Who is Tom Bradley? Was this the correct move?

[skinnykilmer17]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Bradley_(American_football))

It is kind of late in the season to bring someone in from outside, but didn't they need to clean house? Forfeit the season? Read his bio. Does this feel right? Another insular Penn St. lifer?

What did he know and when did he know it?

 

[skinnykilmer17]

Sorry link should work now.

 

[FromFry2Ferentz]

Best move they can make for now Id say Bradley has been at Penn St forever.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

Is there any doubt that Bradley knew about what Sandusky was doing too?

 

[skinnykilmer17]

Is there any doubt that Bradley knew about what Sandusky was doing too?

You wouldn't think so. This is why this feels strange. Don't presume the Board of Trustees really knows what it is doing. They are in reactive, damage control mode. That is such a strange isolated campus and I have a feeling there is much to be learned.

Here is a hypothetical: If Penn St. wins out they go to the Rose Bowl meaning another several weeks for reporters to continue digging and more victims coming forward. What if we learn Tom Bradley is also somehow guilty of not coming forward with information. What then?

 

[DTF]

I heard it was Tom Brady, done QB'ing for NE.

 

[Cover3]

I think assuming everybody on the staff knew about it is getting a little crazy. Word travels fast, but I doubt McQueary was opening his subsequent conversations with, "guess what I saw . . . ." I do think they need a full house-cleaning, but a long-time staffer serving as interim doesn't contradict the sentiment of firing Paterno.

 

[silvanthalas]

I think assuming everybody on the staff knew about it is getting a little crazy.

Bradley has been on the staff for 33 years. He was Sandusky's replacement at defensive coordinator and served under Sandusky.

It's crazier to think he didn't know *something* that could have also ended this long ago.

 

[bhawkn30]

He's the red head on the sidelines

 

[hawkfarmer]

1 question, i believe McQueary is still on staff correct? How is that possible?

 

[BlackerHawk]

It's hard to bring in someone new, especially a high profile coach during the middle of a season, much less a couple days prior to their next game and have them there.

The staff will likely be completely replaced and a new head coach appointed after their Bowl game.

 

[nationalchamps]

He's the red head on the sidelines

That's McQueary

 

[Billso]

1 question, i believe McQueary is still on staff correct? How is that possible?

Yes, Bradley is saying it's a "game time decision" whether McQ will coach from the sideline or the box.

I find that to be absolutely insane. I'd throw a brick at his head if I saw him. I know that would be wrong, but I have two young boys and this is visceral for me. I appreciate there is already a separate thread on that but McQ should be disciplined every bit as hard as JoePa, if not harder as he was the eyewitness.

 

[hawkinaclownhouse]

Yes, Bradley is saying it's a "game time decision" whether McQ will coach from the sideline or the box.

I find that to be absolutely insane. I'd throw a brick at his head if I saw him. I know that would be wrong, but I have two young boys and this is visceral for me. I appreciate there is already a separate thread on that but McQ should be disciplined every bit as hard as JoePa, if not harder as he was the eyewitness.

As crazy as it sounds my guess is they are scared that a lawyer could argue that McQueary should be viewed as a "whistleblower" and as such is protected by federal law against punitive actions from his employer.

 

[Billso]

You may be right... but then why doesn't JoePa also get that status? Sandusky was not his employee, remember, and he reported the incident promptly. I'm not defending Joe, I'm saying their actions are both indefensible.

 

[hawkinaclownhouse]

You may be right... but then why doesn't JoePa also get that status? Sandusky was not his employee, remember, and he reported the incident promptly. I'm not defending Joe, I'm saying their actions are both indefensible.

Could be that he is viewed as being in a position of authority (part of management) and as such I believe he would not be protected by the "whistleblower" statutes.

 

[eveningnewsteam]

These guys have been at Penn State forever. They knew everything Paterno knew and didnt do anything. Im sure Sandusky has come up in conversations. Everyone should be fired, but you cant penalize the current players, they didnt do anything.

 

[hawkinaclownhouse]

These guys have been at Penn State forever. They knew everything Paterno knew and didnt do anything. Im sure Sandusky has come up in conversations. Everyone should be fired, but you cant penalize the current players, they didnt do anything.

I will be shocked if everyone is not fired at the end of the season. Your point about not penalizing the players is precisely why Tom Bradley was appointed interim coach. This allows the team to continue the season with some consistency.

 

[silvanthalas]

As crazy as it sounds my guess is they are scared that a lawyer could argue that McQueary should be viewed as a "whistleblower" and as such is protected by federal law against punitive actions from his employer.

Can't see how that would fly. He didn't blow the whistle then, he hasn't attempted to do so over the last 9 years, so he has no right to attempt to do so now to save his own ***.

 

[Cover3]

Can't see how that would fly. He didn't blow the whistle then, he hasn't attempted to do so over the last 9 years, so he has no right to attempt to do so now to save his own ***.

Correct. Whistleblower statutes protect workers from retaliatory firing as the result of reporting employer wrongdoing. Firing McQueary for complying with an inside cover-up is quite near the other end of the spectrum.