Yeah, I heard that too, where is the data from some student poll?
GIA has its own Compliance Specialist. I'm sure he is leading the charge.
Is the state of Iowa done with their investigation? Perhaps they're looking into the other universities and sports?
UNI is public Drake is private. However, the same laws of Iowa apply.
That last part is funny , ie the 10 more kids part .
Any college age girl within 500 yards of the Ferraris is gambling.
How do we know no women were targeted. And why would they be. Obviously something happened where someone got caught and started talking or they found out one person was betting on a given site and saw other athletes were involved. That would lead to a targeted investigation and rightly so. Once they found the culprits it's not like they can say hey let's check and see if other athletes were involved they found out about a few and then investigated that's how it works. As far as doj they only reason they could get involved is if inter state issues were involved like betting across state lines illegally. In any event this has nothing to do with anything as nobody to my understanding has been charged except the Iowa State kid NCAA acted accordingly and now people are pissed.
Because somebody talked it's not like they said let's look at Iowa or Iowa State it just so happened that's where the athletes went and they were male anything else is a bullshit excuse they knew better end of story
Sounds like you are the one talking out your ass I offer hypothetical s you on the other hand seem to portray some sort of reality that doesn't exist. Either way betting as a college athlete is dumb as shit and anyone who condones it has their head up their ass no matter what team it is. You are just butt hurt because it's Iowa I get it and I can assure you I'm not talking out my ass
Do you you even read what you type before you press "Post reply"?Sounds like you are the one talking out your ass I offer hypothetical s you on the other hand seem to portray some sort of reality that doesn't exist. Either way betting as a college athlete is dumb as shit and anyone who condones it has their head up their ass no matter what team it is. You are just butt hurt because it's Iowa I get it and I can assure you I'm not talking out my ass
Brands plays poker with the other top NCAA wrestling coaches and can't find the mark.
The amount of money required to compete with the top spenders in college football is excrementally higher than to be the top spender in Wrestling. It's like comparing hundreds of pennies to hundreds of millions of dollars. Not even in the same universe.
NO WAY! They are playing at home and are heavy favorites. That would be a sucker's bet
Who is making the selective enforcement argument? It is the selective investigation argument. If a speed trap was set up and the directive was to check the cars of only black people, white people, women, men, or whatever criteria you want it would be trouble. It was taken further here by setting three criteria. 1. male 2. athlete of a certain sport. 3. attend one of two public institutions. Throw in some tracking without a warrant and see how it plays out. The punishments are handed down and that won't change. There will be civil cases and at least a couple officials fired over this. It was bad form at best and highly illegal at worst how this was conducted.
I'm guessing you haven't been following this very closely. You are way off in your guess of how this started. If what you guessed was true it would be no problem. It was quite different. It started with an abundance of extra budget money in a "spend it or lose it" situation. Two rouge officials made a decision based on personal dislike of two Universities to try and hurt particular athletic teams. It was never about protecting the state or ridding us of crime. We have fentanyl flying into our state and young people are dying but this is how we choose to use our money. These two guys will be fired and very lucky if that ends up being the extent of punishment. The state will settle the civil suits for a few million, and things will move on as before. This isn't in any way to me about athletes being suspended by the NCAA. It is about the people we pay to enforce our laws deciding to go on a personal vendetta against a certain portion of our state. Basing an investigation on Sex,race, or religion in Iowa is frowned upon. I would be equally upset if they had decided to only investigate Catholic girls of Hispanic descent who attend private schools. Investigations are to be conducted within the law and for reasons that involve making our state a safer,better place to live. This investigation was neither within the law nor brought about because of a desire to protect Iowa's citizens. This will all be shown if the state doesn't settle before the trial. The surveillance without a proper warrant will be talked about plenty moving forward.Sounds like you are the one talking out your ass I offer hypothetical s you on the other hand seem to portray some sort of reality that doesn't exist. Either way betting as a college athlete is dumb as shit and anyone who condones it has their head up their ass no matter what team it is. You are just butt hurt because it's Iowa I get it and I can assure you I'm not talking out my ass
I think you have it backward. The severity of the punishment is a well seasoned legal rule known and accepted for years. I have zero problem with the punishments handed down. If the cops were setting a speed trap with the directives ordered to radar only men driving Ford vehicles you would have an apples to apples argument. I don't think those directives would age well in our courts. When you are the one pulled over and ticketed no cop would ever admit that you were selected based on age,race,sex,religion, or university bumper sticker. This is pretty much what happened here. Keep following the story. What is done is done imo. The NCAA may want to look at the punishments for future violations, but I never expected them to remove a punishment that has been in place and well known. My beef is not at all with how the NCAA handled the information dropped in their lap. I have a big problem with unauthorized electronic surveillance for any reason. It has made some news worth following here in addition to the harvest reports and weather.
Sadly, this is also the most lucrative way of doing business in human history (sometimes with the cover of a TOS, sometimes not).
Not a single article. I have personal information given to me from a very reliable source. I trust this source when he tells me some very loose use of the rules opened this thing up. It started very small with two agents in western Iowa. These two agents decided to target certain people based solely on gender and participation in several sports at two universities. This is the start (and finish) to my problem with the whole situation. The idiots should not have been betting on sports and the punishment was previously in place whether it was too harsh or too light isn't my issue. The ACLU and the ADF seldom take the same side on an issue, but this one may unite them. There are a ton of legal experts locally offering to represent these athletes in civil suites. There will be more coming soon enough. Brands was rambling between spit sprays about exactly what you seek. He isn't very polished but he was more or less saying what my friend who sits pretty high in law enforcement told me. Nobody has yet asked the right questions to the right people. A trial would bring those questions under oath which is why this will settle. I expect the criminal charges to be dropped in the near future. He told me " 2 agents will be very lucky if this only costs them a lengthy suspension" The only other thing I was told was it caught traction when they recognized a couple of names and decided to use Geofence for notable athletes to make a splash. They certainly accomplished the splash.
Is there a particular news source that is covering this? It does seem odd that there were zero athletes at other Iowa schools who were caught up in this. I just can't find anything about it.
Dan Hendrickson from WHO 13 has covered it a little. That is why Brands is so pissed. Very little coverage. It also doesn't help that the authorities are of course mum and the athletes themselves are too busy crying to the public that the NCAA is the problem. It will take time but stuff will leak as more law suites are filed would be my guess.
When you post a bunch of sentences together and never a paragraph break it makes it very difficult to read. I want to read what you have to say about this but you lose me after three or four sentences when you don’t break up different points in different paragraphs. I’m guessing that when you come across someone that posts all their sentences together without a paragraph break that even you find it difficult to read. You might even get upset at people that post in a way that makes it seem that they didn’t read your entire post but the way you post without paragraph breaks causes this. Maybe give it a try and see if you find people engage with you better. Because it’s very difficult to get all the way through a long post that contains no paragraph breaks and read every word and every sentence and every point made in a long run on no breaks post. I mean don’t you think it is? Because I think it is and I’m guessing others think so too. We are trained to read brief ideas separated by breaks and when you post without it it makes it difficult to read and comprehend and then you lose your audience which I’m sure you don’t want. Now I’m going to go back and try to read all your posts on this topic but if you could try paragraph breaks going forward then I think those of us that want to read what you are posting would be most appreciative.
Sadly (to the peril of our society), investigative journalism is NOT a lucrative enterprise anymore—if it ever was. I guess we’ll have to pin our hopes on the lawyers for this to come to light. 😬 (apologies, tikk).
I don't necessarily doubt anything you're saying, but...
If you keep saying it, maybe it will become true.
Everyone is missing the biggest issue in this thread.Can you score 7? (prior to 3 pt take down).
What leads you to assert (in the post above this one) that there was unauthorized electronic surveillance?
Or maybe it just true ..
I'll always be grateful to my wife for correcting me of that particular fashion choice.Everyone is missing the biggest issue in this thread.
What the F#^K is with the pleats?
Pleats? You sure that isn't massive gas bloating?Everyone is missing the biggest issue in this thread.
What the F#^K is with the pleats?
Well in the defense of @James P. Whitters III he did reply to the same post twice. That is two paragraphs.
Show me one FACT, just one. All the data I've found is of the age group 18 - 38 or 18 - 44. I want FACTS based on college age, you know, 18 - 22. Show me.
