You have to also blame the leadership and not just the coaches. Joe O'Brien was on campus with Paul Bubb before Oliver was done coaching and before the "committee" had even formed. Everybody in the world knew O'Brien would be the coach, and some national media criticized the unprofessional workings of ISU. O'Brien previously walked away from a DI assistant coaching job mid-season, and he was in a JC program which is a placement program. He had no experience in recruiting, and it showed. There were quite a few coaches with a winning background who wasted their time in that bogus search. ISU couldn't afford some of those very same candidates now.
This last time, every person knew the two names were Evans and Louis Wilson. And these were the names before the "committee" was formed. We know somebody had Tingey's ear. I have no problem if the AD just goes out and hires somebody, but these bogus committees waste prospective coaches time and money, and it gives a bad reputation for future searches. Believe me, I know this.
Even Oliver was hired in a chaotic time of "leadership." Irv Cross wanted to flex his power, didn't like Herb Williams, and showed him the door. Oliver knew basketball, but he was smug, didn't do much to sell ISU basketball, and brought in some characters who shouldn't have been in this community. I'm not going to name names, but unless you're in denial, you know who they were.
There are pluses and minuses with ISU, just as there are with many other schools. The problem is, there are many within ISU and the community who have a martyr complex. Many will say the dome kills any chance at a successful program. When it's brought up that Idaho and NAU face the same problems but have had some level of success in recent years, those who want to defend ISU's failure will say ISU has it worse. The very same people who say that ISU has a lack of success because of the dome then turn around and say we''ll never get one because one single person isn't having any success raising money. When some bring up the rural nature of other schools and their success in some sports, like SUU in football, the defenders of ISU's failure will tell you it's different "just because."
Sure, money solves a lot of problems. But what the Hell has ISU done differently over the past few years? As has been argued on here before, the games are ridiculously over priced. Nothing has been done to improve the experience at Reed. The coaches shows are exactly the same now as they were 20 years ago - this in a new age of social media. The marketing is bush league, at best. The ISU Bengals website still has 3 or more year old info on it. The inside of the dome really does look like a billboard museum. Is it any wonder why some of the sports seem like they're treading water when the overall look of the athletic department seems in disarray most of the time?
