Badger_HB

I don't know what's funnier, the fact that people bitch about this every week or the fact that Wisconsin did that to one of the best defenses in the country. I mean, give me a break. As mentioned, Oregon, Boise, and several other teams do this week in and week out (to inferior opponents no less), no one says boo, and it's called "domination". But Wisconsin does it to a vaunted defense and it's prick a-hole douche Bielema's fault.

snip Better to watch the video than to take a single image out of context. Please explain how that is "out of context".

His "apology" was embarrassing, as well as cringe-worthy. The best thing he could've done was own up to his actions right away. He did not. That's what people are jumping on him for. And as for your second point: the stomp is OK because he didn't hurt the guy? Frankly, that's bullsh#t. well you just proved yourself to be 100% not objective. You didn't address anything I said directly but instead spun it and put words in my mouth. It's because he may not have TRIED to hurt the guy. Same as if you purposely miss when you swing a punch in to the air to release frustration/energy. That's essentially what I said. I don't know what you're getting at. Are you saying he just stomped his foot and didn't know Dietrich-Smith's arm was there?

Yes. National Championship good. But that was long, long ago. And you'll soon learn that they hang on to those for their dear life.

His "apology" was embarrassing, as well as cringe-worthy. The best thing he could've done was own up to his actions right away. He did not. That's what people are jumping on him for. And as for your second point: the stomp is OK because he didn't hurt the guy? Frankly, that's bullsh#t.

This makes my head hurt.

I read an article on ESPN I think saying that Dietrich-Smith wasn't letting go of Suh and was in fact pulling him towards the ground. If Suh was trying to get his balance while getting pulled down, it only looked like he was pushing Dietrich-Smith's head into the ground. Any fan (especially any Badger fan) that comes on here acting as if the Packers were completely innocent in this situation is either completely naive or they're worse homers than any of the Nebraska fans in this thread. The Packers O-Line was baiting Suh all game long - they even said as much after the game. And point, Packers - they got him to commit the foul, and even got him kicked out of the game for taking the bait - but stop with all this high-and-mighty "That's not the way the game is meant to be played" BS. Who came on here saying the Packers were completely innocent? Not I said this fan...and for the record being a UW and a GB fan are not the same thing. I know plenty of people that are one and not the other. Oh one last thing, the Packers may not have been completely innocent but there wasn't a penalty was there? The Packers are one of the least penalized teams in the NFL, we play some of the cleanest most respectable football around. Suh and Detroit? meh not so much. Even if Dietrich was holding Suh explain to me how that is an even halfway reasonable response. It isn't, and his post game comment just proves he has piss poor character. Suspend him. No no no. Suh doesn't have piss poor character. He's done many things that have shown his good character. Don't crucify him for how he plays and his excuse. I agree with you that he needs to be suspended. I agree with you that his excuse was pretty piss poor. But he is by no means a terrible person because of what he did. I wonder...if he would've done that to a Vikings player, would you as upset? I can only judge a man off of what I see. I didn't go to NU, I don't live in Lincoln and I'm not going to spend my time reading up on every kid that plays CFB, maybe he's a great guy but not from what I've seen. Had he done what he did on the field, came out and said "I got frustrated, I snapped and I shouldn't have done it" I'd have much less of a problem with him, I'd still think he played dirty but I wouldn't think he was a dirty as a person...unfortunately he didn't man up, he completely bitched out in that comment. I have very little respect for him now. Interesting question about the Vikings. I think I would be just as outraged because its bad for football and just a sh**ty thing to do. Would I argue as much about it on HB? Probably not. I just want to say I find it interesting how much my posts have stirred people up. I simply described the incident how I saw it, what I thought of Suh and what I thought should happen to him. I wasn't demeaning to anyone or to NU, can't say the same about some HB posters around here. Kind of like the Iowa-Gameday thread, when people flipped sh#t after I kindly pointed out that several games have a claim to the "Game of the Century" moniker. People around here sometimes...I'm telling ya... . Not everything is personal, not everything I say is because I'm a UW-GB homer, sometimes, just sometimes I'd like to talk about Football objectively in a friendly manner. I guess that's too much to ask of some people. I hate the packers, i hate them with every fiber of my body. I hate them more then my rich, petty inlaws. I loathe Brett Farve for only the fact that he played there. I loathe there stadium and there chest thumping fan base. There the Ohio St of the NFL. But that still doesnt mean what Suh did should at all be remotely ok. You dont violently drive one foot down to get your balance. He was pissed and caught up in the moment. Maybe he was just stomping because he was pissed and he didnt realize his arm was there, fine but just admit it. Admit you made a mistake and your actions will be looked at with alittle less scrutiny then someone throwing a fit. Lol you hate Lambeau? That's a new one...

I don't get where people are seeing Suh "leaning" on Dietrich-Smith. He repeatedly pushed his head into the ground.

Aren't they really both "frustration" kicks, in essence? Why else would you kick someone?

So, Matthews wrenching on Kevin Smith's neck today, the dirty cut block on Avril, or the packer player ejected for throwing a punch should also be suspended then right? If Suh wants you hurt, you're gonna be hurt. He was wrong today but it was a heat of the moment penalty. Football is a violent game and emotions run high. Come on dude, the guy's not some unstoppable force that just decides if or if not he wants to injure guys. He's a great player, no doubt, but the national perception of him as a dirty player is running in high gear right now.

Jesus dude, that was a tweet from another board. I also emphasized "Take that for what it's worth".

Saw this tweet over on Illinois Loyalty this morning: @ elevenwarriors Take that for what it's worth, but these rumors have been floating around for a while now. If it's true, look out Big Ten.

Well then you're not a hardcore Dallas Cowboys fan. I can root for the packers as long as they're not playing the cowboys idiot...they kinda remind me of the huskers They're one of Dallas' biggest out of division rivals. You should hate the Packers. It makes no freakin' sense. Plus it just mean you're not really a hardcore Dallas Cowboys fan, you're a bandwagon fan. This. I've never met a fan of both teams.

Hey, we'd love to have you as rivals, seeing as how the UW-Minn rivalry has taken a turn for the uncompetitive the last decade or so. Similar styles usually make for a great rivalry.

Penn State's not gonna beat both Ohio State & Wisconsin They just need to beat Wisconsin now that Ohio State lost to Purdue. Yes that's all they need but I have a feeling we stomp them...bad...especially if its at night. B1G rule: no night games in November. I wasn't tracking that. Kind of a stupid rule on the face of it. What's the logic behind it? Safety mainly. They don't want temps dipping before kickoff even arrives.

Ho-hum 8 years in a row.

Again, it has to be said. f#*k Minnesota.

Looks great, but he has faced by and large a horrid schedule... What? Wisconsin's basically played the same Big Ten schedule as Nebraska in terms of top teams.

Let's be clear here: this is 5 total scholarships over the next 3 years, not 5 per year for the next 3 years.

...so instead he waited for nine years and the situation is magnified hundreds of times over.

Sorry but no. He got fired because he was part of the chain of command that this went through and got shoved under the rug by. That much is documented and admitted. It is not a witch hunt. I don't understand how people can divorce themselves from reality enough to think that this was just a convenient opportunity to get rid of the guy. He tied their hands the day he found out about what went on in 2002 and didn't go directly to the authorities and continued to have Sandusky around the program... and that's assuming he was ignorant of the situation that went on before Sandusky was removed as DC in the 90s. Which isn't very plausible. Funny, but I have yet to read of or see any evidence where this was "shoved under the rug" by Paterno. That's media supposition at it's finest, as is the posting by the media and general public on boards and blogs all over the internet about how he must have been thinking about his reputation/wins/legacy versus the safety of those kids. Sandusky had never been arrested for, nor charged with nor found guilty of any sort of crime (and still hasn't), so how exactly do you justify cutting off all ties with the person based on second hand accounts and hearsay? It's not as if Paterno actually witnessed anything that would have made what you are purporting he do - completely block access to all campus facilitys/programs etc,- actionable without putting the university and himself at risk (and even had he done so, there is zero evidence that it would have prevented Sandusky from continuing to molest children). Did JoePa know about what happened in the shower involving his former staff member? yes, he himself admitted that to a grand jury. Did he report it directly to the police? No. There you go. He's not being charged with a crime because he did not lie about that. That doesn't mean the workplace where this was swept under the rug, by the people that this was known by, needs him to be charged with a crime to see that it was a huge problem. By not being immediately turned over to police it was a problem and that was compounded by having the man accused still around the program. His inaction and those of his direct superiors (which is laughable at penn state) enabled a child rapist. Get that through your head. Everyone involved needs to be and will be canned whether they are facing indictments or not. They taint the entire institution if you allow them to remain. He's not being charged with a crime because he did nothing wrong - he reported it to the "authorities" in charge of his institution (which is how the law/statute is worded... although I imagine that the statute may be amended to rid itself of such ambiguity in the future), not because he didn't lie about it to the grand jury - if the Grand Jury thought he was lying they would have charged him with perjury as they did with Schultz and Curely.. but they didn't, which seems to point to and support the fact that Paterno's testimony that he was unaware of the specifics of what took place in the shower is the truth. I've read the Grand Jury's report and honestly, based upon what's in there, Paterno is, at this time and until any evidence is produced to refute it.... innocent of wrong doing. If you want to talk about inaction, how about the detectives who dropped an investigation at the bequest of Penn State Campus Police, an AG/Head of Police that decided not to file charges, a mother who worked with the police to tape phone conversations but didn't pursue it when the police dropped it, the executives of Second Mile who were apparently informed several times about possible issues but did nothing, Shultz and Curely who did nothing... there was a whole lot of failure going on here by not only Penn State officials but by local and county law enforcement, school coaches and officials and other various authorities. The victims were let down at every single level by every person who should have protected them but to pin the majority of the blame on Paterno and say that it was Paterno who enabled and apparently by way of inaction, condoned, Sandusky's actions is a ridiculous. Could he have done more? Given the information we have now, it appears to be obvious he could have. But he didn't have all of this information, he had an apparently vague report of some sort of sexual misconduct between a former employee and a child, which he had already reported a required by law and "morality". Paterno is the "big name" goat being sacrificed to overshadow the rest of the stuff in the background.. it will be interesting to see where this case goes with regard to the public's interest in the case now that the "blood" we've all been calling for has been shed. Wrong. So wrong. McQueary told him what happened in excruciating detail. Show me in the indictment or in the testimonies of those involved where anyone says Paterno was told in full detail what happened in that shower. Don't you think that the Grand Jury would have indicted Paterno as well if Mcqueary (sp) had testified differently? Because that what happened with Schultz and Curley. Are you saying there was someone in the room with JoePa when McQueary relayed the events to him? Because that is the only way that "a person familiar with his account" could be; familiar with his account. Other than that, this is just an inflammatory statement. That's not my quote. That's a quote from a NYT article.

Right or wrong, he's the face of that administration. You've just got to have more accountability than that.

Sorry but no. He got fired because he was part of the chain of command that this went through and got shoved under the rug by. That much is documented and admitted. It is not a witch hunt. I don't understand how people can divorce themselves from reality enough to think that this was just a convenient opportunity to get rid of the guy. He tied their hands the day he found out about what went on in 2002 and didn't go directly to the authorities and continued to have Sandusky around the program... and that's assuming he was ignorant of the situation that went on before Sandusky was removed as DC in the 90s. Which isn't very plausible. Funny, but I have yet to read of or see any evidence where this was "shoved under the rug" by Paterno. That's media supposition at it's finest, as is the posting by the media and general public on boards and blogs all over the internet about how he must have been thinking about his reputation/wins/legacy versus the safety of those kids. Sandusky had never been arrested for, nor charged with nor found guilty of any sort of crime (and still hasn't), so how exactly do you justify cutting off all ties with the person based on second hand accounts and hearsay? It's not as if Paterno actually witnessed anything that would have made what you are purporting he do - completely block access to all campus facilitys/programs etc,- actionable without putting the university and himself at risk (and even had he done so, there is zero evidence that it would have prevented Sandusky from continuing to molest children). Did JoePa know about what happened in the shower involving his former staff member? yes, he himself admitted that to a grand jury. Did he report it directly to the police? No. There you go. He's not being charged with a crime because he did not lie about that. That doesn't mean the workplace where this was swept under the rug, by the people that this was known by, needs him to be charged with a crime to see that it was a huge problem. By not being immediately turned over to police it was a problem and that was compounded by having the man accused still around the program. His inaction and those of his direct superiors (which is laughable at penn state) enabled a child rapist. Get that through your head. Everyone involved needs to be and will be canned whether they are facing indictments or not. They taint the entire institution if you allow them to remain. He's not being charged with a crime because he did nothing wrong - he reported it to the "authorities" in charge of his institution (which is how the law/statute is worded... although I imagine that the statute may be amended to rid itself of such ambiguity in the future), not because he didn't lie about it to the grand jury - if the Grand Jury thought he was lying they would have charged him with perjury as they did with Schultz and Curely.. but they didn't, which seems to point to and support the fact that Paterno's testimony that he was unaware of the specifics of what took place in the shower is the truth. I've read the Grand Jury's report and honestly, based upon what's in there, Paterno is, at this time and until any evidence is produced to refute it.... innocent of wrong doing. If you want to talk about inaction, how about the detectives who dropped an investigation at the bequest of Penn State Campus Police, an AG/Head of Police that decided not to file charges, a mother who worked with the police to tape phone conversations but didn't pursue it when the police dropped it, the executives of Second Mile who were apparently informed several times about possible issues but did nothing, Shultz and Curely who did nothing... there was a whole lot of failure going on here by not only Penn State officials but by local and county law enforcement, school coaches and officials and other various authorities. The victims were let down at every single level by every person who should have protected them but to pin the majority of the blame on Paterno and say that it was Paterno who enabled and apparently by way of inaction, condoned, Sandusky's actions is a ridiculous. Could he have done more? Given the information we have now, it appears to be obvious he could have. But he didn't have all of this information, he had an apparently vague report of some sort of sexual misconduct between a former employee and a child, which he had already reported a required by law and "morality". Paterno is the "big name" goat being sacrificed to overshadow the rest of the stuff in the background.. it will be interesting to see where this case goes with regard to the public's interest in the case now that the "blood" we've all been calling for has been shed. Wrong. So wrong. McQueary told him what happened in excruciating detail. Show me in the indictment or in the testimonies of those involved where anyone says Paterno was told in full detail what happened in that shower. Don't you think that the Grand Jury would have indicted Paterno as well if Mcqueary (sp) had testified differently? Because that what happened with Schultz and Curley.

Are you kidding me? You must be a PSU fan. Just because you didn't break the law doesn't mean you didn't do anything wrong. He did the absolute bare minimum from a legal standpoint, but given this situation, EVERYBODY (not just a head football coach) should be held to a higher standard. His cowardly inaction enabled Sandusky to roam freely to molest other innocent children, and Paterno KNEW that was the case (or he was in denial about it, which doesn't make it better). If your argument is really that he didn't break the law, or that lots of other people were wrong too, then get your head out of the sand. Paterno screwed up in a huge way, and he deserves everything coming down the pipe at him (which by the way, is not jail-time. Just unemployment and shame). Not a Penn State fan at all, just not a fan of being led around by my nose by the media. The majority of what I've seen posted by media and in comments around the web is by people who are angry and start "reading" between the lines and filling in the blanks with "facts" that don't exist and then using those "facts" to stir up others into mindless frenzies. My argument is that Paterno, based upon what we currently know is factual, is the legally and morally innocent, he did what he was supposed to do. The fact that you or I wanted him to have done more doesn't make him morally bankrupt, it just makes us disappointed and mad that someone we elevated to and recognized as a "godlike" epitome of perfection failed to live up to our expectations, so know we're tearing down our idols to him and smearing his name. He's not my idol. He can go to hell for all I care. And morally he's innocent? Really? Even after he was told by McQueary that Sandusky was seen sodomizing a 10-year old boy in the showers, and simply dumped it off to his superiors and left it at that? Even after Sandusky brought boys to bowl games? Even after Sandusky had overnight camps with boys? And he's morally innocent. My ass. As the leading face of that institution, he's got more of an obligation to report such a heinous crime.