Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Murph and Andy

K

kberyldial

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2006
1,265
58
48
Nice little segment just laying out Iowa State and it's players. Had Sears on with a 3rd grade analysis of players "youth" or lack of on the 2 deep. Doesn't account for substituting or guys hurt that would be on the 2 deep. Then of course used Iowa's depth chart "as an example" of how we're not really young. A tee-ball back and forth between Murphy and Sears letting Sears use the phrase "too a tee" 8 or so times comparing the two. Then cap it off with Andy concluding we have no talent.

Thanks alot Murph and Andy. You know there are listeners that are deeply rooted Iowa State fans. We're not having a good season - OBVIOUSLY! It hasn't gone well. We all wish it were better.

I like the show but man. I was kinda left wondering what the motivation behind the segment was. I don't need roses and bunnies when they discuss ISU football but this seemed pretty harsh.
 
It's not like ISU is playing all true freshman. There are plenty of upper classman in the lineup but ISU IS young compared to most teams. I don't see how even a partially logical person can't see that. I remember Murphy (whom I really like) bringing up last year that Iowa was not a youthfull team...meanwhile Iowa is a lot better this year. I expect the same for ISU next year.
 
Well, what did they say that wasn't accurate?
I think we have more talent than your summary has them giving us credit for, but at 1-6, people aren't going to sing a program's praises.
1-6 is often a pretty reliable indicator of talent. Hopefully it isn't, but it may be. Can't fault them for thinking it.
 
I think when most people say "young team" they mean "inexperienced team."

But technically, using the Queen's English, Sears was right. Semantics. :rolleyes:

Everything else they said was right, though. It's not good and doesn't make you feel better about the team next year. You just hope that the coaching staff develops their players and recruit. Like every other program out there. :twitcy:
 
What I struggle with is having John Sears doing pre-game analysis for the Cyclones. Maybe I hold a grudge too long, but I'm still torqued at him flubbing and calling them the Cyclowns when he was doing the sports desk on one news broadcast. Once a Hawk, always a Hawk?

I do recall Murph & Andy giving more & more press to the negatives of the Licklighter era. They don't just do it to us, but yeah, it IS getting pretty old now that Sears is cheerfully combining loss margins for the last two games at the beginning of every segment. Earlier losses were much closer, but I guess they dilute the magnitude of the loss margin too much.
 
We deserve what we get. I don't have problem with that. It was they way they did the segment. kinda douchey.
 
ImJustKCClone said:
What I struggle with is having John Sears doing pre-game analysis for the Cyclones. Maybe I hold a grudge too long, but I'm still torqued at him flubbing and calling them the Cyclowns when he was doing the sports desk on one news broadcast. Once a Hawk, always a Hawk?

I do recall Murph & Andy giving more & more press to the negatives of the Licklighter era. They don't just do it to us, but yeah, it IS getting pretty old now that Sears is cheerfully combining loss margins for the last two games at the beginning of every segment. Earlier losses were much closer, but I guess they dilute the magnitude of the loss margin too much.
Click to expand...

I think is the root of most people's problem here, but I don't think they need to track down a reporter who also happens to be a Cyclone for just this type of scenario. He's the "Cyclone Insider" for Channel 13, so it's part of his deal.
 
ImJustKCClone said:
What I struggle with is having John Sears doing pre-game analysis for the Cyclones. Maybe I hold a grudge too long, but I'm still torqued at him flubbing and calling them the Cyclowns when he was doing the sports desk on one news broadcast. Once a Hawk, always a Hawk?

I do recall Murph & Andy giving more & more press to the negatives of the Licklighter era. They don't just do it to us, but yeah, it IS getting pretty old now that Sears is cheerfully combining loss margins for the last two games at the beginning of every segment. Earlier losses were much closer, but I guess they dilute the magnitude of the loss margin too much.
Click to expand...

Might be time to get over that. Hell, there have been performances by ISU where even I say we look more like Clowns than Clones, and I wasn't saying it as an accident.
 
CycloneErik said:
Well, what did they say that wasn't accurate?
I think we have more talent than your summary has them giving us credit for, but at 1-6, people aren't going to sing a program's praises.
1-6 is often a pretty reliable indicator of talent. Hopefully it isn't, but it may be. Can't fault them for thinking it.
Click to expand...

This.. You can break it down and compare all day long. Youth, Coaching, Talent
After watching the last two debacles the level of talent has to be questioned IMO.
 
mustangcy said:
It's not like ISU is playing all true freshman. There are plenty of upper classman in the lineup but ISU IS young compared to most teams. I don't see how even a partially logical person can't see that. I remember Murphy (whom I really like) bringing up last year that Iowa was not a youthfull team...meanwhile Iowa is a lot better this year. I expect the same for ISU next year.
Click to expand...

Offense
So-2
Sr-1
So-1
So-1
Jr-3
So-1
Fr-1
So-1
Jr-1
So-1
Jr-1

That's the offenses ages with seasons of significant playing time.

Defense

Jr-2
Jr-1
Jr-1
Sr-3

Fr-1/Jr-1?
Sr-2
So-1

Fr-1/So-1
Sr-3
Sr-2/3
Sr-2

Same for defense. Defense is a little older obviously. We will lose 4!!!!! starters from the current offense in the next two years combined. I'll be money no one else in the conference does that. That's not to mention ones a RB and one is a receiver who rotates a lot and I would say probably doesn't play as much as West. Doesn't matter really except with Coleman out, we lose nothing next year.
 
Last edited:
CycloneErik said:
Well, what did they say that wasn't accurate?
I think we have more talent than your summary has them giving us credit for, but at 1-6, people aren't going to sing a program's praises.
1-6 is often a pretty reliable indicator of talent. Hopefully it isn't, but it may be. Can't fault them for thinking it.
Click to expand...


1-6....All I can say is what I told the drive thru girl at Burger King the other day when she said "You Owe Me $11.11 Mister", And my response was..."Don't Remind Me"...the same as don't remind me of our One lowly win this season.lol

Come On Cyclones We Need a WIN over the Mild kitty Kats!!!!
 
No. I don't think they need to have an actual Cyclone alum doing the insider stuff. But frankly, when you have two passionate, rival fan-bases in your primary viewing area, you have to be exceptionally cautious about favoritism. Used to love Heidi Salliday (sp) doing the sports on Channel 8, and for years did not know that she graduated from Iowa. Keith & Andy are from out of state, so they have an easier time remaining impartial, IMO.

I dunno...maybe I just don't want Sears to sound so happy about it! :)
 
ImJustKCClone said:
No. I don't think they need to have an actual Cyclone alum doing the insider stuff. But frankly, when you have two passionate, rival fan-bases in your primary viewing area, you have to be exceptionally cautious about favoritism. Used to love Heidi Salliday (sp) doing the sports on Channel 8, and for years did not know that she graduated from Iowa. Keith & Andy are from out of state, so they have an easier time remaining impartial, IMO.

I dunno...maybe I just don't want Sears to sound so happy about it! :)
Click to expand...

Oh it grates on my nerves just a bit too.
 
Tre4ISU said:
Offense
So-2
Sr-1
So-1
So-1
Jr-3
So-1
Fr-1
So-1
Jr-1
So-1
Jr-1

That's the offenses ages with seasons of significant playing time.

Defense

Jr-2
Jr-1
Jr-1
Sr-3

Fr-1/Jr-1?
Sr-2
So-1

Fr-1/So-1
Sr-3
Sr-2/3
Sr-2

Same for defense. Defense is a little older obviously. We will lose 4!!!!! starters from the current offense in the next two years combined. I'll be money no one else in the conference does that. That's not to mention ones a RB and one is a receiver who rotates a lot and I would say probably doesn't play as much as West. Doesn't matter really except with Coleman out, we lose nothing next year.
Click to expand...
The good news is we have a lot of guys back next year.
The bad news is we have a lot of guys back next year.
:)
 
Cyclonepride said:
Oh it grates on my nerves just a bit too.
Click to expand...

Yep, and when some counter points were brought up about his argument he came out with some blatantly false statements ("There aren't any redshirt freshmen on ISU's o-line") and tried to compare us to Iowa.
 
CycloneErik said:
Well, what did they say that wasn't accurate?
I think we have more talent than your summary has them giving us credit for, but at 1-6, people aren't going to sing a program's praises.
1-6 is often a pretty reliable indicator of talent. Hopefully it isn't, but it may be. Can't fault them for thinking it.
Click to expand...

We are who they thought we are.
 
ImJustKCClone said:
No. I don't think they need to have an actual Cyclone alum doing the insider stuff. But frankly, when you have two passionate, rival fan-bases in your primary viewing area, you have to be exceptionally cautious about favoritism. Used to love Heidi Salliday (sp) doing the sports on Channel 8, and for years did not know that she graduated from Iowa. Keith & Andy are from out of state, so they have an easier time remaining impartial, IMO.

I dunno...maybe I just don't want Sears to sound so happy about it! :)
Click to expand...

Andrew Downs handles his Hawk fandom much, much better than Sears does in my opinion. Sears seems to think that since he admits he's a Hawkeye fan he can say what he wants...
 
When I hear (or use) "young" in reference to college football, I think of true and redshirt freshmen and maybe sophomores/redshirt sophomores. I do not think juniors and seniors that simply haven't played much. So for me, young and inexperienced are not the same thing.


NickTheGreat said:
I think when most people say "young team" they mean "inexperienced team."

But technically, using the Queen's English, Sears was right. Semantics. :rolleyes:

Everything else they said was right, though. It's not good and doesn't make you feel better about the team next year. You just hope that the coaching staff develops their players and recruit. Like every other program out there. :twitcy:
Click to expand...
 
One thing I can guarantee - we have the weather staff on our side. Thanks to our meteorology program, seems like most of them on the local channels are ISU alumni. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom