You got it. There is no question that Osborne's dislike of Texas was the primary reason for B12 infighting at that time and he has probably sped up what was already the slow demise of Nebraska FB by bolting for the B10. In addition to Osborne, you also had long-time Aggy paranoia and jealousy of Texas. I still think AD Bill Byrne wanted Aggy to stay in the B12 but the Neidermeyer Faction of Aggy and Bowtie wanted to bolt to the SEC regardless of any long-term negative consequences. It was no shock that Byrne was prematurely forced out at Aggy. And at Mizzou, the "SEC-based" Wal-Mart money of Mizzou won out over the pro-B12 faction which will also have negative long-term consequences for Mizzou.
*** A conversation with Jamie Pollard ***
- Thread starter ChrisMWilliams
- Start date
You got it. There is no question that Osborne's dislike of Texas was the primary reason for B12 infighting at that time and he has probably sped up what was already the slow demise of Nebraska FB by bolting for the B10. In addition to Osborne, you also had long-time Aggy paranoia and jealousy of Texas. I still think AD Bill Byrne wanted Aggy to stay in the B12 but the Neidermeyer Faction of Aggy and Bowtie wanted to bolt to the SEC regardless of any long-term negative consequences. It was no shock that Byrne was prematurely forced out at Aggy. And at Mizzou, the "SEC-based" Wal-Mart money of Mizzou won out over the pro-B12 faction which will also have negative long-term consequences for Mizzou.
Exactly. I was a little surprised to hear that his family wasn't a bigger priority than his job.
Other things that were telling... Our coaches salaries will never be near the top? If Fred takes us to the promised land, he can't be in the top three paid in the league, ever?....
....McDermott did poorly at ISU just because of timing?? Just buck up and say he was a poor hire and move on.
I did think that JP's comments of not having many personal friends because of his work demands was real, and I thought big of him to admit.
Great interview and write up!
As others have already suggested, the hire was a good one at the time, obviously the results were not good. His credentials coming in to ISU were the equal of or better than those of Tim Floyd and Larry Eustachy. What he inherited at UNI was worse than what Floyd inherited at UNO and Eustachy inherited at Utah State. And despite his lack of success at ISU, his market value was still high in CBB circles as Creighton paid big bucks to hire him and they likely weren't the only program to have done so at that time.
I don't think that's what JP meant. I think Fred is now #4 in the Big 12 at $2 mil/year. While that is "near the top" and #3 is not too far away, I interpreted that to mean that we can never afford to pay the type of money that KU is paying Bill Self (around $5 mil/year). The gist that I got from that statement is that matter what, if Fred has success here, he will be able to make more money somewhere else eventually.
McDermott had high market value at the MVC level. He was not our first, second, or third choice. He was all we thought could get at the time, even though Fred was begging for the job. We can make all the excuses we want, but McD simply could not win at ISU. Good hires win.
He forced out Douglas for a guy who would win national titles. He hired THE biggest coordinator in college football to replace a stagnant regime. He snagged a highly sought up-and-comer from an in-state school.
The only mistake he's made in my mind was the McDermott uber-contract.
He said it was between the SEZ and the football building and our football coach (of all people) went with the football building.
The SEZ is a want. The football building is a need. The SEZ is mostly for **** measuring contests between fans on the internet. The football building has a tangible effect on recruiting.
Do we want the SEZ? Hell yes. But we needed the football building to be a better program. We don't need the SEZ to be a better program.
In just eight years, the season ticket holder base increased by over 20,000. And during that time, ticket prices have never been higher.
So not only are there over twice as many season ticket holders, they're paying a premium (for ISU ticket price standards) to do it.
Remarkable.
I think more than any school, Mizzou will be viewed as a "loser" in conference realignment 10 years from now.
Completely agree on Mizzou.
I think culturally Colorado fits the PAC more than the B12 but they are going to have some years to catch up to Oregon, USC, etc.
Of all the schools that bolted I hold the least against Colorado, their invite to the Pac 10 was basically the same as if ISU had gotten an invite to the Big 10 in the same period of time. They might have been on the outside looking in if everything had gone to hell so they did what they had to do to for #1.
The University is definitely more PAC. The state itself is definitely more B12.
I don't know if CU will ever catch up. I think their move made sense, and it won't doom them, but I think they were sliding fast into irrelevancy, and would be a bottom feeder in the current Big 12. I don't know if they can recapture the early 90's, or even the early 00's for that matter.
Holy Hindsight Bias, Batman!
McDermott and Chizik both had excellent pedigrees when Pollard signed them. Chizik was exposed as a bad coach when he doesn't have elite talent to lean on. Obviously we all knew that ISU didn't have the UT/Auburn talent level, but I don't think anyone expected him to fail as incredibly as he did. McDermott has continued to have success after ISU, so I think it's safe to say there aren't any problems with his style of play/coaching. In both cases, you can't say they "were [in]capable of being successful at Iowa State" at the time they were hired.
With Hoiberg it's the opposite. You'd have been crazy to think a guy with no coaching experience (do summer basketball camps count?) was going to come in and have quick success. Because of his history with the town/school/team everyone was willing to give him a chance (self included), but to believe that success was assured at the time of the hire was just blind faith.
Of course there is hindsight bias. You don't know if something is a good or a bad decision until after the fact. Those hires may have seemed like good ideas, but time has showed us that they most certainly were not. Which is why somebody making a comment in 2008 or so could have legitimately wondered about Pollard.
If you take home the prettiest girl at the bar, envy of all your friends, but she gives you the clap and steals your wallet on the way out, was it still a good decision to bring her home?
Holy cow, were the first four "questions" really necessary? My lord, I was embarrassed to read that. You could have asked him to contrast his statement about how evil transfers are from a few years back with what Fred is doing with transfers now, instead you spent approximately a third of the time not asking questions, but basically telling him how he walks on water. smh
Right, but we still had to hire a football coach and a basketball coach. So you do the best you can with the information you're given. You may not KNOW if it is a good decision at the time, but you have to make an educated guess. That doesn't mean it was a bad hire at the time, and there's no indication that any other available candidates would have done any better. You can say going for it on 4th down is a good decision or a bad decision before you know if the offense converted.
It'd just be a bunch of quotes about drinking "Danny Dan juice" and how his "#BuyoutLife" is going
