It makes no sense to me that people insist there was something Pollard could have done cause CMC to stay here. Penn State is just a better job in every measurable way. From the outside, I'm satisfied with how Pollard has handled the situation. We almost immediately got a proven replacement onboard, and to all appearances. we're getting a quality staff to go with him.
So we can't question Pollard on here anymore?
- Thread starter David Moss
- Start date
The less emails, texts and calls I get from ISU the better. I feel like an ass every time I hang up on them.
And not everyone cares about sports.
Common sense? Not sure if we can blame that though.
College sports are a hobby, one of many possible. Getting someone to spend their money on the ******* void that is NIL instead of one of many other things they can get tangible benefits from should be damn near impossible.
For sure. It takes creativity to get donations from people like that.
TL;DR: Pollard makes some decisions worth questioning, but I think they're usually more justified than fans think. Regardless, on net, I'd rather have Pollard than not, particularly with the financial struggles that every AD is facing or is about to face.
I imagine I'm probably somewhere in the 75th-90th percentile of Pollard defenders. But I'm not going to pretend like every decision of his is perfect. Here are some of the criticisms that I think are most justified, but don't near add up to those who think he should be fired or even those who think he's mishandling the current moment.
Announcing Rogers Immediately: I think Rogers is a very solid hire. But announcing him right after Campbell's departure became official certainly put the fans, and more importantly, the players, on a roller coaster of emotions in a way that seems callous. However, I doubt that approaching it differently would've had as much of an impact of player retention as some think. Overall, it was just a rough situation.
Beer Sales: I'm not near as pro-beer as most. I think many dramatically overestimate its benefit. But in a world where Iowa State is short money, I understand those who point to beer as being a relatively straightforward way to at least close the gap a bit. Pollard has occasionally alluded to it not just being his decision, so it will be interesting to see if change in university administration might mean there are changes here.
NIL/Revenue Sharing: The way some people talk, they make this sound easy. It's obviously not. Pollard is looking at a $27 million shortfall this year that will be covered by AD reserves. There aren't enough reserves to cover future years' shortfalls. I respect Blum a ton, so with the comments he's previously made, I do imagine that there are at least some small things that Pollard could do to approach this differently and meet coaches in the middle. But the general approach of trying to close that shortfall before providing extra NIL? I have a hard time criticizing that.
I think some of the justified criticisms are how We Will vs. the AD have approached donations. We Will had more of an "all hands on deck" approach, strongly encouraging donations from people who could only give $50-$100 a year. The AD seems in all ways focused on the largest donors. And perhaps on a short term $ per hour of effort measure, that maths out to be better. But in the long term, I'm not sure it's better, and it does leave your more casual fans in the dark about the current financial environment.
But overall, I still think Pollard has done and is doing a very good job. Hiring wise, sure there have been coaching misses in his tenure. However, he's gotten better, and I'm still not convinced that coach hiring is much more than a crapshoot.
Financially, even if I'm not sure his approach to donor/NIL engagement is the best, I still feel far better with him at the helm than most athletic directors. The fact that Iowa State even has the reserves to cover a one-year shortfall is a lot better than quite a few other schools, who will be asking their university administration this year to cover the AD even more than they already are. I think it's very possible that in 2-3 years, a lot of athletic departments will be drowning, and Iowa State will at least have its head above water (though perhaps barely).
Finally, CyTown, which I think was pretty visionary, and I haven't seen anything so far that makes me think it won't be fairly successful. And everyone needs to keep in mind, and tell everyone they know, that the athletic department has already spent all of the CyTown money that it was going to (on the lots and underground infrastructure)--the remainder of the financial risk is on the private developer.
I imagine I'm probably somewhere in the 75th-90th percentile of Pollard defenders. But I'm not going to pretend like every decision of his is perfect. Here are some of the criticisms that I think are most justified, but don't near add up to those who think he should be fired or even those who think he's mishandling the current moment.
Announcing Rogers Immediately: I think Rogers is a very solid hire. But announcing him right after Campbell's departure became official certainly put the fans, and more importantly, the players, on a roller coaster of emotions in a way that seems callous. However, I doubt that approaching it differently would've had as much of an impact of player retention as some think. Overall, it was just a rough situation.
Beer Sales: I'm not near as pro-beer as most. I think many dramatically overestimate its benefit. But in a world where Iowa State is short money, I understand those who point to beer as being a relatively straightforward way to at least close the gap a bit. Pollard has occasionally alluded to it not just being his decision, so it will be interesting to see if change in university administration might mean there are changes here.
NIL/Revenue Sharing: The way some people talk, they make this sound easy. It's obviously not. Pollard is looking at a $27 million shortfall this year that will be covered by AD reserves. There aren't enough reserves to cover future years' shortfalls. I respect Blum a ton, so with the comments he's previously made, I do imagine that there are at least some small things that Pollard could do to approach this differently and meet coaches in the middle. But the general approach of trying to close that shortfall before providing extra NIL? I have a hard time criticizing that.
I think some of the justified criticisms are how We Will vs. the AD have approached donations. We Will had more of an "all hands on deck" approach, strongly encouraging donations from people who could only give $50-$100 a year. The AD seems in all ways focused on the largest donors. And perhaps on a short term $ per hour of effort measure, that maths out to be better. But in the long term, I'm not sure it's better, and it does leave your more casual fans in the dark about the current financial environment.
But overall, I still think Pollard has done and is doing a very good job. Hiring wise, sure there have been coaching misses in his tenure. However, he's gotten better, and I'm still not convinced that coach hiring is much more than a crapshoot.
Financially, even if I'm not sure his approach to donor/NIL engagement is the best, I still feel far better with him at the helm than most athletic directors. The fact that Iowa State even has the reserves to cover a one-year shortfall is a lot better than quite a few other schools, who will be asking their university administration this year to cover the AD even more than they already are. I think it's very possible that in 2-3 years, a lot of athletic departments will be drowning, and Iowa State will at least have its head above water (though perhaps barely).
Finally, CyTown, which I think was pretty visionary, and I haven't seen anything so far that makes me think it won't be fairly successful. And everyone needs to keep in mind, and tell everyone they know, that the athletic department has already spent all of the CyTown money that it was going to (on the lots and underground infrastructure)--the remainder of the financial risk is on the private developer.
Does anyone know what the record is for most dumb ratings on a single post? OP on pace to break it whatever it is...
EDIT: Well played, @HeiseRiser, well played.
EDIT: Well played, @HeiseRiser, well played.
Sure, but what are we doing if we are not trying. There is money out there to be had, but you have to want to try and make it.
It just seems that our AD had become very comfortable in where everything stood financially. We were keeping up with facilities, and keeping those few major donors happy. Now we are in a new era, and every dollar is important. However, we are literally witnessing other schools make strides on collecting any and all revenue while we sit idle.
Honest question, has anyone seen one single form of communication from the AD on how people can give to We Will, let alone encouraging donations to We Will? All I have seen is a message from the Blums on how to switch over.
I think announcing JFR right away was a brilliant move. Instead of everyone - including the players - sitting around having no idea what the plan is or even IF there is a plan Pollard demonstrated that he was ready for such an eventuality and the AD was ready to move on without Campbell.
Last edited:
I agree with this. Honestly, a lot of what gets said here is because Pollard has not done a great job of discussing his plan for NIL, and many, myself included, take that to mean he doesn't really have one, or is just hoping it goes away. I just want to know what the plan is, and how the plan will be executed. Waiting around for someone or something else to fix this is not the answer.
See KU football refusing to invest in football facilities during the facility arms race.
Yeah, that's a justified view as well. I just think if I were in the situation of a player, it would make the moment suck even more and I would feel like I had zero control of my future. But I also don't think it would make me make an irreversible decision to transfer, and I'm not sure that "this sucks" feeling would change much by Pollard waiting 12-24 hours to make the announcement.
Alcohol is sold at Jack Trice Stadium now. But one must buy premium seating in order to access it. We require high donor levels and expensive seats. Jack Trice Club. Sukup End Zone Club. Alcohol is confined to those areas and controlled. Those premium seating areas might suffer some in ticket sales if alcohol is sold to the public as a whole. If we want to make money selling beer make the price $15 per 16 oz. Plastic cup in the non club areas.
What alumni is a billionaire?
Who is out there that can donate in a way to sustain talent and success while paying players for one season?
I know it is, and I get it may hurt the premium sales, but I don’t think sales should be restricted to high level donors. If Jamie is going to dig his heels in and just call everybody who is not a high level donor a slob, then that’s a good way to turn people off. If it’s truly the University Counsel and President that are so dead set against it, then it would be better for everyone if he’d just say that. I’d have no problem charging that much as it’s on par with some of the pro stadiums that I’ve been to.
Good questions. Put someone in charge of NIL who knows and can convince them to donate if that's even possible?
This is an awesome post. Wish I could express myself as well as you just did.
Honestly, many overly intoxicated fans act like slobs. Easier to overlook a drunken slob who is making out five or six figure checks to the Athletic Department. And then you get the drunken fan balancing his beers as he navigates through the crowd to his general seating, spilling their beer on parents and children along the way. And that’s what will happen. Parking, seating, amenities are all allocated by donor levels and cost. Alcohol accessibility included.
