"Academic Indegestion" is not a "Strike" IMO
- Thread starter H8IAST8
- Start date
clicheusername3
Banned
I don't see what you're getting at...are you saying there is some kind of "strike policy" in place? This isn't the California penal system. I think the coach has free reign to end your tenure on the team after 1/2 a "strike" if he feels that is what has to be done.
imported_ankle23
Well-Known Member
agreed. coach's decision. who really knows how many 'strikes' he had.
But driving around with a guy who is dealing drugs, in possession of marijuana, while on suspension for who knows what, just after the DJK drug-house fiasco, is a pretty big strike, IMO.
I'm betting he had some internal 'strikes' on top of what is publicly known.
A
alexzelada
Guest
Kirk doesn't respect your opinon nor will he be adopting it. Sad st8, the verdict has been rendered and you look foolish with your childish inability to accept it.
INTIMIDATORHawk
Well-Known Member
I've been thinking about posting my views on this.
Ferentz was preemptive with his suspension of Arob for "academic indigestion". From what I have been able to learn, Adam was completely eligible under university guidelines, but Ferentz saw something he didn't like and didn't want Adam to go down the wrong path. Commend Ferentz for taking a preemptive approach with his STARTING RUNNING BACK.
Now, that said I don't feel it should be considered a "strike" against Adam.
Past precedence set by Kirk Ferentz shows that he might have been a little to hasty with his response. Also, University policy on drug testing is ridiculously hypocritical.
Lets use James Ferentz as an example. TWICE he was in legal trouble. Even after those incidents he was allowed to remain on the team. We all know he is now a starter. Possession of alcohol underage is illegal...as in...AGAINST THE LAW.
Now look at Adam's situation....misdemeanor charge, only one on his record....booted off the team.
Iowa's drug testing policy has major flaws. A player isn't removed from the team until their THIRD POSITIVE TEST! Now, doesn't a player have to be in POSSESSION of the illegal substance in order to test positive for illegal drug use?
Wait.....so just because they didn't get caught by the police makes it alright?
Something is fishy with that whole situation. Ferentz showed favortism toward his own son when compared to Adam Robinson's situation, and the University of Iowa's drug testing policy conveniently overlooks the fact that a player also has to be in POSSESSION of an illegal substance in order to test positive for using it.
Hmmmmm.........
Ferentz was preemptive with his suspension of Arob for "academic indigestion". From what I have been able to learn, Adam was completely eligible under university guidelines, but Ferentz saw something he didn't like and didn't want Adam to go down the wrong path. Commend Ferentz for taking a preemptive approach with his STARTING RUNNING BACK.
Now, that said I don't feel it should be considered a "strike" against Adam.
Past precedence set by Kirk Ferentz shows that he might have been a little to hasty with his response. Also, University policy on drug testing is ridiculously hypocritical.
Lets use James Ferentz as an example. TWICE he was in legal trouble. Even after those incidents he was allowed to remain on the team. We all know he is now a starter. Possession of alcohol underage is illegal...as in...AGAINST THE LAW.
Now look at Adam's situation....misdemeanor charge, only one on his record....booted off the team.
Iowa's drug testing policy has major flaws. A player isn't removed from the team until their THIRD POSITIVE TEST! Now, doesn't a player have to be in POSSESSION of the illegal substance in order to test positive for illegal drug use?
Wait.....so just because they didn't get caught by the police makes it alright?
Something is fishy with that whole situation. Ferentz showed favortism toward his own son when compared to Adam Robinson's situation, and the University of Iowa's drug testing policy conveniently overlooks the fact that a player also has to be in POSSESSION of an illegal substance in order to test positive for using it.
Hmmmmm.........
iloveyoularrystation
Well-Known Member
I find both the notion that Ferentz past acts with this type of stuff was ever hasty and that he has been hypocritical with it, both absurd. If anything Ferentz has been slow to the take as he seems to always be too late before something major occurs.
Beyond that comparing each kids situation is ludicrous especially when we don't know everything behind the scenes, like what conversations they've had with the player prior and what things occurred not in the public realm of knowledge.
Here's the real big deal to me as far as the arob thing goes and this is not comparable to anyone elses situation. His coach went on public tv and said Adam will have the chance to rejoin our team this next semester if he gets his ducks in a row (paraphrasing). How does Arob respond? A few days later while his team he wants to "rejoin" and "prove his dedication too" is in arizona getting ready for the bowl game he was suspended from, he goes out with some guys who are smoking and trying to sell weed. That's how this situation is different from all the other ones you could compare it to. His coach went on tv and stood up for him saying he had the chance to rejoin the team, a couple days later on the news he threw it back in the coaches and teammates faces by getting a drug charge. As far as i'm concerned this situation isn't comparable to any other one.
Having said all that I think a legitimate argument could be made for the coach to decide either way on his reinstatement come the end of spring.
imported_ankle23
Well-Known Member
Intim - how many positives drug tests did Robinson have?
also, big difference in paula and possession of marijuana. not going down that road, but it's not like you can go into hy-vee and pick up a sack of grass.
ShadasRevenge
Well-Known Member
Not legally there isn't.
dmShortSaledude
Well-Known Member
Exactly. How many strikes had ARob had? It's like the Benny Sapp situation. He was in trouble with the law, I believe only once, that was made public and ended in arrest. He got kicked to the curb by the Captain. We all know there were a lot more strikes against Mr. Sapp...
I am not saying they are in the same category, ARob & Sapp. As Benny's actions were of violence, and not peacefully getting squinty eyed and eating Doritos...
That being said, I think that ARob would be better off should he follow B Sapp's lead and head north. Benny turned out alright, and if he is/was smart, he's invested his money and he's rich.
INTIMIDATORHawk
Well-Known Member
Adam answered that question yesterday..... he passed every one of his drug tests.
homerHAWKeye777
Well-Known Member
As others say ... playing this one out in the court of public opinion is a slip up by ARob IMO.
Furthermore, if ARob sticks around, then he remains a potential polarizing figure for the team.
All I can say is that thank goodness Coker had such a great bowl game AND that thank goodness players would rather win than lose ... thus, that often encourages players/teammates to have short memories.
Anyhow, football players get so many other concessions ... I think that ARob's plea about not putting in enough hours at the learning center as being weak. As others noted ... it's actually commendable that the coaching staff was trying to be pre-emptive there. Furthermore, Ferentz wasn't negative about ARob there AT ALL. Heck, by their play on the field ... many Hawk fans probably wished that the coaches would have kept Coker in the game the entire time that day ... instead ARob saw the great majority of the reps in the second half and did absolutely nothing with them.
Also, did ARob say anything about opting NOT to take a drug test at any time? He may have passed all his drug tests ... but he may have meant all the ones that he took.
Lastly, the poster who brought up James Ferentz forgot to also mention that nobody made excuses for the public intox charge ... but, the TEAM (not coaches) circled the wagons for James concerning the initial offense.
koolhandlick
Well-Known Member
Wasn't there a linemen from Des Moines that Hayden booted for pot possession ? Back then nobody cared about how many strikes someone had. It was left up to the coach how he wanted to handle it. I agree with Hayden and Kirk's decisions.
