part of that last sentence is the graduate assistant left immediately. McQueary was a grown mana former starting quarterback for a college football powerhouse who was listed at over 6-feet and 200 poundsand he chose to flee rather than intervene.
The Grand Jury report goes on to detail how McQueary called his father, a long-time friend of Sandusky, and told him about the incident. His father instructed McQueary to leave the building immediately, which he did. McQueary went to his fathers house, where the two decided that McQueary should promptly report what he had seen to Paterno rather than the police. Promptly in the McQueary household must have a different definition than anywhere else, because McQueary didnt discuss the matter with Paterno until the next day.
There are some who defend McQueary and believe he handled the matter appropriately. Their argument is that Paterno was a deity and the supreme authority at State College, and so telling him was as good or better than informing the police. Those people are wrong and possibly delusional.
In the same way that Paterno was rightly criticized for, as he admitted, failing to do more, McQueary should face the same scrutiny and immediate punishment. Leaving the scene and telling your dad, then waiting a day to tell Paterno, then not notifying the authorities at all does not make McQueary innocent in these matters. At best, it makes him shamefully negligent. At worst, and this is what I believe, it makes McQueary just as culpable as Paterno, Spanier, Curley, Schultz and others who failed to act and thereby enabled a child predator.
This shouldnt be a difficult decision for Penn State. McQueary, like the rest, should be gone. No one even remotely involved with what allegedly transpired should be spared. The victims certainly werent.
E-mail John Gonzalez at jgonzalez@comcastsportsnet.com