Even if he does something even worse @Thinker and his compadres will say he deserves a chance to fix it. Because it isn't the grave nature of what he has done but the faux change that has been made in the program. Just look nobody is complaining just like before Daniels said something on Twitter.
It was brought to his attention ad KF made the kid go apologize to Doyle. Made him apologize to Doyle for Doyle's racist tendencies. Just ******* amazing.
This is EXACTLY why you don't allow Kirk to put together the committee. Best case scenario they are just beholden to Kirk for putting them on the committee. Worst case scenario Kirk doesn't like what is going on and he tears it all down so he can put together another hand picked committee.
Searching for tangible metrics to show progress on an issue as complex as the one Iowa is dealing with 18 months after it came to light is asinine. When people do that, it shows more their motivation to put this issue behind them than actually have sustainable change within the program. The frustration some people have with this situation is how simple the fixes appear to have been and how dismissive some Iowa fans are about the severity of it. Not many people outside of the Iowa program and their fans believe real lasting change occurred. The football program could definitely be on their way to addressing things, but it’s way too early to tell just how successful they have been. There’s a multitude of reasons why people don’t believe lasting change has occurred, and at the top of the list is the lack of transparency within the Iowa athletic department, which is what the Gazette is rightfully calling for.
I’m certainly not in the camp where they have the issues behind them but it sounds like there is progress being made. How would you suggest they measure progress?
What is such a big deal if you can see his response that was posted by the university on twitter? What more could you want to ask him when he addressed everything in that letter a week or so ago? Please tell.
What do you want to know that he did not address? As things currently stand?
Lol, so you are in the camp that he is required to sit down and talk with media that reported on something without asking his response first? Those idiots did not ask anyone before publishing an article that was slanted one side. Then they demand to talk to people after the slanted piece. They get told no and are shocked no one will come talk to them. Call me names all you want, but not getting bullied by the press is kind of nice in this day and age where free speech has gotten out of hand.
