Rhoads..lets win with these players..

[d4nim4l]

Funny - I remember the team only scoring 15 points that game. Ironically, that was good enough for a W on that particular day...

I am more than well aware of that but we simply executed better against Iowa and just could not finish in the red zone. My point is you can't dog the players when we turned around and beat Iowa with the same ones that lost to Kent St and UNI.

New system my ***, they had all summer to prep for those games.

 

[Cyrocks]

Here's the one problem that you're apparently missing. Some few of he players who will be out there on Saturdays aren't the best players for any system. Like when the last two coaches were hired, each time the roster was so depleted that it didn't really matter which system they went with--although I suppose that the offense the service academies are forced to use might have worked.

I see where you are trying to go with this, Aclone, but I think you have failed to see the point of this thread.

I think "player development" -- or lack thereof -- has been a huge issue ever since assistant coaches like Rhoads, Steve Looney and Bobby Elliott have left the program. Except for a handful of exceptional athletes -- Wallace, Hobbs, etc., -- few players have gotten better over their careers at Iowa State. But Wallace and Hobbs would have been great no matter because they are tremendous athletes.

ISU, for the most part, has taken fairly decent athletes but not developed them into pretty good athletes. Another college, who I refuse to mention, has done a pretty good job of that for the last 20-plus years.

To me, that's what Rhoads is talking about -- developing the players you have.

 

[nklotz85]

To Aclone--You don't need the most talented players to win. Everyone on the team has some talent and it is up to both the players and the coaches to use it the team's advantage. You can have the most talented players and it could still look like they are running around like they are lost which was similar to what we have seen in the past few years. That would be a coaching error.

 

[d4nim4l]

I see where you are trying to go with this, Aclone, but I think you have failed to see the point of this thread.

I think "player development" -- or lack thereof -- has been a huge issue ever since assistant coaches like Rhoads, Steve Looney and Bobby Elliott have left the program. Except for a handful of exceptional athletes -- Wallace, Hobbs, etc., -- few players have gotten better over their careers at Iowa State. But Wallace and Hobbs would have been great no matter because they are tremendous athletes.

ISU, for the most part, has taken fairly decent athletes but not developed them into pretty good athletes. Another college, who I refuse to mention, has done a pretty good job of that for the last 20-plus years.

To me, that's what Rhoads is talking about -- developing the players you have.

This I think hits it pretty spot on.

Rhoads is pay lip service for sure. All coaches do. The big exception is he has started off by saying he will tailor this system to the guys he has on the roster (Herman has shown that at Rice). Rather than wait for the athletes to eventually show up.

Does that mean he won't recruit better athletes? No. As a matter of fact, he has gone on record saying we need to be more athletic. However, it does mean that these guys are not just warm bodies until he can get "his guys" in to "his system".

Like all coaches he wants to win and do it as often as possible. However, he seems to be insightful enough to know that you have to adapt to your personnel and grow them rather than force a system on them.

 

[Wesley]

Funny - I remember the team only scoring 15 points that game. Ironically, that was good enough for a W on that particular day...

And never scored a TD...

 

[Aclone]

To me, that's what Rhoads is talking about -- developing the players you have.

Thanks for the cordial reply, but I wasnt missing it, not exactly.

After all, in order to develop a player, that player still has to have the fundamental, underlying ability. And coaches have to be able to identify that ability in recruiting--that was one of Elliott's strong suits, and I know that a good friend of Mac's bemoaned his loss.

Take, for example, the Fisher twins. Yes, I know that they are Cyclones, and doubtless worked their rumps off, and are probably great guys. But there is no way that either had the quickness to be a quality offensive lineman, especially at left tackle, no matter how much they developed. And they were hardly the only ones. If a player doesn't have a certain degree of baseline athleticism (or ability to stay in school), there is no way that he's going to develop into a quality contributor. The old saying, you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

And right now, Rhoads has a far better baseline of talent to develop, across the board, than either Mac did when he was first hired--or Chizik did when he was hired. The good thing the last two years has done is clear some dead wood from the roster--hopefully not to be replaced by too much more. Rhoads has a little more raw silk to work with.

Oh yeah--and Ben Lamaak has certainly been one exception to the "can't develop" rule.

 

[Cy Hard]

I gotta say that City if your brother is half as smart as you appear to be in your posts, then he will become a great Cyclone player during his time here. Your posts are always well thought out and consise. Glad to have you on board.

 

[mizouse87]

I gotta say that City if your brother is half as smart as you appear to be in your posts, then he will become a great Cyclone player during his time here. Your posts are always well thought out and consise. Glad to have you on board.

Wait a minute...who is City's brother? Did I miss something? Am in the dark about arguably the most hyped recruit in recent history that decided to come to Ames? What's going on? Somebody please help me!!

Sorry all, just in a rather sarcastic/fun mood, it being Friday and all.

 

[CYKOFAN]

Aclone- I was never a Chiz fan, so I admit I'm biased. But he was a d-coordinator and there was no excuse for the defense circling the drain as the year progressed, or the awful game and time clock management in his second year. But I knew for sure we had a dud when we lined up in the shot-gun at the 6 inch line for the last play in the Colorado game. A bad high school coach is smarter than that.

 

[CloneIce]

Rhoads is right, we can win with these players.... 7-5 or 6-6 winning, not winning the Big 12.

Some folks act as if you need a roster full of 4* 5th year seniors to make it to a bowl game at 7-5 or 6-6 (basically being mediocre). You really don't. You just need a group of well-coached kids working together, a good QB, and maybe a break or two.

 

[KMAC_ATTACK]

In so many ways, in my opinion, Rhoads has put his best foot forward.

1. He started by bringing in a staff that offers experience and a track record.
2. A modern offense that shows he's wise to his surroundings (Big XII). The key to the game now-a-days seems to be letting the athletes put in work. Now don't get me wrong (veterans in general) I believe in smash mouth, pound the ball, mow'em down football too. However I also believe we have a QB and a quality receiving corp. Let's attack the guys who don't wanna tackle (DB's) and run away from the guys who have been tackling since the sand box (LB's).
3.Allow his defensive coordinator to (for a lack of better words) "coordinate the defense" which shows his staff and players that the name of the game is team work, he leads by example.
4. In every interview he shows his heart but not his hand. Meaning he genuinely discusses his desire for the "program" and he doesn't focus on what he needs to do to establish himself as a head coach. He's not concerned with the "nay-sayers". He doesn't buy into what people wanna hear about the X's and O's either, he's concerned more about rebuilding the foundation of Iowa State and the state of Iowa football. (I like that!):yes:
5. (And my favorite part) He's a rally cat! The type of coach that makes a player believe that he'd put the pads on and lead block for you on the field if he could. Not to make himself feel good but for the simple gratification of being a Cyclone! For the priviledge of being in the presence of great players and young men. He kinda gives off that "300" feeling (great movie by the way).:yes:

Not trying to imply that the man will do a perfect job, just believe he's the perfect man for the job.

Oh and I don't drink kool-aid...just a little "Cyclone POWERade" :biggrin:

CYCLONE
NATION!!

CITY - for me, that may be the post of the year......

Awesome job, your insight to the inner workings of ISU football is definitely appreciated.:notworthy::notworthy::notworthy:

 

[Bobber]

CITY - for me, that may be the post of the year......

Awesome job, your insight to the inner workings of ISU football is definitely appreciated.:notworthy::notworthy::notworthy:

I concur. A really great post.

 

[ketelmeister]

The City is right on. A great coach will make the TEAM greater than the individuals that make it up. The only way that happens is with a positive attitude, a team playing together on a single mission and an undying will to win. Coach Rhoads understands that. We may not have the best individual players, but we can be competitive as a team.
(And I expect Reynolds to be a playmaker...and it takes playmakers to win) Go Cyclones!

 

[Al_4_State]

Wait a second...you guys actually are complaining about Chizik losing his first few games, with the same players that got Mac fired? Hilarious!

No matter how good a coach is, you can't make bricks out of straw. Don't believe me, check the Johnny Orr interview thread from a couple of weeks ago over in MBB. I think Johnny knows what he's talking about a heck of a lot better than you guys do.

The players didn't get Mac fired, Mac's failure to learn from his mistakes got Mac fired. Sitting on the ball time and time and time again only to watch a 14 point lead evaporate is what got Mac fired. Having a defense that excelled at attacking the ball sit on it's honches and allow teams 5 yard outs all the way down the field got Mac fired. The only player you could arguably make any case for getting Mac fired was Brett Culbertson, and you know what? Mac should have RECRUITED A KICKER, not scower campus for anyone who might have kicked a football in their life.

The bottom line is that we don't have a pathetic level of talent on this team. A good coach could have coaxed a bowl game out of those guys last year. Look at how many close games they lost. A weak side option OUT OF THE SHOTGUN at the goal line to win the game? You gotta be joking me. You seem to have some kind of hard on for Chizik, but honestly it was starting to look like he had no idea what he was doing. We were all blinded by his results at Auburn and Texas, but guess what? Those teams were loaded with NFL talent. I could have coached the 2006 Texas team into the national title game for crying out loud. A better coach could have gotten more wins out of the players that we have. When you beat Iowa and give Oklahoma a run for their money, but can't beat UNI, Kent State, and Toledo, it's not the talent that is lacking.

 

[Cyrock]

We were all blinded by his results at Auburn and Texas, but guess what? Those teams were loaded with NFL talent. I could have coached the 2006 Texas team into the national title game for crying out loud.[/QUOTE]

That talent wouldn't have been able to handle the academic requirements.

 

[CyBobby]

I agree, first year coaches make these kinds of mistakes (and I fully expect Rhoads to be out-coached from time-to-time - it comes with the territory) - it's just too bad it appeared that Chizik never learned from his mistakes.

I have to respectfully disagree with you...Gene Chizik de cheese-dip himself....did learn from his mistakes...


He left town with his tail between his legs and stopped when he arrived in Auburn, Alabama!!!!!:biglaugh:

 

[dualthreat]

The players didn't get Mac fired, Mac's failure to learn from his mistakes got Mac fired. Sitting on the ball time and time and time again only to watch a 14 point lead evaporate is what got Mac fired. Having a defense that excelled at attacking the ball sit on it's honches and allow teams 5 yard outs all the way down the field got Mac fired. The only player you could arguably make any case for getting Mac fired was Brett Culbertson, and you know what? Mac should have RECRUITED A KICKER, not scower campus for anyone who might have kicked a football in their life.

The bottom line is that we don't have a pathetic level of talent on this team. A good coach could have coaxed a bowl game out of those guys last year. Look at how many close games they lost. A weak side option OUT OF THE SHOTGUN at the goal line to win the game? You gotta be joking me. You seem to have some kind of hard on for Chizik, but honestly it was starting to look like he had no idea what he was doing. We were all blinded by his results at Auburn and Texas, but guess what? Those teams were loaded with NFL talent. I could have coached the 2006 Texas team into the national title game for crying out loud. A better coach could have gotten more wins out of the players that we have. When you beat Iowa and give Oklahoma a run for their money, but can't beat UNI, Kent State, and Toledo, it's not the talent that is lacking.

What?! the guy was like 10th string!! You cant blame a kicker for an entire teams mediocrity and mistakes ..lol


CPR can win with the players he has. Last years team was soo close to winning like 6 games, and this year we are better. Don't tell him its not possible! Develop and coach your players into winners coach!

You don't need to have four years of experience to win 6 games!!

Bob Stoops won the National title in his second year at OU (and don't tell me "anyone can win at OU" because the previous coach showed everyone that you can lost at OU)

So don't discount CPR because of what Chiz or Mac did. If he is the guy who will win games at ISU then we will find out really soon.

 

[Flag Guy]

I have to respectfully disagree with you...Gene Chizik de cheese-dip himself....did learn from his mistakes...


He left town with his tail between his legs and stopped when he arrived in Auburn, Alabama!!!!!:biglaugh:

I was gonna reply to that first, part, but then when I went to quote you I saw the 2nd part :biglaugh:


seriously though, even with the "talent" that Chizik had, he could have done more. Freak'n Baylor game last year, where the kids were coming off of the bus sleepy and not ready to play football. Looked the same way going to the locker room at half time, and coming out after half time. No fire what so ever.

Most excitement I saw from that team was after the game laughing and joking with their family...

And I don't want to hear any excuses about a long trip to get there, I made a longer trip and still managed to bring excitment to that game until I watched them sleep their way though an awful game


A couple other games stick out in my mind as well...
Not to mention Chizik never did figure out what a game clock was for


A coach that will actually show up to win on Saturday (not just give lip service) will be an improvement, if thats what CPR really does. And unlike Chizik, he sounds excited to be here, so he may actually do it

 

[ShopTalk]

The original post and City's post are great...the rest are who was the best/worst head coach we've had in recent history - that's a beech slapping thread.


The Facts:

• McCarney has the only 2 bowl wins in ISU history, the most bowl games and the only co-championship trophy since Big 8/Big 12 play.
• Choak Chizik has the WORST winning percentage of any ISU coach EVER.
• Both had irritating personal habits - I am firmly entrenched and No Doubt About It - and game planning strategies that some fans loved or hated as is the norm with all coaches.

 

[Cyrocks]

Thanks for the cordial reply, but I wasnt missing it, not exactly.

After all, in order to develop a player, that player still has to have the fundamental, underlying ability. And coaches have to be able to identify that ability in recruiting--that was one of Elliott's strong suits, and I know that a good friend of Mac's bemoaned his loss.

Take, for example, the Fisher twins. Yes, I know that they are Cyclones, and doubtless worked their rumps off, and are probably great guys. But there is no way that either had the quickness to be a quality offensive lineman, especially at left tackle, no matter how much they developed. And they were hardly the only ones. If a player doesn't have a certain degree of baseline athleticism (or ability to stay in school), there is no way that he's going to develop into a quality contributor. The old saying, you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

And right now, Rhoads has a far better baseline of talent to develop, across the board, than either Mac did when he was first hired--or Chizik did when he was hired. The good thing the last two years has done is clear some dead wood from the roster--hopefully not to be replaced by too much more. Rhoads has a little more raw silk to work with.

Oh yeah--and Ben Lamaak has certainly been one exception to the "can't develop" rule.

I think we both are talking about the same thing but saying it differently. I don't disagree with anything you said here. I may have misunderstood your original post.

Again, it goes back to analyzing talent and developing talent -- the two things ISU has been sorely lacking in since assistant coaches like Elliott, Rhoads, Ash, Looney, have left the program. We got Rhoads back, as well as Ash. I certainly don't want to put words in Rhoads' mouth, but I understood his statements about the players as he and his coaching staff have to "develop" the players ISU has right now and while going after players that they can mold and develop into their system.

I may be among the minority, but I do think the talent level ISU has right now isn't as bad as what people say, and I honestly believe ISU has had the talent, but not good coaching the last couple of years of Mac and under Chizik.