Let's be honest, where was McCarney taking us?

[Clonefan94]

Dan didn't really inherit anything. He knew exactly what he was getting when he signed those papers as head coach. It was definitely an uphill battle, but, I really can't believe he didn't see it as a huge challenge. Something that I'm not sure Walden was able to see when he took over. JW took over a team that could still get worse. Mac had at least a slight advantage in that he couldn't do any worse than Walden.

In the end, I'm really pretty happy Mac is gone. I'm not here to bash the guy, but, I saw a guy more concerned about public appearance and not hurting anyones feelings more than going out to win a football game. I just never saw that "Lay it all on the line" attitude from him. From game 1 he was more than happy to pack it in and take it easy on any lead he ever got.

Mac did a lot of good things here, that's for sure, but, let's not forget, the Big XII North did a lot of good things for him also. When Walden was here, he had to play a pretty good OU team, a dominating Nebraska team, KSU was an up and coming force and Colorado shared a National Championship. The big 8 over all in Walden's Career was a much tougher place to play than the Big XII North of the last 6 years. Mac benefited from our conference as much as anyone here benefited from him. He got some really good breaks along the way. And in the end, what I never liked about him was that he never took those opportunities and cashed in on them. He was happy to talk about how bad we used to be instead of how good we should be.

 

[StLouisClone]

The other thing that bothers me is Ryan Koch. Over the last 2 years, we had no running game. Kock gets a chance with 2 games left in his career and does a great job. How come he was not given a chance to be the featured back earlier? That is just bad coaching.

A few of us were on this board at the beginning of last season saying that Kock needed to carry the ball 15-20 times per game. Not many people agreed with us. Some said Kock didn't have the speed necessary. Who needs speed when you can run over the top of people? It wasn't until Mac knew his job was already lost that he finally gave in and let Kock get his chance to shine. Makes you wonder how long Mac's assistants were lobbying for Kock. His supporters had to include more than just a few armchair quarterbacks.

 

[Clonefan94]

Makes you wonder how long Mac's assistants were lobbying for Kock. His supporters had to include more than just a few armchair quarterbacks.

Another thing that always baffled me was his hang up on turnovers. Granted, they can hurt you, and I never saw what went on in practice every day, but, I do remember seeing a couple kids with some real break away speed never getting another shot after putting the ball on the ground once during a game. I always kind of felt that Stevie was our Go to guy because of his blocking and ability to hold onto the ball more so than his ability to move the ball with his feet.

 

[Clone_12]

I don't disagree with you guys at all on McCarney from a mere x's on o's standpoint...i did not think he was a good gameday coach...i just wanted to stick up for the guy some with all of the criticism he has been getting on here...the fact is he still did do some good things for ISU football-it's just that from the way some people obsess about him on here, you would think Steve Alford has been our football coach for the last 12 years.

 

[jbhtexas]

Jb, were you around to see the talent level on McCarney's first team of Walden's players compared to the squad Gene is inheriting? I'm talking what he left behind for talent, not wins and losses the year before. There is a HUGE talent gap between the two, not to mention that ISU fans actually expect to win now because we have five out of the last seven years, as opposed to 2 or 3 out of the last 15 years before that...so yes, it is easy to see how he left things better than he inherited them.

The record book doesn't record the perceived talent level of the team, it records wins and losses. The next coach doesn't only take over the talent, he also takes over all of the other messy circumstances that caused the previous team to be the last place team in the conference.

The bottom line is that DM took over the last place team in the conference and left the team in last place for the next guy.

I'd venture to guess that the only reason most ISU fans expect to win this year is because there is a new coach.

 

[jbhtexas]

i just wanted to stick up for the guy some with all of the criticism he has been getting on here...the fact is he still did do some good things for ISU football-it's just that from the way some people obsess about him on here, you would think Steve Alford has been our football coach for the last 12 years.

If you want to stick up for DM, that's fine. But I would suggest showing your support by basing your comments on DM's accomplishments, not by beating down the guy before him. DM did enough of that...

Alford was 152-106 at Iowa and went to post season play in 6 of 8 seasons. Had DM put up numbers like that, I doubt that we would be having this discussion...

 

[Steve]

Part of Mac's lack of success can be blamed on Walden - he did leave behind a team short on talent in addition to throwing in the towel the last year. Mac's problem is how he responded to the situation by not targeting immediate help. If he had, the win total likely wouldn't have dwindled from 3 to 2 to 1 in the early years. He brought in some good talent in year 2, but they couldn't help soon enough. Starting in year 3, Mac had a hard time selling his faltering program to top recruits. When he finally went the Juco route in year 4, it was both too late and overdone.

When the large Juco class was done, he was back to square one with not enough young talent on the squad. I was glad to see Chizik go a different direction with the dozen or so Jucos in his first class.

 

[cycloneworld]

Alford was 152-106 at Iowa and went to post season play in 6 of 8 seasons. Had DM put up numbers like that, I doubt that we would be having this discussion...

You can't compare football and basketball records or winning percentages. Teams almost have to TRY to have a sub-.500 record in basketball with all of the cupcake non-conference games many power conference teams schedule (including ISU).

 

[bos]

Im impressed with how long this thread has been pumping along considering how many like it are in the archives. Still a very passionate topic.

 

[jdoggivjc]

The record book doesn't record the perceived talent level of the team, it records wins and losses. The next coach doesn't only take over the talent, he also takes over all of the other messy circumstances that caused the previous team to be the last place team in the conference.

The bottom line is that DM took over the last place team in the conference and left the team in last place for the next guy.

I'd venture to guess that the only reason most ISU fans expect to win this year is because there is a new coach.

My argument against this is last year we didn't have last place talent - at least according to the preseason media. While our defensive talent was young and inexperienced, our offensive talent was considered one of the best in the Big XII and was supposed to overcome the defensive deficiencies. I'd say conservative playcalling and strategy (i.e., coaching) made an offense that was talented enough to scorch just about anyone legless, exposing the defense. The defense, for their talent and inexperience, kept us in games last year until remaining on the field for 3/4 of the game gave them nothing left to give.

The reason why I expect a bounce back this year is because a lot of the talent from last season is back - Meyer (who under a good coach should flourish), the receiving corps (Blythe, Sumrall and Barkema as our veteran studs as well as Moses and Messiah, both who surprised some last year), and Scales (who is finally healthy but if that doesn't work we've got Bass waiting in the wings). We rid ourselves of most of the offensive line (which was a glaring weakness), and from McFarland's mouth the O-line, including the returners and JUCOs, have developed much better than anyone anticipated and may be actually serviceable this season. The defense has question marks, but if the folks from Kansas are placing our defensive unit above the ones from KU and KSU, they must see something our own fan base isn't. Sometimes I'll take the word of an outsider, especially when they rate their units behind our own.

I think we're going to be a surprise team and win 6-7 games this year. Player-wise, it's just not that different of a team from last year, and I honestly think coaching will make a huge difference as far as utilizing the talent is concerned. I won't be disappointed if we only win 4 games, I'm just anticipating 6-7.

 

[Clone_12]

I didn't say the record book listed "perceived talent level"...but were you around to see the talent level...there is a huge difference-and yes I would say talent level matters a little bit in sports. It won't be easy at all for Gene to build us back up again, but it will be a lot easier than it was for Dan, because Dan DID leave the program in a better state than he inherited it. We've won 5 of the last 7 years, we have more talent than we did when he got here (please don't try and disagree on that because the difference is huge), and we are no longer a school looking for their first bowl win or appearance within the last 2 decades...we also have been ranked at one point or another in 3 of the last 7 seasons...how you can say that isn't better than anything that happened the fifteen years before Dan is beyond me...regardless of some pretty iffy gameday decisions and the inability to get ISU over the hump, McCarney did accomplish more at ISU than anyone before him for quite a while.

 

[jbhtexas]

You can't compare football and basketball records or winning percentages.

That wasn't the point...

Teams almost have to TRY to have a sub-.500 record in basketball with all of the cupcake non-conference games many power conference teams schedule (including ISU).

Nice. Be sure to pass that comment on to GMac. I'd love to hear his thoughts on your assertion.

 

[jbhtexas]

I didn't say the record book listed "perceived talent level"...but were you around to see the talent level...there is a huge difference-and yes I would say talent level matters a little bit in sports. It won't be easy at all for Gene to build us back up again, but it will be a lot easier than it was for Dan, because Dan DID leave the program in a better state than he inherited it. We've won 5 of the last 7 years, we have more talent than we did when he got here (please don't try and disagree on that because the difference is huge), and we are no longer a school looking for their first bowl win or appearance within the last 2 decades...we also have been ranked at one point or another in 3 of the last 7 seasons...how you can say that isn't better than anything that happened the fifteen years before Dan is beyond me...regardless of some pretty iffy gameday decisions and the inability to get ISU over the hump, McCarney did accomplish more at ISU than anyone before him for quite a while.

The discussion you and I are having is not about DM's accomplishments. It is about the state that DM left the FB program in.

( (Accomplishments) != (state of program) ).

Most of the things you list above are completely and utterly irrelevant to our discussion about the state of the program.

Even though all you've presented are your subjective feelings about the talent level at the beginning and end of DM's tenure, I'll grant you that DM left more talent than JW left him. But, so what? If talent alone were all that mattered, ISU would have won more than one conference game last year. The fact, that with all this talent you claim that ISU has, that ISU couldn't win more than one conference game, by definition, must indicate that the rest of the program was deeply flawed.

If you've been paying attention at all to what's been posted here and reported in the media, it should be clear to you that the underlying structure of the FB program under DM was quite flawed. These things were clearly evidenced during gameday. It's not just "iffy" gameday descisions that kept DM from getting over the hump. It was improper conditioning, improper instruction of fundamentals, stressing the wrong physical attributes (size vs. speed). Maybe ISU has talent, but maybe it isn't the right kind of talent to win in the Big 12.

Chizik has to make a fundamental shift in the underlying structure of ISU FB to get ISU to be a contender in the Big 12, because DM did not leave the proper structure in place for that to happen. I hope you don't think that these are just some easy trivial things that will happen overnight. Chizik doesn't just have get ISU back to DM's (about) 0.300 conference winning %. He is expected to get ISU to the top of the Big 12. If you think that's going to be easy, or that his job is going to be easier than what DM had to do when he took over from JW, you're naive.

Now Chizik seems to be focused on what has to be done, and driven to do it, and he might accomplish all this rather quickly, but that doesn't mean it was "easy"...

 

[Clone_12]

I agree with most of what you just said...and if you've read my posts through this thread, or other McCarney threads, you know that I agree he wasn't that great of coach...and at no point did I dispute the fact that we underachieved last year and should've went a lot better than 1-7 in conference...the the fact is their is a LOT more talent left behind then he had to work with his first year...and the accomplishments I listed of his do play a part in this discussion...because school tradition (not that we have a lot) does play a huge part in recruiting, and we don't have much, but it sure is a heck of a lot better than 12 years ago...at least kids out there know now that ISU football CAN be competitive...and at no point whatsoever did I say it would be easy for Chizik to rebuild the program, I just said it would be less difficult then what McCarney had deal with because of the reasons I listed...getting it past that level will be tough...it's always tough to rebuild, but if you saw how low our program was when Dan took over you might appreciate him a little bit more...it was BAD, and we had nothing to sell potential recruits on at all besides immediate playing time...

 

[cyclonenum1]

For all of you that claim McCarney did "great" things at ISU...your definition of "great" is a heck of a lot different than mine.

 

[Clone_12]

How many people on this thread have said he did "great" things?

 

[mpc4isu7]

How many people on this thread have said he did "great" things?

DM took a team that just sucked 15 years ago and made it to were it was expected to go to higher bowl games. He never went to one of these bowl games but he took a program that one 1 or 2 games a year and made the program a consisdent bowl team. He also increased to fan base in his tenure (which is being increased even more with JP and Gene). I would consider these to be a great accoplishment at a program that had NEVER won a bowl game before he got here.

However, i do think that it was his time to go because he had maxed out where he could take the football program. But he might not of been the best on field coach but his loyalty to the University was second to none.

Before DM came along does anyone think that we could of hired a coach with the prestige of Gene? I dont.

 

[jdoggivjc]

DM took a team that just sucked 15 years ago and made it to were it was expected to go to higher bowl games. He never went to one of these bowl games but he took a program that one 1 or 2 games a year and made the program a consisdent bowl team. He also increased to fan base in his tenure (which is being increased even more with JP and Gene). I would consider these to be a great accoplishment at a program that had NEVER won a bowl game before he got here.

However, i do think that it was his time to go because he had maxed out where he could take the football program. But he might not of been the best on field coach but his loyalty to the University was second to none.

Before DM came along does anyone think that we could of hired a coach with the prestige of Gene? I dont.

I think all these things make him a "good" coach, not a "great" one. Great would have been taking the next step, keeping us at least on the 8-9 win plateau, cracking 10 wins every couple of seasons, etcetera. Yes, the 2000 season was one of ISU's top three seasons ever. The only problem is Mac never replicated it - he never won more than 7 games in any given season after that. 2002 was a monumental bust. His coaching strategy that technique should be taught at the high school level and his time not wasted with it was a serious error. Recruiting got so bad that the team needed to be rebooted twice (2003 and 2006). I've been as big a McCarney supporter as anyone on this site and I used to consider him one of the greats, but seeing how the players have responded to Chizik's system in just 10 months and noting that McCarney never did anything like this, he just can't be classified as being great. Honestly, I'm not sure how realistically he can be compared to Bruce, Walden, or Criner, and all these guys were before my time as a Cyclone fan. I know Bruce was deeply successful here; Walden and Criner not so much. It's been argued that Walden and Criner didn't have the support or facilities, but I also question just how much Bruce had, and he won anyway. Then there's the legitimate argument that McCarney was responsible for pulling us out of the muck, which he did, and much of his losing record is attributed to his first five years on campus, also true. The point is, we kept telling ourselves that "next year was going to be the season." Last year we had the talent to do great things, and coaching got in the way of that. At this point in time, I do consider McCarney one of the top five coaches at Iowa State, probably even ahead of Walden and Criner (they didn't have to rebuild like McCarney did), but IMO that's just an indictment of just how bad this program has been. Regardless, Chizik seems to have us on the road to success. McCarney improved the program and got us to expect greater things - here's hoping Chizik delivers those greater things :sweet:

 

[isufbcurt]

If you've been paying attention at all to what's been posted here and reported in the media, it should be clear to you that the underlying structure of the FB program under DM was quite flawed. These things were clearly evidenced during gameday. It's not just "iffy" gameday descisions that kept DM from getting over the hump. It was improper conditioning, improper instruction of fundamentals, stressing the wrong physical attributes (size vs. speed). Maybe ISU has talent, but maybe it isn't the right kind of talent to win in the Big 12.
quote]

You know what I don't know how you can make that comment without knowing what was stressed and taught during practice and lifting sessions. And I you wouldn't know what was taught unless you were in there being taught.

Well I will tell you first hand that the conditioning wasn't improper, the wrong fundamentals were not taught, and speed was indeed stressed (more importantly explosiveness).

While yes the new coaches are doing things differently that doesn't mean things in the past were wrong. I know for a fact that the workouts used in the strength program were modeled after very successful programs throughout college and NFL. While the new strength coach doesn't believe in the Hammer Strength machines they were and still a very widely used workout tool.

 

[StLouisClone]

Well I will tell you first hand that the conditioning wasn't improper, the wrong fundamentals were not taught, and speed was indeed stressed (more importantly explosiveness).

While yes the new coaches are doing things differently that doesn't mean things in the past were wrong. I know for a fact that the workouts used in the strength program were modeled after very successful programs throughout college and NFL. While the new strength coach doesn't believe in the Hammer Strength machines they were and still a very widely used workout tool.

Good point. I am just as excited as everyone else about the reports we have received about the new strength and conditioning techniques, but right now that is all they are... reports. We'll see how successful they are starting in about 22 days.

One of the more interesting tidbits we received is the before and after picture-taking of the players with their shirts off. ISUFBCURT, is that something new? It seems like a good way to motivate someone to get in the weight room.