Only One NonCon Game

[3rdCoastClone]

Last nights statement from the the Big 12 Board of Directors:

https://big12sports.com/news/2020/8/3/big-12-conference-adopts-9-1-football-schedule.aspx

8/3/2020 8:15:37 PM

 

[83Clone]

Just the next step in "death by 1000 paper cuts"

 

[Cycsk]

On the Quarantine podcast, @brentblum says that only reason to play more than the 9 + 1 games is "economic." Well, that sounds like a pretty good reason to me!

 

[CRcyclone6]

Man this Sux, is this one of the Best Iowa state team of the 21st century so far and we have to play only 10 games.

What would bowl eligibility look like?

If we get 10 games in, that would be fantastic. I don't see it happening though.

 

[cycloneG]

I don't get it. Is there really a significant benefit to cancelling non-conference games? The article linked above didn't include any of the reasoning behind it. The only thing I've heard is that it is less risky to play conference teams because we know that they will be able to maintain a consistent level of testing, etc. to mitigate the risk.

First, I think this is overestimating how well the Big 12 teams will handle their own responsibility. What about Baylor makes us trust them?

Second, what makes us think that non-conference teams can't do as much as us to mitigate risk? Many of these schools have outstanding medical schools and facilities, some better than ours.

I just don't get it. There must be some other reason, especially when the Big 12 turns against its own rationale by letting schools keep one non-conference games. I doubt it has anything to do with safety protocols and suspect it has everything to do with TV contracts, but if so, why not at least try for a full schedule?

More bye weeks allows flexibility in scheduling in case of outbreaks.

 

[BACyclone]

I don't get it. Is there really a significant benefit to cancelling non-conference games? The article linked above didn't include any of the reasoning behind it. The only thing I've heard is that it is less risky to play conference teams because we know that they will be able to maintain a consistent level of testing, etc. to mitigate the risk.

First, I think this is overestimating how well the Big 12 teams will handle their own responsibility. What about Baylor makes us trust them?

Second, what makes us think that non-conference teams can't do as much as us to mitigate risk? Many of these schools have outstanding medical schools and facilities, some better than ours.

I just don't get it. There must be some other reason, especially when the Big 12 turns against its own rationale by letting schools keep one non-conference games. I doubt it has anything to do with safety protocols and suspect it has everything to do with TV contracts, but if so, why not at least try for a full schedule?

The only logical thing I've heard about cutting schedule is that it creates more open weeks, thus if there is an outbreak on a team, there's a chance to postpone games rather than outright cancel them.

 

[Cydkar]

And A + B = tangerine. WTH???

No. An orange, because a vest has no sleeves.

 

[CyclonesRock]

Ball St makes sense from a let's see what happens stand point. Students arrive next week which would give us a whole month to get through the initial spike in cases and the inevitable surge over the following couple of weeks. Then we play a game and have 2 weeks to see what happens as far as player or fan exposure.

 

[BCClone]

South dakota makes the most sense. They are closest to us. They are the first game to help create some bye weeks, would be good a later conference game up to week three. Also, it is labor day weekend, kids go to school on labor day, so this gives them another reason to not go home since they would have a game on saturday and class on monday.

 

[Cycsk]

More bye weeks allows flexibility in scheduling in case of outbreaks.

I don't think bye weeks are going to make much of a difference if the ******** of an outbreak happens. If we get an outbreak, we may be cancelling games.

However, if we consider other leagues to have a competitive advantage because they have more bye weeks, perhaps that is a reason to change our schedule to 10 games too.

 

[oldman]

I know they were not on this year's schedule, but I'd really like to see if UNI could still play us. It would be nice to help out an in-state school that we have so much history with.

 

[ArgentCy]

Last nights statement from the the Big 12 Board of Directors:

https://big12sports.com/news/2020/8/3/big-12-conference-adopts-9-1-football-schedule.aspx

8/3/2020 8:15:37 PM

So they are pushing back the start dates. Completely useless.

 

[cycloneG]

So they are pushing back the start dates. Completely useless.

Are they? I sounds like conference games are starting sooner than normal and nonconference games must be played before the start of conference play.

"The start of Conference play will be solidified in the coming weeks, with an anticipated start sometime between mid- to late-September, with the expectation that non-conference games are contested prior to beginning league games."

 

[Sparkplug]

I know they were not on this year's schedule, but I'd really like to see if UNI could still play us. It would be nice to help out an in-state school that we have so much history with.

Why are people so stuck on us playing UNI?

 

[CycloneErik]

I don't get it. Is there really a significant benefit to cancelling non-conference games? The article linked above didn't include any of the reasoning behind it. The only thing I've heard is that it is less risky to play conference teams because we know that they will be able to maintain a consistent level of testing, etc. to mitigate the risk.

First, I think this is overestimating how well the Big 12 teams will handle their own responsibility. What about Baylor makes us trust them?

Second, what makes us think that non-conference teams can't do as much as us to mitigate risk? Many of these schools have outstanding medical schools and facilities, some better than ours.

I just don't get it. There must be some other reason, especially when the Big 12 turns against its own rationale by letting schools keep one non-conference games. I doubt it has anything to do with safety protocols and suspect it has everything to do with TV contracts, but if so, why not at least try for a full schedule?

What about anyone in the conference, or our schedule on general, would lead to trust?

These are all states that don't take this thing seriously enough.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

With 250,000 expected to attend Sturgis I'm taking SD off the schedule if I'm JP.

 

[ArgentCy]

Are they? I sounds like conference games are starting sooner than normal and nonconference games must be played before the start of conference play.

"The start of Conference play will be solidified in the coming weeks, with an anticipated start sometime between mid- to late-September, with the expectation that non-conference games are contested prior to beginning league games."

We were going to play Sep 5. Now the first game is mid-late Sep. That qualifies as pushed back in my book. Perhaps with one game before its only delayed a week or two but it still makes no sense.

 

[cycloneG]

We were going to play Sep 5. Now the first game is mid-late Sep. That qualifies as pushed back in my book.

No. The first conference game is mid to late September. The nonconference game has to be played before that. The first game could still be Sep 5.

 

[BillBrasky4Cy]

We were going to play Sep 5. Now the first game is mid-late Sep. That qualifies as pushed back in my book. Perhaps with one game before its only delayed a week or two but it still makes no sense.

It's a pretty fluid situation, I wouldn't put any stock into the dates that are currently on the schedule.

 

[1UNI2ISU]

With 250,000 expected to attend Sturgis I'm taking SD off the schedule if I'm JP.

Meh, Vermillion is 400+ miles away from Sturgis and has a population of around 10,000 without students, plus they aren't on any major highway. I don't think they're going to be affected by the rally.