Ike Harris also played for Majors in the early 70's before spending 8 yrs with the Cardinals & Saints. The trio of Stowe, Harris, & Willie Jones still sets the standard for WR talent at ISU.
Where did anyone take us (football)?
- Thread starter kberyldial
- Start date
Ike Harris also played for Majors in the early 70's before spending 8 yrs with the Cardinals & Saints. The trio of Stowe, Harris, & Willie Jones still sets the standard for WR talent at ISU.
Here's the link. Had me wondering since I thought MU was 5th and a Lynn Dickey lead KU was 6th
College Football Poll, Past Football Rankings 1970's
Though I did have it backwards AP had Big 8 1-2-3 and coaches had ISU at 17
Last edited:
Besides the number of defensive players that went pro from the '76 team, when was the last time any Iowa State team, or any Big 12 team for that matter, have had two QBs from the same team get drafted. It was quite a exiting lineup to see Wayne and Buddy in the back field at the same.
For you stats guys, wasn't this offense rated in the top 3 in the country?
Another interesting stat would be how many from this ISU team were First team All Big 8? My guess (and that's all it is) is five.
For you stats guys, wasn't this offense rated in the top 3 in the country?
Another interesting stat would be how many from this ISU team were First team All Big 8? My guess (and that's all it is) is five.
Last edited:
It was actually an "end around pass" by Lane Danielson. He actually could have made some positive yardage, but had a man about 30 yards downfield open. I remember shrieking in horror from the front row of the student section as he reared back and instead through it about 30 yards high and 10 yards downfield into the waiting arms of a Husker. And thus ended our chances
The evolution of college football and the Iowa State athletic department makes it almost impossible to compare coaches from different eras.....its still fun though.
If you are an ISU fb coach in the 70's and 80's you were at a serious disadvantage.....you didn't have the budget we now have, and you were playing teams that were well oiled programs like NU and OU every year.....and probably most importantly, you couldn't win 6 games and get into a bowl game. I don't have the numbers readily available, however, I believe we had some seasons were we won a good deal of games yet did not receive an invitation to a bowl game.
Anyways, moving into DM's era, he had the advantage of more bowl games, and a bigger budget. Now Chizik, he's seriously got every commitment a coach needs to run a successful program. So, to compare these guys.....I don't know, but I guess its still fun.
One important thing that has changed in the last two decades or so is that they reduced the number of scholarships that could be offered from 115 or so (I think) to 85. This has made it much easier for the "non-power" programs (like ISU) to get some quality recruits that used to take a scholarship offer from a "football power" school.
Buddy, this is a ludicrous argument...you need to look at winning percentage...not just wins. Early in the 1900s there were a lot of years only 6 or 8 games in total were played. I think they went to 10 games in the 60s, 11 games in the 70s and now we regularly play 12 games.
I think you need to remember with the expanded schedule we have added non-conference creampuffs for opponents more often than not...making it easier now to get the elusive "winning season".
Criner came from Boise St...which at the time was a Division I AA powerhouse (before going DI). Walden was coming off some great seasons at Washington State. They were both thought to be pretty good hires at the time as I recall.
I have been around the country (mostly in the SE) and have seen passionate FB fans. If we were truly passionate we would have demanded that McCarney be ousted far sooner than he was. He was allowed to hang on for 12 years...12 years of mediocre football at its best moments and far worse than mediocre in its worst moments.
Was Barry Hill (played with the Dolphins) on that team or did he come a little later?
When the Big 12 started, we actually swapped out a 'creampuff' for a conference game. Only since last year has the 4th nonconf game come back (with 2002 and '03 as the calendar exceptions):
11 games, 1970-95: 4 nonconf, 7 conf
11 games, 1996-2005: 3 nonconf, 8 conf
12 games, 2006-07: 4 nonconf, 8 conf
We haven't had real solid nonconference opposition in ANY winning season since the 11-game slate started...
1971 (Majors) - Idaho, New Mexico, Kent State, San Diego State (4-0 nonconf; 4-3 conf; bowl loss)
1976 (Bruce) - Drake, Air Force, Kent State, Utah (4-0; 4-3)
1977 (Bruce) - Wichita State, Iowa, Bowling Green, Dayton (3-1; 5-2; bowl loss)
1978 (Bruce) - Rice, San Diego State, Iowa, Drake (4-0; 4-3; bowl loss)
1980 (Duncan) - NE Louisiana, San Jose State, Iowa, Colorado State (4-0; 2-5)
1986 (Criner) - Iowa, Indiana State, Wichita State, Wyoming (3-1; 3-4)
1989 (Walden) - Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa, Tulane (2-2; 4-3)
2000 (McCarney) - Ohio, UNLV, Iowa (3-0; 5-3; bowl win)
2001 (McCarney) - UNI, Ohio, Iowa (3-0; 4-4; bowl loss)
2004 (McCarney) - UNI, Iowa, N. Illinois (2-1; 4-4; bowl win)
2005 (McCarney) - Illinois State, Iowa, Army (3-0; 4-4; bowl loss)
That's a 35-5 (.875) nonconference mark (4 losses to Iowa, 1 to Minnesota) and a 43-38 (.531) conference mark in those 11 seasons.
It is possible, however, not accurate in this case.
ISU has suffered greatly in athletics from a lack of leadership. That lack of leadership made it impossible for Jim Walden to win here. Gene Smith came in Walden's next to last year (much like JP with Mac). Gene threw out these demands, yet was unable to come up with any funds, and he certainly didn't work on selling tickets. 94 tanked, as bad as any in Iowa State history, including 03, and last year, it left no choice, we needed new leadership.
Gene found a lot of money for upgrades then, new turf, updating locker and weight rooms, the Jacobson Building, etc. It was just done for the wrong guy.
And if you look at budgets, schools like Duke, will probably make as much, if not more from bowl shares than in donations. But, then you look at A&M, and yes, they receive plenty from bowl sharing, but that is nothing compared to what they bring in for donations. I use A&M because they haven't played in a BCS game since, I don't know the year, they beat K State. And they have missed bowls with losing records.
Just wondering here...if I can get an answer instead of a 5 paragraph response of excuses on what coach has done more than any other for the football program in the last two decades?...I guess McCarney did nothing but spin facts to make himself look better in his time for ISU, but yet, when asked who has done the most for ISU since the 70's, everyone's answer is either McCarney, or a bunch of excuses and no answer.
Two decades huh??? Well ol' Danno went to all of those bowls, and of course he beat the Hawks, so of course it would have to be him. There a simple answer that you want to hear, even though his winning percentage was equivalent to the people before so it's incredibly watered down, now maybe you will stop following me around.
BTW, I find it ironic that you start every post qualifying everything with oh I know that he wasn't a very good coach, but then you spend a lot of your time on here defending what a remarkable job that he did like he gave you a kidney. So which is it, bad coach or man crush???
And then you never, like the rest of the people that defend the "job" he did, acknowledge how much more he had than any other coach. And how much worse the competition was that he was able to play than the coaches preceeding him. But those facts just don't fit into the argument.
The bar for the last two decades couldn't have been set much lower so even an answer of McCarney doesn't mean much.
Still no reponse I guess, although I guess three paragrahps of excuses and a supposive man crush I have...McCarney definately had a bigger budget to work with, but it was still 10th-12th in the conference the whole time he coached here...btw, this has been the whole point of my posts defending McCarney is that in the last 25 years, nobody has done more than him, and all I get for my point is excuses and personal insults...still waiting for an actual answer to my original question if anyone has anything better than personal insults or sarcastic garbage to respond with.
Oh btw, Darts...I also find it ironic that you rip on McCarney for being the "king of spin"...yet everytime anyone brings up anything he did, that hasn't been done before, you make continuous excuses for why it isn't a big deal, and make excuses for the coaches before him...I could say maybe you have a mancrush on Walden, or maybe you have some serious personal issues with McCarney to follow that, but that has nothing to do with football so I won't do the same thing you do.
I'm trying to understand what you want people to say. Is it that he didn't do anything? Or that he changed ISU football forever? I don't think he did either one. Yes, he increased the budget, he also gave us our first bowl victory, and 5 bowls in 6 years. What does that mean though? He still spun things to make himself look fabulous, when he was a mediocre coach IMO. When he talked to the team before the UNI game, he said something along the lines that he'd be disappointed if we didn't win by 2 TD's, then in the press conference following the game, he said it was the best UNI team he had ever faced. McCarney did something for ISU, but limiting expectations, as well as making himself look good were two of them; two of the big ones. He just peed the conference schedule down his leg, and played the "needing better facilities" card too much.
Cyclone62....have you read my previous posts???...Who has done more in the last 25 years??? That is why I appreciate him. PS...you said, yes he had winning records 5 out of 6 years...who else has done that??? And don't try to bring up the "watered down schedule" point, because before McCarney we still played a very weak nonconference schedule...and we lost to the "mediocre" teams we played in conferece...at no point in my defense for McCarney have I received an answer for my question on who has done more than him in the last quarter-century....all I have gotten is excuses and personal attacks...still waiting for answers guys...btw, I still agree it was time for a change and I am very excited about Chizik and the future.
