So we can't question Pollard on here anymore?

[BACyclone]

But people need to understand that competitive balance peaked once every major college team was on TV, scholarship limits dropped, and basically everyone had at least decent college-level facilities. We're in the early stages of a steep downward slope in competitive balance. Just the way it is, and if not being competitive with the top schools is going to make ISU fans miserable, then that's on them.

There's always been a list of about ... 20? ... schools that Iowa State has never been "competitive" against. Which is to say, maybe we could win a single game against them in a peak year, but we are not recruiting at the same level of them or spending the same resources as them on a yearly basis.

Iowa State has and always will be a developmental program. In the evolving landscape, we can still be an evergreen program with an annual baseline of say, 8-4 regular season with the hopes of peaking out to a berth in the Conference Championship game. Maybe one year in the next 10 we can win one.

But there are going to be a handful of teams in our own conference who are going to be more well-funded than us and it will be a battle to compete at their level every season. Not that we can't win, but it might harken back to playing UT and OU.

We had a honeymoon for the last several seasons that, for the most part, everyone was on a nearly even playing field in this conference. I think that will end over the next several seasons.

But remember, it was still a lot of fun to cheer for Iowa State when UT and OU were in this conference, and even with their resource advantage, we rose up and beat them several times. That can still happen in the future landscape of the Big 12 and maybe even in the CFP.

We just have to keep supporting Iowa State and the "new" program here. It will be fine.

 

[CyLyte2]

By doing what (other than borrowing money)?

Iowa’s approach to NIL and the portal is terrible. That’s why they are a mid athletics department.

 

[besserheimerphat]

this sums up these threads and possibly why they keep popping up against Pollard. At the end of the day the two-three actual ideas for "forward thinking" revenue/NIL that any of our keyboard warriors can come up with might generate an extra 500K -2 mil at most? I'm sorry but that's not going to make our top 4 sports any more or less elite on the field/court.

And the "condescending prick that I wouldn't want to have a beer with" is a common theme too. Some people just don't like him on a personal level. I suspect it's because he (rightly) tells them when they're wrong and they don't like that. But that's what a good boss does.

 

[BCClone]

Ok, but Gene left town because he got offered a better job. I’d be curious how many better jobs have come after Pollard.

Gene also hired Tim Floyd, Larry Eustachy, Bill Fennely, and Dan McCarney.

And pretty much had the athletic department on the verge of bankruptcy

 

[Die4Cy]

And the "condescending prick that I wouldn't want to have a beer with" is a common theme too. Some people just don't like him on a personal level. I suspect it's because he (rightly) tells them when they're wrong and they don't like that. But that's what a good boss does.

Clearly that's what's behind a bunch of it. Pollard is bristly, I've experienced it personally. Sometimes that's the job though.

 

[BCClone]

C

Thread 'Now that the dust has settled, can we have the Pollard talk?'

Dec 30, 2025

Alright everyone, now that we have less than 20 football players on the roster, can we finally acknowledge that Jamie Pollard HAS TO GO.

From Everything I have heard, Matt Campbell did not want to leave, but Pollard forced his hand and pushed him out. He even announced Jimmy Rogers as the new coach before saying anything about Campbell leaving. None of the long time football staff members stayed on, not even the behind the scenes people.

Any media member that said anything negative about Pollard completely retracted the statement in less than a week. Sounds like some threats were thrown...

• cyclonepower31
• Replies: 68
• Forum: Football

• 
• 
• 

This is the tread. It is locked without any explanation of why, but this thread isn't locked and seems much more critical.

Maybe it’s because we now have more than 20 football players so it’s irrelevant

 

[Cyclone06]

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY POLLARD IS NOT SPENDING MONEY ISU DOES NOT HAVE?!?

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY POLLARD IS NOT TRYING TO GET MORE MONEY?!?

WHY ARE THE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ALREADY GIVE TO ISU ATHLETICS NOT GIVING MORE?!? COME ON POLLARD!!

POLLARD CALLED ME A SLOB AND I AM MAD AND SAD!

Please make this post a sticky thread.

 

[isufbcurt]

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY POLLARD IS NOT SPENDING MONEY ISU DOES NOT HAVE?!?

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY POLLARD IS NOT TRYING TO GET MORE MONEY?!?

WHY ARE THE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ALREADY GIVE TO ISU ATHLETICS NOT GIVING MORE?!? COME ON POLLARD!!

POLLARD CALLED ME A SLOB AND I AM MAD AND SAD!

Please make this post a sticky thread.

Pretty much spot on!!!!!

 

[AuH2O]

It is OK to question things. Just not on a public sports message board, apparently. Or even the paid boards, I guess.

Because that is not "constructive" - did I get that right?

It is tough to break from 2 decades of cult-narrative training though. My favorite of the training tenets are - when anything "bad" happens - especially the losing of legendary coaches - this messaging must be pushed relentlessly until the heat dissipates and all accountability, and responsibility either just magically vanishes into the ether or has shifted to the "ousted" legendary coach:

• "There is nothing the AD could have done!"
• "We just don't have the money! We just don't have the donors!"
• "Everyone is just looking for a villain!"
• "It was [insert historic coaching legend here]'s dream to leave for [insert whatever job or pro league they left us for] - repeat - nothing could have stopped them from leaving! The AD did everything they could but there were no options!"

Most importantly though - when the heat doesn't dissipate, it is critical to act really frustrated about how the topic just won't go away, whine about other 'bad' fans not moving on, etc.

People are free to criticize Pollard. But much of this started with people giving the impression that Pollard was turning away donors that wanted to target FB, or spending a bunch of the revenue sharing pot on WBB that could be going to FB, or that every NIL decision at the player level had to be run by Pollard...
Blum shared good insight into how it works as well. Then Pollard also discussed how it worked. It turns out there are odds and ends that can be argued, but the big picture freakouts look like they were unwarranted.

Kind of like political discussion these days. Arguing different points is great, as long as both sides are starting with an agreed upon basic set of facts. But as long as people believe **** that isn't true, kind of hard to have a productive discussion.

Maybe Pollard isn't the guy to navigate us through this time. Maybe there's some radical thinker out there that's got an idea that can actually work. Maybe the problem for ISU is unsolvable.

 

[JEFF420]

lol

 

[Cyched]

 

[awd4cy]

Brent walked a lot back a few weeks ago, but not everything. If Pollard is behind the times on NIL to the point that other coaches want out, serious conversations need to be had.

What is behind the times? Our biggest issue is we don’t have enough rich donors. What do you want Pollard to do about that? Also everyone who blindly believe everything Blum and CW were saying quickly looked foolish.

 

[2122]

Who was it here who asserted yesterday that Pollard had come to dislike Campbell?
I find that hard to believe.

 

[AuH2O]

There's always been a list of about ... 20? ... schools that Iowa State has never been "competitive" against. Which is to say, maybe we could win a single game against them in a peak year, but we are not recruiting at the same level of them or spending the same resources as them on a yearly basis.

Iowa State has and always will be a developmental program. In the evolving landscape, we can still be an evergreen program with an annual baseline of say, 8-4 regular season with the hopes of peaking out to a berth in the Conference Championship game. Maybe one year in the next 10 we can win one.

But there are going to be a handful of teams in our own conference who are going to be more well-funded than us and it will be a battle to compete at their level every season. Not that we can't win, but it might harken back to playing UT and OU.

We had a honeymoon for the last several seasons that, for the most part, everyone was on a nearly even playing field in this conference. I think that will end over the next several seasons.

But remember, it was still a lot of fun to cheer for Iowa State when UT and OU were in this conference, and even with their resource advantage, we rose up and beat them several times. That can still happen in the future landscape of the Big 12 and maybe even in the CFP.

We just have to keep supporting Iowa State and the "new" program here. It will be fine.

I'm distinguishing between being competitive and being at relative parity. Going 4-6 in the last 10 vs. Texas and 2-8 in the last 10 vs. OU is being relatively competitive. We were never and would never be at parity with those teams consistently. But ISU could compete with them, and the structure of college football had changed to enable that.

I think we are on our way to those types of matchups being like the old days vs. Nebraska and OU in the old Big 8. You might win a game with a +4 TO margin or something, but overall the team simply doesn't belong on the same field.

I don't think people grasp how things are going to change. It was one thing when ISU was competing for recruits when both schools were going to offer scholarships and be on TV every week, and ISU got to offer earlier playing time vs. the allure of being at a big name school that had nicer facilities.

Now it's the same thing, but also that school can offer an additional six figure cash advantage.

The "what's the difference, we were never at their level anyway" view is not correct in my opinion.

 

[Cyrealist]

It is also OK to wonder why we're using NIL funds for non-revenue generating sports at the expense of football and basketball;

There used to be that university sports programs were supposed to be under the "institutional control" of the universities. Some apparently like the idea of pro teams with a university attached.

 

[NWICY]

I think he has been a great AD but this age of college athletics has passed him by. Beth Goetz is running circles around him in Iowa City with the NIL stuff.

I don't follow Iowa closely, please cite some examples.

 

[Cyrealist]

The "what's the difference, we were never at their level anyway" view is not correct in my opinion.

That's the point Pate made in his comments on G5 schools in the play off. Whenever lower level/lower budget schools begin to have some success, they are cannibalized by G2 schools.

 

[NWICY]

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY POLLARD IS NOT SPENDING MONEY ISU DOES NOT HAVE?!?

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHY POLLARD IS NOT TRYING TO GET MORE MONEY?!?

WHY ARE THE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ALREADY GIVE TO ISU ATHLETICS NOT GIVING MORE?!? COME ON POLLARD!!

POLLARD CALLED ME A SLOB AND I AM MAD AND SAD!

Please make this post a sticky thread.

ALL CAPS this must be important or angry.

 

[cyclonefan0705]

People who hate on Pollard must be incredibly ungrateful and taking things for granted. No AD is perfect, and he has made mistakes. I will admit, football is a mess, but people are acting like the season that hasn't started yet is over. Let me remind anyone who is pissed at Pollard for football that Jimmy F'n Rogers has done this before, at a school with less resources and money. Hell, they lost 70 players last year and made a bowl game. Outside of football, I don't know if ISU could be in a better place. Call it what you will, but Pollard is still doing an excellent job and it is WAYY to early to throw in the towel on him. Haters gonna hate

 

[WIBadger]

They get shut down because people start verbally attacking each other and the mods can't keep up, not because of the topic.

I don’t think so. There are definitely topics on here that either are shut down real quick or are shut down once they start going a certain way. It’s not just this thread.

It’s very clear the either he or someone working for him watches and then makes the call to shut the conversation down.

I don’t think it is clear. The site can be inconsistent on what is allowed to remain open or what isn’t, but it’s on more than just this topic. I think it’s more of a site decision than an AD decision