I'm intrigued by the way the refer to the statement as "damage cotrol." This is exactly how I've been feeling about all of the Paterno statements, as they seem to be saying the same thing over and over again before anything actually happens. It just appears as though they are trying very very hard to defend Joe before any information has even come out.
I'm also especially intrigued with the last part of the article, which references the part of the statement that says "Joe Paterno is the only person who publicly acknowledged that with the benefit of hindsight he wished he had done more. This was an honest and courageous admission....."
So, he may have admitted that, but it still does not absolve him of whatever he may have done or not done. In response to this, the writer claimes that "A 'true leader' accepts full responsibility in the moment, not 'a measure' of it long after the time for decisive action has passed."
I'm afraid I happen to agree with this sentiment, and it makes me want to point out that, of course, hindsight is always 20/20. If Jerry Sandusky would have said that he wished he hadn't done it, no one would care, because he did.
Food for thought.