ADVERTISEMENT

Update: Noah Shannon CLEARED TO PRACTICE. 26 UI student-athletes investigated for online gambling, incl in FB, Men’s BB, Baseball, T&F & Wrestling

If we lose two guys in the defensive secondary, I would have been more confident about plug and play the next guys, but then we had the TJ Hall experience against Nebraska when CD went out.
Except Hall was thrown to the wolves without advance notice.

Not the case here.
 
So why don't you? He's been on the beat for a long time and is fair with his reporting.
He's a whiny douchebag that can't handle the slightest bit of criticism and is absolutely clueless about football.

So I can see why you like him.

EDIT: I don’t browse the OT board so I didn’t see your update. If this really is Scott, I apologize, you caught some strays from Ron.

If it’s still Ron, the above applies.
 
Last edited:
Leistikow has explicitly stated that there are 2 Iowa football players - beyond those who have been publicly identified (Shannon, Blom, Johnson) - who have yet to be named and referred to at least one as a starter. Go to the 9:00 minute mark of the latest Hawk Central podcast and listen for about 30-45 seconds.

This is straight from Dochterman's article in The Athletic about the current status of Iowa's defensive backfield:

"Iowa will likely lose at least one player in the secondary to a gambling suspension, which has caused the staff to ramp up development, especially with three second-year players."


Leistikow is very cautious with what he reports. That he was willing to state that Iowa will be losing a starter for a couple of games tells me that he's confident in what he's been told.

I haven't interacted with Dochterman but find him to be in the same category.

I'm not expecting Iowa's secondary to be at full strength against Utah State or Iowa State. I'm just hoping that we have the secondary at full strength by the Penn State game.
I normally don't question Leistikow either, but again, absolutely nobody else has even hinted at additional names besides an incredibly untrustworthy source.

Even Chad gets things wrong sometimes, which is okay.

I highly doubt Harris would have been on the depth chart if he's about to be suspended, since they're supposed to know who at this point, just wating for permission to announce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: F5n5
I normally don't question Leistikow either, but again, absolutely nobody else has even hinted at additional names besides an incredibly untrustworthy source.

Even Chad gets things wrong sometimes, which is okay.

I highly doubt Harris would have been on the depth chart if he's about to be suspended, since they're supposed to know who at this point, just wating for permission to announce.
Except if he had removed Harris or Schulte then he'd basically have been announcing who the others were, which he can't do. We already know that the depth chart isn't carved in stone anyway. I wouldn't be sure until Saturday the first time Utah State has the ball, on just who will be back there.....
 
Except if he had removed Harris or Schulte then he'd basically have been announcing who the others were, which he can't do. We already know that the depth chart isn't carved in stone anyway. I wouldn't be sure until Saturday the first time Utah State has the ball, on just who will be back there.....
oh bullshit... they are under no obligation to deceive people and pretend like they are not suspended when in fact they are suspended...

if.... they were suspended... they would not be on the depth chart.
just like Noah Shannon is NOT on the depth chart

c'mon man
 
oh bullshit... they are under no obligation to deceive people and pretend like they are not suspended when in fact they are suspended...

if.... they were suspended... they would not be on the depth chart.
just like Noah Shannon is NOT on the depth chart

c'mon man
Eh…

It’s starting to filter in through some more sources now. Leistikow was correct. I still don’t consider Condon a reputable source though.
 
oh bullshit... they are under no obligation to deceive people and pretend like they are not suspended when in fact they are suspended...

if.... they were suspended... they would not be on the depth chart.
just like Noah Shannon is NOT on the depth chart

c'mon man
i don't know , still hearing that Harris will be out 2-4 games. I haven't heard anymore about Schulte .
 
I normally don't question Leistikow either, but again, absolutely nobody else has even hinted at additional names besides an incredibly untrustworthy source.

Even Chad gets things wrong sometimes, which is okay.

I highly doubt Harris would have been on the depth chart if he's about to be suspended, since they're supposed to know who at this point, just wating for permission to announce.
This article also says others will be suspended. It specifically says at least one on the depth chart.

 
  • Like
Reactions: AuroraHawk
oh bullshit... they are under no obligation to deceive people and pretend like they are not suspended when in fact they are suspended...

if.... they were suspended... they would not be on the depth chart.
just like Noah Shannon is NOT on the depth chart

c'mon man
Well as to your BS comment, try reading the earlier posts. They ARE in fact obligated NOT to give the names of any players who received suspensions from the NCAA without their consent. Since Shannons deal was already out in the open, he went ahead and appealed. The others, (and there are supposed to be others,) have obviously NOT consented to be named, hence Kirk cannot put their names out, (which is exactly what he'd be doing by removing them), That's what the earlier statement said. Now it seems pretty silly considering we're going to know in 5 days anyway, but thats what the statement said. Now I hope I'm wrong, and they both play, BUT I think you'd better prepare yourself, that at least one of those guys, or both, won't be playing on Saturday.
 
Well as to your BS comment, try reading the earlier posts. They ARE in fact obligated NOT to give the names of any players who received suspensions from the NCAA without their consent. Since Shannons deal was already out in the open, he went ahead and appealed. The others, (and there are supposed to be others,) have obviously NOT consented to be named, hence Kirk cannot put their names out, (which is exactly what he'd be doing by removing them), That's what the earlier statement said. Now it seems pretty silly considering we're going to know in 5 days anyway, but thats what the statement said. Now I hope I'm wrong, and they both play, BUT I think you'd better prepare yourself, that at least one of those guys, or both, won't be playing on Saturday.
“Those guys are dealing with a soft tissue issue”
Covers the bases, doesn’t disclose their names…… but people know
 
If Iowa was playing a big 10 game to start the season I might buy into the fact that we could do a head fake and be holding out to the last minute for people not to be playing. Someone tell me what the advantage would be doing the head fake on Utah State. Because that’s really all it would be about. If Iowa was playing a big 10 game to start the season I might buy into the fact that we could do a head fake and be holding out to the last minute for people not to be playing. Someone tell me what the advantage would be doing the head fake on Utah State. Because that’s really all it would be about. If others were suspended we would know on game day and then the rest of the worLd would know. So we would actually be trying to fake out Utah State? It just doesn’t make sense to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: F5n5
If Iowa was playing a big 10 game to start the season I might buy into the fact that we could do a head fake and be holding out to the last minute for people not to be playing. Someone tell me what the advantage would be doing the head fake on Utah State. Because that’s really all it would be about. If Iowa was playing a big 10 game to start the season I might buy into the fact that we could do a head fake and be holding out to the last minute for people not to be playing. Someone tell me what the advantage would be doing the head fake on Utah State. Because that’s really all it would be about. If others were suspended we would know on game day and then the rest of the worLd would know. So we would actually be trying to fake out Utah State? It just doesn’t make sense to me.
no... I agree... if anybody was suspended for the game against Utah State... their name would NOT be on the depth chart.

I don't think there is any mystery suspensions..
I think it was Shannon... the other 2 were Johnson and Blom.

and I don't think McNamara is practicing with a peg leg.
 
If Iowa was playing a big 10 game to start the season I might buy into the fact that we could do a head fake and be holding out to the last minute for people not to be playing. Someone tell me what the advantage would be doing the head fake on Utah State. Because that’s really all it would be about. If Iowa was playing a big 10 game to start the season I might buy into the fact that we could do a head fake and be holding out to the last minute for people not to be playing. Someone tell me what the advantage would be doing the head fake on Utah State. Because that’s really all it would be about. If others were suspended we would know on game day and then the rest of the worLd would know. So we would actually be trying to fake out Utah State? It just doesn’t make sense to me.
I don't understand these comments at all. NO one said we're trying to do a "head fake". When this was posted regarding possible suspensions it said, "players would be named, ONLY if they gave their approval" which Shannon had already put his name out there because of the B1G media days. When did I say they are trying to fake out Utah State?
 
Now it seems pretty silly considering we're going to know in 5 days anyway,
How are we going to know. Wouldnt removing them from the roster or two deeps on game day reveal their identity? You say silly. I tell you what is silly, your conspiracy-like theory that a coach cant remove a player from a roster for fear of revealing they may have eligbilty issues. Just weird.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: F5n5 and iahawks10
How are we going to know. Wouldnt removing them from the roster or two deeps on game day reveal their identity? You say silly. I tell you what is silly, your conspiracy-like theory that a coach cant remove a player from a roster for fear of revealing they may have eligbilty issues. Just weird.

Question for you: Was Iowa’s best hitter, Keaton Anthony, withheld from baseball games due to eligibility issues involving gambling?

Follow up: When and how did people learn of that fact?

Hint: He wasn’t removed from the roster and it wasn’t due to a formal announcement.
 
Question for you: Was Iowa’s best hitter, Keaton Anthony, withheld from baseball games due to eligibility issues involving gambling?

Follow up: When and how did people learn of that fact?

Hint: He wasn’t removed from the roster and it wasn’t due to a formal announcement.
being suspended doesn't mean you are off the roster..
the depth chart is not the same as the roster.
 
Question for you: Was Iowa’s best hitter, Keaton Anthony, withheld from baseball games due to eligibility issues involving gambling?

Follow up: When and how did people learn of that fact?

Hint: He wasn’t removed from the roster and it wasn’t due to a formal announcement.
Two deeps. Does baseball even dontwo deeps? Also there is no confidentiality rule that dictates who a coach places on his two deeps. Kirk can put any eligible player on a list at any position 5 days from now. Hell he could put Dejong at starting QB even after the magical 2 hours before kickoff. The 2 hour rule only mandates if a player will be availible to play. It doesnt mandate who plays where and what position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: F5n5
being suspended doesn't mean you are off the roster..
the depth chart is not the same as the roster.

The point is clear. Ferentz, by law, cannot reveal the names of individuals who are ineligible because of gambling because of FERPA.

Ferentz confirmed that there are two players who are not appealing their eligibility/suspension rulings and who received lighter punishment than Shannon.

You seem convinced that the other two “unidentiifed” players whom Ferentz referred to are Blom and Johnson.

Break it down.

Blom and Johnson are criminally charged and they’ve been accused of betting on Iowa football games. That’s a “no brainer” permanent suspension. Why would two players who bet on Iowa football games receive lesser punishment than Shannon who bet on a different Iowa sport? Makes zero sense.

Kirk’s comments last week: If a player bet on Iowa football games, they are done with the program.

As of right now, neither Aaron Blom (wore jersey number 1) nor Jack Johnson (wore jersey number 15) are on Iowa’s roster.

Per Ferentz - there are 2 not-yet-publicly-named members of the Iowa football team who are ineligible for less than the full season and whose eligibility determination is not being appealed.

Both Blom and Johnson’s names and alleged involvement are public record.

You still think Blom and Johnson are the two players Ferentz was referencing? If so, how many games do you think those guys will miss after betting on Iowa football games?

I’ll reiterate … I don’t expect Iowa’s secondary to be at full strength on Saturday or against ISU. And we will learn - almost certainly - who is ineligible because they won’t be playing on Saturday. No different than how we learned that Anthony was embroiled in the gambling situation.

NCAA’s gambling suspension protocols involve missing 10%, 20%, 30% or 50% of contests. The ineligible players will be back for PSU if the punishment is 10% or 20%. Not sure on 30% - I guess it would depend if they round up or down.
 
The point is clear. Ferentz, by law, cannot reveal the names of individuals who are ineligible because of gambling because of FERPA.

Ferentz confirmed that there are two players who are not appealing their eligibility/suspension rulings and who received lighter punishment than Shannon.

You seem convinced that the other two “unidentiifed” players whom Ferentz referred to are Blom and Johnson.

Break it down.

Blom and Johnson are criminally charged and they’ve been accused of betting on Iowa football games. That’s a “no brainer” permanent suspension. Why would two players who bet on Iowa football games receive lesser punishment than Shannon who bet on a different Iowa sport? Makes zero sense.

Kirk’s comments last week: If a player bet on Iowa football games, they are done with the program.

As of right now, neither Aaron Blom (wore jersey number 1) nor Jack Johnson (wore jersey number 15) are on Iowa’s roster.

Per Ferentz - there are 2 not-yet-publicly-named members of the Iowa football team who are ineligible for less than the full season and whose eligibility determination is not being appealed.

Both Blom and Johnson’s names and alleged involvement are public record.

You still think Blom and Johnson are the two players Ferentz was referencing? If so, how many games do you think those guys will miss after betting on Iowa football games?

I’ll reiterate … I don’t expect Iowa’s secondary to be at full strength on Saturday or against ISU. And we will learn - almost certainly - who is ineligible because they won’t be playing on Saturday. No different than how we learned that Anthony was embroiled in the gambling situation.

NCAA’s gambling suspension protocols involve missing 10%, 20%, 30% or 50% of contests. The ineligible players will be back for PSU if the punishment is 10% or 20%. Not sure on 30% - I guess it would depend if they round up or down.
By your own submission, [they] must be allowed to play on Saturday, or else it will be revealed to the entire world--much the same as pulling their names from the 2 deeps would have--who they are, no?
 
The point is clear. Ferentz, by law, cannot reveal the names of individuals who are ineligible because of gambling because of FERPA.

Ferentz confirmed that there are two players who are not appealing their eligibility/suspension rulings and who received lighter punishment than Shannon.

You seem convinced that the other two “unidentiifed” players whom Ferentz referred to are Blom and Johnson.

Break it down.

Blom and Johnson are criminally charged and they’ve been accused of betting on Iowa football games. That’s a “no brainer” permanent suspension. Why would two players who bet on Iowa football games receive lesser punishment than Shannon who bet on a different Iowa sport? Makes zero sense.

Kirk’s comments last week: If a player bet on Iowa football games, they are done with the program.

As of right now, neither Aaron Blom (wore jersey number 1) nor Jack Johnson (wore jersey number 15) are on Iowa’s roster.

Per Ferentz - there are 2 not-yet-publicly-named members of the Iowa football team who are ineligible for less than the full season and whose eligibility determination is not being appealed.

Both Blom and Johnson’s names and alleged involvement are public record.

You still think Blom and Johnson are the two players Ferentz was referencing? If so, how many games do you think those guys will miss after betting on Iowa football games?

I’ll reiterate … I don’t expect Iowa’s secondary to be at full strength on Saturday or against ISU. And we will learn - almost certainly - who is ineligible because they won’t be playing on Saturday. No different than how we learned that Anthony was embroiled in the gambling situation.

NCAA’s gambling suspension protocols involve missing 10%, 20%, 30% or 50% of contests. The ineligible players will be back for PSU if the punishment is 10% or 20%. Not sure on 30% - I guess it would depend if they round up or down.
yea... so I go back and listen to Kirk.. I believe you are right.. the 2 others are not Blom and Johnson... thank you for correcting me..

now... I still have to say... it is hard for me to believe the 2 other guys that are looking at suspension.. it is hard for me to believe that either guy is on the depth chart that was released yesterday.

if there was something on the depth chart that said 'so and so' is suspended... that would violate the law.... omitting them cannot be a violation of the law.

perhaps with all the wacky legal stuff that has happened... perhaps the university is scared to take any chances..

but... maybe the 2 people that are suspended are waiting to see if the coach will slip up and name them... and catch him breaking the law... that is the only reason I see for waiting to make this public.

if that were the case... that's not good.

I can't imagine a possible scenario for why this isn't public yet.
maybe the 2 guys involved are ashamed.

which would be quite the contrast to Noah Shannon who owned up to this from the beginning.
 
I can't imagine a possible scenario for why this isn't public yet.
maybe the 2 guys involved are ashamed.

which would be quite the contrast to Noah Shannon who owned up to this from the beginning.

Scenario for not being public: FERPA protects the players. Short of public charges, they control whether their names can be revealed.

Ashamed? Maybe. Embarassed? Likely.

Shannon owning up from beginning (March 2, 2023)? Nope. Shannon agreeing to go public right before B1G Football Press Days? Yes and it was absolutely the stand up thing to do. The who, what, when, where and how as to how that decision was reached will likely never be known. My sense is that the optimism expressed by those in the AD re: reinstatement rulings has been somewhat of a ruse. I think that they’ve known ever since the slightly revised guidelines were released that things were dire for Shannon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PNWHawk
By your own submission, [they] must be allowed to play on Saturday, or else it will be revealed to the entire world--much the same as pulling their names from the 2 deeps would have--who they are, no?

How did we learn of Anthony’s involvement? Not in the lineup.

It’ll be the same on Saturday.

I’d bet the house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: littlez and PNWHawk
Scenario for not being public: FERPA protects the players. Short of public charges, they control whether their names can be revealed.

Ashamed? Maybe. Embarassed? Likely.

Shannon owning up from beginning (March 2, 2023)? Nope. Shannon agreeing to go public right before B1G Football Press Days? Yes and it was absolutely the stand up thing to do. The who, what, when, where and how as to how that decision was reached will likely never be known. My sense is that the optimism expressed by those in the AD re: reinstatement rulings has been somewhat of a ruse. I think that they’ve known ever since the slightly revised guidelines were released that things were dire for Shannon.
see... now.. that is a conspiracy theory.. I like it
 
The guidelines absolutely cover punishment of betting on a sport at your school. It is a "permanent" loss of eligibility. Shannon's punishment of 1 year is the equivalent of a "permanent" ban because he's a Senior. But, strictly speaking, a 1 year loss of eligibility is less harsh than a permanent loss of eligibility.
Shannon has claimed he was involved, but did not bet I thought?
 
Shannon has claimed he was involved, but did not bet I thought?

Ferentz stated that Shannon's year-long suspension was because he bet on an Iowa team (not football).

Under NCAA reinstatement rules, if a player bets on a sport involving the same institution where the player attends, the player will permanently lose eligibility.
 
yea... so I go back and listen to Kirk.. I believe you are right.. the 2 others are not Blom and Johnson... thank you for correcting me..

now... I still have to say... it is hard for me to believe the 2 other guys that are looking at suspension.. it is hard for me to believe that either guy is on the depth chart that was released yesterday.

if there was something on the depth chart that said 'so and so' is suspended... that would violate the law.... omitting them cannot be a violation of the law.

perhaps with all the wacky legal stuff that has happened... perhaps the university is scared to take any chances..

but... maybe the 2 people that are suspended are waiting to see if the coach will slip up and name them... and catch him breaking the law... that is the only reason I see for waiting to make this public.

if that were the case... that's not good.

I can't imagine a possible scenario for why this isn't public yet.
maybe the 2 guys involved are ashamed.

which would be quite the contrast to Noah Shannon who owned up to this from the beginning.
Why do they need to say anything?
 
The point is clear. Ferentz, by law, cannot reveal the names of individuals who are ineligible because of gambling because of FERPA.

Ferentz confirmed that there are two players who are not appealing their eligibility/suspension rulings and who received lighter punishment than Shannon.

You seem convinced that the other two “unidentiifed” players whom Ferentz referred to are Blom and Johnson.

Break it down.

Blom and Johnson are criminally charged and they’ve been accused of betting on Iowa football games. That’s a “no brainer” permanent suspension. Why would two players who bet on Iowa football games receive lesser punishment than Shannon who bet on a different Iowa sport? Makes zero sense.

Kirk’s comments last week: If a player bet on Iowa football games, they are done with the program.

As of right now, neither Aaron Blom (wore jersey number 1) nor Jack Johnson (wore jersey number 15) are on Iowa’s roster.

Per Ferentz - there are 2 not-yet-publicly-named members of the Iowa football team who are ineligible for less than the full season and whose eligibility determination is not being appealed.

Both Blom and Johnson’s names and alleged involvement are public record.

You still think Blom and Johnson are the two players Ferentz was referencing? If so, how many games do you think those guys will miss after betting on Iowa football games?

I’ll reiterate … I don’t expect Iowa’s secondary to be at full strength on Saturday or against ISU. And we will learn - almost certainly - who is ineligible because they won’t be playing on Saturday. No different than how we learned that Anthony was embroiled in the gambling situation.

NCAA’s gambling suspension protocols involve missing 10%, 20%, 30% or 50% of contests. The ineligible players will be back for PSU if the punishment is 10% or 20%. Not sure on 30% - I guess it would depend if they round up or down.
Do you believe they know how many weeks the NCAA has handed down for punishment for the two? Do they have to then start serving that time even though in appeal process? My guess is the sentences stay as is.
 
yea... so I go back and listen to Kirk.. I believe you are right.. the 2 others are not Blom and Johnson... thank you for correcting me..

now... I still have to say... it is hard for me to believe the 2 other guys that are looking at suspension.. it is hard for me to believe that either guy is on the depth chart that was released yesterday.

if there was something on the depth chart that said 'so and so' is suspended... that would violate the law.... omitting them cannot be a violation of the law.

perhaps with all the wacky legal stuff that has happened... perhaps the university is scared to take any chances..

but... maybe the 2 people that are suspended are waiting to see if the coach will slip up and name them... and catch him breaking the law... that is the only reason I see for waiting to make this public.

if that were the case... that's not good.

I can't imagine a possible scenario for why this isn't public yet.
maybe the 2 guys involved are ashamed.

which would be quite the contrast to Noah Shannon who owned up to this from the beginning.
burying-head-in-sand.gif
 

What Iowa football coach Kirk Ferentz said ahead of Utah State game

Dargan Southard
Des Moines Register
Aug 29, 2023

We've finally reached the opening week of the Iowa football season, which means a regular Tuesday press conference with Hawkeyes coach Kirk Ferentz.

Here's what stood out most from Ferentz's presser ahead of Iowa's season opener Saturday at 11 a.m. against Utah State.

Kirk Ferentz on Cade McNamara's latest injury status

"It's a strain, a muscle issue, a soft-tissue issue," Ferentz said. "He certainly started working at the end of last week, and he's been practicing. I can't put a percentage on where he's at right now. He's been cleared medically, that's the good news. So the thing we have to judge as we go along is how effective can he be? Can he go out and perform in a way that is representative of the kind of player he is? Looked good in practice today. It's kind of day-by-day. We'll see how sore he is tomorrow and see how he's feeling. We'd obviously love to have him out there, but we also want to make sure he can perform at a high level.

"Right now he is certainly (questionable). I know what he wants to do. I know how he's wired. And that's part of our job, just to be smart about it. It's tricky. It's always tricky."


Kirk Ferentz on the QB situation behind Cade McNamara, primarily top backup Deacon Hill

"Regarding Deacon, (we feel) a lot better than three weeks ago, two weeks ago or one week ago (that he can start if McNamara can't go)," Ferentz said. "And that's what camp is for, to watch guys improve. If there is a blessing when Cade was out, it gave him every opportunity to work a lot. And then Joe (Labas) just returned (to practice) at the end of last week. So it's good to get him back out there, and he looks good.

"It's not perfect, but I think it's a healthy situation right now."

Kirk Ferentz on Noah Shannon's suspension from the sports-betting probe
"Noah's appeal process is in process, and as I've said all along, we support him right now," Ferentz said. "No one is claiming he's not guilty of certain things. But really what the bottom line is we're hoping for reconsideration on this whole thing. I'm hoping when the committee looks at it, reasonable people will reconsider the punishment. Just anxious to see how that all turns out."

Kirk Ferentz on whether Iowa football's other suspended players from the gambling probe will appeal

"It hasn't been done yet," Ferentz said. "Talked to both guys about if they wanted to do that and if they wanted to go down that road, they can. I'm not sure either will."


Kirk Ferentz on the Big Ten's new mandatory gameday injury reports

"I have no problem with it at all," Ferentz said. "I think it's probably a good initiative. But that's really where players are. They're able to go, still some question or they're not able to go."


Dargan Southard is a sports trending reporter and covers Iowa athletics for the Des Moines Register and HawkCentral.com. Email him at msouthard@gannett.com or follow him on Twitter at @Dargan_Southard.
 
How we will find out the names of others suspended was discussed last week.


I'm surprised nobody is mentioning that Kirk said two additional football players will receive multigame suspensions, one longer than the other. This could also have a big negative impact on the team. We haven't been given the names of these players, but I have been hearing two more defensive starters.


we'll find out their names when reporters on Sep 2nd take the roster and start checking off names to see who they see and don't see. This is how the 4 Iowa baseball players' names came out (4 players were nowhere to be found for the game)
 
How are we going to know. Wouldnt removing them from the roster or two deeps on game day reveal their identity? You say silly. I tell you what is silly, your conspiracy-like theory that a coach cant remove a player from a roster for fear of revealing they may have eligbilty issues. Just weird.
You guys keep loving these comments, but come Saturday we'll find out, and I'll stand with my posts. Please come back when these guys on the depth chart don't play and give us your thoughts......
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT