All you haters that think "All In" was just a locker room chant:

**everyyard** · 11-07-2010, 02:39 PM

well, now you know our team and CPR mean it and live it. No way Mac or Chiz or Walden go for 2, and you know what, we probably still lose the game. CPR went for the win, and win or lose, I will always support a coach who plays to win and not "not to lose." If you are sick now, imagine how sick you would be if we went four and out on our next OT possession, or turned it over, or had a kick blocked. Boise State could have went traditional in their BCS game against OU a few years back, but we wouldn't still be talking about it if they did, win or lose. Count me as "All In."

**joefrog** · 11-07-2010, 02:56 PM

I am right there with you! I would much rather be a Cyclone rather than a Husker each and every day of the week. Yeah, of course I wanted to win yesterday, who didn't. But I still think we have a great man and the best person for the job coaching our football team. I think he really is a player's coach. And I think he expects to win, and will win a lot in the future.

Once CPR gets his sort of players into his system, watch out. ISU is going to make some noise!

**RING4CY** · 11-07-2010, 03:53 PM

Who has said that CPR or the Cyclones aren't "all-in"?

The "haters" just hate the "All-what?" "All-in!" as a pregame east-west crowd chant. And they're right.

**jaretac** · 11-07-2010, 04:01 PM

I completely agree with the call to go for it. It was nice to see a Cyclone team, for a change, have the confidence to go for it. In the past, in similar situations, we have gone into OT with the philosophy that we will try to keep up, play it safe, and maybe the other team will make the mistake. We were always the team making the mistake and losing. Rhoads made a statement by going for it, he declared that we intend to win the game and if other teams leaves points on the field, that is their mistake and we will make them pay.

The Cyclones are starting to get a reputation for being a gritty team that will make you work for the win no matter who you are. I like it!

**everyyard** · 11-07-2010, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by RING4CY

Who has said that CPR or the Cyclones aren't "all-in"?

The "haters" just hate the "All-what?" "All-in!" as a pregame east-west crowd chant. And they're right.

you misunderstood me. the haters are the one's who still want to play "not to lose" football and this team and coach isn't that type. they play to win and would rather go for the jugular than sit back and wait for the other team to lose it for us. we are now a "taking" football team instead of an "accepting."

**Wesley** · 11-07-2010, 04:04 PM

If you look on back of the Johnny Majors sign at JTS you will see, "All In."

**RING4CY** · 11-07-2010, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by everyyard

you misunderstood me. the haters are the one's who still want to play "not to lose" football and this team and coach isn't that type. they play to win and would rather go for the jugular than sit back and wait for the other team to lose it for us. we are now a "taking" football team instead of an "accepting."

Gotcha.

One of the things I said at halftime yesterday in the gameday thread was play to win the game. If a team loses because they played to win (just as ISU did yesterday) instead of getting conservative, it is really hard to then fault their effort.

**Cyrocks** · 11-07-2010, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by everyyard

well, now you know our team and CPR mean it and live it. No way Mac or Chiz or Walden go for 2, and you know what, we probably still lose the game. CPR went for the win, and win or lose, I will always support a coach who plays to win and not "not to lose." If you are sick now, imagine how sick you would be if we went four and out on our next OT possession, or turned it over, or had a kick blocked. Boise State could have went traditional in their BCS game against OU a few years back, but we wouldn't still be talking about it if they did, win or lose. Count me as "All In."

Don't disagree with you, but why did you feel it necessary to tear down Walden and Mac, or even Chiz, to make your point?

And, this is just my opinion, I think Walden would have went for two. And/Or he would have tried to throw a long pass with 40 seconds left with 3 timeouts remaining.

The reason I think Walden would have went for two comes from the Iowa game when ISU was driving for the tying touchdown only to have a pass intercepted to seal a 10-3 Iowa win. After the game, Walden said he would have went for two. That was before the overtime rules were in effect, I believe.

**wiuclone** · 11-07-2010, 05:56 PM

i just imagine what 04 and 05 woulda been like if we had CPR was at the helm...however supposedly in 02 against florida st if they counted seneca's TD mac said we wouldve gone for 2, weird memory i have huh?