ESPN/Griffin look at our 2009 schedule
- Thread starter dunar
- Start date
Nothing would make me happier than to get 6 wins and a bowl, and I would definately laugh if we got at least 5, but Im not holding my breath. I think the spring game should help answer a few questions for me though.
A couple of thoughts on all of this.
First, this:
Seriously, he thinks are best chance to win is at home vs Oklahoma State? What about Baylor? Colorado I agree with but you have to throw K-State in there as well. I think beating K-State is more likely than Colorado just because of the regime change and losing Freeman.
That leads me to my thoughts on Griffin. I am glad ESPN went and dedicated blogs to each conference because it does provide much needed national coverage for us. At the minimum, I have found links to both ISU and other schools I would have never found without his blog.
However, Griffin is a southerner and even worse, can't let go of tradition. His predictions can be broke down to this:
- Texas and OU will be class of the conference
- The other Texas schools will always have potential to "challenge" for the South or have a "good" year. Yes, this includes Baylor.
- The North is weak
- The teams in the North that are not weak are Nebraska, Kansas and Mizzou.
- K-State is bound to return to glory with their old coach
That's about it. Griffin has put all of the teams in to their own holes and left them there. No breaking out of them once they are classified. If they do show something out of his classification he will always wonder how long it will last.
About the scheduling. Give it up. These games are usually contracted out 3, 4, 5 years in advance. Sometimes even longer. Utah was put on our schedule a few years ago and seldom would a school schedule opponents based on how their team will be "weak" a few years down the road. It is too much to predict.
When teams were put on our schedule in 2005 and 2006 (this includes Connecticut I believe) we had no idea we would fire McCarney, hire Chizik, lose Chizik and hire Rhoads. There are just too many variables to plan for.
While I agree that K-State, and now Kansas, boosted themselves to higher levels by scheduling patsies it wasn't done out of any perceived weakness to the team in the future. It was done because their ADs and coaches believed that is what was right to increase their team's confidence.
I swear to God that some of you saying that Utah is too tough for us to play are the same ones saying we should move out of the Big XII to win more.
Come on...welcome the challenge.
First, this:
Seriously, he thinks are best chance to win is at home vs Oklahoma State? What about Baylor? Colorado I agree with but you have to throw K-State in there as well. I think beating K-State is more likely than Colorado just because of the regime change and losing Freeman.
That leads me to my thoughts on Griffin. I am glad ESPN went and dedicated blogs to each conference because it does provide much needed national coverage for us. At the minimum, I have found links to both ISU and other schools I would have never found without his blog.
However, Griffin is a southerner and even worse, can't let go of tradition. His predictions can be broke down to this:
- Texas and OU will be class of the conference
- The other Texas schools will always have potential to "challenge" for the South or have a "good" year. Yes, this includes Baylor.
- The North is weak
- The teams in the North that are not weak are Nebraska, Kansas and Mizzou.
- K-State is bound to return to glory with their old coach
That's about it. Griffin has put all of the teams in to their own holes and left them there. No breaking out of them once they are classified. If they do show something out of his classification he will always wonder how long it will last.
About the scheduling. Give it up. These games are usually contracted out 3, 4, 5 years in advance. Sometimes even longer. Utah was put on our schedule a few years ago and seldom would a school schedule opponents based on how their team will be "weak" a few years down the road. It is too much to predict.
When teams were put on our schedule in 2005 and 2006 (this includes Connecticut I believe) we had no idea we would fire McCarney, hire Chizik, lose Chizik and hire Rhoads. There are just too many variables to plan for.
While I agree that K-State, and now Kansas, boosted themselves to higher levels by scheduling patsies it wasn't done out of any perceived weakness to the team in the future. It was done because their ADs and coaches believed that is what was right to increase their team's confidence.
I swear to God that some of you saying that Utah is too tough for us to play are the same ones saying we should move out of the Big XII to win more.
Come on...welcome the challenge.
If we got to 6 or more wins then I would think that reflects well on our past head coach. I don't like him...never liked him...but don't spite him to the point I hope we don't do well. I just have a difficult time believing we go from a 10 game losing streak to a program that has trouble filling its coaching staff...to bowl consideration! I HOPE I AM WRONG...but I just don't see it happening.
I think the Iowa game will be a turning point in the year. If ISU can get to a 4-0 start, then K.C. will be rocking and KSU will have a newbie at QB = win. If they can get to 5-0, I will assume they find a way to sink out another win or two. But if Iowa comes in here and beats ISU, then it could be a 3 win season.
Schedules can be changed on relatively short notice to make for good matchups that could not be foreseen. No one is saying it isn't fun to see ISU playing major opponents. But we are not Texas nor OK and we need wins right now and in two years! What if (and I hate to say this) if we lose to Utah and Iowa in close games that season. We are going to have to go 4-4 in the league (which I hope we do better than that) just to be bowl eligible. And if we don't make a bowl game...people will be angry when other teams who played lesser schedules are getting ready for a December game. That is all that people are saying...I think.
That requires money. We do not have it. Bringing in Utah will sell more tickets.
Your point is valid to a certain extent. But these are the cards we have been dealt.
The outcome of the Iowa game need not dictate the outcome of the rest of the season. We could go 3-1 in non conf with a loss to Iowa, beat KSU, and still have a decent shot to pull out a couple more wins to get to 6-6.
We can lose to Iowa and still be successful. We are not defined by our performance against them, but the performance against the teams in the Big 12.
Don't turn this in to an "ISU Super Bowl" thread, please.
He is right, it is worth a lot. All of our nonconference games are worth that much. Momentum is a fickle thing and if we start 4-0 it will mean a lot of people willing to travel to KC.
If we start 3-1 with a loss to Iowa it will deflate things a bit.
The changes would be made for TV purposes and the network wanting our game would help pay for it. This is not the situation we are in for sure. That said...you are right...the game is already on the schedule so the point is moot (insert SNL clip)!
And really...who would have thought Utah would still be this good 3 years after Urban Meyer parlayed that gig into the Florida job?
I'm not trying to do that - I don't even know what ISUs schedule looks like. I can understand a win over Iowa being a launching point of sorts, but with the Clones can score, and with a defense that should be better, I would think they'll be able to compete in the Big 12 North whether they beat Iowa or not.
Let me look at it from a different angle. Iowa/ISU is the second game of the year. If ISU wins, but loses the last non-con game, but is still 3-1, is that just as bad?
No it's worse, because it would return us to much of what we saw in the past (epic let downs after putting everything into that game)
I think the Iowa game is our biggest non-con game b/c it's the only chance we'll get to see our team against a real BCS opponent.
That's an interesting question.
I was thinking back to 2007 when we started 0-2 with a lot of thoughts of not winning a single game that year. We beat Iowa and everyone realized we weren't dead in the water. Losing to Toledo just brought us back to reality.
Instead of salvaging a 2-2 start we started 1-3 with people again thinking we didn't have a chance of winning a conference game.
This year, I think having Iowa as the second game could mean nothing if we drop the game at Kent State. I will say, a 3-1 start with a loss to Iowa will salvage more momentum than a 3-1 start with a loss to Kent State...or Army.
Is the Iowa game as important as 2007? Probably not. Is it still important in hopes of reinvigorating the fan base before the Big XII schedule? Absolutely.
We had enough talent to win 6 games this last year.
The two actual wins.
The meltdown against Kansas.
UNLV went to overtime.
Iowa is always a tossup, and we outgained them in the yardage department.
Option-gate versus Colorado.
There, getting to six wins with one of the worst teams in the nation last year isn't too much of a stretch. I'll say we win between 1 and 7 next year.
The two actual wins.
The meltdown against Kansas.
UNLV went to overtime.
Iowa is always a tossup, and we outgained them in the yardage department.
Option-gate versus Colorado.
There, getting to six wins with one of the worst teams in the nation last year isn't too much of a stretch. I'll say we win between 1 and 7 next year.
I don't see us going winless in Big 12 play. The offense will be too good for that. I think we get either K-State or CU at home. I think we go into conference play at 3-1, with the loss to Kent St, because everyone here knows no matter how bad they suck, we'll lose on the road. In fact, the worse Kent St is, the more that game scares me. I think we take the Hawks at home, because I refuse to predict defeat in that one (and I honestly think we will hold their offense in check, while our offense blows up against a secondary no longer aided by a stellar d-line). That's 3-1 non-conf., and I think we get CU or K-State. 4-8.
