FC: Private discussions about naming the field at Beaver Stadium

gslachta

Well-known member
May 16, 2023
230
387
135
Terrific post! I admit i never thought of that .... i just get depressed knowing Paterno did NOTHING wrong yet is vilified by the press, public, and even ignorant PSU supporters and Alumni. If Rod Erickson can have his name on a building, JoePa deserves his name on the field, and also everything your post proposes!
Actually, I would go a step further and remove Ericksonā€™s name off the building. His actions measurably cost the University 200 million + . Wouldnā€™t that be nice money to have now for the students and faculty.
 
Oct 31, 2021
65
78
18
Maybe it's just me, but I never liked the naming of the field separate from the stadium. It's like..."we ran out of places to name after football people, so this is the best we can do". Does anybody really give a crap about General Beaver? He already has a main road and a building anyway. After the remodel, change it to Paterno Stadium.
Let's see James A. Beaver served his country and his state with great distinction during the bloodiest conflict our state and nation has ever seen. He was wounded in multiple battles but continued to return to serve until I believe he lost his leg. He then went on to serve as governor and president of the university, but yeah who gives a crap about him. After all he's not on Tik Tok. You know who would give a crap about honoring and maintaining the memory of someone with these credentials... Joseph V. Paterno. SMH.
 

BobPSU92

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
17,676
26,682
113
Actually, that has been attempted - but was rebuffed.

Barry, what the hell happened on Friday? Did Lubrano spring the JoePa field naming resolution on the board without consulting with the other alumni-elected trustees ahead of time? I imagine he did not expect Jay to request that the resolution be tabled.

And what was Short going on about? Is he, as a former player, overly protective of JoePaā€™s legacy or does he have a beef with Lubrano specifically? I could see someone, in principle, using JoePaā€™s legacy for ā€œpolitical gainā€, whatever that means to Short specifically, but does he have a legitimate concern with respect to Lubranoā€™s resolution?

As an outsider, I found what happened on Friday to be, letā€™s just say, odd. Frankly, I expected the resolution to go to a vote and get shot down.
 

doctornick

Active member
Oct 12, 2021
365
483
63
Barry, what the hell happened on Friday? Did Lubrano spring the JoePa field naming resolution on the board without consulting with the other alumni-elected trustees ahead of time? I imagine he did not expect Jay to request that the resolution be tabled.

And what was Short going on about? Is he, as a former player, overly protective of JoePaā€™s legacy or does he have a beef with Lubrano specifically? I could see someone, in principle, using JoePaā€™s legacy for ā€œpolitical gainā€, whatever that means to Short specifically, but does he have a legitimate concern with respect to Lubranoā€™s resolution?

As an outsider, I found what happened on Friday to be, letā€™s just say, odd. Frankly, I expected the resolution to go to a vote and get shot down.

From my outsider prospective, this looks to me like those folks actually were being coordinated in presenting this and the goal was to get it "out there" without getting a vote and shot down. The leak to the media also seemed to be in that that vein. I can't say to what end or how they want this to play out, but I'm skeptical it was as disorganized as it may seem.
 

PSUSignore

Well-known member
Oct 25, 2021
899
1,514
93
Barry, what the hell happened on Friday? Did Lubrano spring the JoePa field naming resolution on the board without consulting with the other alumni-elected trustees ahead of time? I imagine he did not expect Jay to request that the resolution be tabled.

And what was Short going on about? Is he, as a former player, overly protective of JoePaā€™s legacy or does he have a beef with Lubrano specifically? I could see someone, in principle, using JoePaā€™s legacy for ā€œpolitical gainā€, whatever that means to Short specifically, but does he have a legitimate concern with respect to Lubranoā€™s resolution?

As an outsider, I found what happened on Friday to be, letā€™s just say, odd. Frankly, I expected the resolution to go to a vote and get shot down.
Seemed to me like Lubrano and Jay worked together to bring it up on the record in order to enable Jay to give his preplanned speech and little else. I also noticed that Jay was happy to include a shot at Franklin's program's APR in his speech. Then Jay asked to table it because like Lubrano, he knew from the get go it was going to fail by a large margin anyway. The whole thing seemed like a dog and pony show and I think that's what Short likely took exception to.
 

ChandlerPearce

Well-known member
Jan 23, 2022
1,171
1,794
113
BoT still comprised of scum.
It just seems odd that nearly everyone EXCEPT PSU BOT and ESPN has come to the conclusion that Joe was vilified. Seems the more the BOT pushes to NOT honor Joe the more they show their hand that they know the Sandusky scandal was more about jealousy and retribution. I honestly feel the BOT needs a seminar about the scandal and how many parts and players were fabricated and dishonest.
 

GrimReaper

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
6,419
8,872
113
Seemed to me like Lubrano and Jay worked together to bring it up on the record in order to enable Jay to give his preplanned speech and little else. I also noticed that Jay was happy to include a shot at Franklin's program's APR in his speech. Then Jay asked to table it because like Lubrano, he knew from the get go it was going to fail by a large margin anyway. The whole thing seemed like a dog and pony show and I think that's what Short likely took exception to.
Speaking of "Franklin's program's APR" we were told in no uncertain terms that it was reported in error and that it would be corrected. Anyone see the revision?
 

Nitt1300

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
5,162
9,809
113
Speaking of "Franklin's program's APR" we were told in no uncertain terms that it was reported in error and that it would be corrected. Anyone see the revision?
They hired the guy who does appraisals for Trump
 
  • Haha
Reactions: LB99

BW Lion

Well-known member
Oct 14, 2021
3,103
2,436
113
@BW Lion You'd relish that day. You once paid homage to her with your handle. Still. We never really got the inside scoop on the cabana escapades.
Itā€™s a long story, but her rack is ā€¦ šŸ˜

I suspect it would be identity-exposing and perhaps illegal for me to share intimate photos from my phone, so this is the best I can share at present
1708574146909.png
 
Last edited:

MacNit

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
1,332
1,265
113
As much as I would love to see the University honor Joe, I also love how Penn State honors traditions and doesn't follow the latest fads....uniforms, stadium naming rights, names on jerseys (usually :) ).
Penn State plays football in Beaver Stadium.

Something tells me if Joe were alive, he'd feel the same way.

Paterno Field, or as someone else mentioned, Paterno Way would be the way to go IMHO.
Joe is no fad.

He made the football program (and to a large degree Penn State) what it is.

Both have visibly declined since he left the stage.
 

MacNit

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
1,332
1,265
113
On a related note, notice they have not issued any resolutions to remove Joe's name from the library?
This is an excellent point.

Want to know why PSU has gone downhill since Joe left the scene? This says a lot. Gutless/clueless/rudderless leadership.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psuro

MacNit

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
1,332
1,265
113
Barry, what the hell happened on Friday? Did Lubrano spring the JoePa field naming resolution on the board without consulting with the other alumni-elected trustees ahead of time? I imagine he did not expect Jay to request that the resolution be tabled.

And what was Short going on about? Is he, as a former player, overly protective of JoePaā€™s legacy or does he have a beef with Lubrano specifically? I could see someone, in principle, using JoePaā€™s legacy for ā€œpolitical gainā€, whatever that means to Short specifically, but does he have a legitimate concern with respect to Lubranoā€™s resolution?

As an outsider, I found what happened on Friday to be, letā€™s just say, odd. Frankly, I expected the resolution to go to a vote and get shot down.
Brandon has been a huge disappointment.

He owes so much to Joe (just ask people in his former neighborhood).
 

Midnighter

Well-known member
Oct 7, 2021
9,852
15,702
113
I may have missed something - supposedly this was proposed by Lubrano and then tabled after an objection from Jay, which we're led to believe was intentional to just get the idea out there to measure reaction. Did Jay have a substantive reason for rejecting the proposal? Or not?
 

GrimReaper

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
6,419
8,872
113
I may have missed something - supposedly this was proposed by Lubrano and then tabled after an objection from Jay, which we're led to believe was intentional to just get the idea out there to measure reaction. Did Jay have a substantive reason for rejecting the proposal? Or not?
Jay's reasoning was that undertaking this would detract from other important initiatives that Neeli is pushing. Maybe, but I think Jay is full of shlt.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Midnighter

PSU87

Well-known member
Oct 12, 2021
1,703
3,495
113
Joe is no fad.

He made the football program (and to a large degree Penn State) what it is.

Both have visibly declined since he left the stage.
So from my post you got "Joe is a fad"
SMH
 
Get unlimited access today.

Pick the right plan for you.

Already a member? Login