Media Distortions

isucy86 · 11-09-2006, 09:43 PM

Listening to KXNO and reading some of the national pundents comments about Mac's firing, I feel many of the media's take on the situation is distorting the issue. Controversy sells magazines, newspapers and adds life to radio.

My issues are:

1) ISU fans have too high of expectations. Sure some joker will go on the radio or post on a message board they want 10 win seasons. However, I'm willing to bet 80%+ of Cyclone fans would be satified with 6-8 wins EVERY year. With a 12 game season, those are not unreasonable goals. We should beat the UNI's, Toledo's or UNLV's almost every time and I expect to split with the Hawks.

That leaves 3 or 4 Big 12 wins. How can a fan base that expects a .500 record within its conference have too high of expectations?

2) The media tends to characterize ISU as a lowly program and uses the last years of the Jim Walden era as the benchmark for ISU FB history. Being a student from 82-86, I guess my benchmark is the Duncan/Criner years. We might not have been great, but ISU typically went 4-7 or 5-6. I appreciate what Mac has done, but other than the 2000 season Mac's best teams haven't been much better than the Duncan/Criner years. Mac's worst teams (2003 & this season) are far, far worse than the Duncan/Criner years.

3) That 5 bowl games in 7 years is some huge accomplishment. All it takes is 6 wins to be bowl eligible and some of those wins can be over 1-AA teams. In most seasons at least 8 Big 12 teams will be bowl eligible. To use bowl games as a historical benchmark is complete spin. If the bowl environment was the same today as 25 years ago, the Clones would have been lucky to go to 2-3 bowl games. Going to a bowl game 25 years ago was like going to the NCAA hoops tourney. In today's bowl landscape the Insight, EV1 & Humanitarian bowls are the equivalent of the NIT.

4) Jamie Pollard set expectations too high by his rhetoric & actions. Coming into this season most fan polls I saw on this & other boards was a 7 or 8 win season. How is that too high coming off a 7 win season and returning 9 starters on offense? Sure there was talk of winning the Big 12 North, but I think most fans got used to the last couple years where a 5-3 record was good enough to win the division.

5) The billboard in CR was to blame. It put unneeded pressure on the team & coaching staff. Unless I missed something, we were 2-0 while the billboard was up. Did it jack-up the Hawk fan base & provide bullitin board fodder? Sure, but Iowa won that game because they were a better team and the game was at Kinnick. I didn't hear anything about ISU putting up billboards in Austin, Norman or Manhatten.

The reality is Mac got fired because he didn't get the job done on the field. Going 8-22 against the Big 12 over the last 4 years and 0-14 in 2 of those seasons IS A VERY GOOD reason to fire a coach. Even if that coach is a great guy, loves the university and has been around 12 years.

DaddyMac · 11-09-2006, 09:52 PM

You can't see it, but know that I'm in front of my laptop clapping at your post.

Mac did some wonderful things here. And he should never be thought of a black spot in ISU, or even an oversight. At the very least he generated interest within the fanbase for ISU football. Excitement that wasn't there when I went to ISU.

But your points are dead on.

BenEClone · 11-09-2006, 10:16 PM

I haven't seen, and don't care to see, the distortions you have mentioned. I was at ISU '65-'70 (yeah, it took a long time, but, it was fun) My baseline is Earl Bruce and Majors. We went to bowl games in the mid 70's and it was over twenty years until Mac got us there again. As far as I know, NOW is the first time in my recollection that the administration seems to support excellence in athletics. NOW is the first time we have had an institutional goal (contrasted with fan wishes) to be better than mediocre. That is an enormous change in the paradigm and the Hawks and Huskers of the world are worried about it. Too bad.

Cloned4Life · 11-09-2006, 10:26 PM

isucy86... Amazing Post. That's all I'm gonna say. I too am clapping in front of my laptop.

O, and I just realized it's Thursday night, my tests are over, and um... I'm guna go have a few "Brewsters" :-)

CYTIME · 11-09-2006, 10:34 PM

ISUCY, well said. Standing O.

jbhtexas · 11-09-2006, 10:36 PM

Originally Posted by BenEClone

As far as I know, NOW is the first time in my recollection that the administration seems to support excellence in athletics. NOW is the first time we have had an institutional goal (contrasted with fan wishes) to be better than mediocre. That is an enormous change in the paradigm and the Hawks and Huskers of the world are worried about it. Too bad.

Excellent observations! The last thing the Hawks and Huskers want is another contender to bust in on their little war for college athletic supremacy in the upper midwest states. As a result, I expect that ADJP will be hearing criticism from both of those fronts anytime he makes moves to improve ISU athletics.

AirWalke · 11-09-2006, 10:41 PM

Originally Posted by BenEClone

As far as I know, NOW is the first time in my recollection that the administration seems to support excellence in athletics. NOW is the first time we have had an institutional goal (contrasted with fan wishes) to be better than mediocre. That is an enormous change in the paradigm and the Hawks and Huskers of the world are worried about it. Too bad.

GREAT point! All the other Huskers I've talked to on another football forum keep saying "Dan was the best ISU could ever get" and "ISU should just get used to being mediocre"! I'm saving the link to that thread should the opportunity arise that we can say "told'ja so!"

jdoggivjc · 11-09-2006, 11:15 PM

Originally Posted by isucy86

Listening to KXNO and reading some of the national pundents comments about Mac's firing, I feel many of the media's take on the situation is distorting the issue. Controversy sells magazines, newspapers and adds life to radio.

My issues are:

3) That 5 bowl games in 7 years is some huge accomplishment. All it takes is 6 wins to be bowl eligible and some of those wins can be over 1-AA teams. In most seasons at least 8 Big 12 teams will be bowl eligible. To use bowl games as a historical benchmark is complete spin. If the bowl environment was the same today as 25 years ago, the Clones would have been lucky to go to 2-3 bowl games. Going to a bowl game 25 years ago was like going to the NCAA hoops tourney. In today's bowl landscape the Insight, EV1 & Humanitarian bowls are the equivalent of the NIT.

I applaud most of this too, except for point 3. I do think the 5 bowls in 7 years is a big accomplishment, when put into perspective. Yeah, pretty lowly bowls, and half of DI goes to a bowl nowadays, but, it was 20+ years since we had gone to a bowl. And I think Insight is probably more similar to 8-seed of the dance, not NIT. Benchmark of his career? Nah. Him leaving the program in the state it is for the next HC to take over is why he deserves respect.

Bottom line, unfortunately, it is time to move on.

jbhtexas · 11-10-2006, 12:00 AM

Originally Posted by jdoggivjc

Benchmark of his career? Nah. Him leaving the program in the state it is for the next HC to take over is why he deserves respect.

How would you characterize the present state of the program?

On the positive side, the facilities are certainly much better than they were prior to DM taking over. ISU seems to be paying coaching salaries that are in the ballkpark. ISU does have some notariety. Season ticket sales are at an all-time high.

On the other side, fan apathy seems to be pretty high, at least it was after the KU game. How is the present talent level on the team? Frankly, it doesn't look that great. How about the talent level of the new recruits? 2 of the last 4 seasons have not turned out well.

As you seem to imply, one of the things that DM will be judged on is the state of the program when he left. It may take a couple of years to fully determine what that state acutally is.

darts180 · 11-10-2006, 12:12 AM

He had a 7 person recruiting class, and was offering every juco with a pulse. That does not speak of stability to me personally.

One thing that needs to be emphasized in this thread is that the university has made more of a commitment to the FB program than ever in the history of the school, that includes the Bruce and Majors tenures.

MidwestZest · 11-10-2006, 12:14 AM

Originally Posted by jbhtexas

As you seem to imply, one of the things that DM will be judged on is the state of the program when he left. It may take a couple of years to fully determine what that state acutally is.

I think that's wonderfully astute. Of course, 3 years from now, separating what dan left and what our new coach changed may be difficult, especially if the program takes a couple years to get off the ground. I guess it's gonna be that way with any coaching change anywhere when the production is at a relative low.

Psyclone · 11-10-2006, 12:54 AM

Originally Posted by BenEClone

NOW is the first time in my recollection that the administration seems to support excellence in athletics. NOW is the first time we have had an institutional goal (contrasted with fan wishes) to be better than mediocre. That is an enormous change in the paradigm and the Hawks and Huskers of the world are worried about it. Too bad.

You hit the nail on the head. I was there when Johnny Majors built the program in the early 70's There was an active discussion about the "over-emphasis" on athletics during that time. I think it contributed to Johnny leaving. I seem to remember some public conflict between Majors and a professor.

The only thing I would disagree with is about Hawks and Huskers being worried. I don't think what we see happening is perceptible to them. I think they just like to think they are superior to us and talk down to us a very patronizing manner. Beating them won't shut them up until we follow it up with success that puts us ahead of them on the national radar. Until then they will consider any game result an aberration.

jperickson23 · 11-10-2006, 01:18 AM

ISUCY86 that is one of the best posts I've ever read. Sums up my feelings exactly. Nail hit firmly on head. Especially the part about using bowl games as a historical benchmark is complete spin. I'm old enough to remember the 1976 team that went 8-3 and went to the nothing bowl. Two of Mac's bowl teams were 7-6 and 6-5. Hardly an accomplishment to brag about.

jeff76 · 11-10-2006, 06:20 AM

Great post-KXNO sucks, I had to shut it off. To blame Pollard is like blaming the fan base. Mac needed great assistants and didn't have them since Bobby E. and Steve L. left.

cyclonewino · 11-10-2006, 06:48 AM

Originally Posted by Psyclone

You hit the nail on the head. I was there when Johnny Majors built the program in the early 70's There was an active discussion about the "over-emphasis" on athletics during that time. I think it contributed to Johnny leaving. I seem to remember some public conflict between Majors and a professor.

The only thing I would disagree with is about Hawks and Huskers being worried. I don't think what we see happening is perceptible to them. I think they just like to think they are superior to us and talk down to us a very patronizing manner. Beating them won't shut them up until we follow it up with success that puts us ahead of them on the national radar. Until then they will consider any game result an aberration.

Great points!! ISU was an educational institution, NOT a school that could or should concern itself with winning sports.

Even then many Hawks thought UofI had a better football program, after all they NEVER went to minor bowls like the Peach, they were Rose bowl or bust - even under todays easy bowl system they wouldn't have qualified during their 20 years of failure.