Miller: Lickliter Shines in Tucker Situation

JonDMiller

Publisher/Founder
Lickliter Shines in Handling of Tucker | Hawkeye Nation

Rob Howe of HawkeyeInsider.com has a good collection of Todd Lickliter quotes related to Anthony Tucker’s status. Click here to read Rob’s entire offering.

When the second Anthony Tucker/alcohol related incident happened back in December, I felt like whatever Todd Lickliter wanted to do, I was going to be comfortable with it. In my view, that’s not looking at things through black and gold colored glasses, or at least I try to set my personal bias and fandom aside as best I can in situations like this. My feelings on that were more about my belief that Licklter is the kind of guy that is looking out for the best for the individual. This isn’t Todd’s first rodeo; he has three grown children and he is in his 50’s. He’s been a parent for a long time, over half of his life. Those of you that are parents, you know that causes you to view the world in an entirely different fashion than the way you viewed it before having children. If you don’t have children, just trust me on that one.

So if Coach Lickliter decided that Tucker being back on the team was in Anthony’s best interest, I felt comfortable with that decision because Todd has a relationship with Anthony and I don’t. Todd has a far better idea of Anthony Tucker’s needs and well being than I do. If that meant that Coach Lickliter would have dismissed Tucker, then I would have been fine with that, based on what I just wrote; he has more information than I do on this matter and regarding the person and persons involved.

Some might dismiss that faith as convenient. But whatever your opinions are on the Iowa basketball program right now, I have not heard anyone say that Lickliter is a bad guy or that he is unfair, or that he has a ‘win at all costs mentality’. When I say ‘all costs’, I am talking about cutting corners, or putting someone right back on the floor that has let you down, or going against what you believe to be the right course of action. Even in light of losing your second leading scorer from a team that is in great need of scoring, even in light of your program headed for one of its worst three year runs in its history, I just don’t see Lickliter as the kind of guy that is going to compromise what he believes is right for the sake of two or three more wins right now at the expense of inflicting greater damage to the program down the line.

In reading his comments that Rob put together, it’s clear to me that Todd certainly has more information than we do and he thinks he knows what is not only good for Anthony, but at the same time what is best for his team.

Tucker might not play again this year. Heck, he might not ever play for Iowa again. But Todd didn’t kick the kid to the curb and he at least gave him another chance to turn his life around…even if that life might not involve playing college basketball at Iowa…..it still might, but I feel good about the way that Todd has handled this.

“To be quite honest with you, not to take anything away from Anthony, I care about him,†Lickliter said. “This is the most (attention) that’s been directed to him in quite a while. Anthony is going to have to pull himself out of this. It’s up to him. His life is important to us, but there are a lot of important things going on.â€

I think that quote sums it up pretty nicely along the lines I am writing about. The team cares about Anthony, and they are doing what they think needs to be done for Anthony’s best interest but not at the expense of the greater good of the program Todd is trying to build, where no one man is greater than the team.

That’s a great theme for a book, movie or a song, however you don’t see that put into practice in the day to day as often as the day to day world likely needs it. Then there is this comment:

“I’ve tried to live a life where you strike a balance,†Lickliter said. “As I told (Tucker) if you’re in the work force, you might not get this opportunity. But student-athletes have their whole lives ahead of them. Earning a degree is a real benefit for a young person as they go through life. I wanted to encourage him to stay on course and earn a degree. That’s what we’re doing.â€

Again, Tucker might not play again for Iowa this year. Lickliter didn’t rule that out, but he didn’t give any sort of indication on what he might do. However, he did just give a strong indication that the Iowa basketball program is really interested in the well being of its players, and is not just looking to put numbers in the left hand column for the sake of contract extensions or saving your job, things we see quite often in this line of work.

Iowa has won three of its last four games, the lone loss coming at Michigan State against a team made up of high school All Americans and All Stars. Iowa was down by 19 points in that game and rallied back to within three points with just :17 seconds to play. They fought, and they continue to fight. They believe in one another, and right about now, that belief probably has them playing at a collective level that is above their individual skill sets. This Iowa team is proving to be an example of wear the sum of the parts is truly greater than the whole.

It’s not going to end with Iowa qualifying for any sort of post season tournament, but if the Lickliter era has a turning point for the better, we may now be witnessing those crossroads moments. Where a group of kids that were outgunned and outmanned nearly every time they took the floor believed they had a chance to win not because they were superior athletes, but because they felt they could count on one another to just do what each is capable of doing.

That sort of mentality is also playing itself out off the court in the life of Anthony Tucker. He has to feel pretty honored to not have been abandoned, even if he isn’t going to suit up on game days. Or perhaps that sort of revelation will come to Anthony later in life, years after his playing days are done, when he is a father and a husband and gainfully employed thanks in part to a degree he earned at the University of Iowa because his coach knew him better than anyone else, and gave him a third chance to succeed in the game of life.

Because at some point, the band and cheers fade away and they don’t wear your jersey any more. It will come down to the man in the mirror, and Todd Lickliter is helping Anthony Tucker to mold that man into the best he can be.

Chalk up one more in Todd Lickliter’s win column
 
If Tucker stays on scholarship for this semester only and never plays again for Iowa, I would join in applauding Lickliter for his compassionate handling of the situation. I couldn't agree more that it's important for the coach and the University to do what they can within reason to help Anthony stay on track to get a college degree--somewhere.

Anything more than that, and I respectfully disagree.

Just to point out the logical limitations of the concept, Pierre Pierce probably would have been better off had he been allowed to stay on the Iowa basketball team even after the second incident, or had he been allowed to play rather than redshirt after the first. Should he have been given that opportunity because it represented what was best for him?

I'm not equating the gravity of those two situations. I'm simply illustrating the point that the best interests of the program have to be considered in the equation, and not just those of the player.

It's not clear yet where Lickliter is actually going to draw that line. If Tucker finally learns his lesson, is allowed to play again, makes a significant positive contribution to Iowa basketball and helps earn Lickliter the right to finish out his contract (and beyond), Lick will look pretty good in this. If Tucker stays on scholarship beyond this season and screws up again at a time when he can't be replaced, that won't be good for the program at all. Personally I don't think the latter is a risk worth taking based on the pattern of behavior already established. You have to evaluate those risks up front rather than in hindsight.

It'll be interesting to see.
 
Last edited:
Well stated Freddy. I agree.


My thoughts also. I have no problem with Tucker finishing the semester, but beyond that, not sure how many more chances AT should get to mess with another season of Iowa bb. I do not think AT took last season's issues seriously,and that is just flat irresponsible. He has shown a total lack of judgement twices and it has cost the program.

If he plays this year, it will be harder to move him on, I think. I am ok if he plays,but I still think he should transfer to remove him from the whole party scene in IC which we all know is pretty intense.
 
I agree with Freddy here. The juice ain't worth the squeeze on this one. If something were to happen again with AT, still on scholly, it would be a huge black eye to the program. It might even cost Lick his job.

Let AT finish the year on scholly. If he fulfills the requirements, he can stay on the team, but only as a walk-on. (Is a player considered a walk-on if their scholly is pulled?)
 
Good article Jon. Like your perspective on this one.

A couple of things are in play here. I believe Lick has had ZERO to do with AT since he was suspended. Now he is back with the team, Lick wants to observe him and find out where his head is at and is he willing to be a good teammate. That process has just begun. Also, as to the lack of info coming from Lickliter....while I would dearly love to get more information I think it is pretty cool and respectful to the kid that Lick keeps it under his hat. No need to trash the kid or discuss his personal issues in public the way some coaches would. I think Coach is really kind of a hardass, although his demeaner is calm and collected. I sense you do not want to be on Coach's bad side. He has a little Bob Knight in there without the histrionics. The good part of Knight, if you will. I continue to believe Coach Lickliter is the right guy for Iowa.
 
The last two paragraphs describes Iowan’s to a T and for this, Iowan’s will respect Todd and the things he’s trying to accomplish… this is one of the reasons that has endeared Ferentz to Iowa fans and to those not necessarily fans but admirers of his program. Tom Davis and Hayden Fry also understood that their real purpose was more about being life mentors/coaches vs. how many games they win and how far up the ladder they can climb…

People in all walks of life understand and know the difference when a picture of a person’s life is painted for all to see…
 
Freddy:

Your analagy with Pierce fails because you cannot take out the severity of the crimes he was accused with out of the equation. You are right that transgressions of players do have the ability to tarnish the program and the institution as a whole. But you have to consider that any black mark that may be cast is going to be contingient on the nature of the offense. If Tucker goes out and gets a 3rd PI or related offense it will have FAR LESS impact on the program or school than Pierces 2nd (and probably 1st) offense.

Tucker was punished appropriately for his transgression, and in his time away from the team the focus as been on him as a person NOT him as a player. Now that he's taken care of the personal aspect Lick is charged with addressing the player situation.
 
The last two paragraphs describes Iowan’s to a T and for this, Iowan’s will respect Todd and the things he’s trying to accomplish… this is one of the reasons that has endeared Ferentz to Iowa fans and to those not necessarily fans but admirers of his program. Tom Davis and Hayden Fry also understood that their real purpose was more about being life mentors/coaches vs. how many games they win and how far up the ladder they can climb…

People in all walks of life understand and know the difference when a picture of a person’s life is painted for all to see…


How many chances did Mr. Davis give to Chris Kingsbury? My memory fails me a bit here, but I do know that at some point Chris was given his walking papers, but went out and straightened his life out, and is now a small bank exec in Nebraska. I do not think there is any pat formula or exact answers when dealing with 18-21 year old kids. Even when you look at PP, he sat a full year, did all the community service in exemplar fashion, said all the right things, kept his nose clean for 18 months, then the wheels came off again. I guess part of the reason coaches get paid a lot is that their jobs depend on the good judgement of 18-21 yr olds...which is like going to Vegas to make a living.
 
I just hope the young man can change his life for the better.It's got to be hard on his family also.Hopefully he'll make the right choices for now on and get his degree and maybe play basketball again.Usually when you screw up you only have to look into a mirror to see who's the blame.Good luck Mr. Tucker.
 
Completely agree with all this. Lick knows what is best for him and his team.


Also agree with giving a kid the opportunity to get a degree, straighten things out.


Why though, are guys like Urban Meyer criticized for doing the same thing?


Why is it that a guy like Lickliter is seen as just doing whats best for the kid, knows what his players need........ and a guy like meyer is just seen as selfish with his decisions?

Does Urban Meyer not have the reasoning skills and have a compassion towards the players he tries to turn into men?


I just think its funny how you can't WIN and have the players best interest in mind and know whats best for the program and players........ but a lot of losing coaches just only do things the right way and care about the kids before winning. lol
 
Freddy:

Your analagy with Pierce fails because you cannot take out the severity of the crimes he was accused with out of the equation. You are right that transgressions of players do have the ability to tarnish the program and the institution as a whole. But you have to consider that any black mark that may be cast is going to be contingient on the nature of the offense. If Tucker goes out and gets a 3rd PI or related offense it will have FAR LESS impact on the program or school than Pierces 2nd (and probably 1st) offense.

Tucker was punished appropriately for his transgression, and in his time away from the team the focus as been on him as a person NOT him as a player. Now that he's taken care of the personal aspect Lick is charged with addressing the player situation.

While Pierce's transgressions were absolutely, without a doubt worse than Tucker's (though you could argue that Tucker, had he gotten behind the wheel, could have done something terrible, as well), I don't think the Pierce analogy fails because the crimes were different.

I'm not sure if this is the point Freddy was trying to make, but it has always struck me as typical revisionist fan history when people say that Alford was a despicable human because of the way he handled the Pierce situation. Of course it looks like a terrible decision now, in hindsight, after Pierce committed another (more) serious crime; but let's revisit what was happening at the time.

The fact that Pierre - a very gifted kid - stayed in school and out of trouble in high school is remarkable...not because he is black (for the challenges/temptations are there for all talented youths), but because there are a lot of potential distractions for young, popular, talented high school students. Pierre comes to Iowa, gets in trouble, and, as Lick has done with Tucker, Alford takes him off the team. Now, what most people object to is the fact that Alford let him back on the team. But think about it: if Pierre hadn't committed another transgression, if he had gone on to be the exemplary, hardworking, clean-nosed student everyone loves, this is how the story would read: Alford believed in a kid that everyone else wanted to forget about, took him under his wing, and helped him prosper. Jon is writing the same thing about Tucker, and it's not inconceivable that someone wrote something similar back then. Yes, Pierre's transgressions were more severe, but he did his time, completed his community service, etc. Whether or not he did it because he wanted Pierre's basketball talents, we'll never know...but, either way, Alford took a chance on Pierre in giving him a second chance, a chance to turn his life around. Alford and Lick aren't so different in this. Both let the law deal with the student athlete, and then both "believed" in the player enough, cared for his well-being, and let him back on the team. If Pierre hadn't done wrong again, people would praise Alford for his commitment to his players, etc -- just as we're doing with Lick (and rightfully so).

Alford's actions - when Pierre committed a second crime - were no less admirable...he dismissed Pierre immediately and never looked back. How is this so reprehensible? Unfortunately for the victim, Pierre, and Alford, things didn't work out in story-book form, and all three surely live with an indelible memory of what went wrong (some, of course, more than others).

But (and this is my main point) to argue - in hindsight - that Alford was a bad person because he let Pierre back on the team after the first transgression is a convenient way to place blame for an unsavory situation and create a scapegoat for the declining state of Iowa basketball. It is, as I wrote above, a typical revisionist fan history.

So yes, Lickliter should be praised for his handling of Tucker and for the character traits he has displayed amidst adversity in the last few seasons, but, purely in their handling of similar situations (the two coaches are of course very different in other respects, but that's a topic for a different post), I don't think you can argue that Lick and Alford are all that different.
 
While Pierce's transgressions were absolutely, without a doubt worse than Tucker's (though you could argue that Tucker, had he gotten behind the wheel, could have done something terrible, as well), I don't think the Pierce analogy fails because the crimes were different.

No you can't argue that because he didn't drive. In fact, he called a cab. So you can't try and make what he did any worse because what he COULD have done. He didn't do it. For all you know, he could have driven downtown, realized he drank too much, and called a cab to get a ride home.
________
Avandia class action lawsuit
 
Last edited:
LOL--Grandma, I'm not replying to invite debate but to note that you did not correctly discern the purpose of my reference to Pierce, and I don't understand why its purpose was difficult to grasp. Its purpose was exactly as stated: To illustrate that in matters of player discipline (for WHATEVER offense or violation), the best interests of the program should be considered, and not just those of the player.

I also have a very different take than you on the Pierce situation. I thought some of the conduct of Alford and Bowlsby in handling the first incident was reprehensible, and I think Pierce should have been suspended and his scholarship should have been withdrawn at the end of that season rather than having him "redshirt" and play again.

I think one of the fundamental areas in which people differ on these issues, often without saying it in so many words, is that some people place much more stock in the importance of a kid's desire to play a sport for a given program: "Once a Hawkeye, always a Hawkeye." To me, on the other hand, playing basketball or football for a particular program is a privilege, not a vested right, and if a player screws up badly enough or often enough, it isn't a life-and-death decision to take that privilege away from him. I'm very confident that both Pierce (after the first incident) and Tucker could have found--and Tucker may yet find--another school that would give them a chance to play basketball.
 
Last edited:
While Pierce's transgressions were absolutely, without a doubt worse than Tucker's (though you could argue that Tucker, had he gotten behind the wheel, could have done something terrible, as well), I don't think the Pierce analogy fails because the crimes were different.

I'm not sure if this is the point Freddy was trying to make, but it has always struck me as typical revisionist fan history when people say that Alford was a despicable human because of the way he handled the Pierce situation. Of course it looks like a terrible decision now, in hindsight, after Pierce committed another (more) serious crime; but let's revisit what was happening at the time.

The fact that Pierre - a very gifted kid - stayed in school and out of trouble in high school is remarkable...not because he is black (for the challenges/temptations are there for all talented youths), but because there are a lot of potential distractions for young, popular, talented high school students. Pierre comes to Iowa, gets in trouble, and, as Lick has done with Tucker, Alford takes him off the team. Now, what most people object to is the fact that Alford let him back on the team. But think about it: if Pierre hadn't committed another transgression, if he had gone on to be the exemplary, hardworking, clean-nosed student everyone loves, this is how the story would read: Alford believed in a kid that everyone else wanted to forget about, took him under his wing, and helped him prosper. Jon is writing the same thing about Tucker, and it's not inconceivable that someone wrote something similar back then. Yes, Pierre's transgressions were more severe, but he did his time, completed his community service, etc. Whether or not he did it because he wanted Pierre's basketball talents, we'll never know...but, either way, Alford took a chance on Pierre in giving him a second chance, a chance to turn his life around. Alford and Lick aren't so different in this. Both let the law deal with the student athlete, and then both "believed" in the player enough, cared for his well-being, and let him back on the team. If Pierre hadn't done wrong again, people would praise Alford for his commitment to his players, etc -- just as we're doing with Lick (and rightfully so).

Alford's actions - when Pierre committed a second crime - were no less admirable...he dismissed Pierre immediately and never looked back. How is this so reprehensible? Unfortunately for the victim, Pierre, and Alford, things didn't work out in story-book form, and all three surely live with an indelible memory of what went wrong (some, of course, more than others).

But (and this is my main point) to argue - in hindsight - that Alford was a bad person because he let Pierre back on the team after the first transgression is a convenient way to place blame for an unsavory situation and create a scapegoat for the declining state of Iowa basketball. It is, as I wrote above, a typical revisionist fan history.

So yes, Lickliter should be praised for his handling of Tucker and for the character traits he has displayed amidst adversity in the last few seasons, but, purely in their handling of similar situations (the two coaches are of course very different in other respects, but that's a topic for a different post), I don't think you can argue that Lick and Alford are all that different.


With all due respect, I have to respectfully disagree on the analogies of the two situations... As AZ said, there were choices the individuals made that directly impacted other people. The difference is, one chose to force a transgression on another and the other chose to avoid hurting others. One was a blatant act of violence, the other was a self-inflicted transgression. They are completely different from each other and should be handled accordingly. A quick look at the penalties that govern these type of crimes reveal that the law even handles them accordingly. Alford was grilled for even showing support - the first time around (IMO, rightly so) and died on the vine after the 2nd transgression. Mostly because of the type of crimes.

The football program has had identical situations occurr and have handled them accordingly. KF has given players 2nd chances and a few have left him hanging - nobody wanted his head for it. BUT... if it was a severe type of crime - one that was an obvious intentional transgression upon someone else. He let those players go... once the case was pretty clear.

I also agree with Freddy in that, as Todd L. also said, there has to be a balance and teams require balance and not a lot of side issues distracting them.
 

Latest posts

Top