The Clones came out flat. The Clones were more concerned about future conference games that are more important. 
Does Paul Rhoads underemphasize the Iowa game?
- Thread starter Al_4_State
- Start date
I don't think Rhoads underemphasizes the Iowa game. There is a huge difference in talent right now. I think we need to hit the Junior Colleges hard for some big strong defensive linemen and maybe one or two OL as well.
Maybe Iowa being a BCS game winning team last season and quite possibly being even better this season has something to do with it?
These are probably a couple of the better teams Iowa has had in a while... and you guys are still in building mode.
Why all the teeth gnashing?
These are probably a couple of the better teams Iowa has had in a while... and you guys are still in building mode.
Why all the teeth gnashing?
Neither side wants to admit it but it is more than any other game. Rhoads currently treats this game the way Ferentz did until after 2005. Ferentz tried to keep that 'any other game' mentality. I think he got that from the fans.
I hate to break it to all of you chicken littles, but the games against KSU, KU, NU, CU, and Mizzou are SIGNIFICANTLY more important than any game against Iowa.
I hate losing to the hawks as much as anyone, but I would trade a loss in that game for a win in a Big XII north game any time.
Bury your head in the sand if you want... I will be cheering on my Clones in a game 'that matters' next week!
I hate losing to the hawks as much as anyone, but I would trade a loss in that game for a win in a Big XII north game any time.
Bury your head in the sand if you want... I will be cheering on my Clones in a game 'that matters' next week!
This game is not important to ISU and we obviously couldn't care less about the hawks. We have a much bigger game comming up next week agains K-state. It was clear that Rhodes and his staff didn't want to open up the offense and show the Wildcats our playbook. They also were holding back on defense and played a basic uncomplicated scheme. The most important thing is that our best players didn't get hurt and that David Sims got reps in for next week. This is all part of Rhodes strategy for success in conference. The hawks don't matter. 
Fan used to get mad that Mac put too much into this game and it didnt carry over to the rest of the season. Now some are mad this game is treated like it should be.
You are high as hell if you think the CU game means more to this program than the Iowa game. Sure if we play CU the last game of the season for the chance at the North title...then sure. But ISU plays for the chance to go to bowl games. We don't play for conference titles...sorry, but we just don't.
The Iowa game is HUGE, HUGE for the health of the ISU program. I'm assuming sitting on you're couch in Austin, Texas it may seem like the Big 12 games should mean more but they just don't. Instate recruiting, the fight for fan support, media attention...all extremely important and all affected by the Iowa game alone.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Conference wins>win over Iowa. Rhoads recognizes this. As fans, we all should too...it's not that he underemphasizes it. Iowa is a very good team, but Rhoads knows this game means state bragging rights, but wouldn't make or break our season. We have goals to achieve this season. It starts with beating KSU.
Again, how does beating KU help our bowl chances anymore than beating Iowa? A win is a win. And unless we are competing for a north title (and starting next year an outright Big 12 title) beating conference teams is absolutely no more important than any of our non conference games...including Iowa.
Key difference in this game was that Iowa is a top 10 team, and ISU is not even in the top 25.
I'm sorry, I'm not making excuses, but you guys are acting like we should have won this game. This team was nothing like the preseason-2005 Iowa team.
It all starts with K-State next week.
I'm sorry, I'm not making excuses, but you guys are acting like we should have won this game. This team was nothing like the preseason-2005 Iowa team.
It all starts with K-State next week.
And let me be clear. I was not expecting a win today. I'm just frustrated at the nonsense I hear from people trying to downplay this game.
It wasn't like Mac competed well with Iowa until Hayden let the program slide, and Ferentz had to come in and build it back up. When Iowa was bad, we beat them, I know except for 2002.
In terms of recruiting, it really never had a bearing on what happened in-state. Other than a handful of exceptions, Mac never took an Iowa high school player that Iowa wanted. What he managed to do, which was important, was that he was able to get players that Iowa may have grey shirted, to come here on scholarship so he closed the gap in that case.
The problem is that too many Iowa State fans care way too much about this game. You know, I don't care about the game other than the week before, and the week after so I don't have to listen to them chirp.
But even the years when we beat them, as soon as they got into their conference schedule, and had some success, the Iowa State game was inconsequential, except to the Iowa State fans that care more about this early season non-conference game than they should. And of course our schedule got much tougher, playing the best of a strong rotatiion in the Big 12 (and the North was good) and we started faltering and the losses piled up beating Iowa didn't matter.
When we lost 15 in a row, it was important to beat them, only for the sake of legitimacy. Mac was around at the right time for that, and good for him (of course he still hasn't gotten another head coaching job at any level, which is a big red sign about the true esteem with which he is held in the coaching profession).
I thought that Rhoads did a nice job last year with a weaker schedule, and kept his kids together. This year will be much tougher just based on who we have to play.
