This past weekend, I attended another Iowa - Iowa State football game in Ames. I've gone to a lot of these games over the years, and while the product on the field isn't always great, and some (Hawkeye) fans are irrational about their team, the pre-game tailgating and camaraderie are always above par.
For example, a picture that went viral (at least in Iowa) was of two men wearing Iowa State gear lifting a wheelchair-bound Iowa fan -- later identified as a relative of an Iowa player -- up some steps into the stadium. This is the kind of routine nice that you usually see in Iowa.
It got me to thinking that I've been spending too much time thinking about what's wrong with Iowa. Things like our politicians, our weather, our meth labs, and did I mention our politicians?
Anyway, there are plenty of good things about Iowa and its residents, including but not limited to.....
* Generally relentlessly friendly people
* Generally intelligent people
* Wide open spaces
* Low crime rate
* Low cost of living
.....and at the end of the day, it's better to focus on these things than on Iowa / Iowans' shortcomings.
But it's easier to spot and write about the shortcomings, so that's going to keep happening.
Showing posts with label ISU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ISU. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 12, 2017
Friday, April 17, 2015
Terrorists Still > VEISHEA
The past week / weekend should have been a fun time on the campus of Iowa State University. It should have been the 90-something-th edition of VEISHEA. But that was postponed last year, indirectly due to a riot, but directly due to an out-of touch university president.
Last summer that president, Steven Leath, put a permanent end to VEISHEA Of course, he did this after getting that recommendation from his hand-picked task force. An absolute joke.
What was this task force going to do, make a recommendation contrary to what the president and his cronies wanted? Leath had already played judge and jury to cancel last year's VEISHEA shortly after the riot, but well before enough time had passed to collect the facts about what happened.
He acted impulsively and dictatorially, claiming student safety was at risk, and ruining work and plans that were many months in the making. He isn't going to admit now that he was wrong about his actions.
But in truth, those actions haven't made Iowa State students, or Ames, Iowa, a safer place. Suppressing the organized fun and freedom of people doesn't engender trust and safety -- it makes those people bitter and angry, and makes them dislike you. Worst case scenario, it manifests into something chaotic and violent.
Fortunately for ISU / Ames, that manifestation didn't happen this year, and maybe it won't ever. Unfortunately for Leath, the same can't be said for how much he's disliked on campus.
Last summer that president, Steven Leath, put a permanent end to VEISHEA Of course, he did this after getting that recommendation from his hand-picked task force. An absolute joke.
What was this task force going to do, make a recommendation contrary to what the president and his cronies wanted? Leath had already played judge and jury to cancel last year's VEISHEA shortly after the riot, but well before enough time had passed to collect the facts about what happened.
He acted impulsively and dictatorially, claiming student safety was at risk, and ruining work and plans that were many months in the making. He isn't going to admit now that he was wrong about his actions.
But in truth, those actions haven't made Iowa State students, or Ames, Iowa, a safer place. Suppressing the organized fun and freedom of people doesn't engender trust and safety -- it makes those people bitter and angry, and makes them dislike you. Worst case scenario, it manifests into something chaotic and violent.
Fortunately for ISU / Ames, that manifestation didn't happen this year, and maybe it won't ever. Unfortunately for Leath, the same can't be said for how much he's disliked on campus.
Friday, August 8, 2014
Terrorists > VEISHEA, Part Two
ISU President Stephen Leath announced in a press conference August 7, 2014 that VEISHEA will be discontinued and the name will be retired.
"I'm not going to continue to put students at risk so we can observe what to many has become a week-long party," he said.
Leath, you are a politically-correct puppet for a few Republican cronies on the Iowa Board of Regents, and everything I said about you last Spring is as true now as it was then. Only a close-minded fool thinks they have the means to control what they have no power over, such as the off-campus antics of mostly non-students.
Jerk.
"I'm not going to continue to put students at risk so we can observe what to many has become a week-long party," he said.
Leath, you are a politically-correct puppet for a few Republican cronies on the Iowa Board of Regents, and everything I said about you last Spring is as true now as it was then. Only a close-minded fool thinks they have the means to control what they have no power over, such as the off-campus antics of mostly non-students.
Jerk.
Thursday, April 10, 2014
Terrorists > VEISHEA
For the uninitiated, VEISHEA is an annual week-long celebration held each spring on the campus of Iowa State University. VEISHEA is an acronym for the original 5 colleges of the university: Veterinary Medicine, Engineering, Industrial Science, Home Economics, Agriculture. It's presumably the largest student run festival in the nation,
VEISHEA has been marred in the past two decades by off-campus, late night, alcohol-induced, party-goer rioting on the last weekend, causing mostly minor but some significant damage and injuries. The last time it had happened was 2004, and the university president at the time canceled VEISHEA for the following year. Another riot happened again this week (this time early in the week), and in response the new university president, Steven Leath, suspended the rest of -- which is to say most of -- VEISHEA for the year.
Lots of losers in this, but hands down the biggest losers in all of it are.....the ISU university presidents.
While there is no defending the instigators or participants in these, neither is there a rational defense of canceling VEISHEA in response. By all accounts, it wasn't so much a riot as a social-media inspired mob scene with a few drunken idiots. To make matters worse, Leath acts as if his action has the full support of the university leadership.
Let's drop the public posturing and consider the facts that Leath is ignoring, and would like others to ignore:
1) He says he's thinking of the institution and safety in making his decision to cancel, but what exactly does he mean by institution? The administration? The faculty? Because the university institution doesn't exist without the students, and the vast majority of them want VEISHEA to go on. So do the surrounding campus businesses.
2) Speaking of the administration and faculty, while they made be around for dozens of VEISHEA festivals (thank you, tenure!), the students are only there for a few. Many of them volunteer and put many hours of work into it. Now Leath has taken away the fruits of their labor, because of a few folks who might not even be students. It's bad enough that the majority are made to suffer for the few in elementary school or high school, but this is college. C'mon, man.
3) By canceling VEISHEA, Leath has unquestionably increased the probability of more trouble. Now there will be no alcohol-free alternative activities, and more students are likely to attended the off-campus parties, which have always been a source of mob-like behavior. This probability has already become reality, as police have stated that in the following two days after the 'riot' there have been about twice the usual off-campus incidents reported than in past years. (Note: This year's riot was in part a result of police closing down an off-campus party. Is it really that hard for Leath and his institutional cronies to put 2 and 2 together?)
4) Leath could easily allow VEISHEA to commence while law enforcement reviews the volumes of video evidence (something other riots didn't have), and both they and he can ultimately take action against the few who deserve it. Instead, he chose to rush to judgement, and punish the many who don't deserve it. When are educational institutions, at any level, going to accept that they effectively govern behavior that goes on beyond their physical territory?
This continues a pattern of questionable, socially-conservative decisions from Leath. He was the pansy for the conservatives on the state board of regents a year ago in stopping the Harkin Institute at Iowa State, and by not allowing freedom in their research, valuable senatorial papers will now go to Drake University instead. And no one has any idea why he's single-handedly prohibited a player from participating on the men's basketball team this year, even though said previously-suspended player has been cleared by the legal system.
How much longer before the contributing alumni just suspend their donations in the same way Leath seems to arbitrarily suspend things? Maybe they should -- then I'm guessing he'll suddenly find ways to make things work, instead of thinking of reasons for things to not work. I noticed one alumnus already commenting that if there was a student uprising at a sporting event, the president wouldn't cancel the rest of the athletic season. But apparently, canceling VEISHEA is OK, because it only hurts students and not the big donor fans.
By canceling VEISHEA and threatening its future, Leath and his predecessor have simply allowed the terrorists to win at the expense of the students. At Iowa State, this is called leadership, but it's really just retreat.
VEISHEA has been marred in the past two decades by off-campus, late night, alcohol-induced, party-goer rioting on the last weekend, causing mostly minor but some significant damage and injuries. The last time it had happened was 2004, and the university president at the time canceled VEISHEA for the following year. Another riot happened again this week (this time early in the week), and in response the new university president, Steven Leath, suspended the rest of -- which is to say most of -- VEISHEA for the year.
Lots of losers in this, but hands down the biggest losers in all of it are.....the ISU university presidents.
While there is no defending the instigators or participants in these, neither is there a rational defense of canceling VEISHEA in response. By all accounts, it wasn't so much a riot as a social-media inspired mob scene with a few drunken idiots. To make matters worse, Leath acts as if his action has the full support of the university leadership.
Let's drop the public posturing and consider the facts that Leath is ignoring, and would like others to ignore:
1) He says he's thinking of the institution and safety in making his decision to cancel, but what exactly does he mean by institution? The administration? The faculty? Because the university institution doesn't exist without the students, and the vast majority of them want VEISHEA to go on. So do the surrounding campus businesses.
2) Speaking of the administration and faculty, while they made be around for dozens of VEISHEA festivals (thank you, tenure!), the students are only there for a few. Many of them volunteer and put many hours of work into it. Now Leath has taken away the fruits of their labor, because of a few folks who might not even be students. It's bad enough that the majority are made to suffer for the few in elementary school or high school, but this is college. C'mon, man.
3) By canceling VEISHEA, Leath has unquestionably increased the probability of more trouble. Now there will be no alcohol-free alternative activities, and more students are likely to attended the off-campus parties, which have always been a source of mob-like behavior. This probability has already become reality, as police have stated that in the following two days after the 'riot' there have been about twice the usual off-campus incidents reported than in past years. (Note: This year's riot was in part a result of police closing down an off-campus party. Is it really that hard for Leath and his institutional cronies to put 2 and 2 together?)
4) Leath could easily allow VEISHEA to commence while law enforcement reviews the volumes of video evidence (something other riots didn't have), and both they and he can ultimately take action against the few who deserve it. Instead, he chose to rush to judgement, and punish the many who don't deserve it. When are educational institutions, at any level, going to accept that they effectively govern behavior that goes on beyond their physical territory?
This continues a pattern of questionable, socially-conservative decisions from Leath. He was the pansy for the conservatives on the state board of regents a year ago in stopping the Harkin Institute at Iowa State, and by not allowing freedom in their research, valuable senatorial papers will now go to Drake University instead. And no one has any idea why he's single-handedly prohibited a player from participating on the men's basketball team this year, even though said previously-suspended player has been cleared by the legal system.
How much longer before the contributing alumni just suspend their donations in the same way Leath seems to arbitrarily suspend things? Maybe they should -- then I'm guessing he'll suddenly find ways to make things work, instead of thinking of reasons for things to not work. I noticed one alumnus already commenting that if there was a student uprising at a sporting event, the president wouldn't cancel the rest of the athletic season. But apparently, canceling VEISHEA is OK, because it only hurts students and not the big donor fans.
By canceling VEISHEA and threatening its future, Leath and his predecessor have simply allowed the terrorists to win at the expense of the students. At Iowa State, this is called leadership, but it's really just retreat.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Bad Calls
Even opposing teams agree: Iowa State athletics and its fans have been blatantly robbed three times in less than eight
months in big, nationally televised games.
The latest cut came last week in football, when a Texas running back seemed to lose the football near the goal line, and replay officials claimed they didn't have indisputable visual evidence to overturn the call that everyone else could see. Thus, a 90+ yard, ISU game winning fumble return TD was turned into a Texas win.
This piles on top of the two other blown officiating calls that cost ISU dearly in basketball this year. First, the no-call charge debacle against Kansas in February, and then the block-charge screw-up in the NCAA basketball tournament against Ohio State a month later. Both occurred very near the end of the game, and both were clearly declared to be wrong later. (How wrong? Well, the Big 12 apologized and reprimanded the Kansas game officials. And since the Ohio State game, the NCAA has clarified the rules relating to when a player can take a charge.)
National media personalities agree these were all crappy calls, but then most of them eventually say that it doesn't come down to one call. That's true, but also stupid. Bad calls late in a game are much worse than other times, because the offended team has no time to adapt. Don't say there were other times that plays could have been made, when in fact the play of the game was made, but taken away by the officials.
This piles on top of the two other blown officiating calls that cost ISU dearly in basketball this year. First, the no-call charge debacle against Kansas in February, and then the block-charge screw-up in the NCAA basketball tournament against Ohio State a month later. Both occurred very near the end of the game, and both were clearly declared to be wrong later. (How wrong? Well, the Big 12 apologized and reprimanded the Kansas game officials. And since the Ohio State game, the NCAA has clarified the rules relating to when a player can take a charge.)
National media personalities agree these were all crappy calls, but then most of them eventually say that it doesn't come down to one call. That's true, but also stupid. Bad calls late in a game are much worse than other times, because the offended team has no time to adapt. Don't say there were other times that plays could have been made, when in fact the play of the game was made, but taken away by the officials.
The commiseration from national sports media folks on all of these bad officiating calls is nice I suppose, as is the commiseration from other teams' fans. (I wore ISU gear to a Nebraska football game in Lincoln this past weekend, and no fewer than 4 fans spontaneously told me something to the effect of, "You got screwed!") But it doesn't change outcomes or better the attitude of Cyclone Nation. They're just left to know that karma is a bitch - Kansas and Ohio State later lost heartbreakers in the NCAA tournament, and this year's Texas football team is already circling the drain.
It's probably best to simply accept that, home or away, when in doubt, officials' calls are going to favor the traditional national power.
It's probably best to simply accept that, home or away, when in doubt, officials' calls are going to favor the traditional national power.
Friday, September 16, 2011
Squawkeye Nation
Growing up in NW Iowa, I was a football fan of both of Iowa's large universities, Iowa State University and the University of Iowa. In the 70s they both pretty much sucked at it, although ISU was slightly better. Since the 80s, however, Iowa has become a nationally successful program while ISU has languished.
Maybe it's because I moved closer to Ames, or maybe it's my contrarian side, but during this time I found myself becoming a bit more of an ISU fan. I'm still glad for Iowa's football success and all of the attention it has brought to the state, but that success has brought with it a fan base that is not always appealing.
Iowa football fans weren't always like this. Fans sportingly appreciated the success they had in the 80s, after being dismal for so long. Unfortunately, over the years that appreciation has largely become an overconfidence, even an arrogance, that their football team is better than they are.
This overconfidence manifests itself every year during the ISU-Iowa football game. Iowa dominated this series until about 10 years ago, and since then the teams have generally traded victories. But you wouldn't know that from listening to most Iowa fans.
Case in point was this year's game, which I attended and which ISU won in 3 overtimes. Iowa fans were absolutely shocked at losing - it never crossed the minds of many of their faithful that losing was even a remote possibility. Worse still was not accepting that they were outplayed in the game. (One major exception to this was Head Coach Kirk Ferentz, a class act who said right after the game that ISU deserved to win.)
This Iowa football fan reaction is one I've see far too often with their football fans over the past 2 decades. They're like the bully who gets beat up and goes home crying, and it has made it easy to decide whom I'll root for when the Hawkeyes play the Cyclones.
C'mon now, Iowa football fans. Win with grace, but lose with dignity.
Maybe it's because I moved closer to Ames, or maybe it's my contrarian side, but during this time I found myself becoming a bit more of an ISU fan. I'm still glad for Iowa's football success and all of the attention it has brought to the state, but that success has brought with it a fan base that is not always appealing.
Iowa football fans weren't always like this. Fans sportingly appreciated the success they had in the 80s, after being dismal for so long. Unfortunately, over the years that appreciation has largely become an overconfidence, even an arrogance, that their football team is better than they are.
This overconfidence manifests itself every year during the ISU-Iowa football game. Iowa dominated this series until about 10 years ago, and since then the teams have generally traded victories. But you wouldn't know that from listening to most Iowa fans.
Case in point was this year's game, which I attended and which ISU won in 3 overtimes. Iowa fans were absolutely shocked at losing - it never crossed the minds of many of their faithful that losing was even a remote possibility. Worse still was not accepting that they were outplayed in the game. (One major exception to this was Head Coach Kirk Ferentz, a class act who said right after the game that ISU deserved to win.)
This Iowa football fan reaction is one I've see far too often with their football fans over the past 2 decades. They're like the bully who gets beat up and goes home crying, and it has made it easy to decide whom I'll root for when the Hawkeyes play the Cyclones.
C'mon now, Iowa football fans. Win with grace, but lose with dignity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)