ADVERTISEMENT

Tuesdays With Torbee: Men’s basketball season post-mortem . . .

March Sadness, again

By Tory Brecht

As it has far too often in the Fran McCaffery era, the Iowa men’s basketball team entered and exited March quickly, not with a bang but a whimper.

Other than the Keegan Murray-led run to the 2021 Big 10 Tournament championship, the magical basketball month has been more Ides of March than One Shining Moment for the Hawkeyes.

Iowa was predicted to finish 9th in the media’s preseason Big 10 poll. By conference-only record, they finished tied for 5th at an even 10-10, although the overall win-loss record was a decidedly mediocre 9th best in the 14-team league.

Despite technically overachieving pre-season expectations in what was always going to be a rebuilding year, limping to the finish in unimpressive fashion is frustrating.

There was no signature non-conference win and losses to regional rivals Iowa State and Creighton stung, particularly the blowout by the Cyclones. Starting 0-3 in conference put thoughts of an NCAA tournament bid on life support early and despite a late season turnaround, Iowa never seriously challenged the bubble.

Most disappointing were the home losses to a terrible Michigan team and a very mediocre Maryland squad. Had the Hawkeyes managed to win those, they likely would have been on the right side of the tournament bubble, despite the first-round conference tournament flameout at the hands of Ohio State.

Despite all that, I think Fran did a nice job keeping the team competitive despite the rocky season start. There were times I feared a long losing streak, and that never really materialized. But you can’t laud the turnaround without criticizing the creation of the hole to be dug out of in the first place.

The development of young players like Big 10 Freshman of the Year Owen Freeman, emerging slasher and sharpshooter in sophomore Josh Dix and some flashes of special potential from freshman point guard Brock Harding are all grounds for optimism.

But is anyone buying the stock?

I’ve taken a fair amount of grief for supposedly “insulting” and “blaming” Iowa fans for being a fair weather fan base. I don’t think that criticism is fair. After decades of disappointment and the abject failures of the Todd Lickliter era, it is understandable that Iowa fans operate in “prove it” mode and stay away in droves unless Iowa is winning at a high clip.

However, only showing up for the absolute best teams is the textbook definition of being fair weather. That is not an insult and it is not blaming: it is merely a statement of fact.

The truth is, Iowa has a fan problem and fixing it needs to be a top priority of new athletic director Beth Goetz. It is difficult to imagine McCaffery’s seat is even warm, let alone hot, but it is also obvious he has worn out his welcome with a not insignificant cohort of the Iowa fan base. Barring a voluntary separation, McCaffery and Co. have some work to do to re-engage Iowa fans if Carver is to be full and rocking again.

Of course winning at a higher rate and actually competing at the top of the conference will fix the fan problem. The young core of this year’s Iowa team has potential to do just that, provided recruiting ticks up and the portal is used strategically. If Iowa adds a solid combo guard and a backup big guy to spell Freeman, it should have a team able to post a winning conference record and get back in the NCAA tournament for the fifth time in the past six years.

I suspect the lagging support for the men’s team is also partially due to the unprecedented success of the women’s team and the supernova-level stardom of Caitlin Clark. It can be hard to gin up enthusiasm for an inconsistent and streaky men’s team when you know the women are going to be clutch performers nearly every time out. There are also only a limited number of hours people can devote to attending sports in person and watching it on TV and when the women are appointment viewing, something has to give.

The 2024-25 basketball season is shaping up to be an inflection point in the Fran McCaffery era. If next year’s team shows growth and more consistency, earns a tournament bid and manages to win a couple games in the NCAAs, it should boost fan enthusiasm and quiet the critics. Struggle again, drop games to inferior teams and get pushed around by rivals, however, and the road gets even bumpier.

As fans of Iowa – whether you like Fran McCaffery or not – I think we can all agree the former is more appealing than the latter.

Saban

The best part about his 🐊 tear retirement speech, sitting on car dealerships and mountains of cash and Miss Kay Kay or whatever that southern belle *sic is called, is that you know he had a hand in this Proctor deal. It’s been clear that he has an office overlooking Bryant Denny and will be “involved”. He is and what has been wrong with CFB.

Pat Harty's article on HawkFanatics yesterday; has anyone read it?

I ask because the article's title reads "Iowa Football's 2024 schedule now looks more promising".

But the first sentence is "Part of the frustration with the Iowa football team finishing just 8-5 last season ....". I have a question for you and that is didnt the hawks go 10-4 last year, 10-2 in the regular season? Am I correct? I think so because I just looked up the record again at the official hawk football site.

An 8-5 season in 2023? His handle at X is @pathardy and I haven't done X since it changed to X.

It is up to any of you but maybe Pat should be informed and fact checked? Just a minor thing except he is a long time sports reporter.

If you're in law school, how are you a marginalized group?? The state of Washington will no longer require the bar exam in the name of equity.

Can't wait until an MD is not required to perform surgery!!

So, the list of things that are racist continues to grow: bar exam, ACT, SAT, Math, standardized tests, hair style, drivers license, Dr. Suess, the food pyramid, honor role, AP classes, first names....how about this: STOP FEELING SORRY FOR YOURSELF!! F'n ridiculous. If you can't make it off of your own determination and hard work in America, you're just not going to make it. Instead, just keep blaming every obstacle as "racist".

https://www.thepublica.com/washington-supreme-court-rules-that-bar-exam-no-longer-a-requirement-to-practice-law-cites-impact-on-marginalized-groups/#:~:text=The Washington State Supreme Court has ruled that,unnecessarily blocks marginalized groups from becoming practicing attorneys.”

Iowa House sends Texas-style immigration enforcement bill to governor

The Iowa House of Representatives passed a bill Tuesday that would allow state officials to arrest certain undocumented immigrants and order them to leave the country, sending it to Gov. Kim Reynolds for her signature.

The bill is similar to a Texas law that the U.S. Supreme Court allowed to take effect about two hours before the vote in the Iowa Legislature. Just a few hours after that, a federal appeals court blocked the law from being enforced, so Texas officials cannot arrest and deport undocumented immigrants while federal courts decide if that law is constitutional. Courts have previously found that only the federal government can enforce immigration laws.

Rep. Steven Holt, R-Denison, managed the passage of the Iowa bill. He said the federal government has abdicated its duty to control the U.S.-Mexico border, and Iowa needs to step in.

“We know that many have come across our border just to have a better life and escape the pain in their own countries,” Holt said. “But we also know that there are gang members, terrorists, rapists, and those who commit murder that have also crossed our border.”

Rep. Sami Scheetz, D-Cedar Rapids, opposed the bill. He said illegal immigration is a serious problem that requires cohesive action at the national level.

“This bill, in attempting to solve only one problem, risks creating others,” Scheetz said. “Fostering fear among immigrant communities, disrupting families, and potentially hindering cooperation with law enforcement.”

Migrant rights advocates have voiced opposition to this bill and other proposals in the Iowa Legislature that target undocumented immigrants.

“From Texas to Iowa, our message is No Tengan Miedo, have no fear,” said Manny Galvez, a board member for Escucha Mi Voz Iowa. “We will continue to fight this unconstitutional law during rulemaking, in the courts, and on the streets. We will continue to organize to stop deportations, protect refugee children, and keep families together.”

Opponents of the bill have also raised concerns that it would allow the arrest of people who have an application for immigration relief pending before federal authorities, and that state law enforcement officials and judges do not have the experience necessary to interpret and enforce immigration laws.

Holt said state law enforcement officials need the ability to arrest people for coming to the country illegally because federal officials do not always agree to state requests to detain people.

Bill would create state crime called "illegal reentry"

Undocumented immigrants could face up to two years in prison if they enter, attempt to enter, or are found in Iowa and have been denied admission to or been deported from the U.S. People who were previously deported after being convicted of other crimes could face up to five or ten years in prison if they come to Iowa.

Holt referred to this as a “second offense bill.”

“So if you just have somebody that sneaks into the border and hasn’t been previously identified as being in the country illegally, this actually would not apply to them,” he said.

Under the bill, Iowa judges could dismiss some of these charges and order people to return to the foreign nation from which they entered the country, which would be Mexico in most cases. Those who are convicted of illegal reentry would be ordered to leave the U.S. after their prison term.

Iowa judges’ deportation orders would have to include the manner of transportation and the state or local law enforcement agency responsible for ensuring the person leaves.

“Logistically, I get that there are challenges here, because we’re in uncharted territory,” Holt said when asked if state troopers would have to drive people to a border crossing in Texas. “I think those things can be worked out if and when the time comes and it actually has to be used.”

He said law enforcement could take people ordered to leave the U.S. to the Des Moines airport and put them on a flight to Mexico.

Law enforcement officers wouldn’t be permitted to arrest people for this offense if they are at a school for educational purposes, at a place of religious worship, if they’re getting medical treatment at a health care facility, or getting a forensic medical exam related to a sexual assault.

The bill would also protect state and local government officials who enforce it from lawsuits.

“Implementing state-level penalties and enforcement mechanisms not only encroaches upon federal jurisdiction, but it also sets up for a potential legal quagmire, diverting precious resources from areas that directly impact the wellbeing of our communities, like education, health care and public safety,” Scheetz said.

The nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency was unable to determine how much this bill would cost the state because this would be a new crime with an unknown number of arrests and convictions. According to LSA, the state could face “significant” costs to remove people from the country.

The bill passed 64 to 30, with three Democrats joining almost all Republicans in voting for the bill, and one Republican joining most Democrats in voting against it.

If the bill is signed into law and not blocked by a court, it would take effect July 1.
  • Love
Reactions: Here_4_a_Day

Text Messages Show CIA Deployed Personnel Domestically to D.C. on Jan. 6

Text messages obtained via FOIA request by Judicial Watch revealed the CIA deployed personnel to assist at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, despite its prohibition on domestic spying.

The texts under a “January 7 Intel Chain” heading mentioned two CIA bomb technicians assisting with pipe bombs found near the RNC and DNC headquarters, as well as several CIA dog teams standing by.

“The CIA collects information only regarding foreign countries and their citizens. Unlike the FBI, it is prohibited from collecting information regarding ‘U.S. Persons,’ a term that includes U.S. citizens, resident aliens, legal immigrants, and U.S. corporations, regardless of where they are located,” the FBI’s website states.


As the CIA is only meant to collect foreign intelligence and not spy on US citizens, Judicial Watch questioned why a national intelligence agency was operating domestically with law enforcement at the Capitol that day.

“These striking records show that CIA resources were deployed in reaction to the January 6 disturbance,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

It is the first public documentation of the CIA’s involvement in responding to the January 6th events.

Judicial Watch argues this raises concerns about overreach of authority by intelligence agencies.

“We have the same questions you do. What is a national intelligence collection agency whose mission is overseas doing operating domestically with law enforcement at the U.S. Capitol on January 6th?” Judicial Watch’s Director of Research and Investigations, Chris Farrell asked.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...S&cvid=0d687d436c254da1ad3abc379d5fcc11&ei=39
  • Like
Reactions: Scruddy

Iowa bill would create legal immunity for pesticide manufacturers

Iowa Senate lawmakers advanced, for the second time, a bill that would protect chemical manufacturers from lawsuits over failure to warn consumers about potential adverse health effects.



The bill, Senate Study Bill 3188, was supported by Bayer, the manufacturer of the glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup. Bayer has been hit by lawsuits from individuals claiming it failed to warn consumers of the potential health risks of Roundup.


The company has won some lawsuits against individuals alleging Roundup caused their cancer, but in other cases it has been found liable. Bayer spent more than $10 billion settling most pending claims in 2020.




Under the bill, pesticide manufacturers could not be held liable for failing to warn consumers about adverse health effects in a way that exceeds the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency labeling requirements. The bill stipulates that the immunity would not apply to Chinese state-owned companies, singling out the massive agriculture and chemical company Syngenta.


The bill was advanced by the two Republicans on a three-member subcommittee Monday. It is eligible for a hearing in the full Senate Appropriations Committee.


Bayer purchased the Roundup maker Monsanto in 2018. The company has multiple crop science plants in Iowa, including a plant in Muscatine that manufactures Roundup.


Lobbyists for Bayer and major farm groups supported the bill and told lawmakers on Monday it would prevent unfounded lawsuits against the company, which creates a vital tool for farmers.





Brad Epperly, a lobbyist for Bayer, said existing law and EPA regulations prevent Bayer from providing warnings that exceed EPA requirements. He said complying with EPA rules satisfies the company’s duty to warn.


Bayer has said it will seek a U.S. Supreme Court ruling to determine whether state-level duty-to-warn claims are preempted by federal law. A federal appeals court in February decided that those claims can be considered, and allowed a lawsuit to go forward.


“We are not in a position where we can make that kind of warning,” he said. “There’s no regulatory body in the entire world who finds this carcinogenic.”


Debate over Roundup health risk​


Glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup have received significant scrutiny over health claims. The EPA found glyphosate is “not likely” to be carcinogenic and has determined there are no “risks of concern to human health,” but a U.S. appeals court in 2022 vacated those findings for procedural reasons and required the agency to reconsider.


A World Health Organization cancer agency found glyphosate in 2015 to be “probably carcinogenic to humans,” but European Union regulators have found that there was not sufficient evidence for that categorization.


Environmental groups and some individuals objected to the bill, saying it would take away the ability of farmers to seek compensation when a company sells dangerous chemicals without proper warning.


Alicia Vasto, the water program director for the Iowa Environmental Council, said that there have been other chemicals approved by the EPA that were later found to be dangerous.


“This bill would prevent Iowa farmers and rural residents from seeking justice in the future,” Vasto said. “Time and time again, research has uncovered the dangers of pesticide after the EPA has declared a product safe for use.”


Bill would exempt Chinese-owned companies​


A similar bill made it partway through the lawmaking process this year before failing to pass out of either chamber before a deadline. The new bill adds language exempting Chinese-owned companies from immunity.


A lobbyist for Syngenta, which is owned by the Chinese state-owned enterprise ChemChina, called the bill “discriminatory.” Kellie Paschke, representing Iowa trial lawyers, said the provision may be unconstitutional.


Sen. Mark Costello, R-Imogene, who is a farmer, said he’s concerned that if Bayer receives too many punitive court rulings related to Roundup, farmers could lose access to the product. Costello said consumers could still sue the company over specific harms, just not over a duty to warn.


“If they find out they've been lying to us or misrepresenting things, or if it ends up that it really is dangerous, and it's proven, then they can still sue under this statute,” he said.


Sen. Bill Dotzler, a Democrat from Waterloo, declined to advance the bill. He said he thinks there’s evidence that Roundup contributes to instances of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and other cancers.


“I think the label should say some kind of warning that this could affect your health,” he said.

Iowa City police investigating stabbing

The Iowa City Police Department has identified this man who may have witnessed a stabbing Saturday. (Iowa City Police Department) The Iowa City Police Department has identified this man who may have witnessed a stabbing Saturday. (Iowa City Police Department)
IOWA CITY — The Iowa City Police Department is investigating a stabbing that happened over the weekend under the Benton Street Bridge.



Yossarian Ulyesses Williams, 47, of Iowa City, has been charged with willful injury causing serious injury in relation to the stabbing, which happened at about 1:20 p.m. Saturday under the Benton Street Bridge, according to a news release from the police department.


Flourish logoA Flourish map

Williams was arguing with another person before he started stabbing him in the chest, shoving him into the river and telling him he was going to die, according to a criminal complaint against Williams.


The victim had emergency surgery at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, and is in critical condition, the complaint states. The identity of the victim has not been released.




Williams is being held in the Johnson County Jail on a cash-only $10,000 bond.


Investigators are attempting to identify a potential witness to the stabbing, and released a photo of the person Monday. The witness is described as a white or Hispanic man with a long beard wearing all blue clothing and carrying a blue backpack.

Best way to build credit?

Long story short, my wife has no buying power with her credit. Her score is around 700, but since we married 14 years ago she has not been on one thing. I'm the only one on the house, cars, every bill, and she is authorized user on all my CCs.

So we got her a CC about 2 months ago and lo and behold, because we put 380 on it in chicago last weekend it dropped her score by 18 pts. "Using too much of her available credit limit". So I'm asking you financial geniuses of GIAOT for some helpful hints. TIA.

Nationals Preview (with first round matchups)







It is great to be an Iowa Wrestling fan.

Go Hawks!
  • Like
Reactions: T8KUDWN
ADVERTISEMENT

Filter

ADVERTISEMENT