How
Football Culture impacts Social Order
On
June 6th, 2012 the jury was selected for the sexual molestation
trial against Jerry Sandusky. While many
felt the trial should have been held in another county; or at least the jury selected
from another county, the judge denied this motion and all members of the jury
were selected from University Park.
Anyone who is familiar with Penn State knows that it is the consummate
college town. The jury selected in the
case is a stark acknowledgment of this fact, as 8 members were selected; one is
a retired professor, one a current professor, three are graduates, two are
employees, and one is a current student.
The most pressing question in the Sandusky trial, for me, is whether or not the
young men violated in this case can receive justice in the midst of football
culture?
I am a visual person. So, after the news broke, I needed a visual picture of how something of this magnitude could impact so many innocent children. I put this chart together to help me wrap my mind around the many opportunities available that could have prevented these sexual assaults.
My answer to the above question; Can these children receive justice in the midst of a football culture? I
believe they can.
First and foremost,
the general outrage over this case from the NCAA and members of the Penn State community offers some sign of hope. Do not let the protests against the firing of
Joe Paterno fool your perception of the case.
Jerry Sandusky is NOT Joe Paterno.
The circumstances that involved
Joe Paterno in this case is disappointing for most, however the grueling
details of the rape and molestation of these eight young boys far outweighs the
responsibility to report these actions once brought to light. The fact is, most sports fans are connected
to the overall sports program and the Head Coach. Assistant coaches are not only a virtually
unknown member of athletic programs, but are also more easily expendable when
teams are not doing well. For those not
familiar with how hiring and firing work in athletics, when a head coach is
fired, in general, the entire coaching staff is fired. This method of accountability for performance
is unique to most public and private sector hiring and firing practices in the entire
world. In general, when a head coach is
fired there will be no protest for keeping the assistant coaches on board
because most fans could not even give you their names if asked. I would not be surprised if in
the Sandusky case, had it not been reported “Penn State Assistant Coach Jerry
Sandusky”, most people would not have a clue as to who this man is/was. With media attention around the case, the
jury surely does know who he is but I believe harbors no “loyalty” to him as a "Nittany Lion" in this case. At this point,
Penn State is not on trial here, Jerry Sandusky is the man on trial.
Athletic department
cover-ups are unfortunately common placed with sport institutions. The recent Ohio State University case is another prominent example of how coaches often participate in a sort of “Don’t Ask Don’t
Tell” practice in cases that are clear violations of NCAA rules. However, I must admit, never before would I
have imagined that any football program in the country would knowingly allow
the facts of this case to persist in their program. This I would argue is probably the most egregious case of athletic department and university cover-up that has been exposed. When we begin to talk about cover-up, this is the point that Penn State will be put on trial. This fact however remains to be seen as the focus is now on Jerry Sandusky. I believe that the verdict in the Sandusky trial will heavily influence how this case will turn in the direction of Penn State and its administrative officials.
Food for Thought:
I
am most interested in learning the racial backgrounds of the young boys that
were raped and molested in this case.
This fact is important to me because it may reveal some of the reason
for how the cover-up was possible in this case.
Whether there was a racial component to the case or not, what is clear
in this case is that Sandusky took advantage of disadvantaged children. As the case discusses, all of the young men
violated in this case were participants in his charitable program. It at least begs the question of whether or
not some of the people who did nothing in this case, would have made different
decisions had all these children not come from disadvantages backgrounds. Did the administrators know these boys had no one to fight on their behalf? I guess they miscalculated when Sandusky broke protocol and began molesting a young boy who came from a two parent home. Point of information: This family was the first to call the authorities. If not for this family, the world may have never known of Sandusky crimes.
