If Tom Bradley were hired as DC...

If Tom Bradley is hired as DC...

  • Welcome him with open arms, he's a great DC.

    Votes: 78 89.7%

  • Boycott Iowa football because Bradley is linked to the PSU scandal.

    Votes: 9 10.3%
  • Total voters
    87
01-18-2012 06:33 PMJakeTheDog
Just ridiculous to assume that everyone and anyone involved with the Penn State program is somehow a Sandusky sympathizer. Bradley would be a tremendous hire.

CORRECT
 
DwayneTwill said:
Imagine if he were hired at Iowa State or Wisconsin or Illinois.
Click to expand...

I would think they are getting a heckuva coach. Seriously, this guy was going to be the next headcoach of PSU and we might get him at a bargain price for DC.

I hate the situation at PSU as much as everyone, but I don't hold every person to ever be around the program responsible until there is reason to think otherwise.
 
Out of 6 dissenting votes, we have 2 ISU fans, tweeter's misclick, haiku man and two others. Looking pretty good, now just announce it. :)
 
Let's see...if this was a business example...would I hire a guy into my business to be a high profile figure that while employed recently at another business may have known that a pedophile - child rapist - was amongst the team, kids in a charity, the children of players and coaches, and did not report it or leave the program. Get real - it damn near makes me sick to my stomach. Why risk possible damage to my business down the road as the investigation transpires and will include more and more people who knew what was happening when it is not necessary. Bad culture at Penn State - that is why they need to completely start over which they are starting to do with their new head coach. The Hawkeyes can do better and will.
 
I would feel much differently had Bradley been a superior to Sandusky. But he was not so it is more than likely he would not have had any information on what happened. The ones that had knowledge of this kept quiet about it in order to protect Paterno and the PSU football program.
 
Well Penn State is not completely starting over, their new head coach is keeping some of the assistant coaches like Larry Johnson Sr.
 
For the sanctimonious folks who seemingly would like to cordon off the entire state of Pennsylvania, I'm going to out on a limb here and suggest that at one time in your lives, you may have known or worked with someone whose private moral code wasn't at all what it appeared to be. Should you also be barred from future employment, just because you knew a bad person (even if you didn't know it at the time)?

Sandusky was the monster in this case, as was anyone who covered for him. To suggest, though, that everyone who ever crossed paths with him is somehow guilty by association is ludicrous and hypocritical. If KF feels the Bradley is the best candidate, then he'll deserve to be judged on his own job performance and character alone.
 
zedsdeadbaby said:
Let's see...if this was a business example...would I hire a guy into my business to be a high profile figure that while employed recently at another business may have known that a pedophile - child rapist - was amongst the team, kids in a charity, the children of players and coaches, and did not report it or leave the program. Get real - it damn near makes me sick to my stomach. Why risk possible damage to my business down the road as the investigation transpires and will include more and more people who knew what was happening when it is not necessary. Bad culture at Penn State - that is why they need to completely start over which they are starting to do with their new head coach. The Hawkeyes can do better and will.
Click to expand...

1. Please provide some shred of evidence that Bradley knew what was going on. And "well, he was at PSU at the same time" isn't evidence. It's a judgment, and a bad one at that.

2. This sentence from you:

"Bad culture at Penn State - that is why they need to completely start over which they are starting to do with their new head coach."

Let's see, if the culture is that bad, wouldn't you think the new HC would clean house? Because he didn't, he kept two key assistants under Paterno on staff.


If KF were to hire Bradley, it would be a brilliant move.
 
cjhawks said:
1. Please provide some shred of evidence that Bradley knew what was going on. And "well, he was at PSU at the same time" isn't evidence. It's a judgment, and a bad one at that.

2. This sentence from you:

"Bad culture at Penn State - that is why they need to completely start over which they are starting to do with their new head coach."

Let's see, if the culture is that bad, wouldn't you think the new HC would clean house? Because he didn't, he kept two key assistants under Paterno on staff.


If KF were to hire Bradley, it would be a brilliant move.
Click to expand...


1. seemed there were plenty of people at ole PSU that knew about it for at least 12 years that didn't do anything about it or just turned the other cheek. Would it be that big of a shock to come out that person A or person B, C, D, E, F, etc. knew about it as well and didn't do anything?

2. Horrible choice by the new HC and the people in charge at PSU for not cleaning house, I think if the new coach would have been able to take over the program from day one it might have been different.

"If KF were to hire Bradley it would be a brillant move."

That's your opinion just as those of us that think hiring Bradley would be to big a risk.

Look I have said a million times that Bradley and any other coach or person around the program could have had no knowledge of what was going on (which I find very hard to believe they at least hadn't heard about rumors but I still say it's possible) that said until all of the investigation and trials are finished is it worth the risk????

What happens if Bradley becomes a witness in a civil lawsuit against the school, Sandusky, or JoePa? Is that good for the U of I?

I am pretty much done with this topic I think Bradley would be an AMAZING hire 2 or 3 years from now but with still too many unanswered questions in Happy Valley I think it's too big of a risk at this point in time.
 
hoffahawk said:
1. seemed there were plenty of people at ole PSU that knew about it for at least 12 years that didn't do anything about it or just turned the other cheek. Would it be that big of a shock to come out that person A or person B, C, D, E, F, etc. knew about it as well and didn't do anything?

2. Horrible choice by the new HC and the people in charge at PSU for not cleaning house, I think if the new coach would have been able to take over the program from day one it might have been different.

"If KF were to hire Bradley it would be a brillant move."

That's your opinion just as those of us that think hiring Bradley would be to big a risk.

Look I have said a million times that Bradley and any other coach or person around the program could have had no knowledge of what was going on (which I find very hard to believe they at least hadn't heard about rumors but I still say it's possible) that said until all of the investigation and trials are finished is it worth the risk????

What happens if Bradley becomes a witness in a civil lawsuit against the school, Sandusky, or JoePa? Is that good for the U of I?

I am pretty much done with this topic I think Bradley would be an AMAZING hire 2 or 3 years from now but with still too many unanswered questions in Happy Valley I think it's too big of a risk at this point in time.
Click to expand...

You nailed it Hoffa. It is about risk and looking the guy in the eye and getting an answer from him about knowledge. I am not sure how much more housecleaning can take place when the PSU prez/some board of trustees down to lower level coaches are now gone. Yes some are left - but if you subscribe to that logic - why didn't Bradley stay? I am not a betting man but would like to see the Vegas line on Ferentz hiring Bradley.
 
I have said this in an earlier thread, I would not hire anyone on the PSU staff until the conclusion of the Sandusky/PSU trials.

My opinion isn't about Bradley's ability to coach because I am sure he can and is very good at it. I base it on the unknown. I read the grand jury reports as I am sure many of you had as well. I didn't see it noted that McQueary kept this information from other coaches. Not once was it noted that he never mentioned this to anyone else on staff. What happens if in a trial setting it is found that he had mentioned this to other coaches or that Bradley had heard of indiscretions?

Most likely Bradley was unaware of what was going on at PSU. However, until trial that can't be said with any real certainty.

At this time I think Iowa should stay away from this hire.
 
Bradley was not kept because the new coach didn't want him. for those that can't follow this Bradlet would cause a conflict with him being the Interim HC, if you are a player you might be tempted to follow Bradley if there was any kind of team dispute. the best way to avoid a possible team split is to let go the possible competition
and if the New head coach of PSU is comfortable with retaining LJ and a couple other assitants then i feel KF if he is confident with Bradley i say hire him, as far as Norm being a yes man to KF i doubt it. he is well known for maintaining top Defense no matter where he stopped, MSU, Vanderbilt and Iowa
 
zedsdeadbaby said:
You nailed it Hoffa. It is about risk and looking the guy in the eye and getting an answer from him about knowledge. I am not sure how much more housecleaning can take place when the PSU prez/some board of trustees down to lower level coaches are now gone. Yes some are left - but if you subscribe to that logic - why didn't Bradley stay? I am not a betting man but would like to see the Vegas line on Ferentz hiring Bradley.
Click to expand...

Bradley didn't stay because he wasn't hired for the job he interviewed for - which was the HC job. And O'Brien wanted his own DC. It happens w/ coaching changes.

I completely understand what Hoffa is saying, but I am not one to tar and feather a guy based on his association with the program.

What Sandusky did was horrible, and capable by only a monster. If the entire football staff at PSU knew about it, don't you think it would have come to light earlier? If the entire football staff knew what was going on, then why are they not named in any affidavits, any testimony? Sandusky is a monster, and to do the things he did he HAD to have been very good at being secretive. The fact that he was a local legend/celebrity only helped his cause. If PSU had ANY reason to believe Tom Bradley was part of any cover up (and this goes for the assistants as well), there is no WAY they would have allowed him to finish the year as the Interim HC.

I understand those who think the hire would be a risk. What I'm annoyed by is those who immediately assume that the guy HAD to have known something. Until their is solid evidence stating that as fact, it is unfair to judge someone who, by all accounts so far, had absolutely nothing to do with the horrific crimes of Sandusky.
 
TritonHawkeye said:
I have said this in an earlier thread, I would not hire anyone on the PSU staff until the conclusion of the Sandusky/PSU trials.

My opinion isn't about Bradley's ability to coach because I am sure he can and is very good at it. I base it on the unknown. I read the grand jury reports as I am sure many of you had as well. I didn't see it noted that McQueary kept this information from other coaches. Not once was it noted that he never mentioned this to anyone else on staff. What happens if in a trial setting it is found that he had mentioned this to other coaches or that Bradley had heard of indiscretions?

Most likely Bradley was unaware of what was going on at PSU. However, until trial that can't be said with any real certainty.

At this time I think Iowa should stay away from this hire.
Click to expand...

He was never mentioned in the reports. Don't you think if he DID tell other people, they would have been mentioned in these reports? Hmm...I bet they would....
 
This Grand Jury was to determine if Sandusky had victimized children not if McQueary had spoken of the incident.

No, I don't think that would need to be in the GJ report. That is why I would wait for the trials to conclude before hiring someone from that staff.
 
Al Golden was hired at Miami by an Administration that knew the University was under an investigation and they conveniently disclosed that information from him. Just because Bradley had been at PSU for awhile, doesn't mean he was given information about Sandusky. Even if he had heard rumors what was he supposed to do? McQueery (sp?) physically witnessed a sexual act between Sandusky and a child. He then told Paterno that information. Shame on them for not doing anything about it.

However, if I heard a "rumor" that one of my coworkers might be a pedophile it's difficult to do anything with that information when you don't have any facts. It's possible Bradley heard rumors, but if he knew other members of the staff were also aware of these rumors including the head coach and University's administration and nothing was being done about it then how is he in the position to do anything? He wasn't involved in any of the allegations. He wasn't involved in witnessing anything and no one went to him to tell him what they saw.

My point is Bradley was at most an outsider in this whole mess. It's possible he heard whispers about Sandusky being a pedophile, but it's also possible he heard nothing. Even if he heard rumors, you can't prosecute someone on that. He doesn't deserve to be crucified for something that he had nothing to do with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top