- Jun 20, 2006
- 39,428
- 24,746
- 113
FIRE HINES
- Thread starter keepngoal
- Start date
I can tell from your responses you have never held a position like Pollards where you are already accountable to the public and everything you do is scrutinized.
The absolute last thing you do is give time to a reporter fabricating a situation from anonymous sources.
My goodness anonymous sources....If I could count the times I have heard that. Let me translate anonymous sources.... people who lie and want to me surethey won't be caught in their lies. And by some remote chance that an anonymous source is accurate....then there are things called facts to support it. Oops.
Anyone arguing Hines had a clue after Fred's comments is a fool and Hines better hope Pollard is a forgiving person. It's funny that Pollard already took the high road when he could bury Hines if he wanted to.
It's also comical you don't get it.
I see how this works.
Some of the sources are probably Tommy from des moines.
Some of the sources are Hines fellow reporters.
Some of the sources are the Hawkeye who stole from the Hawks locker room.
Some of the sources are the football team who are jealous of the attention basketball gets.
Some of the sources are the university of Iowa teaching staff. If they can reject a president they can remove the ad at isu. They don't like his progress.
get real
Pollard is not the problem. Hines lack of quality sources was the problem. I could find "up to double digit" sources of people who report to me that do not like everything I do. You cannot always make everyone happy.
Did Hines talk to other sources who would have told the other side of the story? Does not appear so the way the article was written.
Last edited:
I'M NOT GOING TO EXPLAIN THE IRONY OF YOUR POST. But I am laughing so hard right now.
I think I will believe the former coach who refuted the entire article and said it wasn't accurate. Pollard wields no power over him anymore and that means there is no reason to lie.
Dang it. Sucks for you though doesn't it.
- Jun 20, 2006
- 39,428
- 24,746
- 113
I think Leath probably has a bit more say in our AD than our own AD. Which personally I think sucks but that's the way it is now. If there were ever problems, I would point the fingers at Leath over Pollard, because our athletics issues seem to have become a bigger problem under Leath than they were under Geoffroy. Seems like Geoffroy told Pollard to do what he wants while Leath wants some control.
for those of you calling it poor journalism, I don't really understand why. There are hundreds of stories reported daily in the US that are based on anonymous sources...hell, even the Watergate scandal was an anonymous source. If Hines is sitting in a bar and talking with some of you about what he heard, you'd probably ask him why he's not following up on it...you'd want to know more. Not sure I fault him for writing the story but have a bigger issue with the chicken **** sources who can't be named. Unless of course Hines is making all of it up...which seems a bit far fetched to me.
Unfortunately, there is probably some truth in what was written...but I really question why it's even a big deal at this point. Too much time spent on the past vs what we have to look forward to.
Unfortunately, there is probably some truth in what was written...but I really question why it's even a big deal at this point. Too much time spent on the past vs what we have to look forward to.
Here is my biggest problem with the story by Hines. If you write something like this, you better have done everything possible to verify the facts of the situation as well. With that said, pretty much all articles like this SHOULD be written this way:
1. Publish the statement of what happened from your sources, even if anonymous
2. Show the steps you took to verify the details claimed by your source (you better make a good effort at it too)
3. Post what you were able to verify or weren't able to verify, even if it goes against what your sources are saying
4. If you write an article over many months, you've got plenty of time to put full effort into this and it is irresponsible not to
This brings me back to my problem with this article, which is the fact that #2 and #3 are pretty much nonexistent and #4 gives you no cop out to not include #2 and #3. If you follow these steps, I have no grounds to criticize you, but unfortunately Hines didn't.
1. Publish the statement of what happened from your sources, even if anonymous
2. Show the steps you took to verify the details claimed by your source (you better make a good effort at it too)
3. Post what you were able to verify or weren't able to verify, even if it goes against what your sources are saying
4. If you write an article over many months, you've got plenty of time to put full effort into this and it is irresponsible not to
This brings me back to my problem with this article, which is the fact that #2 and #3 are pretty much nonexistent and #4 gives you no cop out to not include #2 and #3. If you follow these steps, I have no grounds to criticize you, but unfortunately Hines didn't.
What progress are you referring to? Turning the wrestling program into something that is second-fiddle? Turning the football program from something that was at least mediocre five years ago to now being a laughing stock? Or perhaps not treating his amazing young basketball coach the way he should have been treated?
It is poor journalism because of the half-arse efforts to get the other side of the story.
If in the four to five months he was writing the "story," he had tried to talk to Pollard about it before trying to set up a meeting the day he was going to publish it, he would have known:
1. The Hawaii thing was a checkout/flight deal of only a few hours and the decision was made by Micah Byers with Hoiberg's approval and had nothing to do with Pollard.
2. The assistant coaches were not paying for tickets for family, they were paying the taxes on tickets for sold out games as required by the IRS.
3. The NCAA game was a choice by the families of getting a free trip to Hawaii that would not normally be covered.
Hines apparently had no interest in finding out these facts. Instead, he sensationalized the Hawaii, led with it, and has done nothing to correct it even though KXNO has been tweeting it out to national media.
Moreover, if what Pollard has said is true about what Hoiberg told him, Hoiberg was willing to be quoted in the article debunking most of it, but instead Hines presented it as Hoiberg not commenting.
The article made no attempt to be balanced, fair, and impartial.
If in the four to five months he was writing the "story," he had tried to talk to Pollard about it before trying to set up a meeting the day he was going to publish it, he would have known:
1. The Hawaii thing was a checkout/flight deal of only a few hours and the decision was made by Micah Byers with Hoiberg's approval and had nothing to do with Pollard.
2. The assistant coaches were not paying for tickets for family, they were paying the taxes on tickets for sold out games as required by the IRS.
3. The NCAA game was a choice by the families of getting a free trip to Hawaii that would not normally be covered.
Hines apparently had no interest in finding out these facts. Instead, he sensationalized the Hawaii, led with it, and has done nothing to correct it even though KXNO has been tweeting it out to national media.
Moreover, if what Pollard has said is true about what Hoiberg told him, Hoiberg was willing to be quoted in the article debunking most of it, but instead Hines presented it as Hoiberg not commenting.
The article made no attempt to be balanced, fair, and impartial.
Pure speculation - Fred wanted to get his followup heart surgery out of the way before he committed/went back to the pros.
Fred also has a safe way about him to be non combatant like TH issues surface. He has nothing to gain to jump into the frey.
