It’s time for you to come clean about who you are and where you work, or it’s time to shut the fuck up. You’ve been grinding that axe so fucking hard you’re just standing there with the stub of a handle in your hands. It honestly sounds a lot more like jealousy than anything else at this point, like you mantra yourself to sleep at night saying “Joe Posnanski is richer and a better writer than I, but damn it, I like good music and I have my integrity.” Then a single tear wells up, slowly separates itself and falls to the pillow.

Second, the Paterno estate will locked up it litigation for years to come. Because Pos had unique access to Joe Paterno and his family in the last year or so of his life, he and his work are likely to be part of those suits. For all the armchair heroes who want him to climb up on his soapbox and noisily take a stand, have you considered how doing so might affect that litigation? The potential of the victims to recover some measure of justice and compensation? Pos and his family?

Idea! Since Craig and Joe are so tight…
Let’s start referring to them as Posattera. Or how about Calcananski?

as for the paterno stuff. wow, the vitriol from people who haven’t read the book. I am a former prosecutor, who by the time I quit was pretty done with dealing with child molestation cases. they are the saddest, most infuriating and traumatic for a prosecutor, especially if you have a young child yourself. i am not sympathetic to joe paterno even slightly, and am happy to have him rot in hell. his family with their sad efforts to repair his reputation are just making things worse (please, if you really are planning on getting involved in child abuse prevention, shouldn’t you have done it by now? instead of wasting resources on this weird, sad pr campaign that will change absolutely no one’s minds?)…. but Joe Posnanski remains a favorite writer. am i disappointed that he didn’t nail paterno to the wall? not really. there were plenty of investigative reporters doing that. and he had access to paterno because of the book contract. that kind of access doesn’t continue when you start behaving like an investigative reporter….but keeping that track open, means that we got some insight into how that powerful, single-minded man and his family got that way and how they operate and think. because i think situations like paterno’s are ripe for abuse, breed the kind of thing that happened (if it might hurt the football team, let’s keep it quiet.)(really?because football is more important than even one terrified, screaming child being violated and changed forever? go. to. hell.) and they really need to be carefully dissected to maybe possibly prevent new, similar situations.

and i am okay with posnanski staying the course a bit, because the view he had was one no one else was going to come close to providing. not someone overtly hostile, and certainly not a member of that self-deluded, ultimately dangerous family. and information and insight always helps. maybe nothing will change, since so many penn state and football fans and football programs seem to want to pretend nothing else could or should have been done by paterno and the people at penn state. but the more information on how a school and a program and a person get to that point, the better. it seems pretty obvious to me that you don’t let a football program overrule your student disciplinary program…but they do. or let a football coach try to intimidate local law enforcement and prosecutors…they do. or elevate a football program and its coaches to such a degree that a high school official tells a parent not to bring allegations, no matter how serious, against them because somehow a football program and a football coach have automatically more credibility and importance than a kid who has been obviously traumatized. but they did. apparently we collectively needed something horrific and dramatic tommake us see the worst such situations can do. posnanski’s book, no matter how it was written or what he said, was not going to repair the damage or fix the program or suddenly get the paternos of this world to see their role in these real-life, non-football, wow-this-ACTUALLY-matters situations….so, i am happy for the insight and information on how these people think and how they got there and how they view the world. point out who we really need to educate, how we can’t ever be complacent or assume that someone in an isolated position of power even looks at the world the way the rest of us do. i don’t feel like pos was an apologist. he just wrote what he saw. i am okay with him not rising to the occasion to do more, particularly when writing what he saw was enough. it didn’t have to be all righteous and condemning to remind us all that even the most benign-seeming people can allow monstrosities to happen..

I am going to start by observing that my tone has been respectful throughout this discussion. In particular, I have not personally attacked any of the people who disagreed with me. I would suggest you have not given me the same consideration. In any event:

“Yeah, that’s not what happened. Again, like you posted last time, the timeline is wrong. I also like how you think he was burying his head in the sand, instead of what, standing there and letting people take pot shots at him because they couldn’t be asked to actually read what Pos wrote?”

You have not explained exactly where my timeline is wrong. There is no question that the story broke, and that Posnanski was in a Penn State class the next day saying things that contradicted his initial response. When you said this the last time, I posted links supporting this chronology. There is also no question that Posnanski dropped off the grid shortly thereafter–a search of his Twitter feed will verify this, he even announced that is what he planned to do.

And I think anyone with at least a little integrity would have engaged in some way. Do you think that if Keith Law or Jason Whitlock or Craig or TJ Quinn or Rob Neyer or hell, Buster Olney, found themselves in the middle of a controversial situation, they would respond by putting their fingers in their ears? I feel that all of them even if they did not back down, would at least have the balls to defend and explain their positions.

“What’s so wrong about waiting to make conclusions on a story? The day the accusations came out, all he asked was wait for more information. What’s wrong with that?”

Nothing is wrong, as long as that’s your honest position. But going to a Penn State class the next day and calling Joe Paterno a scapegoat indicates that it was not how he actually felt. That he was being disingenuous at best, and outright duplicitous at worst.

“So much is wrong with this statement that it’s hilarious you think it’s actually valid. If someone touched my son I’d rip his fucking arms off and beat him with them. Do I think that’s a reasonable response for someone to actually do? Hell no, but like Chris Rock said, I understand.”

I fail to see how that responds to my question. What I am trying to say is that Posnanski was able to forgive an awful lot because he was friends with Paterno, while the children who were molested due to Paterno’s actions–or inactions–were just names.

“If you read Pos’s stuff you’d know he was conflicted over the book, especially after more information came to light about how involved Paterno actually was. IIRC he did make some changes to end (Chris F and others can help me out here), but what did you want him to do, scrap it entirely? That’s an extremely noble response, but how many would be able to do that, as well as return whatever seed money he was given when he started writing?”

I actually did read his stuff, lots of it and for a very long time, and I only saw a couple of comments from him on this–a couple of SI columns. I saw relatively little evidence of his being conflicted. Yes, there was a bit of perfunctory “this is a tough book to write” stuff, but I didn’t have any sense of a deep moral quandary, or any sort of soul-searching or whatever.

And I say again, because you seem to have missed it the first time: I would not bet money on people doing the right/noble/ethical thing when this much money is involved. But that doesn’t mean I have to respect them after they chase the money.

In the end, the fact is this: Joe Posnanski’s “aw shucks” routine–whether it’s genuine or just something of a pretense or perhaps some of both–has built up a great deal of goodwill among his fans, such that many are either willing to dismiss this whole incident entirely, or they are willing to “give him a pass for this one mistake.” But there are also a lot of former fans like me–a minority, but a sizable one–that no longer have much use for the man or what he has to say. To me, as I’ve tried to explain, the issue is not simply this book project. The main issue is that the situation has caused me to see Joe Posnanski as kind of a phony. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

calling on people to reserve judgment, then going to a Penn State class the NEXT day and making all kinds of asinine statements, then burying his head in the sand for six weeks)

Yeah, that’s not what happened. Again, like you posted last time, the timeline is wrong. I also like how you think he was burying his head in the sand, instead of what, standing there and letting people take pot shots at him because they couldn’t be asked to actually read what Pos wrote?

What’s so wrong about waiting to make conclusions on a story? The day the accusations came out, all he asked was wait for more information. What’s wrong with that?

When it comes to this situation, the question I’ve asked a number of times on various blogs, etc.–which no one has ever been able to answer–is this: If it had been Posnanski’s kids that were molested, would he still have handled the project in the way he did? If the answer is ‘no,’ and I assume it is, then why is ok when it’s other peoples’ kids who were molested?

So much is wrong with this statement that it’s hilarious you think it’s actually valid. If someone touched my son I’d rip his fucking arms off and beat him with them. Do I think that’s a reasonable response for someone to actually do? Hell no, but like Chris Rock said, I understand.

If you read Pos’s stuff you’d know he was conflicted over the book, especially after more information came to light about how involved Paterno actually was. IIRC he did make some changes to end (Chris F and others can help me out here), but what did you want him to do, scrap it entirely? That’s an extremely noble response, but how many would be able to do that, as well as return whatever seed money he was given when he started writing?

Those who have not read it are largely taking the media’s view of the book. A media which seems to get off on each one being more outraged than the other. Well screw that. I watched the media completely miscall an election for which they had ample data to get it right. They’re supposed to be able be objective about the nuances of a sympathetic autobiography largely written BEFORE this scandal broke? Yeah. Sure they are.

I could give a shit about college football. I don’t even know who Joe Paterno is/was. It just strikes me that when first hand sources say something isn’t “a child molester enabling apology” then I’ll take them at their word unless I actually read the damn book myself.

As for the book, well given that the book was pretty much done when all of this broke, I can see how the author of it might not have delved into the facts of the scandal in great detail. He hadn’t time to re-write in any depth since the publisher would have wanted the book out there. Publication while this was all unfolding would maximize sales.

Ultimately: whatever (insofar as Posnanski’s book goes). Posnanski’s a great baseball writer. He’s not a crime author and I don’t want him to be. I’m glad his work is going to be showing up around here.

Don’t you think that’s a little glib, Craig? This isn’t one stupid/ill-conceived column written on a deadline, ala Mark Whicker. This isn’t one stupid off-the-cuff remark, ala Al Campanis. He had a lot of time to think about this and get this right. It should have been obvious, from the moment the scandal broke to the moment the book hit the shelves, that it was a big deal.

“It’s foolish to say that discredits Posnanski as a writer and reporter. His work speaks for itself.”

I’m not sure I agree. Again, this was a book project that he spent months and months on. I think we can safely say it speaks for Posnanski in a way that something produced in seconds (a quote) or hours (a column) does not.

And beyond that, it’s true that his work speaks for itself. As I noted, it seems to me that Posnanski basically panders to his audience. The nice way to characterize it is: “Posnanski is a storyteller.” But another way to say the same thing is: “He produces easily digestible pablum.” I mean, do you–does anyone–disagree with my comparison to Spielberg?

“Should Posnanski’s book just been titled “Fucking Monster”? Isn’t that inherently a non-objective approach to writing an autobiography of somebody?”

I do not think a hatchet job was necessary, as such. But (1) Joe Posnanski should have kept his mouth shut after asking others not to rush to judgment. He did not. (2) Joe Posnanski should have apologized, or at least said SOMETHING when it became clear how badly he represented himself on that day in the Penn State classroom. He did not. (3) Posnanski should have written a book that did not lead to the use of words like “fluff” and “sympathetic” and “puff piece” in reviews. He did not.

Let me put it this way: While Craig and I apparently disagree pretty strongly on this subject, at least Craig had the balls to respond to my critical comments. Posnanski, by contrast, seems to do everything within his power to avoid criticism, and to avoid engaging with anyone other than adoring audience members (indeed, it seems to me that the best way to meet Joe Posnanski, if you really want to, is to give him an award. He always seems to find time for that).

“He was researching and probably given a lucrative advance to write an autobiography of Paterno when this all went down. Do you really think his publisher was going to say “scrap the project” once Paterno became major news?”

You’re correct–his advance was $750,000. And when all of this went down, both publisher and author had a choice–money or integrity. While I am not surprised that they put money #1, that does not free them from criticism for making the more venal and selfish choice.

That’s a big twinkie.

In short, if you want an inspirational story about a head coach, you hire Posnanski for that project….if you want an hard hitting investigative book about a scandal, you don’t.

I was disapointed in the Paterno book because it wasn’t what I was used to seeing from Posonanski. But his body of work is good enough that I was will to give him a pass on tough subject, in a tough situation.