BoR laughs at ISU
- Thread starter swarthmoreCY
- Start date
"If that needs to be asked, then I am lost for words."
That = GG needing to ask Sally Mason.
The second part...I would go with your doubt.
Actually you did bring Iowa into this discussion. You stated she was afraid to vote no because Iowa may get booted from the Big Ten. You then went on to say we add nothing to the Big Ten. You were factually refuted but dodged it despite the fact that AD revenue at Iowa is higher than over half of the member institutions of the Big Ten. That's even if you dump the Big Ten TV money. Iowa would be at the bottom of the pile revenue wise if they really offerred nothing.
I know what "that" was referring to, and it looks like I was right. Please continue, Rev. Swarthmore.
THH, please try....first post: "And for those who say it would not matter: then why not have Sally Mason vote no."
Again, if it would have mattered I could see the BoR being a little apprehensive b/c Sally voting "no" could be so unattractive to other Big 10 schools, that it would risk Iowa's membership.... especially given the reasons why realignment is happening.
Can some of you not read or what? There was never a problem with Iowa. The problem is with the BoR. They do nothing to help ISU. It has been made clear that they have hitched their cart to Iowa and really aren't concerned about ISU. It isn't about changing anything. No, that vote changes nothing but at least it would have been a sign that they at least try to help ISU. No one ever said anything about Iowa not bringing anything to the table. This is not about Iowa. Contrary to popular belief, not everything is about you guys.
Then please explain your post, I seem to be struggling comprehending THH tonight.......GG did not "just" ask Sally Mason to vote no.
But earlier you said that the BOR should be able to tell Mason how to vote. Get your story straight, old man.
What exactly did you want the BOR to do today?
I can read. Below is the post that started it. It very clearly sates Iowa bring nothing to the table and was afraid to vote no because of it. So the BoR should have made them.
SwarthmoreCy said:
Even when I agree with you on the actual discussion, your need to be condescending while you are a Hawk fan on a Cyclone board is beyond me.
Tornado man wrote this ^^^^
You responded thusly, inferring that if Geoffroy had to ask it would leave you speechless.
"It just was" refers to the question that was just asked, which you said would leave you speechless if it needed to be asked. I said I doubt it based on the grandstanding you've been doing over the last few days.
Now you're getting it.
Maybe not?
Again, not the point. The point is that the BoR has never significantly helped ISU. They don't take us seriously. It has been like that for 30 years so I guess we shouldn't expect it to change now. This will indeed hurt Iowa. They now move down the totem poll another notch. Now you could be nearing the bottom half of the Big Ten.
Iowa has typically been a middle of the pack team in the Big 10 for most of my lifetime anyhow, the addition of Nebraska - one game - is not going to change that.
If the BOR has never helped ISU, what could they have done today to change that?
as a stereotype when making fun of ISU fans as well. never did I say it seriously.
Also, I'm not on hawkeyenation saying that, am I?
Funniest part is that he has 5+ times as many posts here as you do.
Plus, azn, Iowa fans are more Beebe than rapist. Just completely incompetent.
I think we need to ask ourselves some basic questions. Not about money but about doing the right thing. Basic questions. Take money out of the equation.
Is Jim Delaney doing the right thing by expanding the Big Ten Conference? Did Sally Mason do the right thing by voting "Yes" to admitting the University of Nebraska into the Big Ten Conference?
Is Jim Delaney doing the right thing by expanding the Big Ten Conference? Did Sally Mason do the right thing by voting "Yes" to admitting the University of Nebraska into the Big Ten Conference?
That's not what I meant. I meant that Nebraska is ahead of Iowa in the Big Ten. They will be a bigger deal to them.
The second one is a great point. I have no argument. A simple vote would have been a nice gesture though. The Big Ten wouldn't get rid of Iowa. That's ridiculous. There should have been no reason for them to vote yes. Whatever, it doesn't really matter. Hopefully we get to the Big East and do some damage.
cohawk,
By nature "Iowa" is brought into the discussion when discussing the role of the BoR in supporting State institutions. However, think of Iowa as a variable; I just could have easily said "School X".
Now, if you are still with me, in my original post I attempted to speed up the discussion by giving a counter to what I anticipated would be resistance to my attention drawing thread title. This was a rebuttal to the claim that the BoR should have stayed out of it the vote did not matter. To refresh your mind, the contention was that if it did not matter, there was no threat to Iowa. Furthermore, reasons why the State of Iowa would be insecure about the repercussion of a no vote- which is in this era of realignment, TV sets is the champion of all. Iowa does not have a lot of TV sets.
You have provided compelling cases why Iowan's should be proud of the Iowa AD, but you have refuted nothing in terms of the opportunity cost Iowa inflicts on the Big 10. . There are Universities out there that could successfully replace Iowa in the Big Ten in terms of revenue generation for the conference. It was successfully refuted that Iowa's position in the Big 10 is not guaranteed based on being a founding member...for which I am appreciative.
Last edited:
