Hawkeye11en1
Well-Known Member
Problem is the high road is getting us next to nowhere.
On a high note, from the looks of the ad on the right, I got selected to win my choice of an Apple product! I think I'll take the iPad.
Scoop on Hubbard
- Thread starter DuffMan
- Start date
Problem is the high road is getting us next to nowhere.
On a high note, from the looks of the ad on the right, I got selected to win my choice of an Apple product! I think I'll take the iPad.
HawkPrdatr40
Well-Known Member
Fair enough Burky. But if you have to put in special requirements that are different from the other players, that should be a big RED FLAG. Just my take. What a waste of Iowa's time.
Last edited:
tweeterhawk
Well-Known Member
Was this a case of Sally, meet Fran; Fran, meet Sally? Which is to say these conditions likely came down from above the basketball office and/or athletic department?
hawkIhoops
Well-Known Member
Great post. Wow, kind of a broken record at this point, but why hire a recovering alcoholic as a bartender? So McCaffrey went all in with a troubled kid who had to abide by rules a nun would probably break? Unreal. Huge PR mistake # 1 and #2, this is just a **** poor basketball decision. What was he thinking?
burky247
Well-Known Member
It's absolutely the case from everything I've heard.
First, ok so some conditions might be placed on him, but I think those conditions should not be so far from the standards of other players. If a regular player would get a second or third chance with something like a disorderly conduct charge, then they could have told Hubbard, any charge then you are gone, but to have conditions on him that he could be kicked off the team for something that another player would only get chewed out or maybe have to do some extra sprints in practice, that is just ridiculous and wasn't even worth taking.
To me it makes the University look like idiots because they trotted him out and said how they spent all of this time recruiting hima and that he has fully turned his life around, blah, blah, blah, and then they kick him off for basically nothing and try to cover it up. I don't care what people say, I don't think that makes the University look good. First it makes the basketball program look for taking him under such conditions and passing on other recruits, second it makes the Athletic Department and Uni look stupid for trying to cover it up.
To me it makes the University look like idiots because they trotted him out and said how they spent all of this time recruiting hima and that he has fully turned his life around, blah, blah, blah, and then they kick him off for basically nothing and try to cover it up. I don't care what people say, I don't think that makes the University look good. First it makes the basketball program look for taking him under such conditions and passing on other recruits, second it makes the Athletic Department and Uni look stupid for trying to cover it up.
DuffMan
Well-Known Member
It's a stretch to say there was a "cover up". Again if he did something that violated the conditions of his scholly and the university gave him a choice to leave on his own which he took then there is no cover up.
Just because a company or a school doesn't release the "whole story" doesn't mean there is a cover up.
Just because a company or a school doesn't release the "whole story" doesn't mean there is a cover up.
burky247
Well-Known Member
Who is trying to cover anything up? That is one stupid post.
The University of Iowa told Hubbard..."We will give you a final chance, but it has to be by our rules. If you can't abide by them, you should look somewhere else." Hubbard agreed to the stipulations and then didn't follow through on his end. Like I said earlier, had Hubbard got busted in a bar, many of you same people would be crying that he shouldn't have been allowed into a bar in the first place.
Now was it naive for the university to think Hubbard would be able to handle additional rules? Perhaps. But the administration didn't have to award a scholarship to him in the first place. They gave him an option on how he could be awarded one, he accepted the conditions, and then he failed to meet him.
I tend to agree that it was dumb to offer Hubbard if they were just going to add stipulations to his scholarship. Especially when you are dropping offers to other players as a result. But I definitely don't blame the university for putting restrictions on Hubbard.
Last edited:
And Fran could have said ot wasn't worth it.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
How would that have gone??
Sally "Anthony, here are the additional stipulations you must comply with in order to keep your scholarship valid while at Iowa."
Anthony "No problem Sally, I have no issue with these stipulations. Where do I sign."
Fran "Hold on, hold on! What the h*ll is this! I won't stand by and let you put these stipulation on such a fine and upstanding citizen! Anthony go home, and Sally, go f*ck yourself!"
burky247
Well-Known Member
How would that have gone??
Sally "Anthony, here are the additional stipulations you must comply with in order to keep your scholarship valid while at Iowa."
Anthony "No problem Sally, I have no issue with these stipulations. Where do I sign."
Fran "Hold on, hold on! What the h*ll is this! I won't stand by and let you put these stipulation on such a fine and upstanding citizen! Anthony go home, and Sally, go f*ck yourself!"
Terrific post. What's sad is there seems to be people who think that's how the scenario should have unfolded.
Um the university is trying to cover it up. They haven't stated a reason for him leaving and tried to make it seam like he just left because he wanted to be closer to home because they let Hubbard say that and didn't refute anything.
If he violated some kind of rules then tell the public what he did otherwise they are going to look stupid when/if it comes out that he got kicked off of the team for some reason.
Also, I don't care if he goes to a bar he is 26 years old, he is legally allowed to drink and should be allowed to drink.
BigD
Well-Known Member
tweeterhawk
Well-Known Member
I understand that Hubbard was on a very short leash but I would be concerned whether it was so short that inevitably he was going to break it with any perceived minor step across the line. Seems to me that perhaps the POTB set this whole thing up expecting it to fail. Wonder how many of the conditions Fran readily agreed to, and how much of this has left a bad taste in his mouth. This just comes across as a whole waste of everyone's energy for a situation that in the end was doomed to fail the way it was set up.
Hubbard was aware of the rules,and agreed to them. If he broke one,then he just could not be trusted. Seems harsh,but he had put himself in a no-tolerance situation.
I am guessing he might have had a beer in a bar,or something that most 26yr olds do routinely,but,for him,not routine. Not the crime of the century either. Just broke his word. Too bad,but it was handled correctly,imo. Trust is paramount on a team. We do not need a repeat of the last Anthony on the team...kid from minneapolis could not be trusted.
I am guessing he might have had a beer in a bar,or something that most 26yr olds do routinely,but,for him,not routine. Not the crime of the century either. Just broke his word. Too bad,but it was handled correctly,imo. Trust is paramount on a team. We do not need a repeat of the last Anthony on the team...kid from minneapolis could not be trusted.
SwirlinLingerie
Well-Known Member
Fran and in turn, Barta, had to get buy in from the very beginning on this thing. I can't see the leash being so ridiculously short that it was inevitable Hubbard would fail. Why would the administration or Barta even waste their time at that point?
And these stipulations were obviously presented to Hubbard at the time he visited. Why else would so many in the administration meet with him? He had other options. If the leash was that short I can't believe he'd pick Iowa.
My guess is that the stipulations were reasonable and Hubbard clearly crossed the line. I also don't think it is inconceivable he crossed it more than once. Perhaps an incident occurred (or Fran even heard hearsay about something) which resulted in Hubbard being re-assigned to live with Cartwright. Fran probably thinks I'll nip this in the bud, put him with the oldest guy on the team who I trust the most. The behavior does not cease, and Fran cuts bait on the spot.
Iowa offered him a full ride athletic scholarship for a revenue producing sport. The institution wouldn't make that commitment without thinking Hubbard could reasonably fulfill his end of the obligation.
And these stipulations were obviously presented to Hubbard at the time he visited. Why else would so many in the administration meet with him? He had other options. If the leash was that short I can't believe he'd pick Iowa.
My guess is that the stipulations were reasonable and Hubbard clearly crossed the line. I also don't think it is inconceivable he crossed it more than once. Perhaps an incident occurred (or Fran even heard hearsay about something) which resulted in Hubbard being re-assigned to live with Cartwright. Fran probably thinks I'll nip this in the bud, put him with the oldest guy on the team who I trust the most. The behavior does not cease, and Fran cuts bait on the spot.
Iowa offered him a full ride athletic scholarship for a revenue producing sport. The institution wouldn't make that commitment without thinking Hubbard could reasonably fulfill his end of the obligation.
burky247
Well-Known Member
I don't think you know what a cover up is.
He could have been asked to leave for doing something that wasn't illegal. If that's the case, what is there to cover up. For example, let's say Ms. Mason said that Hubbard couldn't be caught in a bar while at Iowa as a condition. And then let's pretend he was caught in a bar. He's violated the terms of his scholarship, but he's done nothing illegal. So guess what, no matter how much it might **** you off, the university isn't going to tell you why he's leaving. Because, for one, it's none of your business. Second, because of rules protecting the students.
Give it up.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
Look stupid? I disagree. They'll look like they took the high road rather than to trash a kid publicly who's already got enough going against him.
MJSCK
Well-Known Member
I don't want to beat a dead horse nor do I even want to see one but . . . UI was absolutely in the right to put extra conditions on Hubbard's scholly. Hypothetically, let's say he gets busted with marijuana in his possession come January 2012 and then it comes out, hypothetically, that he had previously tested positive for marijuana in July. People would jump Fran and the Gang even worse.
The administration could do no less than put extra conditions on the scholly with Pierre Pierce still in the rearview mirror.
I would guess he had to take monthly urine tests, had to attend a certain percentage of classes, or was told he could not drink. I would guess he was allowed to drink, though, unless he had past drinking problems.
If a basketball player or football player tests positive for marijuana, the university may admonish them privately. If Hubbard tested positive for marijuana, I bet they would just ask him to leave.
Hubbard a binding scholarship for the 2011-2012 season. Iowa had to provide him books, tuition and boarding for this coming season. They didn't have to allow him to play, however. So they likely told him, "Anthony, you won't be playing this year. You broke the rules set in place for you because of your special conditions but you are allowed to go to school this year free of charge. We will let you transfer, if you wish, without any restrictions."
Since he didn't come to Iowa for its well-known history department, he likely thought, "I fudged up but I want to play ball somewhere. I'm going to try to find another scholarship."
Everybody lost in this deal. I don't think Hubbard will land on his feet after this. Iowa loses out and Hubbard likely won't find a scholly to any reputable program. If the red flags didn't scare them off before, the flashing red lights probably will now.
