Man, I would love for ISU to be in the SEC West or similar division with Missouri, Arkansas, Vandy, OSU, OU, Texas, LSU, A&M and the Mississippi schools. The last 3-4 years we’d have been battling OU, A&M and LSU for the top spot. There are some heavyweights there for sure but Matt Campbell would keep us upper half, or at least middle of the pack. In basketball TJ might put us at the top. Not terrible geography either. Similar to the current Big 12.
Realignment Megathread (All The Moves)
- Thread starter ISUcyclones11
- Start date
How the hell is that cherry picking? It is literally the current period under the current head coach?
Despite the last 5 years including two of the three worst seasons in the last 20 years, during that time they’re still above .500 and have two 9 win seasons.
Anybody who wouldn’t sign up for Coach Campbell’s tenure at Iowa State to end with success similar to that of Coach Shaw at Stanford is a fool.
Because Stanford’s recruiting is necessarily national as it is I’d expect base region of the league they play in won’t affect them much.
You have to wonder if some of these people even watch college football outside of ISU.
Or hell, even that…do they know ISU was 7-6 last year?
Anything new worth talking about yet? Didn’t think so.
It goes back farther than the current coach numbnuts, and 2010 (12 years ago) just so happens to be the first time they had finished the season ranked in almost a decade. That's cherry picking. I didn't say anything about being happy or not happy with a record like Shaws when compared to Campbell or any of that, so I don't even know what you are blathering on about there.
What if we go back to 1990 to present? Would that be acceptable? Because then we can add 3 more final season rankings including another top ten.
I'm just saying expecting them to duplicate the run they had those 7 years is a stretch. Could it happen, sure. But seems unlikely especially considering they have come crashing back to reality recently. Yes, saying they won't win any games is hyperbole, but in the end they will just end up as another punching bag for the big boys in the B1G if that's where they end up.
I get that this argument is popular, but taking away competition is also important. If the Big12 can steal from the PAC, the value may be higher simply due to less desirable supply. Plus, stability should be part of the value calculation
Stanford hit gold about a decade ago and Shaw had them on a roll. They have lost that top 20 mojo over the last 5 years.
But Stanford isn't attractive because their top 20 potential, but because:
- Stanford is a top 5 school
- Stanford is located in the San Fran/Oakland/San Jose TV market
- Palo Alto is in Silicon Valley
Oh, you’re factoring in odds?
Well, imo, odds are it will take BIG making moves for FAU/Miami for BIG to get any ACC. UNC and UVa aren’t killing the ACC early, and likely aren’t going to BIG imo.
I wonder if BIG going after ACC schools is as much about getting espn to remove ND’s comfortable spot as it is they think they can get ACC schools.
Basketball schools will be in play at some point imo. A guy on a forum long known to have connections to Fox sports has hinted several times Fox is interested in macros like CBB tournament, building BIG to go with Big East. We know ESPN is about that too, which if they added KU and UNC, Duke, UK etc, could be by far top conference in both sports
Ahh, I’m sorry. That is a crucial off-by-one mistake on my part.
While it would be batshit and ignorant to suggest a program with 7 ranked finishes in the last eleven full seasons they’ve played will never beat anybody at football, only 6 ranked seasons in the last ten full seasons is a different story.
Good luck in that meat-grinder of Minnesota, Purdue, Indiana, and Northwestern. One shudders to think what the Hawkeyes are gonna do to ‘em.
I gave no odds to anything, The Florida schools you mentioned because of distance would rather stay in the ACC or move to the SEC. Its really that simple, why fly all the way to LA when you do not have too?
BB will always play second fiddle to football, because no matter how large the tournament gets that money is split between every conference, big and small, while football money only goes to the largest conferences.
Perhaps it is a good point in another context.
Your non sequitur, especially with its original reference to Cal (instead of much of the PAC), got me thinkin’ though.
Poaching a Cal or Stanford would not be without some precedent. I can think of a much, much more extreme version at the D-III level.
Johns Hopkins left a league of similar institutions (the UAA) to a little podunk of a league (the Centennial Conference).
While a Cal/Stanford doesn’t up the prestige of a league with major national universities like ISU and KU nearly as much as Johns Hopkins does for one with the likes of Muhlenberg and Swarthmore, it is something to think about.
Last edited:
I smoked pot with John Hopkins.
Yes, you did. You responded to why leave out FSU and Miami with basically “they rather go SEC”…aka, not likely the BIG could get them
Is it likely the BIG can get all of ND, UNC, UVa? No.
So if we are not limiting things to what likely the BIG can actually get, a best case scenario for BIG may include FSU and Miami imo.
FSU and Miami would not stay in ACC over an offer from BIG (particularly if UNC, UVa, and ND are in BIG). There are actually boosters in FL of both schools that would rather go BIG over SEC if in the group I listed (plus one more, Duke or GT). The thought being , FSU and Miami being in a BIG with those ACC academics, ND, Stanford, etc would help erode the “flagship” advantage of UF. The climb in FSU as an institution the last 30 years has been assisted by conference affiliation, and the BIG is building the preeminent conference in that regard
Last edited:
How well schools pull is the primary point in realignment.
I have to wonder if you follow high major athletics outside the Bay Area.
Two points here:
1. I didn't say they will never beat anybody at football, another poster did. However, when I read that comment I took it for what it was, obvious hyperbole. To read that and take it literally would be, to use your words, batshit and ignorant.
2. Why would you assume they are going to keep the east/west divisions especially if they add more schools like Stanford? I would assume the exact opposite. They will most likely come up with new divisions or just do away with divisions altogether.
