January 25, 2012, 8:30 a.m.
NCAA vs. Hawkeyes
Both the Press-Citizen and Gazette (and possibly Daily Iowan to come) have stories about Iowa Athletic Director Gary Barta's meeting with faculty leaders yesterday. The differences in the stories are striking.
The Press-Citizen's story, buried in small print at the bottom of page 3 leads with the report that Barta "defended the departments hiring practices and coaches' salaries" (the exclusive subject matter of the entire story). Emily Schettler, "Barta Defends Coaches' Salaries and Iowa's Hiring Practices," Iowa City Press-Citizen, January 25, 2012, p. 3.
The Gazette, by contrast, in heavy type at the top of the page, leads with "Barta on Tuesday [Jan. 24] told faculty leaders he is comfortable with the department's renewed relationship with the Iowa Lottery" (the exclusive subject matter of the Gazette's entire story). Diane Heldt, "Barta: I'm Comfortable with Lottery Relationship," The Gazette, January 25, 2012, p. 11A.
I guess you had to be there. (Which is probably the case of anyone's report of any event.)
Barta says he's "comfortable" with the Iowa Lottery "because it's a state-sponsored agency." Is that relevant? Should it be? During my first judicial clerkship (U.S. Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit) a significant part of our caseload involved what was then called "the numbers racket," often Mafia-run, it was considered a serious crime. So, OK, now the state has taken it over. Does that make it, for NCAA student-athlete purposes, not gambling? I don't think so.
But what really caught my eye in Ms. Heldt's report was, "Barta said any relationships the department has with the gambling industry are limited to the Iowa Lottery . . .." [Photo of Kinnick scoreboard.]
Why did that catch my eye? Because the last time I checked (so it may have changed), the Kinnick scoreboard was still running an advertisement for the Riverside gambling casino, and the casino still had a Kinnick skybox for its high rollers.
And my memory, and a prior blog entry, indicate that the NCAA at one time put the Iowa athletic program on notice that it did not look favorably on these gambling industry associations, in light of the concerns and spirit of Article 10.3. ("The NCAA wants to distance itself from sports gambling, and the gambling industry generally, in every way possible. It expressly forbids association with gambling casinos at NCAA events or in its advertising. It highly recommends that NCAA schools follow the same practice. It has written the UI athletic program with regard to its partnership with the Riverside Gambling Casino. And yet our football program tries to rationalize the gambling partnership while refusing to do anything about it."
"Conflicts, Cover-ups and Corruption," June 26, 2007.)
I very seldom reprint a former blog entry. But since this one is so on point, and since it's over five years old (and therefore long forgotten if ever remembered), I now do so:
"UI Football Promoting Gambling?" September 16, 2006
Is the University of Iowa Athletic Department, specifically the football program, promoting gambling?
There is very little ambiguity regarding the NCAA's rules regarding gambling on college sports. The NCAA Division I Manual provides [Note Jan. 25, 2012: What's below is the relevant Article 10.3 in 2006; the current, 2007 version, has been only slightly modified from this one.]:
10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised: 4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
( a ) Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
( b ) Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
( c ) Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
( d ) Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
( e ) Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)
NCAA Division I Manual, Bylaw Article 10, Ethical Conduct, 10.3 (2001-02).
_______________
It couldn't be much clearer, could it? Academic institutions are able to claim that they want to maintain an impenetrable wall between their athletic programs, staff and student athletes, on the one hand, and the temptations of sports gambling on the other.
Of course, these standards do not address, nor could they, gambling on sports by those unaffiliated with a university. (And I am not claiming that the Universty's getting in bed with gambling interests, and taking the gambling industry's money, is "the same as" coaches and athletes betting on games.)
But it does seem a bit incongruous for the University's athletic program to enter into what amounts to a partnership with the gambling industry. How has it done that?
The University has (1) sold special indoor box facilities in the football stadium to a local gambling casino, aware that the casino purchased the facility to entertain, and encourage, high rollers, (2) knowing that the casino plans to bring gamblers into the state, put them up at its hotel, transport them to and from the football games, and (3) then agreed to let the casino use the football program's oversized electronic scoreboard to advertise the gambling casino to the 70,000 plus sports fans in attendance! (4) Removing any possible ambiguity about this, the Casino Web site's opening page currently displays, "Turn a Hawkeye game day into a weekend getaway!"
See William Petroski, "E. Iowa Casino to Lure U of I Fans; It will offer post-game parties, stadium shuttles," Des Moines Register, August 29, 2006 ("The casino has spent $165,000 for a three-year deal to lease a new skybox at Kinnick Stadium, and the casino has purchased dozens of football tickets for its preferred customers. Starting with the Iowa-Iowa State game on Sept. 16, charter buses will be offered to transport patrons between the casino parking lot and Kinnick Stadium, and there will be post-game parties at the Riverside complex."), and William Petroski, "Kinnick ‘Hotel’ ad omits 'Casino;' By design, an ad for Riverside's complex does not mention gambling," Des Moines Register, September 8, 2006 ("Chief Executive Officer Dan Kehl pointed out in a recent interview that . . . many students already gamble online.").
The duplicity is stunning. Apparently the University, recognizing the impropriety of what it was doing, but wanting the money from the gambling industry advertising anyway, decided everything would be OK if only it would falsely represent that no gambling actually takes place in a gambling casino by changing the name on its scoreboard from the gambling casino's real name -- the "Riverside Casino & Golf Resort" -- to that of a non-existant facility called the "Riverside Hotel & Golf Resort."
While I suspect that few of the 70,000 fans were led to believe that the Casino had truly decided to abandon gambling income for total dependence on its hotel business, there may well have been a few who found the name switch a little bizarre and baffling.
Not only does a university's promoting gambling to the young students in its charge violate basic principles of common sense and decency, it also violates the spirit of the law (which forbids anyone under the age of 21 to enter a gambling casino), and the spirit of the NCAA rules.
(Another incongruity is that while the University forbids consumption of alcohol in the stadium and some tailgating areas, a special dispensation to drink is granted to the Casino's stadium gamblers, as well as the guests of other purchasers of the $50,000-plus-a-year indoor skyboxes. There's no telling what lesson that provides the students in the stands and the athletes on the field.)
The University is certainly in no position to feign ignorance and innocence. As early as May 2006 the campus paper reported,
"[Riverside Casino Manager Joe] Massa has hired a sales manager to lure groups and conventions to the casino, and he plans to hire a sales staff in Chicago and Des Moines. A package could include a hotel stay with a trip to Kinnick Stadium for tailgating and box seats at an Iowa football game. Kehl says he wants to organize junkets to the casino, where out-of-state gamblers would be flown into the Eastern Iowa Airport."
Elaine Watkins-Miller, "If they build it, will they come?," Master's Media Project/Riverside Project, The Daily Iowan, May 5, 2006.
What has the University had to say about all of this?
"University of Iowa athletic director Gary Barta said Tuesday that the university would not place restrictions on a Riverside casino that has rented a Kinnick Stadium skybox with plans to bring big gamblers to Hawkeye football games.
“'We have never placed any restrictions on a company which owns tickets, how they use them secondarily,' Barta said. 'Once they are sold to a company, it is that individual’s or that company’s discretion how they use them.'
"The new $140 million casino at Riverside is placing a special marketing emphasis on Hawkeye football games. The casino, located 12 miles south of Iowa City, has spent $165,000 for a three-year lease on a skybox at Kinnick Stadium. The casino has also purchased dozens of Hawkeye football tickets for its preferred guests.
"Iowa has 19 casinos, but the opening of the Riverside complex Thursday at 9 p.m. marks the first time a casino has been so close to one of Iowa’s three state universities.
"Barta said the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the U of I are 'very concerned about possible ill effects as they relate to gambling and intercollegiate athletics.'
"He added, 'On the other hand, the various casinos in this state, they are legal businesses. So you walk that fine line between your concern about gambling and its association with intercollegiate athletics and what you know has been understood as a legal entity in this state.'"
Randy Peterson, "High-Level, High-Dollar, High Ol' Times," Des Moines Register, August 30, 2006 ("Casino's Football Skybox is OK With U of I").
The Hawkeyes won the game today, and a good one it was. And they've made a lot of money from the gambling industry.
But in the process they've certainly fallen far from the educational and moral high ground to which they profess to aspire.
Technorati tags: Iowa Rain Forest, economic development, attractions, tourism, rain forest, pork, Earthpark, Earthpork, Earth Park, Iowa, casino, gambling, Riverside, Pella, Riverside Casino & Golf Resort, football, college sports, sports betting, gambling and college football
March 27, 2011, 10:00 p.m
[Related: "Hawkeye Football Players' Criminal Records; We're Number Two! We're Number Two!" March 3, 2011; "Hawkeyes' Criminal Record Lengthens," February 25, 2008.]
Felons on the Field; From District Court to Basketball Court
Do Hawkeyes Check Criminal Records Before Awarding Scholarships?
On March 2 Sports Illustrated reported that the University of Iowa Athletic Program tied for number two among the 25 top universities' athletes arrest records. Jeff Benedict and Armen Keteyian, "College Football and Crime," Sports Illustrated, March 2, 2011. And see, "Hawkeye Football Players' Criminal Records; We're Number Two! We're Number Two!" March 3, 2011.
In that blog entry, I wrote:
Three years ago, when Iowa's football program was also singled out for its players' criminal records, I wrote in this blog,
I've suggested in blog entries here before, but it bears repeating that in addition to whatever else the Athletic Department may be doing to improve its criminal record, it might give a little more attention to who it's recruiting.
And, No, I don't mean that a teenage athlete's single indiscretion should bar his or her entering our program. And I don't mean we should be probing in depth the private lives of potential recruits. And I understand that juvenile court records are not always available. And, Yes, I agree that living in a community like Iowa City, the added maturity of a couple of years, and a strong and positive relationship with the right coach can sometimes turn lives around.
But I do think it might be appropriate to make at least some greater effort to find out, before we bring them here, if those we are recruiting have already established patterns of anti-social and criminal behavior, and a disrespect for law, such that the data indicates the mathematical odds are it is likely to continue.
"Hawkeyes' Criminal Record Lengthens," February 25, 2008.
Today's SI/CBS report reveals that the failure to investigate recruits' criminal records, which I highlighted three years ago, is in fact a central cause of the problem.
Among the 25 schools in the investigation, only two -- TCU and Oklahoma -- perform any type of regular criminal background searches on recruits. But even TCU and Oklahoma don't look at juvenile records. . . .
Yet it wouldn't take much for schools to access this information. Take Florida, for example. The Sunshine State is not only one of the nation's largest football hotbeds, it also has the nation's most open public records law. Through the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, anyone can check a person's complete criminal history -- including many juvenile arrests -- for $24. . . .
Additional commentary: . . .
4. . . . I think the Daily Iowan's report [Jordan Garretson, "Barta: Background checks on athletes worth discussing," The Daily Iowan, March 3, 2011] of [UI Athletic Director Gary] Barta's response to the idea of background checks leaves a good deal to be desired. . . .
But Barta said he has some reservations about the idea, noting that screening potential recruits and conducting background checks might not be the most effective way to keep athletes out of legal trouble.
“Maybe this will provide us another opportunity to open the discussions,” Barta told The Daily Iowan in a phone interview. “If it would help guarantee us that we wouldn’t have student-athletes making bad decisions, I certainly would consider it. I don’t know whether it would accomplish that, however.”
Not "the most effective"? He'll only consider improvements if they will "guarantee us that we wouldn't have student-athletes making bad decisions"? Which of his present approaches to the problem are "the most effective"? What does he have in mind that would "guarantee" no more "bad decisions"? How has his current approach to these problems been working for him? Why would you not want to consider advance information that is easily available to you before bringing a recruit on campus? Even if you do decide to go ahead and recruit with scholarship a player with a number of serious felony convictions, wouldn't it be helpful to know of that record ahead of time in arranging for the support and additional attention that might benefit the player (not to mention other students and the community)?
And so it was that four days later the Press-Citizen reported, in a little-noticed, small story on its back pages, that the basketball program both (1) "decide[d] to go ahead and recruit with scholarship a player with a number of serious felony convictions," and that (2) "it [would] be helpful to know of that record ahead of time. . .."
Here is that story. (Because I see no need to further implant future Google searches on the athlete's name with his criminal record, I refer to him simply as "the athlete.")
University of Iowa officials conducted an extensive background search on [a] 25-year old junior college basketball recruit . . . before allowing him to take an official visit over the weekend, [the athlete's] junior college coach said Monday.
According to HawkeyeInsider.com, Iowa coach Fran McCaffery reportedly has offered [the athlete] a scholarship despite [his] criminal background that includes spending nearly four years in prison after pleading guilty to robbery.
"They did their background work, absolutely," said [the athlete's coach] . . . this season. "We had paperwork here, and we sent the paperwork out to them."
[The] robbery charge stems from an incident in December 2003 in his hometown . . ..
[The athlete], who was 18 at the time, also was charged with malicious wounding and use of a firearm, which are felonies, stemming from the same incident. But he ultimately pleaded guilty to the robbery charge and served 37 months in prison.
[He] now is a sophomore at [the junior college] and has emerged as a Division I recruit.
He averaged 20 points and 10 rebounds this season, and the 6-foot-5, 220-pound combo guard has schools such as Iowa, Penn State and Iona pursuing him.
"To me, this is what I say to all the coaches; he made a mistake when he was 18 years old," [the athlete's coach] said. "He's now 25. Enough. He's a great kid and let's move on."
[He] also was arrested for a misdemeanor assault in January, but the charge later was dropped.
"It was nothing," [his coach] said without being specific.
[The coach] said Iowa's relationship with [the athlete] started in January when McCaffery called the coach] at home asking about [him].
McCaffery was not aware of [the athlete's] criminal record, but [the coach] said he was upfront and honest with McCaffery during their initial phone call.
Asked how McCaffery responded, [the coach] said:
"He said 'Well, let me see.' And he went and checked with some people and he made another call back and said, 'We're going to proceed a little bit further.'
"And as we proceeded a little bit further he was always checking with other people."
NCAA rules prohibit UI officials from talking about a specific unsigned recruit. However, UI Athletics Director Gary Barta said Monday that UI officials usually know about a recruit's background before approving a campus visit.
"I would just say that it would be highly, highly unusual for someone to come to Iowa in any sport and us not know about their background," Barta said. "Just think about a high school student-athlete, if they get into trouble during their high school time, it's very likely, especially in today's world that it's going to be in the newspaper. It's going to be documented some way or another.
"So most of the time we know a student-athlete's background and we know whether or not they're going to fit at Iowa."
[The athlete] told HawkeyeInsider.com that Iowa offered him a scholarship about two weeks ago.
"When we make a final decision to offer a scholarship to a young person in any sport, we've spent months and in some cases years trying to evaluate if it's going to be a good fit," Barta said. "I can tell you by the time they decide to bring someone to campus, or we decide to bring them to campus, we know more about them than one can imagine. We don't do official criminal background checks, but we do an extensive background search." . . .
[The athlete] told HawkeyeInsider.com that he has nothing to hide with regard to his past.
"I'm being straight up with everybody about what I've been through," he said. "I'm not hiding from anybody. It made me who I am today."
Pat Harty, "Iowa officials did background search on recruit; has received scholarship offer," Iowa City Press-Citizen, March 7, 2011.
Now let me be clear. As I wrote in 2008, and quoted above,
No, I don't mean that a teenage athlete's single indiscretion should bar his or her entering our program. And I don't mean we should be probing in depth the private lives of potential recruits. And I understand that juvenile court records are not always available. And, Yes, I agree that living in a community like Iowa City, the added maturity of a couple of years, and a strong and positive relationship with the right coach can sometimes turn lives around.
To which I might add, I also understand that the college education made possible by an athletic scholarship can make an enormous difference in the future lives of many college athletes (with or without the subsequent unlikely role of professional sports in those lives).
But having said all that, what is one to make of Pat Harty's story about this recruit?
Is it the case that Iowa actually does check into the criminal background of recruits, notwithstanding SI's suggestion to the contrary? Or was this the first time it was done?
If the Hawkeyes do routinely check criminal records, why does AD Barta suggest he's reluctant to do what is already being done (unless, as he says, such research could "guarantee" the elimination of all Iowa athletes' criminal activity)? And if Iowa does do the checks, why would the UI not use the criminal record checking services that SI says are readily available? Or does it?
Does this story accurately reflect the Athletic Department's standards with regard to recruiting athletes with felony records? Does it even have such standards; that is, written guidelines regarding the maximum criminal record a potential recruit can have and still be acceptable to the program; taking into account such things as the number of arrests, felony convictions, the seriousness of the crime, and so forth?
How does athletic ability factor into the equation? This athlete averages 20 points a game. What if he'd only averaged 14 points a game? Assume, for illustration only, that 14 points a game is normally impressive enough to warrant recruiting a player. Would a felony record count more heavily against a 14-point player than a 20-point player? Or does the criminal record standard, if one there be, get applied the same to every potential recruit regardless of comparative athletic ability?
How, and in what ways, if at all, does it do risk assessment as a part of this evaluation; that is, the potential impact on the Iowa City community, the welfare of UI students, staff and faculty, and other athletes -- including the adverse public relations for all of the above -- if the past pattern of criminal activity continues in Iowa City? What is the risk the recruit's criminal behavior will continue, and how serious would it be if it does? Intuitively, one assumes an individual's criminal behavior is likely to continue, and that recidivism rates are high. But intuition is often wrong. What data is there, in general, regarding the relationship between past record and future behavior, and to what extent is that taken into consideration in our recruiting process?
And, finally, when the Hawkeyes do recruit convicted felons and bring them to Iowa City, do they, as I ask above, find it "helpful to know of that record ahead of time in arranging for the support and additional attention that might benefit the player (not to mention other students and the community)?" If so, what is the nature of those extra efforts, attention, and support -- above and beyond what is provided to all team members?
I think these are questions, and a story, worth pursuing, by local citizens, University administrators, the media -- and, of course, the Athletic Department.
# # #
February 14, 2011, 8:00 a.m.; February 23, 2011, 7:30 a.m.
There Are Three Steps
(bought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
[Update, Feb. 23: An important addition to this Feb. 14 blog commentary regarding the University's overlooking the lessons in the "crisis communications playbook" when handling the hospitalization of 13 Hawkeye football players on Jan. 25, headlines all the local papers this morning [Feb. 23].
I closed the Feb. 14 commentary with:
It's UI President Sally Mason's call as to how, when, and with whom to draw on what I call the "crisis communications playbook." But Heldt reports that "When asked if athletics crisis communications might be moved to the office of the UI's vice president for strategic communications, Tysen Kendig, Mason said it doesn't matter who reports to whom."
That's one call for which I'd recommend a challenge and instant replay.
It now turns out I was right to call for an instant replay. What the replay shows is that "who reports to whom" was a major part of the problem.
The Des Moines Register got hold of the emails that were flying around the campus in late January -- they are "public records" under Iowa law -- and all the papers are reporting on what those emails reveal about the Iowa's "chaos in crisis communications."
See, Tom Witosky, "Documents cite U of I concerns on what to release about hospitalized athletes," Des Moines Register, February 23, 2011 (also in Iowa City Press Citizen's HawkCentral); Erin Jordan, "UI releases emails showing response to hospitalization of athletes," The Gazette, February 23, 2011 ("Even the University of Iowa’s top communication official disagreed with the Athletics Department’s handling of the football player hospitalizations in January, according to e-mail communications released Tuesday by the UI."); Jordan Garretson, "UI rethinks PR approach after football hospitalizations," The Daily Iowan, February 23, 2011.]
# # #
Last Wednesday [Feb. 9] The Daily Iowan's Alison Sullivan reported the University of Iowa's Athletic Director, Gary Barta's analysis of the University's recent bad national press over the hospitalization of 13 football players -- the "negative attention directed at the University of Iowa football program."
"He [said] the national media and the public reacted too quickly to the recent hospitalization of 13 football players. The instant negative publicity resulted from what he described as the media’s mentality of getting information fast in the Internet era, even if 'facts be damned.'” Alison Sullivan, "Barta: Football media attention has been difficult," The Daily Iowan, February 9, 2011.
The paper maintains an online edition where readers can post comments. I contributed the following:
"The national media and the public reacted too quickly to the recent hospitalization." The other possibility? Maybe the AD [Athletic Director Gary Barta] and [football] Coach [Kirk Ferentz] reacted too slowly.
There's a public relations playbook for "crisis management" that's seldom read and less often followed -- whether any president's White House, corporate CEO, or athletic team -- and was ignored in this crisis as well.
As Ferentz acknowledged: "Ferentz . . . acknowledged he erred by leaving campus to recruit while the players were hospitalized." HawkCentral, Feb. 2. [Andy Hamilton, "Ferentz Says He Erred, but Defends Program," HawkCentral, February 2, 2011.]
Had he briefly returned, expressed the concern, announced an investigation, and made the statements he made later, that "negative attention directed at the University of Iowa football program" would not have been eliminated, but it sure would have been significantly balanced and softened.
Admittedly, some journalists jumped without facts. I've deliberately not blogged about the hospitalization because I don't have the facts either.
But focusing on the media's faults may not be the most constructive or efficient way to identify, and respond to, "the problem."
This morning [Feb. 14], The Gazette's Diane Heldt reports the University may now be digging out and dusting off that "crisis management" playbook. Diane Heldt, "UI considers changes to crisis communication; experts offer tips," The Gazette, February 14, 2011, p. A1: "University of Iowa officials are discussing ways to improve how they communicate in a crisis, after the university’s response to the recent hospitalization of football players garnered bad press across the nation."
My son, Gregory, calms his computer customers' frayed nerves by beginning virtually every instruction for them with the line, "There are three steps" -- which he then proceeds to reveal.
So it is with Crisis Communications 101. Heldt reports, "Experts in image consulting and communications say immediacy, transparency, honesty and empathy are key when an organization is hit with a crisis and the public and media are demanding information. 'When you let there be a lag time, that can be perceived as lack of concern or avoidance,' said Kate Loor, vice president with Frank Magid Associates, speaking about crisis communication in general."
OK, four steps. But it's pretty much what I was saying in my little comment on the DI's story. It's not rocket science. It's kind of common sense.
According to Heldt, Barta is still focused on medical details instead of PR basics. "UI Athletics Director Gary Barta said when news first broke of the 13 hospitalized football players, UI officials didn’t have a lot of information and their No. 1 concern was for the players’ safety. 'We felt that was all the information we had at the time,' Barta said of the initial UI response. 'In hindsight, maybe I would have done things differently, but we went with what we knew at the time.'”
So, you don't know the medical details. OK. The "four steps" -- immediacy, transparency, honesty and empathy -- still leave you with a lot of things you can say and do (rather than saying nothing while playing golf in Florida).
Heldt reminds readers that Coach Ferentz acknowledged on Feb. 2 that "it was 'bad judgment on my part' to not return immediately to Iowa City to be with his hospitalized players or take part in the news conference" (which neither he nor Barta attended). (Coach Ferentz was tending to one of his top priority responsibilities: recruiting players for next season's team, with national "signing day" looming before him in 10 days.) That's the confession of someone who "gets it." That's class. We all make mistakes; we don't all acknowledge and take personal responsibility for them, without excuses and blaming others. (He's displayed equal character on occasion when blaming himself, rather than his players, for the loss of a game.)
It's UI President Sally Mason's call as to how, when, and with whom to draw on what I call the "crisis communications playbook." But Heldt reports that "When asked if athletics crisis communications might be moved to the office of the UI's vice president for strategic communications, Tysen Kendig, Mason said it doesn't matter who reports to whom."
That's one call for which I'd recommend a challenge and instant replay.
# # #
Addendum, For the Record.
I subsequently elaborated on my first comment on the DI's page.
Following my original comment, an "Ed S" said, "Nick 52 is right on the money with his comments. If the AD does not understand the problem he has created than who in the world does? . . .."
This prompted an "FlSven" to come to the AD's defense. In the spirit of the FCC's repealed "Fairness Doctrine," I reproduce his comment in its entirety:
All way off base, this truely is the result of the "instant news, screw the facts, just tell me something, anything" culture and mentality we've slipped into.
Can you imagine the 'outrage' by these analyzing experts if quick, inaccurate statements were made by Coack Ferentz .. omg!!
All these University individuals are very honorable Gentlemen and this has been validated by the new recruits and their families who didn't waver in their committments and the existing players who are all looking forward to more HAWKEYE football.
I'd suggest getting over yourselves and recognizing the hype and exaggeration that the media and some fans of other teams have blown up over this accidental event that was handled professionaly by the University.
Please let go of the jealousy that surrounds the monies made by successful individuals discussed, it's not very attractive and is often the vehicle of the wannabies and unsuccessful.
In response, I commented:
Seldom would I respond to a comment here. Such 'tis-'tain't exchanges too often escalate into dialogues neither constructive nor civil. And I'm not even sure FISven had my earlier comment in mind. But to remove any possible ambiguity as to what I was trying to say:
- I also noted "some journalists jumped without facts" and that "I've deliberately not blogged about the hospitalization." Of course the media bears much of the blame for how the media handled the hospitalization.
- No one's suggesting that Ferentz should have, or would have, made "quick, inaccurate statements." What I suggested was that had he "expressed the concern, announced an investigation, and made the statements he made later" the "outrage" FISven (and I) wish to avoid "would have been significantly balanced and softened." His choices were not limited to (1) delaying saying anything, and (2) making "quick, inaccurate statements."
- I absolutely agree with FISven that "all these University individuals are very honorable Gentlemen." I've described Coach Ferentz as perhaps the best coach in the country -- pro and intercollegiate -- who runs a class program.
- However, both Coach Ferentz and I seem to disagree with FISven's characterization that the public relations and media relations aspects of this event were "handled professionally by the University." He's publicly acknowledged as much -- being the classy guy that he is. I agree; and because of my affection for the University of Iowa, offered the suggestion that it might be institutionally advantageous for the University -- and its major programs in the spotlight, UIHC and athletics -- to anticipate, and give a little more attention to, what I called the "public relations playbook for 'crisis management.'"
_______________
* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source -- even if I have to embed it myself.
-- Nicholas Johnson
# # #
