Nebraska vs. Penn State

[sd'sker]

will psu be distracted with this insane scandal overwhelming the media?

 

 

 

 

I can't imagine they won't be.

 

I feel for the fans because they had nothing to do with it.

 

If you're a PSU fan how are you excited to make the trek to Happy Valley this Saturday? I wouldn't be.

 

I'd be embarrassed for my school and a little depressed that something like this could happen.

if a lot of them are catholics, it will not be anything new.

I assume you thought that comment was cute or humorous when you typed it?

If your goal was to offend Catholics, I think you probably succeeded.

 

Yeah, I think it's too soon for the jokes. And as a non-practicing half-Catholic, I'm not bothered by the jab (as it's deserved), insomuch that this thing is less than a week old and we're already forgetting the victims in this.

 

I'm not going to pull a Matt Millen, but I am a wee bit concerned.

i am only concerned for the children. maybe i should not have made a joke, but it was hardly a joke. there is a serious problem with society and humanity when major institutions continue to let this happen. the two scandals are shocking similar. like i said, i typed it tongue-in-cheek not expecting this to be about anything and not being an indictment on catholics. but i am still upset at how the catholic church dealt with their scandal and it is happening again right before our eyes at a college. to read the grand jury report, it is surreal anyone could let this happen. how does such a clear moral wrong get systemically ignored and covered-up?

[sd'sker]

will psu be distracted with this insane scandal overwhelming the media?

 

 

 

 

I can't imagine they won't be.

 

I feel for the fans because they had nothing to do with it.

 

If you're a PSU fan how are you excited to make the trek to Happy Valley this Saturday? I wouldn't be.

 

I'd be embarrassed for my school and a little depressed that something like this could happen.

if a lot of them are catholics, it will not be anything new.

I assume you thought that comment was cute or humorous when you typed it?

If your goal was to offend Catholics, I think you probably succeeded.

good, it was my goal. but i really don't care about catholics in general, just the ones complicit in child abuse and the insane cover-up. i am sure you are impressed with yourself for feigning indignation and implying to maintain the moral superiority, but anyone who could remain in an organization responsible for such egregious atrocities and corruption is beyond me.

 

finally, please do not address me as a child, do not try to make me feel guilty or rotten for my comments. why should i feel bad for acknowledging the crimes of others. the statement was accurate if it was anything. why should not catholics be offended by the actions of their leaders? they should be abjectly humiliated. you can be disgusted in my comment, but i find it much more disgusting to redirect anger at me and ignore the fact that the church still has not rectified its wrongs, they have barely acknowledged they have committed their transgressions.

 

i may have made my statement in jest, but i find sexual abuse against minors profusely unforgivable. and anyone involved or who acquiesce by not standing against it or separating themselves from the entities involved are equally unforgivable.

How's the weather up there on your pedestal? You assume so many things about me and others that are so completely wrong that it would be funny if it wasn't apparently so real. I addressed you as a child? Feigned indignation? Implied moral superiority? I'm not offended by the actions of some in the church? I don't stand against sexual abuse? If you can't refrain from reading things that are not actually on the page in front of you, you might possibly need some professional help.

first, it's cold up here. second, you are right, i went on a rant that overreached the limits of your response. but, then, what were you getting at with your comment? you asked if i thought it was cute or funny? would you care to elaborate on your original response and explain to me how you wanted to make me feel when you typed it?

 

i said something accurate, even if tongue in cheek, and you reply sternly about me being cute and offending catholics. it felt like a lecture and i did not care for it. again, i do not think i said anything inaccurate, it was just misdirected. but in fairness, i was defending my comment that you were attacking.

I didn't want you to feel any particular way. I wanted you to think about what you were saying. It didn't strike me as an appropriate time to take a cheap shot at any group of people unless that group is a very finite collection of actual child molesters or direct enablers. No one can argue that the Catholic church has not had way more than it's share of these types of scandals. But to then go on and claim that people who have not distanced themselves from the organization are somehow culpable and not opposed to those actions is highly inaccurate and destructive. If nobody sticks around to see that positive changes are made within the organization, who will? JoePa basically distanced himself from the problem and we see how well that helped the future victims. And, yes, as a Catholic myself, who is very disturbed and opposed to the actions of some of these priests and clergy and the slow and lacking response from the powers that be, your comments offended me. There are a few issues where a person may want to think twice about what they are implying about other people. Child molestation would be one of those issues.

fair enough. we seem to only be in disagreement about whether the comment should have been made or not. i feel bad for members of the catholic church, because what are they to do, but somewhere up the chain of command there should have been some accountable group holding the one liable responsible. i am not sure if i intended to offend you or not, i really do not have problems with catholics in general. but in the heat of it, my point was that what i say, accurately, offends you, even though it is accurate, when all i was doing was not letting people forget about past atrocities that still have not been rectified. in that way, i think i have more right to be offended.

 

nonetheless, i really do not want to create an enemy. i think clarity is more important than agreement, and i now understand your position and hope we can let this go. good day sir, and gbr.

[JJ Husker]

will psu be distracted with this insane scandal overwhelming the media?

 

 

 

 

I can't imagine they won't be.

 

I feel for the fans because they had nothing to do with it.

 

If you're a PSU fan how are you excited to make the trek to Happy Valley this Saturday? I wouldn't be.

 

I'd be embarrassed for my school and a little depressed that something like this could happen.

if a lot of them are catholics, it will not be anything new.

I assume you thought that comment was cute or humorous when you typed it?

If your goal was to offend Catholics, I think you probably succeeded.

good, it was my goal. but i really don't care about catholics in general, just the ones complicit in child abuse and the insane cover-up. i am sure you are impressed with yourself for feigning indignation and implying to maintain the moral superiority, but anyone who could remain in an organization responsible for such egregious atrocities and corruption is beyond me.

 

finally, please do not address me as a child, do not try to make me feel guilty or rotten for my comments. why should i feel bad for acknowledging the crimes of others. the statement was accurate if it was anything. why should not catholics be offended by the actions of their leaders? they should be abjectly humiliated. you can be disgusted in my comment, but i find it much more disgusting to redirect anger at me and ignore the fact that the church still has not rectified its wrongs, they have barely acknowledged they have committed their transgressions.

 

i may have made my statement in jest, but i find sexual abuse against minors profusely unforgivable. and anyone involved or who acquiesce by not standing against it or separating themselves from the entities involved are equally unforgivable.

How's the weather up there on your pedestal? You assume so many things about me and others that are so completely wrong that it would be funny if it wasn't apparently so real. I addressed you as a child? Feigned indignation? Implied moral superiority? I'm not offended by the actions of some in the church? I don't stand against sexual abuse? If you can't refrain from reading things that are not actually on the page in front of you, you might possibly need some professional help.

first, it's cold up here. second, you are right, i went on a rant that overreached the limits of your response. but, then, what were you getting at with your comment? you asked if i thought it was cute or funny? would you care to elaborate on your original response and explain to me how you wanted to make me feel when you typed it?

 

i said something accurate, even if tongue in cheek, and you reply sternly about me being cute and offending catholics. it felt like a lecture and i did not care for it. again, i do not think i said anything inaccurate, it was just misdirected. but in fairness, i was defending my comment that you were attacking.

I didn't want you to feel any particular way. I wanted you to think about what you were saying. It didn't strike me as an appropriate time to take a cheap shot at any group of people unless that group is a very finite collection of actual child molesters or direct enablers. No one can argue that the Catholic church has not had way more than it's share of these types of scandals. But to then go on and claim that people who have not distanced themselves from the organization are somehow culpable and not opposed to those actions is highly inaccurate and destructive. If nobody sticks around to see that positive changes are made within the organization, who will? JoePa basically distanced himself from the problem and we see how well that helped the future victims. And, yes, as a Catholic myself, who is very disturbed and opposed to the actions of some of these priests and clergy and the slow and lacking response from the powers that be, your comments offended me. There are a few issues where a person may want to think twice about what they are implying about other people. Child molestation would be one of those issues.

fair enough. we seem to only be in disagreement about whether the comment should have been made or not. i feel bad for members of the catholic church, because what are they to do, but somewhere up the chain of command there should have been some accountable group holding the one liable responsible. i am not sure if i intended to offend you or not, i really do not have problems with catholics in general. but in the heat of it, my point was that what i say, accurately, offends you, even though it is accurate, when all i was doing was not letting people forget about past atrocities that still have not been rectified. in that way, i think i have more right to be offended.

 

nonetheless, i really do not want to create an enemy. i think clarity is more important than agreement, and i now understand your position and hope we can let this go. good day sir, and gbr.

No problem. Nothing that would keep me from having a beer with you.

[sd'sker]

will psu be distracted with this insane scandal overwhelming the media?

 

 

 

 

I can't imagine they won't be.

 

I feel for the fans because they had nothing to do with it.

 

If you're a PSU fan how are you excited to make the trek to Happy Valley this Saturday? I wouldn't be.

 

I'd be embarrassed for my school and a little depressed that something like this could happen.

if a lot of them are catholics, it will not be anything new.

I assume you thought that comment was cute or humorous when you typed it?

If your goal was to offend Catholics, I think you probably succeeded.

good, it was my goal. but i really don't care about catholics in general, just the ones complicit in child abuse and the insane cover-up. i am sure you are impressed with yourself for feigning indignation and implying to maintain the moral superiority, but anyone who could remain in an organization responsible for such egregious atrocities and corruption is beyond me.

 

finally, please do not address me as a child, do not try to make me feel guilty or rotten for my comments. why should i feel bad for acknowledging the crimes of others. the statement was accurate if it was anything. why should not catholics be offended by the actions of their leaders? they should be abjectly humiliated. you can be disgusted in my comment, but i find it much more disgusting to redirect anger at me and ignore the fact that the church still has not rectified its wrongs, they have barely acknowledged they have committed their transgressions.

 

i may have made my statement in jest, but i find sexual abuse against minors profusely unforgivable. and anyone involved or who acquiesce by not standing against it or separating themselves from the entities involved are equally unforgivable.

How's the weather up there on your pedestal? You assume so many things about me and others that are so completely wrong that it would be funny if it wasn't apparently so real. I addressed you as a child? Feigned indignation? Implied moral superiority? I'm not offended by the actions of some in the church? I don't stand against sexual abuse? If you can't refrain from reading things that are not actually on the page in front of you, you might possibly need some professional help.

first, it's cold up here. second, you are right, i went on a rant that overreached the limits of your response. but, then, what were you getting at with your comment? you asked if i thought it was cute or funny? would you care to elaborate on your original response and explain to me how you wanted to make me feel when you typed it?

 

i said something accurate, even if tongue in cheek, and you reply sternly about me being cute and offending catholics. it felt like a lecture and i did not care for it. again, i do not think i said anything inaccurate, it was just misdirected. but in fairness, i was defending my comment that you were attacking.

I didn't want you to feel any particular way. I wanted you to think about what you were saying. It didn't strike me as an appropriate time to take a cheap shot at any group of people unless that group is a very finite collection of actual child molesters or direct enablers. No one can argue that the Catholic church has not had way more than it's share of these types of scandals. But to then go on and claim that people who have not distanced themselves from the organization are somehow culpable and not opposed to those actions is highly inaccurate and destructive. If nobody sticks around to see that positive changes are made within the organization, who will? JoePa basically distanced himself from the problem and we see how well that helped the future victims. And, yes, as a Catholic myself, who is very disturbed and opposed to the actions of some of these priests and clergy and the slow and lacking response from the powers that be, your comments offended me. There are a few issues where a person may want to think twice about what they are implying about other people. Child molestation would be one of those issues.

fair enough. we seem to only be in disagreement about whether the comment should have been made or not. i feel bad for members of the catholic church, because what are they to do, but somewhere up the chain of command there should have been some accountable group holding the one liable responsible. i am not sure if i intended to offend you or not, i really do not have problems with catholics in general. but in the heat of it, my point was that what i say, accurately, offends you, even though it is accurate, when all i was doing was not letting people forget about past atrocities that still have not been rectified. in that way, i think i have more right to be offended.

 

nonetheless, i really do not want to create an enemy. i think clarity is more important than agreement, and i now understand your position and hope we can let this go. good day sir, and gbr.

No problem. Nothing that would keep me from having a beer with you.

sounds good brother-man. i know i can be acerbic, and it is easier for people to put me in my place or challenge me on a message board than in person. the crazy thing is i still do not think i was wrong, but nor were you. complex, unpleasant issues. glad all is good.

 

(full disclosure, i too am catholic)

[IlliniHusker]

JoePa announced his retirement at the end of the season. He reportedly talked to the PSU team for about 20 minutes then broke down crying. The team gave him a standing ovation. SO - this is the senior's last home game AND JoePa's last home game. Gee, will they go all out and try to win the last one for JoePa in front of their home fans?

I think we are in a world of hurt! My only hope is that their emotions are so high they get penalized a lot and try things they can't execute.

[Husker_in_Tarheel_land]

Well the poor performing Nitty Lions offense did score 34 on Northwestern and win that game. That being said it's their defense that is going to win this game for them. Their defense in my opinion is the best in the B1G. Other then LSU they are the only team to hold Alabama below 30 points. That and the Offense was able to put up the second most amount of points against Alabama this year.

 

I have a feeling that our offense is going to have a very hard time moving the ball on PSU. So far our D hasn't shown me anything special. The MSU game we won not because we beat MSU and our defense stopped MSU. It was because MSU imploded after having all those high profile match ups with OSU, UM, and Wisc and winning. If the MSU team that played in those games had shown up we'd be sitting here with 3 loses right now.

 

PSU is going to score on our D plain and simple despite how "bad" they are. Our O is going to struggle unless Martinez suddenly becomes a passing threat, as PSU has shown they can stop national title contender running teams (Alabama). Stack the box and make Martinez beat you with his aweful throwing machanic. I honest think PSU can stop our running attack. Not saying totally lights out but they will shut our running down just enough that we will have to throw to keep up.

 

That and sure PSU has a lot of distractions going on right now, but like IlliniHusker said. This is going to be Joe Pa's last home game. That is huge and that team is gonna pull out all the stops to make that last game a W imho.

 

PSU 21 NU 13

[ladyhawke]

Here are a few comments from the Big Ten Blog-ESPNU: http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten as far as player reaction to JoPa's exit from PSU:

 

JoPa to retire: "On what JoePa told the players: "He just told us he put in a letter of resignation. He thinks that would be best for Penn Sate, best for his family and best for everybody else. He doesn't want to put Penn State through a war or a fight or a media war against anybody. … He just always wants us to remember that this team will always be a team and always be together, not just for the next so many games and next year but we’ll be a team for the rest of our lives."

 

Players feelings about the game on Saturday with NU: On Saturday's game against Nebraska: "I don't really know what it's going to be like. What I do know is I’m going to be playing my last football game with some people I’ve spent five years with, people I really, really care about. We're playing for each other right now. We’re playing for all we’ve worked for in the last five years."

[sd'sker]

will psu be distracted with this insane scandal overwhelming the media?

 

 

 

 

I can't imagine they won't be.

 

I feel for the fans because they had nothing to do with it.

 

If you're a PSU fan how are you excited to make the trek to Happy Valley this Saturday? I wouldn't be.

 

I'd be embarrassed for my school and a little depressed that something like this could happen.

if a lot of them are catholics, it will not be anything new.

I assume you thought that comment was cute or humorous when you typed it?

If your goal was to offend Catholics, I think you probably succeeded.

good, it was my goal. but i really don't care about catholics in general, just the ones complicit in child abuse and the insane cover-up. i am sure you are impressed with yourself for feigning indignation and implying to maintain the moral superiority, but anyone who could remain in an organization responsible for such egregious atrocities and corruption is beyond me.

 

finally, please do not address me as a child, do not try to make me feel guilty or rotten for my comments. why should i feel bad for acknowledging the crimes of others. the statement was accurate if it was anything. why should not catholics be offended by the actions of their leaders? they should be abjectly humiliated. you can be disgusted in my comment, but i find it much more disgusting to redirect anger at me and ignore the fact that the church still has not rectified its wrongs, they have barely acknowledged they have committed their transgressions.

 

i may have made my statement in jest, but i find sexual abuse against minors profusely unforgivable. and anyone involved or who acquiesce by not standing against it or separating themselves from the entities involved are equally unforgivable.

How's the weather up there on your pedestal? You assume so many things about me and others that are so completely wrong that it would be funny if it wasn't apparently so real. I addressed you as a child? Feigned indignation? Implied moral superiority? I'm not offended by the actions of some in the church? I don't stand against sexual abuse? If you can't refrain from reading things that are not actually on the page in front of you, you might possibly need some professional help.

first, it's cold up here. second, you are right, i went on a rant that overreached the limits of your response. but, then, what were you getting at with your comment? you asked if i thought it was cute or funny? would you care to elaborate on your original response and explain to me how you wanted to make me feel when you typed it?

 

i said something accurate, even if tongue in cheek, and you reply sternly about me being cute and offending catholics. it felt like a lecture and i did not care for it. again, i do not think i said anything inaccurate, it was just misdirected. but in fairness, i was defending my comment that you were attacking.

I didn't want you to feel any particular way. I wanted you to think about what you were saying. It didn't strike me as an appropriate time to take a cheap shot at any group of people unless that group is a very finite collection of actual child molesters or direct enablers. No one can argue that the Catholic church has not had way more than it's share of these types of scandals. But to then go on and claim that people who have not distanced themselves from the organization are somehow culpable and not opposed to those actions is highly inaccurate and destructive. If nobody sticks around to see that positive changes are made within the organization, who will? JoePa basically distanced himself from the problem and we see how well that helped the future victims. And, yes, as a Catholic myself, who is very disturbed and opposed to the actions of some of these priests and clergy and the slow and lacking response from the powers that be, your comments offended me. There are a few issues where a person may want to think twice about what they are implying about other people. Child molestation would be one of those issues.

fair enough. we seem to only be in disagreement about whether the comment should have been made or not. i feel bad for members of the catholic church, because what are they to do, but somewhere up the chain of command there should have been some accountable group holding the one liable responsible. i am not sure if i intended to offend you or not, i really do not have problems with catholics in general. but in the heat of it, my point was that what i say, accurately, offends you, even though it is accurate, when all i was doing was not letting people forget about past atrocities that still have not been rectified. in that way, i think i have more right to be offended.

 

nonetheless, i really do not want to create an enemy. i think clarity is more important than agreement, and i now understand your position and hope we can let this go. good day sir, and gbr.

No problem. Nothing that would keep me from having a beer with you.

you seem to have gotten under my skin, as i have been thinking about this a lot. if i had to do it over again, after you asked if i was being cute, i should have said the following: i was not attempting a joke, even though i may have inadvertently phrased it as such. i was just making a statement of fact. unfortunately a large group of us are already all too familiar with such atrocities. it was not a dig at catholics, just an unfortunately true statement. society needs to do a better job of protecting its children and it starts with those who have the power to force change.

[AustinHuskr]

As it stands right now we're a BCS long shot: 10 spots, 6 AQ's. We're not even sitting in a good spot if we win the B1GC so winning Sat is an absolute must

 

The media has already pegged us in to the Cap1 or Gator bowls playing either UF or KSU! Wow.

 

From B1GC favorite to this.

[AustinHuskr]

Someone explain to me how we intend to stop PSU's run game with 3 DT's? Don't know much about that Thompson guy who just moved from OL but it doesn't look good at all.

 

I have a feeling it's going to be a long ugly night in Scandal Valley.

[kchusker_chris]

As it stands right now we're a BCS long shot: 10 spots, 6 AQ's. We're not even sitting in a good spot if we win the B1GC so winning Sat is an absolute must

 

The media has already pegged us in to the Cap1 or Gator bowls playing either UF or KSU! Wow.

 

From B1GC favorite to this.

you realize the winner goes to the Rose Bowl (hint: that's a BCS game)

 

EDIT: and I don't remember us being this overwhelming B1GC favorite - that distinction has been (for good reason) the Badgers since this summer. We were favored in our division for a few weeks there after Ohio State's issues.

[kchusker_chris]

Someone explain to me how we intend to stop PSU's run game with 3 DT's? Don't know much about that Thompson guy who just moved from OL but it doesn't look good at all.

 

I have a feeling it's going to be a long ugly night in Scandal Valley.

because only 2 need to be on the field at a time.

[AustinHuskr]

Someone explain to me how we intend to stop PSU's run game with 3 DT's? Don't know much about that Thompson guy who just moved from OL but it doesn't look good at all.

 

I have a feeling it's going to be a long ugly night in Scandal Valley.

because only 2 need to be on the field at a time.

Brilliant.

 

I didn't think I needed to state the obvious (bec. I already mentioned 4 DT's incl. Thompson), so here goes: how do we intend to stop PSU's run game with 3 DT's in the rotation?

[kchusker_chris]

Someone explain to me how we intend to stop PSU's run game with 3 DT's? Don't know much about that Thompson guy who just moved from OL but it doesn't look good at all.

 

I have a feeling it's going to be a long ugly night in Scandal Valley.

because only 2 need to be on the field at a time.

Brilliant.

 

I didn't think I needed to state the obvious, so here goes: how do we intend to stop PSU's run game with 3 DT's in the rotation?

i am guessing 1 or more of the 11 defenders on the field will need to tackle the ball carrier...?...

[Blackshirt96]

Someone explain to me how we intend to stop PSU's run game with 3 DT's? Don't know much about that Thompson guy who just moved from OL but it doesn't look good at all.

 

I have a feeling it's going to be a long ugly night in Scandal Valley.

because only 2 need to be on the field at a time.

Brilliant.

 

I didn't think I needed to state the obvious, so here goes: how do we intend to stop PSU's run game with 3 DT's in the rotation?

DE - DT - DT - DE

 

& one DT rotating in. Seems pretty self explanatory to me.