McDowell and Bell off team?

[synapticwave]

I feel bad for these guys. They came in under McCarney, and have seen two coaching changes and never got a chance to really develop their skills or play with the a team/system that they planned on. With two coaching changes and three fairly significantly different coaching styles all of the players get screwed because they're locked in to the school without losing elidgibility and transfering.

I haven't looked into this but I bet the average time a head coach is at a school has decreased significantly over the last 20 years, with the demand to win and the amount of $$$ involved coaches are only given a couple of years to prove what they can do and then they usually move on. Not to mention coordinators and position coaches resume look like a amtrack train schedule with how many cities most of them have stopped in for 1-2 year stints. All the while, athletes commit to schools and then get stuck with whoever comes along next.

The NCAA seriously needs to re-examin the rules for transfering if a coach leaves. I understand they can't just let players transfer willy nilly with the coaches that recruited them, but if a coach leaves a school maybe an extra year of playing time could be granted or maybe they could loosen the rules on being able to transfer within conference without an extra year penalty or something. Guys like Bo Williams get completely screwed transfering once sitting out a year and then here comes a new staff who he doesn't fit with at all. It's really just unfortunate for the players and in McDowell's and Bell's case, I don't blame them for their frustration, although I don't agree with the mid-season quitting, I do understand it.

 

[jbhtexas]

Honestly, I don't blame them. I think it is somewhat plain to seet that the tipping pont was probalby KB getting the start last Saturday after the events of the proceeding week. I am sure (AB at least) felt that this could be his shot at showing the coaches what he can do in a game, but instead he had to sit back and watch KB's at times spotty defense.

Another thing that I think people overlook is the time these guys put in, be it starters or the back-up long snapper. They devote a huge portion of their time to football, and I would imagine it to be very frustrating to feel like all the time you put in is to get a good seat for the game.

I don't think quitting over PT is the answer, but I can definitely understand the frustration. If a kid can't get into a pre-conference game that's well in hand, it's pretty easy to think that nothing is going to happen during the conference games either.

The PT for some players up to this point has been a little confusing. For example, I know that the Bo issue has been discussed in other threads, but the bottom line is that on the 9/28 depth chart, Bo is listed as the #3 RB, and he didn't see a play in the pre-conference games, while Beau, who saw a few snaps, isn't even listed on the depth chart. Now A-Rob is hurting, so it's quite conceivable that the #3 back may need to play (especially if #2 is having issues).

 

[djcubby]

With everyone talking about throwing them a bone and giving them some mop up time at the end, who is to say that a little more playing time would solve the issue? Both of these guys have started at one point or another and both have been recruited over, which is the name of the game in college sports. Maybe they are thinking that they need to start instead of play back up?

 

[cyhiphopp]

I feel bad for these guys. They came in under McCarney, and have seen two coaching changes and never got a chance to really develop their skills or play with the a team/system that they planned on. With two coaching changes and three fairly significantly different coaching styles all of the players get screwed because they're locked in to the school without losing elidgibility and transfering.

I haven't looked into this but I bet the average time a head coach is at a school has decreased significantly over the last 20 years, with the demand to win and the amount of $$$ involved coaches are only given a couple of years to prove what they can do and then they usually move on. Not to mention coordinators and position coaches resume look like a amtrack train schedule with how many cities most of them have stopped in for 1-2 year stints. All the while, athletes commit to schools and then get stuck with whoever comes along next.

The NCAA seriously needs to re-examin the rules for transfering if a coach leaves. I understand they can't just let players transfer willy nilly with the coaches that recruited them, but if a coach leaves a school maybe an extra year of playing time could be granted or maybe they could loosen the rules on being able to transfer within conference without an extra year penalty or something. Guys like Bo Williams get completely screwed transfering once sitting out a year and then here comes a new staff who he doesn't fit with at all. It's really just unfortunate for the players and in McDowell's and Bell's case, I don't blame them for their frustration, although I don't agree with the mid-season quitting, I do understand it.

Sorry, but if there were little or no consequences for transferring during a coaching change, ISU would have had a lot more kids leave the past 3 years. The players have to face a reality that they sign on to play for a school and not a coach.
The only schools who would benefit from making transfer rules more lenient would be big schools who hire away successfull coaches from lower tier schools. That coach could then take his best players, who have been in the system for multiple years, and install his coaching style seamlessly at a new school.
Would you have liked it if Chizik could have taken a chunk of the starters with him to Auburn with no penalties? That would have been great for ISU.

 

[CloneIce]

This hurts. We didn't lose any starters but this decimates our depth in the defensive backfield, and Bell was making some nice plays on special teams as well. Going to make it harder to play dime when we face some of these passing offenses in the future, and we really can't handle any injuries at CB this year now!

 

[Wesley]

If Bell is gone basically due to disciplinary issues then I can live with that but I too am disappointed losing McDowell, I thought he showed some potential a few times last year. This is a big blow to the depth of the team, especially for a team who runs as much Nickel as we do...even against a team like Army.

People who say that this does not hurt are only kidding themselves. When the pass happy Big 12 teams play us and throw it 50 times, you will need all the people that you have. practices will be less without thse extra players. Competition will be less. Remember Dan McCarney sayign in06 that he had no backup competition. This still reflects on the coach to keep the squad together during the middle of the season. Yes, you better send some of the reserves a bone in the non conference. Frankly, I was surprised how much Banks was allowed to play last week. And I will also say that he played his best game. Now go ahead and fire at me.....

 

[d4nim4l]

Already touched on, but Bell contributed on special teams. Hopefully he comes around after walking out on that punishment and maybe comes back to the team.

Our special teams are becoming a constant for us and losing anyone will always hurt.

 

[StLouisClone]

Bell was fifth on the team in tackles in 2007 with an interception and a fumble recovery. I never understood why Bell's playing time dropped off so drastically in 2008. I was hoping Rhoads would give him a new chance in 2009, but maybe there were lingering issues that only the coaches and players are privy to. I wouldn't be surprised if Bell posts a message on CF since he has done so before. If so, I only hope it doesn't distract the rest of the team from what they are trying to accomplish.

Iowa State - Cumulative Season Statistics

 

[SpokaneCY]

Honestly, I don't blame them. I think it is somewhat plain to seet that the tipping pont was probalby KB getting the start last Saturday after the events of the proceeding week. I am sure (AB at least) felt that this could be his shot at showing the coaches what he can do in a game, but instead he had to sit back and watch KB's at times spotty defense.

Another thing that I think people overlook is the time these guys put in, be it starters or the back-up long snapper. They devote a huge portion of their time to football, and I would imagine it to be very frustrating to feel like all the time you put in is to get a good seat for the game.

.

AND a free MULTI-thousands of dollars worth of education.

 

[SpokaneCY]

If Bell is gone basically due to disciplinary issues then I can live with that but I too am disappointed losing McDowell, I thought he showed some potential a few times last year. This is a big blow to the depth of the team, especially for a team who runs as much Nickel as we do...even against a team like Army.

We didn't need them in the nickel against Army - why would we think they match up better with taller and faster receivers and much more prolific QBs?

 

[Clonefan32]

AND a free MULTI-thousands of dollars worth of education.

I assume that upon quitting the team their scholarship is over with. In this case, they gave their services to the University for as long as they are on the team, and now that they are not, the school is no longer paying for their education. Again, I am assuming their scholarships immediately terminate, but I cannot see how this isn't fair to all parties involved.

 

[SpokaneCY]

Bell was fifth on the team in tackles in 2007 with an interception and a fumble recovery. I never understood why Bell's playing time dropped off so drastically in 2008. I was hoping Rhoads would give him a new chance in 2009, but maybe there were lingering issues that only the coaches and players are privy to. I wouldn't be surprised if Bell posts a message on CF since he has done so before. If so, I only hope it doesn't distract the rest of the team from what they are trying to accomplish.

Iowa State - Cumulative Season Statistics

Good question ---- chiz didn't play him for whatever reason and now CPR won't play him. Maybe the common denominator is him?

 

[synapticwave]

Sorry, but if there were little or no consequences for transferring during a coaching change, ISU would have had a lot more kids leave the past 3 years. The players have to face a reality that they sign on to play for a school and not a coach.
The only schools who would benefit from making transfer rules more lenient would be big schools who hire away successfull coaches from lower tier schools. That coach could then take his best players, who have been in the system for multiple years, and install his coaching style seamlessly at a new school.
Would you have liked it if Chizik could have taken a chunk of the starters with him to Auburn with no penalties? That would have been great for ISU.

I'm not saying little or no consequences, I'm saying slightly less consequences. Maybe, players still have to sit out a year, but they're allowed an extra year the first time they transfer. They still get to play 4 years but after a transfer the 5 year clock becomes a 6 year clock. Having to sit out a year means putting NFL plans on hold and still possibly getting beat out on the new roster.

Also, I think we might actually be a better team right now from an athlete standpoint if this were the case. With the way chizik left I'd be suprised if he thought more than 3 of our guys would compete for a spot at Auburn, and sure maybe a few more would have left with him, but harely any of them were actually recruited by him, most of that was done by the assistants who are currently happy without jobs taking ISU's money. So I don't think we would have lost a lot of the players on this team. Plus, I think we could have upgraded our LBs and DEs if the guys Rhoads recruited at Auburn followed him here. I wouldn't have minded taking some of the Rice Wideouts or a QB when Herman came in either. Or if Wally was able to bring in some of the LBs from USF.

I guess what I see is exactly the opposite of what you pointed out, players commit to play for a coach not for a school. Which makes sense, if a coach promises a kid a chance to play at RB and then leaves the school didn't make the committment nor does the new coach have to honor anything the old coach did or said. In most circumstances, I think players base their decision on where to attend school on what the staff is like and what kind of system they use, not on the school itself. I think because of this dynamic the NCAA should be more lienient when coaching changes occur.

 

[cycloneman003]

Our 4 best CB's are LJ, Banks, Benton and Reeves... we arent hurting by losing our 5th and 6th. Its not like they were promising young freshman or something. Yes it hurts the depth, but they had hardly seen the field. We wont miss them much at all I dont think. I understand McDowell's case. With one year left, why not go somewhere else where he can get playing time, I wish all the luck in the world too him. As for Bell, I wont miss him. The kid got tons of chances it seemed like.... walking out of a punishment though? really? thats just pathetic. dont want that around our team

 

[Steve]

Good question ---- chiz didn't play him for whatever reason and now CPR won't play him. Maybe the common denominator is him?

I believe that cover skills are Bell's achilles heel. One reason that he had so many tackles two years ago is that he was tackling guys who caught passes in his zone. He had his chances, didn't produce, and it's time to move on with some of the younger guys getting his reps in practice.

 

[PGreen ISU '92]

Losing McDowell and Bell is just plain bad news. No other way to slice and dice it. But have to move on and quick.

 

[ISU4Life]

What I don't understand is how does it benefit McDowell to leave mid season, he won't be able to play with anybody this year and only a D-2 school next season. Why not wait till the end of the season to make your decision, kinda like what happened with Bates last year

 

[cyhiphopp]

I'm not saying little or no consequences, I'm saying slightly less consequences. Maybe, players still have to sit out a year, but they're allowed an extra year the first time they transfer. They still get to play 4 years but after a transfer the 5 year clock becomes a 6 year clock. Having to sit out a year means putting NFL plans on hold and still possibly getting beat out on the new roster.

Also, I think we might actually be a better team right now from an athlete standpoint if this were the case. With the way chizik left I'd be suprised if he thought more than 3 of our guys would compete for a spot at Auburn, and sure maybe a few more would have left with him, but harely any of them were actually recruited by him, most of that was done by the assistants who are currently happy without jobs taking ISU's money. So I don't think we would have lost a lot of the players on this team. Plus, I think we could have upgraded our LBs and DEs if the guys Rhoads recruited at Auburn followed him here. I wouldn't have minded taking some of the Rice Wideouts or a QB when Herman came in either. Or if Wally was able to bring in some of the LBs from USF.

I guess what I see is exactly the opposite of what you pointed out, players commit to play for a coach not for a school. Which makes sense, if a coach promises a kid a chance to play at RB and then leaves the school didn't make the committment nor does the new coach have to honor anything the old coach did or said. In most circumstances, I think players base their decision on where to attend school on what the staff is like and what kind of system they use, not on the school itself. I think because of this dynamic the NCAA should be more lienient when coaching changes occur.

Other players would have left and gone to other teams besides Auburn. It does stink when a coach leaves and a player takes a hit. However, it is part of the game. Who's to say the kid wouldn't flourish in the new system like AROB has in Hermans system.
The bottom line is that less consquences for transfers would mean more kids transfering. ISU is rarely on the good end of those transfers. (See most recent transfers).

 

[cyhiphopp]

What I don't understand is how does it benefit McDowell to leave mid season, he won't be able to play with anybody this year and only a D-2 school next season. Why not wait till the end of the season to make your decision, kinda like what happened with Bates last year

He also loses out on the rest of the seasons strength and conditioning. He basically has to work out on his own until he gets to a new school. Seems like an odd move.

 

[Clones85']

Our 4 best CB's are LJ, Banks, Benton and Reeves... we arent hurting by losing our 5th and 6th. Its not like they were promising young freshman or something. Yes it hurts the depth, but they had hardly seen the field. We wont miss them much at all I dont think. I understand McDowell's case. With one year left, why not go somewhere else where he can get playing time, I wish all the luck in the world too him. As for Bell, I wont miss him. The kid got tons of chances it seemed like.... walking out of a punishment though? really? thats just pathetic. dont want that around our team

So when we are playing Okie St and Banks twists an ankle, you are still going to be saying the same thing? Remember we will be playing a 4-2-5 defense. That leaves us with literally no depth and doesn't give our DB's any breaks.

Once again anybody who says this doesn't hurt is crazy