Jiskche was good at fund raising for the university but overall I don't think he was very well liked. He didn't make athletics a priority either. Geoffroy was the best ISU president during my lifetime IMO. He was not scared to interact with the students and actually listen to them on issues. I remember 1 year during move in when I was a RA in the dorms he and his wife were walking the floor welcoming students and handing out treats. He stopped by my room and we had a nice conversation and he thanked me for taking on the challenge of being an RA. Also felt like he and Pollard were on the same page when it came with athletics and he supported a lot of the aggressive visions Pollard had with where he wanted to take the athletics department. Leath has his issues at the end of his tenure as well as being the one to permanently end VEISHEA. I could care less about losing VEISHEA as it just felt like another Greek week to me on campus but I know some hate Leath for that. With all the issues over the years surrounding VEISSHEA it was probably inevitable it was going to end at some point IMO. It had strayed away from what it was supposed to be about and not worth the risk of all the violence and problems that were becoming a part of it. Wintersteen has done a good job, I can't really think of any negatives tied to her tenure.Seems like the 2 more popular university presidents were people already associated with ISU. Jiskche was president when I attended, I don’t remember him being well liked among the student population and he was looking to move on. Are there current administrators at ISU that have the necessary background to be a university president at a major university? I feel like having someone that knows our university, knows the history we have faced.
Pretty spot on.Jiskche was good at fund raising for the university but overall I don't think he was very well liked. He didn't make athletics a priority either. Geoffroy was the best ISU president during my lifetime IMO. He was not scared to interact with the students and actually listen to them on issues. I remember 1 year during move in when I was a RA in the dorms he and his wife were walking the floor welcoming students and handing out treats. He stopped by my room and we had a nice conversation and he thanked me for taking on the challenge of being an RA. Also felt like he and Pollard were on the same page when it came with athletics and he supported a lot of the aggressive visions Pollard had with where he wanted to take the athletics department. Leath has his issues at the end of his tenure as well as being the one to permanently end VEISHEA. I could care less about losing VEISHEA as it just felt like another Greek week to me on campus but I know some hate Leath for that. With all the issues over the years surrounding VEISSHEA it was probably inevitable it was going to end at some point IMO. It had strayed away from what it was supposed to be about and not worth the risk of all the violence and problems that were becoming a part of it. Wintersteen has done a good job, I can't really think of any negatives tied to her tenure.
From an athletics standpoint we definitely need the next president that will see eye to eye with Pollard and knows what it is going to take to stay competitive in this new era of college athletics. However, when the regents go through candidates academics is a big part of the selection process too as it is an academic institution they will be in charge of so I doubt Pollard has much of "veto" power because he is not part of the board that will ultimately select the new president.
HIlton had the vision of the Iowa State Center including Hilton, Trice, Stephens, Fisher and Scheman. It was groundbreaking at the time. Hilton, along with Parks, oversaw the growth of Iowa State College into a true university. He pushed for the development of humanities programs to augment ISU's strong science, technology and agricultural roots.Considering the importance of the ISU buildings named after former university presidents, one has to assume that (in no particular order) these are the top three:
James Hilton
William Beardshear
Robert Parks
Jiskche was good at fund raising for the university but overall I don't think he was very well liked. He didn't make athletics a priority either. Geoffroy was the best ISU president during my lifetime IMO. He was not scared to interact with the students and actually listen to them on issues. I remember 1 year during move in when I was a RA in the dorms he and his wife were walking the floor welcoming students and handing out treats. He stopped by my room and we had a nice conversation and he thanked me for taking on the challenge of being an RA. Also felt like he and Pollard were on the same page when it came with athletics and he supported a lot of the aggressive visions Pollard had with where he wanted to take the athletics department. Leath has his issues at the end of his tenure as well as being the one to permanently end VEISHEA. I could care less about losing VEISHEA as it just felt like another Greek week to me on campus but I know some hate Leath for that. With all the issues over the years surrounding VEISSHEA it was probably inevitable it was going to end at some point IMO. It had strayed away from what it was supposed to be about and not worth the risk of all the violence and problems that were becoming a part of it. Wintersteen has done a good job, I can't really think of any negatives tied to her tenure.
From an athletics standpoint we definitely need the next president that will see eye to eye with Pollard and knows what it is going to take to stay competitive in this new era of college athletics. However, when the regents go through candidates academics is a big part of the selection process too as it is an academic institution they will be in charge of so I doubt Pollard has much of "veto" power because he is not part of the board that will ultimately select the new president.