Are we better off?

[Luth4Cy]

Not going to get into the whole Mac v CPR. But frustrations are going to rise to dangerous levels for CPR if things don't change pretty quickly. Consider:
1) all the facility improvements and investments made over the last 5 years--the product on the field is not up to those investments.
2) if we don't have talent/depth, why not? The excuses of the past are now gone--see above.
3) in year 5 of a program, we should not see this kind of meltdown. This tells me our recruiting has not been up to Big 12 standards for years.
4) Our O is clearly not up to standards--in an offensive dominated league, 300 yds/game of total offense is like bringing a knife to a gun fight. And we have been doing it for years.

I hope CPR figures it out. At most places, his seat would be on fire. But, we are Iowa State.

1. The biggest of these was the new weight room. This should play a role in training and I think it has, it's just not showing right now due to immaturity on the field. It also has only had about 11 months to play a major role in recruiting, since it's only been open for 11 months.
2. Talent at Iowa State will never be near the top of the conference. Talent and depth have improved, just not as much as some hoped for.
3. The term meltdown is being overused. The Iowa and UNI games were bad, but since then a lot of the problems have been fixed. Saturday's game was also a disappointment, but with a lot of passed teams that game would have quickly been a blow out.
4. Our Offense is no where near standards. The offensive line is poor. A lot of things have played a role, but I believe there is enough talent on the offense to be successful. I blame this a lot of coaching and game planning.

 

[weR138]

Didn't McCarney win 9 games in a season? Will Rhoads ever do that? The odds are heavily against it.

I disagree that the odds are heavily against it...

3 pre con wins + wins vs. (teams PR has already beaten) KU, UT, OSU, BU, TTU, TCU.

Replace UT & OSU for KSU & WVU if that seems more plausible. I just never say OU or KSU because PR hasn't done it yet and OU, well, I'm never going to expect a win vs. OU.

 

[weR138]

I am not saying that DMac was better by any means. I am just saying that we are not really in THAT much better of a place now. People tend to hold CPR on some sort of pedestal and I just don't get it.

That's fair. But as a witness of both tenures I think the pedestal comes from PR delivering wins vs. teams Dan would've lost to.

He also got us ranked as high as #9

What season was that? Also, OU proved that ranking was an error.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still ****ed about losing to UNI. It absolutely should not have happened.

 

[CyBobby]

First, you cannot compare DMs first 5 years with CPRs. DM took over a program that was one of cfball worst programs of all time, yes all time, it was that bad. A few years prior to DMs arrival we lost to Drake folks, Drake.

Second, DMs 2000 and 2001 team would beat any team CPR has fielded, game wouldn't even be close.

Is ISU far more competitive in Every single game, absolutely, but are those same teams as good as they were 10-15 years ago? Take the Texas, OU and Nebraska teams 15 years ago and those teams are far better than today's.

When Danny Mac arrived in ames I remember him saying that the biggest problem was that the fball program was "Completely Washed Out"......In other words he was starting at Rock Flipping Bottom, in resurrecting our football fortunes.

CPR is the best coach we can hire right now and everyone should support him in turning this losing skid around..

Go Cyclones Lets Beat the Bears.

 

[cycloneworld]

I am not saying that DMac was better by any means. I am just saying that we are not really in THAT much better of a place now. People tend to hold CPR on some sort of pedestal and I just don't get it.

If you've watched games during both eras, I don't see how you can say we aren't in a much better place now.

1. Rhoads has been a ranked team on the road each of the past 3 years.
2. We beat the #2 ranked team under Rhoads.
3. We consistently put 50,000+ (many times over 55,000) in JTS. We couldn't muster 40,000 when we were playing for a chance to go to the Big 12 title game against Missouri under Mac.
4. In that "magical" 2002 season you mentioned, we played 4 ranked teams, went 0-4 by a combined 169-47. We followed that up with a 2-10 season getting blown out in the last 8 games.
5. In 2004 when we blew the chance at home against Missouri to play for the Big 12 title, we went 6-5 in the regular season playing ZERO ranked teams.
6. In 2005 when we blew the chance on the road against a terrible KU team to play for the Big 12 title, we went 7-4 playing ZERO ranked teams.
7. We followed up those 2 good seasons in 2006 with a 4-8 record.

I loved Mac and I'm grateful for him getting the ship pointed in the right direction but there is no way you can say we aren't much better under Rhoads. We don't have all of the wins to show for it yet but our schedule is 2x more difficult than it was in the early 2000s.

 

[ahaselhu]

I ran some numbers for Rhoads, McCarney, and McCarney's best years (from 2000-2006).

NOTE: These charts DO NOT include this season, since opponent win totals are not yet known.

Here are the wins and losses for Rhoads and McCarney vs. opponents organized by the final number of opponent wins, and the win percentage in such games. As you can see, Rhoads is doing just as well as McCarney did IN McCarney's BEST YEARS against bottom- and mid-tier teams, and is doing better against top competition.

Games	Losing/FCS	Win%	6-8 Wins	Win%	9+ Wins	Win %
Rhoads	15-2	88.24	5-11	31.25	4-14	22.22
McCarney	44-14	75.86	9-32	21.95	3-39	7.69
MC 00-06	31-4	88.57	9-18	33.33	3-21	14.29

In the next chart, the % columns indicate the percentage of total wins/losses accounted for by the previous column. For example, of Rhoads' wins, 62.5% have come against teams with losing records or FCS teams, and 16.67% of his wins have been against teams with 9+ wins.

Wins	Losing/FCS	%	6-8 Wins	%	9+ Wins	%
Rhoads	15	62.50	5	20.83	4	16.67
McCarney	44	78.57	9	16.07	3	5.36
MC 00-06	31	72.09	9	20.93	3	6.98
Losses
Rhoads	2	7.41	11	40.74	14	51.85
McCarney	14	16.47	32	37.65	39	45.88
MC 00-06	4	9.3	18	41.86	21	48.84

The difference isn't as striking as I expected it to be, but there's no doubt that we're doing AT LEAST as well under Rhoads as we ever did under McCarney, and this during what should have been program-building years under Rhoads.

 

[mt85]

Maybe some folks just miss Dan's playing not to lose mentality and/or hearing about how the team won the second half of a blowout loss.