Sorry to post on this again, but I find it an interesting and sad subject. This is an interview with the authors of the "Game Change" book. I think the key quote is: Dvorchak said it's "almost impossible" that Paterno didn't know what was happening at the university. He said, "If he did not know that there was an investigation by the campus police in 1998 and that Jerry Sandusky was gone a year later. And there was another incident in 2002 that he was told about at his kitchen table. If you don't connect the dots there, I think you're just trying to avoid a situation." That quote alone demonstrates the difference between a "Pulitzer Prize Finalist," and a Pulitzer Prize Winner like Sarah Ganim -- suppositions and conjecture versus reporting on the facts. I have not read this book, and do not plan to, but if someone here does read it, could you please summarize?