[Cyrocks]

Originally Posted by Gavrilo

Well said Cyrocks. I agree with you.

Hell has just officially frozen over.



I totally agree with you, as well, as to let's wait and see what Clayborn pleads to and then what kind of punishment Ferentz hands down. Until then, let's all just settle down and enjoy this lovely Iowa weather.

[hawkeyescott]

Originally Posted by Cyrocks

I thought there was something legally wrong with that, but I could be mistaken. Either way, having the head coach's son living in subsidized housing was not a good public relations move. Should have just given him some money for an apartment in the first place.

Morally wrong, yes, legally, no. Brian Ferentz was over 18 when he lived in those apartments so he was an adult and didn't have to include his parents income on the application (only his) to get the subsidized housing.

Also even though Brian is KF's son he is still a scholarship player bound by NCAA regulations and rules and I don't think KF can just give him money for living expenses even though he is family.

[Gavrilo]

Originally Posted by hawkeyescott

Morally wrong, yes, legally, no. Brian Ferentz was over 18 when he lived in those apartments so he was an adult and didn't have to include his parents income on the application (only his) to get the subsidized housing.

Also even though Brian is KF's son he is still a scholarship player bound by NCAA regulations and rules and I don't think KF can just give him money for living expenses even though he is family.

Sure he could. Don't be ridiculous.

[Cyrocks]

Originally Posted by hawkeyescott

Morally wrong, yes, legally, no. Brian Ferentz was over 18 when he lived in those apartments so he was an adult and didn't have to include his parents income on the application (only his) to get the subsidized housing.

Also even though Brian is KF's son he is still a scholarship player bound by NCAA regulations and rules and I don't think KF can just give him money for living expenses even though he is family.

Originally Posted by Gavrilo

Sure he could. Don't be ridiculous.

NCAA provides for some exceptions when sons/daughters of coaches are on scholarshiop as well.

Like I stated earlier, that whole thing could have been avoided with some simple steps.

[Frak]

While the subsidized housing thing wasn't illegal, it was IMO immoral. That program wasn't set up for CFB players who get scholarship money and training table. It was intended for poor people. And I know for a fact that KF and his staff were using it as a recruiting tool..."come to iowa, live in this subsidized housing and pocket the extra cash". Whether FB players are still living there, I don't know. Ames now has Section 8 housing too. I'd hope that no ISU players are living there, but I don't know that for sure. I'd be disappointed if they were, but I guess if iowa is still getting away with it, I don't begrudge ISU for wanting to play on a level playing field.

[Gitwitit]

Originally Posted by Frak

While the subsidized housing thing wasn't illegal, it was IMO immoral. That program wasn't set up for CFB players who get scholarship money and training table. It was intended for poor people. And I know for a fact that KF and his staff were using it as a recruiting tool..."come to iowa, live in this subsidized housing and pocket the extra cash". Whether FB players are still living there, I don't know. Ames now has Section 8 housing too. I'd hope that no ISU players are living there, but I don't know that for sure. I'd be disappointed if they were, but I guess if iowa is still getting away with it, I don't begrudge ISU for wanting to play on a level playing field.

That had been going on for probably 20 yrs and it wasn't just football players. It was athletes from other sports but it was also just regular students. Are you upset with regular students for doing it? It was a loophole that was found and exploited. I don't blame Brian Ferentz for living there considering he wanted to live with friends on the team that were already there. In hindsight, I'm sure he would take it back due to the amount of grief it has caused him and his family over the years, but it is what it is. There are a lot worst things going on in college athletics than this.

[Cyrocks]

Originally Posted by Gitwitit

That had been going on for probably 20 yrs and it wasn't just football players. It was athletes from other sports but it was also just regular students. Are you upset with regular students for doing it? It was a loophole that was found and exploited. I don't blame Brian Ferentz for living there considering he wanted to live with friends on the team that were already there. In hindsight, I'm sure he would take it back due to the amount of grief it has caused him and his family over the years, but it is what it is. There are a lot worst things going on in college athletics than this.

See, that's the thing. As the coach's son -- right or wrong -- everything you do comes under close scrutiny. Coach Ferentz should know that better than anyone.

Also, seriously, would you let your son or daughter, who attend college, to stay in subsidized housing intended for the poor when you knew you could afford to pay for an apartment? I don't think you would.

[TarHeelHawk]

BHGP takes down Mr. Ford. Second story down.

It's Not Plagiarism If You Link To It Has a Gun, Some Fish, and a Barrel - Black Heart Gold Pants

And then sweeps the leg when Ford gets back up.

Rep. Wayne Ford Holds Adrian Clayborn to Higher Standard Than He Holds Himself - Black Heart Gold Pants

[Cyrocks]

Originally Posted by TarHeelHawk

BHGP takes down Mr. Ford. Second story down.

It's Not Plagiarism If You Link To It Has a Gun, Some Fish, and a Barrel - Black Heart Gold Pants

And then sweeps the leg when Ford gets back up.

Rep. Wayne Ford Holds Adrian Clayborn to Higher Standard Than He Holds Himself - Black Heart Gold Pants

Ummm. considering Rep. Ford was never charged with any crime, nor did he plead guilty to any crime in relation to what was mentioned in the article (see below), how is he holding Clayborn to any higher standard?

Not sure when this all was. It could have been last year, but again, Ford was not charged with a crime, arrested for a crime, had a court date scheduled or is scheduled to plead guilty to a crime.

You seem to take pride in taking down people who used induendos when talking about the Clayborn case, maybe you should do the same with BHGP.

On May 15th, Ford's campaign reimbursed an urban dreams employee $93.00 for gratuities paid to youth. Ford wrote checks out to himself for the same purpose four more times that month and once in June. The total amount spent on gratuities to youth over the three week period was $2693.00
Another red flag – on May 30th, Urban Dreams, the non-profit managed by Ford, contributed a little more than $60 to Ford's campaign. In a letter to Ford, the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board ordered the campaign to refund the money. Iowa Law prohibits non-profits from contributing to campaigns. In fact, it could jeopardize Urban Dreams' non-profit status.
And finally, there are questions about loans made to Ford from his campaign and how they were repaid. The oversight group wants to know why in one case, "a loan would be made, seemingly to repay a loan."

[TarHeelHawk]

Originally Posted by Cyrocks

Ummm. considering Rep. Ford was never charged with any crime, nor did he plead guilty to any crime in relation to what was mentioned in the article (see below), how is he holding Clayborn to any higher standard?

Not sure when this all was. It could have been last year, but again, Ford was not charged with a crime, arrested for a crime, had a court date scheduled or is scheduled to plead guilty to a crime.

You seem to take pride in taking down people who used induendos when talking about the Clayborn case, maybe you should do the same with BHGP.

On May 15th, Ford's campaign reimbursed an urban dreams employee $93.00 for gratuities paid to youth. Ford wrote checks out to himself for the same purpose four more times that month and once in June. The total amount spent on gratuities to youth over the three week period was $2693.00
Another red flag – on May 30th, Urban Dreams, the non-profit managed by Ford, contributed a little more than $60 to Ford's campaign. In a letter to Ford, the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board ordered the campaign to refund the money. Iowa Law prohibits non-profits from contributing to campaigns. In fact, it could jeopardize Urban Dreams' non-profit status.
And finally, there are questions about loans made to Ford from his campaign and how they were repaid. The oversight group wants to know why in one case, "a loan would be made, seemingly to repay a loan."

You're missing the point. Ford made it clear in his statement that it doesn't matter if one is guilty or innocent, but merely the appearance of guilt or innocence. If whatever shady dealing that Ford has involved himself in haven't been resolved, then maybe he should take his own advice and recuse himself from the state legislature until they are.

If this about "appropritate and inappropriate behavior," then perhaps Ford should take his own advice and suspend himself. That's the point the author was trying to make.

[Cyrocks]

Originally Posted by TarHeelHawk

You're missing the point. Ford made it clear in his statement that it doesn't matter if one is guilty or innocent, but merely the appearance of guilt or innocence. If whatever shady dealing that Ford has involved himself in haven't been resolved, then maybe he should take his own advice and recuse himself from the state legislature until they are.

If this about "appropritate and inappropriate behavior," then perhaps Ford should take his own advice and suspend himself. That's the point the author was trying to make.

Nope, it is you that is missing the point. I could be wrong I think Ford wants those "charged" with a crime to sit out. That's the difference. It is not about just about "inappropriate behavior".

Here is a portion of Ford's letter that addresses this:

“I have said before and I am saying again, Iowa’s three state universities are wrong when they allow players to continue to participate in sports after they have been arrested. Being arrested on assault charges is not some penny-ante crime. It is serious and should be treated as such,” Ford noted.
“Over and over again, we see instances of star athletes at our three universities making bad decisions and being charged with serious crimes – theft, drug charges, drunk driving, assault, even rape. And yet, they face no consequences, at least not until the season is over.”
“My concern is for the athletes. We are sending the wrong message when we ignore their wrongdoing. We are saying that if you are a good enough player you can do whatever you want and do not have to face the consequences. This is not how life works and our students need to learn that before they get into even more serious trouble.”
“Over the past 14 year, I have talked to athlete directors, coaches, players, and members of the Board of Regents. I have asked them repeatedly, how many players have to end up in handcuffs before we admit we have a problem at our universities? I have urged the Board of Regents to create a uniform policy that applies to all three universities. That policy must clearly spell out that in Iowa we will not tolerate unlawful behavior. It is not about being found innocent or guilty. It is about what is and what is not appropriate behavior.”
“Nothing has sunk in. So, now, as a member of the Legislative Oversight Committee, I am going to ask the chairs to invite the members of the Board of Regents to meet with the committee so we can discuss this problem and make sure they take action.”

Again, as I recall, no charges were filed against Ford, he wasn't arrested, he wasn't charged -- only allegations in which Ford was cleared (which BHGP leaves out).

Now if you and BGHP would have stuck with the first example, I wouldn't have argued with you. That clearly makes the point. But to print half-truths in an attempt to make a point is downright dishonest and deceiving

[Frak]

Originally Posted by Cyrocks

See, that's the thing. As the coach's son -- right or wrong -- everything you do comes under close scrutiny. Coach Ferentz should know that better than anyone.

Also, seriously, would you let your son or daughter, who attend college, to stay in subsidized housing intended for the poor when you knew you could afford to pay for an apartment? I don't think you would.

Also, most regular students don't get scholarship money to pay for their living expenses that they pocket due to the low rent. Regular students I could see, because most of them ARE poor. Athletes may be poor too, but they are supposed to get a check to cover room and board plus expenses. IMO it is scamming the system. And then to use that in your recruiting pitch? That's pretty low. It's basically paying players. I know McCarney's staff wasn't too happy with it.

Funny, you don't hear about that anymore. Either the loophole was closed or UI buried the story.

[TarHeelHawk]

Originally Posted by Cyrocks

Nope, it is you that is missing the point. I could be wrong I think Ford wants those "charged" with a crime to sit out. That's the difference. It is not about just about "inappropriate behavior".

Here is a portion of Ford's letter that addresses this:

“I have said before and I am saying again, Iowa’s three state universities are wrong when they allow players to continue to participate in sports after they have been arrested. Being arrested on assault charges is not some penny-ante crime. It is serious and should be treated as such,” Ford noted.
“Over and over again, we see instances of star athletes at our three universities making bad decisions and being charged with serious crimes – theft, drug charges, drunk driving, assault, even rape. And yet, they face no consequences, at least not until the season is over.”
“My concern is for the athletes. We are sending the wrong message when we ignore their wrongdoing. We are saying that if you are a good enough player you can do whatever you want and do not have to face the consequences. This is not how life works and our students need to learn that before they get into even more serious trouble.”
“Over the past 14 year, I have talked to athlete directors, coaches, players, and members of the Board of Regents. I have asked them repeatedly, how many players have to end up in handcuffs before we admit we have a problem at our universities? I have urged the Board of Regents to create a uniform policy that applies to all three universities. That policy must clearly spell out that in Iowa we will not tolerate unlawful behavior. It is not about being found innocent or guilty. It is about what is and what is not appropriate behavior.”
“Nothing has sunk in. So, now, as a member of the Legislative Oversight Committee, I am going to ask the chairs to invite the members of the Board of Regents to meet with the committee so we can discuss this problem and make sure they take action.”

Again, as I recall, no charges were filed against Ford, he wasn't arrested, he wasn't charged -- only allegations in which Ford was cleared (which BHGP leaves out).

Now if you and BGHP would have stuck with the first example, I wouldn't have argued with you. That clearly makes the point. But to print half-truths in an attempt to make a point is downright dishonest and deceiving

They don't leave it out, they mention that the last mention of it that they could find was on June 26th. If he has been cleared, it hasn't been in the news. In fact, BHGP goes out of their way to say that it's entirely possible the everything Ford has done in this situation is on the level.

BHGP is saying that it shouldn't matter whether you're arrested or charged - a point that Ford made himself - but that the mere look of impropriety should be enough for someone like Ford to excuse himself.

I'm not arguing whether or not it's right to allow players charged with a crime to play - every school in the state has done it, and it's a debate that's been had here many times.

[Cyrocks]

Originally Posted by TarHeelHawk

They don't leave it out, they mention that the last mention of it that they could find was on June 26th. If he has been cleared, it hasn't been in the news. In fact, BHGP goes out of their way to say that it's entirely possible the everything Ford has done in this situation is on the level.

Then what is the point of using this? That's a very common, pathetic practice used to discredit people -- throw out an allegation, or a story, and then say "Now, it is entirely possible that this person is innocent." Do a little research to find out, and if you can't find it out, then don't use the allegations.

BHGP is saying that it shouldn't matter whether you're arrested or charged - a point that Ford made himself - but that the mere look of impropriety should be enough for someone like Ford to excuse himself.

Does Ford say it shouldn't matter if a person is arrested or charged? You have to show me in the letter where he states this.

I'm not arguing whether or not it's right to allow players charged with a crime to play - every school in the state has done it, and it's a debate that's been had here many times.

[TarHeelHawk]

That's exactly what he said. Find the key phrase in this quote - one you posted in it's entirety a few posts ago.

"My concern is for the athletes. We are sending the wrong message when we ignore their wrongdoing. We are saying that if you are a good enough player you can do whatever you want and do not have to face the consequences. This is not how life works and our students need to learn that before they get into even more serious trouble."
"It is not about being found innocent or guilty. It is about what is and what is not appropriate behavior."