I think it's fair to say it would be better if the opposing team and students didn't cross paths in a field storm and not have that labeled as an over-reaction. IDK if it's worth moving them or not, that's for some risk-assessment person in the AD to decide, but I can see why they would want to change that up.
This. I'm fully on board with rushing the field. I think it's great, and I don't want to tell fans not to do it. However, deserved or not, Iowa State has had a bumpy history with field/court rushes. And that's going to add a layer of scrutiny that might not exist at other schools. I'm not saying that's fair or unfair, just acknowledging that it exists.
As a result of that, it's not overreacting to see if there are measures that can be taken to mitigate the risks associated with field rushes. That doesn't mean we have to implement them, but there's nothing wrong with exploring that area. It might have only been one student that was arrested on Saturday, but it only takes one to cause an ugly incident. It's Pollard's job to look at the situation, determine the likelihood of an incident, decide what level of risk the school is willing to assume, and make/decline to make changes.
But make no mistake, it's not likely that Iowa State is going to get the benefit of the doubt on any future field rush incidents going forward.
If, for example, we beat Texas in a couple weeks, and rush the field again. If there's another incident with a fan and an opposing player, you can bet Iowa State will be getting more than just a letter as a result. We're in a position now, where any change we make is our choice. You don't want to be in a position where you're forced to change. That's not overreacting. That's just pragmatism.