KF Disbands Former-Player Advisory Committee

HuckFinn

Well-Known Member
I like Mike Hlas, even though I disagree with him at times. I won’t pay to read the Gazette, but will to follow Hawk Central. Just my choice.

Now. I have not read one post that recognizes the fact that this revisit to the whole investigation of our treatment of minority players, which is in the courts, which has been widely publicized, and supposedly revolved around the management of an advisory committee assigned to assist KF with advice on changes to improve treatment of black athletes, a committee which was updated, not eliminated, has now become, in the midst of the critical time for recruitment, been chosen by the local and National media as a good time to review all of Iowa’s sins of omission and commission and PR failures. I have never been a big fan of conspiracy theories, but also not a big fan of coincidence. The doubling down of the local media, plus the lack of attention to the facts by them and the national media, is beyond flat out incompetent behavior.
Long story short? If our recruiting suffers, it is not due to racial discrimination, but rather to misrepresentation of reality by members of the press and their failure to apologize for their unprofessional behavior.

Just to be clear: Iowa has no excuse for mistreatment of minority players. They are required to correct this problem forth with. Focus should be on graduation rates. Cultural differences among players are ultimately up to the players to correct, along with encouragement from the staff. Get your ass in gear and commit to excellence.
 

HuckFinn

Well-Known Member
Fry. Don’t attack the source. That is lazy rebuttal. Document their failure of journalistic integrity with specific examples of those failures.
 

okeefe4prez

Well-Known Member
If our recruiting suffers, it is not due to racial discrimination, but rather to misrepresentation of reality by members of the press and their failure to apologize for their unprofessional behavior.

The members of the media are heroes. The media has not once misrepresented anything. Calling the media unprofessional is an attack on the press, undermines our institutions and is a direct threat to our fragile democracy.
 

Fryowa

Administrator
Fry. Don’t attack the source. That is lazy rebuttal. Document their failure of journalistic integrity with specific examples of those failures.
You're doing that thing again where you respond to me without quoting my post in hopes that I don't see it and don't reply. You've done it twice now in the last day. Grow a pair.
 

HuckFinn

Well-Known Member
You're doing that thing again where you respond to me without quoting my post in hopes that I don't see it and don't reply. You've done it twice now in the last day. Grow a pair.
Now you can read my mind. Wow. …”hopes that I don’t see it.” Well, that makes no sense. Of course I want you to see it. Otherwise, I wouldn’t bother to post it. I will try to keep track of your requirements for posting.

Did I do it right this time?
 

okeefe4prez

Well-Known Member

F this. As the moderator of the board, it is your duty to ensure that EVERY BOARD is tended to. No post should get past you. Someone could be posting pornographic content on the wrestling board or debating vaccination rates on the football board or talking about the cleanest election ever on the women's basketball board and unless they directly quoted Fry, supposedly he wouldn't know. I'm calling bullshit here. CuckFinn wins this round, buddy.
 

Fryowa

Administrator
Yet the Gazette refuses to give accounts of the program from current players or those who played the year before, after the changes Porter wanted were made (which he admits to).

My opinion on any of this doesn't matter because I'm a white guy (and it shouldn't), but even Lomax is telling them to inquire with current players.

The Gazette is looking for a hot expose to get clicks from the SJ crowd. They don't want any input that will interfere with or discount their narrative. What's worse is that their narrative isn't driven by morals, it's driven by wanting clicks and attention.

The Gazette reporters when asked on Twitter about current players? Silence.

Gazette reporters when confronted with twisting words around in KF's email and leaving vital context out? Silence.

Gazette reporters when asked about Lomax and the content of KF's email? Silence and diversion. "I stand by my article" with no explanation of why.

HOW IS SILENCE BY REPORTERS WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THEIR INCONSISTENCIES AND APPARENT BIAS AGAINST IOWA'S FOOTBALL STAFF ANY DIFFERENT THAN KIRK FERENTZ REFUSING TO COMMENT ON THE SITUATION?
 

HuckFinn

Well-Known Member
Yet the Gazette refuses to give accounts of the program to current players or those who played the year before, after the changes Porter wanted were made (which he admits to).

My opinion on any of this doesn't matter because I'm a white guy (and it shouldn't), but even Lomax is telling them to inquire with current players.

The Gazette is looking for a hot expose to get clicks from the SJ crowd. They don't want any input that will interfere with or discount their narrative. What's worse is that their narrative isn't driven by morals, it's driven by wanting clicks and attention.

The Gazette reporters when asked on Twitter about current players? Silence.

Gazette reporters when confronted with twisting words around in KF's email and leaving vital context out? Silence.

Gazette reporters when asked about Lomax and the content of KF's email? Silence and diversion. "I stand by my article" with no explanation of why.

HOW IS SILENCE BY REPORTERS WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THEIR INCONSISTENCIES AND APPARENT BIAS AGAINST IOWA'S FOOTBALL STAFF ANY DIFFERENT THAN KIRK FERENTZ REFUSING TO COMMENT ON THE SITUATION?
Good stuff, Fry. Thank you for your comments.
 

RobHowe

Administrator
Here's a thread I Tweeted from my personal account on Sunday...

The Cedar Rapids Gazette story published a week ago today is/was news. The headline could have been clearer, but the story contained Kirk Ferentz’s quote used in other stories before letter was sent to Iowa Football parents. He turned down interview requests by CRG & others.

If he shared contents of letter w/ CRG instead of waiting 36 hours to make it public, there would have been less controversy. Maybe he could have asked someone on the committee w/ opposing views to Porter to speak w/ CRG.

To date, we haven’t heard publicly from KF or anyone else on committee other than Porter. Jordan Lomax tweeted but turned down interview requests. Porter has answered questions from multiple media outlets. CRG didn’t know other committee members B4 publishing. They wanted privacy.

Names of committee members were released in an Athletic story shortly after CRG published. Still, none have spoken publicly. Would they have if CRG knew their names & contacted B4 publishing? Again, CRG contacted KF. He did not want to be interviewed or provide committee names.

As far as semantics discussion on dissolved/restructure, KF used both terms in original statement to CRG. He decided to change committee in Nov. Currently, there is no committee, 2 months later. Again, CRG could have had better headline, maybe like DMR, which also used dissolved.

Screen Shot 2022-01-25 at 3.32.19 PM.png

And The Athletic used Dissolution in its headline

Screen Shot 2022-01-25 at 3.35.26 PM.png

IMO, current players can’t be only measuring stick for growth. For years, nothing was said while abuse occurred. KF said in ‘20 that players more comfortable talking after leaving program. Current guys are focused on improving now & working toward pro career.

KF & most of current coaches were here when abuse occurred. They have self-professed “blind spots.” Those aren’t all revealed & fixed in 18 months. KF, Porter, Broderick Binns, others said there was lot of work & it would be ongoing. Some of that has to come from outside facility.

I like guys of all ages being on committee. It provides mix of life experiences & experiences while at UI. Ideally, “old” committee could have shared what it learned w/ “new” committee. Maybe still can. But it’s going on 3 months & this should always be priority. Is it?





Screen Shot 2022-01-25 at 3.35.26 PM.pngScreen Shot 2022-01-25 at 3.32.19 PM.png
 

ohhawk

Well-Known Member
Not sure I buy into the desperation clicks point being made but the Gazette is entitled to their opinion but they aren't exempt from some of their own work being critiqued as several have already posted.

* Took a swipe at Gov. Reynolds as well as the Republican party.........that belongs in this article? Comes across as a broader issue that this "staff" has issues with. They seem to want to make a broad position statement but use a narrow program example in their headlines.

* Gave no credit to KF that I recall reading in the piece.......guess there's been no progress since the racial issue was identified? Am I wrong? If not, then why no mention as others have stated?

* They offer no possible positive spin to KF's recent note to potential recruits that another "approach" is evolving.......only that since nothing currently exists (that we can see) then he is doing nothing in showing "forward progress". When did The Gazette start measuring?

Overall, I get a sense of frustration coming out of the Gazette camp because they aren't being shared everything. Last I knew KF doesn't have to share anything unless he chooses to do so. That's not wise in some cases but since he is ultimately responsible for the football program he can play it as he chooses for the most part. Sure seems like his decisions haven't hurt the football program thus far when measured with current players, recent signed classes, and current recruiting. Ironically we're enjoying some of the best in recent years on this front.

P.S. Read recently that UI has one of the lowest departing # of players among Div. 1 in the transfer portal as well. Another disconnect with the current state of affairs and progress commentary?
 

Casualfan

Well-Known Member
Yet the Gazette refuses to give accounts of the program from current players or those who played the year before, after the changes Porter wanted were made (which he admits to).

My opinion on any of this doesn't matter because I'm a white guy (and it shouldn't), but even Lomax is telling them to inquire with current players.

The Gazette is looking for a hot expose to get clicks from the SJ crowd. They don't want any input that will interfere with or discount their narrative. What's worse is that their narrative isn't driven by morals, it's driven by wanting clicks and attention.

The Gazette reporters when asked on Twitter about current players? Silence.

Gazette reporters when confronted with twisting words around in KF's email and leaving vital context out? Silence.

Gazette reporters when asked about Lomax and the content of KF's email? Silence and diversion. "I stand by my article" with no explanation of why.

HOW IS SILENCE BY REPORTERS WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THEIR INCONSISTENCIES AND APPARENT BIAS AGAINST IOWA'S FOOTBALL STAFF ANY DIFFERENT THAN KIRK FERENTZ REFUSING TO COMMENT ON THE SITUATION?

What the "sj" crowd?
 

Latest posts

Top