Schwartz: Loyalty Should Have Limits

[RobHowe]

This past week showed that Iowa coach Kirk Ferentz can sometimes be loyal to a fault, writes HN columnist David Schwartz: https://www.hawkeyenation.com/football/schwartz-loyalty-limits

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Pretty much yeah. Especially with CJs case. Looking back on it even now what do you think CJs honest answer would be to that or at least after the draft depending how his life going forward plays out...
I've mentioned that on some previous threads another issue is not only loyalty to his assistant coaches but in turn what does that get? It gets assistants that are 'yes men' They are company men through and through in that there's little to no dissension against what KF wants. I think Brian being is in the perfect position to be able to challenge him from time to time. Where Davis from the building of game plans to the depth chart to game day play calling just wasn't going to challenge KF on anything... And with that gets you loyalty...

 

[HawkGold]

I know you think I beating a dead horse but this is another softball thrown at KF
A stab at criticism without offending him.

He kept CJ in the game because he thought CJ was less risk. KF doesnt get back up quarterbacks ready. Stanley was more risky. It is on KF. STANLEY OR WHOEVER doesnt get enough reps or playing time. It due to the pursuit of perfection and not making mistakes. STANLEY CLEARLY WAS NOT READY.

G D was here because he did what K F wanted. The person loyal to a fault was G D.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

If loyalty is so prevalent at Iowa in ferentz' program, what it does point out is ferentz made a bad decision in hiring davis and made 4 subsequent bad decisions to not release him. Was that loyalty or the unwillingness to admit a mistake and correct it quickly? Was this always the plan in order to allow brian to become the OC?

Look, while loyalty itself has a strict definition. However, loyalty in application is a vague operation. Stating something bad or unpleasant happened out of loyalty reduces or mitigates culpability. How on earth didn't ferentz know Davis' philosophy was the antithesis of his own? this is another example of how ferentz is not having his feet held to the fire.

 

[HawkGold]

This article is akin to a job interview when they ask what is your biggest weakness. The canned response is, "I'm too Loyal". It's a tactic designed to not get one kicked out to the job hire process, but is so cliche it gets you no where.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

Loyalty cuts both ways. It's a good thing when you stand behind a friend through tough times. It's not good when it blinds you to the truth and compromises your objectivity on important issues.

 

[MoseSchrute]

If loyalty is so prevalent at Iowa in ferentz' program, what it does point out is ferentz made a bad decision in hiring davis and made 4 subsequent bad decisions to not release him. Was that loyalty or the unwillingness to admit a mistake and correct it quickly? Was this always the plan in order to allow brian to become the OC?

Look, while loyalty itself has a strict definition. However, loyalty in application is a vague operation. Stating something bad or unpleasant happened out of loyalty reduces or mitigates culpability. How on earth didn't ferentz know Davis' philosophy was the antithesis of his own? this is another example of how ferentz is not having his feet held to the fire.

After the 2012 tackle-apocalypse/Weisman-orama, the offensive numbers improved every year besides this one, the receiver-apocalypse. It is highly unlikely that Ferentz is going to hire an OC that looks as good on paper as Davis did when he was hired.