True that one of Iowa's biggest donor is one who pushed for the Ferraris?

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

There is a huge thread on Hawkeye report about this.  Including lots of fighting between Willie Saylor and Bob Nichols (who apparently one of the biggest donors to the Hawkeye program and namesake of the new Nicolls Wrestling Room:

Quote

 

The new wrestling room will double the amount of training space and will allow Iowa’s collegiate wrestlers and members of the Hawkeye Wrestling Club to train at the highest level. That space will be named in honor of Bob Nicolls and Kathy Nicolls of Franktown, Colorado.

Bob Nicolls has been a passionate Iowa wrestling fan since his time as a student, and the couple are generous supporters of Iowa’s track and field and wrestling teams, as well as the UI Department of Accounting. To honor the Nicolls’ $7 million gift to the Carver Circle campaign, the wrestling room will be named in their honor.

“Bob Nicolls got this campaign started,” says Brands. “He stepped up right away, brought others to the table, and never wavered in his commitment and drive to help us get this project done. He’s been the lead volunteer on this project and a great friend to our program and me. We are honored to have the Nicolls’ name on our wrestling room. It can’t be anyone else. That’s how important Bob Nicolls was to getting this campaign done.”

 

Apparently Bob is the one who "persuaded" the Brands to go after the Ferraris and continues to do so.  And Bob was making  many posts slamming the Chittums for leaving the Hawkeyes.  So much drama - see here: https://iowa.forums.rivals.com/threads/ferrari-clan.413922/page-45

Edited May 11, 2023 by Jimmy Cinnabon

[jchapman]

 

[98lberEating2Lunches]

No.

As far as I can tell, he has long been on record as willing to support any Brands' decision to recruit the Ferraris with appropriate guard rails in place for the family.  Ultimately any Ferrari admission to the University or joining Iowa wrestling are the University of Iowa and Coach Brands respective decision (not his).

I recall nothing on the forum stating or otherwise indicating he attempted to persuade the Brands one way or the other.

I recall nothing on the forum stating he would personally bankroll Ferrari NIL $, if the Brands chose to recruit the Ferraris and their joining was contingent on that kind of sponsorship.

Some people seem to be inferring his stated support of the Brands and their decision-making is an implicit form of persuasion.  I don't read it that way, even if it can be contrasted to other anonymous posters vehemently objecting to one or more particular Ferraris joining the Iowa wrestling family.

[LJB]

franktown...

the simulation proves once again it is in full effect...

[billyhoyle]

When people refer to the Ferraris, I'm assuming under no circumstances would they let AJ on or near campus right? Any coach that would even consider having him in their room should not be coaching. 

Edited May 11, 2023 by billyhoyle

[ionel]

34 minutes ago, billyhoyle said:

When people refer to the Ferraris, I'm assuming under no circumstances would they let AJ on or near campus right? Any coach that would even consider having him in their room should not be coaching. 

Read HR, plenty of folks wanted him. 

[lowSingle155]

4 hours ago, 98lberEating2Lunches said:

No.

As far as I can tell, he has long been on record as willing to support any Brands' decision to recruit the Ferraris with appropriate guard rails in place for the family.  Ultimately any Ferrari admission to the University or joining Iowa wrestling are the University of Iowa and Coach Brands respective decision (not his).

I recall nothing on the forum stating or otherwise indicating he attempted to persuade the Brands one way or the other.

I recall nothing on the forum stating he would personally bankroll Ferrari NIL $, if the Brands chose to recruit the Ferraris and their joining was contingent on that kind of sponsorship.

Some people seem to be inferring his stated support of the Brands and their decision-making is an implicit form of persuasion.  I don't read it that way, even if it can be contrasted to other anonymous posters vehemently objecting to one or more particular Ferraris joining the Iowa wrestling family.

Ok Bob

[billyhoyle]

7 hours ago, ionel said:

Read HR, plenty of folks wanted him. 

Random internet posters or people actually put their names behind suggesting Ferrari should live on the same college campus as women? I think even John Smith should feel partially responsible for what happened to that woman for failing to kick Ferrari off of the team fast enough. I hope he feels some culpability and will adjust his approach to discipline moving forward.   In Smith's defense, he only knew Ferrari was capable of reckless driving.  Also shooting guns aimlessly on roads.  Also exhibiting zero maturity.  

But with all that criticism of Smith aside, I can understand him not equating Ferrari's reckless prior behavior with the actions of a sexual predator (allegedly).  But to know what Ferrari is now charged with, combined with what he is already on video and on record doing...He is 10X more likely to end your career as a coach than to help it.  And if I were the parent of an athlete at Iowa, I would want assurances that there is no chance he would ever join the program. 

It seems logical to me to recruit the younger Ferraris, make the rules clear, and offer them an opportunity to go forward on the right path.  But the older one should not be considered under any circumstances. 

Edited May 12, 2023 by billyhoyle

[ionel]

12 minutes ago, billyhoyle said:

Random internet posters or people actually put their names behind suggesting Ferrari should live on the same college campus as women? I think even John Smith should feel partially responsible for what happened to that woman for failing to kick Ferrari off of the team fast enough. I hope he feels some culpability and will adjust his approach to discipline moving forward.   In Smith's defense, he only knew Ferrari was capable of reckless driving.  Also shooting guns aimlessly on roads.  Also exhibiting zero maturity.  

But with all that criticism of Smith aside, I can understand him not equating Ferrari's reckless prior behavior with the actions of a sexual predator (allegedly).  But to know what Ferrari is now charged with, combined with what he is already on video and on record doing...He is 10X more likely to end your career as a coach than to help it.  And if I were the parent of an athlete at Iowa, I would want assurances that there is no chance he would ever join the program. 

It seems logical to me to recruit the younger Ferraris, make the rules clear, and offer them an opportunity to go forward on the right path.  But the older one should not be considered under any circumstances. 

I dont know where all that comes from, report at the time was that he had been kicked out of the university before the alleged sexual assault occurred. 

[billyhoyle]

8 minutes ago, ionel said:

I dont know where all that comes from, report at the time was that he had been kicked out of the university before the alleged sexual assault occurred. 

Ferrari was kicked out the day the sexual battery allegations were announced.  He should have been kicked off after the video of him shooting guns recklessly was posted. Or if not then, after the car accident when the report came out about how he was driving leading up to it.  But in Smith's defense, he didn't know the guy was an (alleged) sexual predator.  But if it were any other athlete, he would have been kicked off of the team much earlier and the assault on campus would not have happened.

AJ's actions should not be held against his brothers, but under no circumstances should AJ be anywhere near that program. 

Edited May 12, 2023 by billyhoyle

[Offthemat]

As is typical for OSU, there weren’t a lot of announcements, or details, but when the assault allegations were reported they included that AJ had been off the team for a couple of days prior.  Whether that means out of school or not, I never heard. 

[nhs67]

Sorry for being late to this party...

 

[Husker_Du]

21 hours ago, billyhoyle said:

When people refer to the Ferraris, I'm assuming under no circumstances would they let AJ on or near campus right? Any coach that would even consider having him in their room should not be coaching. 

he was literally on campus a couple weeks ago

edit: and he's there this weekend

[billyhoyle]

6 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

he was literally on campus a couple weeks ago

edit: and he's there this weekend

How is that not a huge problem for people because isn't it an issue from a risk standpoint to bring someone like this on a college campus with so many 18-22 year old women?  I get that it's a public school so until he has a conviction on his record he probably shouldn't be barred from being on the campus itself, but is he really there under the invitation of the wrestling program?  I hope he is going to be under constant supervision at least.....

Edited May 12, 2023 by billyhoyle

[DJT]

2 hours ago, billyhoyle said:

 I get that it's a public school so until he has a conviction on his record he probably shouldn't be barred from being on the campus itself, but is he really there under the invitation of the wrestling program?

If the alleged victim is/was an OSU student, it would be well within the prerogative of the judge to ban him from that campus as a condition of his bond… other campuses, probably not so much. But, agreed, it surprises me that any coach would be inviting him to campus at this juncture.

[billyhoyle]

8 minutes ago, DJT said:

If the alleged victim is/was an OSU student, it would be well within the prerogative of the judge to ban him from that campus as a condition of his bond… other campuses, probably not so much. But, agreed, it surprises me that any coach would be inviting him to campus at this juncture.

Putting it that way blows my mind even more (assuming Willie is correct and he usually is).  An NCAA wrestling coach invited an athlete out on bond for sexual battery to visit a college campus. It seems unbelievable that this actually happened, as it is incredibly irresponsible-if Ferrari actually did what he is accused of, he would be a sexual predator and you would want him nowhere near campus...How is that not an absolutely HUGE story if true?  

[DJT]

14 minutes ago, billyhoyle said:

Putting it that way blows my mind even more (assuming Willie is correct and he usually is).  An NCAA wrestling coach invited an athlete out on bond for sexual battery to visit a college campus. It seems unbelievable that this actually happened, as it is incredibly irresponsible-if Ferrari actually did what he is accused of, he would be a sexual predator and you would want him nowhere near campus...How is that not an absolutely HUGE story if true?  

Don’t get me wrong, I’m 100% for the presumption of innocence, and I find it abhorrent that so many people get wronged by the media stoking the mob with half-truths, typically pulled from probable cause statements which, by definition, are meant to paint the suspect in the worst possible light to the point that they’re works of fiction. 

However, if I were making $300k+ at my (presumptively) dream job, I wouldn’t risk not only that job, but the prospect of ever having a similar job, by pissing on a hornets’ nest. I’d wish AJ well and tell him we’ll talk when there’s more clarity to the resolution of his criminal case.

[lu1979]

21 hours ago, billyhoyle said:

Ferrari was kicked out the day the sexual battery allegations were announced.  He should have been kicked off after the video of him shooting guns recklessly was posted. Or if not then, after the car accident when the report came out about how he was driving leading up to it.  But in Smith's defense, he didn't know the guy was an (alleged) sexual predator.  But if it were any other athlete, he would have been kicked off of the team much earlier and the assault on campus would not have happened.

AJ's actions should not be held against his brothers, but under no circumstances should AJ be anywhere near that program. 

It was decent of you to put the word allegedly into your post at one point.  I doubt that AJ will be showing up at any campus to participate in athletics until such time as the ongoing case is resolved.  If the case is resolved and AJ is not found guilty of any criminal wrongdoing is it still your position that " under no circumstances should AJ be anywhere near that program."?  just curious.

[billyhoyle]

7 minutes ago, lu1979 said:

It was decent of you to put the word allegedly into your post at one point.  I doubt that AJ will be showing up at any campus to participate in athletics until such time as the ongoing case is resolved.  If the case is resolved and AJ is not found guilty of any criminal wrongdoing is it still your position that " under no circumstances should AJ be anywhere near that program."?  just curious.

Yes. For both his reckless driving and the video of him shooting guns blindly into the night. That is enough that it was irresponsible for JS  to keep him on the team. The sexual battery is alleged but those other two actions are not.
 

Final thing to consider is the trial itself. Does it get dismissed immediately? Does he plead guilty? What will the victim testify to? All of these are important to consider regardless of the verdict itself. Simply being acquitted may not clear his name.

[billyhoyle]

46 minutes ago, DJT said:

Don’t get me wrong, I’m 100% for the presumption of innocence, and I find it abhorrent that so many people get wronged by the media stoking the mob with half-truths, typically pulled from probable cause statements which, by definition, are meant to paint the suspect in the worst possible light to the point that they’re works of fiction. 

However, if I were making $300k+ at my (presumptively) dream job, I wouldn’t risk not only that job, but the prospect of ever having a similar job, by pissing on a hornets’ nest. I’d wish AJ well and tell him we’ll talk when there’s more clarity to the resolution of his criminal case.

He is innocent until proven guilty for the sexual battery, but he has already behaved very recklessly prior to that. While the trial is ongoing, the MO should be to keep him away from a college program, just like you wouldn’t want Sam Bankman Fried near a crypto exchange even though he also has the presumption of innocence. 
 

And much more important than the risk to a coach losing his job is the risk to the students. They are entrusting the university of Iowa with their physical safety-there is too much unknown and the allegations are so serious that I would not want my kids on the same campus until much more information is known. If he were to do something while on campus, those responsible for bringing him in would be responsible for his actions morally in my view. 

Edited May 13, 2023 by billyhoyle

[DJT]

14 minutes ago, billyhoyle said:

Yes. For both his reckless driving and the video of him shooting guns blindly into the night. That is enough that it was irresponsible for JS  to keep him on the team. The sexual battery is alleged but those other two actions are not.
 

Final thing to consider is the trial itself. Does it get dismissed immediately? Does he plead guilty? What will the victim testify to? All of these are important to consider regardless of the verdict itself. Simply being acquitted may not clear his name.

If he’s acquitted, yes, his name should be cleared of the sexual assault allegations, not the other dumb shit that’d be enough for me as a coach to never want him around.

The longer this drags out, the more likely the alleged victim won’t want to testify and just move on from it. Then, chances are he’ll take a plea agreement with a guilty plea on a misdemeanor sexual assault charge that wouldn’t require him to register as an SO, and deferred prosecution on the felony sexual assault charge… likely a few years of probation.

[jackwebster]

10 hours ago, DJT said:

Don’t get me wrong, I’m 100% for the presumption of innocence, and I find it abhorrent that so many people get wronged by the media stoking the mob with half-truths, typically pulled from probable cause statements which, by definition, are meant to paint the suspect in the worst possible light to the point that they’re works of fiction. 

However, if I were making $300k+ at my (presumptively) dream job, I wouldn’t risk not only that job, but the prospect of ever having a similar job, by pissing on a hornets’ nest. I’d wish AJ well and tell him we’ll talk when there’s more clarity to the resolution of his criminal case.

Word. Innocent in a court of law =/= innocent enough to become my son-in-law.

Edited May 13, 2023 by jackwebster

[WrestlingRasta]

We have to remember that ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is in the eyes of the law. And we see people get off of crimes they oh so obviously committed because of technicalities all the time. We do this, in law, intentionally making it difficult to convict a guilty person, under the philosophy that we’d rather let four guilty people walk, than convict an innocent man. Again, in the eyes of the law. 
 

Individuals can see a case with their own eyes, and make their own decisions accordingly. 

[Offthemat]

3 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

We have to remember that ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is in the eyes of the law. And we see people get off of crimes they oh so obviously committed because of technicalities all the time. We do this, in law, intentionally making it difficult to convict a guilty person, under the philosophy that we’d rather let four guilty people walk, than convict an innocent man. Again, in the eyes of the law. 
 

Individuals can see a case with their own eyes, and make their own decisions accordingly. 

But beware what you say on a recording or put into print. 

[WrestlingRasta]

5 hours ago, Offthemat said:

But beware what you say on a recording or put into print. 

Not following