Thoughts on 2002

[iowastatefan1929]

#9 ranking; at Oklahoma; Gameday feature; Senaca for Heisman; blocked punt in Norman on first drive; all downhill from there. Then beating Texas at halftime only to lose. KSU took us to the woodshed; UCONN took us down in Ames [all excitment was gone before that game] I would venture to guess the 2012 team would destroy that team.

Points of emphasis:
1. Lack of speed at running back.
2. Average schemes; not good enough talent to run average schemes [like running the option all year long].
3. Lack of depth; Mac never seemed to play a lot of people.

Any thoughts? Just can't stop thinking about it.

 

[justcynn]

The disappointment was monumental but it sure was fun leading up to the OU game. Thankfully these players and coaches don't have to think about 2002 or any other year the Cyclones almost broke through into college football relevancy. Rhoads has already proven past performance does not guarantee future results.

 

[JSmoove]

Dont forget Seneca dressed in Cesar like clothing in some of the pregame videos. Anyone else remember this?

 

[Cydkar]

Senaca?

 

[c.y.c.l.o.n.e.s]

#9 ranking; at Oklahoma; Gameday feature; Senaca for Heisman; blocked punt in Norman on first drive; all downhill from there. Then beating Texas at halftime only to lose. KSU took us to the woodshed; UCONN took us down in Ames [all excitment was gone before that game] I would venture to guess the 2012 team would destroy that team.

Points of emphasis:
1. Lack of speed at running back.
2. Average schemes; not good enough talent to run average schemes [like running the option all year long].
3. Lack of depth; Mac never seemed to play a lot of people.

Any thoughts? Just can't stop thinking about it.

Simple really. Prior to Oklahoma, teams stacked the box to stop our running game which opened up the short passing game for Seneca - which he could do well. OU said "you can't run on us even if we play you straight up". Then they took away the short passing game assuming that Seneca didn't have the arm or accuracy to beat them over the top. They were right. It turns out that we couldn't run on anybody when they played us straight up and they all deployed the same basic scheme.

 

[ISUAgronomist]

Senaca?

Wallace!

 

[Topshelf]

Rain and cold also hurt Seneca... Small hands... That's what she said...

 

[CyFan61]

Dont forget Seneca dressed in Cesar like clothing in some of the pregame videos. Anyone else remember this?

I remember something about Kirk Herbstreit dressing up and talking about the origins of the Greek name "Seneca" before the ISU-OU game... when he was at or near Kirk's "Heisman Watch" list...

 

[Cloned4Life]

#9 ranking; at Oklahoma; Gameday feature; Senaca for Heisman; blocked punt in Norman on first drive; all downhill from there. Then beating Texas at halftime only to lose. KSU took us to the woodshed; UCONN took us down in Ames [all excitment was gone before that game] I would venture to guess the 2012 team would destroy that team.

Points of emphasis:
1. Lack of speed at running back.
2. Average schemes; not good enough talent to run average schemes [like running the option all year long].
3. Lack of depth; Mac never seemed to play a lot of people.

Any thoughts? Just can't stop thinking about it.

Not enough depth or overall talent. Seneca won or was the major reason for the 7 wins. He was a legit college stud. Solid WR crew but no gamebreakers, although Lane had decent speed and excellent hands.

 

[Cloned4Life]

Simple really. Prior to Oklahoma, teams stacked the box to stop our running game which opened up the short passing game for Seneca - which he could do well. OU said "you can't run on us even if we play you straight up". Then they took away the short passing game assuming that Seneca didn't have the arm or accuracy to beat them over the top. They were right. It turns out that we couldn't run on anybody when they played us straight up and they all deployed the same basic scheme.

Seneca had the arm AND the accuracy. That's why he's been in the NFL for so long. OU just had oodles more talent and depth. Bigger, faster, stronger, at every position.

And as already mentioned, Seneca could not handle the ball in the rain. Small hands were an issue.

 

[MartyFine]

O-line started to decline when Loney left. Wasn't fully exposed until the OU game, although there were a number of times Seneca had to scramble and work his magic early in the year.

I think you are being unfair to the backs. Rutland and Wagner were solid if not spectacular, but they didn't have the blocking that Davis, Davis and EH had.

Most people remember the UCONN player saying after the game that they knew every play that we were going to run. That is usually a problem.

 

[jay moe]

When Loney left and Brickey took over calling plays it started the downfall of the offense. Not to mention Marty Fine as o-line coach.

 

[JSmoove]

I remember something about Kirk Herbstreit dressing up and talking about the origins of the Greek name "Seneca" before the ISU-OU game... when he was at or near Kirk's "Heisman Watch" list...

Haha yes this is it!

 

[cyclones500]

Aside from the nuts & bolts described here regarding offensive deficiencies, a simplified perspective 10 years later is, that team just wasn't quite as good as some of the promise and excitement suggested early in the year.

The only very good team ISU beat that season was Iowa (and we didn't know that yet, at the time); only one conference team Iowa State beat was above .500 (TT). Nebraska was a big win when it happened, but NU finished 7-7.

UConn loss was embarrassing, yes, but there were losses to four 10-win teams.

Perfectly mediocre.

 

[redrocket22]

Aside from the nuts & bolts described here regarding offensive deficiencies, a simplified perspective 10 years later is, that team just wasn't quite as good as some of the promise and excitement suggested early in the year.

The only very good team ISU beat that season was Iowa (and we didn't know that yet, at the time); only one conference team Iowa State beat was above .500 (TT). Nebraska was a big win when it happened, but NU finished 7-7.

UConn loss was embarrassing, yes, but there were losses to four 10-win teams.

Perfectly mediocre.

I concur with your analysis. However, at the time - it really felt like OU stole our mojo.

 

[Palmer]

Aside from the nuts & bolts described here regarding offensive deficiencies, a simplified perspective 10 years later is, that team just wasn't quite as good as some of the promise and excitement suggested early in the year.

The only very good team ISU beat that season was Iowa (and we didn't know that yet, at the time); only one conference team Iowa State beat was above .500 (TT). Nebraska was a big win when it happened, but NU finished 7-7.

UConn loss was embarrassing, yes, but there were losses to four 10-win teams.

Perfectly mediocre.

This....feasting on a pretty weak early schedule...


If only CPR teams had to navigate the schedule Mac's teams had during those years.

 

[cyclone13]

Depth was the issue, plus we were playing 12 games. We should have removed Tennessee Tech and put UConn in the date instead of playing UConn in the end of the season.

IIRC Mac also mentioned why running game didn't really work: the offensive philosophy was to give the ball to your best offensive player, so they gave the ball to Seneca and neglected the running game.

 

[cyclones500]

Depth was the issue, plus we were playing 12 games. We should have removed Tennessee Tech and put UConn in the date instead of playing UConn in the end of the season.

IIRC Mac also mentioned why running game didn't really work: the offensive philosophy was to give the ball to your best offensive player, so they gave the ball to Seneca and neglected the running game.

Actually was 13 games (14 w/ the bowl) --- but I agree with your point. The season seemed to last forever. Three full months with one bye week. After the brutal stretch of 4 road games in 5 weeks (OU, UT, KSU, CU) team was bound to run out of gas.

Re: offensive philosophy — In retrospect I figured I just imagined that transformation. It did seem like it became reduced to, "have Wallace drop back, look to pass, then run." It didn't appear to integrate rushing game or use the scramble out of pass-first mode.

 

[cyclones500]

I concur with your analysis. However, at the time - it really felt like OU stole our mojo.

Definitely some mojo-theft with that loss.

Question is, was there enough confidence-killing that bled over into the Texas game — maybe that one goes the other way. Would the ceiling have still been about 9 wins anyway?

As I've said before, it seemed like a 10-4 team in many respe, but also was close to being 5-8 (fine line w/ Iowa & Missouri wins).